Klarinet Archive - Posting 000234.txt from 1997/01
From: "David C. Blumberg" <reedman@-----.COM>
Subj: Re: How much opinion vs how much fact
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 22:34:35 -0500
Sounds like "Stan the Man" was being a real jerk. I do however wonder if
the composers wrote for clarinet in C just to give us an easier key to
play in, <bold>and no other reason</bold>.
At 07:19 PM 1/18/97 EST, Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu wrote:
>> From: MX%"charette@-----.24
>> Subj: Re: How much opinion vs. how much fact
>
>> Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu wrote:
>>
>> > Clarinetists (in general, all instrumentalists) have no
>> > business making arbitrary substitution of one pitched
>> > instrument for another, particularly in the face of an
>> > explicit request on the part of a composer with an
>> > unusually good ear, which is what Brahms is reported to
>> > have. When arbitrary substitutions are made, the impact
>> > on the sonic palette that the composer hears when s/he
>> > composes is altered to some unknown degree. And if one
>> > can substitute an A clarinet for some other pitched
>> > instrument with impunity, why not a tenor saxophone for
>> > a clarinet in B-flat, or an English horn for a basset
>> > horn?
>>
>> But what constitutes arbitrary? The instruments have greatly changed
>> in some cases; the tone palette originally intended may have been
lost
>> through the evolution of the instrument. Could it possibly be that
>> the substitution of a different pitched modern instrument ends up
>> being a more accurate representation of the period instrument?
>>
>> Many of the instruments used in orchestras have undergone
"progressive
>> refinement" even since the time of Brahms; the piano has undergone
>> incredible changes in the last century. Should we not play the music
>> of the previous centuries on our modern instruments because the
sounds
>> are so different from what was intended at the time?
>>
>> Why not a tenor sax for a Bb clarinet, if we can determine that a
tenor
>> sax sounds closer to what we believe a clarinet of a different
period
>> sounded like (after due diligence in our research, of course).
>
>Has anyone determined anything? You say, "if we can determine that
..."
>but the facts are that no research of any kind has been done to
>support or to contradict the environment of which we are speaking.
>In actual practice we have a runaway train in which any player feels
>that any reason permits substitution of almost any clarinet for almost
>any other clarinet under any circumstances.
>
>There is zero evidence that suggests that an A clarinet of today
>sounds the way a B-flat clarinet sounded in Brahms' lifetime, so to
>suggest that, in the absence of any real intelligence on this matter,
>we are in a position to do as we wish is colossol arrogance (not that
>you used those words - I have taken the discussion to an extreme).
>
>Perhaps I am still burning from the time that Stanley Drucker
suggested
>that I be fired from a gig in which I played the Missa Solemnis
>C clarinet part on a C clarinet. That is how far this kind of
>arrogance can take us.
>
>In no way do I exclude myself from the accusation that clarinet
>players surround themselves with two qualities: ignorance and
>arrogrance.
>
>
>
>>
>> If the substitution is for expedience only, then possibly the
>> substitution should not be made, but I'm not so sure that it makes
>> as much difference as the "refinements" in the instrumentation have
>> already made.
>> --
>> Mark Charette "In the next world, you're on your own"
>> charette@-----.com - Firesign Theater
>====================================
>Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
>(leeson@-----.edu)
>====================================
>
>
David C. Blumberg
reedman@-----.com
Principal Clarinet Riverside Symphonia
Adjunct Woodwind Instructor Univ. of Penn,. Bryn Mawr College
