Re: Levels of Playing


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Rick Denney on November 25, 2002 at 11:31:27:

In Reply to: Levels of Playing posted by Collin on November 23, 2002 at 19:18:35:

Your question makes it sound as though you are contemplating a professional career, and that imposes some requirements the rest of us won't ever face. My answer is tempered by that goal--if you don't have, then consider the last paragraph as your answer.

The sound versus technique debate will never end, and it has been with us right from the beginning.

I once asked Lee Hipp, during my first lesson with him, whether a great player (i.e. full-time symphony quality) had to have the sound first or the technique first.

He said, "Yes."

This is a variation on the previously mentioned anecdote of needing only two traits: a great sound and great reading ability, if you define great reading as getting the notes, getting the dynamics, nailing the articulation, understanding the phrase, and feeding all that into a clear musical-emotional context, the first time you see the music.

A chain is only as strong as the weakest link. If you are happy with your technical progress at this point, but not with your sound, go to your teacher and say, "I want a great sound." If your teacher thinks your sound is all it needs to be, and you don't think that's the case, find a different teacher.

The only talent that marks successful professionals in music is the drive to be the best. I'm not talking about wanting to win the next competition, I'm talking about spending nearly every waking moment striving to root out any weakness and turn it into a strength. That drive is not normal--regular people like me don't have it (at least when it comes to playing the tuba). I'd have never worked hard enough to be the very best, even assuming the talent was there in the first place.

There are few with so much natural talent that they can succeed without that drive. The wisest course of action is to assume that you aren't one of them and don't worry about those who are. Most that have that talent also have the drive, and so are even better. That's the sort of competition you face to be a pro. Ask Jay Bertolet (for example) if he thinks his playing is all it should be, or if he is still rooting out what he perceives as weaknesses. That we can't hear his weaknesses is only a sign that he has identified and worked on them, not that he never had them. But that commitment to improvement--no it should be said stronger than that: That compulsion to improve is the entry fee to being great at anything.

This is a topic about which I've been thinking lately, because we have a new tuba player in our band who has what I think is a better sound than I do. There are things I do better than he. I could worry about it and go into competition mode, but I don't have the drive to be the best. I'd be just as happy with both of us learning from each other, exploiting our strengths and covering for each other's weaknesses. That is a good approach for a couple of amateurs--we will improve together rather than in competition with each other. But if you want a solo seat in an orchestra, that isn't good enough.

Rick "with no compulsion to excellence but also with no paycheck at stake" Denney


Follow Ups: