 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Grendel McGrenadill
Date: 2023-10-27 12:39
Hello.
A while back I found a recommendation of Keith Stein's "The Art of Clarinet Playing" in this wonderful board. I found it to be a very well explained encompassing lecture.
I was wondering if someone here could recommend something similar for music theory and a systematic approach to learn sight-reading.
As I never had a good musical theory education in school all my self-gained knowledge is good and helpful but I am missing a structure to help me understand things I am sometimes musing about.
For example why the lowest note on a ( Eb ) Bass clarinet is called Eb and not D# and similar seemingly obvious questions.
Thanks for all suggestions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2023-10-27 18:54
There is a "Music Theory for Dummies," which might be a decent source for basic theory.
As to sight-reading, the best way to learn to sight-read is to do it. Look up music online - IMSLP has an inexhaustible supply if you're looking for "classical" style.
How would you describe your level of playing when you're reading from printed music? There isn't any point in trying to sight-read music that's either beyond or significantly below your technical ability.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2023-10-27 19:54
I'm speculating here, but the reason the lowest note on a contra-alto (the only Eb "bass" clarinet I know of) is called Eb is probably because the instrument is pitched in Eb, not D#. As you know from your music theory, the key of D# would have 9 sharps, 2 of which are double sharps (F## and C##), far more complex than the key of Eb and its 3 flats. Most wind instruments are typically pitched in flat keys (Bb, Eb, F). Some exceptions are a few in C and A. In both cases, no more than 3 flats or sharps.
Although the contra-alto was called contra-bass by many in the mid-20th century, I think contra-alto is most commonly used today. In any case, referring to it as a "bass" would be wrong since the bass clarinet is in Bb.
Generally, music theory exists to make how music works easier to comprehend, not harder. So if your particular solution to a music theory problem is really complex, it's probably not the best solution.
Post Edited (2023-10-27 19:59)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2023-10-27 21:08
Grendel McGrenadill wrote:
> Hello.
> For example why the lowest note on a ( Eb ) Bass clarinet is
> called Eb and not D# and similar seemingly obvious questions.
Are you talking about an instrument that's *pitched* in Eb, or a bass clarinet with fingerings that go down to Eb (instead of C), which is often described as an Eb bass?
You've gotten a couple of replies about why an instrument pitched in Eb is called an Eb instrument (alto clarinet, alto sax, piccolo clarinet, etc) instead of D#. D# is technically higher in pitch than Eb.
The Bb bass that lacks the C extension and is often called an "Eb bass", but the lowest note can function (and be notated) as either Eb or D#, depending on the key context.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-10-27 21:48
Wow, a lot of complex replies. I’ll assume you meant a bass that goes down to Eb. Yes, we say Eb. It comes from the predominant use (scales with flats are easier for “flat” transposing instruments to play; also there IS a key signature of Eb but not D#). My best guesses why.
For reading, learn the names of the notes by rote (on our staff, treble clef, the second space up from the bottom is always “A” and the top line is always “F,” for example. Thinking fingerings may seem like a good idea but it will hold you back, DON’T DO IT!!!!
As for theory, there is no one stop shop but I’d say a good starting point would be to learn how to put together a chart of the circle of fifths. More on that later.
………..Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2023-10-28 00:54
Quote:
As I never had a good musical theory education in school all my self-gained knowledge is good and helpful but I am missing a structure to help me understand things I am sometimes musing about.
I think that the music theory most people receive in school isn't particularly useful. It's more helpful to invest that time and energy into building strong fundamentals in ear-training, singing, spelling intervals and scales, rhythm exercises, basic keyboard playing, etc.--things that now get grouped as "musicianship" skills.
The issue with music theory education is that students learn things as "rules," divorced from the actual experience of music making. They know, for example, that a deceptive cadence occurs when scale-degree 5 in the bass moves up to scale-degree 6 and could provide this answer on an exam. But, importantly, they can't recognize by ear a deceptive cadence in a piece of music they're playing and therefore can't perform it in an expressively appropriate way.
The two textbooks most conservatories and universities use are Steve Laitz's The Complete Musician and Carl Schachter's Harmony and Voice Leading. I had both Laitz and Schachter as teachers: both are brilliant educators and musicians, and Schachter, in particular, had a huge influence on the way I think about music. Having said that, both texts are a little "wordy" and aren't super friendly for beginners. I would suggest starting with Seth Monahan's excellent YouTube series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgZH3Vee7xE&t=406s
Monahan is a professor at Yale University. So you're getting an expertly crafted education for free online. These videos, then, could be augmented by the Laitz or Schachter books, which could provide further depth and examples on the things that interest you.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2023-10-29 00:55
Hi,
I've managed to fight my way up from grade 1 to distinction in the grade 5 music theory exam in the last few years, just working from books.
The thing that I found is that there are a lot of books and youtube videos and websites and whatnot, but a lot of them really make no sense, and make the learning harder rather than easier.
I also asked people who knew a lot about music and it seemed that they found it very hard to explain, even though they knew it themselves.
In the end I figured out that there is one series of books that makes sense, if you are learning alone, without a teacher.
This is the good set:
https://shop.abrsm.org/shop/ucat/Music-Theory-in-Practice/1164
There are also answer books to buy, which are really important, because without the answer books there is no way to know if you have really understood what is wanted.
One thing that I found really good about the books is that I had to do *a lot* of transposing, and spent months filing in the little notes on the stave. After I had ground through all the books, my sight reading got really a lot better and I can sight read far better in both clefs on the piano now.
The previous generation of books by ABRSM were not as accessible, and the current, later generation don't have enough examples to really make the knowledge sink in. I think that the actual set above are the good ones.
There is one question in the ABRSM grade 5 music theory paper where you have to look at a melody and make chords and cadences and write them down as roman numerals, and I couldn't find any books that explained that well, but it is explained in this video really well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtAwpynolz8
I also needed this book:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/AB-Guide-Music-Theory-Vol/dp/1854724460
I learned the vocabulary from this website training course:
https://app.memrise.com/course/134901/grade-1-5-music-theory-abrsm/
In order to sit the exam I also had to learn to write out the circle of fifths from memory. The trick is to notice that the letters go in alphabetical order if you go round the circle writing every second letter. The sharps and flats also just add one more each time, so if you know the order they are added in then that is easy.
This is the circle of fifths:
https://americansongwriter.com/songwriter-u-songwriting-tips-with-the-circle-of-fifths/
I also had to be able to draw a keyboard really fast on paper.
You can do the grade 5 music theory test online from anywhere in the world, and there are practise papers online here:
https://www.abrsm.org/en-gb/music-theory/about-music-theory
Once I got to grade 6 it was much harder, and I kind of got defeated. I have bought a lot of books, but I think that to do grade 6 I would need a natural gift for musical composition, and I just can't seem to get my head around it.
It helps if you have pencils that sharpen to a really sharp point and a rubber that works really well, because there is a lot of filling in tiny notes in the books.
It takes quite a long time.
Good luck!
Post Edited (2023-10-29 01:03)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Grendel McGrenadill
Date: 2023-10-29 13:51
Wow. So much info. Thanks a lot!
I should have mentioned my level of knowledge a bit better.
So I do / did play drums professionally in a jazz, pop and sometimes theatre context. I also fooled around on the piano once to prepare for a music school entrance examination. For that I also learned the basics in theory and ear training. Circle of fifths, scales, the likes.
I did not end up in that school for various reasons, mostly since I was already on the road a lot.
Down that same road I also picked up the guitar once or twice and also created some music for performances and moving pictures.
However all of this was done more by trial and error and once could say that I do lack a lot of the theoretical knowledge to explain what I did.
I actually do agree with "brycon" though that musicianship skills are usually more helpful "in the field" however, I am a curious person and I like to learn.
A while back I picked up the clarinet, an instrument I always liked and always wanted to play. The Stein book and some tips from actual players in real life plus the very helpful "tomplay" app did allow me to practice in a more or less successful way.
What I came to notice though, is that very often my mind gets a bit to discombobulated trying to figure out the whys and hows.
As a simple example: Last week I decided to start practicing the minor blues scales on the clarinet in the easier keys and I started to write them down.
Of course I ended up with quite some accidentals strewn through the staffs.
Then I of course added a key signature to the beginning. In the case of the F minor blues scale I used f / Ab. Now that got rid of most of the accidentals of course, but: I do not know if this is the "correct" way / approach to do this.
And with correct I don't mean "fit for an exam at music school" but "making sense to other musicians" in the context of good legibility and simplicity.
( That reasoning I gained from years of re-writing drum charts created by various non-percussion persons for the sake of usefulness in action )
In case of theory I still catch myself imagining a piano keyboard in my head and then counting the keys to find and name an interval to another note.
All those things do help sometimes but now I figure it might just be helpful to put a bit more structure in that whole endeavour especially since I am learning a new instrument which has its beginnings within the "classical" music world.
From my experience I would argue that once you have a solid basis of theory in a topic you can figure out a lot of stuff by logic reasoning.
That said however, there are unfortunately some awful books around which use pointless things like mnemonics for remembering note names... even though the alphabet is quite a strong mnemonic in itself.
So this is the reason I was asking for something like the Keith Stein book, because what I really liked in it was that he did not give some "secrets", "special sauce", "hacks" and what not but instead presented the fundamentals in an understandable way.
I will now make a coffee and check into all the examples given here.
Thanks again!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
