Too much talking not enough direction. He could have done just as good over the phone with her. I find the best teachers are very direct, they pick out exactly what your problem is, they don't talk in general terms, or softer here louder there. They target the problem and it causes the sound to correct itself. There is no vagueness. Masterclass with Barenboim on youtube, now thats getting somewhere!
Well, if you don't understand what he is talking about, that's your problem since I understand it perfectly well. The plumber comment is just rude and dumb.
I took hundreds of hours of lessons with this guy before I won the Cleveland Competition ( I didn't know I could just as well prepared the pieces with a plumber!), and believe me, if one listens to him one learns
She actually played the opening passage worse after he spoke. Is this the point he was trying to make? Clearly it wasn't because he didn't get the result he was after which led to even more talking.A good teacher teaches to the student's ability and comprehension. Instead, you had to learn his method of teaching through "hundreds of hours of lessons" before you "won the Cleveland Competition." You must really be a good student. Secondly, I made no comment about the student who is always innocent. It was the teacher who is suspect. If his point was to make her play worse, then clearly he succeeded. He's a really good teacher!
A dynamic shape of a phrase ( cresc. - dim) does not necessarily mean that there has to be a felt direction in the phrase to a certain point ( I could add that especially that is true in the introduction since it goes to F Major in a F minor piece)
You confuse democracy with rudeness, I'm afraid. And it's clear that what is annoying you is that this post give hits i.e. promotes my website which makes the "communist" comment very entertaining.
This was interesting to watch, not least because it seemed very reminiscent of my experiences attending similar classes. Regarding whether she played it worse afterwards or not, if (and I'm certainly not convinced) she played it worse afterwards, that is surely not so uncommon in such situations, as the teacher is planting ideas in her head as how to play a passage and it is unrealistic to expect such ideas (no matter how good the teacher) to crystallise immediately within the pupil's mind.
Ramsey, I really like the way you put that, as a crescendo being three-dimensional. I hope you allow me to use that expression in my teaching.And yes, I agree. It's very common when one tries to do new things for the first time that the result is, in the short run, not better. But it is in the long run.
Too much talking not enough direction. He could have done just as good over the phone with her. I find the best teachers are very direct, they pick out exactly what your problem is, they don't talk in general terms, or softer here louder there. They target the problem and it causes the sound to correct itself. There is no vagueness.
Good masterclass teachers do at least two things: 1. get noticeable improvements, either musical or technical, immediately
From the audience perspective, this should be crystal clear immediately because they are only observing. From the student's perspective, it should be crystal clear afterward because they must both be instructed and perform...
...A good teacher teaches to the student's ability and comprehension. Instead, you had to learn his method of teaching through "hundreds of hours of lessons" before you "won the Cleveland Competition." You must really be a good student.
I've always been interested in this little discussed phenomenon. Crescendi and diminuendi are actually three dimensional phenomena; sometimes they come forward, towards somewhere, or backwards, away; other times they stretch outwards or constrict inwards.
I think this is a very good point, which is rarely recognized, or discussed.Most of the people see crescendi and diminuendi on a "softer/louder" level, while in fact, those are rather function of changings of sound image, emotional context, and music intensity.Best, M
I've always been interested in this little discussed phenomenon. Crescendi and diminuendi are actually three dimensional phenomena; sometimes they come forward, towards somewhere, or backwards, away; other times they stretch outwards or constrict inwards. I find that very few people seem to recognize the difference. In some pieces, when a crescendo should spread outward rather than just forward (think three dimensional spaces), a forward-crescendo will sound muscular, aggressive, and out of place. I commented on one such occurence in the Audition Room, in a fellow's otherwise lovely "Cygne" transcribed by Godowsky. His crescendo wasn't three dimensional, it was just coming straight forward; it should have spread outward. A small detail but of infinite use!Walter Ramsey
The first time I read your post about the three-dimensional nature of a crescendo, I thought, well, yes, that's an amazing concept.But the more I think about it, the less I really understand what you are saying.You don't mean, of course, creating this dimensional effect by altering the tempo as well as the volume, do you? Whenever, as a beginner, I would slightly slow diminuendi or speed up crescendi, my teachers would tear their hair out.Could you explain this further, maybe using some other image for me. I just can't quite grasp the concept.For example, what do you mean by the crescendo "spreading outward"? Do you mean that the volume, of course, gradually increases, but that, additionally, the intensity of the expression also increases?
Slobone...a crescendo does not have to have a one-dimensional direction. You will limit yourself if you think that, I promise.
I don't think anything you said was wrong, but I don't think it is in disagreement with anything else posted here.