Author: SecondTry
Date: 2025-08-07 21:09
Apologies for any potential deviation from the OP's original question this brings.
I sometimes wonder if the astronomical amounts that legends of the craft charge is truly worth it. Are students paying in part for the cache of saying they studied with "X" on their resume?
It's even possible that some of the truly gifted players, also gifted at teaching are doing things that even good teachers don't, but is it worth the marginal difference in lesson cost?
I don't mean for a second to equate all teachers of the craft. But let's take Paul above as an example (don't worry a good one Paul.)
Paul, I bet you are an encyclopedic resource for clarinet pedagogy. Is it somehow different (inferior) when you assign "studies in 6th's" from Bearmann III than when some legend among us does, if you catch my drift? I strongly think not.
Perhaps a teacher's worth might be related to the number of students that find work in the craft after having studied with them. To that extent maybe Yehuda Gilad is worth his cost. But I've wondered, at a certain point, if, once a teacher makes a name for themselves, which I think is both ability and yes, somewhat luck (Russianoff and Drucker) driven, if the high caliber of student then attracted to them has as much to do with their success at finding student's employment and proficiency as it does anything else.
I suppose, in the final analysis a teacher's worth what people will pay them, but plenty of great players aren't great teachers and plenty of merely good players are great teachers (again the Russianoff example.)
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
