I don't feel as if I'm very expressive when I play and I'm beginning to worry about it Am I expecting too much too soon, or should I be sounding beautifully expressive by now.... I'm G3 (clarinet) but my teacher gave me a G6 piece to learn over the holiday which is lovely music and deserves to be played more expressively, but to be honest, I don't know what to do to make it sound "expressive"

Any thoughts or guidance anyone?

In my opinion this is one the hardest things to do in music, play expressive and with good communication especially if it doesn't come naturally. You need to think about what the piece is about, what the composer wanted you to play. And then when you play think about what it is you are trying to acheive.

What I do sometimes is ignore the composers markings on dynamics and play it how I think it should be played..then I take notice to the markings and play with them instead and kind of add in my little bits that I did...and then kind of compromise..

Argh, I am no good at explaining things like this.

Sorry I couldn't be of more help

I'm struggling to play as expressively as I 'feel' on the violin because my technical skills are not in place yet (ie vibrato). It's driving me nuts!

If you concentrate on the dynamics it might make you 'feel' the natural impulses of the music - try to imagine yourself singing the tune because the voice is the most expressive thing we have without an instrument.

When you go back to your lessons ask your teacher to play you a tune 'flat' and 'expressively' to you and once you hear the difference you'll naturally pick it up.

Look first of all for where the phrases begin and end - not always as obvious as you think! Then look at the shape of each phrase - where is the most important note?

Generally phrases will do one of three things: increase in energy towards the last note, relax from the first note, or increase towards a note and then relax away from it. In other words, and imagining these are hairpins, it will look like one of these: <, >, or <>. Note that I am not specifically talking about dynamic changes as such, but about where the music is leading.

Another useful tip is to think of all the notes between one important note and the next as leading towards the next important note.

If you stress the important notes lightly, the other notes will take care of themselves.

thanks andante - that really helps my thinking about the music - now how to find the important notes!

Do some listening. Not just listening because it's a nice piece of music, but listen really closely, pick out the phrases you think are beautifully expressive and analyse why - is it the phrasing, tone, articulation, use of dynamics? If you can find a recording of the piece you're working on so much the better, if not you should be able to pick up clues from anything in a similar style.

Think about how the music should be like, and play it as you think it is. That's enough to make it quite expressive.



If it's a piece in your CD collection, listen to it.

Don't know whether this will help.

With piano (G5/6 standard), there are certain pieces that I can 'feel' from within and that I can play expressively - other pieces do nothing for me so I tend to avoid playing them.

With violin (G3 standard), like Lottie, there are technical aspects to deal with, so I find that I cannot express what I feel for the piece unless the bowing is exactly right, which doesn't happen very often. Does this apply with the clarinet?

(Edit - should also mention that memorisation plays a massive part in what I can play expressively!)

You could try thinking about what emotions you are trying to convey to your listener when you are playing a particular piece. Then think about how you are going to play so that you express those emotions. It might help to think about how a person's voice sounds when they are expressing those emotions and try to do the same things when playing your instrument.

For example, when a person is very angry they often shout, talk quickly, their voice might sound harsh, the pitch might waiver about a bit, and they might spit out each word. So if I am trying to express anger, I might play loudly, fairly quickly, use a lot of vibrato, alter my tone so it is harsher and I would attack each note. But if I were trying to express tenderness I would play softly, at a slower speed, smoothly, with a rich tone, little attack on the notes and only slight vibrato. I don't usually analyse the way I express things though, I just think about the emotion I want to convey and it just happens.

You could try playing a very simple piece in different ways to express different emotions (eg anger, disgust, fear, happiness, sadness, love, pride, contentment etc).

There are some REALLY good ideas here, thanks ever so much.

And I've ordered a CD of the music, which is being performed by Colin Bradbury, and that should come early next week.



Yes I'm still finding my way with the technicalities of the piece, but some sections of it are relatively easy, and it's those sections which I feel as if I ought to be able to make sound more expressive. I'm going to study what's been written here and try and put it into practice. Thanks again everyone

With piano so far I don't find it hard AT ALL to play expressively (but there again at grade 2 to 3 level on a piano there's not many things you can do!).
On violin like Lottie said I find it much harder but that's because there are SO MANY MORE things that you can do with your bow/right hand/left hand to make a piece sound different, much more than on a piano 'I think' (forgive my ignorance if I got it wrong on this one). I find that being between grade 2 to 3 on violin it is MUCH MUCH more difficult to make a piece expressive than on a piano on a same 'level' piece.

Now I don't know anything about the clarinet so I don't know if it is more like a violin or a piano, basically don't know how many things you can do and how many different ways you can play a note. If it is like the violin (that you can make a note sound in soooo many different ways) then being grade 3 might be a bit challenging to be as expressive as you would like to be.

do i make any sense?

One of my adult piano pupils has an excellent ear when it comes to expression - he can mark on a duplicate copy, the expression and dynamics that I play

yet, when it comes to himself playing the same piece, he simply cannot replicate the expression he has just identified..........but he thinks he is.

Everything has to be played as if he and the piano are having a fight, and HE is going to win.

The only way in which he will "express himself" is if I give him instructions whilst he is playing - almost conducting him, but as soon as I stop, he goes back to his old ways.

Odd??

I would be very slightly wary of trying, when playing, to think about "get louder here", or "slow up here" - if you think about making the music in a way which focuses too much on technicalities, it can soon sound mechanical. Equally though, even if you are playing a piece which brings a storm of emotions from you, it's best not to give that emotion so much rein that you lose the plot. Having a story or a description in mind for your piece can help with some sorts of music, and I agree with others too about listening to a lot - you will soon hear how you like a piece to go, and also ways of playing which don't really do it for you.

Looking at phrases, finding out where a string of notes is really aiming towards, and thinking about that journey as you play, will produce expressiveness quite spontaneously. I try not to mark hairpins or dynamics in my music, but do have arrows arching over phrases to show where they peak, sometimes; baroque music lends itself particularly well to this though. I don't enjoy learning modern pieces where every other bar has expression marks in it - makes for too much to think about whilst playing.

The other thing is - whilst you're trying to get on top of the notes, don't worry too much about the expressiveness. Wait until you've got the notes under your fingers with reasonable accuracy, then come back to the sense of meaning at that point. It's very hard to expand into a phrase or accelerate artistically down a musical chute if you're still having to struggle with that high note in the middle of the bar....

My piano teacher said that gazing at the ceiling is good at giving the impression that you're playing expressively...

As others have said, I really believe the key to this is listening. Not specifically to the pieces you want to play, although this can help at first to confirm to you that you have the technical skills to imitate interpretative playing, and may be a good starting point. The key is general listening, listen to lots of music written by lots of different composers, hear how people play it. You'll get used to 'feeling' the emotion from their playing and only then will you be able to feel yourself how you want things to sound. You'll also have a lot of knowledge about what's appropriate for certain pieces too.

As andante says, paying a lot of attention to the details that are on the page can be a very good starting point: it's often surprising how much this adds above a performance that pays less attention. I wouldn't worry about the grade 6 piece too much: if your teacher is deliberately giving you a piece that is difficult for you then it will be hard to play it musically, as it's harder to play in the first place and there are more technical hurdles in the way: I'd expect you'd find it easier to play the grade 3 level pieces you're working musically, even if there's not quite so much scope for doing so . It's much easier to play a piece musically if the technical aspects are very much 'under the fingers'; although being technically sound doesn't in itself imply musicality. Finally it is something that develops with experience, both listening experience and playing experience, so it will come with time .

Surely you mean slow down? Or speed up?




My grade 1 mark sheet described my playing as "expressive."

I took it as a polite way of saying "wasn't keeping to the written music".

Actually I disagree - I may expect a grade 2 or 3 pianist to only play with a limited degree of expression (though there are always exceptions who play really expressively from the start) but even simple pieces can be mined for expressive potential by a more capable musician, and I'd expect less from the early grade musician because of their relative lack of familiarity with the technical demands of the instrument and the written music than necessarily with the music. After all, some early grade music is taken from beautiful full-length works by esteemed composers. Just because a piece is technically easy enough for a grade exam doesn't mean it's not possible to play it expressively

Some pieces will, I think, be more natural to play expressively than others, but to use the perennial example of Fur Elise, just because a grade 4 or 5 pianist can play it (and possibly reasonably well!) doesn't mean Ashkenazy couldn't play it better Some pieces may be less conducive (Merrily We Roll Along, anyone ) but by no means is the possibility of playing beautifully or expressively, or communicating with one's audience, confided to "higher grade" music Go Tell Aunt Nancy may have its limits, but there would, one hopes, still be a difference between the way a grade 1 pianist and a concert pianist would play it!!

No, I don't think I did. You can also talk of slowing up.



If we keep rigorously to the precise time values and expression marks as written, it does actually make for a less expressive performance - and therefore a less communicative one - it's the difference between saying "here are the dots as recorded on the page" instead of "here is music, this is what it means to me, I hope you enjoy it too". The trick is in giving the music enough "give" or flexibility to speak to us without overdoing it. If you try animating a character to walk, it will look stiff if all the phases of stepping out take the same amount of time as each other, because when we walk naturally there is a natural acceleration and deceleration through the leg-swing. Music has that too, much more subtly than in my example, and that's why thinking about where a string of notes is heading to can help to decide on those tiny adjustments of tempo which make the music come alive, instead of being stiff and automatic.

Erm, how? Slowing meaning to decrease speed, "up" meaning an increase. So you you decrease increase speed? That's like "over and out"; a massive contradiction.

Hello captaintau, I see you're relatively new here and I don't think we've met before, so hello In an effort to get back on-topic, I shall interpret your post as a demonstration of how semantic nit-picking is a bit like playing all the notes in the music without conveying the musicality of the piece, whereas anacrusis conveyed to me precisely what she meant using her own expression


Thank you everyone for the very thought-provoking replies. I've printed the thread out and am studying it. Part of the piece is only around grade 2-3 level, apart from the occasional grace note, so I'm hoping I can use the advice I've been given to make a better interpretation of it

Wow, would you believe it's come today, what brilliant service from Clarinet Classics (Victoria Soames Samek’s web site)

I've played the track and, well as you might expect, it's chalk and cheese compared with the way I'm playing it. It's much softer, he's barely tonguing the notes, and in fact I would say he's "caressing" them rather than playing them. Well at least now I know what I'm aiming for, and I can try and apply what's been said here to try and improve

First rule of pedantic nitpicking - make sure one is right. You evidently haven't.

Slowing up is indeed correct. Slowing is negative acceleration; up, as you point out, means an increase. Thus, 'slowing up' denotes an increase in negative acceleration and hence a reduction in speed. 'Slowing down' only came into usage because people, like yourself, through hypercorrection and naïve presuppositions, decided to use 'down' rather than 'up'. Indeed, at its inception, 'slowing down' would have been perceived by the erudite as a double negative. Now, however, through the mutation of language over time, both are used in the vernacular.

That aside, I agree with the rest of what anacrusis said - her taste in music-making largely coincides with my own , other than the fact that I still haven't convinced her that Schumann's music is as good as I think it is .

I many ways I think 'slowing up' conjurs up a better picture of what we actually want to do in certain cases. Like reining in a horse or putting on the brakes, as opposed to simply easing off on the accelerator.

Right then, semantic experts: who's willing to give a good explanation of the difference between rallentando and ritenuto?

Not a semantic expert *hunts for dictionary* but here is my 2p worth.

Rallentando is a gradual slowing down.
Ritenuto is holding back, a more immediate thing.

Slightly off topic but I'd be interested in responses to this question as well! A 'novice' response follows.

What I've been told to do with a rit. is to suddenly slow down but to an even tempo throughout the remainder of the piece. With a rall. I've been told to gradually slow down and get slower and slower............is that correct?

Ermmm...... actually, just looking up terms, there's 'ritenuto' and 'ritardando'; the latter is the same as rallentando?

(Admits defeat - over to the experts!)

Hello!



That wasn't my intent, but I like your analogy. Very good. I'll certainly think about that.



I personally didn't read "expression", I read "poor language use". Using your analogy, is that an example of how music (or any other art form) is interpreted differently to different people?

Or is it deceleration?

Surely "fast" and "slow" are just relative terms for speed. Much like "hot" and "cold".

You "speed up" (increase your speed) and "slow down" (reduce your speed)

Regards double negative ( ), I see that "slow down" could be tautological (as you could simply "slow"; "I'm slowing"/"I'm slowing down") but hardly a double negative.



And yet I've only heard "slow up" in the past year or so as aother phrase thats come over the States, again bastardised from Standard English, another recent example being American's insistence that they "could care less!"

maybe we should start a new thread for the semantics of the language and for correcting posters?

I am now finding it difficult to follow what was a sensible post.

It seems to me that the posts prior to the 'degeneration' overlooked or assumed mastery of the instrument and knowing all the notes and fingerings before expression.
If these are not 'in place' there may be a tendency for the music to fall apart as we concentrate on our determination to introduce a new element - expression. Maybe better less expressive music than a very expressive ermmm.... random collection of notes?

Consider the idea of 'compartmentalisation' so that each element of playing etc is able to stand on its own ...

Perhaps someone might comment?

Just the one American???

It's a different culture in a different country...

I take that as a 'no'

so how about someone changes the title of this thread..... how about something to do with 'semantics, syntax and philology and derivations from Latin and other languages'?

CAUTION THIS WILL SOUND WIERD!!

usually, i phsycollogically (spelling on that one! ) set my mind to drama mode. as someone previously said, imagine your singing, thats what i do on the piano and stuff. also, i try and sum up the character of the piece and turn it into a person and play that character (look i said id sound wierd!).

it all usually works well for me tbh, it really does, and i also find that there are different ways with different composers,
e.g. MOZART , light and bouncy like a ball
RACHMANINOFF, heavy and majestic
BEETHOVEN, lovingly and melodically
SCHUBERT, a string quartet with a elin manhan thomas like soprano solo

dont criticize these please, i just find it helps, and ive been acclaimed a few times for the expression in my playing.

my biggest advice is, just to relax and enjoy it and use an emotion whilst potraying what you think the piece symbolizes to you.

I'm inclined to agree. I don't know if you recall the discussion on General Music some months ago about the relative merits of playing with "emotion" or playing with "good technique". The consensus seemed to be that to be able to communicate the emotion one needed the technique. And in the end, the objective was to achieve both.

thank you KJ.
I think you have put it probably more succinctly than I.

Yes. I agree.


Why? As YAP has pointed out, an increase in deceleration = decreased speed. I'd also be interested in your evidence for the expression being an Americanism...


When perdanting [sic] it is best not to make elementary grammatical errors...

I agree on the expression vs technique debate - neither is much cop without the other.

Yes...

I think too many people try and play stuff that is way beyond their technical difficulty and assume that playing all the notes = being able to play the music. And some people go to the other extreme and "it doesn't matter about the mistakes, they are playing expressively". The two things need to balance out.


I don't think that the elements can truly stand on their own... they are, or surely should be, intertwined.

I think I know where SaxFan is coming from on this one....possibly advice from a pretty eminent sax player. I think the idea is separating out the technical "How do I make this metal tube with holes in make a sound" from the musical "How do I express what this means to me". One is purely technical, the other something very different. The moment the listener hears the battle with the metal tubes with holes in is the moment you've lost them.

Yes, I can agree with that one

But its still a decrease. Your speed drops. Hence "down"



No evidence, whatsoever, just experience. I had not heard of "slow up" until probably last year and I don't recall hearing or reading it anywhere except on American television. And on this thread



From my perspective, they're purely typographical. I confess to not proof-reading my posts (not enough hours in the day). Yes, I know how the apostrophe should be placed.

When the speed drops in most cars car, the needle moves to the left. Should I then say I "slow left"...? Why should a decrease in speed be necessarily linked to the spacial sense of up or down? In fact, the needle often moves in a semicircle and thus moves up before it moves down... if I am driving very fast then I can slow up-and-left before I start to slow down-and-left


There are many phrases and words derided as Americanisms which are anything but... some have better "pedigrees" in terms of how long they have been in use than the "Anglicisms" we prefer.

(I do think that "I could care less" is a particularly ridiculous expression...)


The point is, when one is being a pedant, it rather lets the side down to make grammatical errors

Sarah (proud member of Forum Pedant/Perdant Society)

Just crystallising my own thoughts on this thread based on some of the previous posts - please feel free to agree or disagree but this might be helpful for Skylark who asked for advice in the first place.

Musical expression is inherent in all individuals.

Musical expression comes from within, much as our facial expressions convey our inner thoughts/feelings to others.

We are effortlessly in control of our facial expressions, both consciously and subconsciously - how often have you smiled without realising it?

Musical expression also requires 'control'; this is referred to as 'technicality'. If the notes/fingering etc are technically secure (in my case with memorisation of piano pieces), then expression becomes effortless. If there are technical limitations (in my case with violin bowing), then expression becomes a challenge; the more difficult it is to 'relax' into a piece, the more difficult it is to express.

Does this make sense so far?

We all react differently to eg jokes (some we find funny, others not and can't see why others find it funny!) and by the same token our response to music is different, which is what makes us individuals. Different recordings of the same piece will sound different as a result of differences in interpretation, which is just as well otherwise it will be 'same old...'

hear hear!
One reason why I wish radio stations would vary the the choice of performers of "potboilers" and other pieces more - maybe I'm unlucky, or don't listen enough, but a core of individuals and groups seem to get an unfairly large share of airings. There again, some folk think that having more than one recording of a given piece is daft...I beg to differ.

if its melancholic on piano i know, it really helps to sort of, sway a bit. Whether this is any use for clarinet i have no idea.

infact, i dont know why i posted that lol

*ponders*

well bye

Followed by rolling your eyes up into your head and alternatively smiling and grimacing?

thank you, Tsax.
Once the technicalities are sorted you can get on with playing the Music that is in the notes, as it were.


yes, exactly.
and if you are playing a piece of music technically beyond your usual ability, you will more likely have trouble playing expressively.

That is a very good point, I own many recordings of the same pieces, it's trial and error really to see which is the best performance or the performance that appeals to you the most...Classic FM for example plays the same old people all the time it gets tedious, their stable of performers is very limited...I often wonder if their record companies have some deal running with the station to get airplay. There are so many gifted musicians who deserve to be heard on air but don't get a look in which is a dreadful pity...Radio3 seems to go the other way and plays some very obscure programs of music...the musical snobbery there seems unlimited or maybe I have got the wrong drift on it...

Listen to as many versions of the same pieces as possible, the differences will astound you...

As for expression and playing expressively...I would suggest that this comes from our own emotions and the ability to draw on them...each performer will interpret expression differently as their reactions to the emotive will be different.

I would suggest to play expressively that you draw from your experiences of life and from your very soul, allow yourself to be an open book in LARGE print and expose your soul to the world, that is the hallmark of performance, allowing the audience a glimpse of who you really are by your interpretation of a piece of music...let them into your world..., if you feel Joy, play joyfully, brightly, if you feel pain FEEL PAIN when you play...etc etc,

Rather early for this sort of thing...exposing souls etc and just when I have had my breakfast...but I hope it gets my point across...apologies for lack of syntax and semantic chaos...

I would say the potential for musical expression is inherent in all individuals but some individuals are "more in touch" with it and can express themselves more easily and naturally (just like some people smile easier or are more spontaneous). Analog to this is the idea that everyone has inherent motor capabilities but some individuals physically move naturally with more facility, athleticism, precision or enjoy greater speed of technical learning, etc.

We all have our own individual challenges. I know that many teachers talk about students who are more musical but who may learn pieces slowly or have difficulty keeping them consistent and those who are more technically competent and who can learn the notes quickly and perfectly but always sound rather wooden and mechanical when performing.

I like the comparisons made between expression and emotion. I think it helps to think about expression as helping to communicate a certain emotional reaction in the listener. Expression must of course be realized with certain movements on the instrument, so movements then create emotion. Having good technique then is being able to make the appropriate motions to awaken the right emotions in the listener.

So, some of us may be more challenged by being able to get the right repertoire of reliable manipulations to be made on the instrument (technique) and others may be more challenged with choosing and deciding in real time the right manipulations, including timing, etc to perform a piece (expression).

Here are some things you might find helpful in playing more expressively:

1. have one or more aural ideas developed from silent study of the score, example playing from teacher, recordings, etc. take the time to imagine the aural idea you want to be yours;

2. try to play as expressively as possible from the start; avoid mechanical, "they're just notes" practice, keep sections as small as possible to allow this. experiment with what kinds of manipulations give what kinds of sounds and what kinds of sounds express your aural image; FEEL and LISTEN

3. think in terms of emotions by for example imagining that the music is the score to scenes in a film. make the music be appropriate to accompany the images. Visualize and let your unconscious make decisions.

4. tap into emotions you have felt before and make the music be the right accompaniment for them. For example if "agitato" is called for, one could imagine starting a thread, having posters not follow the way you want them to post, feel your heartbeat rise, your face flush, the need to respond quickly and decisively and put them in their place, feel the rush to post, then to edit or delete the post, then PM someone, read the reaction, feel the anger, feel the heartbeat, oh my, oh my ..... and let this feeling come through in the music

5. develop remote control. To ensure that the playing doesn't fall apart under influence of the 'felt' emotion, change your physical reaction to capture the same sound, but keeping your own feeling of the emotion at bay.

6. Experiment playing the same piece with a different film scene or emotion in mind. Be open to various, spontaneous interpretations.

There's been such a lot of good points made since I last posted, thanks ever so much. There's a lot to think about but I must just make a quick comment on hello_cello's post cos it really made me laugh



hello_cello, after I got the CD I'd ordered that I mentioned earlier, I played the track and as I mentioned in my earlier post, I could hear that the clarinettist was "caressing" the notes. So I tried playing it that way, and found myself swaying too Thanks for posting!