Memorizing scales

by

As I’ve mentioned before, my university students are subject to a scale proficiency exam. Most arrive at the university “knowing” at least some major scales, but most of them will also have to learn at least a few new ones and maybe put some old ones into a new format.  For their exam, the scales need to be memorized well enough to play three randomly-selected major ones, and three randomly-selected melodic minors.

For some students, there are technical barriers to this:  untrained fingers, insufficient familiarity with alternate fingerings, or tone production issues in extreme ranges. Some also struggle with nerves or other psychological baggage (“I’ve never been good at scales, Dr. P.,”). Even among students who are moving rapidly through advanced repertoire, and have all the necessary facility to play the scales, there are some that find the memorization to be very difficult.

metronome
Photo, CZMJ

Here are some of the issues that my students have:

Read more

Clarinet/saxophone doubling and “loose” and “tight” embouchures

by

I have been watching with dismay some recent online message board conversations about clarinetists picking up the saxophone and saxophonists picking up the clarinet. I am of course a big supporter of doubling, but much of the discussion seems to center around embouchure, and the language used is not only misleading but also vaguely pejorative. Clarinetists seem to regard the saxophone embouchure as “loose,” a term I think most saxophonists would take exception to, and saxophonists consider the clarinet embouchure to be “tight,” a concept I would expect clarinetists to shy away from.

Photo, Adrian Midgley
Photo, Adrian Midgley

I am not aware of any difference in looseness/tightness between the embouchures of the two instrument families, and can’t think of a reason why there should be one. In both cases, the embouchure—the lips and surrounding facial muscles—need to be “tight” enough to form a non-leaking seal around the mouthpiece and reed, and “loose” enough to allow the reed to vibrate at the desired amplitude (volume). The most common looseness/tightness problem I see in teaching both instruments is excessive tightness, often used in an attempt to compensate for pitch stability problems caused by poor breath support, and resulting in sluggish response, restricted dynamic range, and stuffy tone.

Read more

Required recordings, spring 2013

by

As regular readers know, I have my university students (oboists, clarinetists, bassoonists, and saxophonists) each add a new recording to their library each semester. During the course of their respective degree programs, they should each accumulate a nice curated collection of recordings. Here are this semester’s selections:

Peter Cooper: Cooper & Marriner

Peter Cooper: Cooper/Marriner

Amazon (CD) | Amazon (download)

Repertoire: Concerti by Strauss and Mullikin.

Read more

2012 in review

by

Here are some highlights (to me) of what happened on the blog this year. Thanks for reading, and stay tuned for new, non-meta content once the holidays are over. Some technique talk for flutists, oboists, and clarinetists, and some stuff for reed players of various stripes. Some stuff for woodwind doublers: finding gigs, why fingerings aren’t that big … Read more

What I’ve learned in my first three years as a college professor

by

I’m still at what I hope is the beginning of a long career, with lots of things left to learn. But here are a few little things I’ve picked up along the way so far (three and a half years, actually), and that I thought might be worth sharing.

red pen
Photo, cellar_door_films

Getting hired for a job in academia is about being the right match. I applied to a lot of jobs during the final year of my doctoral studies. A few seemed like good matches on paper, but for a number of others I thought I could perhaps offer something better than what was listed in the requirements. For example, I applied for quite a few single-woodwind jobs, and tried to emphasize in my cover letters and CVs that I could potentially take on responsibilities with additional instruments. I got virtually no response to those applications. The jobs that I got interviews for were specifically multiple-woodwinds jobs.

A highly-qualified and very talented friend of mine was hired for a teaching position. I had opportunity later to speak with one of his new colleagues, who raved about my friend’s lively and outgoing personality. “The other person we interviewed was so boring,” she moaned. I suspect that had I interviewed for that job, I would have been the “boring” one. At some other interview, my friend’s energy and humor might have been seen as frivolous or flippant, and my more muted social style might have won the day.

Since being hired myself, I’ve had several opportunities to serve on committees that have sifted through applicants for other music faculty positions. There are lots of people looking for those jobs, and when the applications start to pile up, anyone who doesn’t meet the specific requirements of the job gets set aside pretty quickly, no matter what other strengths they might bring to the table.

Read more

Stuff my students say

by

What my students say What my students mean I was too busy to practice this week. My choices this week did not include practicing. I can play it perfectly when nobody is listening, I promise! When somebody is listening, I’m suddenly painfully aware of problems with my playing that I ignored in the practice room. … Read more

Review: Ben Britton’s A Complete Approach to Sound for the Modern Saxophonist

by

I have been in touch with saxophonist Ben Britton since I mentioned his blog in a roundup review last year. He’s a nice guy, not to mention a great (and award-winning) saxophone player:

I was pleased to hear from Ben about his new book, A Complete Approach to Sound for the Modern Saxophonist. It is now available in print from Amazon (currently a very reasonable $14.95) and as a download from Payhip (a steal at $9.95).

The book is around 60 pages long, but it’s not densely packed text. It can easily be skimmed in one sitting. What you get for your money is a highly-concentrated, efficient approach to tone production. I (and probably you) have shelves of much longer and much more expensive books that take a week to read and longer to extract anything useful from. Ben’s book is a straightforward, less-is-more approach that is refreshing and worthwhile.

My copy arrived just in time, as my tenor hasn’t been getting enough attention lately (teaching classical repertoire means lots of alto) and, as I feared, my tone and control have suffered a bit. I soaked some reeds and spent the morning with the book.

Read more

Changing octaves on the flute: a survey of published opinions

by

On the flute, there are several notes that have identical fingerings: each note from bottom-line E through third-space C-sharp has exactly the same fingering as the note an octave higher. Obviously, some factor other than fingerings must account for the octaves, but flutists as a group seem to be unclear on what it is.

I got curious and dug through some pedagogical sources to see what flutists have published about it. I have compiled my findings into a chart:

To achieve the upper octaves on the flute

I have started from the baseline of the lowest octave’s tone production methods, and framed the authors’ ideas in terms of what has to be done to move into higher octaves. And I’ve grouped the answers together as best I can, hopefully with reasonable accuracy as to the authors’ intended meanings. For example, “move jaw” and “move jaw forward” obviously overlap, but I separated them to try to maintain the authors’ original levels of specificity. And “jaw” and “chin” may really be the same thing for most flute-playing purposes, but I’ve separated in them in a case where the author seemed to see them as distinct.

Some of the authors address the issue specifically and in detail, while others just mention something in passing, so the chart does not necessarily represent their complete and definitive views. I have provided a bibliography with page numbers so you can read the authors’ words in context, and I highly recommend doing this if you’re interested in the topic. I’ve color-coded things so you can see at a glance which ideas are most popular, though I don’t think this is an issue to be settled by popular vote.

There are some surprising outliers. Most authors who mentioned the size of the aperture indicated that it should get smaller in the upper octaves, but a couple insisted that it should not change. Several authors indicated that the distance from the aperture to the blowing edge decreases for upper registers, but one said it actually increases. There’s significant disagreement on whether blowing harder is part of achieving the higher octaves.

I think some of the differences of opinion shown in the chart may be due to flutists actually doing the same things but describing them differently. It’s also possible that the techniques listed can be combined in different ways to create different tone production “recipes” that produce similar results.

I’m interested in continuing to expand this in the future. If you can point me toward a published source, then send it along (I’m not really interested in anecdotes or private opinions), or let me know if you think I have misread or misinterpreted someone’s views (especially if you’re the author!).

Read more

Best practices for accidentals in online music writing, and introducing jQuery Accidentals

by
In an ideal world, you see five musical symbols here:

flat natural sharp double-flat double-sharp
♭ ♮ ♯

But, depending on the device you are using to read this, you may notice one of these problems:

  • None of the symbols show up properly: they are either missing or replaced with squares, diamonds, question marks, or some other “placeholder” symbol.
  • The flat, natural, and sharp appear properly, but the double-sharp and double-flat are missing or placeholders.
  • The symbols don’t quite match each other—they appear as though they come from different fonts.

And for the blogger or other online writer, there is an additional problem: these characters aren’t easily typed from a keyboard. Using them means copy-and-pasting or remembering obscure numeric codes. And then you hope that your readers’ devices can display them.

So, for most situations, some kind of text substitution is made. Two styles are fairly common:

  • Spelling out the symbols in words, such as “A-flat.”
  • Using a “close-enough” character, such as “A#” (pound sign, number sign, or hash) or “Bb” (lower-case B).

Using words is my preferred method, since using “#” and “b” is semantically incorrect, garbles the meaning for non-visual browsing devices (such as screen readers for the blind), isn’t compatible with all fonts (such as those that don’t have a clearly-differentiated upper- and lowercase B), and can be ambiguous:

  • “Today I did my patented Ab Workout. It’s basically all the major and minor scales starting from Ab.”
  • “Today I did my patented Ab Workout. It’s basically a bunch of sit-ups.”

Thus, I recommend this usage: “A-flat,” “B-natural,” “C-sharp,” “D-double-sharp,” “E-double-flat.” Note the hyphens (with no spaces), and the lower-case accidental names (even for titles: Sonata in D-flat).

This solves the major issues of typing and reading the accidentals in an onscreen situation, but leaves us with a rather inelegant and typographically boring representation of the true musical symbols. This would be intolerable for print media, and, as screen text steadily replaces print text, a better solution is required. Here are some possible scenarios (warning—a little technical):

Read more