Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-02-21 04:59
My 1 2 3 chair experiences are all from 1968-71 and are a bit dated, things do change. In my high school band it was strictly you started at the bottom in the group of 3rd chair players. Position was not by challenges (I hate that system) but by your progress in "technique", which was the band director's pseudo private lesson system. Actually, he was very good- I wonder now what instruments were his strong suit. Anyway, he'd keep track of your progress on his chosen literature and the scales, thirds, and arpeggios. Every 6 weeks he'd update the big chart on the wall, and the furthest advanced players became 1st, next group 2nd, and finally 3rd. Most folks settled in and didn't switch groups, but there were always surprises in the updated postings. I distinctly remember sending my girlfriend from 1st to 2nd section when I jumped from 2nd to 1st- ouch.
THEN I remember finding the 1st parts not that much tougher than 2nd, mostly, but higher range. Especially in the marching music we revisited briefly my last spring semester. Most painful was having to relearn everything, or sight read it with mixed success.
I like the idea of a mixture of player strengths on each part. That would not have worked well on our 1969 music- 3rd part was WAAAY easier than 2nd or 1st, and as I said not such a big jump between 2nd and 1st. Is that still true? Are 3rd parts not enough of a challenge for high end players?
Surely at the highest levels of classical music, all the parts are equally difficult, right? I wouldn't know, I've never been tempted to look. To me the ideal would be- all 3 parts are equally interesting, ranges are mixed up (not always 1st on top of chord and 3rd on bottom)- and solos occur equally in all 3, sometimes trading off from one part to another (that I bet NEVER happens- does it?).
Thanks for an excuse to daydream back 45 years...
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2015-02-21 05:29)
|
|