So I started out this blog with a very broad idea and topic focusing on the general dynamic between performers and audience in a concert. I focused on a handful of genres to compare and contrast and was fortunate to have had a chance to talk to many very interesting people in the UCSD music community. With this, I had a difficult time narrowing it down as much as I probably should have. Since my project was almost completely based on interviews, I admit to feeling like I had an obligation to make use of all the great things everyone told me. I talked to 15 people, but still didn't feel like I had enough since I covered so many styles of music. I think that the topic turned out to be too ambitious for what I could have realistically accomplished in 9 weeks.
I did manage to narrow my focus down to a couple specific things however. For the performance side, I focused on performance anxiety and the direct affects on one's comfort on stage. This was found to be a combination of personal matters and a direct connection with the audience and environment. The differences were not so much inherent in genre, as I thought may be the case, but the main factors seemed to be 1. confidence/how much the performer prepared and 2. solo vs group. These two can be applied across all genres, though I did find that the performance practices and environment revolving around certain genres (NOT necessarily inherent in the music itself) did have an affect as well. For example, the silent audience watching a soloist on stage under a spotlight was deemed to be much more nerve-wracking than a casual pop cover at a coffee shop where the audience may not be as focused. Other factors included who's in the audience and what the audience is doing. This is of course directly tied to the audience angle of my project as well.
I looked into the audiences hoping to receive possible insight on how they may also affect the performers. I started out by asking them what draws them to watch concerts - the answer being seen as "validation" and showing why certain behaviors and such would affect the performer. For example, many cite that they mainly attend concerts because they have to. From a performer's perspective, it may not always be fun performing for those who are just there out of obligation and not to watch you perform specifically...thus potentially leading to increased levels of anxiety. One of my interviewees did say that she gets very nervous when she notices people in the audience writing or sleeping in the audience as she worried about being too boring. Across genres, there didn't seem to be a huge difference in what draws people to concerts. It seems to be a general set of ideas (socialization, support, education...) that vary in levels with regards to the genre. People are drawn to the concerts that better match their personality/goals at any given time.
I mentioned that in class today that I was drawn to this topic because I'm a performer who generally doesn't like to perform (OK, so maybe that makes me not a performer). Looking back and talking to others for the most part made me feel better as it showed that I'm not the only one who struggles with this. I was able to relate with most of them as a performer, but as I stepped back my relation seemed to be most of fascination and curiosity. The idea of performing to me really is a curious thing - it's natural for many, but others like myself, there are times when it feels painfully unnatural having to stand (or in my case sit) in front of an audience and finish whatever I set to do while my body is screaming to run away. Even though I remained unsure today, I think it ultimately is worth it. Performance can be a moment of great power to engage, inspire, educate as well as an emotional form of communication while bringing people together that just cannot be replicated. And I think this is true across all genres.
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Different graduate perspectives
This week I interviewed graduate students Yvonne Wu and Siu-Hei Lee. Yvonne is a composition student and Siu-Hei is a musicology student. Yvonne no longer performs, but attends and thinks about concerts/music regularly. Siu-Hei still tries to perform, but admits to not being as comfortable with it as others may be even though he did complete undergraduate and graduate studies in piano performance. He also loves pop music, especially Asian pop (mostly canto and mando-pop) which he grew up listening to alongside classical music.
YVONNE WU:
Growing up, what kind of music did you listen to and/or study?
Yvonne: "I started piano at 5, so it was mostly pedagogical materials in terms of studies. It wasn't until I was 17 when I began hearing new music. I mostly listened to what my parents did on the radio: mostly easy listening, Taiwan popular music tapes, and normal radio stuff. It wasn't until maybe early teens until I started listening to Classical.
Have you always attended concerts? How is it different for you compared to recordings?
Yvonne: "Attending Interlochen music camp at 16 was an eye-opening experience for me as far as live concerts go. It was probably my first time listening to live orchestras and first introduction to chamber music. It was really mind blowing. The presence of performers, watching how a professional string quartet moves together, seeing the gestural language of the music being performed in front of you...as a teenager clarified a lot for me. It gave me another dimension to the listening. For the orchestra, just the exhilaration of having so many musicians in front of you...the sound feels richer. Sometimes listening may be better in a recording because there are a lot of social distractions in live recordings: wind, noise, people around you..., it may not be as deep getting into the sound, but the fact that it's happening live is exciting. This moment can't repeat, you can't go back and listen to that moment. It's urgent that you pay attention."
What do you think, on a societal level (at least our society), is the point of the live performance?
Yvonne: "I think a lot of people feel the same way as I do. We have to remind ourselves that recordings are a documentation and less authentic. I've heard people say that live performance is the only way to listen to music. In visual art, even if you see a painting in a book..even a good representation, is totally different than seeing the real thing. Seeing a Van Gogh in person is very different in person. It's so much more radiant, the texture means something, and it just resonates in a completely different way. I think it's the same way with music. Even though we can say that our recording technology is so good and so prevalent, we, as a society, need to not forget that...but honestly there are a lot of crappy recordings out there, or they listen through crappy laptop speakers. It drives me nuts. On one hand, I don't want to put anything online because I know people are listening to it through really low quality means and that's frustrating. Nothing can replace live performance for both the reasons I explained earlier: being exhilarated, engaged with the music, seeing the performers make the sounds and being part of the social experience of everyone being actually captivated by the same thing and shared. There's a lot of power to that compared to listening to your own in your car. Not that that's wrong. It fills a different role."
Have you attended concerts outside of the Western art tradition?
Yvonne: "haha...um....I went to Mark Dresser's Telematic concerts - 2 of them! I go to watch a few jazz concerts or my friends in a band here and there."
Did you notice any finer details in the experience and dynamics between those different genres?
Yvonne: "Actually, different kinds of bands (bluegrass or popular or something) is more exciting live. The difference is greater. I suppose the charisma of the performers is more important - it's part of the show...the energy that they convey and the energy the audience receives that's more important in the fabric music, so it's even more exciting. The social experience is supposed to be part of it as opposed to just sitting there and being quiet in concert where any distraction like unwrapping a piece of gum becomes amplified and is a bad distraction. In popular music, you roll with it and it's ok. The space in other concerts seems more integrated with the environment. It's not just performer-audience, but includes the venue, the bar, the coffee.."
Do you approach classical and new music differently as a listener?
Yvonne: "Well new music is my job...that's the reason I'm here. So I'm always ready to hear it when I go. With the old stuff, even if I don't know the piece, I basically know what's going to happen. It's a very familiar language to me and in a way, it can potentially be more boring if it's not that great of a piece. Comparatively, as a composer and not a performer, I mostly hear the piece and not the performer, so my judgements are usually based on that. With new music, I'm really listening as a composer - for the journey through the music. I'm working harder as a listener as there are so many ways to listen and we need to find out how in each piece - what issues are relevant. It's part of the fun...figuring out the piece and finding ways to enjoy it. It's more work, but that work is more interesting."
Me: It's probably similar for most other people, but for them, it's too much work and out of their comfort zone.
Yvonne: Of course. That's hard when you don't have the tools, the context, and you don't know where to place things. Being exposed to more, you have more reference points. Going into your first 20th century piece, you have nowhere to put it in your mind, nothing to compare it to so you don't know what they're trying to do.
Me: Haha I took on the task of interviewing audience members. While program notes and the mini-lecture helped, I think a lot of people just couldn't get past the sound itself. They said it made them feel anxious, it was disharmonious and it was out of their comfort zone. "E" liked the Strauss because it was predictable...it's comfortable....(spiel about music history...) It's a completely understandable perspective where they're coming from. I loved Amerique, but if you had asked me 5 years ago, I probably would have hated it too. It surprised me, well not really, but most people said they liked the Strauss, which sounds like an 18th century piece written in 1942. For me, I had a harder time connecting to it given the context. So my question is whether you think that Western art music takes too much education to be fully appreciated...too elitist even."
Yvonne: Oh yeah...and that's an issue as it seems to only appeal to a portion of a portion of a population. And that goes back to back our question of whether music has to have a certain function. *** said it must communicate something to a wide audience. *** said it brings people together and has meaning within a society. But is it 'wrong' when certain music doesn't do that? I think everybody just has to answer that on their own. If it makes people feel uncomfortable, then they probably shouldn't engage with it. Does that make those who do so guilty of being elitist? There are certain problems with that like why we teach only this tradition to music majors--a lot of music majors don't know that's what they're signing up for. Does that make what we do as wrong? I don't know...it's a question I ask a lot."
For most others that I've talked to, they attend concerts here either because they have to because they want to support a friend. Do you feel similar or do you attend the concerts for the music itself?
Yvonne: "Yeah..I go to listen to the pieces. I feel like it's part of my education here.
SIU-HEI LEE:
Growing up, what kind of music did you listen to and/or study?
SH: Cantopop (dad plays older style songs) Classical music (dad buys CDs). Starting from middle school i started buying CDs in both categories. Now I listen to these two + mandopop. not really contemporary music... except when I have to know them, or when I go and support my friends for concerts.
SH: "When I came to UCSD, I had a goal to make friends with international Chinese students to pick up their music and share it with their friends. That way I get to perform, learn about students, and attract more people to concerts. I adjust my program a little bit according to the event and audience, but still try to play something for myself as well. People come mostly for friendship. The concert report group was extra and unexpected. It was awesome. I told the backstage crew to let people go in and out during my performance. I don't really mind because I know the audience is not used to this and I don't have the heart to 'educate' or 'civilize' them. Just let it be. But I wouldn't let it happen for a more serious concert."
Do you ever feel nervous while performing and do you think your levels of anxiety changes according to different criteria?
SH: Of course. One time I was playing for my ex-piano teacher at his house and the music was perfect. That was the only time in my life since 6 that I played without wrong notes. No matter what type of music I play, I always start nervous, get into a little bit, then play wrong notes because I get too relaxed. That makes recording for me difficult because I'm not so great technically.
Do you approach performance differently depending on the music or audience?
SH: yes, Depending on the occasion I will talk to the audience about the music I'm going to play.
Me: I attended your recital and was surprised by your inclusion of pop music. Are there reasons that you did so? How do you think this affected the audience?
SH: I did that because I love pop music and it makes me happy to play it. Behind the music selections, there's a story with my friends. A lot of memories and some of my friends cried while I played it.
YVONNE WU:
Growing up, what kind of music did you listen to and/or study?
Yvonne: "I started piano at 5, so it was mostly pedagogical materials in terms of studies. It wasn't until I was 17 when I began hearing new music. I mostly listened to what my parents did on the radio: mostly easy listening, Taiwan popular music tapes, and normal radio stuff. It wasn't until maybe early teens until I started listening to Classical.
Have you always attended concerts? How is it different for you compared to recordings?
Yvonne: "Attending Interlochen music camp at 16 was an eye-opening experience for me as far as live concerts go. It was probably my first time listening to live orchestras and first introduction to chamber music. It was really mind blowing. The presence of performers, watching how a professional string quartet moves together, seeing the gestural language of the music being performed in front of you...as a teenager clarified a lot for me. It gave me another dimension to the listening. For the orchestra, just the exhilaration of having so many musicians in front of you...the sound feels richer. Sometimes listening may be better in a recording because there are a lot of social distractions in live recordings: wind, noise, people around you..., it may not be as deep getting into the sound, but the fact that it's happening live is exciting. This moment can't repeat, you can't go back and listen to that moment. It's urgent that you pay attention."
What do you think, on a societal level (at least our society), is the point of the live performance?
Yvonne: "I think a lot of people feel the same way as I do. We have to remind ourselves that recordings are a documentation and less authentic. I've heard people say that live performance is the only way to listen to music. In visual art, even if you see a painting in a book..even a good representation, is totally different than seeing the real thing. Seeing a Van Gogh in person is very different in person. It's so much more radiant, the texture means something, and it just resonates in a completely different way. I think it's the same way with music. Even though we can say that our recording technology is so good and so prevalent, we, as a society, need to not forget that...but honestly there are a lot of crappy recordings out there, or they listen through crappy laptop speakers. It drives me nuts. On one hand, I don't want to put anything online because I know people are listening to it through really low quality means and that's frustrating. Nothing can replace live performance for both the reasons I explained earlier: being exhilarated, engaged with the music, seeing the performers make the sounds and being part of the social experience of everyone being actually captivated by the same thing and shared. There's a lot of power to that compared to listening to your own in your car. Not that that's wrong. It fills a different role."
Have you attended concerts outside of the Western art tradition?
Yvonne: "haha...um....I went to Mark Dresser's Telematic concerts - 2 of them! I go to watch a few jazz concerts or my friends in a band here and there."
Did you notice any finer details in the experience and dynamics between those different genres?
Yvonne: "Actually, different kinds of bands (bluegrass or popular or something) is more exciting live. The difference is greater. I suppose the charisma of the performers is more important - it's part of the show...the energy that they convey and the energy the audience receives that's more important in the fabric music, so it's even more exciting. The social experience is supposed to be part of it as opposed to just sitting there and being quiet in concert where any distraction like unwrapping a piece of gum becomes amplified and is a bad distraction. In popular music, you roll with it and it's ok. The space in other concerts seems more integrated with the environment. It's not just performer-audience, but includes the venue, the bar, the coffee.."
Do you approach classical and new music differently as a listener?
Yvonne: "Well new music is my job...that's the reason I'm here. So I'm always ready to hear it when I go. With the old stuff, even if I don't know the piece, I basically know what's going to happen. It's a very familiar language to me and in a way, it can potentially be more boring if it's not that great of a piece. Comparatively, as a composer and not a performer, I mostly hear the piece and not the performer, so my judgements are usually based on that. With new music, I'm really listening as a composer - for the journey through the music. I'm working harder as a listener as there are so many ways to listen and we need to find out how in each piece - what issues are relevant. It's part of the fun...figuring out the piece and finding ways to enjoy it. It's more work, but that work is more interesting."
Me: It's probably similar for most other people, but for them, it's too much work and out of their comfort zone.
Yvonne: Of course. That's hard when you don't have the tools, the context, and you don't know where to place things. Being exposed to more, you have more reference points. Going into your first 20th century piece, you have nowhere to put it in your mind, nothing to compare it to so you don't know what they're trying to do.
Me: Haha I took on the task of interviewing audience members. While program notes and the mini-lecture helped, I think a lot of people just couldn't get past the sound itself. They said it made them feel anxious, it was disharmonious and it was out of their comfort zone. "E" liked the Strauss because it was predictable...it's comfortable....(spiel about music history...) It's a completely understandable perspective where they're coming from. I loved Amerique, but if you had asked me 5 years ago, I probably would have hated it too. It surprised me, well not really, but most people said they liked the Strauss, which sounds like an 18th century piece written in 1942. For me, I had a harder time connecting to it given the context. So my question is whether you think that Western art music takes too much education to be fully appreciated...too elitist even."
Yvonne: Oh yeah...and that's an issue as it seems to only appeal to a portion of a portion of a population. And that goes back to back our question of whether music has to have a certain function. *** said it must communicate something to a wide audience. *** said it brings people together and has meaning within a society. But is it 'wrong' when certain music doesn't do that? I think everybody just has to answer that on their own. If it makes people feel uncomfortable, then they probably shouldn't engage with it. Does that make those who do so guilty of being elitist? There are certain problems with that like why we teach only this tradition to music majors--a lot of music majors don't know that's what they're signing up for. Does that make what we do as wrong? I don't know...it's a question I ask a lot."
For most others that I've talked to, they attend concerts here either because they have to because they want to support a friend. Do you feel similar or do you attend the concerts for the music itself?
Yvonne: "Yeah..I go to listen to the pieces. I feel like it's part of my education here.
When
I know that an event promises to be very experimental, especially ones
by certain grads here, another element of the excitement of attending is
to find out: "what is going to HAPPEN?"
We're
not as far out as the hippies during the 60s and 70s, say, like those
who were part of the Fluxus movement, who did performance art, and who
went to "Happenings" and not concerts. However, sometimes there really
is some degree of intrigue. Even if I know some of the elements of the
performance or what the main concept will be, I still don't know what
they will do exactly, how it will feel watching them perform, and
exactly what will happen over the course of the event. So there is a
sort of fascination, of not wanting to miss out on a completely unique
event (knowing that so much of what we do here will not be
repeated--ever), and, as mentioned, the excitement of sharing that
unique experience with others in the
musical community, others who also witness and participate in a
once-in-a-lifetime event."
SIU-HEI LEE:
Growing up, what kind of music did you listen to and/or study?
SH: Cantopop (dad plays older style songs) Classical music (dad buys CDs). Starting from middle school i started buying CDs in both categories. Now I listen to these two + mandopop. not really contemporary music... except when I have to know them, or when I go and support my friends for concerts.
What kind of audiences do you draw to your concerts? Are there different people depending
on what type of music you're playing? And can you speculate why they may come watch you
perform?
SH: "When I came to UCSD, I had a goal to make friends with international Chinese students to pick up their music and share it with their friends. That way I get to perform, learn about students, and attract more people to concerts. I adjust my program a little bit according to the event and audience, but still try to play something for myself as well. People come mostly for friendship. The concert report group was extra and unexpected. It was awesome. I told the backstage crew to let people go in and out during my performance. I don't really mind because I know the audience is not used to this and I don't have the heart to 'educate' or 'civilize' them. Just let it be. But I wouldn't let it happen for a more serious concert."
Do you ever feel nervous while performing and do you think your levels of anxiety changes according to different criteria?
SH: Of course. One time I was playing for my ex-piano teacher at his house and the music was perfect. That was the only time in my life since 6 that I played without wrong notes. No matter what type of music I play, I always start nervous, get into a little bit, then play wrong notes because I get too relaxed. That makes recording for me difficult because I'm not so great technically.
Do you approach performance differently depending on the music or audience?
SH: yes, Depending on the occasion I will talk to the audience about the music I'm going to play.
Me: I attended your recital and was surprised by your inclusion of pop music. Are there reasons that you did so? How do you think this affected the audience?
SH: I did that because I love pop music and it makes me happy to play it. Behind the music selections, there's a story with my friends. A lot of memories and some of my friends cried while I played it.
I've talked to many audience members of different concerts about their perception of "new" music and was met with unenthusiastic responses about it. How do you feel when performing/presenting new music? (if you even do so, of course) Do you find that there is a lot of pressure to engage the audience?
SH: I rarely present new music. I will play...Webern, but that is not new music by UCSD's standards. I hope to present more new music in the future because the music may suit the general idea of my program. With the Webern , I played his piece between J.S. Bach and Franck because they all used the "sighing" motif, but in very different ways. I may also do so to support my composer friends or because the occasion calls for it (say the Rochester Women in Music Festival).UCSD undergraduate performers
Today I took the time to interview six undergraduate performance majors and discussed with them a set a questions, the same ones I asked John Fonville. I specifically sought some of them out as they are versed in two or more genres and can personally compare them. I also talked to a couple only-classical musicians. The six are:
Sarah Kim -violin/fiddle - classical, classic rock, bluegrass, jazz
Felicia Gutierrez -voice/keys/flute - jazz, pop, church
Janet Lee - piano - classical, jazz, church
Peter Ko - cello - classical
An Nguyen - piano - classical
Chris Chan - piano - classical, jazz, pop, church
I asked them these basic questions (or a variant), but of course, some of them invited further discussion (and some were not so clear with answers and could not be 'accurately' categorized):
1. Growing up, what kind of music did you listen to and/or study? How about now?
Sarah: "Growing up in Korea, I listened to classical, K-pop and church music. My mom was my piano teacher and I had a strict violin teacher. As a kid, I would try to make up my own stuff, but I wasn't allowed to and got scolded because they wanted me learn strict 'proper classical music'. My music tastes now have been really influenced by the culture here in San Diego and UCSD. It's not the same as it was six years ago, or three years ago. I don't listen to K-pop anymore...they're music tends to be sappy, but I wanna write and play more exciting and funky non-traditional music. *whisper*: I'm actually beginning to enjoy contemporary music too. When I first took a contemporary music class...my freshman year...I hated that class. To me, that wasn't music. For now, I'm learning a lot of context about certain pieces and that really helps in my enjoyment. I still listen to an enjoy classical, as well as bluegrass and rock."
Felicia: "Growing up...mostly classic rock. My parents were musicians. My dad played a lot of songs from a band called 'Yes'. My mom was a vocalist. I also grew up with church, so a lot of church songs as well. I later expanded to jazz, more soulful stuff. I do jazz mainly at UCSD, but outside, I deal with popular genres. I also do a lot of church music."
An: "I didn't really listen to music until I was 12 or so when I listened to the radio. Maybe when I was 14 I started enjoying specific genres: punk, rock, and classical since I played piano"
2. What kind of audiences do you draw to your concerts? Are the people different depending on what type of music you're playing?
Sarah: "mostly students and teachers to classical concerts as support. The ones who come to my classic rock shows tend to come because they like us...or they were already in the bar."
Felicia: "For church music, it's not really a performer/audience thing, but you leading communal prayer. My goal is to inspire. For pop music, it's really informal - usually coffee shops and stuff. It's most formal here at UCSD.
An: "Friends, fellow students...and their parents."
Chris: "My audiences are generally my friends and classmates. In the case of friends, my audience won't change due to the style because they're coming for me rather than the music. It's a different story for classmates because they would tend to see music from a more academic standpoint, which could have an effect on their desire to come to one of my performances."
3. Do you get nervous when you perform? Are there certain factors that increase or decrease these levels?
Sarah: "For new music, I feel more relaxed. And I shouldn't say this but honestly, most people can't tell if you mess up. There's more flexibility - not everything is always written out for you. It's kind of fun...but I definitely have more fun performing it than listening to it. For classical music, I'm either playing in the orchestra or solo. I don't get nervous when I'm playing in the orchestra, so the biggest thing is whether I'm playing with other people or not and not really genre. I feel more relaxed with my classic rock band - everyone is just there to have a good time. A good deal of that is attributed to the audience, the environment...there's 6 of us. In my other band, which is bluegrass rock, there are also 6 of us and I feel like I'm just there to embellish whereas in classical music, my part is much more distinct. But between my bands, I feel more pressured doing covers than originals or improvs because a standard has already been set. But classical is definitely the worst as it's quiet and all the focus is on me and not split between say dancing and drinking. This wasn't always the case - before I was comfortable with improvising, I had to actually notate everything myself because I'd be too nervous. This goes back to the issue regarding confidence with my own abilities. In classical, my teacher may be in the audience, my classmates..I feel like they're all judging me.When I was concert master once, I got nervous when I had to tune for the orchestra knowing that my teachers, friends and family were in the audience. Definitely the most nerve-wracking is when I play solo pieces with or without piano accompaniment and even that varies. How comfortable I'm on stage is directly proportional to how much I practiced. So, I'm more comfortable playing solo than with a pianist I haven't practiced with. I turned down Brent (Wong) once to perform bluegrass in seminar because I didn't feel ready even though he told me that it's ok to make mistakes in bluegrass. You also get direct response from the audience while you're playing jazz and pop genres - they will cheer and dance, sing, and clap while you play or after solos ...and that's encouraging. People that come to these shows often come as fans already. You feel more supported and there's more of a connection with the audience."
Felicia: "haha I was talking to David Castaneda and Tiffany about this yesterday and she asked him if he gets nervous. He said 'being nervous means your alive.' I said 'That's a good way to put it...I'm probably dead!' I just don't really get nervous - I've gotten used to it. I guess I feel the most pressured doing jazz here because I focus extra hard as the audience is my peers and professors. I very rarely play solos though...I do remember being nervous while playing solos in the past."
Janet: "I get nervous when my parents are here...they don't always say nice things after. I feel like they will say something bad about my performance. I'm not as nervous performing in front of people that I don't know, but only people I do know because I feel like they will judge me. I don't think about my teachers though because they know how I play and I've played many times for them already. If I mess up, non-musicians don't make me nervous. Also when people are sleeping...that means I'm boring, or when they're writing. I don't really get nervous playing jazz music because I'm usually with a band. Even though I mess up, you can make it up through improvisation and the audience is more supportive. Playing classical piano is scary because everyone is only watching me. When I'm playing at church, I just leave it to God, so I don't think about what I'm playing or who's watching so I don't get nervous."
Peter: "The more important the person is to me, the more nerve-wracking it is for me...whether they're non-musicians or not because I don't really care about what they think - I care about what I think. It's all in my head.
An: "The thing that makes me the most nervous is when I'm not prepared. My worst scenario is if I was given music the day of to sightread as an accompanist since I'm not a very strong sight reader. It's mostly on myself and not on the audience, except auditions. Unless it's one-on-one - that makes me more nervous sometimes. As for as music styles go, Bach makes me the most nervous because I can get easily lost. And I learned that the hard way from my first solo recitals where I got lost and ended up just playing a scale in the key. You can also hide behind new music, but that music is often really difficult."
Chris: "I always consider classical and jazz to be more formal genres of music (art music). And so I have to approach these with a little more respect and have a more idealized vision of what it should be. Because I go into a performance with a more idealized vision, getting nervous is almost a guarantee. Popular music is popular because everybody knows it. And since popular music is one that reaches out to more non-musicians than classical/jazz, it is replicated by a wider variety of skilled musicians/amateurs. As a result, the sound of popular music can evolve much more easily than classical or jazz. Because of this evolution, I feel that it allows me to be more liberal with my approach in playing popular music. Because I have this sense of openness to evolve a popular song, I'm not as nervous heading into a performance because I can weave a way out of situations. It's harder to get stuck in a genre of music that has become so open to the audience. The same can be said of jazz in terms of its openness, but I'm not comfortable enough in that genre to not get nervous. If I were equally skilled in both genres of jazz and classical, I would have more trouble with nerves when playing classical music based on inherent differences. I appreciate the flexibility in Jazz and its higher emphasis on the ability to adapt. Unfortunately, I'm less sure of myself in the genre of Jazz, so I have yet to embrace that part of Jazz performance due to my lack of experience and knowledge. When it comes to performances, I put a lot of pressure on myself to play well and with respect towards the composer, the style, and the audience. So based on inherent differences, ideally, I would feel less nervous when playing Jazz."
4. Do you feel you approach performance differently depending on the music?
Sarah: (touched upon this in her answer to #3)
Felicia: "For jazz concerts here, my approach is to be professional, but I still want to show joy and a level of having fun enjoying playing with other musicians and what they're doing. For outside pop stuff...some people listen and some don't...whatever haha. For church, we try to 'warm up the room' by getting this presence ready so that when people walk in they feel inspired like we're all in this together. Those people aren't there to listen to you, but to feel welcome."
An: "I feel like I need to approach contemporary music differently. But I haven't played enough of it to really say how. I'm trying to get really good at Classical music first."
Chris: " I think that if I have an idea who I'm playing for, I would try my best to change my approach completely to suit them. For example, when performing in a formal recital, my whole posture would change. I would sit straighter, probably play a little more conservative and essentially make my presence one that is obviously separate from the audience. If I'm playing at work (a senior home), they're not looking for someone who seems distant. They're looking for someone to connect with. So the music I play requires a sense of relatability. I try to play with more sensitivity. Even take other formalities (like scratching my nose, or slouching) more lightly to create a sense that this is a comfortable setting to enjoy music. Though I would not consider playing a church a performance because i think that takes away the sort of sacredness to the setting, playing at church is to play to comfort others as well. And so the mindset going in definitely is affected by who i'm anticipating to be in the audience. because it doesn't matter how good you are. If you don't play in a way that connects with the audience, I don't think you're playing correctly.."
5. What draws you to performance? (loaded question, I know)
Sarah: "...just having fun and being in the moment."
Felicia: "well...I have to perform here...in order to get my grade haha. No, I perform because it's fun and exciting. It has a big room for error, but a big room for victory as well. It's also cool to see what the other people you're playing with come up with on the spot. In church music, I don't see it as performing, so why are we playing live music? It's an active process of worship and to connect with the audience."
Janet: "I have to practice the music, so why not perform? I enjoy playing music and it gives me a goal. But even though it's so nerve-wracking, it feels really good."
Peter: "It's something to aspire to. When you're up there performing and everything goes well, you feel like you're on top of the world. You can't replicate that. And even when you're not doing so well, there's always spots where you can enjoy yourself."
An: "I like practicing more than performing; I get a lot personal enjoyment out of it. The recital serves as a good goal and a showcase to the audience of my work. It motivates me to practice."
Chris: " I'm drawn to performance because it gives me a chance to hold attention. I believe everyone has something to say. People hold powerful thoughts and experiences that are too often neglected or unexplored. And it's harder for some to express themselves (whether it's because of personality, or even opportunity). That is why I enjoy being on stage. I get a chance to talk. And at the same time, I don't have to talk. I like making people cry and I'm blessed to have that opportunity at work and at church. I don't believe crying is an expression of sadness alone. I think it's a sign of gratitude for something that may have passed, but is not forgotten. So that is why I perform. I perform because I want people to hear music that strikes a connection between their present state of mind and one that is greater."
6. How do you think the concert/live performances contribute to our society? Do you think the different types/genres of music contribute in different ways? As opposed to recordings?
Sarah: "For the undergrads here, going to concerts expose you to music that you otherwise wouldn't seek out on your own."
Felicia: "The value is community. I think we're meant to be creative together, share, and connect..and that works across all genres. Even with John Cage..as weird as it is and as much as I don't get it, he has something to say and needs to share with someone. Especially with something like 4'33", a recording won't be representative. A huge part of performances is being in the moment and enjoying it with others around you. There is a presence to jazz that has more importance than the technical aspect to it. The communal connection sucks the audience, makes it more real, and shows that they aren't just showing off a technical skill, but a passion. They're there to give the audience a feeling firsthand, technical skill second. Compared to recordings, you can see the technical aspect of it as well and it's fun to watch the skill of performers first hand."
Peter: "It's entertainment and a way to communally enjoy it with others and not just by yourself."
An: "Most students listen to music and live performances is a way for them to get together."
Chris: "People enjoy spontaneity. They enjoy risk and though it is scary, people can also enjoy the unknown. So going into a live performance, anything can happen. It is also a great place to be among other people. Music is universal and attending a live performance with strangers from different backgrounds reinforces the idea that music has the power to bring people together. Recordings are powerful as well, but it isn't very often that you can appreciate the shared interest of a stranger who may be listening to the same recording at the same time. Different genres do contribute in different ways because I believe they represent different values. I mentioned that popular music is popular because it is supposed to be relatable to the masses. Classical music is more artistic in which it tries to explore the boundaries of music. Jazz has an emphasis on spontaneity and blending. Each of these are important to audiences and each of these are important to the human spirit - feeling connected, feeling challenged and feeling adventurous."
7. Do you like to attend concerts? If so, why?
Sarah: "I go because I like it. It's a different experience seeing it live. I like classical concerts because it's sentimental to me - classical was kind of the only thing I listened to when I was young. Not only am I getting a glimpse of my childhood, but it's also educational and intellectually-stimulating. For shows at the Loft or something, I go more out of hobby and socializing. Many of the other genres, they're fun to attend because they're less restricted - every performance is different."
Felicia: (the presence idea mainly) "I like pop concerts because there's usually beer....haha.
Janet: "I go to learn and see how others perform.
Peter: "I'll go either to support my friends or to see someone I know is good and I will enjoy. It's a different atmosphere to be able to see the performer. And it's more genuine. When you listen to a recording, you don't know if it's been spliced or how many takes it took to achieve that. I attended Sungod one year to see Jimmy Eat World. It was exciting. Pop concerts are very high energy - it adds to the music"
An: "I mostly go to piano concerts because I like it. It's more personal for me. If I go to a violin concert or something, it's probably just to support my friend...because I hate the violin. For pop music, it's mostly a socializing it. You're around other people who are physically showing that they enjoy the music by dancing, having a good time with your friends."
Chris: "I honestly attend concerts MOST of the time to support those performing. This relates back to the question about why I am drawn to performing. I attend performances to hear what others have to say. I attend performances to remind the performers that people are listening. Of course there are times when I go for the music itself. I need to attend performances to keep me inspired, to realize how vast music is. I attend performances to keep me grounded in reality that though I may consider myself a musician, I'm not that unique. There is always someone to look up to and always someplace to go."
Sarah Kim -violin/fiddle - classical, classic rock, bluegrass, jazz
Felicia Gutierrez -voice/keys/flute - jazz, pop, church
Janet Lee - piano - classical, jazz, church
Peter Ko - cello - classical
An Nguyen - piano - classical
Chris Chan - piano - classical, jazz, pop, church
I asked them these basic questions (or a variant), but of course, some of them invited further discussion (and some were not so clear with answers and could not be 'accurately' categorized):
1. Growing up, what kind of music did you listen to and/or study? How about now?
Sarah: "Growing up in Korea, I listened to classical, K-pop and church music. My mom was my piano teacher and I had a strict violin teacher. As a kid, I would try to make up my own stuff, but I wasn't allowed to and got scolded because they wanted me learn strict 'proper classical music'. My music tastes now have been really influenced by the culture here in San Diego and UCSD. It's not the same as it was six years ago, or three years ago. I don't listen to K-pop anymore...they're music tends to be sappy, but I wanna write and play more exciting and funky non-traditional music. *whisper*: I'm actually beginning to enjoy contemporary music too. When I first took a contemporary music class...my freshman year...I hated that class. To me, that wasn't music. For now, I'm learning a lot of context about certain pieces and that really helps in my enjoyment. I still listen to an enjoy classical, as well as bluegrass and rock."
Felicia: "Growing up...mostly classic rock. My parents were musicians. My dad played a lot of songs from a band called 'Yes'. My mom was a vocalist. I also grew up with church, so a lot of church songs as well. I later expanded to jazz, more soulful stuff. I do jazz mainly at UCSD, but outside, I deal with popular genres. I also do a lot of church music."
An: "I didn't really listen to music until I was 12 or so when I listened to the radio. Maybe when I was 14 I started enjoying specific genres: punk, rock, and classical since I played piano"
2. What kind of audiences do you draw to your concerts? Are the people different depending on what type of music you're playing?
Sarah: "mostly students and teachers to classical concerts as support. The ones who come to my classic rock shows tend to come because they like us...or they were already in the bar."
Felicia: "For church music, it's not really a performer/audience thing, but you leading communal prayer. My goal is to inspire. For pop music, it's really informal - usually coffee shops and stuff. It's most formal here at UCSD.
An: "Friends, fellow students...and their parents."
Chris: "My audiences are generally my friends and classmates. In the case of friends, my audience won't change due to the style because they're coming for me rather than the music. It's a different story for classmates because they would tend to see music from a more academic standpoint, which could have an effect on their desire to come to one of my performances."
3. Do you get nervous when you perform? Are there certain factors that increase or decrease these levels?
Sarah: "For new music, I feel more relaxed. And I shouldn't say this but honestly, most people can't tell if you mess up. There's more flexibility - not everything is always written out for you. It's kind of fun...but I definitely have more fun performing it than listening to it. For classical music, I'm either playing in the orchestra or solo. I don't get nervous when I'm playing in the orchestra, so the biggest thing is whether I'm playing with other people or not and not really genre. I feel more relaxed with my classic rock band - everyone is just there to have a good time. A good deal of that is attributed to the audience, the environment...there's 6 of us. In my other band, which is bluegrass rock, there are also 6 of us and I feel like I'm just there to embellish whereas in classical music, my part is much more distinct. But between my bands, I feel more pressured doing covers than originals or improvs because a standard has already been set. But classical is definitely the worst as it's quiet and all the focus is on me and not split between say dancing and drinking. This wasn't always the case - before I was comfortable with improvising, I had to actually notate everything myself because I'd be too nervous. This goes back to the issue regarding confidence with my own abilities. In classical, my teacher may be in the audience, my classmates..I feel like they're all judging me.When I was concert master once, I got nervous when I had to tune for the orchestra knowing that my teachers, friends and family were in the audience. Definitely the most nerve-wracking is when I play solo pieces with or without piano accompaniment and even that varies. How comfortable I'm on stage is directly proportional to how much I practiced. So, I'm more comfortable playing solo than with a pianist I haven't practiced with. I turned down Brent (Wong) once to perform bluegrass in seminar because I didn't feel ready even though he told me that it's ok to make mistakes in bluegrass. You also get direct response from the audience while you're playing jazz and pop genres - they will cheer and dance, sing, and clap while you play or after solos ...and that's encouraging. People that come to these shows often come as fans already. You feel more supported and there's more of a connection with the audience."
Felicia: "haha I was talking to David Castaneda and Tiffany about this yesterday and she asked him if he gets nervous. He said 'being nervous means your alive.' I said 'That's a good way to put it...I'm probably dead!' I just don't really get nervous - I've gotten used to it. I guess I feel the most pressured doing jazz here because I focus extra hard as the audience is my peers and professors. I very rarely play solos though...I do remember being nervous while playing solos in the past."
Janet: "I get nervous when my parents are here...they don't always say nice things after. I feel like they will say something bad about my performance. I'm not as nervous performing in front of people that I don't know, but only people I do know because I feel like they will judge me. I don't think about my teachers though because they know how I play and I've played many times for them already. If I mess up, non-musicians don't make me nervous. Also when people are sleeping...that means I'm boring, or when they're writing. I don't really get nervous playing jazz music because I'm usually with a band. Even though I mess up, you can make it up through improvisation and the audience is more supportive. Playing classical piano is scary because everyone is only watching me. When I'm playing at church, I just leave it to God, so I don't think about what I'm playing or who's watching so I don't get nervous."
Peter: "The more important the person is to me, the more nerve-wracking it is for me...whether they're non-musicians or not because I don't really care about what they think - I care about what I think. It's all in my head.
An: "The thing that makes me the most nervous is when I'm not prepared. My worst scenario is if I was given music the day of to sightread as an accompanist since I'm not a very strong sight reader. It's mostly on myself and not on the audience, except auditions. Unless it's one-on-one - that makes me more nervous sometimes. As for as music styles go, Bach makes me the most nervous because I can get easily lost. And I learned that the hard way from my first solo recitals where I got lost and ended up just playing a scale in the key. You can also hide behind new music, but that music is often really difficult."
Chris: "I always consider classical and jazz to be more formal genres of music (art music). And so I have to approach these with a little more respect and have a more idealized vision of what it should be. Because I go into a performance with a more idealized vision, getting nervous is almost a guarantee. Popular music is popular because everybody knows it. And since popular music is one that reaches out to more non-musicians than classical/jazz, it is replicated by a wider variety of skilled musicians/amateurs. As a result, the sound of popular music can evolve much more easily than classical or jazz. Because of this evolution, I feel that it allows me to be more liberal with my approach in playing popular music. Because I have this sense of openness to evolve a popular song, I'm not as nervous heading into a performance because I can weave a way out of situations. It's harder to get stuck in a genre of music that has become so open to the audience. The same can be said of jazz in terms of its openness, but I'm not comfortable enough in that genre to not get nervous. If I were equally skilled in both genres of jazz and classical, I would have more trouble with nerves when playing classical music based on inherent differences. I appreciate the flexibility in Jazz and its higher emphasis on the ability to adapt. Unfortunately, I'm less sure of myself in the genre of Jazz, so I have yet to embrace that part of Jazz performance due to my lack of experience and knowledge. When it comes to performances, I put a lot of pressure on myself to play well and with respect towards the composer, the style, and the audience. So based on inherent differences, ideally, I would feel less nervous when playing Jazz."
4. Do you feel you approach performance differently depending on the music?
Sarah: (touched upon this in her answer to #3)
Felicia: "For jazz concerts here, my approach is to be professional, but I still want to show joy and a level of having fun enjoying playing with other musicians and what they're doing. For outside pop stuff...some people listen and some don't...whatever haha. For church, we try to 'warm up the room' by getting this presence ready so that when people walk in they feel inspired like we're all in this together. Those people aren't there to listen to you, but to feel welcome."
An: "I feel like I need to approach contemporary music differently. But I haven't played enough of it to really say how. I'm trying to get really good at Classical music first."
Chris: " I think that if I have an idea who I'm playing for, I would try my best to change my approach completely to suit them. For example, when performing in a formal recital, my whole posture would change. I would sit straighter, probably play a little more conservative and essentially make my presence one that is obviously separate from the audience. If I'm playing at work (a senior home), they're not looking for someone who seems distant. They're looking for someone to connect with. So the music I play requires a sense of relatability. I try to play with more sensitivity. Even take other formalities (like scratching my nose, or slouching) more lightly to create a sense that this is a comfortable setting to enjoy music. Though I would not consider playing a church a performance because i think that takes away the sort of sacredness to the setting, playing at church is to play to comfort others as well. And so the mindset going in definitely is affected by who i'm anticipating to be in the audience. because it doesn't matter how good you are. If you don't play in a way that connects with the audience, I don't think you're playing correctly.."
5. What draws you to performance? (loaded question, I know)
Sarah: "...just having fun and being in the moment."
Felicia: "well...I have to perform here...in order to get my grade haha. No, I perform because it's fun and exciting. It has a big room for error, but a big room for victory as well. It's also cool to see what the other people you're playing with come up with on the spot. In church music, I don't see it as performing, so why are we playing live music? It's an active process of worship and to connect with the audience."
Janet: "I have to practice the music, so why not perform? I enjoy playing music and it gives me a goal. But even though it's so nerve-wracking, it feels really good."
Peter: "It's something to aspire to. When you're up there performing and everything goes well, you feel like you're on top of the world. You can't replicate that. And even when you're not doing so well, there's always spots where you can enjoy yourself."
An: "I like practicing more than performing; I get a lot personal enjoyment out of it. The recital serves as a good goal and a showcase to the audience of my work. It motivates me to practice."
Chris: " I'm drawn to performance because it gives me a chance to hold attention. I believe everyone has something to say. People hold powerful thoughts and experiences that are too often neglected or unexplored. And it's harder for some to express themselves (whether it's because of personality, or even opportunity). That is why I enjoy being on stage. I get a chance to talk. And at the same time, I don't have to talk. I like making people cry and I'm blessed to have that opportunity at work and at church. I don't believe crying is an expression of sadness alone. I think it's a sign of gratitude for something that may have passed, but is not forgotten. So that is why I perform. I perform because I want people to hear music that strikes a connection between their present state of mind and one that is greater."
6. How do you think the concert/live performances contribute to our society? Do you think the different types/genres of music contribute in different ways? As opposed to recordings?
Sarah: "For the undergrads here, going to concerts expose you to music that you otherwise wouldn't seek out on your own."
Felicia: "The value is community. I think we're meant to be creative together, share, and connect..and that works across all genres. Even with John Cage..as weird as it is and as much as I don't get it, he has something to say and needs to share with someone. Especially with something like 4'33", a recording won't be representative. A huge part of performances is being in the moment and enjoying it with others around you. There is a presence to jazz that has more importance than the technical aspect to it. The communal connection sucks the audience, makes it more real, and shows that they aren't just showing off a technical skill, but a passion. They're there to give the audience a feeling firsthand, technical skill second. Compared to recordings, you can see the technical aspect of it as well and it's fun to watch the skill of performers first hand."
Peter: "It's entertainment and a way to communally enjoy it with others and not just by yourself."
An: "Most students listen to music and live performances is a way for them to get together."
Chris: "People enjoy spontaneity. They enjoy risk and though it is scary, people can also enjoy the unknown. So going into a live performance, anything can happen. It is also a great place to be among other people. Music is universal and attending a live performance with strangers from different backgrounds reinforces the idea that music has the power to bring people together. Recordings are powerful as well, but it isn't very often that you can appreciate the shared interest of a stranger who may be listening to the same recording at the same time. Different genres do contribute in different ways because I believe they represent different values. I mentioned that popular music is popular because it is supposed to be relatable to the masses. Classical music is more artistic in which it tries to explore the boundaries of music. Jazz has an emphasis on spontaneity and blending. Each of these are important to audiences and each of these are important to the human spirit - feeling connected, feeling challenged and feeling adventurous."
7. Do you like to attend concerts? If so, why?
Sarah: "I go because I like it. It's a different experience seeing it live. I like classical concerts because it's sentimental to me - classical was kind of the only thing I listened to when I was young. Not only am I getting a glimpse of my childhood, but it's also educational and intellectually-stimulating. For shows at the Loft or something, I go more out of hobby and socializing. Many of the other genres, they're fun to attend because they're less restricted - every performance is different."
Felicia: (the presence idea mainly) "I like pop concerts because there's usually beer....haha.
Janet: "I go to learn and see how others perform.
Peter: "I'll go either to support my friends or to see someone I know is good and I will enjoy. It's a different atmosphere to be able to see the performer. And it's more genuine. When you listen to a recording, you don't know if it's been spliced or how many takes it took to achieve that. I attended Sungod one year to see Jimmy Eat World. It was exciting. Pop concerts are very high energy - it adds to the music"
An: "I mostly go to piano concerts because I like it. It's more personal for me. If I go to a violin concert or something, it's probably just to support my friend...because I hate the violin. For pop music, it's mostly a socializing it. You're around other people who are physically showing that they enjoy the music by dancing, having a good time with your friends."
Chris: "I honestly attend concerts MOST of the time to support those performing. This relates back to the question about why I am drawn to performing. I attend performances to hear what others have to say. I attend performances to remind the performers that people are listening. Of course there are times when I go for the music itself. I need to attend performances to keep me inspired, to realize how vast music is. I attend performances to keep me grounded in reality that though I may consider myself a musician, I'm not that unique. There is always someone to look up to and always someplace to go."
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Rachel Beetz and John Fonville
Last week I interviewed graduate flutist Rachel Beetz and yesterday I interviewed her teacher Professor John Fonville.
Rachel is in her first year at UCSD's DMA program in flute performance.She performed the flute solos in Edgard Varese's Ameriques in the La Jolla Symphony concert I posted about a while back. She has performed from an early age and claims to have never really experienced stage fright.
"The only time I get close to performance anxiety is when I don't think I have practiced enough."
John, who does suffer from performance anxiety, later said, "One thing I've gathered about Rachel is that she's pretty much fearless."
While she listens to some electronic 'pop' music, the only concerts she attends are of Western art music.
"I attend concerts mostly for the performers and not the music itself. I mostly go to listen to and support my friends."
She turned to experimental music because she grew tired of the older traditions of classical music.
"The flute is always expected to play all this pretty stuff...and that's not me. I was jaded after playing the Tchaikovsky 4th Symphony for the millionth time. I got into a fight in undergrad with a studio mate who hated the people in the orchestra, but came for the music. There was a big difference between him and me. I was more interested in people and what they bring, so I started exploring different composers and got interested in making different sounds."
When I questioned her on her current relationship with "old" classical music, she said, "I've learned to appreciate it again. I still play the old stuff. I approach it differently now than I did then though. I apply bigger mental activity to older music...a new perspective after being apart from it for a while."
I then mentioned to her the 'results' from the interviews I obtained after the La Jolla Symphony concert. I said mostly people liked the Strauss for predictability but felt uncomfortable with the Varese.
"Really? I think the Strauss horn concertos are dreadful - they're nothing like his other stuff. The Varese is great - it doesn't nearly get played enough. I think the audience members you interviewed just weren't ready to accept these new pieces of music (even though it's no longer 'new'). I actually hated Varese for a long time until I was ready to accept it."
Me: "If it's so difficult to accept, why do you think people should try as opposed to sticking with what they know and love?"
Rachel: "Experiencing art music is a way to help me see the world in a different way, in a different perspective. Pop music is fun, but is more of an escape. I don't need to escape. I'm happy reflecting on the world's conflicts and I hope that my performances show that as well even to those who may not like the music."
As mentioned, I also had a chance to interview Professor John Fonville. He is a flute professor and was my former music theory teacher. We mostly discussed performance anxiety as, as far as I and he knows, is the only performance professor at UCSD to suffer from it. He had performed for the undergraduate seminar last year and admitted to his recent struggles with being nervous in front of an audience. Until he was about 50 years old, he hadn't experienced the mental occupations and physical tremors that sometimes come as a result of the fight-or-flight response.
"I don't know why it started and can't predict when it will - it's always a surprise. I feel like there's a certain shame attached to it. It's like...why are you a musician if you have trouble with this? This is something you love, something you do. It's like a contradiction of sorts."
I asked him if he feels certain factors tend to alter these levels of anxiety to which he replied 'no.' Upon further questioning, however, he admitted that it never happens when he plays in a group.
"When I performed for 143 (undergrad seminar), it was very informal in front of my students...there was no pressure. It's something you do for yourself. I can be playing for 4000 people and not feel a thing, but I can play for 40 undergraduates and struggle - it's kind of inexplicable. I've had to turn to medication to control it."
It was then when I found out about his improvisation group The Tone Road Ramblers with whom he's been playing with for 30 years and performs the most with currently. He said he never gets nervous playing with them; they completely understand each other. Instances when is the most nervous are in solo situations.
"There's a shared connection in time in group performance. It's a shared burden and a shared joy. And that's very different from when you're standing on stage all by yourself.
He later said that none of the other professors feel the same consistently, but once in a while may experience shaking or something. Only a few graduate students have confided in him about performance anxiety, but what makes them professional is that they have learned to control, combat, and even utilize it.
"For many, it's hard because it comes from when your expectations are too high and if you don't live up to them.
Turning the tides a bit, I asked him how he feels, as a performer, when presenting experimental music to an audience. I explained to him the situation with Varese and the La Jolla Symphony and wanted to know if there are certain pressures with engaging the audience in music they may have difficulty in understanding.
"For most people, of course they must take the audience into consideration. Otherwise they will starve to death. In our situation at UCSD, even if only 5 people attend a concert, it will not affect our ability to thrive. Being in academia allows you the freedom to choose what you do or don't do. With that said, I only do things I completely believe in. And if people want to come along and believe and enjoy what I truly believe in, that's great...but the ritual is with the object (the piece). It's wonderful when they go along and not when they don't. But I don't believe that you should gear what you believe in based on the consensus of the lay person...as painful and elitist as that may sound. I think you have to think like this if you do new music as the most important thing in your life."
From the audience side of things he explains what he personally looks for in new music.
"Perception is not innate. It takes training and the accumulation of experience. But there are those like myself who have the natural propensity for things that are new. As we become more experienced, we have the ability to infer and reference a big library of experiences. Very seldom do I hear something that doesn't fit into my experiences, so I listen to a few things. Number 1 is that I can tell that there is intelligence and thought behind the piece even when I don't know what that thought is. Number 2, I look for the care and attention to detail. The third, if it happens is the epiphany, ranging from 'aha' to 'wow'. But this is fairly rare for me. Things that don't impress me are things that seem facile and too easy. I tend not too appreciate pieces written by people are overly musical because I can't sense the struggle and grappling of decisions that you have to make as a composer. I may not understand it, but I appreciate it when it shows that the person spent a lot of time and energy on the piece."
I then asked him about his opinions on the value of the live performance when recordings are so much more easily accessible.
"In a live pop or rock concert, you're really being physically assaulted with this huge sound and I understand the attraction to that. There's something about being manipulated with such high decibels - you're physically altered with the adrenaline and all. This feeling can be found in art music as well, though more subtle."
This a very interesting concept that he brought up in light of social psychology concepts. It's been studied that adrenaline really does affect the way you view things. I believe one famous study dealt with a woman on a shaky bridge as opposed to the same woman standing next to you on stable ground. People were then asked to judge how attractive she was and on average, they rated her as being more attractive on the shaky bridge. One would probably only get a small adrenaline rush yet the differences are noticeable. In a concert setting, the difference is huge.
Rachel is in her first year at UCSD's DMA program in flute performance.She performed the flute solos in Edgard Varese's Ameriques in the La Jolla Symphony concert I posted about a while back. She has performed from an early age and claims to have never really experienced stage fright.
"The only time I get close to performance anxiety is when I don't think I have practiced enough."
John, who does suffer from performance anxiety, later said, "One thing I've gathered about Rachel is that she's pretty much fearless."
While she listens to some electronic 'pop' music, the only concerts she attends are of Western art music.
"I attend concerts mostly for the performers and not the music itself. I mostly go to listen to and support my friends."
She turned to experimental music because she grew tired of the older traditions of classical music.
"The flute is always expected to play all this pretty stuff...and that's not me. I was jaded after playing the Tchaikovsky 4th Symphony for the millionth time. I got into a fight in undergrad with a studio mate who hated the people in the orchestra, but came for the music. There was a big difference between him and me. I was more interested in people and what they bring, so I started exploring different composers and got interested in making different sounds."
When I questioned her on her current relationship with "old" classical music, she said, "I've learned to appreciate it again. I still play the old stuff. I approach it differently now than I did then though. I apply bigger mental activity to older music...a new perspective after being apart from it for a while."
I then mentioned to her the 'results' from the interviews I obtained after the La Jolla Symphony concert. I said mostly people liked the Strauss for predictability but felt uncomfortable with the Varese.
"Really? I think the Strauss horn concertos are dreadful - they're nothing like his other stuff. The Varese is great - it doesn't nearly get played enough. I think the audience members you interviewed just weren't ready to accept these new pieces of music (even though it's no longer 'new'). I actually hated Varese for a long time until I was ready to accept it."
Me: "If it's so difficult to accept, why do you think people should try as opposed to sticking with what they know and love?"
Rachel: "Experiencing art music is a way to help me see the world in a different way, in a different perspective. Pop music is fun, but is more of an escape. I don't need to escape. I'm happy reflecting on the world's conflicts and I hope that my performances show that as well even to those who may not like the music."
As mentioned, I also had a chance to interview Professor John Fonville. He is a flute professor and was my former music theory teacher. We mostly discussed performance anxiety as, as far as I and he knows, is the only performance professor at UCSD to suffer from it. He had performed for the undergraduate seminar last year and admitted to his recent struggles with being nervous in front of an audience. Until he was about 50 years old, he hadn't experienced the mental occupations and physical tremors that sometimes come as a result of the fight-or-flight response.
"I don't know why it started and can't predict when it will - it's always a surprise. I feel like there's a certain shame attached to it. It's like...why are you a musician if you have trouble with this? This is something you love, something you do. It's like a contradiction of sorts."
I asked him if he feels certain factors tend to alter these levels of anxiety to which he replied 'no.' Upon further questioning, however, he admitted that it never happens when he plays in a group.
"When I performed for 143 (undergrad seminar), it was very informal in front of my students...there was no pressure. It's something you do for yourself. I can be playing for 4000 people and not feel a thing, but I can play for 40 undergraduates and struggle - it's kind of inexplicable. I've had to turn to medication to control it."
It was then when I found out about his improvisation group The Tone Road Ramblers with whom he's been playing with for 30 years and performs the most with currently. He said he never gets nervous playing with them; they completely understand each other. Instances when is the most nervous are in solo situations.
"There's a shared connection in time in group performance. It's a shared burden and a shared joy. And that's very different from when you're standing on stage all by yourself.
He later said that none of the other professors feel the same consistently, but once in a while may experience shaking or something. Only a few graduate students have confided in him about performance anxiety, but what makes them professional is that they have learned to control, combat, and even utilize it.
"For many, it's hard because it comes from when your expectations are too high and if you don't live up to them.
Turning the tides a bit, I asked him how he feels, as a performer, when presenting experimental music to an audience. I explained to him the situation with Varese and the La Jolla Symphony and wanted to know if there are certain pressures with engaging the audience in music they may have difficulty in understanding.
"For most people, of course they must take the audience into consideration. Otherwise they will starve to death. In our situation at UCSD, even if only 5 people attend a concert, it will not affect our ability to thrive. Being in academia allows you the freedom to choose what you do or don't do. With that said, I only do things I completely believe in. And if people want to come along and believe and enjoy what I truly believe in, that's great...but the ritual is with the object (the piece). It's wonderful when they go along and not when they don't. But I don't believe that you should gear what you believe in based on the consensus of the lay person...as painful and elitist as that may sound. I think you have to think like this if you do new music as the most important thing in your life."
From the audience side of things he explains what he personally looks for in new music.
"Perception is not innate. It takes training and the accumulation of experience. But there are those like myself who have the natural propensity for things that are new. As we become more experienced, we have the ability to infer and reference a big library of experiences. Very seldom do I hear something that doesn't fit into my experiences, so I listen to a few things. Number 1 is that I can tell that there is intelligence and thought behind the piece even when I don't know what that thought is. Number 2, I look for the care and attention to detail. The third, if it happens is the epiphany, ranging from 'aha' to 'wow'. But this is fairly rare for me. Things that don't impress me are things that seem facile and too easy. I tend not too appreciate pieces written by people are overly musical because I can't sense the struggle and grappling of decisions that you have to make as a composer. I may not understand it, but I appreciate it when it shows that the person spent a lot of time and energy on the piece."
I then asked him about his opinions on the value of the live performance when recordings are so much more easily accessible.
"In a live pop or rock concert, you're really being physically assaulted with this huge sound and I understand the attraction to that. There's something about being manipulated with such high decibels - you're physically altered with the adrenaline and all. This feeling can be found in art music as well, though more subtle."
This a very interesting concept that he brought up in light of social psychology concepts. It's been studied that adrenaline really does affect the way you view things. I believe one famous study dealt with a woman on a shaky bridge as opposed to the same woman standing next to you on stable ground. People were then asked to judge how attractive she was and on average, they rated her as being more attractive on the shaky bridge. One would probably only get a small adrenaline rush yet the differences are noticeable. In a concert setting, the difference is huge.
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Spontaneous interviews 2
Before delving into the interviews, I wanted to offer a chance to listen to Varese's Ameriques:
This piece was written around 1920 by French-born composer Edgard Varese. It is inspired by the city of New York when he moved there. Thus, it is meant to sound chaotic, colorful, and grand. It is scored for a very large orchestra eleven percussionists and includes the sounds of police sirens. It also includes quotes of Stravinsky's The Rite of Spring, to which it is often compared. He wrote two versions: one for very very large orchestra and a revised version for very large orchestra so that it could be more easily performed. The La Jolla Symphony performed the second version.
First interview: "E" came because his flute teacher Rachel Beetz was performing the Varese and encouraged him to come. It was a lifetime event, she said, because it is rare for such a huge piece to be performed. She also claimed that it was "better than the Rite of Spring." He agreed that it was a big piece, but it was ultimately too intense for his tastes. He liked the Strauss (Richard Strauss's Horn Concerto NO. 2) because it was predictable - he said being able to predict the music is comforting, which the Varese definitely did not offer. In addition to classical music (particularly Baroque and Romantic), he enjoys pop music (esp. of the TOP 40 variety). The only concerts he attends, however, are classical - mainly out of convenience of being a UCSD music student.
"People go to pop and classical concerts for different reasons. For pop, you go to sing and dance along - it's a party! In Classical, you sit quietly because it is more intellectual and you need to pay attention."
Second interview: "S" is an undergraduate voice performance major at UCSD. She listens to opera music and indie pop. She came for a concert report for her music history class that required a 20th century piece. She also likes free concerts.
"I wish people weren't so serious...but not obnoxious either (in classical concerts). Indie pop concerts are much more chill and there's freedom."
She liked the Strauss and was especially surprised at how tonal it was. Regarding the Varese:
"It was really big - I can't imagine it with a larger orchestra (referring to the first version). I feel like the audience would go deaf," she said while laughing. "I liked most of it, but some of it was a bit much."
Third interview: "B" is an undergraduate mechanical engineering major who came to write a concert report for one of his music classes. He felt that the Chou was the most interesting as it incorporated Asian sounds which is not commonly heard in symphony concerts. He thought the Strauss was "just okay-it's nice but kind of boring" and the Varese was "weird. It was hard to follow and didn't make any sense to me." He would not have attended this concert had it not been for the concert report. He does normally enjoy attending rock concerts, however, as he thinks the atmosphere is full of energy and a lot of fun - something you don't get when you just listen to recordings. On the other hand, he thinks that classical music is better to listen through recordings because you can use it to study but you can only sit there quietly when watching a live performance.
Fourth and Fifth interviews were combined as they were sitting near each other. One was Michael, but I didn't catch the other's name. They both came to watch their friends who were members of the orchestra. Michael said that his friend had a lot of trouble conceptually grasping the Varese so he invited Michael to see what he thinks. He is a non-musician who believes that he has a deep relationship with music, but does not regularly attend concerts of any kind. While his favorite genre is classic rock, he was able to appreciate the Strauss and rather enjoyed it. Still, it is not something that he would watch on his own volition had his friend not been performing. With regards to the Varese he said, "I can see where my friend was coming from. It's really not my style. I think the piece is too disharmonious and caused a lot of anxiety which is not something I listen to music for."
The other man agreed that it is not something he necessarily enjoyed listening to, but he was still impressed. "It sounds so difficult to put together and the sound is so huge. The conductor also made it engaging by dancing to it."
This week I had the opportunity to interview flutist Rachel Beetz who is a DMA student at UCSD studying with John Fonville. She is the teacher of "E" who had encouraged him to attend the concert. She played the flute solos in Ameriques. I would like to get some more perspectives and go over this interview later this week.
My interviews with the audience at the concert and with Rachel basically told me so far that most people in the UCSD community only attend classical concerts to support their friends. I would like to talk to those who attend more popular concerts such as Camera Lucida to hopefully get a different picture since Prof. Charles Curtis definitely doesn't need my support! On the other hand, they are drawn to concerts of the popular styles because it's fun.
On that note, I would like to talk to people who attended Sungod - a very different concert atmosphere, but one that is important to UCSD culture.
Sunday, May 5, 2013
Spontaneous interviews
I went to the La Jolla Symphony dress rehearsal on Friday and got a chance to interview some of the audience members. It didn't really go as well as I hoped mainly because most of the audience that came for the dress rehearsal were friends/family of the performers or music students writing concert reports (a group to which I admittedly belonged to) and either were their reasons for attending that night. I also did not initially plan to conduct any interviews but thought that the opportunity would be wasted. Still, I'm proud that I had the courage to approach strangers and was happy that they were willing to work with me. I plan on interviewing some of the performers about the program and other things.
The program:
It was a fairly interesting concert especially in the context of Schick's notes. Schick is good friends with Wen-chung who was Varese's student who was both acquainted and inspired by Strauss. Nice programming. I was to pay attention to the Strauss for my concert report, but I really came for the Varese, which is reminiscent of The Rite of Spring - thankfully no riots though! While I greatly enjoyed this piece (and Steven Schick's amazing dance-conducting), reminding why I personally enjoy attending Western art music concerts, I was more importantly interested in what the audience thought.
I talked to: 3 music students, 1 non-student musician, 2 non-musicians
There was a consensus among them all: Ewww Amériques!!
Well, they put it more nicely than that. While I'm sure that I probably would have felt the same if you had asked me at an earlier time in my life, I was a bit shocked (just a bit..). Sure, it's not the most 'harmonious' piece, but the scope, colors, and intensity of it very much fascinated me and thought that those aspects, at least, could appeal to a wider audience as I had been recently trained to open my mind to such music (not saying that I enjoy it all - see last week's entry). Nope...not even the other music students agreed (though everyone enjoyed Schick's conducting of the piece).
In fact, most people liked the Strauss the most, which (to me) was the least interesting (though Nicolee did extremely well!). I expected more people to like the Wen-chung which is still very consonant, but it's probably too 'exotic' for many. Some words used to describe the Varese were: random, intense, anxious, disharmonious, and loud.
While their reasons for attending that night were not anything remarkable, I did get some insight about what types of concerts they do like to attend and why and their general thoughts about classical music concerts.
Planning on updating with some more specific info on the interviews and more clearly tying that into my project soon.
The program:
OLD WORLDS/NEW WORLD
May 4-5, 2013 | Steven Schick conducts |
Chou Wen-chung
Richard Strauss Edgard Varèse |
Landscapes
Horn Concerto No. 2 Amériques |
Special Guest: Nicolee Kuester, horn
| |
It was a fairly interesting concert especially in the context of Schick's notes. Schick is good friends with Wen-chung who was Varese's student who was both acquainted and inspired by Strauss. Nice programming. I was to pay attention to the Strauss for my concert report, but I really came for the Varese, which is reminiscent of The Rite of Spring - thankfully no riots though! While I greatly enjoyed this piece (and Steven Schick's amazing dance-conducting), reminding why I personally enjoy attending Western art music concerts, I was more importantly interested in what the audience thought.
I talked to: 3 music students, 1 non-student musician, 2 non-musicians
There was a consensus among them all: Ewww Amériques!!
Well, they put it more nicely than that. While I'm sure that I probably would have felt the same if you had asked me at an earlier time in my life, I was a bit shocked (just a bit..). Sure, it's not the most 'harmonious' piece, but the scope, colors, and intensity of it very much fascinated me and thought that those aspects, at least, could appeal to a wider audience as I had been recently trained to open my mind to such music (not saying that I enjoy it all - see last week's entry). Nope...not even the other music students agreed (though everyone enjoyed Schick's conducting of the piece).
In fact, most people liked the Strauss the most, which (to me) was the least interesting (though Nicolee did extremely well!). I expected more people to like the Wen-chung which is still very consonant, but it's probably too 'exotic' for many. Some words used to describe the Varese were: random, intense, anxious, disharmonious, and loud.
While their reasons for attending that night were not anything remarkable, I did get some insight about what types of concerts they do like to attend and why and their general thoughts about classical music concerts.
Planning on updating with some more specific info on the interviews and more clearly tying that into my project soon.
Monday, April 29, 2013
Wolff
To clarify my research topic, I've decided to focus specifically on the performer/audience dynamic within different realms of music (classical - 'old' and 'new', Jazz - 'old and new', and popular styles) and how this affects both/either party. Some particular aspects that I hope to learn include performance anxiety, boredom, expectations, and purpose (why they perform/attend concerts).
I started off this project from with myself as a performer and continued this week with myself as an audience member. This week I attended the Christian Wolff concert where UCSD faculty, graduate students, and Christian Wolff himself came together and presented a concert on his music. I knew going into this that it wouldn't be my cup of tea, but was honestly curious as to what kind of people this music does attract.
For those who don't know, Christian Wolff is a composer of the 'new' Western art music tradition. The music is experimental. While there were certainly interesting moments and concepts: prepared piano, use of speakers, unconventional performance practices (each half consisted of everyone on stage and taking turns to play each piece), and the composer himself, as a whole it didn't interest me. I attribute this mainly to the fact that I simply don't understand it and without program notes to give hints to any compositional processes, I'd be surprised if the music appealed to those un-scholarly about new music as I am.
I paid careful attention to the audience. In fact, I recognized most of them. It mainly consisted of UCSD music faculty, graduate students and undergrads. I noticed that most of those I didn't recognize left either in the middle of performances (to the dismay of many!), in between (a bit more considerate), or at intermission (the second half definitely had a smaller audience). I speculate that they left out of confusion and/or boredom. I wish I had rushed out to talk to them, but I would have also received dirty looks.
And we certainly didn't need more dirty looks. CPMC Concert Hall has such great acoustics that we were able to hear every whisper, page turn, phone drop, foot step, camera flashes, and ringtone! Even Eunah (who also wrote about this concert in her blog) and I who were clearly not interested in the music could not resist shooting glares at every person who made a sound or walked in and out during performances. Not to mention, Professor Charles Curtis who was on stage also glared at several audience members. We've been trained. So, even with regards to experimental music, these stuffy traditions most often associated with classical music persist. I know this was not always the case and would like to research more on how this came to be in another post.
The only people I had a chance to talk to so far about this performance were undergraduate music students. Most of them came for school-related purposes like concert reports. They all admitted either to falling asleep or being bored to tears (if not both). My music theory professor Lei Liang highly suggested that we attend this (we deal exclusively with post-1945 experimental music in this class) and a few that I saw attend for this reason did say they enjoyed it. But then again, they are composers themselves. I hope to talk to some graduate students and professors as well.
I also am trying to talk to some of the performers, especially Charles Curtis who is proponent of both 'old' and 'new' classical music. I want to know how performing new music affects their nerves. I wonder if it would make them less nervous knowing that 99% won't realize they made a mistake and that many aren't paying attention anyway or if would make them more nervous because they feel more pressure to engage the audience (or anything else that may come up). I also want to know how he perceived the audience situation - as I mentioned, he did much glaring.
I started off this project from with myself as a performer and continued this week with myself as an audience member. This week I attended the Christian Wolff concert where UCSD faculty, graduate students, and Christian Wolff himself came together and presented a concert on his music. I knew going into this that it wouldn't be my cup of tea, but was honestly curious as to what kind of people this music does attract.
For those who don't know, Christian Wolff is a composer of the 'new' Western art music tradition. The music is experimental. While there were certainly interesting moments and concepts: prepared piano, use of speakers, unconventional performance practices (each half consisted of everyone on stage and taking turns to play each piece), and the composer himself, as a whole it didn't interest me. I attribute this mainly to the fact that I simply don't understand it and without program notes to give hints to any compositional processes, I'd be surprised if the music appealed to those un-scholarly about new music as I am.
I paid careful attention to the audience. In fact, I recognized most of them. It mainly consisted of UCSD music faculty, graduate students and undergrads. I noticed that most of those I didn't recognize left either in the middle of performances (to the dismay of many!), in between (a bit more considerate), or at intermission (the second half definitely had a smaller audience). I speculate that they left out of confusion and/or boredom. I wish I had rushed out to talk to them, but I would have also received dirty looks.
And we certainly didn't need more dirty looks. CPMC Concert Hall has such great acoustics that we were able to hear every whisper, page turn, phone drop, foot step, camera flashes, and ringtone! Even Eunah (who also wrote about this concert in her blog) and I who were clearly not interested in the music could not resist shooting glares at every person who made a sound or walked in and out during performances. Not to mention, Professor Charles Curtis who was on stage also glared at several audience members. We've been trained. So, even with regards to experimental music, these stuffy traditions most often associated with classical music persist. I know this was not always the case and would like to research more on how this came to be in another post.
The only people I had a chance to talk to so far about this performance were undergraduate music students. Most of them came for school-related purposes like concert reports. They all admitted either to falling asleep or being bored to tears (if not both). My music theory professor Lei Liang highly suggested that we attend this (we deal exclusively with post-1945 experimental music in this class) and a few that I saw attend for this reason did say they enjoyed it. But then again, they are composers themselves. I hope to talk to some graduate students and professors as well.
I also am trying to talk to some of the performers, especially Charles Curtis who is proponent of both 'old' and 'new' classical music. I want to know how performing new music affects their nerves. I wonder if it would make them less nervous knowing that 99% won't realize they made a mistake and that many aren't paying attention anyway or if would make them more nervous because they feel more pressure to engage the audience (or anything else that may come up). I also want to know how he perceived the audience situation - as I mentioned, he did much glaring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)