Klarinet Archive - Posting 000227.txt from 1996/06

From: Adam Michlin <amichlin@-----.EDU>
Subj: Re: Jazz Clarinetists?
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 04:08:13 -0400

At 01:03 AM 6/15/96 -0500, Edwin Lacy wrote:
>How? I have played most of the saxophone solos in the orchestral
>repertoire, such as the Old Castle movement in "Pictures," "Bolero,"
>Bizet's "L'Arlesienne Suite," etc. Then, there are a very few works
>which use saxophones briefly as a section, such as Gershwin's "Rhapsody
>in Blue." Certainly these works would have to be classified as difficult
>enough that only the very best high school orchestras, or "all-star" type
>goups can play them. For 99% of high school saxophonists, this
>realistically just doesn't represent an opportunity to play in an
>orchestra. There have been a couple of books published which contain
>"orchestral excerpts" for saxophone. Except for a dozen or so works,
>the literature involved would have to be considered fairly obscure, mostly
>quite difficult, and definitely, none of them are high school orchestra
>material.

I absolutely agree that the saxophone is an obscure orchestral instrument
(becoming less and less, hopefully), but it's still an orchestral
instrument. Luckily, saxophonists usually have a concert band in which to
learn to play "classical music" but if a school only had an orchestra for
classical music (like some schools only have a jazz band for jazz music) I
can't see how one could justify excluding a student who played saxophone.
Let them play horn parts (no more horrendous than a clarinet playing a
trumpet part). Perhaps the Alto Saxophone player you let play the 4th horn
part will go on to play those difficult true Alto Saxophone parts in a
professional orchestra. You never know.

Before I re-start the yearly "is it ok to substitute instrument X for
instrument Y against the composer's wishes" argument, let me be clear that I
only advocate this for teaching. I make no claim that this improves the
music (I'd probably agree that it hurts the music), I only claim that it
helps educate more students. In a high school situation education should be
the most important consideration.

>True, Hamilton and Bigard were primarily featured on the clarinet. In
>particular, Hamilton was hired during the time when the clarinet was
>featured prominently as a solo instrument in swing bands. The influence
>of Goodman, Shaw, Herman, etc., had made that an expected texture in the
>music of the era. Jimmy Hamilton gave Ellington the opportunity to
>feature the clarinet in a similar way. But, still, when he played the
>clarinet, he was mostly an improviser; when he was used as a part of the
>section, he ususally played saxophone.

He played clarinet a lot with the ensemble. The Far East Suite and
Ellington's Nutcracker adaption (ok, this might not be a fair example) come
to mind off hand. Harry Carney's bass clarinet work was entirely ensemble work.

>Now, if the high school or college jazz band has a clarinetist who can
>improvise solos of the quality of the ones played by the players we have
>mentioned here, it is a fairly easy thing to feature them in many jazz
>arrangements. This still does not make them integral parts of the
>ensemble, when the band is playing published arrangements without
>clarinet parts.

It's ok to let them into the jazz band if they already know how to play jazz
(ie can improvise).. but it's not ok if they want to join to learn to play
jazz?
You don't see the problem here?

>Well, what are the most used instruments in jazz? I think most would
>agree that these would be the saxophone, the trumpet and trombone, piano,
>guitar, bass, drums, .... the voice. Where does the clarinet come in
>this list? In terms of a listing from most used to least used, clarinet
>would not rank in the top half dozen or so. Why? Not because clarinet
>players or their instrument are being discriminated against, but for the
>same reason that the oboe, bassoon, violin, etc., are not used as much as
>the others - because jazz players prefer the sounds of the other
[...]

Yes, but the problem is with people who insist clarinet is *not* a jazz
instrument, not the people who insist clarinet is a somewhat minor jazz
instrument.

>> Right, and the band sounding good is the most important issue. Who cares if
>> the students learn anything. Ahem. I apologize for the sarcasm, but I have
>> had personal experience with band directors who have exactly this attitude.
>
>Excuse me, but in what dream world do you conceive a situation where the
>students are learning, but the sound of the band is not a factor?

I never said sound is not a factor. I said I feel some teachers think
they're there to make the band sound good, not to teach. Excluding the poor
students (those that need to learn!) certainly makes an ensemble sound better.

>> There's simply no reason a musician (regardless of instrument) should be
>> denied the opportunity to learn to play jazz. If there isn't enough money
>> to have
>> more than one ensemble, then (qualified) students should be able to play
>> jazz. Period. And I only say qualified in that they needed to be skilled in
>> their instrument, not that they play the "right" instrument.
>
>A very fine sentiment, and I don't think anyone will argue about students
>being afforded the "opportunity to learn to play jazz." But, as a
>matter of practicality, how is this to be accomplished? Should the
>director write all the arrangements so that everyone who wants to play
>can do so, no matter what instrument they play? Show me one director
>who has the time to do this. Do you know of a source of arrangements
>and compositions which will accomodate this educational philosophy? If
>so, you owe it to all band directors to tell them where this music can
>be obtained. Do you suggest that the teaching of jazz should be based on
>learning improvisation only, with no emphasis on ensemble performance, so
>that all instruments can participate? Show me a program where this is
>possible, and where the students can be motivated to do this over a
>substantial period of time without being balanced with some kind of
>ensemble experience. The ensemble has many benefits for the students -
>I guess I won't take time to enumerate them here.

In an ideal world, all music programs could afford to have both a
"traditional" jazz band and an improvistion/jazz lab type setting. We both
know not every school can have this so the band director has to make
judgement calls. Given that there are big band charts of all difficulties
that have clarinet parts (yes, I know, they're the minority by a large
margin) I think a band director could work something out. Sometimes the
teacher will be unable to work something out and they should say so but
still encourage the student to seek other ways of learning jazz. Simply
saying "clarinet is not a jazz instrument" is not acceptable.

>> The more variety of musical settings a musician is exposed, the better.
>> It's up to the band director to balance the settings so that everyone gets a
>> chance, not just those playing the currently annointed "jazz" instruments.
>
>"Balance the settings?" What does that mean? Again, you are
>demonstrating that it is easy to sit on the sidelines and pontificate,
>but if you were "in the trenches," with the necessity of teaching such a
>group yourself, I think your attitude might change rather quickly.

I mean balance the settings in that giving a clarinestist a chance to play
in the jazz band doesn't mean the other students have to only play music
with clarinet parts. Just like many school bands have multiple pianists who
each get a shot at playing in the ensemble I don't see why a clarinet player
can't be allowed to play some of the time. I don't see that this is a
terrible inconvience on the band director.

>> The clarinet *is* customarily used in jazz. Even in jazz bands. Just
>> because the teacher has only seen watered down high school big band charts
>
>Is that it? Is it only "watered down" arrangements which do not include
>the clarinet? I would be very pleased to suggest several thousand
>published compositions for jazz band which are of extreme difficulty,
>even for professionals, and which do not include clarinet parts.
[...]
>Where? If those sources exist, I want to know about them.

The music of Duke Ellington, Artie Shaw, Benny Goodman, Glenn Miller and
Woody Herman all contain some clarinet parts. I've played Buddy DeFranco
arrangements (I don't know the specifics, I wish I had written them down)
which heavily feature both solo and ensemble clarinet. Toshiko Akiyoshi
often has clarinet parts, though always doubling saxophone (she even uses
Alto Clarinet!). Bill Holman has a Bass Clarinet feature for his big band
on his recent release "A View From The Side" (a must listen). Plenty of
stock arrangments from the 30s and 40s have clarinet parts. Yes, it's not a
lot, but it's out there for a band director who takes the time to look.

>> I did end up doubling on saxophone somewhat later, but I learned to
>> play jazz on the clarinet.
>
>What did you play? Did you play transposed saxophone parts on the
>clarinet, or perhaps trumpet parts? Did you play Glenn Miller-type
>arrangements with clarinet lead in the saxophone section? Was your jazz
>education experience one of improvisation only without consideration of
>the techniques of ensemble performance? Do you know how many published
>arrangements today include clarinet parts?

I played 4th trumpet. I played Glenn Miller, Maynard Ferguson, Stan Kenton,
and pretty much every other type of big band music there was. Some had
clarinet parts, most did not. I learned improvisation on the side, but I
never would have started without the ensemble playing. I can honestly say I
would not be a musician today if I hadn't been given that opportunity, which
is probably why I take this topic so seriously.

(As an aside, there was nothing I hated more than playing a re-arrangement
of Miller's Moonlight Serenade that took out the clarinet part).

>I know that there are excesses on both sides of this issue. I'm just
>trying to argue the side of practicality, while balancing those views
>with a desire to see as many students as possible to learn about jazz.

I'd agree that letting a bag pipes player into a jazz band is impratical. I
just don't think it's impractical to have a clarinet player.

>I have considerable experience with what can happen to those who are
>studying to be music educators, but who play one of the traditionally
>non-jazz instruments, and who don't participate in jazz as students. A
>former classmate, a French hornist, considered the playing of jazz to be
>beneath the dignity of the horn. As a result, he never learned anything
>about how jazz works. As you can imagine, his first teaching job was in a
>school which had a tradition of a fine jazz program. I heard his jazz
>band perform, and believe me, the results were painful for all
>concerned.
>
>Now, I ask you, what is the solution in such a case. Should the jazz
>band director in his college have written special arrangements to include
>the French horn, and then tried to induce him to participate? Or, should
>he have allowed the hornist to play trombone parts or trumpet parts on
>his instrument? Or, should the horn player have learned enough about one
>of the other instruments to be able to participate in the jazz program at
>least a little bit? I would be interested in your solution.

Most colleges have plenty of opportunities to play in a jazz context without
playing in the jazz band. I'm not arguing that North Texas State's One
O'Clock jazz band should start letting in clarinet players! I'm arguing
that high schools should be more flexible because high school students
typically don't have any other way to learn jazz. Nothing saddens me more
than to hear that young students told things like "clarinet is not a jazz
instrument".

As far as the band director, he shouldn't have gotten the job.

-Adam
amichlin@-----.edu
amichlin@-----.com