Klarinet Archive - Posting 000147.txt from 1994/09

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.EDU>
Subj: Jay Heiser's comments on Rosewood
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 07:49:00 -0400

Jay, in speaking about Indian rosewood (as contrasted with SA rosewood)
suggested that it was not as visually appealing. I need a clarification
on that, Jay.

Is it that Indian rosewood is not as appealing as SA rosewood, OR

(and it is a big OR)

are you suggesting the rosewood in general is not as visually appealing
as mpingo wood?

My question may sound agressive (almost all question of clarification do),
but it is not. I simply did not understand what you mean.

Personally I find rosewood gorgeous, so much so that I think it has a
positive impact on my playing, but that's just one man's view. And let
me add that the aesthetics of the material on which one plays may well
have some impact on how one plays. You all know the assertion (that I
subscribe to) which suggests that one plays better in the company of better
players? Well my impression is that one plays better when one believes that
the physical material of the thing on which one plays is beautiful.

It is a separate topic, of course, but I have often wondered about the
influence of aesthetics on our ability to play well or less well. Do
we play less well when we are dressed in jeans as contrasted with tails?
I don't know. Do we play better when our fingernails are clean and
manicured as contrasted with dirty and bitten? I think so but I have no
evidence to support this view. Do we play better in magnificent surroundings
than in a dump??

But first things first, Jay. Please clarify per the above.

====================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
(leeson@-----.edu)
(leeson@-----.edu)
(dnl2073@-----.edu)
Any of the above three addresses may be used. Take your pick.
====================================