"amateur" / "professional"

[Rick Denney]

Yes, but many pros will go to gigs not "prepared" but have such good fundamental and sight-reading skills that it seems like they're prepared (did that make sense?)

Sure.

But pros have also studied a lot of music in great detail. Last night, we read through Suite of Old American Dances. I've played that a couple of times in the last 25 years, and it was all comfortably under the fingers. Others struggled. Am I a better reader, or do I just have a larger repertoire?

(The answer came when we read Ives's Variations on America, which I'd never played. My struggle level was somewhat higher, heh, heh.)

I know there are pro gigs where you walk in and see the music right before the guy says "go". But I also know that most pros will complain if they are asked to perform with insufficient rehearsal. Okay, Tommy Johnson (RIP) and the movie guys are the exception, heh, heh.

Rick "whose reading has improved dramatically up to the upper mediocre level" Denney

[WoodSheddin]

But I also know that most pros will complain if they are asked to perform with insufficient rehearsal.

Because more rehearsals equals more pay.

[sloan]

Amateurs care about the difference between pros and amateurs.

Pros don't.

[Wyvern]

Surely the only difference between a professional and amateur you can be certain is that the former is paid, while the latter is usually not and plays for the love of it. Then there is the semi-pros who make some money from playing, but most of their income by other means.

Regarding standards, to be a professional you have got to be of a high standard, while an amateur could be anything from poor to as good musician as the professional.

A little while back I heard the conductor of the best amateur orchestra I play with (includes a number of semi-pros) speaking to a professional dep (from a top orchestra) hired for the concert on this very subject. Their conclusion was that the main difference is that professionals usually have more experience to pick things up quicker.

[WoodSheddin]

A little while back I heard the conductor of the best amateur orchestra I play with (includes a number of semi-pros) speaking to a professional dep (from a top orchestra) hired for the concert on this very subject. Their conclusion was that the main difference is that professionals usually have more experience to pick things up quicker.

Well, if we are not talking playing mechanics, and instead characteristics from a contractor's point of view things get simpler.

The ringers can be brought in for 1 rehearsal and the job while the fulltime non-pro members might take a couple of weeks of rehearsals.

To relate to bloke's construction example. Try drywalling a room sometime from bare studs with you and a few buddies. In the next room spend the money to have some local pros do the same job. Takes them 2 days. Takes you 2 weeks.

[sloan]

...
To relate to bloke's construction example. Try drywalling a room sometime from bare studs with you and a few buddies. In the next room spend the money to have some local pros do the same job. Takes them 2 days. Takes you 2 weeks.

You mean, like this?

[ken k]

I attended a workshop today with the Dallas Brass and the discussion of amatuer groups vs. professional groups came up. One of the comments trombonist Mike Levine eluded to was similar to an earlier post about how amatuers are part of the main grop that support the professionals, someone use the golfing analogy. I just thought that was very interesting and coincidental.

He also mentioned that the word amatuer is derived from the Latin ama- meaning to love (amorous). so to be an amatuer really means to do something for the love of it rather than the vocation.

sort of ties into the "We don't do it for the money " thread too....

ken k

[Rick Denney]

I do not need to play in the Chicago Symphony to be musically satisfied, but I do need to play with dedicated musicians and conscientious people to be happy.

Clue for the future: Nobody pays you to be happy. They pay you for the service you provide. Happiness is up to you.

When you are in school, your job is to work diligently towards an education. Part of that education for you might be to learn that in this life, being surrounded by people who are as dedicated and conscientious as you are is a rare good fortune.

Everyone has a different standard of dedication, and you can't define yourself or your own happiness by their standards. Someday, you may run into a group of people whose dedication is greater than what you can muster up, and then the shoe will be on the other foot. If you can work with people less dedicated than you now, then you'll be able to work with yourself if and when your own dedication wanes.

Rick "who is learning this the hard way" Denney

[WoodSheddin]

(No, I am not in the top band at North Texas. Not even in the second band! I wish... )

2. The real problem for me is not playing with people who lack ability, but playing with people who lack motivation, or dedication, or interest, or conscientiousness - ie, those who just don't care about whether what they're playing is in tune, or is musically well-crafted, or has a good sound, or is tight rhythmically.

This might be a bit brutal of an answer, BUT... Stop losing auditions and you will suddenly notice those around you are better musicians then before.

[WoodSheddin]

Nobody pays you to be happy. They pay you for the service you provide. Happiness is up to you.

there is a reason you are the Resident Genius. your words took me 2 decades to begin to understand.

[lgb&dtuba]

I'm going to loopback around to Bloke's earlier comments on rhythm and something several others have mentioned.

I actually agree that keeping proper time is an essential skill for a tuba or bass player. But what is this play before or after the beat stuff? We are the beat.

Are symphonic players compensating for an indistinct indication from the conductor as to where the beat is? Or maybe having their view partially blocked by being on the back row such that they have to anticipate where the conductor's baton will be at the bottom of the arc?

I'm not talking about syncopation here. Or variances in tempo as required. I'm just really unclear on how an instrument that largely determines the beat can be either ahead or behind the beat itself and be correct on any level. If you aren't on the beat you are either rushing or dragging.

I don't buy this idea that it's to compensate for a lag in starting the process of producing a note and it coming out the bell, either. If you haven't learned to listen to yourself and unconciously produce that sound at the correct time without breaking it down into component movements of your body parts you are really back at beginner square one.

In situations where I'm playing either tuba or bass with a drummer on a kit my (and the drummer's job) is to sync up. Tightly. None of this before or after the beat nonsense. That would mean we aren't synced up and not providing the rhythmic foundation we are supposed to. Especially when we aren't under a baton. I don't mean one of us following the other, either. If either one of us did that we would automatically be out of sync. It's about syncing up our internal metronomes and agreeing on where the beat is and both hitting it at the same time.

And don't get me started on trying to play with a drummer who can't keep the beat or won't assert the beat when the trumpets start wandering.

I don't know about proper rhythm being the biggest difference between pros and amateurs, but it's for sure a one of the hallmarks of a good musician.

[Rick Denney]

But what is this play before or after the beat stuff? We are the beat.

No, the conductor's ictus is the beat.

All I know is that when I think I'm playing right with his ictus, he often complaints that I need to be more on top of the beat. When I anticipate his ictus slightly, I don't hear that complaint. I think it has to do with how quickly the tuba speaks compared to the stick banging on that tight drumhead.

And I know something else, my perception of being on the beat where I'm sitting often results in recordings where I hear myself being behind the beat a bit. So, I have to think the conductor is probably right.

Rick "whose conductor is a tuba player" Denney

[Leland]

I actually agree that keeping proper time is an essential skill for a tuba or bass player. But what is this play before or after the beat stuff? We are the beat.

Well, really, when you get down to it, everybody is the beat. We in the bass voice have a little less flexibility in where we can play, but being metronomically "on the beat" still may not be the answer 100% of the time. Depending on the style, pulling back may be more correct, as would sticking right at the very beginning of the pulse.

Part of the situation with an orchestral tubist being ahead of the beat might have been because he had a different idea of which part of the conductor's pattern should be the pulse. If one ensemble plays right smack on the conductor's ictus, and a player goes to another group that primarily plays a bit later in the pattern, that player will habitually play ahead of the rest of that second group.

Rushing & dragging are different from being ahead of or behind the beat, too. Rushing is playing at 130 bpm when the tempo is 120. Playing ahead of the beat would still be playing at 120 bpm but at an earlier point in time relative to the pulse.

I've noticed, unfortunately, that most tuba sections are behind the beat. They are almost never dragging (playing at a slower tempo), but their sound arrives just a hair later than everyone else. One of my guesses about this ("diagnosis"?? nah..) is that the other players are going strictly by the conductor's pattern and aren't exactly listening to the tubas for their pulse.

If the tubas are right exactly on the pulse, the ensemble sounds nice & tight. If they're a little ahead, and I mean by just a tiny fraction, the sound seems to "bloom" from the bottom up, which can sound quite nice in the right circumstances. If the tubas are behind just a tad, the listener hears the higher voices first, and the resulting sound is more hollow.

[Leland]

So, I have to think the conductor is probably right.

When in doubt (and as long as they're not completely clueless) the conductor is always right.

That's not a statement of their skill. That's a statement of their location in front of the ensemble. They're in the best position to hear what's going on. Therefore, they're in the best position to make adjustments to how the ensemble is playing.

[lgb&dtuba]

OK, thanks for the explanation. Clears it up some.

Most of the time my group isn't using a conductor, so there is no ictus to watch for. The front man may start us off and indicate the tempo he wants, but by 2 or 3 bars into the polka or waltz he's doing something else. Singing, interacting with the crowd, or has picked up his trumpet and started playing. So in my particular situation what I said about the drummer and tuba driving the beat stands.

When everyone is paying attention and listening to each other it's nice and tight. We do these songs all the time, after all. If attentions are wandering then not so tight. Depends a lot on which of our drummers is scheduled that night, too. Sometimes on how much beer has been consumed and by who.

The leader calls out a number, we flip pages, and off we go.

Different world, different rules than a symphony.

Same goal, though. Make good music. Make the customers happy to be there.

[Leland]

Most of the time my group isn't using a conductor, so there is no ictus to watch for. The front man may start us off and indicate the tempo he wants, but by 2 or 3 bars into the polka or waltz he's doing something else. Singing, interacting with the crowd, or has picked up his trumpet and started playing. So in my particular situation what I said about the drummer and tuba driving the beat stands.

You've got no argument from me there. I'll even say that groups like yours are at a timekeeping "advantage" since the rest of the group has to listen to you for the pulse of the beat.

In an early version of the bar band in which I played trombone during college, the bass player (himself with more credentials than the rest of us) was the drummer's dad. The two of them actually watched each other all the time to make sure they stayed tight.

[lgb&dtuba]

I actually agree that keeping proper time is an essential skill for a tuba or bass player. But what is this play before or after the beat stuff? We are the beat.

This comment has nothing to do with any sort of snobbery, but sitting on the back of the stage in a large hall in a large ensemble is different from playing in a polka band in a bar. (I've done both many-many-many times.)

I don't like to think of "anticipating" the beat. I like to do whatever I have to do to make MY sound part of the composite sound that happens in the very first instant that the composite sound occurs.

bloke "and in a REALLY fine ensemble, EVERYone is the keeper of the tempo"

No problem. I don't take it as snobbery. I was really just trying to understand it in relation to the differences between what I do and what is done in a symphony. In fact, what you said is really another way of saying what I said - "If you haven't learned to listen to yourself and unconciously produce that sound at the correct time ", etc.

Bottom line, and something you yourself have said (as well as Rick, and others), and I'm saying it too, you have to really listen to what you are doing in relationship to everyone else and adjust to make it sound right. You cannot and must not just put your head down in the music and plow ahead. You may be called upon to do it differently depending on the type of group you are playing with, but do it you must. It's all part of ensemble playing regardless of the genre.

[windshieldbug]

Bloke- I'm comin' round to where your head is...

After a day of community band clinic that my community band put on with local kolege professors (my wife included), I think that MA's got it, but that it most often shows up in tempo and rhythm.

People who play simply for the love of it focus on the notes. Quite simply, they take the music as gospel, and play everything as written. Like giving every note it's FULL value, then grabbing a breath, and adding 1/64 extra to the bar. If everyone does it, it still works fine, but if you've learned to treat the note after a tie in a slow movement like this, or put the accent here and grab the breath then here (and by the way, that's exactly what the composer MEANT you to do, they just wrote it a lot more simply), it makes what you're hearing in the audience/room, sound very metrically unbalanced (and possibly also dynamically unbalanced).

Once you learn what to do when in this circumstance, then you also get to through in venue to the mix.

Listening to my band play with REAL conductors, and seeing what often happened, and remembering my playing experience made me think of this thread, WHICH IS NOT JUST SEMANTICS, BUT SOMETHING AN ASPIRING PROFESSIONAL NEEDS TO CONSIDER, AND REALIZE WHAT THEY'RE LEARNING HOW.

[MartyNeilan]

Rushing & dragging are different from being ahead of or behind the beat, too. Rushing is playing at 130 bpm when the tempo is 120. Playing ahead of the beat would still be playing at 120 bpm but at an earlier point in time relative to the pulse.

If the tubas are right exactly on the pulse, the ensemble sounds nice & tight. If they're a little ahead, and I mean by just a tiny fraction, the sound seems to "bloom" from the bottom up, which can sound quite nice in the right circumstances. If the tubas are behind just a tad, the listener hears the higher voices first, and the resulting sound is more hollow.

Bingo.
Great explanation!

[Alex C]

I think I've finally got a handle on this topic, at least for me.

Rhythm, pitch, range, intonation, technique... should all be taken for granted. What seperates a professional is the speed at which they do things.

This does not mean how fast they play but means the speed at which music they play reaches a professional level. How long does it take a professional to get any music to a performance level?

A booking agent here in my area used to have a big band in another state. To have the band ready to play a gig required that they have a rehearsal every week. If the band laid off for a couple of weeks it was like starting from scratch. Now that he's in an area with more professionals, all he has to do is hire the right people and it sounds better than the group that used to rehearse.

The Met orchestra is a good example: they do so many performances that there's little, sometimes no, time to rehearse. If you can't do it right the first time, you can't do that gig. Period. You don't have time to rehearse, you don't even have time to go home and practice. You have to be professional the first time in many cases.

Those conditions hold true for most of the major orchestras. They certainly are true for (the ever decreasing) session work.

When I hear of someone like Marcus Theinart performing the world-premier of a concerto on one rehearsal, it reminds me how professional he is.

Listening to the "basement tapes" of Arnold Jacobs, I'm reminded of how polished his performances were; those tapes are his practice. I bet there are hundreds of tubists who'd kill to sound that good on stage, much less in their basement.

Regardless of the conditions, a professional delivers a professional performance without delay. All the elements of playing have to be expected but the speed of "perfection" seperates the professionals from the amatuers.