What do you know about conducting?

[pianistimo]

This question may seem random - but it's actually something I'm very interested in.  Now, if you had a student of say 12-13 years of age and they got bored of repetative piano practice and wanted to combine piano lessons with some short conducting exercises (sightreading scores, theory, and conducting practice) how would you set up a 15 minute lesson and what would the general course be for say six weeks?

It seems to me that one could break up the lesson into five minute segments with exercises to take home on each segment.  One might be simply learning the various instrument ranges and registers by listening to specific CD's with those ranges heard so that you don't just see the notes, but you hear them.  The next might be listening to some CD's for a general learning of how to conduct various tempos.  And, how to find the tempos for yourself with wristwatch or various other mental methods.  And, lastly perhaps listening or reading about interpretation skills.   For instance Wagner was obsessed with sustained forte at one point and insisted that conductors needed to learn how to standardize their orchestras so that the strings were not too quiet and the winds were not too loud.

I am very interested to ready thoughts on teaching conducting, on conducting itself, and on approaching the very basics of conducting with bright students in the case that they may become interested in the piano as a general overview instrument (and very instrumental) to conducting. 

Also, if you were to create a piano-based method for conducting what would the focus be and how would it be different from standing in the middle of a room and conducting.  Is this generally only reserved for choral conducting at times and not orchestral.  Could one literally conduct and play a piano concerto alone?  What is the advantage of a pianist who is also a conductor? 

[richard black]

It's always struck me that studying conducting is a very bizarre thing for a young musician to do, on the whole (out-of-sight geniuses excepted - Mozart/Korngold sort of level). The number one requirement for a good conductor is a wealth of musical experience, which is the number one thing young musicians, almot by definition, lack. Probably the number two requirement is excellent personnel-management skills, which is another thing you don't expect to find in the young. Stick technique comes a long way down the list.

I don't conduct, but I spend long hours working with conductors when wearing my opera or choral repetiteur hat, so I've had plenty of opportunity to observe them at close quarters.

Studying scores and the ranges and capabilities of instruments is, however, a very useful thing for any musician to do, I'm sure. Indeed, simply listening to lots of recordings is a very good thing to do too!

[pianistimo]

I thought so too, but genius can come in a student that listens well, has good observation, and likes to learn quickly but doesn't thrive on doing the same thing from week to week (ie learning new piano music) only.  They need constant new information and are unlike 'most' students.  This particular student is very bright, but i have no idea from test scores if he is genius.  Many geniuses are misdiagnosed as children as utter failures and with slight tendencies to 'do their own thing' and thus provoke the wrath of the teacher.

For instance, one week - i showed this student a little theory and he comes back the next week with two or three songs written down (and we barely went over sight reading).  We've been going over harmony and he seems to understand immediately the concept of I IV V chords.  Perhaps continuing to focus on a little harmony and using exercises at piano to play in all registers and get used to pitch discrimination in the middle section.  This is a student whom would thrive if asked to discriminate pitch and chords.  He likes constant challenges from week to week.

I'm tempted to make a tape of several phrases of melodic (one line)music from assorted piano repertoire with several measures of the score to look at while listening.  Then, I'd ask him if he can attempt to hear the music first before listening and go over finding the first pitch and moving from there by intervals.  I think he likes fast moving topics and to vary them from week to week.  He'll take whatever is talked about and move it around.

Perhaps he would also be interested to find out about tunings and have some instrument he can manipulate with tunings.  Perhaps an old clunky piano and a tuning fork and wrench.  The old organs of europe were mean-tuned and had a lower concert A pitch than 440 although after Silbermann the pitch started going up a bit.  Silbermann's was as low as 415.  Then it went to 420 with Schultz.  Some of the Vienna organs were as high as 446 later on.  Mean-tone temperament makes the bass much lower and the treble more high and sparkly.

Now, out of curiousity - i would think knowing the pitch limitations of the instrumentation you are working with would change the 'relativity' of some pieces and it could actually be adjusted during intermission if a piece had a much different selection of instrumentation.  For instance, if one is playing a piano concerto after the first half - the orchestra would definately want to use the piano tuning, right - but most of the time they don't actually use well-tempered tunings only do they?  I thought good orchestras were like good singers and fudged the pitch lower in the bass and higher in the treble according to which way the music was going. 

[communist]

if they know music theory well enough teach them how to hold the baton and what to do with keeping beat but MAKE SURE they know when they are conducting at the first beat of every measure to let the musicians know that they started a new measure.

[G.W.K]

When I was at school, I was in a Brass Band and it was there I also learned how to conduct. Although I have no need of that skill anymore, I can understand people's conducting quite well (if they do it right!).

So, I know how to conduct an orchestra, (though never used it since) because all the bands were formed into one in the end, plus we were taught conducting over 5 years and unless the student you're mentioning would require conducting at a later date...I see no point in teaching them it. Especially if they are only a pianist as conducting is not something used with pianists as much as it is with other instruments.

Teach them how to recognise time signatures by listening to a music excerpt, teach them to be able to use all the skills a pianist would use/need, etc. I think conducting is not one of those skills.

G.W.K

[pianistimo]

Yes.  I suppose getting too carried away might cause the whole lesson to lose it's tenor.  It's just that 'if I could teach anything' in a piano lesson - this kid would get a lot of random but helpful stuff so he wouldn't go home bored.

The typical lesson doesn't seem to work on him as far as motivation.  I have this 'routine' if you want to call it that - of going through the scales (circle of fifths order), a few exercises (a very few and they are fairly easy), and mostly repertoire and whatever technique we're learning.  He's in the level 3 of Alfred and doing well.  It's just that he's bored of doing the 'routine' now.  He is one of those kids that you don't come across all the time.  He thinks 'out of the box.'

At first when I met him, I thought 'aha, he will be a great pianist.'  But, after getting to know him - his personality is more on the 'how does it work' side.  He wants to figure things out for himself and likes challenges.  He doesn't only like a lesson where you are told things and you go and practice it - but seems to like to challenge the status quo.  At his age, I think he could easily learn a lot about conducting and actually become a very good conductor.

I like the idea of breaking things down - so the suggestion of staying aware of the downbeat (first of the measure) is a good one.  Keep them coming if you think of something that you first learned when you were young about ANYTHING to do with conducting.  Also, he seems to love technology.  Are there any 'gadgets' out there $30. and under that would be interesting to a 12 year old?  Mini-tactel watches or something.

[mad_max2024]

Maybe you can teach him improvisation and let him vent his creativity.
Find out what sort of music he likes and encourage him to experiment instead of just sticking to the whole piece learning and technical stuff.
Teach him a bit about music theory and get him started on fooling around with chord progressions.
Maybe you can divide the lesson into the two sections. Most classical students get bored because they don't understand what it is they are playing. They just play what is written. If you teach him theory and analysis and show him how he can improvise and make variations on what he plays maybe he will have more interest.

Besides, classical tecnhical and improvisation or jazz training nicely complement each other in my opinion, he will become more complete as a pianist if he sees both sides.
Find out what he wants to do...

[pianistimo]

That's good advice because he already has shown interest in writing down music that he has composed.  One of the Alfred books (3rd level) is a composition book and he had an exercise last week to write in above the correct chords a selection of notes (different jazz scales) that would make the melody.  Hopefully, he'll enjoy that and we'll play it this week.

I really am not a jazz musician - but I like to hear improvisation.  I feel that my strengths as a teacher are with the fundamentals of music and so that's why i drifted to some of the conducting ideas.  But, as you say - he might be wanting a less 'formal' approach and seeking more improvisation.  For that, he might need another teacher

[mikey6]

I think conductors need a strong personality in order to convince/overpower 80 odd musicians - thats where it I fall down!  orchestral musicians can be quite scornful!