Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I should think that if given the choice, I would take a pedal harp over a chromatic cross strung. Playing in any key is possible on both instruments, and its silly to have feet and not use them. Plus, pedal harps have access to many different glissandos, while I am not sure how cross strung technique would would facilitate the same. The technique for cross strung just sounds so clumsy to me. There are good reasons why the pedal harp is the standard now, instead of the cross strung. But I have never played a cross, so I might be wrong.
I started playing when I was fifteen, and had no concerns about it
being a feminine instrument, because I knew it was really masculine and
they were just dumbing it up with their bleached-blond hair and harps
to match. I never found a male teacher, but my teacher taught me like
she was one. We are lucky that we now have masculine-looking harps to
own like the Salzedo. He was a very manly harpist. I am now a male
teacher in my forties, and I am looking for male students and will give
them a scholarship, too. But I am only in Philadelphia, or for master
classes or guest teaching if I am traveling. I am in Minneapolis about
twice a year and in central Massachusetts (Greenfield-Northampton area)
two or more times a year. Anyone who asks, you just tell them the
greatest harpists were men. Sometimes we have to work harder and longer
to get there, but we can do it.I am pretty sure that the video/dvd is available from harp.com. As for
Salzedo, he was a man of his times, the Modern era. His notation is
quite clear, and is much more than just “glissandi” if you read his
Modern Study and Method. What is conveyed by seeing and hearing is the
best tone quality that the effects can result in. What is interesting
is how fresh and modern and appealing his music sounds today, as it
grows and grows in popularity. His notation succeeds largely because it
is so well-thought out and well-designed. And his sounds work well in
the hands of others. He was not the only composer able to use them. Nor
was his young friend Marcel Grandjany.What a wonderful dissertation. I avoided enrolling at the Mannes
College just because they required so much Schenkerian analysis, which
I already disliked from my college exposure to it. What makes a piece
art? Art requires imagination, I am thinking lately. I am not
suggesting less-aspiring is not enjoyable, but there are certainly
more-or-less discrete levels of achievement. It is clear when listening
to guitar repertoire, so why not harp? Saint-Saens composed better
music than Schuecker. Why? Well, he was an enormously gifted, genius
composer. Schuecker might have been a great harpist, but a creative
genius? Doubtful. Gifted, quite likely. One criterion to use is whether
the music is of interest to non-harpists. Time and again I read reviews
where the music composed by most harpists is shoved aside into a
category requiring apology, which then tends to extend to the harp as a
whole. We are rarely considered a primary instrument by other
musicians, even. We have to use very good taste and judgement in
selecting our repertoire and balancing our programs. I think a
distinguishing factor in the music that is best tends to be the
presence of intellect and musical thought beyond the scope of the piece
itself, or that the piece contains hints of something much greater or
infinite, not that it is cerebral only. Great music also touches the
soul, something I think Elliott Carter will never do. Better music also
tends to get the attention of critics. I know it is not a popular
position to take. It is much easier to try to please everyone or follow
the crowd. I know someone who suffered for having high standards not
for her own sake, ever, but for the sake of the harp. Certainly one can
make mistakes in judgement, but one has to make considered thought part
of the selection process. Also, as teachers, we must weigh the value of
the student’s limited time and what pieces they will most benefit
from.
Important Repertoire implies establishing criteria to filter out the
best works of art. What are the criteria? What draws me to music is
that it extends beyond the personal preferences of any single
individual. It is tempting to debate personal preferences for the
purpose of establishing stronger social acceptance of those
preferences. The underlying issue has to do with how we evaluate an
aesthetic work. The two poles of objective vs. subjective criteria are
the issue at hand, as is our method of applying these principles.
Objective criteria assume that art is an ideal towards which human
expression strives. There are universal principles demonstrated in the
natural world that can apply objectively to human expression.
Subjective criteria focus on the context of the expression and its role
in the human experience. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Art
generally falls between the two poles.Objective criteria for harp repertoire could include the composer���s use
of the natural resonance and physical properties of the harp, use of
natural patterns, cycles, principles of how objects and sounds move
through time, etc. Many of the great works of art music are built on
fractal patterns which are unveiled through Shenkerian Analysis. While
these factors play an important role, context is also relevant. The
cultural, philosophical, personal context that produces the work and
the consequences it has on those who experience it are also a
measure of its importance.To apply this in a practical manner, it would be useful for each
contributor to qualify important repertoire. When naming a specific
piece and/or composer including a description of why it is important
and significant would be especially useful to all perusing this thread.
In this way each reader can determine if that value system matches
their own, to assist in determining what repertoire they are likely to
consider important personally.That is an excellent question, and perhaps a mystery. I have had some
training as a composer, not a lot, but I consider myself a serious
composer who is concentrating on harp music. I would like to study it
intensely but circumstances do not permit it. The appearance of genius
has so much to do with luck, it seems. Bochsa may have had some, but
not good character. But did Mozart have good character? I think the
harp attracts people of certain kinds over and over again. People who
are capable of success and achievement are more likely to choose fields
in which they can attain more or become more wealthy/successful. The
repertoire for piano or violin attracts people to them as much as the
instrument itself, I believe. We do have repertoire that is so
musically challenging, that few ever play it, like Milhaud and Bax.
Their styles are so individual, but when you know their other
repertoire, you can grasp what they are after with the harp. But I
didn’t grasp the Milhaud concerto until I heard the Cambreling
recording.I suggest that every time you order music, buy one piece you don’t know
at all. They are often cheap, and that’s how I’ve built my collection.
You won’t hear much of it played, and it can take years to arrive at an
understanding of a piece and just how to capture it. The maturing of my
harp and my playing has made a big difference in that.Yes, there is much to learn and look forward to. Other musicians can be
unreliable, so we are fortunate to have so much solo repertoire.I left out some composers as I was only using the Lyra catalog as a source. Dean Roush has two excellent solo pieces.
