 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: TianL
Date: 2012-04-25 20:24
I want to get an idea of how many people actually went through EVERY etude in the Rose 32.. please respond with how many you have done.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2012-04-25 20:45
Um...
Why wouldn't you? Yes, I played all of them as a student and I go back to them now and then.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TJTG
Date: 2012-04-25 22:32
I've played all of the 32. First semester of college.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2012-04-25 22:39
cigleris wrote:
> Who cares? They're all dull.
Quite a helpful statement.
At times having a student play something 'dull', and not actually having them attempt to "make" it interesting, is an essential expenditure of "lesson time".
TianL,
-Played in a lesson setting with a teacher? About half. (sorry, that is as specific as I can be.)
-"Gone through" later on to see what could possibly be offered to a student? All of them.
-How many have I used with past students? Student A- 2, Student B- 8, yet another student- 6.... I hope you get my point.
As a teacher, 'study material' is often only as productive as the teacher is capable of making it.
Again, I apologize for the lack of specific numbers.
(And I agree some of them are "dull" Peter; but "dull" in an important way.)
-Jason
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2012-04-25 23:08
I must apologies for not being clear, though I stand by my statement of "who cares".
Of course Jason they are "dull" in an important way and I occasionally play through them to work on a few techniques such as No1 of the 32 (C major if memory serves). I, however find them musically dull and can never understand why so much emphasis is placed on these when there are far more rewarding studies out there, but of course this is just my humble opinion.
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2012-04-25 23:26
Peter,
I was actually referring to the "musical dullness."
-Jason
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2012-04-26 01:42
cigleris wrote:
> I, however ... can never understand why so much
> emphasis is placed on these when there are far more rewarding
> studies out there, but of course this is just my humble
> opinion.
>
I wonder outside of the U.S. how important the Rose studies are or even, now that the American clarinet world has spread beyond the Bonade/Curtis Institute influence (they were basic to Bonade's syllabus, an emphasis certainly continued by his immediate students), how much emphasis they continue to have even here. I really don't know the answer - I haven't studied in a formal way for a long time.
I'm interested to know why TianL asked the question in the first place.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: davyd
Date: 2012-04-26 02:42
I've studied all 32, some with more than one teacher. That was all "back in the day"; I haven't worked on them in quite some time.
I'm informed that the 32 and the 40 are based on music for other instruments by various composers. I'd be curious to know the "root forms" and see how they differ from what's in the Rose books.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mvjohnso
Date: 2012-04-26 03:23
They aren't dull, they just aren't musical. Though they are good tools for learning musicality (either via being Frankenpieces (parts Rose took from other works spliced together) or by being habit/ technical breakers). Have learned and had lessons in most (had two teachers use em).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2012-04-26 04:26
There was a long discussion about the Rose etudes, their "usefulness" and the source for the books a few months back.
Rather than re-hash that, a search may be more helpful... but I unfortunately cannot recall the subject thread. I'll do some digging and see if I can find it.
(Some of the material was adapted from the Ferling oboe studies, and further, is used in some violin studies.)
-------------------------
As for Rose being musically dull, I do agree some on that point. (Some of the etudes Are "better" than others.) But I take that musical dullness as a useful tool.
Having a student actually make something "dull" into "good" or "interesting" music, while falsely a proper idea on the surface, is a misguided pursuit in my mind.
The fact that some of the Rose etudes are musically dull, or banal, makes them an invaluable tool. Have the student play the works as they stand... if it seems to be doing nothing, or not going anywhere at some point, then play it as such. Not all music has to be doing something in every measure. When something arises that can be done, it can then be addressed. (This all relies on the guidance of the teacher however.)
Of course, discussion of implied harmony, rhythm, their inter-play, interpretative markings that are present and those markings absent (or potentially scratching out markings placed in some particular edition by a well-meaning editor) are key. But sometimes the key is to do nothing at all.... or if you place chains on a student in a proper way, they are forced to see the subtleties and learn to incorporate those things into their "clarinet-ing."
Many attempt to phrase (or actually "re-phrase") works, generically based on rules- usually harmony. -----Strongly crescendo to the 5th, then ebb away. Playing the longest phrase possible spanning several staves of music. Or the business of "ups" and "downs" if one is indoctrinated in the Tabuteau "system."---- et al.
Teaching, or playing, in that manner is dangerous. It really is akin to shouting your own opinion over top of the composer's work. You can't escape harmony in tonal works... those are the building blocks. Playing with a concrete set of rules that solely follow/reinforce harmony is often "dull"- you can't escape it! Play a non-solo composition in with those "rules" and it can sound like an auditory knife fight.
That's why having a "dull" etude can be useful. Let the dull parts be dull.
Of course through all of this, playing the clarinet in a correct manner is implicit.
---------------
Teaching to make a little etude do something by distorting what is present is bad enough. But let's be honest... if "dull" Rose is wrongly played, then no great harm is done. The true harm occurs when that practice of making the music into something we wish it to be is extrapolated to Bach, Mozart or any of the truly inspired composers we ultimately strive to perform.
Of course we can escape all of this, avoiding the over-usage of etudes, and devise our own teachings drawn from those Master's compositions.... but the ability to teach in that manner often relies on outside factors.
Or once what is needed to be discovered in any set of etudes is clear, they can be cast aside. (Thus my inability to give a concrete number of how many I learned or use in teaching.)
Perhaps this is why TianL posted the question. I'm curious as well....
-Jason
Post Edited (2012-04-26 04:29)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2012-04-26 04:47
As an addendum:
In viewing some of the non-sense going on in the articulation thread--- the thread where having a wide variation of 'articulative', or 'annunciative' tools is being wrongly dismissed......
...using a simple dull Rose etude and removing the access to wide dynamic variation, we can begin to address all the subtle articulations that are a necessity in our skill set.
Much as a singer must learn proper annunciation and diction, we as clarinetists must learn all the subtle annunciations and articulations necessary to effectively convey a composition to a listener.
But I truly don't think La, Da, Ta, Na etc... are inherently correct, nor incorrect. Truth be told, I couldn't tell you exactly what syllable I am using in any given articulation. I know what I need to produce, and how to do so. (And that is wildly variable.)
As a teacher it's vital that a student be given opportunity to realize and acquire the same palette.
Enough preaching.
-Jason
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TianL
Date: 2012-04-26 05:36
Karl,
My teacher and I were just wondering about it. I'm at about 24/32 and actually wanted to finish all of them, because I believe each of them specifically targets at different technical stuff. Of course they aren't as musical as say a sonata or concerto, but those don't systematically or specifically target things, technical-wise. My teacher is fine with me doing them all, but he kinda want to move me on to pieces that are more musical.
Tian
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: janlynn
Date: 2012-04-26 14:35
i did almost all of them ( about 3 -4 not done) with my lesson teacher.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
