A short text about teaching saxophone at the Fontys Conservatory

Saxophone teaching
My first three years

I have been teaching saxophone to young professionals for three years now. Next year my first end exam students -the ones I have I have taught from the beginning of their studies- will play their end recital. Very exciting, for them of course, but surely also for me. I have seen these students grow and develop as a musician and as a person. But they also have witnessed the birth of a teacher. I never taught before. So I am still learning, and I expect I always will.

From the beginning I have been trying to find my own way of explaining music and the saxophone. The basis of my current teaching is to have to student find his own solution. In stead of always telling him how I myself do it. I am convinced this way he will find a more personal way of playing his instrument. Also it is a necessity because I am still adapting my playing and my way of thinking about music. There is no one way of doing things and I still try to find different entrances to making music and playing the saxophone. I will keep experimenting. I do notice this is sometimes very hard for the students. Every once in a while I see frustration in my class room when the student realizes things are still not working even after he put so much time and effort into it. I recognize this from my own studies. I spend hours and hours each day on fixing my sound and only being happy with it once every year or so. But in the end I did find my own embouchure, my own sound, my own way of practicing. Of course my own teacher Arno Bornkamp had a lot to do with this. He let me free to experiment, also sometimes to his frustration One week I could play much better than the period before and the next week I put myself months back. This made me a stronger musician. I know what I want, and I know how to reach it.

These are some aspects of my teaching so far:

The technical base is very important. It is the stuff the students build their 'house' on. I try to tell my students that there are different of ways of constructing a house but that the base should be able to support the house. The base is build in a quite 'objective' way. That is, I try to provide my students with a neutral base. I want them to be free to play however they want. Of course the base can be built in several ways, and this way comes from me, but in the end the base is not visible anymore when they have build their own house on it.

*Breath support. Music consists of phrases and gestures that are connected, just like in speech. To connect those we need air support from the diaphragm. There is a lot to be said about this, which I will not to do now...
*Mechanical technique, fingers, concentration. I start every student out with 5 Klosé books. I want them to study one from every book every week and one scale in different forms (seconds, thirds, triads, minor/major parallels, later on bigger intervals and other scales (chromatic, octotonic, etc.)). The student should be able to dream these exercises after maximum one and and a half year. Every exercise is in a certain key and at about half way it has one or more traps (funny modulations, strange intervals, etc.). The point is to recognize these traps and find the focus to keep going without mistakes.
*Embouchure. I do not emphasize a certain way of playing except in the lowest base: the corners of the mouth should be centered, the diaphragm should provide enough support, the back of the tongue focuses the air and the rest is relaxed. The rest is up to the student. This basic embouchure is a great base to experiment with different sounds. I find a relaxed embouchure to be very flexible in sound, register changes and other techniques (vibrato, multiphonics, flutter tongue, etc.).
*Although I do not specifically prefer one type of vibrato in teaching, there's one that I personally prefer: the jaw vibrato. I use only this one, which I sometimes combine with a little bit of throat. The basic vibrato I teach my students is the one that goes through the middle but more below the center than above, and does not touch the ceiling and bottom of the sound. But in practice it is more interesting to experiment with this and use different amplitudes and speeds throughout a piece of music.

I try to avoid imposing a certain 'interpretation' of a piece of music onto the student. My goal is to be a coach that helps the student to find his own way of playing the piece. But I do put great value on the written text and in principle I do not like to override it.

I find that a lot of students ask me what I thought of their playing. I try to avoid answering this question in the way they want me to. I always bounce the question back whenever I can. I think it is very important that the students develops his own taste and discovers what he likes and how he wants to play and most importantly, that he learns to give this the greatest value of all. In the end, the student is the one who should believe in what he is doing.

http://www

http://www.artsjournal.com/sandow/2010/02/performance_reborn.html

Concertgebouwreporter.nl posts a short article by Ties Mellema about the classical concert format.
This article was also published on http://muziek3daagse.nl/

http://www

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3378420&l=137fd886ca&id=716823321

De toekomst van de klassieke muziek Ik speel op de Nederlandse en buit...

De toekomst van de klassieke muziek

Ik speel op de Nederlandse en buitenlandse concertpodia sinds eind jaren '90.Sindsdien heb ik niet echt een trend in mijn reguliere concerten kunnen bespeuren. De concertvorm lijkt over het algemeen vrij statisch te zijn. Pas het laatste jaar gonst er iets. Mensen beginnen zich zorgen te maken over de klassieke muziek in het algemeen. Er worden verschillende oplossingen genoemd. Begin jaren 2000 lag één van de antwoorden in de cross-over. De combinatie van klassieke muziek en musici met andere disciplines, hip-hop, rock, pop, dans, etc., om zo een ander publiek de concertzaal in te krijgen. Zo hoopten ze dat als mensen eenmaal van klassieke muziek hadden geproefd, ze zouden terugkomen naar de reguliere programmering. Dat bleek niet te werken. Nu ligt de 'formele' concertvorm onder vuur. Het klassieke concert zou te stijf zijn, het publiek te oud. Jonge mensen voelen zich hierdoor niet op hun gemak, en hoe goed de muziek ook is en gespeeld wordt, hierdoor komen ze niet naar klassieke concerten. En ik geef ze vaak geen ongelijk. Als ik eerlijk ben voel ik me meer op mijn gemak in zalen als het BIMHuis. Waar de sfeer informeler maar toch ook zeer respectvol is. De directeur legde me ooit uit wat zijn visie was. Dat illustreerde hij aan de hand van zoektocht naar de goede deuren voor de zaal. Deze deuren moesten geruisloos open dicht kunnen tijdens het concert, als mensen uit het publiek een drankje wilden halen en ze moesten de zaal afschermen van het cafégedruis, maar tegelijkertijd moest je ook het gevoel hebben dat er nog wel iets was daarbuiten.

Als ik heel eerlijk ben tegen me zelf, wil ik gewoon spelen. 'Gewoon' concerten geven. Ik weet niet of er een wezenlijk verschil is met een regulier concert. Misschien wel. Ik vertel wat over de stukken die ik speel, waarom vind ik ze goed, wat voor muziek is het, etc. Ik vind het een leuk een wij-gevoel te creëren in de zaal. Maar dat is ook van het moment zelf afhankelijk en ik ben natuurlijk geen acteur of cabaretier. Soms gaat dat gewoon niet.
Ik trek ook wel eens wat anders aan. Meestal spelen musici in accountantspakken of rokkostuums. Zeker het maatpak is kleding die mensen zelf al dragen doordeweeks, op kantoor. Daarom vraag ik regelmatig AZIZ iets voor me te ontwerpen. Maar wederom, soms draag ik ook een pak...
Het hangt van het moment af, van mijn eigen stemming. Soms heb ik niet zo'n zin om te praten en dan wil ik de muziek meer laten spreken. De Tracks serie in het Concertgebouw is een erg mooie opzet (www.concertgebouwtracks.nl). Dat zijn eigenlijk heel 'normale' concerten waar de musicus veel vrijheid krijgt om zijn eigen ding te doen. Ik deed zo'n concert in december (zie bijlage, Uitkrant, maart 2010). (op de site staat ook een interviewtje met ondergetekende waarin ik wat meer uitleg over mijn visie destijds).

Trouwens, wat is een 'gewoon' concert? Een concert moet toch altijd zo bijzonder mogelijk zijn, of je nu een accountantspak of een spijkerbroek aan hebt?

Misschien is voor mij persoonlijk een persoonlijk en integer concert erg belangrijk. Ik ben erg enthousiast over bepaalde muziek en ik wil die graag delen met zo veel mogelijk mensen.  Misshcien is het wel zo dat musici meer de kans zouden moeten krijgen om zichzelf te zijn op het podium. Om de verscheidenheid aan persoonlijkheden te laten zien tijdens een concertserie. Daar ligt dan ook een taak voor programmeurs. Iemand die hier net mee begonnen is, is Christiaan Kuyvenhoven met zijn serie P!tch in het Betty Asfalt Complex in Amsterdam. Alhoewel de serie op veel vlakken nog in de kinderschoenen staat, is er na een paar edities al een vast en jong publiek. Christiaan combineert zijn losse en ietwat SBS6-erige presentatie met een ijzersterke inhoud. En dat maakt deze serie erg bijzonder. Ik speelde een paar dagen geleden Bach, Berio en Gubaidulina in deze serie, voor jonge mensen die er van smulden. Christiaan interviewde me tussen de stukken door, en we hadden allemaal een leuke avond. En het leuke is, dat ik persoonlijk nog eens beter ga spelen van zo'n losse sfeer. Voor aanvang van het concert haalden we als een soort rattenvangers van Hamelen het publiek op uit de foyer met een moderne improvisatie en leidden ze zo de zaal in.
Dit hoeft allemaal niet tot in de puntjes gepland te worden. De echte planning zit hem in hoe ik de noten wil spelen, dat is al genoeg werk! Als ik de kans krijg om mezelf te zijn op het podium is het halve werk misschien al wel gedaan....

Pat Metheny on Kenny G Question:Pat, could you tell us your opinion ab...

Pat Metheny on Kenny G

Question:

Pat, could you tell us your opinion about Kenny G - it appears you were quoted as being less than enthusiastic about him and his music. I would say that most of the serious music listeners in the world would not find your opinion surprising or unlikely - but you were vocal about it for the first time. You are generally supportive of other musicians it seems.

Pat's Answer:

Kenny G is not a musician I really had much of an opinion about at all until recently. There was not much about the way he played that interested me one way or the other either live or on records.

I first heard him a number of years ago playing as a sideman with Jeff Lorber when they opened a concert for my band. My impression was that he was someone who had spent a fair amount of time listening to the more pop oriented sax players of that time, like Grover Washington or David Sanborn, but was not really an advanced player, even in that style. He had major rhythmic problems and his harmonic and melodic vocabulary was extremely limited, mostly to pentatonic based and blues-lick derived patterns, and he basically exhibited only a rudimentary understanding of how to function as a professional soloist in an ensemble - Lorber was basically playing him off the bandstand in terms of actual music.

But he did show a knack for connecting to the basest impulses of the large crowd by deploying his two or three most effective licks (holding long notes and playing fast runs - never mind that there were lots of harmonic clams in them) at the key moments to elicit a powerful crowd reaction (over and over again). The other main thing I noticed was that he also, as he does to this day, played horribly out of tune - consistently sharp.

Of course, I am aware of what he has played since, the success it has had, and the controversy that has surrounded him among musicians and serious listeners. This controversy seems to be largely fueled by the fact that he sells an enormous amount of records while not being anywhere near a really great player in relation to the standards that have been set on his instrument over the past sixty or seventy years. And honestly, there is no small amount of envy involved from musicians who see one of their fellow players doing so well financially, especially when so many of them who are far superior as improvisors and musicians in general have trouble just making a living. There must be hundreds, if not thousands of sax players around the world who are simply better improvising musicians than Kenny G on his chosen instruments. It would really surprise me if even he disagreed with that statement.

Having said that, it has gotten me to thinking lately why so many jazz musicians (myself included, given the right "bait" of a question, as I will explain later) and audiences have gone so far as to say that what he is playing is not even jazz at all. Stepping back for a minute, if we examine the way he plays, especially if one can remove the actual improvising from the often mundane background environment that it is delivered in, we see that his saxophone style is in fact clearly in the tradition of the kind of playing that most reasonably objective listeners WOULD normally quantify as being jazz. It's just that as jazz or even as music in a general sense, with these standards in mind, it is simply not up to the level of playing that we historically associate with professional improvising musicians. So, lately I have been advocating that we go ahead and just include it under the word jazz - since pretty much of the rest of the world OUTSIDE of the jazz community does anyway - and let the chips fall where they may.

And after all, why he should be judged by any other standard, why he should be exempt from that that all other serious musicians on his instrument are judged by if they attempt to use their abilities in an improvisational context playing with a rhythm section as he does? He SHOULD be compared to John Coltrane or Wayne Shorter, for instance, on his abilities (or lack thereof) to play the soprano saxophone and his success (or lack thereof) at finding a way to deploy that instrument in an ensemble in order to accurately gauge his abilities and put them in the context of his instrument's legacy and potential.

As a composer of even eighth note based music, he SHOULD be compared to Herbie Hancock, Horace Silver or even Grover Washington. Suffice it to say, on all above counts, at this point in his development, he wouldn't fare well.

But, like I said at the top, this relatively benign view was all "until recently".

Not long ago, Kenny G put out a recording where he overdubbed himself on top of a 30+ year old Louis Armstrong record, the track "What a Wonderful World". With this single move, Kenny G became one of the few people on earth I can say that I really can't use at all - as a man, for his incredible arrogance to even consider such a thing, and as a musician, for presuming to share the stage with the single most important figure in our music.

This type of musical necrophilia - the technique of overdubbing on the preexisting tracks of already dead performers - was weird when Natalie Cole did it with her dad on "Unforgettable" a few years ago, but it was her dad. When Tony Bennett did it with Billie Holiday it was bizarre, but we are talking about two of the greatest singers of the 20th century who were on roughly the same level of artistic accomplishment. When Larry Coryell presumed to overdub himself on top of a Wes Montgomery track, I lost a lot of the respect that I ever had for him - and I have to seriously question the fact that I did have respect for someone who could turn out to have such unbelievably bad taste and be that disrespectful to one of my personal heroes.

But when Kenny G decided that it was appropriate for him to defile the music of the man who is probably the greatest jazz musician that has ever lived by spewing his lame-ass, jive, pseudo bluesy, out-of-tune, noodling, wimped out, fucked up playing all over one of the great Louis's tracks (even one of his lesser ones), he did something that I would not have imagined possible. He, in one move, through his unbelievably pretentious and calloused musical decision to embark on this most cynical of musical paths, shit all over the graves of all the musicians past and present who have risked their lives by going out there on the road for years and years developing their own music inspired by the standards of grace that Louis Armstrong brought to every single note he played over an amazing lifetime as a musician. By disrespecting Louis, his legacy and by default, everyone who has ever tried to do something positive with improvised music and what it can be, Kenny G has created a new low point in modern culture - something that we all should be totally embarrassed about - and afraid of. We ignore this, "let it slide", at our own peril.

His callous disregard for the larger issues of what this crass gesture implies is exacerbated by the fact that the only reason he possibly have for doing something this inherently wrong (on both human and musical terms) was for the record sales and the money it would bring.

Since that record came out - in protest, as insignificant as it may be, I encourage everyone to boycott Kenny G recordings, concerts and anything he is associated with. If asked about Kenny G, I will diss him and his music with the same passion that is in evidence in this little essay.

Normally, I feel that musicians all have a hard enough time, regardless of their level, just trying to play good and don't really benefit from public criticism, particularly from their fellow players. but, this is different.

There ARE some things that are sacred - and amongst any musician that has ever attempted to address jazz at even the most basic of levels, Louis Armstrong and his music is hallowed ground. To ignore this trespass is to agree that NOTHING any musician has attempted to do with their life in music has any intrinsic value - and I refuse to do that. (I am also amazed that there HASN'T already been an outcry against this among music critics - where ARE they on this?????!?!?!?!, magazines, etc.). Everything I said here is exactly the same as what I would say to Gorelick if I ever saw him in person. and if I ever DO see him anywhere, at any function - he WILL get a piece of my mind and (maybe a guitar wrapped around his head.)

NOTE: this post is partially in response to the comments that people have made regarding a short video interview excerpt with me that was posted on the internet taken from a tv show for young people (kind of like MTV)in poland where i was asked to address 8 to 11 year old kids on terms that they could understand about jazz.     the fact that this clip was released so far out of the context that it was delivered in is a drag, but it is now done. (its unauthorized release out of context like that is symptomatic of the new electronically interconnected culture that we now live in - where pretty much anything anyone anywhere has ever said or done has the potential to become common public property at any time.) i was surprised by the polish people putting this clip up so far away from the use that it was intended -really just for the attention - with no explanation of the show it was made for - they (the polish people in general) used to be so hip and would have been unlikely candidates to do something like that before, but i guess everything is changing there like it is everywhere else.Dit bloggen!