Memorization of Standard Tuba Concertos?

[CC]

IMHO, essentially we have 3 main Concertos:

Ralph Vaughan Williams
Edward Gregson
John Williams

I know this may spark some debate, but is it reasonable that people should start to have at least 2 of these 3 memorized?

(When I say 2, I mean the Gregson and the RVW).

[Todd S. Malicoate]

I voted no. I've always held the opinion that the audience doesn't enjoy a piece more when you play without music, nor do you receive any more "points" for doing so. It is also blatantly obvious when an instrumentalist plays without music just to garner perceived "prestige"...kind of low-class to call attention away from the music and toward one's ability to memorize, in my opinion.

The exception, of course, is in those competitions that require memorization...my experience has been (as a competitor and an accompanist) that, at least in the early rounds, those who memorize the best tend to advance. A very effective "weed-out" tool when awarding $$$ for musical performance.

I will revise my opinion only after someone convinces me there is a legitimate, musical reason for playing by memory that leads to a better, more satisfying performance for everyone. I will not accept "I play so much more expressively when I'm not staring at the music" as a reason (even though I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard that one)...you can have the music on a stand and still not "stare at it."

I would value having the three concerti in question thoroughly prepared and expressively thought-out well. Leave the memory work for the pianists. Besides, if you do learn them effectively, you'll usually find they're already memorized. I just don't see the need to advertise it.

Todd S. "who can often play by memory but doesn't see the point of it" Malicoate

[eupher61]

why play from memory?

because string players and piano players do it.

[J.c. Sherman]

why play from memory?

because string players and piano players do it.

And we look up to them because.... ?

[rascaljim]

I believe this whole thing got started by Liszt. Prior to that, I don't believe I've heard of performance practice including the use of memorization for the performance. Might be something to consider.

[Chris Smith]

This topic I have always been curious about. I am terrible at memorizing works of any kind. I know I need to work on that but I am not sure why it is. I just prefer to play with music in front of me. IMO (or maybe this is just an excuse) I play more musically with the music in front of me because then I don't worry about fingerings and intervals. Personally while I am watching someone perform I don't really pay attention to if they are reading from music or not (except one time when a very famous trumpet player was giving a recital at school and he stopped the piece because forgot where he was). But even for the trumpet player he played the entire recital from memory and I was more floored with his technique and musicality that him having a memory slip just made him feel more human.

[Tubainsauga]

Memorization leading to greater expression in your playing does have some basis (debateably, of course) in terms of psychology. There is research to suggest that the interpretation of symbols and characters (music) and creative expression are controlled largely by different hemispheres of the brain. Eliminating the step of reading the music and allow the music to simply "flow" is thought by some to make expression easier. To me, this brings up the question of memory and how that really relates to the whole process and whether recalling the memorized music as compared to reading it makes any difference. Either way, my opinion is music is part showmanship anyways and memorization can be useful. In addition, I've found that once I've worked on a piece for a little while, it's most of the way to being memorized anyways. Just my thoughts.

[TubaRay]

I am terrible at memorizing works of any kind.

I just prefer to play with music in front of me.

Personally while I am watching someone perform I don't really pay attention to if they are reading from music or not.

Me, too. I believe some folks memorize things easier than others. My wife can memorize anything. I, on the other hand, find this to be quite difficult. I find I can learn a piece much sooner, thoroughly, than I can memorize it. If this is a tuba solo piece, I often memorize large "chunks" of it, but I may have a few gaps which call for much more repetition in order to memorize. I don't feel that using music hampers my musical concentration in any way. It might even help me because I am able to focus my gaze on the music itself. I don't know about the rest of you, but my mental focus tends to follow my eyes.

A lesson I learned in performing with the TubaMeisters is that memorizing music can be a perk which frees one up to "enjoy the scenery." Some of our tunes that we perform most often have become memorized with no particular effort to do so. Admittedly, this may cause my mental focus to once again follow my eyes. Regardless, this can certainly enhance the performance from the performers viewpoint.

In my case, all in all, having to memorize music prevents my spending my practice time learning something new. I enjoy learning new music more than I enjoy repeating things I already know. Perhaps that is just me.

[Roger Lewis]

I know a lot of players who play the standard orchestral excerpts from memory. Some teachers actually require this, and IMHO, with good reason. Getting past the notes and into the flow of the music, the song if you will, let's you be a better "singer". Every now and then it's a good idea to get the music out and make sure that you have not "added" something into it to "improve" it.

Jens Bjorn-Larsen does everything from memory as does Oystein Baadsvik. I saw Froedis Wekre in recital a number of years ago and she believed that everything should be done from memory.

At the University of Houston there is a memory requirement on your recitals. I believe that a minor work needs to be played from memory on a Junior Recital, a major work from memory on a Senior Recital. At the doctoral level entire recitals must be played from memory, no matter what the instrument.

I don't think it's life or death, but you may be sirprised by how much more you can bring to the music when it is memorized. As always, your mileage may vary.

Peace.
Roger

[windshieldbug]

Anything that an orchestral tubist plays in front of an audience you should KNOW WELL ENOUGH TO HAVE IT MEMORIZED. Anything you play on stage. Of course, there are situations you can't control, but you should.

That said, if I played a solo on a program, I would have to sit because of my horn and to have the ability to make intonation changes that I needed to. I would keep in front of myself clear, to maximize any audience visual communication, and I would always have the music on a stand to my side, "just in case". I have seen enough soloists (pianists and strings included) have enough slips that, having the time to plan beforehand, I am not willing to risk. If something untoward should happen, all you have to do is glance to your side to recover.

And it's not about your personal ego or capabilities. Its about the audience, the kind of performance that they paid to hear, and the kind of performance they deserve.

[J.c. Sherman]

I've tried it both ways.

I don't like the insecurity I feel when playing from memory - the knowledge that I have nothing to use to find myself should I have a mental block or skip. I've found that if I have the stand low and I have eye contact available with the audience (sorry tubists, but this means facing the audience no matter what!), then I get the most out of the performance both in personal energy and shared energy from tha crowd, while being the most confident I can be.

I've memorized performances. I don't anymore. Not something that happened immediately, but I prefer things this way. YMMV.

J.c.S.

[BriceT]

I accidentally memorize almost everything I play anyway. Anyone who has played next to me can tell you after I play something once or twice I've got it. Although it doesn't feel like I've memorized it. I see the music in front of me when it's not there. Kinda freaky musical photographic memory I guess.

That's pretty much how I am too. I can memorize things pretty easily after some repetition. If I have memorized something in the past, then I can usually play it close to performance level after a long break of not working on it. Anyways, about the importance of memorizing standard literature; well I think it is pretty smart to have at least the RVW memorized since it is so often asked for auditions. If not memorized then it should IMHO be very well prepared and on the back-burner. Also, I think that the theory of "memorization allows for a much better performance for the player and listener" really just depends on the person. Personally, I feel like I play better when I don't have music in front of me, but if I have any doubts about memorization of the piece then I will have the music there just in case.

[PWtuba]

I don't intentionally memorize music, it just kind of happens. That said, I think that I can be much more musical when I have the music memorized. I always play with my eyes closed when I have a solo memorized, and not having anything to look at makes it that much easier to focus on what I am trying to say with my music.
However, I practice it about 50% with and without the music, because I don't want to forget the composer's dynamic wishes, etc.

[TexTuba]

Hay no insult intended but what are you stupid? I don't think so but maybe you've lost sight of somthing here.
They don't come to hear the music. They don't come to see you.

They come to be with you (socialy).
That's why they ask for autographs and such. They want to personalize they're experence. "I got his autograph AND I shook his hand. He was soo cool!"
Do you think the Beatles shook their heads and said wooo because they wanted too? No! They thought their audence would relate to that and guess what - it worked!
Hiding behiend a music stand won't do. Paying "a flawless proformance" won't connect you to them either! Let me quote Floyd Cooley. "If you make it sound too easy they won't like it".
I believe it.
Of course I've made a stupid asumption here (again) . Are you playing for the
general public? If your only playing to other musicians then OK, I'm the last person to advise you. I only play one instrument and I only play it moderately well, but I make people smile!
What other purpose is there?

What?! Who in the hell goes to a recital to not see you OR hear what you're playing?! I could be completely off, but I think people go see live performances to SEE the artist and HEAR what they are playing. I know I do. I don't go to be with them socially. That's what bars are for.

[Todd S. Malicoate]

What?! Who in the hell goes to a recital to not see you OR hear what you're playing?! I could be completely off, but I think people go see live performances to SEE the artist and HEAR what they are playing. I know I do. I don't go to be with them socially. That's what bars are for.

Pssst...Ralph...I think he was being facetious.

At least, I hope so.

[windshieldbug]

That's what bars are for.

and after all, what would music be without bars (AND bars)...

[Tubaryan12]

I'm lucky. I have never had a problem memorizing music and I always perform better when I do. I am more likely to make that mistake of reading the wrong line if the music is in fromt of me and it is not memorized.

Sidetrack for a second....how many of you guys had to memorize marching band music? And if so, were you good at it?

[Kayla]

I had to memorize my marching band music but concertos are a bit more involved than tuba marching band music, at least the stuff my high school marching band played.

I do see the memorization requirement as an effective tool in auditions, but in other circumstances it should be up to the player whether or not they want to memorize the piece. Either way, it should be a stellar performance if they practiced.

[sloan]

Some of our tunes that we perform most often have become memorized with no particular effort to do so.

This is the key point.

What we have here is a "chicken/egg" problem, mixed in with "learning to the test".

If you learn a piece THOROUGHLY, then most (but not all) players will find that they have memorized it (without any effort expended on the "memorization" - you just learn it).

This means that "being able to play it without the music" is a convenient test to see if you *really* know the piece. so...it might be reasonable to say "practice this piece until it is memorized".

But...as soon as you say that, you change the game. Now, the task is not "learn the piece", but rather "memorize the piece". THEY ARE NOT THE SAME!

In some situations, you *must* memorize the music. In all other situations, it seems (to me) senseless to spend time on memorization that might better be spent on understanding.

It does seem that Ray has pointed out one strong motivation for memorizing the music:
he has better things to do with his eyes while strolling through the beer garden <insert usual picture here>.

[bort]

A few years ago, my community band went on tour in Austria. The luggage with our music was lost by the airline and didn't arrive until the next day. In the meantime, we had a rehearsal with about 40% of the band not having music (I did not have my music.) About halfway though the rehearsal, between pieces, the director says to me:

BD: Hey, I thought you didn't have your music?
Me: You're right, I don't
BD: What, did you memorize the music?
Me: We've been playing it for 6 months. (with a grin)

I'm sure I didn't play it perfectly. But at least convincingly.

So for a big concert, recital, etc. I would probably have it memorized at the time. Once the performance has passed, I might not sound too great without the music in front of me.