 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2007-07-14 03:07
Hi,
A well known clarinetist/teacher recently told me that he's noticed a trend among collegiate clarinet players:
According to him, young clarinetists are driven more by the desire to "get past the first round" than to become artists. Our fear of failure has made us uptight and afraid to take risks. As a result we develop bad habits such as tension, "practice-room" sounds, etc in our playing.
Do any young clarinetists notice this problem with their playing? Do any of you more experienced players notice this trend in the younger generation?
This teacher told me that a student once asked him, "Would you like me to play the Mozart like an audition or musically?"
P.S. I know that most orchestras don't want to hire robots, I'm just curious why most of us students have this preconception.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2007-07-14 03:19
I blame not enough connection between the student and professional world. At least where I've been studying, they're separate worlds: I don't REALLY know what goes on or what it takes. All I know is the student world of being marked on my recitals in things like rhythm, tone, and articulation. Very rarely does artistry come into the equation in the study of music performance.
All my point of view of course. I know someone's going to come along and argue the opposite.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-07-14 10:04
well if there really are such perceptions among so many young musicians it must be because there have been many teachers that HAVE told them such. A thought like that doesn't come from thin air.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2007-07-14 21:13
I did not mean to imply that teachers are producing robotic students...
It seems like many students evaluate the success of their careers in terms of whether or not they have a job. This type of thinking is bound to make someone feel like a failure. Nevertheless, many students, me included, have had thoughts along these lines during college.
Anyone have any thoughts on why?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda ★2017
Date: 2007-07-15 02:07
Could it go back to when they were really young students? Possibly it's an idea that they naturally have because they listen to rock music most of the time, and the TV shows for kids all have fast music content? Maybe their teachers have to illustrate playing a piece both ways so they can hear the difference. Maybe the teacher has to insist on the student's making their audience cry or laugh or be surprised! Just a guess. The reason I say that is because the 12 to 14 year olds that I've taught only want to play fast - it could be technically correct but will leave me cold. They don't want to play the slow, melodic pieces assigned in the Conservatory repertoire and will play them only because they have to.
However, I'm pleased to see that the RCM adjudicators will make special note when something is played artistically! Perhaps it's because it's rare among the young ones? I don't know. I only know that I make them do it, like it or not. Maybe when they're 18, 25, 35 they'll have a measure of maturity to understand how much better it is to play SOME pieces without making them a race to the finish line. Now if I can convince my 12-yr-old student to play The Swan with tenderness and slow down before the recapitulation, we'll have advanced a long way. She could knock the socks off the adjudicator if she does that. Of course that means great air support!
Now, about the 5/8 pieces offered as choices for the Grade 4 exam! "Take Five" arr.by Paul Desmond is one of them, although it's not really that fast but is so neat! Now that beats Mozart any day for a 12-yr-old, a bright contrast to the slower pieces, and is a good precursor for the Odd Meter Studies book later on.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dano
Date: 2007-07-15 05:18
I have noticed that artistic ability and creativity sometimes take a back seat to perfect and robotic playing of scales and passages. I think that when music, or any other art, is viewed as "a job", it seems that it all becomes a series of lines with dots and veering from that thought makes some afraid that they won't do their "job" correctly. In other words, playing something "musically" instead of "as in an audition" is in their eyes, taking too much creative licence. As a young clarinetist many years ago, I had the opposite problem. I used the instrument to release creativity more than anything else and had to be reeled in and set on track by higher-ups. That must be why I can deal with jazz and improvisation alot easier than I can with orchestral settings. There really is a fine line that one has to be aware of when it comes to getting past first rounds and creative artistry.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2007-07-15 16:05
One of my favorite things is to go to master classes. At ClarinetFest this year, I tried to make it to every one.
Kalman Bloch said that over his career (since about 1937, say) musicianship has slipped, while technique has advanced.
I noticed that highly competent players, products of highly regarded teachers, always seem to benefit from the "second opinions" offered by other highly regarded teachers at master classes. Is one teacher not enough?
A few of the recitals at ClarinetFest were presented, as Johnathan Cohler termed, "metronomically." UGG. Its sort of like a midi playback, or a Finale test run: note perfect, but without emotional involvement.
One thing Cohler made clear at his master class is that there is a difference between a performance and an audition. He promised to get back to the audition version playing, but focused on artistry --and ran out of time.
I'm left with the impression that note-perfect, metronomic playing (with a beautiful tone quality) is expected in auditions, and that one needs to avoid "interpretations" that might offend someone in a jury.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-07-15 16:26
In college, during a lesson once, I was told that I need to have better rhythm for a particular section. I explained that it wasn't a mistake but a slight rubato that I had intended on taking. The teacher understood, but if it had been a jury or competition I would have lost points for it as a 'mistake' and I would have had no chance to defend my decision. It wasn't on the score, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.
I think a lot of people at competitions would rather play it safe.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2007-07-16 10:04
> "Would you like me to play the Mozart like an audition or musically?"
Oh, that's good ;-D
It may have something to do with the prevalence of recorded sound. Recordings are expected to be 'perfect'.
The other thing (if I might be permitted to play devil's advocate for a moment, please don't flame me, I think this is a serious issue) is that artistry can't be quantified, so it doesn't exist, right?
*
Brenda - My teacher loved the crazy 5/8 stuff at ABRSM grade 4/5. I loathed it - and I'm sure I wasn't ready to play it anywhere near 'musically'. Looking back, tho, there's some good pieces there. There's this piece 'Almost a Waltz' - I don't know if it's still on the syllabus. :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2007-07-16 11:43
Nobody could pay me enough to be a teenager again, but allow an old bag who's ended up as an amateur with terminal stage fright to comment that this situation is nothing new. I went to very few music competitions for the excellent reason that I wasn't good enough, but even though my piano teacher encouraged me to try "just for the experience," and kept telling me to relax because none of this stuff mattered anyway (he was a fine one to talk--I once saw him break down so badly from nervousness in Bartok 1 that the conductor nearly stopped the orchestra), I will never forget the feeling of absolute doom.
Invariably, I knew, going in, that nothing I could do would be the right thing. I would sit there and watch other kids (who played better than I did) wait their turns while gnawing their fingers or rocking back and forth. Now and then one of them would suddenly leap up and rush into the bathroom to vomit; or for no apparent reason burst into tears; or start cursing so loudly the sould probably carried onstage; or rise, walk in dignified silence toward the door that did not lead to the concert hall and then suddenly develop winged feet and dash out of the green room, never to return. (You think wind students are bad; you should see the mobs and mobs and mobs of terrified little pianists facing the facts of gross over-population.)
Sometimes, I played with robotic rigidity. Other times, I went too far the other way and waxed disastrously creative. Never did get it right. I didn't have that problem at public speaking contests, maybe because I was better at those and went into them thinking I knew what I was doing and had a good chance of winning. Music contests: I guess they're necessary, to weed out people like me, but--feh.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2007-07-16 12:48
Actually there is a school of thought that says you have to play with 'robotic rigidity' before you are allowed to mess about with musicality, and I suppose there's some truth in it. That is, a large number of jazz musicians can play straight (though whether they started that way, like Jaques Loussier, is another question). And Picasso could in fact 'paint'; he just chose not to. The problem comes when this approach is followed without ever progressing to that elusive next stage. There's always another harder study to play in strict time to distract you from playing properly the stuff you can play like a robot.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: marzi
Date: 2007-07-16 13:52
It just might take a little time for them to get the maturity to get the emotion part, I think, although we have a couple of middle age guys who are technically very good, but I always think it could get a lot better with a little expression they seem to be missing. sure you can get the fast notes perfectly, but when it comes to the slower stuff its plain flat.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2007-07-16 14:50
Teachers: how do you actually go about teaching 'musicality'? I imagine it must be difficult, especially for younger students.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clariniano
Date: 2007-07-17 22:03
I too have noticed problems with students who are rushed through the levels, and the student ends up suffering from nerves and tension in their playing, and who sometimes do poorly on RCM exams.
I have pulled students back a level or two (occasionally more) to re-establish their confidence and work on re-establishing their foundation of playing skills; I've heard of 11 year old clarinetists who are playing RCM Grade 6 material when they are not really ready for it, and often have only been playing 1 1/2-2 years.
As a result of my philosophy of "it is better to play a simple piece well than a more advanced one poorly", I have produced three students in my not-quite 8 years of teaching who have earned 90% or better on RCM exams (never below 80, even below 85 is quite uncommon unless the student doesn't practice or practices ineffectively--something I have an issue with some piano students! It seems that clarinet students are much more accountable for their playing), most recently a 10 year old student who got a 90 on his RCM Grade 2 exam in June, and the previous one just 1 1/2 years prior, with a 93 on a Grade 4 clarinet student. I could have put this 10 year old student in RCM Grade 4 (he was ready for the Grade 2 almost two months before the exam, and had performed his pieces a few times, for church services, student concerts, and my own concerts which we sometimes include students, but I wanted to give him some breathing room and work on things like dynamic contrasts, phrasing, and ritardandos on the ends of pieces.(he did the Finzi Carol from Five Bagatelles for List A and the Bach Gavotte for List B) I also do a lot of work on the tone of my students. And this 10 year old kid is doing great on the RCM Grade 4 stuff, he's doing his Grade 4 in August and is almost ready for it, has learned 4 different pieces in the repetoire list (Stamitz, Albinoni, Mozart Minuetto and trio, Tchaikovsky Allegro con Grazia from Symphony no. 6, though he is choosing the Mozart and the Tchaikovsky for his exam) With the Mozart Minuet and Trio and the Tchaikovsky, I had them listen to the original version which I have on CD. The kids did get positive comments on his artistry, especially his use of ritardandos and dynamic contrasts. And I have students in high level ensembles, including a 15 year old who plays in a regional symphony and also attends an arts high school.
Meri
Please check out my website at: http://donmillsmusicstudio.weebly.com and my blog at: http://clariniano.wordpress.com
Post Edited (2007-07-17 22:16)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sean.Perrin
Date: 2007-07-22 20:03
The problem is that music students don't see what they do as an art form, it's more an activity with a desirable outcome. The ones that see the former become artists. The latter become highly qualified enthusiasts.
Founder and host of the Clarineat Podcast: http://www.clarineat.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: OmarHo
Date: 2007-07-23 17:24
Speaking as a young clarinetist, I have experienced tension in my playing due to wanting to get the perfect sound out of my instrument. I felt unaccomplished compared to professionals and was asking too much out of myself for something that I haven't yet developed.
A way a battled with this tension was to tell myself "you'll get more satisfaction with yourself if you give less to the instrument". So instead of demanding so much out of myself, I just gave up and I immediately relaxed.
Another reason why I felt tense was because I didn't understand the reason why I was playing music in the first place. It was easier singing my piece without the clarinet, but as soon as I put the clarinet back in my mouth to imitate what I sang, I lost the musicality. But I just tried to overcome this by thinking that the clarinet is just an extension of your body, you already have every component to playing the instrument.
I'm not sure if that answers your question, but I think that's the way a lot of other young students feel as well.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katelyn
Date: 2007-07-24 01:56
I'm all too familiar with the fear of failure. I think kids in general nowadays are far too concerned with meeting the requirements, accomplishing things and being the best merely for the sake of getting the grade. I see a tendency to cheat in my fellow honors and advanced placement students than in my 'average' friends.
I do believe that there is hope, though. Our whole high school band votes in deciding who wins chair challenges (our director used them as an opportunity for us to learn and analyze how pieces should or should not be played, argue whether notes or rhythms are most important, etc). To make a long and dramatic rivalry short, the band chose a more musical and artistic version of a piece over what was obviously a mere show of technical prowess. The loser was obviously a better player than the winner, but had made the piece sound robotic. Despite his stammered arguments of the piece being "not a musical expression but a technical excercise meant to improve speed and accuracy!" he had to wait the standard two weeks to challenge back.
I think as long as we have good teachers trying to impress the goal of musicianship, instead one of merely playing "higher faster louder" (the unofficial motto of my clarinet section), we'll still be churning out real musicians to keep the music alive for the next generation.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: katie_netie
Date: 2007-07-25 15:17
first off -- Katelyn wrote "The loser was obviously a better player than the winner, but had made the piece sound robotic."
Are they obviously a better player?! I don't think so, if the whole idea of music is to emote and to communicate... if we play like robots then the era of people being the musicians is doomed, as the computers will always win on the technical aspects.
What sets us appart from a perfect recording or a midi file is our personality and the 'human' quality of our playing - and yes, that includes the mistakes we make. I always prefer to hear the player take a breath on a recording (as it reminds me that they are human) and even a little mistake in a performance makes that performance unique.
I may just be a naive student, but I am tired of all the calls for perfection. I don't want to be perfect or sound EXACTLY like everyone else. I sound like me. Clearly I need to improve my technique to allow for a flowing performanve, but it should not be the only thing we consider... I must say it is really annoying to go in to a performance and play my little heart out and have the pannel say nothing but "the rhythm was a little iffy, and there could be more clarity of technique." No refference to my trying to be a 'musician' and play something that was 'me.'
So how do students learn to be musical if that is never asked of them and is in fact discouraged as it reduces the impact of the technique?
In terms of the practice of learning technique and to play like robots before we learn to play musically... I've only ever heard that on a piece by piece basis. I don't think it works like you spend the first ten years as a robot and then you can add the music. I think it's that when you're learning a piece, you need to learn the rhythms and the written dynamics. Be able to play that perfectly, and then explore with your creativity.
Just my thoughts!
Katie
Yamaha Custom SEV, Vandoren M13, Vandoren Optimum Ligature
Buffet E11 Eb Clarinet, Vandoren leather ligature and B44 mouthpiece
Going into second year university for music
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kev182
Date: 2007-07-26 04:00
I have noticed this trend as well. At my school many seem to think "they have come this far, time to go a bit further." But to be honest, people do have to think realistically.... leave doors open etc...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2007-07-26 15:05
Katie, Kevin,
Have a look at the philosophy expressed by Michael Rusinek in Dr. Shoen's dissertation from Florida State U. ( recent thread here gives the URL). If you aren't willing to read through the entire 154 pages, just find the appendix with the Rusinek interview.
The work is on the conflict between auditions and performances, and I imagine that there are some good tips there for those of you who are faced with the frequent, trying auditions associated with professional life as a musician.
In a nutshell, Rusinek says that he displays his musicianship, and the customer can take it or leave it. When the right match between his art and the musical organization occurs, he'll win the audition.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2007-07-26 15:44
Bob,
I like the philosophy that Rusinek takes. Being in college, I see a lot of students searching for a "magic answer" to the question of how to win a job. They spend hundreds of dollars to take lessons with well known pros, etc. in hope of finding some sort of secret to the excerpts.
I of course don't have a job so I am by no means an expert, but it seems to me if you can play the clarinet at an extremely high level and are artistically minded, you will eventually win a job. If you lose some auditions because the panel preferred someone more "robotic" then you wouldn't want a job in that orchestra anyways.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
