 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: alvi
Date: 2014-11-18 14:49
Hello everyone !
I have always trouble to learning playing from memory..
This is very hard for me.. but if I learn something I can play when you will wake up me on night but it is very time taking
When I practice and want to play from memory I play once of notes and later trying to play form memory, two years ago I learn Jorg Widmann Fanatasie and I was learning from memory one year :( Is very long time...
Now I start learning Carl Nielsen Clarinet Concerto and it is to me difficult, like Widmann.. I have to play Nielsen from memory on January so I don't have so much time like Widamann :(
Maybe you have some advice for playing/practice form memory?
Thanks for advice!
Greetings!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-11-18 15:27
I'm sure there are the very technical sections that you've practiced so much that you know them by heart. The trick is to make the connective portions and then the "easy" sections just as ingrained. You do it the same way. Take small chunks and play them over and over. Once the chunk (for example one leading to a memorized bit) is memorized through repetition, then add it to the technical bit. Then do the same for a part AFTER the technical bit. Keep going like that. Just keep in mind that you do NOT have to learn it in the order the piece is written, you just need to 'end up' there.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2014-11-18 17:20
If you think about any other things you know by memory (national anthems, childrens songs, etc.), these things were "overlearned". Meaning you said or practiced them soooooo much that you will almost NEVER forget it and it becomes automatic.
Part of learning from memory is having your scales and various patterns down. If you already know the scales and patterns, and it shows up in the music, that's one less part you have to "learn".
The other part is learning the differences and connections as Paul said. When I find that I've memorized something it's because I've practiced that one or two bars SOOOO much to get it correct, that I memorized it by accident. I didn't start out intending to memorize it, but because I had to practice it so much, I did. I'm sure there are a few little areas in each piece of music that you have memorized because you had to practice it so much. The other stuff you can read easily or maybe haven't had to practice so much that you memorized it. If that's true, try practicing the "easy" parts just as much as those harder parts. Might help.
Getting the neilson by January? Ooof! Not an easy task. I'd take it little by little and work on it as sections, and then as Paul said above, work on transitioning from section to section. Best of luck! Too much of a task for me to get Nielson by january, let alone memorized!
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2014-11-18 19:07
Ken, in your linked article, Stephen Hough mentions great pianist Sviatoslav Richter as performing from music in recitals. This was only true in the last few years of Richter's long career. Richter actually had one of the greatest musical memories of all. By the end of his life he had some 80 solo recital programs in his head and fingers, and one count including concertos and other works tallied 833 pieces. Richter claimed to have memorized Bk II of Bach's Well-Tempered Clavier - 24 preludes & fugues in all keys - in one month. He learned Prokofiev's 7th sonata in four days (quite a complex piece) and then premiered it to great acclaim.
Late in his career, Richter came to feel that memorizing was not directly about the music and therefore detrimental to it; at that time he also played in darkened halls with only one small light illuminating the score, so the audience would not be distracted visually by him.
Richter said that one must keep after memorized pieces or they will steadily disappear from memory.
Descending now to me, I've been working on a music memorizing project for a couple years now. When I began I asked myself, how do I do this. The answer so far has been pretty straightforward: identify the sections of each piece, learn the sections separately, and repeat a lot. My progress has been slow but steady.
There seems to be several kinds of memory. A lot of what I use is ear memory combined with muscle memory. I.e., the fingers learn to play what one hears in one's head. So, by this it is necessary to be able to hear the whole piece accurately in one's head. Visual memory is another thing; some musicians (like pianist Artur Rubinstein) relied a lot on their visual memory of a score. I use visual less, but sometimes focus on it if some passage is being stubborn.
For pieces in progress, it seems to help to reinforce memory more than once a day. I.e., work on a piece in the morning, and then at least briefly again in the evening. Once a piece is basically memorized, I find I still have to run through it at least every couple days; maybe eventually this requirement will relax to longer time spans as the music becomes more ingrained. I mean, I can play very familiar works like the Mozart concerto or the Weber Concertino pretty well from memory, even if I don't happen to turn to them for a period of weeks. But basically, as Ricther said, you do have to keep after the memorized works.
This summer, I learned and performed Flight of the Bumblebee from memory in 12 days. But that was a simple piece, almost all chromatic runs. I haven't played it since, and I'm sure I don't remember it all now. Don't confuse me with Richter (or any other professional.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2014-11-18 22:16
There is a world of difference, IMO, between a major soloist who plays one of several standard works on tour for a season and anyone - major artist or local talent - who prepares a specific piece for a single concert appearance.
I expect lots of disagreement, but I think that for most players, it's possible to know the music well without the overhead of added anxiety that comes from performing "without a net" with no music on onstage during the performance. It's certainly important not to be reading the piece, eyes buried in the print, once you're out there, but I don't see that it hurts anything to have the music in sight as a reference - something you can glance at to prepare for the next entrance, just for security's sake if nothing more.
My wife and I saw and heard Andre Watts last weekend play Beethoven's 1st concerto with the Philadelphia Orchestra. He had the music lying flat on the piano (where the music rack would be, but with the rack down flat) where he could see it. I don't think he was reading it, but he did turn pages during rests while the orchestra played, so he meant it to be available if needed. I don't know if that concerto is part of his normal repertoire or not nor do I know how long ago he played it last, but the piece was scheduled, not a last minute replacement. I suspect he does not play the Rachmaninov 2nd Concerto or the Liszt or the other major Romantic staples he's played throughout his career with music, but he evidently felt better having this one available. I once saw Isaac Stern at a dress rehearsal, playing from memory with the Philadelphia Orchestra (back in Ormandy's day), completely blank out during a Viotti concerto. They stopped and he had to walk over to Ormandy's score to jog his memory. I believe when I saw the performance a couple of nights later, he had the music on a stand in front of him - I imagine just in case. When I saw my long-ago teacher, Anthony Gigliotti, perform both the Hindemith Concerto and, in his final season with the orchestra, the premier of the Rochberg Concerto, he had music in front of him. I'm certain he knew the pieces quite well.
My feeling - occasional soloist that I have been at a very local level - is that memorization is something that happens naturally as you practice and internalize a piece of music but that performing without music as a goal in itself is unnecessary and adds a level of anxiety to the process of preparing and performing that can be distracting and ultimately detrimental, especially for the player who doesn't perform as a soloist routinely.
We don't, most of us, play Beethoven's Fifth Symphony without music on our stands, even though we may have played it countless times and know every note in the part. Why try to do it with Nielsen (unless you're touring with it)?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-11-19 02:51
Ensemble music is a different animal altogether, and memorization is NOT practical because all one's concentration should be on REACTING to what is going on around you. As a soloist in a dedicated solo piece of music it is mostly YOU that everyone else reacts to.
There is a very interesting video making the rounds amongst us music people of and open rehearsal with Ricardo Chailly and a female piano soloist. At the opening chords of the piece, it is obvious that she had NOT prepared the piece the orchestra was playing and she even goes so far as to communicate this rather openly to the conductor. He choses to dismiss her protestations and as she buckles down to plow through the piece it is clear that she indeed has the work in her memory (another standard work of course) and she continues to play beautifully. Just an interesting moment to watch!
...........Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
