Klarinet Archive - Posting 000319.txt from 2004/04

From: "Gene Nibbelin" <gnibbelin@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] RE: Competitions and Juries
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:47:02 -0400

Nancy - What the hell did those so-called jurors know about clarinets?
Probably very little. I can use a number of fingerings on my Leblanc
Concertos that my teacher cannot use on his Buffet R-13s. My point being
that some alternate fingerings work and are reasonably well in tune on some
horns but not on others.
The 1 & 1 Eb is better in tune on my A than on the Bb. I seldom us this 1 &
1 but a couple months ago I ran across a technical exercise that required it
in order to get it up to a reasonably fast tempo.

The jurors should take NO notice of any of the fingerings used unless they
resulted in a terribly out of tune note or one whose timbre was really bad.
If this is not done, a superior, more advanced player would be penalized for
having a better knowledge of his horn than a less advanced player who simply
did not know of the existence of the more convenient alternates.

My teacher 65 years ago taught me a lot of the alternate fingerings that I
learned to use regularly. I have shown my current teacher several of which
he was not aware. Of course, he has returned the favor and we have both
learned some new ones from Tom Ridenour's great book.

These "jurors" need to learn that they are not the sole font of musical and
instrumental knowledge. If they were, they would be sleeping in to recover
from last night's gig, rather than pontificating from a paucity of knowledge
as a so-called "juror".

Regards to the victims of these stupid, "jurors",

Gene N..

-----Original Message-----
From: Buckman, Nancy [mailto:nebuckman@-----.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 4:30 PM
To: klarinet@-----.org
Subject: RE: [kl] RE: Competitions and Juries

Tony P.,

My problem with your comment deals with that word "perception", which to me
indicates an opinion about something. When dealing with kids, if you want
them to change something they need to "see what that change is and what
factual evidence you have for them to base their change on. For instance, I
had a student who was playing a piece (I don't remember exactly which
piece), and did a fine job. When she got a poor rating, I couldn't
understand why. Two of her three adjudicators marked her down for using a
fingering that wasn't on a fingering chart. She played beautifully. In
fact, she played the same piece at her entrance audition to one of the
nation's better conservatories and got very good comments about her
technique and her musicianship. What good was the remark about the
fingering (she used 1 on 1 for Eb instead of the side trill key)? It was a
subjective comment that did nothing to improve her confidence or execution.
Anything below college level should not be judged on perception. Kids
should be judged on technique and musicianship in a very general way. There
is plenty of time for the nastiness of competition after they begin their
undergraduate study. up to this point, my personal opinion is that any
encouragement that can be given, no matter how miniscule, will make any kid
feel good about his performance. Who knows, that small amount of praise may
be the difference between continuing study and quitting.

Nancy

Nancy E. Buckman, CPO, AFO, Technical Assistant
School of Health Professions, Wellness and Physical Education
Anne Arundel Community College
Arnold, MD 21012-1895 USA
Phone 410-777-2316 Fax 410-777-2233
E-mail nebuckman@-----.edu

Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 12:41:25 +0100
To: klarinet@-----.org
From: Tony Pay <tony.p@-----.org>
Subject: Competitions and Juries
Message-ID: <90958aa14c.tony.p@-----.org>

Just to say something about this topic from the point of view of the jury
member, which I have quite often been:

It's very, very difficult for an unsuccessful competitor to hear usefully
anything you say to them afterwards about their performance. I'd say that's
because in that particular situation, they hold your criticism not as
*something they might improve in their playing* -- as they would in a lesson
-- but as *the reason why they weren't successful*.

And then it's so tempting for them to say: the only reason that that jury
member could come up with for why they didn't like me was X (where X is
something fairly trivial).

As an aside, it's worth noticing that even in a lesson, it can be very hard
to get someone to perceive for themselves one of their faults, *as a fault*.
Indeed, sometimes this difficult change of perception is all that's
necessary
to correct the fault. How much harder then must it be for a disappointed
competitor to make the shift?

But actually, particularly in the final stages of a competition, the reason
why someone wasn't successful often can't be captured by identifying a
particular fault, or even a collection of faults.

It was just that, on the day, someone else's performance came over as,
simply, *better*; even including their faults!

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd tony.p@-----.org
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE http://classicalplus.gmn.com/artists
tel/fax 01865 553339

... (((((((HYPNOTIC)))))))(((((((TAGLINE)))))))

------------------------------

MSN Zoeken, voor duidelijke zoekresultaten! http://search.msn.nl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org