Klarinet Archive - Posting 000254.txt from 2005/07
From: Karl Krelove <karlkrelove@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] re: Tempo for Rose 32 Etudes #6 & #21
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:28:08 -0400
Annie,
I'll second David's response. Auditions are meant to compare players,
and the institutional wisdom that prevails in the organizations I've
been involved with is that the comparison is only valid if each kid is
trying to do exactly the same thing (i.e. what's prescribed). Since
andante cantabile and allegro could prove to be confoundingly vague as
judging standards, the auditioning committee has chosen to clear up any
doubt.
I've never gone as far as to teach misprints to my private students,
even though, as David says, that's what our Music Educators'
Associations here say we should do. And as a judge I've certainly never
deducted for a student who plays the corrections. I think that musically
intelligent judges can and often do correct for some of the
institutional inflexibility that organizations tend to impose. But
musical intelligence is not a requirement for membership in state-wide
or county-wide Music Education Associations.
By the way, for what it's worth, I don't think either of those tempi is
inherently unmusical. #6 at quarter=104 may tax the technique of a lot
of high school players, but it works if a student can manage it without
being sloppy. Quarter=60 for #21 is, I think likewise, a perfectly
musical way to play it. It is a different piece from what results at
quarter=44, but I don't find the faster tempo destructive. Which points
up another reason for the organization's having given metronome
markings. There's a always chance that a judge who is used to
teaching/playing a piece one particular way might actually penalize a
students' musical approach where it differs significantly from the
judge's. So in some ways, this kind of "leveling of the playing field"
works for the protection of both the organization and the students.
Karl Krelove
David Blumberg wrote:
> --------------------------------------
> AnneLenoir@-----.net (Anne Lenoir)
> Cc: bell@-----.com
> Subject: Tempo for Rose 32 Etudes #6 & #21
> Message-ID: <16752-42E4762F-1587@-----.net>
>
> I am helping students to prepare these etudes for an upcoming audition
> for chair seating and eventually for Colorado All State. The band
> directors have marked #21 at a quarter=60. Isn't that a wee bit fast,
> as it is counted in eighths (an 8th=120) to get all the subdivisions to
> sound leizurely? It isn't a Souza march, but a lovely piece marked
> Andante Cantabile. I would think that it should be an 8th=50 or even 44.
> What about #6? The band directors have marked it at a quarter=104.
> That also seems a bit rushed to me. I would think that 84 would be fast
> enough. What's the big rush? Is anybody out there knowledgeable about
> Tempos for Rose 32 Etudes? ANNIE
> -------------------------------------
>
>
> Annie, it doesn't matter. Auditions such as that often want the music
> played exactly as printed. It it's marked at 60, they want it at 60,
> not 66, not 54. What gets really compilcated is when there's a
> misprint in the music - the "fine band directors" in my area (Phila
> suburbs) specify that they want it exactly as printed with no
> deviation - wrong printed notes too!! Exact words were from the
> President of the Org. as I've judged the auditions many times "this is
> a band directors festival, not a private teachers festival". That was
> in reply to a question "should the student play what is on the page,
> or what is correct?".
>
> Last I checked, Band Directors were supposed to be musicians too.......
>
> That being said, typically I do change the wrong notes and have them
> play the tempo that makes the most sense for them and the music.
>
> David Blumberg
> http://www.mytempo.com - Galper Key is back!
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org
