Learn and practice the basic principles of running an effective music ensemble rehearsal. Techniques and strategies are applicable to a variety of ensembles, including bands, orchestras, choirs, and chamber groups.
Serving as the Composer’s Advocate
Loading...
En provenance du cours de The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Fundamentals of Rehearsing Music Ensembles
231 note
À partir de la leçon
An Introduction to Rehearsing
This week, Module 1, we’ll discuss basic philosophical issues such as: What we do in rehearsals, what skills are needed, and the idea of the conductor as “the composer’s advocate.” I will also introduce the concept of Macro-Micro-Macro, which serves as the overarching principle of rehearsals. Then we will move on to basic conducting technique.
Rencontrer les enseignants
Dr. Evan FeldmanAssociate Professor & Wind Ensemble Conductor
Music
[MUSIC].
There's an overarching philosophy that can help govern what we
do in rehearsals and it is called being the composer's advocate.
This is a term that was popularized by the
composer Eric Leinsdorff in a book of the same title.
What it means is that what we do is that we're essentially the servant of
the composer that we're there to advocate for his or her musical
creation, the piece that they've written and how we approach that in rehearsal
we want to make sure that we're
honoring their intentions, that we're their advocate.
Now this isn't exactly the same thing as saying that we don't have any artistic
license ourselves, that all we're there to do
is simply be the proxy for the composer.
One, one way of looking at would be, well one of
my teachers, his name is Michael Bodum at the University of Maryland.
Is fond of describing it in this way, that if you're playing a
piece, and in rehearsal or in concert, and the composer walks into the room.
Now, admittedly that may not be possible,
because not all composers are still with us.
But let's say, hypothetically.
We're rehearsing Beethoven's Fifth Symphony
and Beethoven walks into the room.
We want him to stop to listen and then to essentially say,
yeah, yeah.
That's what I meant.
That's what I was going for.
But the question then becomes is where is the line between being in the composer's
advocate and having some flexibility to express ourselves individually.
Or as a group.
Most composers understand that when they walk into the room into this
hypothetical situation they're not looking for
one specific way of having things sound.
And if it's not exactly like that well then
they're not just going to nod their head in agreement.
They're just, nope, you're not doing exactly what I want so forget it.
Most composers understand that one of the beauties and advantages
of live performance is that there's going to be a
range of different solutions to the musical problem that they've
created through their piece and allow for that range to happen.
If they wanted complete control over every aspect of the piece, every single
aspect, every detail, then they probably are
going to go into computer music, which.
They can control every aspect.
So, the question is, since we know there's
some flexibility, most likely, in what the composer will
accept in our ability our journey to be
their advocate, the question is, where is that line.
Well, there's certain things that are probably set
in stone, that we're not going to touch.
For example, notes and rhythms.
We're not going to say, say a G on beat three,
and say, you know, I'd rather that be a G sharp.
I'm going to change that to a G sharp.
Probably not.
That's the letter of the law, and we're not going to change it.
Rhythm.
Same sort of thing.
Let's say there's a quarter-note on beat four.
We're not going to say, you know, I'd like that
to be a four-16th note, so I'm just going to change that.
Notes and rhythms are generally speaking off, out of limits, off limits for us.
But there is still beyond that, some flexibility be-, be-, between
the letter of the law and the spirit of the law.
For example tempo.
A composer might write quarter note equals 144 in the piece.
Well, there's two reasons we might not take it 144.
One would be a practical reason, and the other would be an expressive reason.
A practical reason would say, well we may not
have an ensemble that can perform it at 144.
If we took it that fast, it may just be a train wreck.
We say, we might say, you know if we take it 128, it's going to be
not be the letter of the law, but it's going to be the spirit of the piece.
We're going to better satisfy our role.
As the composer's advocate.
From an expressive point of view, we might change it
because, well let's say we want to take it 152.
We might say, I think the composer, what they're
going for here at 144, is a certain style.
And we can amp that up by taking it 152.
Without jettisoning some of the other clarity issues that might happen.
Or say, we're going to take it 138 a
hair slower, but we're still going to be incredibly
vibrant with our articulation and we're going to bring out
some details that maybe we couldn't get at 144.
So there is an expressive purpose to that too expressive reasons to change
what's on the page also, we have to find our way through that.
One of the main ways we do that is through our score study.
That's part of the goal of that.
To figure out what is the composer going for here.
What does the piece mean, however we define that.
What are the things that he or she is prioritizing as a composer.
And how can we best express that through
the way we eventually wind up performing the piece.
So, beyond tempo we can look at something like articulation.
There might be something in articulation that's in the woodwinds da da da da
da da dum, that our woodwinds can't play, for, they just physically can't do it.
Well an expressive, sorry a practical reason for changing would be that
they can't play it that fast so we are going to instead of.
[MUSIC]
We're going to play it,
[MUSIC],
slur two, tongue two,
[MUSIC].
It's not the letter of the law, but we're hoping
it achieves the spirit of the law; by creating this
same style and something that we can technically achieve and
thus, we can satisfy our role as the composer's advocate.
Or maybe there's an expressive reason that we change.
What the articulation is.
Perhaps the Cellos have tenuto quarter notes, something like
[MUSIC],
that's what's written, but we say, you know if we do that, we're
going to cover another line, so we're going to create a little more separation,
[MUSIC].
And stretch the meaning of tenuto [LAUGH] to, as, no pun intended.
Or maybe we want to create more separation to create
more distinction between that cello line and another line.
So there might be another expressive reason that we change what's
on the page, it's not notes and rhythms, it's something else.
Dynamics is something that's often adjusted, the composer
might write mezzo forte and piano over here, okay.
Well they might mean that literally, but very often we
for a practical reason, we might have to say you know,
I know the horns are written there mezzo piano, but we
only have two horns or our horns don't play that strong.
So we're going to change it.
Mezzo-piano to mezzo-forte, in order to make sure that line
comes out, based on what we think needs to sound.
It's a practical reason.
We might do it for an expressive reason,
the horns might be mezzo-piano, but we might
say, you know, that line, we would really
like to hear that in counterpoint to another line.
Based on our score study, we, we're going to value those two, those
two voices, so we might boost the level up there a little bit.
So change.
What the printed dynamics are.
So there's some wiggle room there with dynamics, all in
the service of trying to, serve as the composer's advocate.
Instrumentation is another one and this gets a little controversal sometimes.
A classical example is Mahler, the composer Gustav Mahler.
Would have famously changed the
orchestration to some Beethoven symphonies.
His argument was, well, if Beethoven had the technological resources that he had in
terms of valved brass instruments, he might
have written those parts a little bit differently.
So, I'm going to go, Maller is going
in and make those adjustments on Beethoven's behalf.
Trying to serve the composer.
Well, the flip.
It's a reasonable way of looking at it, but
the flip side of that, argument would be that.
No, look.
Beethoven, knew what he was doing.
He knew the limitations of the instruments he
had at, at his disposal and he wrote accordingly.
So, we don't have to change anything what so ever.
Well, that's also a reasonable argument.
So.
This is something you just have to figure out your
way and it depends a little bit on your own philosophy.
It depends on the piece, and the situation, and the composer.
So for a practical reason.
Let's say there's a line in the trombones.
And we just can't hear it.
It's written only for the trombones.
Well maybe we also write it for the horns.
Maybe we double it in the chellos.
Or you can think of all sorts of instrumental
combinations that, all right, we're going to write this
into the violas, but we don't have many violas,
or we can't hear them, or they're not very strong.
So we're going to double it in the second violins, if it's within their range.
Alright, that's a practical reason that we're changing the, what the composer
wrote, to serve the intent, the, to advocate for that line coming out.
Well, an expressive, reason for changing
the orchestration might be something similar.
We might say, can we really, want to beef up, to bolster that viola line.
So, although the composer didn't write it, we're going to
take the liberty to double it in another voice.
It might be reasonable.
It might say, well your score study says that's important and
the composer just, well made, made a little bit of a mistake.
Well, that's possible.
The other way of looking at it, which is also reasonable, is that.
No.
The composer knew the color combination that he or she
were playing with, says I only want the viola sound in.
Figure out a way to make the viola sound
dominate without mixing it with something else in the palette.
So there's a lot of gray area here, and it's, it's a
fascinating discussion when you can't come up with, a one answer right here.
But it's something that's worth going through for yourself, and figuring out.
Where you stand on these issues.
We have a really good notation system in midwestern music right now.
It's good in a lot of ways.
It's very specific for notes and for rhythms and we can put
a lot of expressive details in there from a notation point of view.
But our other ways, it doesn't allow us to show
certain subtleties and nuances and very specific bits of phrasing.
We write crescendo, but if we put too much, a crescendo,
a deep crescendo, a little bit of rubato, it gets very cluttered.
As we try to get specific.
Not to mention that some composers, just
simply don't want to micromanage, what's going on.
And that's often what's really the issue here.
That even if the, the piece says, piano
and eight measures later says, say forte with crescendo.
That doesn't mean that the composer necessarily
expects that all there's going to be.
Is a completely smooth, even, and predictable crescendo,
from piano to forte; over the eight measures.
That might be one solution, but perhaps
it's also reasonable to well we're going to have
a small crescendo here, and then were going to back off a bit, and then a.
Final big crescendo.
Too many crescendos embedded within the larger one.
It's these sort of details that the composers would often expect us to put in.
Different eras of music actually have different.
Densities of musical expression information in the score.
If you look at a medieval or renaissance or even baroque and
classical score, they will often have,
usually have, much less information, if any,
about dynamics expressive details, accents, articulation,
compared to a 20th or 21st
century piece where composers are usually very good about putting those details in.
But that doesn't mean that the Renaissance
composer didn't expect there to be any dynamics.
Or, that he only expected there to simply be a piano,
and a forte, nothing else, no shaping or phrasing with a net.
No, they probably expected there to be a lot more expression in there.
And one way we know that, well we don't have any recordings, but we
can read treatises and essays about performance
in those eras and we can clearly see.
That they are saying, oh yeah, there's going to be expression that's
not on the page that we expect you to add as performers.
So again there's this tension in a good way between being
the composers advocate and expressing ourselves as individuals or an ensemble.
There's also the issue of performance practice.
And a modern day example of this is jazz swing.
That when a jazz composer writes a piece today, they don't
necessarily write a note at the top that says these two
8th notes should be played like a triplet sort of figure
dup da dup da becomes do da do da da ba.
Well, we know if we're playing jazz that, that's probably
what it's going to be unless they specifically write otherwise.
Composers don't write that because it's the performance practice, it's assumed and
if you're playing in this idiom you're going to play in that manner.
Well, the issue of performance practice, can be applied throughout music history.
There was a performance practice for Mozart for Hyde, for
Renaissance Music, for Medieval music, it's not necessarily on the score.
We just.
It's incumbant upon us to do a little bit of research to find out what it is.
And to know that, say, a Mozart Forte Piano, or a Mozart
Accent, is very different from a
Stravinsky Forte Piano and a Stravinsky Accent.
They look the same on the page, but they're played very different.
And we have to do that.
The composer's not going to tell us that.
They assume we already know and a Wagnerian legato passage will or, or
expressive passage will probably be played
differently then a Renaissance expressive legato passage.
In Wagner, it's probably, you will probably going to connect.
Each note as intensely as possible.
Whereas, in the renaissance music, we might put a
little more separation, even in the, in a legato passage.
Looks the same on the page, if you factor out the
fact that we have different harmonic languages that we're dealing with.
But, besides that, it look, the notation is going to look the same
on the page, but there's different
performance practices that we're going to apply.
Another example.
If we look at Mozart, could be the way we treat slurs.
Often in Mozart, if we have say five notes slurred together de do do do dom.
It's often going to be played with a decresndo.
He doesn't write it in the part, but the performance practice
was often de do do do dum ta do do do dum.
Not always.
And there are actually writings about, well,
how do we treat these sorts of figures?
So, it's, again, it's incumbent upon us to know the traditions and apply them.
To do our score study, to do our research,
mostly as we work to serve as the composer's advocates.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Explorer notre catalogue
Rejoignez-nous gratuitement et obtenez des recommendations, des mises à jour et des offres personnalisées.
Coursera propose un accès universel à la meilleure formation au monde,
en partenariat avec des universités et des organisations du plus haut niveau, pour proposer des cours en ligne.
© 2019 Coursera Inc. Tous droits réservés.
