 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: bmg1988
Date: 2005-12-06 00:11
I have visited the colleges I want to go to. Here they are in order starting with the one i like the most:
FSU
Eastmen School of Music
Miami
Now I am a Junior in high school and will soon be auditioning for college.
I know all my major scales really well, my natural and harmonic minor scales pretty decently, and I am working on my melodic minors. I have been working out of the Foundation Studies edited by David Hite along with 32 etudes for clarinet by Rose exclusively. These are the solos my band director, a great clarinetist, and I have been working on with me over the past couple years: (some we will be doing in the near future)
Sonata for Clarinet and Piano by Poulenc
Concerto No. 1 by Spohr (mvt. 3)
Grand Duo Concertant by Weber (mvt.1)
Mozart Clarinet Concerto (mvt. 2,3)
Concerto No. 2 by Weber (mvt. 1,2)
Fantasy-Pieces for Clarinet and Piano by Schumann (all)
Sonata for Clarinet and Piano by Mendelssohn (mvt.1)
First Sonata by Brahms (mvt.1,3)
Second Sonata by Brahms (mvt. 1,2)
Premeire Rhapsody by Debussy (all)
I will be doing a couple concerto contests and college auditions and I need one technical and one lyrical for college and a good concerto for contest. I am wondering which ones wood be the best choice to audition with and do contests. I will be happy to recieve any input and I would like to know what some of you have used for college or contests. Thank You.
-brian
Post Edited (2005-12-06 00:52)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-12-06 00:45
bmg1988 wrote:
> These are the songs my band director, a great
> clarinetist, and I have been working on for me over the past 2
> years: [snipped]
> I will be happy to recieve any input
They're not songs ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif) ... GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EEBaum
Date: 2005-12-06 01:48
Pieces. Or if even that isn't high-brow enough, Compositions or Works will do as well.
Those are all old-school standards (in my humble contemporary opinion). They should pretty much all be fine. Just know that the more commonly-played a piece is, the more likely the auditioner is to have a preconcieved notion of what it's "supposed to" sound like.
-Alex
www.mostlydifferent.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2005-12-06 04:07
Quote:
Those are all old-school standards (in my humble contemporary opinion). They should pretty much all be fine. Just know that the more commonly-played a piece is, the more likely the auditioner is to have a preconcieved notion of what it's "supposed to" sound like. And therefore (in case you didn't get the implied above by Alex) the more scrutinizing the person is likely to become.
The priemere rhapsody is probably among one of the tougher (IMO) of this list, however if you can pull it off very cleanly, that'd be a great competition piece. Especially if you can not only get only the notes, but REALLY convey different emotions and moods in it's respective areas. Just saying that of those pieces, this one REALLY has the capability to draw the most emotion out of me and I can't get enough of hearing it done well.
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-12-06 04:58
clarnibass wrote:
> He convinced me and I think the examples here are songs.
Song: (sông, 'so[ng]) - a short musical composition with words
The Mozart Concerto K.622 (and the other references on the list) is a work, a composition, a piece, a selection, an oeuvre, etc...
But definitely not a "song" ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2005-12-06 05:16
I think that since English is not my first language I'll stay of it. Giora Feidman translated from Hebrew and I did the same here.
Post Edited (2005-12-06 12:00)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-12-06 10:41
clarnibass wrote:
> Giora Feidman's reasons were much deeper and more convincing
> than a dictionary.
He may have been convincing to you, but to change the common usage of a word means you have to convince us. Just repeating what someone told you without the underlying reasons isn't going to get you very far.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2005-12-06 10:52
1. Nothing wrong with 'songs without words' :-)
2. My teacher said the same about commonly performed pieces - you have to be really good. So he got me playing twelve-tone studies all the time. Garn, it was demoralising. Part of the challenge is to understand and enjoy what you're playing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2005-12-06 11:29
I think there may be a tendency to bristle at the term "song" when applied generically to anything music due to its over usage on the grammar school, high school level. However, Leon Russianoff stated very clearly that we should realize when playing anything that it is either a "song" or a "dance" period. I think he was addressing maestro Feidman's approach.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: aberkow
Date: 2005-12-06 13:09
Hi Brian,
For what it's worth, I think you should definitely use the Mozart, or Weber (either) for college audition, or competition. Try and stay away from the Poulenc because it really sounds weak without the piano. The Brahms also may be a poor choice in this situation. I think the Debussy could work well for you (you could even do it for competition because of D's own orchestration). I can't remember the Spohr off hand, and I've never heard the Mendelssohn.
Now to jump into the fray a bit. Please recall that Mozart and Weber were primarily known as opera composers. Also, a large amount of Brahms and Schummann's work is taken up by vocal pieces. So, when playing music by those and similar composers, we really ought to acknowledge the vocal style behind what they've written.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-12-06 13:14
aberkow wrote:
> So, when playing music by those and similar composers,
> we really ought to acknowledge the vocal style behind what
> they've written.
Acknowledge it? Yes
Incorporate the feeling into your playing? Yes
Calling the above cited works "songs" ? No
...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2005-12-06 16:51
We have a no spelling correction rule.
I propose a no terminology correction rule. Really!
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark G. Simon
Date: 2005-12-06 17:51
I think it would be useful for Brian to know that classical musicians consider it gauche to refer to instrumental pieces as "songs", especially as this knowledge may help prevent him from making a faux pas at his auditions.
Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana--Mediocrates (2nd cent. BC)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bass9396
Date: 2005-12-06 22:44
They're words people. The kid asked what music to play. Not for a debate about which are songs and which are pieces.
Now. I would play Schumann or Debussy. I agree that the Schumann has a vocal quality to it, and that is all the better for you. It gives you a chance to really get into that style of playing...that mindset....it's a good way to learn. The Debussy is (as mentioned previously) quite impressive if you can really convey the music and not just the notes. Also, it is less well-known.
I agree that you may want to avoid music that gets played a lot. I played an All-State etude and some little contest piece for my college audition and I got money. So, you should be fine. Thinking back on it, playing stuff the panel didn't know may have helped.
Regarding the actual audition. Be sure to talk to the panel, introduce yourself, shake people's hands, then ask if you can play a few notes to get set. That's a good way to take control since they won't say no to such a simple and innocent request.
Good luck!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-12-06 22:58
bass9396 wrote:
> They're words people. The kid asked what music to play. Not
> for a debate about which are songs and which are pieces.
You've missed the point.
Correct terminology is an important tool. It reflects and demonstrates your understanding of the repertoire. People are frequently judged on their language usage - Using incorrect terminology, especially in front of an audition committee is not a wise move.
Would you call Haydn Symphony #104 a song? How about "The Planets" ?
Why not??
They're only (your terminology) "words"
...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bnewbs
Date: 2005-12-06 23:16
Brahms and Debussy are always great for showing your expressive abillities. The Premier Rhapsody is really great, one of my personal favorites. Maybe not quite up with Copeland or Neilsen, but then its much easier to play well.
I really don't care what you call these pieces (that is what I would call them), songs whatever, it's great music and thats all that maters to me.
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetist04
Date: 2005-12-07 04:58
I'd play...the Debussy of your "repertoire." The Spohr is pretty tough technically but I don't think it would display technicality and musicality at the same time. On the other hand, I'd pick something more contemporary for your showy piece. Stravinsky's Three Pieces? Good luck.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Scotti
Date: 2005-12-07 06:17
I has nothing to do with egos or getting over oneself. As Mark pointed out, Brian is young and would not be hurt from a little correction here that would save him an embarrassing moment in school next year. When I was in school, we even had a running joke after a piece was played, saying "that's a good song," clearly mocking those who didn't know better.
If this is too highbrow for you, find a new interest, because classical music has always been the most elite of the arts. Whether or not that's the way it should be, it wouldn't hurt to use the correct terminology when making first impressions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bawa
Date: 2005-12-07 10:01
Did I miss something? In the original post I can only find reference to solos, not songs...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bass9396
Date: 2005-12-07 10:55
The most elite of the arts..........why don't we ask Twyla Tharp, or Martha Graham....maybe we should ask Picasso or Van Gogh.....maybe Sheryl crow or Madonna......how about Coltrane or Miles Davis or Jelly Roll Morton or Muddy Waters or Stevie Ray Vaughn. I forgot Django Reinhardt, Allison Krauss and Union Station, Garth Brooks, and the Darlings. Let's ask them if classical music is the most elite of the arts and see if they care.
The real lesson here is 'don't take yourself too seriously'
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-12-07 11:22
It seems like you are pretty inbalanced with your etudes to solos ratio.
You need to work more on etudes!!
Baermann, Cavallini, possibly JeanJean, Bozza, etc.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-12-07 11:24
"Would you call Haydn Symphony #104 a song? How about "The Planets" ?"
No, the Planets isn't a "song" it's a "sweet"
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bmg1988
Date: 2005-12-09 08:47
I have decided to do the Weber Concerto No. 2. I think this work has a good amount of technical content as well as expressive. Another question is how important is knowing all minor scales rather than most of them?
-brian
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-12-09 13:28
You aren't going to get denied on not knowing some minor scales. What will make the difference in you making it is the listeners seeing innate talent in your playing.
Can you be shaped into a great player compared to the others auditioning? (that's what is most likely in their minds)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
