I think it's good for the composer to teach because you always have new students and you have to begin at the beginning and make things clear.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
It is always interesting and sometimes even important to have intimate knowledge of a composer's life, but it is not essential in order to understand the composer's works.
The difference between the student and the born composer is he really hears the thing, and they have to stage it and manipulate it by technical equipment.
It is important for the musician to learn as much about the composer as possible and to study the music he has written. Then, even a short piece by Brahms or Chopin can be played with much more understanding.
I may not be a first-rate composer, but I am a first-class second-rate composer.
I am not so complicated or intelligent a composer, nor am I very interested in becoming so. I am much more happy doing what I know I can do than what I am not sure I could do.
We teach young kids from 8 to 14 or 15 about their musical heritage through great songs written by American songwriters. We don't do too many modern composers, although we include songs from Billy Joel and other writers like him.
I've learned a lot from the masters of orchestration, like Ravel and Stravinsky.
I sort of enjoy being able to hear what other composers are doing and how they might score something differently than me. I enjoy that part.
I basically taught myself how to sing and play by copying records, and that's just how it was for me. I know that's true for a lot of budding musicians out there - that's the thing that gets them inspired, is trying to learn their favorite songs. I think it's a great way to teach yourself.
I go into the whole composer thing quite open to keep on going and keep on trying different things because you never know... the next idea you have might be the one.