Author: Ed
Date: 2014-11-02 18:17
A couple of things to add. You mentioned that Russianoff and Opperman were not known as players. While that may be true of Russianoff, who never had a playing career, Opperman was a very highly regarded NY player, doing the top Broadway and studio work.
http://www.kalmenopperman.com/biography/professional_work
There are many factors to consider in the debate of teachers/players. What works for one person does not necessarily work for another. Personality, temperament, needs, strengths etc may not fit. One teacher may be great for advanced concepts and may not deal well with those who need work on fundamentals. One who is great in teaching the mechanics of playing may not have the musical insight or knowledge of advanced repertoire. Both of these teachers might be great for individual students because they are able to fit the needs of that student at the right time.
I often think that a player like Drucker, who is a real force of nature, may have had a huge career no matter who he studied with.
Some of the top players are not necessarily great teachers. Fine teaching and playing are not necessarily related. Some lack the ability to verbalize and explain what they do, some lack the passion, some are just too focussed on their own playing.
A great teacher has to be the right fit for a student and have the ability to find solutions to a variety of problems. To me, whether a teacher becomes a huge name is not necessarily related and is a result of many other factors.
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
