Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Saul- I can’t tell you how much I was practicing that variation. And very early on I got it so I could play it at the tempo I wanted and could play it with no mistakes. But because it’s a left hand variation and I’m not left handed, I could never get to the point where I could sit down cold and play it. I always needed to work on it for 5 minutes or so to get it back up to performance level. I never had to do that with the right hand variation. I wanted to use that piece on a recital about 2 years ago and I found I was spending an inordinate amount of time on that one variation, so I just threw in the towel and took it off the program. Several people suggested I perform the piece leaving out that variation, which could have easily been done and to be honest would sound fine. But that idea bothered me so I didn’t do it.
Tony- That’s an interesting post. I don’t want to give the wrong impression about my original post. My left hand is excellent, very agile, and strong, and I don’t notice any awkwardness to my left hand in anything that I play EXCEPT that &%^$* left hand variation of the Handel. If I were to take it slower I’m sure I would be able to play it fine. But I don’t like it slower. So I’m wondering Tony if at the upper limits of difficulty do you notice any difference between your left and right hands?
Most craft people are pretty ambidextrous, and when I’m rebuilding harps, I can pretty much use tools in either hand. As a harpist, I worked very hard on the left hand and mine is pretty agile and strong. But even after all these years, there is still a limit to what my left hand can do, either playing the harp or using tools. Beyond that limit, using my left hand still feels very awkward.
It does take a lot of work to make the weaker hand stronger, but I’m not sure there is ever a point where the left hand of a right handed person is going to feel equal to the right hand. To be honest, I can’t think right now of an other piece (other than the harmonious Blacksmith) where my left hand is so obviously limited. When I was an undergraduate I practiced scales like a madman. I can honestly say that in playing scales, my left hand can play as fast as my right, which is pretty fast(4 notes to the beat at 126 top speed). Why that left hand variation gives me such a hard time I don’t know.
All of the advice on this thread has been wonderful. I’ve been going through this with my talented 17 year old male student. I’ve told him that making a living full time at music is difficult. I’ve said that he has enough ability to do whatever he wants with the harp(perform, enter competitions, play orchestra auditions, teach, etc.) without spending big bucks for a music degree. I’ve encouraged him to train for some non-musical career that will be dependable and earn a decent living, but to continue to study the harp privately. If, in the end, he decides to go to musc school, he’ll at least do it with his eyes wide open.
Diane- I think that’s wonderful that you play gigs in places like that. I think music, and our harp music in particular takes on a completely new dimension for the audience and for us the players under those circumstances.
On the subject of talking about the pieces before playing them: avoid generalizations, like”this is one of my favorite pieces,” or “I just love the harmonies in this piece.” Instead, give them something specific to listen for. I usually program 3 movements from Ravel’s Mother Goose Suite. Everybody, but particularly the children in the audience, love the second movement, LITTLE TOM THUMB(Petit Poucette). I tell them the story of the little boy lost in the woods and how Ravel characterizes that in the music. Children are enthralled by that one in particular. I have a Bach Gigue that I may put on a program sometime, and if I do, I’ll tell the audience that Bach tricks us into thinking that we are hearing a melody, a counter melody, and chords in this piece when in fact, from the first note to the last, you are never hearing more than one note at a time. That’s all they need to be told to want to listen actively to the piece. And I agree, my favorite piece is the one I’m playing at the moment.
I suppose by your definition every concert I have done in the last 10 years has been a ‘dog and pony show.’ Another term would be a lecture-recital, although that sound too high faloutin.
When I do a solo recital(2 halves, each 35 minutes or so long with intermission) there is a printed program, but I also talk about each piece I’m about to play. I do this because the audience in all likelyhood has never heard any of the pieces on my program and without the verbal introduction the whole program would be for them a wash of pleasant harp sounds that they would forget as soon as the program was over. By talking about each piece they have just enough information to listen, and want to listen, actively. This makes a huge difference, and the most meaningful compliments that I get after the program are when people come up to me at the reception and tell me which piece was their favorite. I gave a concert like this in Florida a year ago, and after the program this big strapping 20 year old football player type of guy came up to me and extended this bear paw of a hand for me to shake. “Oh man, that was awsome!” he said. Dumbfounded, I asked him if there was a particular piece that he liked. “That Spanish piece” he said with no hesitation. He was referring either to Viejho Zortzico of Guiridi or Lolita the Danser of Tournier(which sounds Spanish). I wasn’t sure which and didn’t press the issue.
Another time I gave a similar program for the Long Island Chapter of the Harp Society, and the audience consisted of a large bunch of kids sitting on the floor(this was in someones house) with assorted parents and adults seated around the periphery. After the program was over and everyone was gone, the chapter president, whose house this was in, looked at me wide eyed and said “Those kids were absolutely silent through the whole program! You had them hypnotized.”
The point of all this is that it is critically important for all musicians to engage more with the audience, since many of them know little or nothing about classical music, and specifically about what we(harpists) play. A friend of mine got his doctorate from Eastman in ‘cello and he said that they were told constantly there to do the same thing.
My own rules for the talking part are: keep the comments short, no more than 2 minutes maximum for each piece. Keep them light and conversational in tone, and if possible weave some humor or jokes into the talk. My model for all of this is an Opera singer named J.B. Ward who does a program called STAND UP OPERA. If you can find the CD, get it. She’s fantastic. She talks about each aria she sings and she’s very very funny. Then she sings the aria straight, with a gorgeous voice and beautiful musicianship. I love that combination.
Oh, and to answer your original question, I don’t have a favorite piece for this type of thing. They’re all my favorites.
Tony- I couldn’t agree with you more. Technique is just as important in playing Pop or jazz as it is in playing classical. The more technique you have, the more you can do with the instrument, and the more of the instrument you can use. I have heard some pop harpists who frankly couldn’t play very well, and they were severely limited as to the range of the instrument they could use, as well as the types of patterns they could play. Good technique is good technique for all kinds of playing. There isn’t a seperate technique for jazz or pop.
Virtually all of the really good pop and jazz harpists have a very solid classical background. That’s because,,,THAT’S HOW YOU LEARN TO PLAY THE INSTRUMENT. Berkelee School of Music in Boston is a world renowned center for all aspects of the popular music industry. But the students, in their private lessons, study classical repertoire again, because that’s how you learn to play the instrument.
I’m always astounded when I see people flocking to take workshops with Deborah Hansen-Conant or Ray Pool on playing popular music. Most of these people can barely play the instrument. Do they really think that a workshop will do them that much good or make them sound like Deborah or Ray, who are both very well trained classical musicians?
I don’t know of any harp maker anywhere that will take back an instrument just because ‘it’s not quite what you were looking for.” If they take it back, it’s because, for whatever reason, there are serious problems with it and the client does not want to continue with that instrument. In virtually all cases, a returned instrument will be exchanged for another. I have never heard of refunds for a returned instrument.
If you have very specific ideas about what you are looking for, then you need to go to a showroom and try out the harp you are thinking of buying. That way you know exactly what you are getting.
I will tell you from years of experience as a traveling regulator, repairman, rebuilder, and harp maker, that almost every harpist has their own concept of what they consider to be a good instrument, and most of them think that every other harpist has the same concept. They think that an instrument that they consider good will be thought of in the same way by everyone else. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!! For this reason, I don’t think there should be any discussion about what people think about this or that maker, model, or instrument. Personal taste varies way too much for the information to have any real meaning. I’ve regulated instruments that sounded to me like banjos, but the owners loved them, and who am I to tell them they are wrong. If you are hunting for a harp, new or used, then go look at the instrument yourself and play it BEFORE you buy it. That’s the best guarantee that you will like what you bought.
To me the division between classical and pop(including jazz) is that in classical the artist is expected to perform the music exactly as written, adding only his or her own interpretative details. In pop, jazz, and maybe folk, the performer is expected to create his own arrangement, with virtually nothing written down. In performing pop music, playing a written out arrangement is frowned on, even ridiculed, while in classical, there is a strict adhearance to the written page. It wasn’t always like this. in the 18th century,printed classical music was pretty bare bones, and the performer was expected to improvise and fill out what was written. So in a major way, 20th century pop music is almost exactly like 18th century classical music, particularly French music.
David- Wouldn’t it be wonderful to put together a series of CD’s of these great artists from the past. Several of them could be grouped together on the same CD. Their recordings really ought to be made available again.
You’re right Saul about classical not being the pop music of it’s day. Pop music before recordings and radio was almost entirely music that amateur musicians could play. Music that people could play in their homes. Recordings and radio(and later television and movies) changed all of that. Suddently the field of professional pop musician came into being, raising the standard enormously. Now pop musicians play and sing at a level far above any amateur musician. And any amateur musician who plays for anyone but himself is held to a much higher standard.
There are, and have been, so many, and because their playing style is so personal and individual, I can’t use the word ‘best’ to describe any of them. I loved John Escosa, Jack Nebergal, Verlye Mills, Mimi Allen, Liza Re, of course Deborah Hansen-Conant, Park Stickney, Elenor Fell, Ray Pool, Jan Jennings, and so many others. I love them all.
