Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin, Liszt, and Bach. What do these musicians all have in common? What about Scott Joplin, Bill Evans, Oscar Peterson, or Thelonious Monk? Well aside from the fact that they all have memorable piano pieces such as Fur Elise, Hungarian Rhapsody No. 2, and The Entertainer these men are all considered great musicians. That is why we learn of them in textbooks at school and references are made about them to pianists whenever they may be playing virtuoso piano music. The question is WHAT made them great MUSIICIANS? Why aren't they simply labeled as great PIANSISTS? In fact why is anybody labeled a great musician as opposed to a great instrumentalist, singer, or composer?
The answer may not be as profound as one would expect... because they put feeling and emotion behind their music. Well if that's all it takes it can't be that hard to be a great musician can it?
I read an article concerning "Musical Flexibility" by a band teacher in Seymour, CT named Brant Schneider. This article discussed the idea that music students (particularly those in an ensemble setting) need to be helped to become musical musicians as opposed to "play or sing all the rights notes at the right time" musicians. This is a concept I think many administrators who aren't musical can't quite wrap their heads around. In the article Mr. Schneider mentions that " Directors are judged by the pieces they select and how their ensembles perform at concerts and competitive festivals." How true. An art form suddenly becomes a numbers and competition game. In line with this thought Mr. Schneider goes on to mention that "Through all of this, rehearsals become desperate scrambles to the finish line – a process that, while it can be rewarding, leaves little room for creativity from the members of the ensemble." So in all this controlled chaos, where does the aspect of musicianship come in?
Well Mr. Schneider has come up with quite an interesting way to embed the concept of being a musician into his students. He states that while he was able to get his students to perform pieces, their musicianship wasn't growing well enough so he came up with an idea to focus on four specific skills. They are 1) Musical discipline, 2) Technique, 3) Theory, and 4) Composition. With musical discipline Mr. Schneider expects his students to perform outside of their comfort range, such as a saxophonist being able to cover a flute part because the flautist is out sick. This indeed is a much needed aspect for students being trained to be musicians. The great musicians were able to do this flawlessly because great musicians know that instrumentation is relative and it is only about the feeling and emotion of that part that needs to be replicated or emphasized.
Technique is an obvious must have for musicians. Without it we don't have a strong foundation to perform the pieces we are reading or the compositions we may hear in our heads. Mr. Schneider goes one step further by mentioning that its not just enough to know how to play a notated part. He wants them to truly know their own instruments and be able to play pieces by ear. Certainly most, if not all would agree that if a musician can figure out a tune on their respective instrument just by hearing the tune in their heads they may certainly be considered a true musician and not just a computer reading code.
Mr. Schneider lists theory and composition as two different focuses. While I understand the idea and also given the fact you only have but so many minutes with your students that you want to spend your time wisely and in an organized, conducive manner, I feel that these two should be combined if students are going to grasp the true essence of notated music. Notation is half of the battle; anyone can write dots on a page. The true test is using your knowledge of those dots and making music from it. The composers I listed above where marvelous at this concept. Its not that their skills with 4th species counterpoint was remarkable (although it was), but the fact that when the first note(s) was struck every single note afterwards had a purpose, whether it was to build tension or intensity or build expectations and choose to either fulfill them or go against them. That was one aspect of what made them great musicians but it is also the essence of why they are considered musicians in the first place. In short I would say if it were me and my band, I would most likely integrate an understanding of theory with practices in composition so as to cement the idea in my students that musical notation, like a well written essay, should lead you on a journey and fulfill a purpose.
Mr. Schneider's article was very informative on how much work and patience a music educator must have in order to not only fulfill the requirements the state has for education, but also the building of musical skills in our students. But the question remains: is becoming a musician more of a skill or is it more of a talent?
In my opinion its all in how, when, and which way your taught.
The answer may not be as profound as one would expect... because they put feeling and emotion behind their music. Well if that's all it takes it can't be that hard to be a great musician can it?
I read an article concerning "Musical Flexibility" by a band teacher in Seymour, CT named Brant Schneider. This article discussed the idea that music students (particularly those in an ensemble setting) need to be helped to become musical musicians as opposed to "play or sing all the rights notes at the right time" musicians. This is a concept I think many administrators who aren't musical can't quite wrap their heads around. In the article Mr. Schneider mentions that " Directors are judged by the pieces they select and how their ensembles perform at concerts and competitive festivals." How true. An art form suddenly becomes a numbers and competition game. In line with this thought Mr. Schneider goes on to mention that "Through all of this, rehearsals become desperate scrambles to the finish line – a process that, while it can be rewarding, leaves little room for creativity from the members of the ensemble." So in all this controlled chaos, where does the aspect of musicianship come in?
Well Mr. Schneider has come up with quite an interesting way to embed the concept of being a musician into his students. He states that while he was able to get his students to perform pieces, their musicianship wasn't growing well enough so he came up with an idea to focus on four specific skills. They are 1) Musical discipline, 2) Technique, 3) Theory, and 4) Composition. With musical discipline Mr. Schneider expects his students to perform outside of their comfort range, such as a saxophonist being able to cover a flute part because the flautist is out sick. This indeed is a much needed aspect for students being trained to be musicians. The great musicians were able to do this flawlessly because great musicians know that instrumentation is relative and it is only about the feeling and emotion of that part that needs to be replicated or emphasized.
Technique is an obvious must have for musicians. Without it we don't have a strong foundation to perform the pieces we are reading or the compositions we may hear in our heads. Mr. Schneider goes one step further by mentioning that its not just enough to know how to play a notated part. He wants them to truly know their own instruments and be able to play pieces by ear. Certainly most, if not all would agree that if a musician can figure out a tune on their respective instrument just by hearing the tune in their heads they may certainly be considered a true musician and not just a computer reading code.
Mr. Schneider lists theory and composition as two different focuses. While I understand the idea and also given the fact you only have but so many minutes with your students that you want to spend your time wisely and in an organized, conducive manner, I feel that these two should be combined if students are going to grasp the true essence of notated music. Notation is half of the battle; anyone can write dots on a page. The true test is using your knowledge of those dots and making music from it. The composers I listed above where marvelous at this concept. Its not that their skills with 4th species counterpoint was remarkable (although it was), but the fact that when the first note(s) was struck every single note afterwards had a purpose, whether it was to build tension or intensity or build expectations and choose to either fulfill them or go against them. That was one aspect of what made them great musicians but it is also the essence of why they are considered musicians in the first place. In short I would say if it were me and my band, I would most likely integrate an understanding of theory with practices in composition so as to cement the idea in my students that musical notation, like a well written essay, should lead you on a journey and fulfill a purpose.
In my opinion its all in how, when, and which way your taught.
"...if a musician can figure out a tune on their respective instrument just by hearing the tune in their heads they may certainly be considered a true musician and not just a computer reading code."
ReplyDeleteI like that Joel. Computers don't possess the ability to feel different emotions. It is up to us to teach our kids how to feel different emotions in the music as well as how to hear an emotion or idea in their head and translate it to their instrument without thinking too hard about it. It's more of a second language than anything else. Just like we don't have to think of how to form words in a conversation. Nothing is scripted. It just flows.