TubeNet

Hey guys! I was wondering in your opinion what the best college is for low brass? I not talking about marching bands. I am talking about a music degree Eastmann, Curits, The Shepherd School, SMU, etc....


Thanks,

Nick Phillips

Are you interested in college, or conservatory?

Either one.

It's usually a cop-out answer, but it's a very true one -- ask your teacher. If you don't have a teacher, then it'd be good to at least take a lesson or two and talk about this.

Maybe you're an Eastman-quality player, I have no clue. But for the huge majority of us who are NOT Eastman-quality, there are still a TON of options for schools and programs. Very few are "bad," but some may have more opportunities than others or have that intangible "fit" quality for you... and you will be the only person who knows that.

tubagod94 wrote:Either one.

In that case, I recommend Harvard + private lessons.

tubagod94 wrote:Hey guys! I was wondering in your opinion what the best college is for low brass? I not talking about marching bands. I am talking about a music degree Eastmann, Curits, The Shepherd School, SMU, etc....

A place like Curtis only accepts one Tuba player. (If they drop out, then they'll hire a sub....) In this kind of school the competition and camaraderie from other tuba players, euphonium players, trombone, etc. won't exist. There will be one tuba player and 4(3?) trombones. If you are the kind of player who doesn't need/want colleagues than this might be a great school for you. The opposite holds true of a really large school like UNT, Michigan, Indianna, etc...

Next, you have the absolute most important decision you should take, Do you get along with the teacher? It would be foolish to study for 4 years with a teacher, even if he/she is the best player in the world, if you don't get along and agree with them? Some great players are ok teachers, while some ok players a great teachers...

All the schools you have listed are quite good, there are however many other schools that are as good....

Next, you have the absolute most important decision you should take, Do you get along with the teacher? It would be foolish to study for 4 years with a teacher, even if he/she is the best player in the world, if you don't get along and agree with them? Some great players are ok teachers, while some ok players a great teachers...

+1

If you love to perform, sometimes it doesn't have to be a big name college. Moderately sized institutions can be equally rewarding. Some INCREDIBLE teachers are there in them, and some of them have playing/performance opportunities galore.

I did some time (sounds like prison, eh?) at a small(er) college, and was given the opportunity to perform in 14 ensembles a semester. I rearranged my schedule, heck, even ended up auditing some of them, and even got written notes from the registrars office to allow me to be in some of them without being in the class portion.

When I moved to a much bigger school, the opportunities were far more sparce.

An even bigger deal... learning to learn. When I was young and dumber, I didn't know how to learn from teachers. At that point in my life only the very best and firmest could get anything done or accomplished with me. It wasn't until I learned how to learn from others, that everyone around me became a good teacher. Good students always have good teachers, and it isn't always the direction you'd think.

Juggernaut04 wrote:

Next, you have the absolute most important decision you should take, Do you get along with the teacher? It would be foolish to study for 4 years with a teacher, even if he/she is the best player in the world, if you don't get along and agree with them? Some great players are ok teachers, while some ok players a great teachers...

+1

-100

Anyone who chooses a *college* based primarily on the personality of a SINGLE faculty member making a mistake, in my opinion.

This is a bit like signing up for private lessons with that one faculty member, and then tacking on an entire undergraduate study program on the side.

If the instructor is all THAT important to you, then just move there and take lessons. It will be a lot cheaper, and you'll have more time to gig and party.

FIRST, narrow down your selection to INSTITUTIONS that fit you - that includes both the musical and academic level of achievement and aspiration.

ASSUME that you WILL change your major at least twice (or at least recognize that this is a strong possibility). Also, consider the possibility that that one "special" instructor will move on. What will you have in reserve?

After you have some idea of the general class of institution you want, THEN look at the specifics of the program your intend to major in. This applies to biology, physics, French literature, and music.

In my opinion, an adequate "Instructor of Tuba" in a good school is a far better bet than "world class Tubist who is a great guy to party with" in a crappy school.

College tuition is a very expensive way to pay for practical music lessons. For the price of your average conservatory, you could afford to fly to Hong Kong and take lessons from Roland Szentpali. If he'd have you...

sloan wrote:

Juggernaut04 wrote:

Next, you have the absolute most important decision you should take, Do you get along with the teacher? It would be foolish to study for 4 years with a teacher, even if he/she is the best player in the world, if you don't get along and agree with them? Some great players are ok teachers, while some ok players a great teachers...

+1

-100

Anyone who chooses a *college* based primarily on the personality of a SINGLE faculty member making a mistake, in my opinion.

I think you must be a very lucky man, Dr. Sloan. It seems to me that you have never had a graduate student or met a colleague with a graduate student with whom there was no cohesion between the two. (I find that the relationship between a Graduate Adviser, and a private instructor in music is very similar, one would be foolish to despise their student or adviser yet persevere in that direction.)

FWIW, While the OP has said that he is looking for a college or a conservatory, it seems to me, as his definiton of the two is different then yours, that what he is actually looking for is the latter of the two. (ie. a Music school)

sloan wrote: This is a bit like signing up for private lessons with that one faculty member, and then tacking on an entire undergraduate study program on the side.

First, I think that the reality in music schools is that a lot of performance majors do conceive that they re studying Tuba first and doing the rest of the "college crap" on the side.

Second, I don't necessarily agree with this way, but I have see oodles of great players turn out using this method, because instead of researching or reading they spent 3-4 hrs in a practice studio and listened to all the great music they could.

sloan wrote:
Anyone who chooses a *college* based primarily on the personality of a SINGLE faculty member making a mistake, in my opinion.
...
ASSUME that you WILL change your major at least twice (or at least recognize that this is a strong possibility).
...
College tuition is a very expensive way to pay for practical music lessons.

These are very important points. Neglect them at your peril.

PMeuph wrote:
First, I think that the reality in music schools is that a lot of performance majors do conceive that they re studying Tuba first and doing the rest of the "college crap" on the side.

And *that* is the root of all evil.

That may be what high school students *think* they are signing up for when they apply to "Music School". But, if this "Music School" is embedded in an actual college (and not a Conservatory), then they are
sadly mistaken - and will end up being very unhappy.

Than may be what "Tuba Professors" *think* they are being hired to do when they are given positions
as Adjunct Assistant Instructors in Practical Music - and why they never understand that the college does
more than serve as home base for their precious "studio".

If you want training in how to play the tuba, please enter a Conservatory, or sign up for private lessons, or move to Vegas and get a job in a pit.

[note that I consistently make the same point about high school kids who want to be trained in any other
job-related field, like nursing, or engineering, or teaching, or medicine, or Microsoft-certified Systems Analyst. You want job training? Find someone willing to take you on as an apprentice and have a nice life. On the other hand, if you want an education...you might consider going to college.]

You started off by discussing grad students. I have had plenty of those, both good and bad. Grad students are NOT undergrads. Graduate school does tend to be more job-related (Master's programs, Law Schools, Med Schools, and the like are often aimed at preparation for employment outside academia, PhD programs are mostly "job-related" training for jobs IN academia).

Grad school is not college.

In many fields, when you apply to grad school you do apply to an individual Professor - and your "fit" with that Professor is very important.

For undergrads, it just ain't so. Outside the elite Conservatories, claiming otherwise is simply false advertising. High school kids can be excused for being confused about this. Adults should be ashamed of themselves for intentionally misleading those high school kids. I can't think of one decent academic department where an undergraduate experience is dominated by the influence of a SINGLE faculty member - and that includes Music departments.

My advice stands - if you want to study with one, and only one, music teacher - sign up for private lessons. Instead of snoring through all those pesky required courses in English and Math and Science - you could be gigging, or flipping burgers to pay the bills (or practicing!)

If you want a college education with an emphasis on MUSIC - by all means go to a good school with a decent music department. Consider it a plus if they also have an Instructor who specializes in your instrument. If not...consider that you might get the same value by majoring in Math and taking lessons
from a local symphony pro. Even if you major in MUSIC - there's more to music than blowing into your tuba and pushing the right buttons. You'll want a complete, diverse music faculty - and you'll spend more time in classes with people OTHER THAN your studio head. Make sure you evaluate the quality of the entire department (and, I think, the entire college) when making your decision.

Who knows...you might discover that you'd rather be a composer than a performer. Make sure there's a decent composition instructor in addition to that nice pleasant tuba teacher.

I suspect that, right now, all the "Tuba Instructors" are really mad at me...and the "Music Professors" are
quietly nodding in agreement (but can be forgiven for not jumping in).

I prefer TheElephant as a teacher, but the campus isn't quite as large as S.B.I. and the facilities are inferior. So, in the end (taking in Sloan's advice) I'd choose the Sousaphone Buffing Institute.




It doesn't matter (... well, it sorta does)where you get your degree to teach kids how to make fart noises into big swirly cones of brass. Motivation and patience are nice things to have. pfffff what do I know?

k001 "your community loser" k47

EDIT: sloan's post just before this is a GREAT one. I've noticed that his opinions are often pretty blunt and fuel for debate, but it's usually what we need to know.

I'd stay with TheElephant - in a couple of years, he'll be able to offer instruction in Java Programming, and you can get a real job to support your dream of being a licensed Sousaphone Buffer.

sloan wrote:
You started off by discussing grad students. I have had plenty of those, both good and bad. Grad students are NOT undergrads. Graduate school does tend to be more job-related (Master's programs, Law Schools, Med Schools, and the like are often aimed at preparation for employment outside academia, PhD programs are mostly "job-related" training for jobs IN academia).
Grad school is not college.
In many fields, when you apply to grad school you do apply to an individual Professor - and your "fit" with that Professor is very important.

Not splitting hairs... but up here, Law schools, Med Schools, Dentistry are usually considered "Professional" school and not Grad school. My reference to Grad students applied solely to students in research programs (Thesis/dissertation based) with an academic supervisor.

In that regard, I have found that the relationship I have with my Graduate supervisor is quite similar to my former lesson prof. I have found the "fit" aspect to be quite important.

Fwiw, I have studied in a SLAC, a Conservatory and am now in a large research university. I wouldn't have come here if my supervisor and I didn't get along beforehand, I wouldn't have stayed in the conservatory if I disliked my prof and we would have been butting heads. I had friends who played quite well, yet didn't get along with their studio prof, they didn't finish a degree at their school. If you are going to spend an hour a week with a person for for years, you better make sure you can get along with them, that is my point.

The school were I currently study is good. The music department is on the smaller side but has some very excellent tenured faculty. OTOH, the lack of a local full time symphony means that some of the applied lessons teachers are not the best. Indeed, if you were to study tuba here, while you might have some great theory resources, some challenging yet worthwhile musicology classes, a decent band, an amazing "elite scholar" program for first years entering with 90% averages who want a course were they survey the humanities and sciences, science programs among the best, especially in biology, agriculture, and physics and a law school and a med school on campus, you would have a lousy experience as a tuba player. First off all studying with a teacher that doesn't play your horn, who doesn't push you and will basically give you an a+ all throughout your undergrad even though at the end you are not as good as the kid who got in to the conservatory. At $60-$80hr for 15 weeks with a $3000 a year symphony job, that is unfortunately the best instructor you will find. I assume that this situation is applicable in one instrument or another in about half the Canadian universities with music. (Especially those outside of urban areas)

I think you have just misconstrued my point to mean something that I didn't originally intend it to be. Maybe it is my clunky prose, but I never meant to say that the ONLY reason you should pick a school is because of the teacher, I meant to say that it should be pivotal and among the most important. (Most important and only are two separate terms and should not be conflated)

Lastly, this might be reading too much into your point... but couldn't it not be beneficial for someone to study in a school with a great tuba teacher, but with a lousy music program. Heck, that school surely had a great department somewhere else in the school. Further, if the student realizes what he is missing at that school, won't he be tempted to seek out elsewhere what he is missing... Isn't that part of the college experience, to learn from both our successes and our failures? I personally would prefer a lousy music department to a lousy tuba instructor, you can have your pick either way....

Thoughts:

1.) Practice rooms look the same at every school.

2.) Large/strong tuba studios encourage competition/improvement.

3.) Large/strong music schools/departments can field multiple strong ensembles and thus expose students to a wider swath of literature and experiences.

PMeuph wrote:Not splitting hairs... but up here, Law schools, Med Schools, Dentistry are usually considered "Professional" school and not Grad school. My reference to Grad students applied solely to students in research programs (Thesis/dissertation based) with an academic supervisor.

Of course you are splitting hairs, and arguing with a guy who gives this advice for a living.

Your narrow definition of graduate students makes Dr. Sloan's point even stronger.

I'll split a hair of my own--one cannot become a licensed engineer through apprenticeship. It used to be possible, but that has not been the case for about 20 years, and more in many states. So, an undergraduate engineering degree is required, and like all college degrees it is more general education in math, science, and liberal arts than it is in specific engineering topics. But the Fundamentals of Engineering and the Principles in Practice examinations do not cover those general education topics.

It is also difficult to get into law school or medical school without having a general education first. Yet little of the bar exam covers general education topics, I expect, and one becomes a doctor through testing and observation of trained skills and specific knowledge, not general education.

That tells me that society thinks there is value in requiring practitioners of learned professions to also be educated as well as being trained as a condition of being licensed. Society doesn't, perhaps, care what that education covers (since nothing of it is on those tests), as long as it's a broad accredited program. Why society might value that education is worth thinking about. It's not necessarily just because it makes, say, better engineers, but rather because it makes engineers better. And better people behave more professionally and responsibly, and are more likely to protect the public interest, which is a requirement of their license (and the reason licensing is required in the first place).

So, do you want be an educated person who chooses to also train to become a professional musician? Or, do you want to just be a professional musician by the quickest possible means? If it's the former, then get an education where the education you get is a good one. Choose a city with a good symphony pro if you feel the need to supplement what the faculty provides, or choose a college that provides both a superior education as well as a strong music program.

If you just want to be a professional musician, move to a city that has a great teacher, and spend the time you aren't practicing or taking lessons playing gigs.

Now, I'd like to switch gears and talk about teacher compatibility. Most teachers are incompatible with lazy and entitled students, and most teachers will do their best to work with motivated and dedicated students. That said, the best stuff I ever got from teachers was the stuff I hated getting at the time. The grad-school professor that set the stage for the most powerful educational epiphany of my life was thought by me to be a "mean old man" about, oh, five minutes before that epiphany struck. The best teachers are those who set the highest standards, and who, brutally if necessary, enforce those standards. Sometimes they do it in a nice way, but to my thinking that is not necessary. What is necessary is that they can provide a strategy for attaining those standards to motivated and dedicated students. (The lazy ones don't matter.)

If I were choosing a tuba teacher with the desire to become a professional, I would look around and see who has a gig and with whom they studied. If there is a teacher that stands above the others in successfully placing people in pro gigs, then that's who I want to study with. The point is becoming a pro, not being his buddy.

In fact, I chose my graduate program in part to be able to study with that mean old man. And I'm glad I did.

Rick "licensed to practice engineering in five states, and professionally respected in no small measure because of having been a successful student of that mean old man" Denney

Rick Denney wrote:
Now, I'd like to switch gears and talk about teacher compatibility. Most teachers are incompatible with lazy and entitled students, and most teachers will do their best to work with motivated and dedicated students. That said, the best stuff I ever got from teachers was the stuff I hated getting at the time. The grad-school professor that set the stage for the most powerful educational epiphany of my life was thought by me to be a "mean old man" about, oh, five minutes before that epiphany struck. The best teachers are those who set the highest standards, and who, brutally if necessary, enforce those standards. Sometimes they do it in a nice way, but to my thinking that is not necessary. What is necessary is that they can provide a strategy for attaining those standards to motivated and dedicated students. (The lazy ones don't matter.)

If I were choosing a tuba teacher with the desire to become a professional, I would look around and see who has a gig and with whom they studied. If there is a teacher that stands above the others in successfully placing people in pro gigs, then that's who I want to study with. The point is becoming a pro, not being his buddy.

In fact, I chose my graduate program in part to be able to study with that mean old man. And I'm glad I did.

Rick "licensed to practice engineering in five states, and professionally respected in no small measure because of having been a successful student of that mean old man" Denney

I've studied with several people, some good, some bad. In my experience, I have found the most essential aspect to be the relationship with with tuba/euphonium teacher. After having lessons for 6 years with him I know that I learned a lot and you're right most of the stuff I didn't always learn because of it was easy and I wanted to. Matter of fact in 180 hours of lessons (more or less) most of the time I would play something and he would listen and try to get me to figure out what I could improve. He was open suggestions, discussion, exchange of ideas. Yes there was stuff I didn't like, but we never butted heads consistently for the whole duration of our lessons. I have met people like that, who are impressive players in their own right, but lousy pedagogues for their inability to communicate and listen carefully to the student. The point to me, is that I feel that after 6 years of lessons we were not "buddies" but more junior colleague to senior colleague.
On a side-note, I also studied composition, with two profs. One I hated, one I loved. The reason I hated one is that he would point out stuff he didn't like (and possibly offer a re-write) but not explain why he hated it or what was wrong with it. The other was much better at trying to display why this wasn't working or why it wasn't ready yet. I figured out what I needed to improve with my playing by the time I was in university, what I needed was not someone to tell me what was wrong, but someone who could comfortably help me overcome those obstacles. Personality to me is not just are we friends outside of class, it is can I work professionally with this guy, take his feedback and work on the stuff he wants to give me without wanting to quit this program.... YMMV

sloan wrote:If you want a college education with an emphasis on MUSIC - by all means go to a good school with a decent music department. Consider it a plus if they also have an Instructor who specializes in your instrument. If not...consider that you might get the same value by majoring in Math and taking lessons
from a local symphony pro. Even if you major in MUSIC - there's more to music than blowing into your tuba and pushing the right buttons. You'll want a complete, diverse music faculty - and you'll spend more time in classes with people OTHER THAN your studio head. Make sure you evaluate the quality of the entire department (and, I think, the entire college) when making your decision.

I figure that for a 200- level undergraduate humanities class I would get a 85% grade with about 30-45 hrs of work in the semester. (outside of class time that is) I don't know of anyone would could prepare a second year recital, with 30 minutes of music in just 45hrs (3 hrs a week, or 30 min a day (6 days) for 15 weeks). So the claim that we spent more time in class, doesn't necessarily hold too much weight to me.

As I'm still not sure if the topic is undergraduate or graduate school, I will assume undergrad.

I don't necessarily agree that you will change your major once or even twice but a university setting gives you a broader choice if you do.

You don't have to be best friends with your teacher (save that for after you've graduated and grown up...) but you have to respect him (or her) and believe that his methods produce great players. But you can and should learn an AWFUL lot about musicianship from people other than your instructor. Naturally you will learn an AWFUL lot from your instructor, but you should also be soaking up the art from everyone else. A few hours a week spent observing (or even better, playing in!) chamber music being coached by a resident string quartet is invaluable to your musicianship!

Rick Denney wrote:That tells me that society thinks there is value in requiring practitioners of learned professions to also be educated as well as being trained as a condition of being licensed. Society doesn't, perhaps, care what that education covers (since nothing of it is on those tests), as long as it's a broad accredited program. Why society might value that education is worth thinking about. It's not necessarily just because it makes, say, better engineers, but rather because it makes engineers better...

This is so important!

Conservatories, while excellent places to learn to be a great musician, often lack the general education elements that make for a well-rounded experience (which seems to me to lead to being a well-rounded musician). As an example, you may, at some point, have wondered, "Why on Earth do I have to learn all this math? I'm never going to need it!" But if you are extremely lucky - as I am - to have had a very wise person in your life who can explain stuff, he might tell you, "You don't learn math in order to be able to do math. You learn it in order to train yourself to think by a careful, logical processes, structuring your thoughts, and using what you know to find out what you don't know." That was a pretty heavy day, as it turned out. Whether this kind of thing is important is something each person has to determine for himself.

If there is any way you can pull it off, visit a bunch of schools and observe them - their orchestras, chamber music, and certainly try to take a private lesson with the tuba instructor.

End of the day assumption: if you don't spend 1000 hours per year on your instrument, you won't be able to compete with the people who do, no matter where you (or they) attend school.

EDIT: sorry, I meant practice room hours, and as a minimum. This doesn't include playing with ensembles!

Trevor Bjorklund wrote: End of the day assumption: if you don't spend 1000 hours per year on your instrument, you won't be able to compete with the people who do, no matter where you (or they) attend school.

About 3 hrs. a day... An athlete who wants to be successful (i.e. play in the game) spends at least that much time in some aspect of training. It's reasonable to expect someone who wants to 'play in the band' to practice that much also...

Jeff "Keeps thinking of that friend of Bloke's who won a military gig with a three-valve plastic souzy and no professional lessons" Benedict