Itzhak: Concept of Sound

I finally got around to watching the film Itzhak, about the life and career of Itzhak Perlman. My favorite parts of the film are the little musical/philosophical discussions that Itzhak has with various people.
 There were several thought provoking observations about interpretation, but the one I have been mulling over the most is the idea that one needs to have a "concept of the sound in his mind, you need to be able to hear it, otherwise nothing comes out." As a teacher, I have observed students that from almost the beginning, seem to know exactly what kind of sound they want to get from the violin/viola and they almost naturally play with a good tone from their first twinkle variations. I had the pleasure of hearing a student get more shading and color than I thought possible from an inexpensive Yamaha violin and Glasser fiberglass bow (she has since gotten a better violin and bow and sounds even better), she just knew what she wanted the sound to be and she found it. On the other hand, I also have students that don't seem to have any inner sound at all. Some of them have a reasonably nice, pleasant tone, but the sound doesn't seem to connect to any sort of inner ideal, but is the result of good technique and imitation of recordings and demonstrations, all phrasing and dynamic shadings, have to be specifically coached and planned.

How does one teach or cultivate an inner sound? 

Photo: Nan Melville for The Juilliard School

Listening: I do think (and observe) that students who listen to recordings and go to concerts generally have a better concept of sound than those who don't, and that those who listen to a variety of performers generally have a better concept than those who only listen to the Suzuki CD, but I think there is more to it than that.
Expression: I think students also need to know that they can "say something" with their music and that their playing can be a form of personal expression. With the exacting nature of classical music, it can be easy for both teachers and students to get into the mindset of doing it "right" and thus performing become more akin to a math test with "right" and "wrong" answers than a way to express oneself or portray musical character or emotions.
Technique: Another barrier to sound is, of course, technique. Without an understanding of the relationship between bow speed, weight, and contact point, it is much more difficult to create a beautiful and varied tone. Although again, some students seem to figure this out with a minimum of instruction, while others can recite the three variables for tone/dynamics, but have to be guided almost note, by note to create any variation in tone or dynamics.
Self-Assesment: Related to listening, students also need to learn to listen to themselves. With so much to think about in order to play (posture, technique, music reading, etc..) students can sometimes forget to listen to what actually comes out of the instrument. Or are so focused on playing the right notes, that they ignore the quality of said notes. Guiding them to listen to a particular aspect of their playing or recording and having them listen/watch for themselves (thank you iPhones!), can help students to be more aware of how they sound.
Exploration: I have found (unsurprisingly) that students who spend more time playing generally have a better concept of sound. Even students who don't practice a lot, but play in school orchestra generally have a better tone, just from the act of playing more, and getting a better feel for the bow on the string and how the instrument works. I try (although I could do better) to encourage students to explore the instrument and try out different options for creating sound.
Teachers, How do you cultivate an inner concept of Sound/Tone?

Teaching vs. Performing

I recently attended a concert that was part of a concert series dedicated to a pianist/teacher who passed away a few years ago. Seeing and hearing his name reminded me of my interactions with him at a music festival early in college, where he was the coach for a piano quartet I was playing in for the week. I don't honestly remember much about his coaching or playing. I do remember that near the end of the week he asked me what my major was, and when I told him I was majoring in viola performance, he made a comment to the effect of "you could be a Suzuki teacher." While it is impossible to know exactly what he meant by that, I took it to mean he thought I wasn't good enough to be a performer and was hurt by his comment (If I want to give him the benefit of the doubt it could be he thought my personality was suited to teaching little kids, but I guess I'll never know).

I have thought a lot about this comment over the years and the problematic assumptions that this implies.
1. Being a teacher is a second choice career to performing.
2. You don't have to be a good player to teach.
3. Teaching isn't as important as being a good performer.

To attack some of the assumptions above: One: I know many musicians who always wanted to be Suzuki teachers and pursued that as a primary goal, others primarily pursued careers as teachers in the schools. I always knew I wanted to teach, but originally thought I would teach more as a supplement to performing rather than as my primary income, but have found that I absolutely love teaching.  I also prefer the relative stability of a teaching income, rather than waiting for the phone to ring for gigs. I have found the same to be true for many other teachers.

As for the second assumption that you don't have to be a good player to teach, while I would say that you don't need to be able to toss off Paganini caprices to teach beginners, you do need to be able to play some advanced repertoire with good technique (and I would say a good teacher should almost always have at least a Bachelor's degree in music). It is important in order to be able to demonstrate, and to have a plan in mind for helping your students progress to more advanced levels. Also, the skills of teaching, while they include skills of good performers, are unique to teaching. All good performers know how to hold the bow correctly and use vibrato, however, knowing how to do these things is very different from knowing how to teach a wiggly 7 year old to do the same things.

I think the last assumption, is probably the biggest problem in the music profession (and society in general). We tend to glorify those who can do something at the highest level (particularly the things we can watch),  and while that is understandable, we tend to forget the teachers and coaches that make these things possible. If you read bios of musicians in programs you often see teachers listed, however, these teachers are generally their college and grad school professors who they did not study with until they had already achieved a relatively high level of proficiency on their instrument. I personally think that musicians should all be required to list their first music teachers along with the impressive list of professors at good universities and conservatories. After all, no one gets into Juilliard (or even a decent university program) without years of lessons, and a high level of achievement mostly attained thanks to their first couple of teachers. The music profession really owes everything to the beginning private teachers and orchestra directors of the world, but we publicly acknowledge very few of them.

I am now primarily a teacher with 50+ private students and love teaching more than almost anything else I do, but I realized recently that I still subconsciously held some of these assumptions when I was considering my career and what I do. I do perform professionally, but not as much as many musicians I know, and my income comes primarily from teaching. I still occasionally find myself slightly embarrassed to admit that I am a "violin/viola teacher" and that I don't do a ton of freelancing (it's hard to play gigs and teach 50+ students). While I am working to find a better balance between teaching and performing (and everything else), I am also working on being proud of what I do and not apologizing for being "just" a teacher. My students play well and I think that what I do is meaningful to them and to the world.
And after all in what other job do you get to dress up as Mary Poppins and play the viola?

Progress Out of Sequence

I've been thinking a lot lately about acknowledging progress with my students. The other day I was finding myself slightly frustrated with a student who was "still" not playing with a full tone. She has been studying with me for two years so I was starting to question whether or not I had been doing enough to address this issue, and wondering why I couldn't seem to get through to her on this topic. 

Then, it occurred to me how incredible this student's progress has been in almost every other way. When she started with me two years ago, she had played only at school for 1 1/2 years, struggled to play early book one pieces, and could barely read music. She's now playing book 3/4 level music, can shift consistently to third position, plays with a nice vibrato and excellent intonation, and can sight-read well for her level. This fall she auditioned for two groups outside of school orchestra and was accepted to both. So while her tone still needs improvement, almost every other aspect of her playing has improved exponentially.

I think it is easy as a teacher to see the step-by-step sequence of learning the violin (or any complex skill) as a straightforward sequence that must be taught in order, but I am continually reminded that not all students will learn exactly step-by-step in the order I have in mind. With this particular student, she almost overnight figured out how to read music after struggling for over a year, and as soon as she took off there she was so impatient to move forward and learn more pieces that it was pretty much impossible to hold her back to work on tone, and in retrospect I am glad I didn't. One of the groups she now plays in and loves would have been completely out of her reach if I hadn't let her advance in repertoire more quickly than I normally would and had forced her to sit on old pieces and perfect her tone production. Will she eventually have to dig in and work on her tone? Absolutely, but I think by then, she'll be ready and have the maturity to recognize the importance of playing with a bigger and better sound. Until then, I'll keep bringing it up, but also acknowledge all of the amazing progress she has made in other areas.