 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2002-02-25 23:02
It never fails - a student asks me a question which I don't have a satisfactory answer for.
Do you think that one's ability and skill on the clarinet has a pre-conceived limitation point? In other words, if one practices endlessly will you just continue to improve without end, or is there a finite point one will never get past?
I know my opinion on this, but I would like yours. Thanks...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2002-02-25 23:19
Hang on while I get god on the line ... sorry, keep forgetting I'm an athiest (or the line's engaged) - sorry, that's a how long is a piece of string question, isn't it?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Qhartb
Date: 2002-02-25 23:33
This is not exactly an answer, but . . .
I've read about a study kind of like that a while ago. It had to do more with memorization than development of a skill, but it may be similar. The researchers created lists of nonsense words with definitions and gave subjects a variable amount of time to study them. Charting the amount of study time to the average number of words remembered produced a graph which was increasing at a decreasing rate.
The problem with this test for your question is that the maximum was limited by the number of words, and so after a certain amount of study time one could know all there is to know about these nonsense words. This is obviously not the case with any real life subject.
I guess an easier way to think of it is to look at the greats, who work their whole lives getting better, but the last little bit to perfection is unattainable. If their limit is perfection, I would say normal peoples' probably is too (given an infinate amount of practice time), but who's to say they're not approaching their personal limit, which for them happens to be extremely good? Then the common person's limit is probably lower.
To make a short story (more of a musing, actually) long, my best answer is "I don't really know and will look forward to further replies."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DennisP
Date: 2002-02-25 23:34
I asked this very thing of my clarinet instructor over 30 years ago. He said if practiced at least 2 hours every day for 10 years I would not be the first chair player but I would be "one of the best" whatever that means. I guess instructors are supposed to know these things.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sally Gardens
Date: 2002-02-25 23:46
>I guess an easier way to think of it is to look at the greats, who work their whole lives getting better, but the last little bit to perfection is unattainable. If their limit is perfection, I would say normal peoples' probably is too (given an infinate amount of practice time), but who's to say they're not approaching their personal limit, which for them happens to be extremely good? Then the common person's limit is probably lower.
Calculus on a clarinet board. Yippee.
(It's a pretty good analogy, incidentally.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clairgirl
Date: 2002-02-26 00:13
This is really thought provoking... Well maybe it is genetics, but perhaps the clarinet "greats" were simply predisposed to becoming good clarinetists and were also given the patience and perseverance to get there. If they were given another instrument by chance, they might not have made it as far. Practicing indefinately is not going to give you ideal "genetic traits" (like natural embouchere, fast tounge) but it may help you become a better player on your own natural "setup." But then again, we don't really know who has these "ideal setups" so thats why you should all be practicing!!! Anyway, no matter what level you hope to attain, don't let anyone limit you (including yourself).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: john gibson
Date: 2002-02-26 01:01
Diz...I'm sorry to hear you're an atheist.
As for all the rest....I find most clarinetists way to introverted.
Must have to do with finding the "perfect reed". You know, you CAN
OVER-ANALYZE things. Just practice and get as far as your abilities allow you.....and don't be "boxed in" by what "others" tell you. You are only limited by your own limitations. Jeez...all you have to do is "feel" the music..."touch" the clarinet...."allow" yourself the freedom to think. AND not think about what mouthpiece..reed..ligature......just put the thing together and PLAY!!!! I know this is as anal retentive and over analytical as I'm saying DON'T BE....BUT....think about it...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sally Gardens
Date: 2002-02-26 01:45
>Diz...I'm sorry to hear you're an atheist.
Say, there's the way to World Peace: "I'm sorry to hear you're a ____" (fill in the blank with the religion, philosophy, ideology, or other affiliation not of your choice).
"I'm sorry to hear you're an atheist."
"I'm sorry to hear you're a Catholic."
"I'm sorry to hear you're a Baptist."
"I'm sorry to hear you're a Muslim."
"I'm sorry to hear you're a Unitarian."
"I'm sorry to hear you're a Pagan."
And I'm sorry to those who feel left out of the above list, but I think I've made my point, now. ;-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Pegel
Date: 2002-02-26 02:03
My philosophy is thus:
There are several elements to playing ability. Some of them are limited, some aren't. Some are changeable. In a way, one has limits, but also, there is never a point where one cannot improve anymore.
1. Simple question of talent. Do you pick up these things quickly? Have you been around music your entire life? Things like that. This obviously has limits. Some people are just tone-deaf while others have perfect pitch. Some people don't have a sense of rhythm while others can count 19/16 time with triplets or some gibberish like that like it's nothing.
I fall into both categories here. I have perfect pitch. (It's a curse, really, especially when you're having trouble getting in tune. It's like water torture.) My rhythmic sense, however, leaves much to be desired. This gives me my personal limit to my pracitcing. But these are the tyes of limits that can be stretched.
2. Obvious. PRACTICE! It's not limitless, and the more you practice, the better you're going to get.
I practice sevral things. Composition and performance are perhaps what I practice most. While I am not a particularly good instrumentalist, I am improving. I have noticed, though, that I practice composition about three times more than performance, and those abilities have soared to the point where I want to go out and get published. I'm not bragging or anything, just stating an example from personal experience. I write better than I play.
3. Coordination. One must be able to know what their hands are diong. It's hard to play a fast cadenza when you can't send instructions to your hands fast enough.
4. Physical ability. Left-handed people have more trouble playing piano sometimes because their weak hand is doing so much work. Some people didn't have loose enough lips to play tuba, though they could play euphonium okay and French Horn excellently. Problems like TMJ or arthritis could cause people to have problems with clarinets. I gues one of the few exceptions to this would be singing. (No, wait, laryngitis...)
Oh my, I've gone on quite a rant, have I? Well, there's my two bits. Hope it's worth a little.
David Pegel
(who's still looking through the books on arrangement...)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2002-02-26 02:11
David - interesting that you find perfect pitch a "perfect bitch" - I have the same feelings for it, too.
However, it did get me out of hot water when, as a youngster I purchesed my first clarinet (after having used the school's Yamaha plastic one) and I took my beaufitul Selmer Series 9 home and started playing ... I said to my mother - "Mum, there's something wrong and I don't quite know what but I think it's playing an A instead of a B flat" She said, "Oh, what does that mean" and I said "It means that the man in Landis Music (now defunct) sold me the wrong clarinet". This was a defining moment, let me tell you.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ginny
Date: 2002-02-26 02:17
I suspect that learning is remarkably physical and that we have limitations, yet can exercise our brains and continue to improve even into old age. The perfect pitch genetic/environmental studies omnipresent seem to imply that nuture acts on nature and that early learning may be important. Research on physical differences in brain structure and personality and ability are very common now.
I suspect that some of us use less effective parts of our brains to play music with, that some us have less to use, don't know how to exercise that best bits or did not grow the nerve connections when we grew our brains. MRI and PET scans have really opened up this field of study. I would like to see educators teaching people to exercise the math and music areas of the brain...just like a fitness trainer says do those crunches to get the ab flab gone.
My experience indicates that very early music education is a key to natural first language like playing. This certainly has been my experience with my children, who learned music as a first language and do not seem to struggle with it. They exercised those bits of brains as they grew them. I am certain I will never achieve their degree of fluidity having started past age 5.
Ginny
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2002-02-26 02:53
It's opinion time.
For a practical view, try examining the professional skills of some real people. I believe you will find that it's all rather driven by the kinesthetic skills required to perform the bodily actions needed to achieve professional success. Nadja Comaneci once was awarded a perfect score in gymnastic performance at the Olympic Games. Surely, she would be unable to repeat that accomplishment today despite any amount of rehearsal, practice, or whatever. This is simply because the human body doesn't do many things as well after time marches on, no matter how much we may dislike this.
OTOH, a clarinetist's skills are limited more by the ability to execute relatively low-energy body motions (other than breathing, perhaps). Synchronization of complex and compound finger and tongue motions, for example, is hardly the same as synchronization of total-body motion, excited by some of the longest and strongest muscles in the body.
Once your body learns how to do something, your nervous system likely will always have the capability of telling the muscles how to do it, unless you begin suffering from a pathological difficulty in this area. However, a different form of deterioration of ability probably will arise at some point because your muscles will become less capable of executing orders from the nervous system to do the specific tasks required.
Put this all together, and what does it mean? I suggest that practice may not make perfect, but it will make one better, and it will continue to make one better until one reaches the kinesthetic limitatiions of whatever one is trying to accomplish. Tonguing 32nd notes at MM=120 is, and always will be, beyond me. My tongue simply could never move that fast. To try to reach that level would be a waste of time. But I can try to improve my tonguing skills to increase my speed until I have reached my bodily limit of performance. In another area, my skills of performing scales more and more rapidly with fewer and fewer errors also can be improved. And with practice, they will be improved, right up to the limit of my tongue and finger synchronization speed.
But there is that limit. How well I can do these things will be limited by the ability of my muscles to perform the actions required, in response to commands reaching them eventually from the central nervous system. And if my neurons won't transmit nerve impulses faster, or if my muscles won't respond faster, I really don't believe that trying to force them to do it faster will help. There is a limit, and once it is reached, it's time to go practice something else.
Clarinet playing (other than the breathing requirement) is not an activity which demands huge physical strength, nor is it one which can be improved by building increased muscle mass. If it were so, the limitations we have could be moved up, up, up to an undeterminable level. Do todays athletes perform better than those of fifty years ago? Surely. But is Sabine Meyer's performance of K622 better than Anton Staedtler's? While we have no way of knowing, many would suspect not. We can, of course, compare todays instrumentalists with those who recorded during the last century. How would you vote: better, or pretty much the same?
So yes, one can only get so good at any specific task and no better. But clarinetting is a multi-tasked activity which involves so many different aspects, each of those can be practiced until maximum performance levels are reached across the board. And then, as the performer reaches newer heights, other things one hadn't even thought of before can be practiced. And so on. And on.
Regards,
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: chuck
Date: 2002-02-26 03:25
GBK: I do believe there is a limiting factor in all of us--somewhat akin to Murphy's Law--that no amount of practice will overcome. We all have a level of competence which will either (1) ensure our capacity to perform at a professional level, or (2) relegate us to playing for the fun of it. But the first grouping can be divided into the guys you hire to do a show, or the ones who solo with a major orchestra. Think of Marcellus or Leister with the Mozart--and think of how many who may spend a lifetime of practicing and come up with a very good performance . . yet still fall short of what we may choose to call perfection. If talent were distributed evenly, we could all aspire to greatness, but it isn't. The biggies have talent. The rest of us are working on it. Chuck
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Susie
Date: 2002-02-26 03:26
I think most people have said it well....
There definitely are people who seem to have natural abilities. I'm not an atheist, and I think of these abilities as gifts that we're created and born with. I have a friend who has never had a tennis lesson or an ice skating lesson or a skiing lesson and yet picks up the rhythm of those sports with relative ease... he clearly has some atheletic abilities which I don't have. I enjoy doing all of those things but in order to be even halfway as good as he is, I would have to work at it twice as hard. One might explain this in terms of hand-eye coordination, or in terms of balance or flexibility or whatever... and clearly, the environment and family I grew up with and what I was exposed to makes a difference... but the bottom line is that if both of us wanted to be good at one of these sports and worked at it to the same degree... I have a hard time imagining that he wouldn't be significantly more skilled in the end.
I think playing an instrument is the same. Granted there are people out there with great natural talent and ability, but no love of music or of playing an instrument and therefore that ability will never mature... and there are those with more limited abilities, or physical limitations, who give time and energy and passion to the art, and who become much better musicians than they, or those around them, might have anticipated they would be....but I think there is a difference between these 2 groups of people in terms of natural ability...
Susie
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SPF
Date: 2002-02-26 03:38
Sally,
If your point was that you and Diz can state an unsolicited opinion about God but John can't, then you have made your point.
To the question:
THEORY- Unlimited practice gains unlimited improvement, regardless of natural ablility.
PROBLEM- We don't have unlimited time. We sleep, we eat, we age.
APPLICATION- The more I practice the better I get, but I'll eventually reach a practical limit based upon how much I can practice in my lifetime.
spf
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sally Gardens
Date: 2002-02-26 03:47
>Sally,
If your point was that you and Diz can state an unsolicited opinion about God but John can't, then you have made your point.
My point was that Diz was simply referencing her own belief. John was putting down her belief. Diz ought to be able to refer to her atheism, especially in the humorous way she did, without having it made an object of "pity." If she had instead made an analogy to being Lutheran or Catholic or some other belief, I think most people would readily see it's inappropriate to say, "Sorry to hear you're Lutheran (or Catholic)." Atheism is just another way of believing -- or not believing, as the case may be. We all have our own answers to What's Out There.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sally Gardens
Date: 2002-02-26 03:54
And, getting back on topic...
>Check http://www.sneezy.org/clarinet/Misc/Talent.html for an interesting article (Y'all have explored Sneezy past the Bulletin Board and knew about that article, right?)
Oh, yes, Magnificent Sneezemeister, I have explored Sneezy past the Bulletin Board. But behold, Sneezy is so vast and encyclopedic a site, that much of it remains to be discovered by this humble visitor to this domain. I shall proceed presently to the above-referenced article, and continue pushing toward the unattainable but oh-so-tantalizing limit of Ultimate Clarinet Enlightenment.
(Plain talk translation: Dang, this is one big site. I'm impressed. Thanks for pointing out that article. Will read.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-02-26 03:58
Sally Gardens wrote:
> (Plain talk translation: Dang, this is one big site.
Badly organized ...
It gets reorganized every couple of years ...
half way.
then I run out of time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2002-02-26 04:25
um - did I suddenly change gender without realising!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sally Gardens
Date: 2002-02-26 04:35
I'm sorry, diz -- you're a "he"? ("He may be she, what I'm told is never for certain." - name that Elton John song!) Oh, and I mean I'm sorry for the mix-up, not sorry that you're male. ;-) I must've been thinking that "diz" was a nickname for some female name -- what name, I don't know. ;-) It's late; I'm tired; I think I am x approaching the limit of my brain function.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sally Gardens
Date: 2002-02-26 04:43
Well, despite my previous comment about my brain function, I'll throw in my thoughts on the topic (ooh, aah, on topic!):
Obviously we all do have limits. Some of us have more limited limits than others. All people are limited, but some are more limited than others. 2 + 2 = 5 .... oh, never mind.
Some of us are born with more natural "talent" than others for clarinet playing. We all have our natural aptitudes (and inaptitudes). Attribute this to genetics, good luck, god(s), goddess(es), chance, design, evolution, revolution, or the tarot-reading woman with the really fake accent on the psychic hotline commericals; as you will. The bottom-line, observable fact is that people are born with varying degrees of aptitude for any given function.
I still like that image of approaching but never reaching the limit: As we get closer to the limit, our progress is less dramatic, more subtle, but if we keep moving along the "curve" we do continue to progress lifelong.
"I know it's not much, but it's the best I can do..."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 2002-02-26 04:59
Students(not necessarily music students) should know they themselves are their own teachers in the long run. Also they should be advised to think by themselves before making questions to their teachers, whether they are wrong or correct. Besides, often there are no solutions or a single solutions. Teacher/student relationship is reciprocal not one-way.I may sound like Mr.Chips. But his way of teaching seems to be loosing ground these days.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2002-02-26 10:15
I think that the key to crossing into virtuosity is practicing past the point of diminishing returns.
Obviously, we make much faster progress playing easy stuff. Then we run out of easy stuff, and the next generation of material brings us slower progress for the same effort. The next after that brings us even slower progress at twice the effort. For most folks, myself included, this means a self-imposed ceiling.
I think that the people who do best are those who take practice in stride. They're willing do all those boring warmup and 'maintenance' exercises thoroughly and patiently, and then proceed to stretch themselves daily, no matter how slow the going.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2002-02-26 15:35
All who teach know that there are some students who would never become symphonic players, even if they devoted huge amounts of time to practice. Others, however, seem to breeze right along, improving by leaps and bounds almost every time they pick up their instruments. They have what we call talent. Thanks to the work of Howard Gardner and others, we now are quite certain that those others have talent, too. It just needs to be found.
To me, it is a crying shame that so many people want to learn how do best what they love, rather than wanting to learn how to love what they do best. Those who learn most things with extraordinary ease we call "gifted" and tend to leave them to their own devices. Those with extraordinary difficulty in learning certain things are called "learning disabled," and we try to devote whatever effort is necessary to teach them the things we are so sure everyone should know. This is so unfortunate.
A young child teased his older brother, who could not tie his own shoes. Mother was beside herself, insisting that the older boy, who was "developmentally disabled," just had to learn shoe-tying. I suggested the best way to stop the teasing would be to throw away all their shoes with laces and buy new shoes with Velcro fasteners. She thought I was nuts.
If we knew and could accept all there is to know about teaching, learning, and natural abilities, we would live in such a a wonderful world.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Al
Date: 2002-02-26 16:59
IS OUR ABILITY LIMITED?
Can we all become gold medal Ski jumpers?
" " " " " " Figure Skaters?
" " " " " " High Jumpers?
" " " " Plate Jugglers?
" " " " Rocket Scientists?
.........or is "our ability limited?"
Are there no natural abilities?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Suzanne
Date: 2002-02-26 19:54
Dumb question--if you have perfect pitch, and you play Bb, won't it sound like Ab?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2002-02-26 20:54
Suzanne - having perfect pitch (which I do) and playing a transposing instrument is a little "odd" at first, but your mind soon adjusts - but yes - it was very disconcerting when I first started the clarinet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sandra F. H.
Date: 2002-02-27 00:23
"You can do anything that you want to do." Truly. ...and we can all celebrate in the whole of clarinetting and musicianship. Have you all checked out the astrological charts for some famous musicians. You'd all be amazed at the energy patterns indicated for musical (and any other) talent! P.S. My life experience has made me a better musician, not just practicing!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2002-02-27 02:26
To state my opinion as a short answer - yes, I believe that we are limited by genetic traits. We can either achieve our potential or not - depending on our willingness to work at it. I doubt that many of us ever peak our abilities.
However, the good news is . . . we are not limited in our capacity to enjoy our playing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RA
Date: 2002-02-27 02:31
As far as learning disabilites and music goes, I am one of them. I started playing clarinet four years ago on Jan 21, 1998, my sophomore year of high school. I am now playing seven year pieces and did not really think I would be where I am today. I was terrible at math, yet music makes sense to me somehow. Maybe it is because it will not laugh back at me if I make a mistake here and there. It won't make any cruel comments and allows me to be who I truly am. A musician striving for perfection. My clarinet teacher was offered a job in the summer to teach in PA at a Catholic school and I miss her very much. I have to transpose a lot of my own and play with our pianist at church on my Bb Clarinet. It is hard but I think that it is good experience because I wish to play in a symphony or orchestra one day yet, realistically, I most likely will end up teaching lessons. So, is our ability limited you ask? Well, yes in some things but I think a lot of it is exploring on our own.
RA
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Pegel
Date: 2002-02-27 03:13
This debate is getting weirder and weirder.
I must say I'm a little confused now about "ability", as I defined it in my lengthy posting earlier. We all seem to have our own general ideas that go off on completely different tangents.
So how come we seem to get a similar answer at the end?
Question: Is all great truth based on paradox?
Answer: Yes and no, of course. Didn't you know that?
It seems that's the only way to answer this quuestion now.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jim Lee
Date: 2002-02-27 12:57
If you would spend time with your instrument instead of this fooling around you would be surprised how well you could play.
(tongue in cheek)
Jim
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2002-02-27 14:17
Since I'm one of the over 50 crowd on this board, let me add my feeble wisdom from life's experience. I have seen so many people overcome so much that I would have to say that nothing is impossible. I'm not an atheist because I've experienced the power of God in my life in very tangible ways after once being a border line agnostic--and have learned that human beings are created with a unique talent for creativity. We may never be great at something, but if we work hard and persist we will improve. When we add the creative gene we can be spectacular--like a sunset!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: c'est moi
Date: 2002-02-27 18:17
Uranus has nothing to do with my clarinet...and I'd prefer to keep it that way.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-02-27 21:27
Nicely put, Brenda (except for the god part - I'm way past the borderline on the agnostic part 8^)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
