 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2021-04-10 17:36
Hi Ken,
There have been several times with a wind ensemble when we've played an orchestra transcription when I wished there was an A clarinet part (and I had an A clarinet). Several sharps and all around the break. There a couple of Copland compositions that I can think of right away where this is the case.
But that begs the larger question of "should an arranger pick a more user-friendly key when transcribing an orchestral work?" A purist would probably say no whereas someone that has to play a part in the original key on a Bb clarinet would possibly say yes.
Best,
Hank
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2021-04-10 19:59
Sometimes I suspect that the people who advocate the daily practice of Baermann bk III are fewer (or at least different) than those who actually do it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2021-04-10 21:35
Hank Lehrer wrote:
> But that begs the larger question of "should an arranger pick a
> more user-friendly key when transcribing an orchestral work?" A
> purist would probably say no whereas someone that has to play a
> part in the original key on a Bb clarinet would possibly say
> yes.
I don't really see why a purist would care so much about the key - the damage, to the extent that any has occurred from the revision, has already been done by transcribing an orchestral work to band in the first place. The change from strings to all winds is where any problem has been created. IMO a shift of a half-step from A or D major to Bb or Eb is minor by comparison.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Lagace
Date: 2021-04-10 23:10
I thought it was interesting that composers 'should' consider it. I just played anything as-is, including the Daphnis 2nd Suite in Carnegie Hall - on Eb - in the key of 'B' - and had a ball playing it.
I remember my 1st Wagner opera in the pit with parts for an A bass clarinet, bass clef. I just sat down and learned to read it in two weeks.
Couldn't play either now in my old age.
Those were the good old days.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-04-11 00:12
A Russian friend of mine suggested playing the whole Daphnis suite on Bb and transpose down (it at first looked to me as if you were just exchanging one set of problems for another). When I balked, he said, "then don't do it." Years later I see the point of playing some of those altissimo runs down a half step........ya never know.
And yes, I play Baermann III every day. In fact if I am pressed for time, that is tne ONLY thing I do. Not the whole book in one sitting mind you, you pick your poison. But if you have to narrow it down and get the most bang, I'd do the thirds and simple chords. The dominant seventh chord exercises are still my favorite!
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kilo
Date: 2021-04-11 15:45
"...picking up his Bb model and playing her piece as darkly as she could have wanted..."
Nice.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: StanD
Date: 2021-04-11 16:23
Hello Paul,
I, too, play Baermann lll every practice session. As I like to stay in one “key”, I tired of flipping pages and decided to re-organize the book in “key” sequence. I know I’m not the first to do this (Snavely?). I also decided to extend the ranges of numerous exercises as well as to include some additional materials. An unexpectedly ambitious project.
Now, as I like to do, I can conveniently stay in one key signature for about a week and, in the more challenging ones (B major, G# minor, etc., etc.), for up to a month. As yourself, I too work over the thirds but really beat myself up in the sixths. They’re tough in the “remote” keys!
My revision is still undergoing minor editing but If you’re interested, or just curious, a hard copy is yours for the asking.
Stan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Lagace
Date: 2021-04-11 16:58
Kal Opperman back in the 1960's would give me a two hour assignment, then add, "and play it in all the keys."
But then I saw (disappointed) that in his third book of Daily Studies, it is all one pattern transposed in all keys.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2021-04-11 19:14
Quote:
Sometimes I suspect that the people who advocate the daily practice of Baermann bk III are fewer (or at least different) than those who actually do it.
I should hope so! Doing the same things every day stifles growth and creativity. By remaining in your comfort zone, you stick to plateaus rather than searching out new learning curves. Playing the same scales every day is just such a terrible use of practice time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-04-11 22:22
Ummmm..............
I would humbly suggest that (other than atonal music) a regimen of the BASIC building blocks of technique is more akin to an athlete hitting the gym with a standard list of exercises, or doing a routine of grass drills.
Of course if you prefer the "hit or miss method" of creativity, no problem.
....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2021-04-12 01:07
Quote:
I would humbly suggest that (other than atonal music) a regimen of the BASIC building blocks of technique is more akin to an athlete hitting the gym with a standard list of exercises, or doing a routine of grass drills.
Well, it isn't an either/or--scale-book exercises or no scale exercises--unless, of course, one completely lacks intellectual curiosity and cannot fathom practicing technique outside of what a hundred-year-old book says to practice.
Because you bring up sports, I'm a serious basketball enthusiast, played rather competitively in high school, and follow what professional trainers do with their NBA clients for inspiration (with basketball and clarinet!). Athletes, at least as far as basketball goes, practice different types of exercises: skills-based exercises and game-based exercises. Skills-based exercises, such as dribbling and shooting drills, are very much like practicing "BASIC building blocks." With these exercises, however, trainers add complexity, often by switching between tasks (what's called "random practicing" or "interleaved practicing") or stacking tasks on top of one another. At any rate, they avoid doing the same exact exercises every day because the mind dulls and growth slows.
When you practice Baermann, to bring it back to clarinet, you could start your scales from the top pitch and play the scales in reverse, begin in the middle and expand outward (a type of scale Busoni advises and which I learned from Carl Schachter), begin on different scale degrees, and so forth.
But professional sports trainers are also very careful to include game-based exercises, which seek to incorporate the specific movements, actions, and variables athletes experience in an actual game.
So if you play your Baermann scales every day for your life, great: when there's a Baermann scale concert, you'll be the first person called to perform. But in the complex world of actual music, things rarely work as they do in a Baermann exercise. To demonstrate, then, what I mean by creative practicing:
There's a passage in Mozart at m. 108 (in sixteenth-notes: G-F#-A-G-B-A-G-F#-E-D#-F#-G) that a student was struggling with. The student could play her scales as well as her scales in thirds. The difficulty, then, seemed to be switching between the two diminution patterns. (And switching between scales and scales in thirds is not something that appears in any scale book I know of.) So I asked her to learn the line beginning on each scale degree of E minor and then in all 12 keys in order to gain fluency with the particular task with which she was struggling. (This type of practicing, though, has many other benefits, including transposition and tonal hearing, that is, aurally recognizing the relationships among scale degrees.)
The music, then, generated the technical exercises needed to help the student with her particular problem. And that's creative practicing. Indeed, I encourage my students to keep a book of staff paper with things they realize are difficult for them and exercises to remedy the difficulties (many years ago, students used to call these sorts of books "zibaldoni" or, in English, "heaps of things").
Quote:
Of course if you prefer the "hit or miss method" of creativity, no problem.
Scale books are useful for inexperienced students, who have trouble reading in keys, or for bringing something to your attention that you a.) didn't know existed and therefore b.) didn't realize would be difficult to play ("Ah, returning scales moving up by scale degree are tough! I should add them to my book of things to practice."). But otherwise, they're a waste of paper.
Moreover, practicing the same exact thing everyday doesn't lead to perfection, it leads to mediocrity. But if you prefer mediocrity, have at it!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-04-12 04:29
Agree to disagree
But yes, I do also agree that you must add variety and find ways to approach the techniques that are personally challenging.
I try to keep in mind that we have a wider audience here and don't wish to provide a less ambitious student the excuse to avoid learning scales. Even the great Mike Lowenstern made reference to the Baermann as a way to make easy work of standard tonal music.
......................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2021-04-12 06:12
Quote:
I try to keep in mind that we have a wider audience here and don't wish to provide a less ambitious student the excuse to avoid learning scales.
That's a strawman. I think scales are vitally important. The issue, though, is about practicing the exact same scale exercises every day.
Quote:
Even the great Mike Lowenstern made reference to the Baermann as a way to make easy work of standard tonal music.
And that's an appeal to authority. But I think Baermann can be fine as long as it's a tool in your toolbox, not the only tool in your toolbox. (Moreover, I feel pretty sure Michael Lowenstern wouldn't suggest something as silly as practicing Baermann III every day of your life!)
Quote:
Agree to disagree
But that's the main issue here. It isn't a matter of two equally valid but contrasting opinions. Sports psychologists, professional trainers, educational experts, etc. recommend variety when it comes to learning. Aside from your own experience, what is there to support doing the same thing every day for years?
In your defense, when we're in our comfort zone, we often feel as though we're improving considerably, and studies show this might be the case in the short term. Over longer periods of time, however, people who introduce more variety into their practice regimens have been shown to improve more. (There's an article on interleaved or randomized practicing, which encourages leaping somewhat quickly between tasks, at the Bulletproof Musician blog that discusses this phenomenon.)
By telling students, "Do your Baermann scales every day for 30 mins," then, we could be helping them improve to a point and then holding them back. At the least, perhaps do Baermann scales on M, W, and F and chromatic scales on T, Th, and S. And then, after a month or two, switch to some other scales: two octave scales starting on scale-degree 1, 2, 3, and 4 on M, W, and F, and Hamelin scale exercises on T, Th, and S, for example.
But coming up with your own exercises is so simple. Recently, I heard a Mozart phrase that had his idiosyncratic chromatic appoggiatura (scale-degree #2 to 3 on top of a tonic chord at a phrase ending). I thought, "Hmmmm, that's nice. What would it sound like in a scale in thirds?" So, for a week, I practiced scales in thirds with a chromatic appoggiatura in front of each group of two notes (in triplets: B-C-E, C#-D-F, D#-E-G, etc.).
Yes, it takes just a bit more brain power than opening up your Baermann book and doing the same thing you do every day. But you learn some musical language; train your ear; train your fingers in new patterns; and, perhaps most importantly, take ownership over the learning process. So maybe instead of outright dismissing it, give it a shot for a few months and see how it works!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2021-04-12 16:21
Ken,
I've been on forums where I have seen the moderators quickly and firmly insist that a thread not be "hijacked." As I recall, the suggestion was often included that "keep doing it and..."
HRL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2021-04-12 16:23
The video claims the main consideration in choosing to score for Bb or A clarinet is the provision of keys that are easier to execute. Discussion flared out from that aspect into the best ways to build technical facility in all keys. It went sideways, into an interesting discussion.
In the video, it's odd that the timbral difference between the clarinets is dismissed by asserting that capable performers can easily alter timbres as needed on either one, while implying that they'd have difficulty executing certain keys. Successful manipulation of timbre as described is at least as advanced a technique as facility in all keys. I'd guess the latter is more common than the former. If the composer/arranger has reason to be worried about how hard the keys are for the players, then they better not assume those players can adjust the timbre to lighter or darker.
Maybe the lighter/darker thing isn't that important. It may exist, albeit with many exceptions, but I doubt the majority of listeners are going to catch it, at least consciously. Assuming that, the video makes sense. Otherwise, probably not.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2021-04-12 16:30
Sure: now back to the same rousing discussion that's already been had tons of times before. Have at it.
Post Edited (2021-04-12 16:53)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
