Klarinet Archive - Posting 000156.txt from 1996/06

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.EDU>
Subj: Sound characters of clarinet types - redux
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 12:18:10 -0400

Things are getting slow on this list. While the postings on reeds,
mouthpieces, etc. are all interesting and all very important (may
they continue to continue), it happens not to be my personal cup of
tea so most of them get flushed through my reader as quickly as
possible. (And while I am at it, I am so glad to see my friend Jim
Pyne on the list and remember with great affection our 1991
performances of the Gran Partitta at Ohio State where Jim
improvised a dozen and a half different eingange over the several
rehearsals and performances. It was such a delight to be working
with such a professional. Hi Jim!)

But there are issues that need repoking, particularly in light of
new information. One of them has new information (new to me, at
least) that I found so astonishing that I want to share it with the
list, and also want to use it to cause reevaluation of an old and
as yet unresolved topic: sound character of clarinets of various
pitches.

Nick Shackleton, who is on this list (and who has a considerable
reputation of his own), was kind enough to send me, at my request,
a copy of Colin Lawson's new book entitled "Mozart: Clarinet
Concerto," Cambridge University Press, 1996. Run. Do not walk to
your nearest store. Order it. Read it. Dynamite stuff!

I have had little time to do anything since receiving the book
because I am devouring it, a page at a time. It must take me an
hour to read a page, partly because I don't want to leave a page
for it successor; i.e., I'm having a good time where I am, thank
you. And such wonderfully researched and thorough information!

Well, I'll leave the pleasure to you. But one item I am especially
anxious to bring to the attention of the list because some
information that Lawson has supplied shines an entirely new light
on the issue of "Which clarinet to play what on." This has been a
topic of great breadth, one that we have visited on probably four
occasions, with each occasion resulting in a month's worth of
discussion.

It began with my suggestion that clarinetists have an obligation to
play a work on the particular instrument mandated by the composer.
A number of people (not loose canons, but thoughtful, serious,
knowledgeable players) came right back and said, "Ca ca! It is
acceptable to play on any instrument which is convenient to the
player. I do C clarinet music on B-flat or A depending on the key
signature of the composition and I know of nothing in music history
that speaks against the practice."

I and others would counter argue that the clarinetist is not the
boss, the composer is and we violate his/her intentions when we
make such arbitrary changes, to say nothing of the changes in the
sonic palette of the music.

And thus the argument went for weeks on end, each person bringing
thought suggestions to the discussion. Right now, the world is
divided into two classes: those who do not believe that they are
not in violation of the composer's demands when they (the players)
chose an instrument that they perceive is more convenient to the
circumstances; and those who make the effort to do exactly what the
composer requests.

Now what has shown up in Lawson's book that sheds light on this
controversy?

Beginning on p. 25, Lawson discusses "The newly invented clarinet"
and takes the discussion up to "The basset clarinet in A" of
Mozart's quintet. This is all introductory material to the
discussion of the concerto, but it is both fascinating and
revealing. Finally, Lawson has a subchapter called "The clarinet
in A major" in which he discusses views from that era about the
sound characteristics of the clarinets of various pitch. I quote
the entire section:

"Although scholars and clarinettists have tended to
concentrate their interest upon the design of Stadler's basset
clarinet, Mozart's choice of tonality for the Quintet and the
Concerto has generally escaped detailed study. We have seen
that Rameau made idiomatic use of both D and A clarinets
(according to context) when writing operatic numbers in D
major. Francoeur's "Diapason general" (Paris, 1772)
identified the particular tonal qualities of each of the nine
clarinets he listed: the large G clarinet was the sweetest,
saddest, and most lugubrious, whilst the highest E and F
clarinets were suitable only for storms and battle. Among the
more common middle sizes, Francoeur clearly distinguished
clarinets in A and B-flat. The A had a very sweet sound, much
less somber than the G and with a greater range; it was
suitable for tender, graceful melodies. On the other hand,
the B-flat had a stronger sound, which could project and was
therefore suitable for the grand gestures found in symphonies
and overtures. The tone-quality of A and B-flat clarinets was
characterized in this way by many other writers during and
after Mozart's lifetime; the A was always reckoned more gentle
and melancholy, sometimes even rather dull in tone. A
celebrated appraisal in 1812 by a panel of judges at the Paris
Conservatoire differentiated the sound of A, B-flat, and C
clarinets. A desire to retain all three was the reason for
the decision to reject a new, supposedly omnitonic, B-flat
instrument by the clarinettist-inventor Iwan Muller. [I
recently examined Muller's 1825 book and it describes a newly
designed instrument that supposedly could play in keys of up
to and including seven sharps and seven flats, thus
eliminating the need for multiply-pitched clarinets whose
existence was to allow use of clarinets in all concert major
and minor keys playing in, at most, written keys of four flats
and/or two sharps. Leeson] The A was described as a pastoral
instrument, the B-flat expressive and majestic. The latter
retained its supremacy throughout the nineteenth century;
Mozart's espousal of the A clarinet as a solo instrument was
followed by few later composers."

Well, for me at least, this paragraph has some extremely important
information that sheds light on our "which clarinet to use"
discussion. No matter what we might think today, the above
suggests that composers of the late classic and early-middle
romantic period were influenced by the idea that each clarinet had
a unique characteristic to its sound. This is absolutely the exact
opposite position of those who believe that which clarinet is used
is unimportant!

One can poo-poo this notion as being false, but, in light of the
above evidence, one cannot state that the view did not exist. It
suggests that the selection of a particularly pitched clarinet (in
C, for example) WAS INDEED influenced by the perception of sound
character. And I am not sure if the dog wags the tail or vice
versa; i.e., the choice of which clarinet pitch was, early on,
influenced by the concert key of the work and the established
orthodoxy of the times which said, "this concert key means that
pitched clarinet." But once the pitched clarinet was selected, it
is clear that the composer had a perception of the kind of music
that should be written for that kind of a clarinet.

And thus, when we see a part that reads "clarinet in C" and then
play it on a differently pitched clarinet, we are indeed violating
their implicit intentions.

I suggest, therefore, that those who continue to hold the view that
they are authorized to make clarinet substitutions at will, now are
in possession of evidence that make that posture unsustainable in
logic.

To sum it up in the most responsible and precise technical
language: they of full of ca-ca and doo-doo!

====================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
(leeson@-----.edu)
====================================