 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: 3dogmom
Date: 2005-04-14 10:39
Okay, I need advice. I play with a local (mostly non-paid) "flute choir" with which I play the clarinet. I play mostly bass flute parts, sometimes doubling other parts or playing music which has arranged specifically for our odd instrumentation, which often includes a cello as well.
Here's the issue - we have a performance coming up in two weeks. One of the members, who does most of the music purchase and arranging when necessary, also belongs to a local women's warbling singing group. She asked them, without consulting the rest of us, to sing along with us at this performance. We play mostly classical music, but she wants to make it a "singalong". We were asked to vote. I was the only one to vote no.
These women sang with us once before. They're very nice but sing poorly. In fact, some of them don't sing at all but play the tambourine along with everything we play, like Telemann. When I was asked to join this group, it was with the understanding that we would play chamber music.
Would you guys feel obligated to continue at this point? I do not want to do this. This was not the arrangement we made when I began. However, they have a performance coming. We have more than enough music prepared that they could perform without me. Your thoughts on the issue would be appreciated. Thanks.
Sue
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2005-04-14 10:55
how can i put it....
"run away, run away, run away" (i'm sure someone will get that)
more seriously- you need to say to them what you said to us.... the singer people don't do it for you. I'd stick it out for this next performance but then make it clear that more of the same and you're "history"
i know that sounds mean, but if you can pull it off with a bit of grace, then maybe they will respect you for your honesty..... ummm, yeah....
good luck
donald
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda
Date: 2005-04-14 11:39
There are some groups who will respect your honesty, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they'll do what you say. Since everything's set for this performance you may decide it best to stick it out this once.
For sure you'll get the best response by speaking privately to whoever's in charge. Pick a time when the two of you are in a reasonable mood and you're sure you won't lose it, state your case with honesty but granting everyone dignity as well (pick your words carefully). You could even mention that you think it's best for the group's reputation to not have the others sing with you, that you're not just thinking of yourself. Determine whether you'll stay or not depending on the final decision, and if you decide to leave, then leave quietly without putting anyone down or causing any dissention behind you. How you behave here will surely follow you wherever you go.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mike Clarinet
Date: 2005-04-14 12:42
Certainly do this performance: You have worked for it along with the rest of your group, and you would be letting them down if you dropped out now.
For the next job, try a compromise: some joint sing-along numbers, your group does its stuff without choir, the choir does its stuff without your group. With careful selection, the daftness of playing Telemann on a tambourine will become self-evident.
Does your group have any sort of annual general meeting with all members? If you raise this point there (tactfully, of course), you may find that other members of your group have the same opinions as you. If there is no AGM, go with Brenda's advice and talk to whoever's in charge.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ralph G
Date: 2005-04-14 13:03
If doing the right thing is important to you, play the performance, then walk away. Chances are they'll sing with you again in the future, and you'll have to go through it yet again.
Reminds me of the famous "Had It on Long Island" letter to Ann Landers (first one listed):
http://www.s-t.com/daily/08-96/08-20-96/c05ad093.htm
________________
Artistic talent is a gift from God and whoever discovers it in himself has a certain obligation: to know that he cannot waste this talent, but must develop it.
- Pope John Paul II
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ohsuzan
Date: 2005-04-14 13:05
Reminds me of a church where I once directed -- briefly!
OK -- but what I notice (something of which I'm sure you're painfully aware) is that you were the *only* one in the group who voted against the inclusion of the warblers.
Doesn't mean you're wrong, or that they are right. It just means that you and this group are apparently not on the same page in regard to your musical goals.
That must be disappointing to you, but frankly, I wouldn't make a big deal of it. I would just discontinue my participation, unless there were some reason why, upon reflection, I decided it would be better to continue, even while holding my hands over my ears.
Perhaps it is time to start your own group?
Susan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-04-14 13:27
As you were asked to Vote you really should play the performance. Then if they want to do that again I'd quit it.
As everybody but you voted "yes", you should play it. If it were a split decision and after hearing the screamers, maybe taking another vote would be the thing to do 
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2005-04-14 13:44
Follow through with this performance because you have given your word on it. Then bring up the issue you have mentioned and resign. More than likely this kind of behavior will happen again because of the "attachment" this member has with the warblers. In any event--there is apparently a lack of mutual vision and enough tension to cause you not to enjoy working with them.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Terry Stibal
Date: 2005-04-14 14:30
Regardless of your decision (right or wrong) in the global scheme of things, it's important to realize that not wanting to do the co-performance is YOUR decision on this. The virtual unanimity (with only you in dissent) shows the lay of the land, and the group exists for all of the members of the group. It might be the wrong decision (and it sounds like it is), but it's THEIR decision.
Furthermore, while it's quite possible that either your standards are higher, or your skills are greater (or, even both), there are a number of others in the group who (on the surface at least) don't agree. Sure, they may be under the sway of the "friend of the vocalists", but they are and your arguments were not enough to move them in the other direction.
On working with vocalists of all stripes and other "problem" folks:
I've seen far more artistic differences between vocalists and "non-vocalist" musicians than I ever have between musicians themselves. They learn in a different world than we do, and it seems that vocal performance is often a lot more about the performer than it is the performance.
However, the one musical type that causes problems along these lines is the "church accompanist who thinks in vocal terms. There are some fantastic pianist and organists out there who are virtually incapable of playing with other musicians due to their need to control the tempo and phrasing.
The worst ever argument that I witnessed in the musical sphere (worse, believe it or not, than the worst of Buddy Rich's tantrums) was between one of these people and the contractor in a pit orchestra production of Gypsy. In effect, she was part of the deal to play the show (or so I was told), and the theatrical group favored her in a big way.
Prior to the year that they did Gypsy, they had always used only piano. However, they had the money and the understanding to know that live music with an orchestra would give them a more professional result.
I do have to state that she was a fantastic pianist, capable of improvising fill where it was needed (and it was fully harmonized fill too, not just a melody line). But, she was wedded to favoring the singers, had her own video feed and audio monitor, and ignored the conductor (who was trying to coordinate twelve others so that it all worked together).
She would literally make mistakes "work out" on her own, changing the music "on the fly" to accommodate a dropped verse in a song without so much as a by your leave to the conductor. (She watched the stage throughout on her TV monitor, headphones clamped to her head, and ignored poor Darryl at the lip of the pit.)
Of course, it was very comforting for the singers to have someone tailor the music to their errors. Too bad that the rest of us had little or no idea as to what was happening (as we were in a covered pit and had no view of the stage).
The argument, when it happened, was nuclear in scope. The woman went into seclusion for the rest of the evening, and the piano-less music went very well. The next day, the separate monitor and audio feed was gone, but the accompanist/pianist never could learn to follow direction. That was the last that we saw of her.
I've seen (and hire, and still employ) vocalists who are not really musicians, but I always prefer those who can at least read the rhythmic aspect of music. (As they usually sing according to intervals, a strict "reading the notes" is often not needed.) When you get one who never can be bothered to count off the eight bars of an intro ("Do I come in yet?" is the usual refrain under those circumstances, accompanied by a cute, disarming smile from a fresh young twenty-something), you start to look really hard at how good they look and sound and ask yourself, "Is this really worth it?...
Besides all of the above, I can't stand it when a choir type tries to direct both vocalists and musicians. In their scheme of things, "A mighty fortress is our God" contains not eight beats but eleven, and no amount of pleading can change it, come what may...
leader of Houston's Sounds Of The South Dance Orchestra
info@sotsdo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob A
Date: 2005-04-14 18:01
Terry, maybe it because they are from the South--but however way you count it, I can only come to eight, or TEN, not eleven--unless God is getting two beats???
Bob A
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Terry Stibal
Date: 2005-04-14 20:00
Shorthand wrote:
> And I thought that A&M didn't have a music program!
Don't associate me with any of the mess that passes for a music education program down here. I'm a Yankee through and through, despite having spent a quarter of my life down here at this point.
The extra beat came from trying to count the total beats on my fingers and having to switch hands in mid stream. Ten it is...and it's still virtually impossible to meld with a dyed in the wool choir director as a result.
leader of Houston's Sounds Of The South Dance Orchestra
info@sotsdo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 3dogmom
Date: 2005-04-15 02:04
Yikes, I'm a Yankee too and, although I went to grad school in Texas, I'm staying out of that one.
You all have said what I essentially knew, I guess. This is not the first time this has happened with this group. The person who does most of the gruntwork for the group is the one who has the vocal connection. She did this before, at Christmastime, and it got really bad. So, as you have all indicated, it will continue.
On the other hand, I get a chance every week to play some great music with good musicians. I went tonight determined to tell them that I would honor this performance commitment but would be done after that. However, I got caught up in playing and never did.
The public humiliation is the worst.
Thank you, all, for your thoughtful insights. I do think I will try to discuss this with some of the other players in the group.
Sue
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarispark
Date: 2005-04-15 13:28
You should talk to the entire group. Tell them that this is a chamber music group you play in. This choir's vocal performance could detract from what people think of your instrumental performance.
Honor your committment to them now, then look for other people to play with. Maybe you could get a clarinet choir up....
--Michelle
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Synonymous Botch
Date: 2005-04-15 21:43
Let me guess... this is the age group that considers headbands "slimming"?
And nothing flatters like rhinestones - LOTS of rhinestones?
Bail, run and dump this turkey before you become tainted by association.
They probably don't notice you when the spotlight comes on, anyway.
******
Unless, of course, one the other players can block you from joining a future group that stays the course what damage will 'falling ill' cost you?
I play for fun, and want to be with musicians that are better than myself, unless they're under the age of four...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2005-04-16 13:19
The primary consensus here seems to be to play the current performance and then vote with your feet. That sounds exactly right to me.
I agree that there's some risk-by-association, but I'd rather be known for keeping my word than for bolting at a critical time.
Terry's post brings back a world of memories that have me ROTFL. I always find myself in shock and amazement at the number of musicians and singers who can't seem be be expressive without speeding up and slowing down their tempo. Even Music Minus One's "Easy Clarinet Solos" are made considerably more difficult by a pianist whose brain has been tattooed with the word 'rubato'--knowing full well that there can never be eye contact with the soloist.
I generally believe that strong players should hang in there with weaker groups who are actually trying to improve. I've seen out-and-out miracles happen in a couple of community bands in the last few years because of this. But from what you describe of this group, they have extramusical needs that neither your skills nor influence can help.
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 3dogmom
Date: 2005-04-16 21:16
After having a wonderful vocal-free rehearsal the other evening, where good musicians played some wonderful music, I decided that, yes, I need to follow through with the performance (yuck). I will then tell them that I am not prepared to participate with any further vocal alliances, and if that's a deal breaker for them, that's fine. I get playing experience locally through this group, and we do the occasional paid performance. Other opportunities are starting to present themselves, however, so the time is probably coming where I will move on to other things.
As somebody stated earlier, I was the only one to vote "no", so this is what they all apparently want. I have to add my particular favorite vocal story - the one where the vocalists say, "Oh, we don't want to sing it that high (where the instrumentalist' music is written), so we'll just sing it lower". Without a key change. Ghastly.
Thanks, everybody.
Sue
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Eileen
Date: 2005-04-16 22:04
Another consideration on the politics of the situation. Sometimes when a vote is made public rather than by secret ballot, timid souls may not vote their true preference for fear of being put in your situation - the lone nay-sayer. However, if those same timid souls are approached one-on-one in a friendly fashion to discuss what they really think, you may discover that they share many of your views and would have voted the other way had they been confident that the majority of the group did not want to waste their time on the singers. Before I would quit, I would sound out others in the group. If the majority is with you and was just feeling pressured to be polite on the previous vote, it's time for some grassroots organizing and coalition building.
And, we are talking about a bunch of flute players after all. Hate to sling stereotypes but the princess personality of one person may have predominated over the rest.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
