 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-02-18 17:52
What I think has gone on for at least a generation now is- composers work on computers with sampled instruments that can play "anything" at any speed. So the works just get more impossible for real players every day.
On the other hand, if you sequence an old well established work like some of the ones mentioned in this article- it will never sound right on the computer because we're not used to hearing it performed as actually written.
Does anybody market sequencing software that filters for human playability? I mean that it would play like real people would, and fake if it gets too difficult. Then you could get an accurate sense of how it might sound in live performance. If it doesn't exist, consider this my free $100K value idea- go for it. Perhaps the program could also generate comments for you like you could expect to get from the performers.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2014-02-18 22:53)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rmk54
Date: 2014-02-18 22:58
String players fake all the time - easy to do when there are 16 players on one part!
Can't do that in the wind section...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2014-02-18 23:09
My motto has always been, "if I can't read it, I'll make it up". Glad for the support this article lends.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2014-02-19 00:46
If it's bad in the orchestra just consider the military/wind band situation!
Some of those old orchestral transcriptions are nigh impossible to play every note and of course the original parts were mostly written for strings.
Having fun with Holst's planet right now.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2014-02-19 06:37
You can fake it in a wind section, flute players do it all the time. Much easier in the tutti passages of course...
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2014-02-19 02:05
My concert band is rehearsing a new piece by a talented young composer. Clearly, he has written this music using a program such as Sibelius or Finale. The complexity of the runs, rapid tempo and constant changes of meter are using up all of our valuable rehearsal time as he conducts us through it over and over. But at the end of the day, one can only take a stab at the complex runs and hope to start and finish together- what happens in between is anybody's guess. Perhaps we should ask him to demonstrate himself how he wishes this stuff to be played!
Jerry
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-02-19 02:34
saxlite wrote:
> My concert band is rehearsing a new piece by a talented young
> composer. Clearly, he has written this music using a program
> such as Sibelius or Finale.
Well, the question is, where is his talent? Is it in composition or in manipulating the notation software? Composers in the pop and film world learned long ago (probably even before Vangelis and Chariots of Fire, though that was a milestone in electronic film scoring) that the electronic products of their synthesizers couldn't be reproduced with any fidelity except by synthesizers. If a composer expects human musicians to play his creation, he has to take into consideration the performer and what he or she is physically capable of doing. That's part of the gig. Otherwise, Finale and Sibelius will both create sound files that can be played back on high end equipment and reproduce exactly what the composer created.
> The complexity of the runs, rapid
> tempo and constant changes of meter are using up all of our
> valuable rehearsal time as he conducts us through it over and
> over.
Someone in a position of responsibility in your band is choosing to give him so much rehearsal time, which seems like a questionable decision if the result is so much frustration. I know the musicians who first played Beethoven's 9th questioned its playability, and they struggled in Paris with the Le Sacre du printemps, but this sounds like a different level of impracticable. If conducting you through this "over and over" is improving it, maybe it's worthwhile. If it isn't getting any better, someone should put limits on the time commitment going forward.
Does he conduct the meter changes accurately?
Faking, as described in the article happens all the time in orchestras great and not so great, but it doesn't account for more than a small fraction of the material in any given piece.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-02-19 12:20
kdk wrote:
> If a composer expects human
> musicians to play his creation, he has to take into
> consideration the performer and what he or she is physically
> capable of doing
So can somebody explain to me how "Ginastera Clarinet Variation" became part of the standard repertoire? Apparently it is almost never played as written (which is said to be impossible anyway). And wouldn't the popularity of a piece like that encourage similar efforts from other composers? Of course, complaints from the musicians are not likely to be taken seriously... "quit whining and work harder or we'll find somebody else who will".
I confess I know little of the history of that piece. If somebody can tell me that it originated as a live performance on clarinet by the composer, later transcribed for others to play exactly the same way (like Chopin on piano), then I'll apologize and go sulk in a corner.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2014-02-19 07:57
>> The complexity of the runs, rapid tempo and constant changes of meter are using up all of our valuable rehearsal time as he conducts us through it over and over. But at the end of the day, one can only take a stab at the complex runs and hope to start and finish together- what happens in between is anybody's guess. <<
Maybe it was meant to be played that way, or this is one option of several of how it can be played, or it wasn't intended but now he is finding that it works this way too.
When I played a piece where, to give one example from it, there were 11 notes, 9 notes, 8 notes and 7 notes, all taking the same amount of time (e.g. half a bar) and each played by a different player, it was obvious that it wasn't going to be as accurate as a computer... but it was fine. It was purposely a "mess" and was written on a computer because that's the easiest and most practical way to write it (good luck adding bars in the middle, correcting mistakes or when changing your mind, etc. with a pencil... possible but...).
Someone should write a piece that is entirely faked!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-02-19 20:27
So some fraction of the classical music world is apparently a sham. Printed music is presented to the uninitiated (young students, public at large) as gospel- "This is what professionals play every day." When in reality- beyond some threshhold of complexity or below some level of permitted study time- almost nobody fully complies or even cares that much that they don't comply. Part of the aura of the professionals vs the common folk not in the fraternity.
But that's no different than many (all?) other fields of study. I wager that even in arguments in front of the Supreme Court, nobody sitting there has all that full a command over all the history and pertinent case law- until they have opportunity to review later. Doctors, engineers, physics profs- all have a vested interest in making themselves look more capable and their field more restrictive than reality. And so shall it ever be.
Now I have to tell an engineering story. A friend studying for his PhD in engineering mechanics at UT Austin stood in front of the committee for his oral doctoral qualifying exam. It was raining outside. A prof asked him, "How would you describe the fluid flow of the rain through that pipe out there?". My friend spent the next 20 minutes developing the equations of laminar and turbulent fluid flow in a closed channel on the blackboard. When he finished and there was a pause, that same prof said, "I'd probably just look it up in a handbook."
Enough preaching for now I guess. LOL
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2014-02-20 01:24)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2014-02-19 21:27
On one occasion years ago We were doing a piece for chamber orchestra that had the bass and Eb part on one part so I was playing both since it was a split orchestra week. There was an Eb passage in the part that I must have gone over hundreds of times trying to play it correctly in tempo. Before the first rehearsal I went up to our conductor, something I've never done before or after, and said I just can't play that section in tempo and I don't know what you want me to do. He put his hand on my shoulder and said, Eddie, you're the last ww player, there was one player on each ww, to tell me your part is impossible, fake it best you can. :-)
On another occasion we were doing an orchestra piece that had a section that I found impossible to play. I looked at the score and saw that it was a tutti passage so again, after spending ontold practice sessions trying to play it I edited it so I could get to the bar lines on time, just to many ridiculous notes in a bar. At the first rehearsal, after hearing all my colleagues complain about the same page, we read through it and it was chaotic. The composer came on stange as told us and the conductor, that's just an effect, don't worry about the notes. I felt like throwing my clarinet at him. Why not write that in the part, this is for effect only.
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-02-19 23:41
Ed Palanker wrote:
> ...The composer came on stage as told us and the
> conductor, that's just an effect, don't worry about the notes.
> I felt like throwing my clarinet at him. Why not write that in
> the part, this is for effect only.
>
Let's see, how could he make that *look* sophisticated for publication? Notes ad lib? Quasi caotico?
:)
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kthln.hnsn
Date: 2014-02-20 02:14
I really appreciate this article! I thought I was the only faker out there
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2014-02-20 21:43
Ed Palanker wrote:
> ...The composer came on stage as told us and the
> conductor, that's just an effect, don't worry about the notes.
> I felt like throwing my clarinet at him. Why not write that in
> the part, this is for effect only.
>
Karl wrote,
>>Let's see, how could he make that *look* sophisticated for publication? Notes ad lib? Quasi caotico?>>
I like "quasi caotico" --! I'm an amateur composer, but fwiw, aleatory elements in the score can *make sense* whether the passage looks sophisticated or not. For one thing, the composer can simply write an explanatory note in plain English. That's what I did with a solo piano piece I wrote as a joke for a friend who teaches piano. It's an extremely unsophisticated parody of a spoiled kid getting frustrated during a practice session.
My first note, at the top of the score says,
>Don't use pedals. The little genius can't reach the pedals yet. For all passages marked ff and fff, never mind the exact notes. Just bash any notes you please with fists, flat hands or forearms.>
"Minuet: The Little Genius"
http://www.scoreexchange.com/scores/83144.html
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: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-02-20 23:56
I love it! But I think you have the advantage over many "modern" composers in not taking yourself or what you're doing too seriously, at least in the case of "Minuet: The Little Genius."
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-02-21 01:03
I have had great fun my entire life with "unmentionable" topics, precisely because others considered them so... much to the distress of my wife and everybody else in my life except the other adolescent (at heart) clowns.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill G
Date: 2014-02-21 06:24
On my first circus job (while in high school) I had trouble with some of the very fast gallops. An old timer sitting next to me said "When in doubt, trill."
Bill G.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2014-02-21 07:34
Well, a composer writing something unplayable on an instrumentt other than their computer could simply write. "I know this is impossible so it doesn't make a damn difference what you play just try to end with the rest of the orchestra. :-)
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-02-21 03:49
Musicians can go to great lengths to perform something thought impossible, especially if a despised rival can play it. Look up "Terror in Teakwood" from the old 1960's Thriller TV show- on YouTube or DVD. It's about pianists- but I can easily imagine (bass?) clarinetists doing similar.
But if you watch it- don't blame me if you don't sleep well for a few nights.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2014-02-21 06:50
A good tenor saxophone player I used to play with said "If one gets lost in a solo, one can play chromatic phrases and no one will know!". Several band players I know fake or pretend to play when they can't play the notes. Some play with a non projecting sound and never get in trouble until a solo is needed. I've also faked some but I try not to make it a habit.
It is perhaps harder for string players as people can watch the bow movements.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-02-21 12:32
Wes wrote:
> It is perhaps harder for string players as people can watch the
> bow movements.
But not so much the fingers - string players just need to be careful to move their bows with the section. The fingers can do what they need to do.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MSK
Date: 2014-02-22 18:30
I noticed that one of the pieces mentioned as requiring faking was the String part on on the Mozart Clarinet Concerto which is news to me. Apparently, faking has been going on for centuries.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
