Klarinet Archive - Posting 000427.txt from 1994/02

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.EDU>
Subj: Eddie Daniels and his comments about the Mozart concerto
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 19:28:15 -0500

In music one has to be prepared to hear a lot of things with which one
can disagree at an artistic level. But part of being a player is to
be able to view artistic decisions from many points of view. I don't
think there is a single way (i.e., the only way) to play anything when
it comes to interpretation of the printed text.

On the other hand, there are also factual matters with respect to music
about which it is much harder to accept a different opinion. I once
had a conductor suggest that he intended to use tenor saxophones in
place of the B-flat horn pair in the Gran Partitta. He was welcome to
do that, but not with me playing, thankyou.

Finally, there are matters about which one cannot argue. Mozart died
in 1791 and no intelligent musician is going to make up a scenario
that depends on him dying in 1795 or 1937.

According to a note posted on the board, Eddie Daniels (whose
spectacular playing makes him a wonder of the clarinet world both
in jazz and non-jazz performances - simply magnificent playing)
made several assertions about the history of K. 622 including that
it was originally for viola, later modified for basset clarinet which
was very popular at the time.

I find it hard to believe that an intelligent musician like Daniels
would hold these views, but I did want to say that whoever does hold
them will have a fight on his hands should we ever be on a panel
discussing the matter. It is simply a case of collossol misinformation.

At the time that Mozart wrote the concerto only one person in the world
had basset clarinets and that was Anton Stadler who had three, one in
C, one in B-flat, and one in A, as I stated in a previous note on this
subject.

As for the viola as the original instrument for the K.622,I'd rather
not spend a lot of time on this notion. The evidence is so overwhelming
to the contrary, that it is not worth any time on this board.

When I saw the original note asserting Daniels' alleged statements, I
thought that it was best to not respond at all. But, in medieval
courts, silence was interpreted as consent and I did not want anyone
to think that, by my silence, I was in agreement with those statements.
====================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
(leeson@-----.edu)
====================================