TubeNet

Hello I was wondering does anyone know the teaching style of Warren Deck? Also if people don't mind sharing the teaching styles of their teachers or people they have encountered. Thank you in Advance.

For my first two years of undergrad I studied with David Lewis, who has been with the North Carolina Symphony for many years. There were a few things about his teaching that really remained with me all these years. After I would play something, he would ask me what I thought about how I played. This drove me crazy because I just wanted him to tell me what was wrong and how to fix it. I was young and stupid at the time. Of course he was trying to get me to listen critically to myself and not just blow into the horn and push the buttons.

He was very much about attitude and mind set too. Have a confident attitude and you will play with confidence. He had me read about Zen and from the Inner Game of Tennis as well as the Inner Game of Music, which I think had just come out around that time. He tried to get me to dress better too, but that took much longer for me to understand.

Almost every question I asked, his answer was "More air!"

I wish I had had a better appreciation of his approach at the time, but as I said, I was young and stupid.

mike

It's been many years since I had a teacher but in college I had the great fortune to study euphonium for 4 years with Leonard Falcone at Michigan State. He taught a soloistic style. He originally played violin in Italy so was greatly influenced by a string style of playing. In some ways the euphonium for him was the cello of the band. Phrasing was very important and he didn't allow allow any scratched notes. He frequently tested his student's breath control by measuring how long you could hold a note. He was old style and didn't use any of the more recent tools in our lessons.

When I teach I also emphasize style and phrasing. Each phrase has to mean something and be musical. Breath support is crucial.

He had me read about Zen and from the Inner Game of Tennis as well as the Inner Game of Music, which I think had just come out around that time. He tried to get me to dress better too, but that took much longer for me to understand.

HA! That's Great! I studied trumpet with Carter Eggers at Eastern Michigan University and he had the same reading list. First everyone had to read "The Inner Game of Tennis," next I think was, "Zen and the Art of Archery." The inner game of music was on his list as well - but he didn't like it as much. The required reading list was probably only about 5 books, but he always had one on his "Hey - you should read this" list - I remember the cliche was that it took much of Freshmen year to figure out what he was talking about. Kind of like Daniel LaRusso getting upset with Mr. Miyogi for having him paint the fence all day when he promised to teach him Karate.

Great Teacher!

John

I think this is an interesting thread and is one that caused me to stop, read it, reflect upon my own experiences, and feel compelled to post a response. This is a long post and I doubt that many will read it or really understand what I'm talking about without having been there, but here goes...

I, like many here, have worked with a wide variety of teachers. Some for a short time, others for years and years. I found that I was offered dintinctly different approachs by different teachers over the years and that I can classify them as follows:

-My earliest teachers were "lead by example" teachers that tried to teach me to play by saying "play it like this!" or "play it like that!" In my case, as a beginner, this was totally ineffective...I didn't know HOW to play it like this or play it like that...that is what I needed to be taught as a beginner. As a result, I think I developed rather slowly as a player.

-My second phase of teachers put literature in front of me that was technically beyond me (I had basically taught myself enough to get by at that point) and then tried to get me "through" the works without much regard for how I was (or wasn't) actually getting through. I wasn't taught basics, taught how to practice, or shown what to practice.

-My third phase of teachers came shortly thereafter and became the most successful for me. The teacher took me back to the basics, taught me how to practice, demonstrated thing to me, and then taught me how to get those results myself. I was given appropriate literature to play and was always aware of WHY we were doing something. I belive that knowing why I was doing something helped me feel like I was accomplishing something in my practice and playing. I stayed with this one particular teacher for about 6 years.

-The fourth phase came in college. I got caught up in the first teacher's own playing and performing reputation (which was excellent), the tuba arms race around me, and being competitve, and learning CC tuba, etc., etc. and I really lost sight of what I needed in a teacher. Looking back on it now, there was a lot of "play it like this" or "play it like that" happening and I just went with it. I was also presented with some interesting literature that I'm very grateful to have played, but I didn't have a lot of guidance there. I just picked the stuff I thought would look cool. Of course some of it was tuba jock stuff that I just hacked my way through. I guess I learned something, but I'm not sure that a student like me (at the time) should have been allowed to do that vs. being "assigned" literature. I needed more structure in my instruction and decided that it wasn't the place for me and left after a year. Others loved it and have done exceptionally well there. I harbor no resentment for the teacher, it simply was not the best place for me.

-The fifth phase came when I left college #1 and went to college #2. What I found there (and knew going in) was that it was a continuation of the approach that had worked for me before (see phase #3) but on a higher level. Heavy emphasis was put on the basics and I was presented with literature that required some serious work and skill development, but was also realistically within my grasp. I feel like I left there as the best player I could be at the time and that I really clicked with the teacher and his approach. Interestingly, this teacher, never, not one time, in 4 years played one single note and said "play it like this." This person was also the sort of teacher that many would call a mentor. I learned plenty about "music" but also lots about life and how to be "good person." The summer I spent helping him build an addition on his house proved just as valuable as time spent in his studio.

There you have it...my journey and the schools of teaching that I encountered.

I can make no comments re: Warren Deck. We've never met.

My main teacher was R. Winston Morris. He always stressed fundamentals (He has an entire sheet with 45 + minutes of scales in legato, marcato, staccato, etc., and a list of all the fundamental considerations- fingers, intonation, air, etc.) and being able to conceptualize something by singing/buzzing it before you played it. He had a unique way of teaching legato. He taught legato the same way a trombone player would play it to move between notes on the slide. He said you should be able to play a c scale to where it could "make someone cry...in a good way." He said if 1) You didn't have your fundamentals right and/or 2) You couldn't conceptualize it before you played it, you would "throw up out of your bell."
And indeed I saw several people (in and out of his studio, including some professionals) whose playing had regressed since he last saw them, and he always referred them back to simple fundamentals. Often it's because something extremely subtle crept into his/her playing and their ear got used to it and accepted it. Which is why he advocated use of a tape recorder, metronome, tuner on the stand at all times. They keep you honest and are subjective. His lessons could be brutal at times and he never minced words, but he seemed to know exactly what to say to motivate you one way or another...