Klarinet Archive - Posting 000400.txt from 1997/01

From: "David C. Blumberg" <reedman@-----.COM>
Subj: Tempo/Composers/Competitions
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 00:04:57 -0500

In the 1992 ICA competition- Cincinatti, Oh., my student Michael Rescorla
had to play a modern piece (I don't recall the name) written for the
competition. The 2nd mvt. had a jazzy idiom to it, that I just didn't agree
with the 112 tempo marking. I told my student to play it at 132 to make it
swing at the "proper tempo" to my ears.
Well, at the Competition, he did play it at 132- the fastest in the pack.
It wasn't a question of speed, it was a question of making the jazz swing
at the right tempo.
After the prelim's I went up to the composer (who was in attendance), and
asked him what tempo the 2nd mvt. shoud be at, if the 112 was what he
wanted. He said to me that to tempo of the 2nd to last player was perfect!
I then told him that that was my student, and that he played it at 132. The
composer proceeded to take out his score, and cross out the 112 tempo, and
write 132!! He then asked me for a tape of my students performance, as it
was what he now had as a concept of the best tempo for his piece. That
student was the only High School student admited that year to the competition.

At 05:27 PM 1/22/97 -0600, Edwin V. Lacy wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu wrote:
>
>> I am sorry Bill, but this transcends logic. The way it reads is
>>
>> 1. The composer writes
>> 2. The performer decides on the fallibility of the composer
>> 3. If fallible, believe nothing
>> 4. If infallible, believe everything
>>
>> And there is a corrolary to this, too.
>>
>> 1. The performer is infallible
>
>Two stories which may relate to this issue:
>
>I was studying saxophone with Gene Rousseau, and playing the Bernard
>Heiden Sonata. There was a place where an articulation didn't agree in
>the exposition and the recapitulation of one of the movements. As
>Heiden's studio was just down the hall at Indiana University from
>Rousseau's, he suggested that I ask Heiden about it, which I did. Heiden
>looked at me as though I had asked him to explain nuclear physics, and
>said, "No one has ever asked me that before." He then proceded to study
>the score for a long time, mumbling to himself. Then he handed it back to
>me and said, "I can't remember - it has been too long since I wrote that.
>Just articulate it whatever way you like."
>
>My bassoon teacher, Leonard Sharrow, was playing one of the early
>performances of the Poulenc Trio for Oboe, Bassoon and Piano, with Poulenc
>himself playing the piano part. Sharrow and the oboist, whose name I
>can't recall right now, were asking Poulenc questions about how certain
>phrases should be played, hoping to get special insights from the
>composer. However, Poulenc refused to be pinned down. He said things
>like, "Play it the way that sounds best to you."
>
>Now, some may like to quibble about whether Heiden or Poulenc are as
>fastidious in this regard as some other composers, or whether such matters
>as articulation and phrasing are as important to the aesthetic effect of a
>work as which clarinet is used.
>
>However, my problem with all this is that it seems entirely more likely to
>me that composers such as Brahms, for the most part, tended to choose one
>clarinet or the other on the basis of the convention that the Bb generally
>works better in flat keys and the A in sharp keys, from a purely technical
>standpoint. (I do realize that there are many exceptions.)
>
>But, to follow the logic that the composer's designation of clarinet key
>must be slavishly followed leads to some other necessary procedures.
>
>1. The trumpets and horns must play on natural instruments rather than
>valved ones for the first two symphonies.
>
>2. The strings must send their instruments back to a repair shop and have
>them altered to their 19th century standards: different neck angle,
>different string material, different string tension, etc.
>
>3. The timpanist must take off the plastic drum heads and replace them
>with skin heads.
>
>4. We must never play these works in large, modern concert halls, as they
>would sound different than they did in Brahms day.
>
>5. We must never listen to Brahms symphonies if we have ever heard any
>music of later eras. Listening to Mahler, Schoenberg, Ives or Stockhausen
>will most certainly "color" our hearing and understanding of Brahms.
>
>To me, it's not a question of whether some clarinetist, or some several
>clarinetists, or all clarinetists can tell which one is being played.
>Rather, it is a matter of whether in the context of the full orchestra
>texture, changing from one clarinet to another materially changes the
>artistic effect of the piece. Assume for a moment that a clarinetist with
>really keeen and experienced ears is listening to a performance of Brahms,
>and assume further that the player doesn't know what the composer
>originally designated in this regard. Would the work still have the same
>aesthetic effect if the player chose a different clarinet next time. I
>think it would.
>
>Ed Lacy
>*****************************************************************
>Dr. Edwin Lacy University of Evansville
>Professor of Music 1800 Lincoln Avenue
> Evansville, IN 47722
>el2@-----.edu (812)479-2754
>*****************************************************************
>
>
David C. Blumberg
reedman@-----.com
Principal Clarinet Riverside Symphonia
Adjunct Woodwind Instructor Univ. of Penn,. Bryn Mawr College