Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2010-06-22 12:10
graham wrote,
>>There's a fundamental weakness in putting all strong players on first and all weaker players on third. each part should have one strong player who can then tell if people are struggling and give them help in time for the performance.
>>
Good point. I haven't played in a band in decades (my last experiences were in orchestras with a maximum of four clarinets), but I don't remember any band seat jump that awarded seats the way violin sections portion them out. The band directors I read for never gave first, second and third place to first chair, principal second and principal third; then second on first stand in first section, second on first stand in second section; second on first stand in third section and so forth. The directors always awarded band seats in the order graham describes -- the result, invariably, was a third section so weak that some of those people could hardly play their instruments at all.
The band scores exacerbated the problem, because the third clarinet parts tended to be so beginner-easy, so boring, so "oompah, ooompah," that the better players might've quit if required to snooze through playing that stuff. Meanwhile, the worst players, stuck back there in third, had little incentive to practice those deadly dull parts. I think directors could help by re-arranging their sections as graham suggests, but only if they choose music that gives all the musicians something interesting to play. That way, with the worst clarinetists distributed among the last desks in all three sections, if some of them who don't practice or have lost their skills sit there and fake it, the sound of the whole section won't suffer nearly as much.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
Post Edited (2010-06-22 12:17)
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
