 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: RRMatthew
Date: 2003-08-09 13:08
I like to listen to a cd of a piece that I'm working on and follow with the music. I try to get several different recordings to do this with to learn how each artist approaches phrasing, breathing, tempo, nuances, etc. My goal is to find my own voice around these issues. My concern is, if I incorporate an idea from performer 1 and a second from performer 2, is it really my own, or am I just creating a new hodgepodge that lacks consistency around the overall style. I realize this is an ongoing process but when does it stop being a bunch of other peoples ideas and finally become your own?
Matt
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2003-08-09 14:35
One onf the things that makes music so interesting is that there is no one "right way" to execute musical phrasings. The only guiding factor is that the work should be phrased in a manner which makes sense unto itself, within certain universally accepted musical perameters (intonation, rthythms, etc) of course. There is even no set definition of "what" a good tone quality is. Or vibrato--or not (that is often the controvesy). But there are still so many subtil nuance stylings that can come "into play". When you arrive at the point in your musical career when you can interpret your music in a musically expressive style that is consistant with the composers intent, yet unique in its own way, then you may say that you have "arrived".
Most credit Marconni with the invention of the radio. But what he really did was to combine already known invented components into a device that performed a unique--and new--function. That is what most musical performers really do--like a bride getting married "something borrowed, something blue, something old, something new"--and present it in a new combination of musical phrasings, stylings and sound. This will be your "own voice".
(and I'm still trying to sound like Larry Combs......and trying, and trying.....)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Schwab
Date: 2003-08-09 16:56
Interesting question. It got me wondering if playing the glissando at the begining of Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue was stealing someone else's idea? Gershwin didn't write it that way. Some creative clarinetist did it one time and it stuck.
I also immediately though of the baroque composers. It was common in those days for a composer to take someone else's work and play around with it. It wasn't considered stealing or plagiarism; it was common practice. Of course they didn't flat out perform someone else's work and call it their own, but from what I've gathered there was nothing unethical about taking artistic license with someone else's idea and putting your name on it. I suppose they believed that imitation was the sincerest form of flattery, at least more so that they do today.
I don't doubt that economics has played a large part of that. I don't suppose that composers of that day were threatened, either on a personal level or compensation wise, by what a different composer did with their musical idea. But things today are different. Just look at what happened with the song "My Sweet Lord" by George Harrison and "He's So Fine" by The Chiffons. George Harrison got sued because his song sounded too much like theirs. As an aside I do think The Chiffons had a point. They do sound remarkably similar at times.
Personally, I think what you're proposing is a good idea to get started. I don't doubt that once you get into a song your own ideas and style will begin to emerge. You gotz to begin somewhere.
Bob Schwab
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2003-08-09 17:13
Bob Schwab said:
> It was common in those days for a composer to take someone else's work and play around with > it. It wasn't considered stealing or plagiarism; it was common practice
If Handel didn't borrow from himself and others, the Messiah would have taken far longer than 21 days to complete.
Let's not even begin to talk about Bach (and practically every other major composer during the past 300 years)
I don't think that one ever reaches a final level of interpretation of a piece. It constantly is changing. Just as humans experience mood swings, and emotional changes, the performance of music (being a living and breathing entity) will also change daily.
I once asked Karl Leister about listening to his own older recordings of the Mozart and Brahms works. He told me that he doesn't, mainly because those were different interpretations at different points in his life. In a way, it was like yesterday's newspaper - old news. Just a snapshot in time.
The best interpretation, he said, is the one you will play next...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Pinner
Date: 2003-08-10 22:25
I would also try a little passive listening without slavishly following the score. This is probably a better way to get other peoples ideas into your head. In the end the performance is your own and likewise the interpretation. There is relatively little value in mathematically calculating exactly what one or two other players have done with a work and then trying to adopt them as your own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jim E.
Date: 2003-08-11 04:35
I do computer graphics, and design cabinetry and stained glass pieces. I'm not conceited enough to not realize that everything I put into pixels, wood or glass has been influenced by the sum total of everything I've seen in almost 53 years.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
