I'd like to get some opinions on the debate between accuracy and speed. As classical marimba players, we should strive to reproduce the composers' work as accurately as possible. But what happens when we are limited to playing a piece under tempo due to one or more parts in the piece that are beyond our technique? I'm pretty much asking if anyone out there looks down upon someone performing something under tempo, but accurately.
It goes without saying that the notes should be accurate. If you are interpreting pre-existing music, it is your job to be musically expressive while honouring what the composer wrote, i.e. pitches, dynamics, etc. Tempo markings are often difficult to follow when playing transcribed works for the marimba. By playing the piece on marimba your are saying that this work for another medium sounds great on your instrument too. So play the right notes (as much as possible!) and do whatever it takes to make the piece sound great on the marimba. For both transcribed and original marimba works I often choose to play at a tempo slower than indicated because I feel it sounds better that way. In my opinion, speed is often overrated.
never. accuracy is always better than speed. All of my profs always tell me that. I would never look down on someone playing a piece slower than it should be, unless it was say a piece at 160, and the performer was playing it 100. That gets into chosing pieces that are correct for your level of playing, which I think is really important.
Scott
I had some trouble with this issue on the second movement of the Tanaka a few months ago.
My feeling is this.... acuracy and tempo are both very important. As are dynamics, phrasing, interpretation etc. It isn't really valid to discuss the merits of these things individually. It seems like you are asking "If I have to give up one which one should go?"
You also mention that sections of the piece are under tempo. My question then is.....are you saying these sections are unattainable to you at tempo and will continue to be even if you are REALLY practicing? If the answer is yes then I would say that it isn't a matter of choosing which to give up (speed or accuracy) it is a matter of choosing a piece that is more appropriate to your level. You have probably heard this before, but when I have tempo/accuracy problems I work the section starting at half tempo moving up by maybe 5 bpm. Over and over and over....
This really isn't my place to say, since I know everything I play isn't magnificent. But you wondered if people would look down on a performer for taking a tempo down. I don't know what level you are playing at but I will say this. IF it is a well known piece.....lets say....Two Mexican Dances, and you hear someone playing it extremely slow... yeah....people who know the piece are probably not going to congratulate you on your interpretation of tempo. They will probably realize it is beyond your level at this point..... A lesser known piece you might be able to get away with.
Just my opinion. No offense intended.
Jennifer
accuracy of course. tempo can be a lot of the palyers own interpretation of the piece, but you can never actually change the piece. however, if a song is out of your reach, i personally think you shouldnt be palying it at all
you keep practicin' it till itz perfect no excuses for not bein' able to do it
"you can never play your best but you can allwayz play better.(Chris Roblee)"
just keep workin' at it till itz better... chris
you keep practicin' it till itz perfect no excuses for not bein' able to do it
"you can never play your best but you can allwayz play better.(Chris Roblee)"
just keep workin' at it till itz better... chris
