 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Matt74
Date: 2016-08-30 19:29
From the time I started playing, through my second year of college as a music major, I always played first parts in concert band. Last year in a community band I played 3rd, and some 2nds. The 2nds and 3rds were a lot harder. You were always crossing the break, using the pinky keys in odd combinations, and always playing throat tones. Intonation is sketchy. Because the parts were harmony parts, you were usually playing note combinations that were not straight arpeggios or scales. There are also frequent long rests, and it's often hard to match what is written on the page with what you are hearing in the group, so getting lost is easy. My director was "Mr. Rubato", and not great with cues, so that didn't make things any easier. The other thirds were following me, so if I got lost, we were all lost.
At some point in the distant past it occurred to me that the 3rd part was just as important as the 1st, and that in a school or youth band, it didn't make any sense to have all your best players on first part. In fact from a pedagogical standpoint, it seemed like all players should rotate through all parts (insofar as this is possible). There is a real art to playing harmony roles.
(I'd like to point out here that in some bands the trumpets seem to be playing random parts every rehearsal. "Who's on first?" "Who's on Cornet?" "We don't have a second." "I thought you were on third.")
It's the same as playing a solo... When you are playing a lot of eighth notes you sound great, but it's much harder to play convincing half and whole notes.
What do you guys think? I'm talking youth bands, not professional musicians. I'm not arguing against formal chair placement or auditions, just saying that it seems preferable to mix up who plays what part a bit. The way it's usually done gives the impression that the first parts are harder, the 3rd parts are easy, and that only the first part is important. It also gives the impression that if you are playing third, you are no good, or don't really matter, which isn't true.
- Matthew Simington
Post Edited (2016-08-30 19:42)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2016-08-30 19:44
I haven't looked at band arrangements in decades- so tell me- are any written with any expectation that 1st chair players are better than 2nd or 3rd? That is- 3rd is easiest? I thought I remembered being taken aback by the difficulty of 1st parts when I first advanced that far in high school- at least the marching parts were a lot higher up! Was that an accident or deliberate by the arranger? The issues you mention (throat tones, sustained notes) could happen even if arranger was trying to make 2nd/3rd easier.
If this ever happens (and I know it doesn't ALWAYS happen), how often and for what kinds of music? School only? Community bands? Professional show parts? At some level aren't all players expected to be top notch?
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2016-08-30 19:46
Agree.
And congratulations for your openness and insight - I was halfway expecting some primaballerina whining, which it certainly wasn't. :-)
I think each chair should have at least one "secure" player whom others can follow. And rotating is a good idea, especially as you learn to appreciate the harmony parts, and the comparative easiness of a melody part. Plus it is a lesson in humility when you realise that just because you're a good first chair player you can still stink as a 2nd or 3rd.
Add bass and alto clarinets to that equation. They too weave the sound carpet for others to wade through, and, in the situation of the bass clarinet, you often have some rhythm section duties.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2016-08-30 20:41
In band, the 2nd part often follows the first part, but lower in pitch.
The 3rd part often follows some other instrument altogether, like bassoon or one of the horns. It can be more interesting this way than 2nd - and more prominent.
As for bass clarinet, if the band doesn't have one then you don't realize how much is missing until the first day one actually shows up. It changes the entire sound of the band.
Stan, in professional groups generally every member can really play, right down to the last chair. This is also true of better college groups, as I understand competition is fierce and selection thresholds are high. Other amateur groups vary in how selective they are.
Placement angst in the pros seems rarely discussed. Presumably the assumption is, if one dislikes one's job one goes elsewhere. No doubt there's instances where someone seated lower can play obviously better than the principal. I don't know how that works.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2016-08-30 21:18
I know that arrangers have a lot of limits on what they should write, especially for music for school bands. Still, I would be tempted to throw some morsels to the 2nds and especially 3rds. Why not a gorgeous solo in the 3rd part, with the 1st filling in higher harmonies? Is there not, somewhere someplace, an arrangement that does something like this? Or did the arranger who tried that end up in some other career, perhaps microbiology?
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: KenJarczyk
Date: 2016-08-30 22:15
Percy Grainger always seemed to emphasize every section and part in his compositions.
Ken Jarczyk
Woodwinds Specialist
Eb, C, Bb, A & Bass Clarinets
Soprano, Alto, Tenor & Baritone Saxophones
Flute, Alto Flute, Piccolo
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SonicManEXE
Date: 2016-08-30 23:33
Just last week I was put on second part for my college's symphonic band, and after playing Apollo Unleashed (Ticheli Symphony No. 2 Mvt. III), Festive Overture (Hunsberger arrangement), Council Oak, Overture to Candide (Grundman arrangement), and countless other pieces on first or solo part for the past two years in my high school's wind ensemble, being on second part again is very strange.
I would say that first part can be more difficult only because of the high range you can potentially reach, but that doesn't make second part any easier to play. It is still challenging, but it doesn't usually have the requirement of having an embouchure of steel (something I partially lost due to not playing much over the summer so I'm actually glad I have a semester to get back to the stratosphere). Third part could be a kitten or a tiger depending on the piece. That's how it's always seemed to me.
Also, in response to Stan, it could be very possible that an arranger (especially if the arranger is the band director or someone hired by the band program) could make the second and/or third part easier than the first part for marching band music. I know that happened a few times in high school, at least as far as range is concerned. You give a bunch of freshmen high notes and almost all of them will freak out.
Jared
Ft. Lauderdale & Tampa, FL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-08-30 23:35
I conduct a small (40-45 piece) youth wind ensemble for a local organization that includes 3 wind ensembles (of progressive ability - mine is in the middle), 2 orchestras and 3 young string ensembles as well as several chamber groups. I also coach a young clarinet quartet (grades 6-7 from the younger band).
I've always moved the clarinetists in my wind ensemble around among the parts, but have had one strong player whom I kept in the 1st chair. Even then, I have assigned the solo passages to different players, so 1st chair is more a visual perk than a musical one. Usually, I haven't had the 6-8 players physically move - they are all sitting near enough to each (in two rows) other to hear the other parts.
In the clarinet quartet I make sure to rotate the players through different parts for each piece, which means I need to have at least four pieces in the repertoire at any given time.
I do need to be more careful about who is assigned to the top parts when there's real difficulty involved. Realistically, some of the kids do play better than others. But by making sure even the weakest players get a chance to be "first" on something within their ability for success, I think they all benefit.
The top orchestra in the organization actually rotates the entire two violin sections - each of the two sections play 1st for half of the program and 2nd for the other half.
I think mixing things up this way works well. It's a little more work for the director but more kids feel ownership of the performance.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: locke9342
Date: 2016-08-31 05:22
It's weird, in highschool bands we typically go best to worst (my band is actually trying the strong player on each part thing) and that doesn't always end well. We end up with relatively new players trying to get their throat tones in tune and be back bone of the band. And in some cases the 2nd and 3rd parts are actually harder than the 1st, such as in 4 scottish dances. The 2nd and 3rd parts are actually nearly impossible and we have 8th graders playing them. I guess its a good learning experience.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roxann
Date: 2016-09-01 01:35
Joe Tornello, the director of the All-Campus Band at BSU (as well as the Blue Thunder Marching Band), mixes up the clarinet, flute, and trumpet sections so there's always someone very strong playing in each section...and we switch chairs for each number. This also gives 3rd's the opportunity to play 2nd and 2nd's the opportunity to play 1st. Over the past four years, the band has improved dramatically, and I'm certain that that is one reason why. This year, we're playing two of the little known Sousa pieces that one branch of the military has found and re-scored. Evidently, Sousa used a very odd seating arrangement in his bands. We're going to be using that same arrangement when playing those pieces. I'm curious to hear the difference.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: derf5585
Date: 2016-09-01 02:00
One way to alleviate the problem of chairs is to play an "orphan" instrument
IE
Alto, Bass, Contra alto, Contra bass, Octo contra alto, octo contra bass
Baritone sax, bass sax
Bassoon, contra bassoon
String Bass
Oboe, English Horn
Alto flute, Bass flute
fsbsde@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: CEC
Date: 2016-09-01 06:20
Way back in the dark ages, when I played in the University of Illinois Symphonic Band, the seating arrangement was as follows:
The top six players were first clarinets, the second and thirds alternated. 7th played first chair second, 8th played first chair third, 9th played second chair second, 10th played second chair third, and so on. I don't think I've heard of another group with that system. Moving players around definitely seems to be the trend these days - the local conservatory does it with their wind ensemble.
Chris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2016-09-01 07:28
I've played and continue to play in many community ensembles. I don't get to pick the players and the chairs. But if I had my way, I'd put (with about 8-10 clarinetists), top two on first, next on second for a strong second, next on third for a strong third, and then divide up the rest up to their comfort levels.
And I'd always build the section like a pyramid from the bottom up. For example, in a section of ten, 5 thirds, 3 seconds, 2 firsts. Or maybe 4,4,2, but in general, I'd ALWAYS have more thirds and seconds than firsts. Not sure how this would apply in a band where EVERYONE plays well, but in the community bands I've been in, the thirds tend to be the weaker players, and they then play more timidly which means they're heard even less. So realistically, having more would boost their confidence (helps people feel less exposed as a personal player as there's a bigger section to blend into) and would boost the volume equal to the firsts (typically strong players, NOT afraid to play loud)
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2016-09-01 15:28
Alexi -
In every band I've played in (even including West Point), nearly everyone played as loud as possible. My motto is one I got in junior high: At ff, if you can't hear everyone else, you're too loud. At pp, if you can hear yourself, you're too loud.
In ensembles, I always play one dynamic lower than marked, and if I'm near the brassholes, I use earplugs. I think about blending with the rest of the section. Even if I have a solo, I depend on resonance and center to be heard, not volume.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2016-09-01 16:08
Ken Shaw wrote:
> Alexi -
>
> In every band I've played in (even including West Point),
> nearly everyone played as loud as possible. My motto is one I
> got in junior high: At ff, if you can't hear everyone else,
> you're too loud. At pp, if you can hear yourself, you're too
> loud.
>
> In ensembles, I always play one dynamic lower than marked, and
> if I'm near the brassholes, I use earplugs. I think about
> blending with the rest of the section. Even if I have a solo, I
> depend on resonance and center to be heard, not volume.
>
> Ken Shaw
That's awesome stuff Ken! I use the same concepts of ff and pp (especially for chamber music). But in the community orchestras I play in, they are filled with many folks who just aren't confident so a third clarinet section ff often consists of all of them playing probably a mf-f, while the brass in the band (also amateurs or people getting back into music) aren't shy of playing at blastissimo. So for THAT type of makeup in an ensemble, I prefer more thirds than seconds or firsts.
I think the hardest concepts to teach others and effectively learn about dynamics is that ff isn't "as loud as you can play". It's typically just "significantly louder than what just preceded it or will follow it". The concepts of not making all your fortes or fortissimos the same throughout a piece, and also being able to think and know when it's a "group" forte or "ensemble" forte is tough.
I just now that in most of the groups I've played in, the further from the first chair you go, the less confident the person has played, and the less the part has been heard or been filled in. So personally, I prefer at least one very strong second clarinet player and possibly even a STRONGER third clarinet player. (Personal opinion, based on very different playing abilities than what might be found at music schools/universities or other places that have a higher bar or audition requirement just to get into the group)
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2016-09-01 16:44
Yesterday a gentleman who's a long-time community band conductor, clarinetist, and teacher told me that it's usually bad to have exactly two clarinetists play 1st because they tend to not play in tune; it's better for intonation to have either three 1sts or just one.
I don't doubt that he spoke from long experience, but I'm having trouble understanding this.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2016-09-01 18:40
Well, in my experience this tends to be the case, at least with high and long notes (with fast riffs, nobody would really notice).
And as one can hear these squeaky high notes very good anyway, it was decided that only one at a time should play that lick while the others played some harmony part (or not at all).
One player only: never out of tune with themselves, never out of rhythm with themselves. It just sounds better than when three or more make a mushy fuzzy pap out of what should be a crisp lick.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
