Klarinet Archive - Posting 000006.txt from 1995/07

From: Neil Leupold <Neil_Leupold@-----.COM>
Subj: Minor correction?
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 23:48:49 -0400

ntouch Memo 07/01/95
Subject:Minor correction? 8:35 PM
Lynn Thomas wrote:

"Now, if a B.S. candidate practices the same amount as a B.M. candidate, even
if they don't add on more lessons, technically they could learn as much as the
applied music major. You can give a full recital, if you want, as an education
major. You can *play* as much as you want,
period. Performance is the basis for the B.M. I think that, for reality's
sake, we should consider that with only a B.M. you can't really "go anywhere"
anyway, you need a Master's in Performance - so why not give yourself a broader
background, get the B.S., and then get the Master's in Performance?"

Lynn, are you sure you don't mean a B.A.? I've never heard of a B.S. in music.
The alternative to a performance-intensive B.M. degree is usually a B.A. in
education, musicology, or music history. I think degrees in Theory and
Composition still fall under the B.M. category. I don't know if you are
correct about the original poster's point concerning the comparison between
universities and conservatories, but you do make another interesting point
about the prudence (or lack thereof) concerning getting a B.A. over a B.M. I
think it is probably very much an issue of personal goals and desires when
deciding which degree is better suited to an individual. I'm sure there are
many who make the argument that they need the more concentrated curriculum of
the B.M. degree program, even though they may also consciously acknowledge that
they can go on to an M.M. afterwards. It must be understood, though, that some
musicians are so darned talented and musically focused that an undergraduate
degree is all they need before they manage to land a job in a good symphony
orchestra. I've known a few who didn't even get through their B.M. degree
programs before they left school altogether after winning a job mid-semester...

- Neil