Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:37:41 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Ed Zubrow <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>What do list members find to be the most effective ways of meeting a new
>work and why? Do your approaches vary depending on the repertoire? How
>about if you are engaging a new performance of a work with which you are
>familiar?
One thing that I do when I'm listening to a CD for the first time is to
keep track of how long each movement is, and look at the CD player display
to see where I am in that movement.
It sounds kind of goofy, but I do it because when I hear a piece for the
first time, I don't necessarily have a sense of scale. Not knowing whether
it's 5 minutes or 30 minutes long means that on first listen it tends to
sound like it's just stringing out music for a while until it stops.
Knowing that I'm 20%, or 80%, of the way through a piece helps me
understand where I am in the arc of that piece's structure.
When listening to music before the 20th century, this isn't as big of a
deal, since the structure is generally a lot more transparent; you can
tell when you've reached the end of the exposition, etc.
>Also, how many of you make notes of music you listen to for the first
>time? And, finally, when (and how) do you introduce the score into your
>study of a piece?
I read a score when I can (god bless Dover) but it's more because I just
find it more enjoyable than because I'm trying to study the piece carefully.
Dan Schmidt -> [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]
|
|
|