 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2016-01-09 21:49
What's your theory on why clarinet advancement comes to only a small subset of those introduced to the instrument?
Yes, the instrument is inherently hard. There's difficulty with reeds, finger placement, all sorts of things. But what's your take on leading causes for failure?
Here's mine.
Leading causes of failure can come from ironically enough, the study of failure to do that which proves to be leading causes of success: the meticulous, metronome intensive, fingers religiously geared to speed, properly placement, and not stiff............ not taking beyond speed capable of play, adherence to the study, and study, and study, and yet more study, albeit monotonous, of the classic etude books of our craft.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2016-01-09 22:08
1. Lack of perseverance (and/or love).
2. Lack of critical thinking skills.
3. Lack of self-directed goal-setting.
4. Lack of listening.
5. Lack of quality ensemble experiences
6. Lack of good instruction.
7. Lack of talent (from rmk54)
The order can be argued. I'm looking forward to other responses.
James
Gnothi Seauton
Post Edited (2016-01-09 23:07)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-01-09 22:20
The answers really depend on what you mean by failure.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rmk54
Date: 2016-01-09 22:21
You left out lack of talent.
Music is an art, not a science. There will be those who excel at all your criteria and yet never achieve proficiency.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2016-01-09 23:02
rmk54 and Karl have already hit one issue on the head: what is failure?
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2016-01-10 00:04
On a strictly economic level -
Many fail to advance and/or quit when they come to the realization that the monetary return on the number of hours/months/years spent practicing is no longer worth it.
It's just the reality of trying to preserve live music on an antiquated instrument to an ever diminishing audience.
...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-01-10 00:51
So, are we talking about why so many clarinet students don't make in into professional performing?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MSK
Date: 2016-01-10 04:01
I am both a clarinet player and a parent of one. I have noticed that the average middle or high school student in my community is much less advanced than was my own case growing up elsewhere. Obviously, there are those students who have greater drive, talent, opportunity for private lessons etc. However the educational system is also at fault in holding back the average music student.
I saw a weak first year band director cause many students to lose interest and quit. He still works there. The following year there was a school principal who did not support the new band director when he tried to get the students together for full band practice. Another year there was a band director who did not hold students accountable for learning their music (many never took instruments home to practice). When my kid finally got a strong band director, the ensemble as a whole had failed to advance to where fourth year students should be. If my own child wasn't being raised in a musical family, he probably would not have advanced much and likely would have quit by now.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: locke9342
Date: 2016-01-10 04:35
I feel like a lot of the points made about lack of motivation/ passion and discipline are not clarinet specific; these are points about learning music in general
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Slowoldman
Date: 2016-01-10 05:32
I agree with MSK's comments that the right educational setting can make a big difference.
When I think back on my Elementary, Junior High and first High School band directors, I find it amazing that I persisted at all. Their methods did little to help me understand or develop a passion for music; and there was no encouragement toward excellence. It was only in my Senior year that I was fortunate to have a new band director who was excited about band/wind ensemble music, and knew the growing "serious" band literature. His enthusiasm was infectious, and was instrumental (pun intended) to my continuing to play in college, even though I was not a music major. And finally, it was the "seeds he had planted" that kept me interested in music through the many years I didn't play, creating within me the desire to return to playing when my life again permitted it (in my early 60's).
So now I'm catching up on all the other attributes listed (Tobin, above), and I am a much better clarinetist and musician than I ever was; and music is more satisfying than ever. Probably too little, too late for a lucrative career, but a form of success, none the less.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kellid
Date: 2016-01-10 06:11
I have to agree with those comments about how instruments are taught in school.
Band programs are great but if they aren't supported by instrument specific teaching it is difficult to develop the necessary skills. I am a clarinetist and I am proficient on sax also. I can play flute and have just started learning oboe but I only teach clarinet. I don't have the skills and knowledge to teach the others and would be doing students a disservice if I tried.
I was fortunate that my education included instrumental lessons from Gr 5 as instrumental teachers were employed by the Education Dept and worked at different schools and that my parents could afford for me to have private lessons through high school.
I have also found that strings and brass are "easier" to teach. I am also a viola player, I can play violin without ever having a lesson because the technique is the same. I know many brass players who play across the whole range. Each woodwind instrument is different and requires different skills and techniques. Students need this expertise when they start learning, to learn the correct skills from the beginning.
I applaud directors of band programs, most do a fantastic job but they need to be supported by instrumental specialists so the students can progress and the improved individual skills will also build a better ensemble.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony F
Date: 2016-01-10 07:25
While this thread has taken the course of discussion of the way band programs can sometimes hinder students rather than help them, I think that a large part of the reason that students fail to advance goes back further than that. At the most basic level a clarinet student learns their way around the instrument, and here lies the first of several pitfalls.
It is my observation that after only a few lessons most piano students know the names of the notes on the keyboard and where they are to be found, both on the keyboard and on the stave. This is frequently not true with novices on other instruments. I know players of many years experience who have difficulty naming notes at the extreme upper and lower reaches of the compass of their instrument, and who would not be able to confidently play a passage written in those regions without some time to work out the notes. This acts as a brake on further development.
The next major pitfall is playing over the break. Too many teachers approach this as something fraught with difficulty, something that is regarded as special. The student is given the feeling that this is something much more difficult than anything that they have done before. This may be true, but if the student has less than complete confidence in themselves then this may well be regarded as priming them to fail.
In fact, playing over the break is not particularly difficult, and when I came to that point my teacher completely ignored it as being in any way different from what we had done up until then. Playing over the break took up one lesson and half an hour of practice, and from then on it was never a factor. This is as it should be.
I couldn't count the number of novices I've met who never got past that point, or who regarded it as such a hurdle that it affected everything about their relationship with the instrument from then on.
These are only a couple of points that I think can stunt the development of students as musicians, and it always comes down mainly to the way the subject is taught.
Tony F.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill G
Date: 2016-01-10 09:22
What about physiological impediments? There are several which may retard development, although those obstacles might be overcome by an innately diligent student with good private instruction and strong encouragement. I'm thinking about bite abnormalities, hand shapes not fitting standard instrument configurations, tongue size and shape, and neurological conditions affecting motor speed and movements.
Bill G
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2016-01-10 19:21
I'm not sure we've really defined "fail to advance." That phrase can mean different things to different people. I played first chair in my high school orchestra. If failure means failure to go on from there, get private lessons, go to music school and become a professional clarinet player, then I'm a failure. I have too much stage fright to play in public and I'm not nearly good enough anyway. However, I worked at learning the clarinet and as an older adult, I greatly enjoy playing as an amateur. The outcome seems more like the result of rational choices than failure.
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: brycon
Date: 2016-01-10 21:37
Quote:
What's your theory on why clarinet advancement comes to only a small subset of those introduced to the instrument?
Not enough focus on equipment. If you aren't willing to shell out a grand on a ligature, you're never going to make it in this business!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2016-01-10 22:27
It is not my intent to ignore Karl's well considered original notions that terms like "failure" be defined.
I've just been hesitant on doing so because I enjoy reading the commentary as people define what constitutes their own benchmarks here, and the causal factors that they feel impede or catalyze those benchmarks being realized.
FWIW--and I don't think it matters at this point, my mindset at the question's inception was to seek out the factors that prevent students from being the best players their inherent abilities can make them.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Matt74
Date: 2016-01-11 08:12
I think there are a number of reasons.
1. Society doesn't value classical music. People aren't exposed to live music so that it is a part of their lives. It's not a priority. Most kids don't know anyone outside of their band instructor or private teacher who actively play music.
2. The underlying assumption about studying music is that students have to be especially "talented" and that if you are not, studying music is basically hopeless. We treat music like it's some kind of magical gift, rather than a human quality that can be nurtured. Contrast this with the Suzuki approach which assumes that all students can make music by nature, and that all of them can achieve considerable success. The point shouldn't be making all-state, or being a prodigy, or being awesome, it should be that music is a beautiful part of life for everyone.
3. Music is a lot of drudgery. Band methods, etudes, scales, etc. Students aren't taught what music is really about, just the seemingly impossible mechanics. Couple this with instruments that don't work, awful reeds, and lousy instruction.
4. There is too much emphasis on "literal" or "correct" playing of notation. Teachers are too rigid and unmusical in their approach. It's no fun. Of course students need to know how to play correctly, but they also need to play musically. They need to know what the options are and where the flexibility is. That can be taught.
5. Obviously they need to learn from a clarinetist, from the beginning.
6. Ideally, they should learn keyboard as well, and start a a young age.
Just one personal example. I had very good opportunities growing up, considerably better than average. Nevertheless, I don't think that any of my teachers (most of them pros or college teachers) ever assigned listening. When I was playing (ahem) saxophone (ahem) I practiced a lot of Ferling. No one ever explained to me what it was. Nobody ever told me is was written for oboe, or taught me about Bel Canto style, or anything else. I couldn't make heads or tails of the stuff. The slow pieces seemed like a lot of flittery nonsense. The more baroque-like stuff I liked, because I had listened to baroque music. Likewise no one ever told me that the Rose Studies were largely written for violin! You'd think that it would be important. If they had told me to go and listen to opera, or violin playing, it would have made a lot more sense.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: gwie
Date: 2016-01-11 15:18
You should see some of the stuff people are being told to say to clarinet students in the methods classes some of these budding band directors are taking.
There are so many things I have to fix with new 4th and 5th grade students coming to me from their limited experience with band, it's absolutely astounding...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BflatNH
Date: 2016-01-11 16:45
1. I understand some clarinet players in Turkey are rock stars.
2. Create more venues. Maybe Apple and Belsomra ads and 'contemplative' scenes in movies will increase public demand for clarinet.
3. Reach people musically where you can.
4. Make your own rules & definition of success.
what is unsuccessful in one context may be valued in another
Post Edited (2016-01-11 18:06)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GeorgeL ★2017
Date: 2016-01-11 17:41
"My mindset at the question's inception was to seek out the factors that prevent students from being the best players their inherent abilities can make them."
One factor would be that some of us are not interested in being the best player we could be. To be the best I could be, I would have had to put clarinet much higher on my priority list. In both school and community bands, my goal has been to play well enough that I am useful for the band. Whether I play first or last chair is not important to me. If I enjoy what I am doing, and the other people in the band enjoy having me do it, I am satisfied.
Needless to say, I never considered music as a possible occupation when I was in school.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-01-11 20:13
I think a lot of kids simply find other interests as they get older and have opportunities to try more things. I don't know, though, if that constitutes failing to advance, because many have advanced at a respectable rate right up until the time they find that athletic or extra-curricular club schedules conflict with their music activities, which until that point have not had serious competition for their time. Some get to college or other post-high school settings and find that the music activities are either not available or too inaccessible for non-music majors.
There will always be kids who start playing an instrument and drop out quickly, some because their home situations don't support the time or the expense or the level of commitment needed to advance, some because a low talent level makes it too difficult to keep up with peers and the gratification is too limited.
When it comes to adults, each comes with his or her own set of goals and success or failure is quite a personal and individual standard, so I'm not sure the question is even answerable for them. If they stop, it's usually because they've found something else that interests them more and motivates them to devote their time and energy more than music does. But many adults find success and fulfillment in reaching a level of utility, like GeorgeL and Lelia, that allows them to do what they want to do musically as one of many interests in an active life.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2016-01-11 21:53
I'll add one: pensions; or perhaps more to the point, health care.
At first glance pensions might seem to have as much to do with clarinet play as pencil sharpeners.
On second glance, pensions, or to rephrase, the legacy costs that places like school districts, or even clarinet manufacturer's like Buffet have to pay (and pass along to us consumers) have sucked dry the coffers/budgets of places, such that the arts seem to be the first thing that takes a funding hit.
Now--I'm not saying said pensions aren't well deserved by their retiree recipients. I'm not saying that those who sat on the school board and approved said benefits 30 years ago were poor or corrupt negotiators, or that today's school boards should fail to honor those contractual commitments of yesteryear set by their parent's generation.
But pensions, and the rising cost of healthcare, coupled with these aged retirees greater need for same uses the arts, to a significant extent, as its scapegoat.
"Back then," health care costs were in large or complete part paid by employers. Today, those costs are shared with employers and employees alike, with ever greater shares assigned to the latter. Something though does bother me about the fact that some older generations enjoy better funding of these costs than their employed successors will when geriatric...even if they did win WW II for us, and even if us "youngins" have had more advanced services available to us.
It's tough to be in fine arts, and its getting tougher.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ll lebret
Date: 2016-01-12 00:10
I think that the main problem is that beginners are seldom taught by teachers that actually are proficient clarinet players so they have faulty technique which doesn't allow them to progress. Another problem is that one must have some kind of internal standards so that one actually tries to do things to a high level instead of just good enough. Talent might merely be the ability to concentrate for an extended period of time and holding oneself to high standards.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DougR
Date: 2016-01-15 08:13
I think it's a miracle that so many kids are playing clarinet as it is. Really, if you look at the lives these kids lead, the music they hear, the video and internet they see, and so on, WHERE is the clarinet? Where are the role models for the instrument? Why on earth would anyone their age ever think to play such an instrument?
When I was a kid, I saw this movie "Rock around the Clock." The ONLY thing I remember about it now was the band playing onscreen, and in the foreground was a baritone sax player. I knew instantly as a kid that I wanted to be THAT guy, playing THAT honking big horn. Elementary school band teacher said no, you have to learn clarinet first. So i poked along being a profoundly mediocre clarinet student for a few years until I discovered Benny Goodman (really, a happy accident) and swing music in general. So, I started practicing harder. Got into a junior high band led by a dashing, dapper ex-Jean Goldkette reed player who'd had his own swing bands, who encouraged me to start practicing even harder. So, I took lessons from a local musician who did club dates, pit work at the Kennedy Center, recording, AND drove a Porsche AND his girlfriend was a hot blonde! I loved the music, I wanted to play it--and here were tremendous musicians for me to emulate! So: role models in the culture, plus role models as teachers, plus lots of encouragement. I was lucky I had that.
My point is that to excel at clarinet, or music in general, you need a vision to pursue. And role models (and a passion for the art they make) are at the center of where the vision comes from.
I have a friend who teaches clarinet and sax to kids at a local middle school. He's basically hoping to instill in them the fire for music that he has, but generally it feels like a losing battle due to competition for kids' time and attention (and, I contend, a lack of readily available role models for them to discover and hew to). He works his ass off to prepare lessons and teach the kids, and he's met mostly with modest interest at best, and at worst with fairly total indifference.
I think the board here is kind of a select bunch, in the sense that for most of us, the desire GOT kindled, the mental and emotional connections got made, and somehow we allied ourselves with exemplars (celebrity musicians, charismatic teachers, whatever) that provided the inspiration. We don't see, or have forgotten about, the hundreds of our peers who were exposed to music and took up football, or woodworking, instead. So for us, the mean is a lot higher than for the general public, and maybe it can lead to unrealistic expectations about what success looks like, or why there seem to be so few who DO succeed. (Leaving aside the question of what 'success' is.)
But one thing I know is, if I were teaching, I would absolutely be assigning listening, every week--in addition to, and possibly in preference to, actual practicing, the idea being to expose the student to as many different types of music as possible, and as many pivotal players in clarinet history as possible, with a commitment to hear what the student has to say about what he/she has heard. Did you like it? What did you hear? What did you think? Did you feel excited, or energized, or … happy?? And, I'd do everything possible to encourage my school (assuming I'm on staff at one) to do music trips to hear local groups: orchestras, chamber groups, jazz groups, etc. I'd love for interested students to sit IN performing ensembles, at the elbow of the professionals, literally sharing a stand, just to watch and listen and take it all in--with the hope that some of the magic would rub off.
But then, possibly those of you who already teach do this as a matter of course, and have alrady discovered it's no kind of magic bullet. And in the final analysis, no matter what pains we take, it's still true that out of a whole audience of little girls watching the Nutcracker onstage, there'll only be one or two of them are going to get hit hard enough by the experience to want to pursue it seriously, all the way to say a conservatory level.
Unfortunately, in today's climate, it's important (says me, anyway, and I could always be wrong, never having taught myself) to teach not just instrumental technique but also the lore of the clarinet, its place in various musics, and the virtuosi in each style--to hopefully give the students knowledge and inspiration that our culture no longer does.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Matt74
Date: 2016-01-16 09:10
Attachment: BennyGoodmanCorbis.png (581k)
Attachment: ellington-1964-6.jpg (232k)
Attachment: shaw-artie.jpg (40k)
This is what they used to see:
In those old movies the band guys were cool. Musicians were cool.
Classical music too. Stokowski was in Fantasia. Toscanini was on the front page.
- Matthew Simington
Post Edited (2016-01-16 09:16)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SarahC
Date: 2016-01-16 11:34
I am only new to clarinet, but have been teaching music for more than 20 years.
I think the problem isn't limited to clarinet.
I feel in the time I have been teaching, there has been a drop in standard generally. I feel there are two major contributors.
One is the increase in "screens". Which has lead to lower concentration, and less time available for practise.
One is people in general seem to have more free cash, and enrol their kids in numerous activities, rather than just their instrument.
Of course there is different speed of learning, plus physiological differences, but these were always there. Even some of the baroque and classical pedagogue mention these issues.
I have also noticed schools assign more homework these days than they did when I was a child, I am not sure if that is schools being silly, or whether because of increas in screen time, kids have lower concentration, and hence aren't achieving as much in school hours.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2016-01-16 21:16
All of these responses are spot on.
Some of you mentioned the way clarinet is taught in band classes, and the way these classes are set up. In my junior high in the 60s, we had two bands that were based on playing ability. Some seventh graders qualified for the more advanced ensemble, but most didn't. This system had a major advantage. If a student was motivated, he or she could be with other students who really wanted to excel. Looking back, our band played some difficult music, such as March and Procession of Bacchus (Delibes-Osterling). Believe it or not, this was a required piece for our band festival in the late 60s, although I must confess that we could have played it much better.
The move away from junior highs to middle schools, and the move toward grade-specific bands really changed things. In my area, if you're in sixth grade you're in sixth grade band, seventh grade, seventh grade band, etc. My own kids were often frustrated because they were with many students who couldn't play the music and didn't care they couldn't play it. In order to appeal to everyone, middle school band music often isn't very challenging--or interesting. The situation sometimes improves in high school where assignment to concert bands is often based on ones playing ability.
Nobody mentioned high school marching band, a subject that has generated considerable debate in the past. It's a nice activity, but it shouldn't be the group that defines the high school band program. When I see bands spend endless hours drilling the same music for three months, and then spend every weekend at marching competitions, I cringe. If one wants to encourage high school clarinet players to advance, this isn't the way to do it.
I've written about this in the past, and I'll say it again. The dirty little secret is that music education is divided into the haves and the have nots. In the urban district where I spent most of my years teaching, most parents couldn't afford to buy instruments. Intermediate or step-up clarinets, hard rubber mouthpieces, reeds beyond basic Ricos, and private lessons were nice dreams. Several years ago, Ed Palanker posted a long and interesting message about his wife's experiences teaching in Baltimore, and my experiences in another city were quite similar.
In areas where parents can afford instruments and buy them, better reeds, mouthpieces, and private lessons are often a tough sell to financially-strapped parents. It's hard to play the standard high school solo pieces without private lessons--while playing on a Bundy with a plastic mouthpiece.
Post Edited (2016-01-16 21:18)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
