Klarinet Archive - Posting 000271.txt from 1997/06

From: mdelceg@-----.nz (Michael Delceg)
Subj: Re: Improvisation (2)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 03:03:10 -0400

>I think the reason I have such confusion with the subject is the use of
>real "hard core" improv in jazz, where the piece is introduced and then
>soloists take their own tangents. I am not as accustomed to small changes
>being called improvisation, however it is very accurate. What I meant by
>using the the same tonal structure and changing the line is to keep the
>skeleton chord progressions going while going into variations of the
>melodic line using rhythmic, etc changes to make the melodic line take new
>turns.
>Do you agree with me, however, that it is imperitive to any improvisation
>on a piece like the Mozart to be very well studied and practiced with it
>first? Speaking of making changes to a piece which you have not thoroughly
>learned is like saying you can rewrite a book that you have not read.
>Thanks for the enlightenment. We learn something everyday!
>--
>Todd & Lynnette Staley
>email: nette@-----.net
>
>----------
>> From: Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
>> To: klarinet@-----.us
>> Subject: Re: Improvisation (2)
>> Date: Saturday, June 14, 1997 11:16 PM
>>
>> > From: MX%"klarinet@-----.51
>> > Subj: Re: Improvisation (2)
>>
>> I don't want to cloud the issue by getting involved in terminology.
>> If the performer modifies the composer created line in any way,
>> and if s/he does it without pre-preparation (i.e., instantaneous
>> creativity), then that person is improvising. It may also be
>> called "ornamenting" thought that term is much more restrictive
>> and generally applies to the interpretation of composer created
>> "ornaments."
>>
>> Now the improvisation may be simple, it may be complicated. On
>> a clarinet you cannot modify the accompanying chord structure
>> as one can on a piano, so it is more restrictive on an
>> instrument that can only play a single melodic line.
>>
>> But if you alter what is written, you are improvising, complexity
>> notwithstanding. And it can involve nothing more than adding
>> a passing tone, or it can be a great deal more than that.
>> I don't know what you mean when you say "using the tonal structure
>> of the music and actually changing the line."
>>
>> I don't have any less respect of K. 622 than you and would never
>> take or suggest action to diminish that work. On the contrary,
>> what I suggest is to pay respect to the performance practices
>> that were in effect at the time of its composition.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Dan,
>> > Please let me clarify myself. I do believe that adding embellishments
>to
>> > music is very acceptable and is what makes a piece, such as the
>Mozart,
>> > interesting to hear over again by different artists. I believe that
>this
>> > was always done, certainly in Mozarts time. However, I have not been
>> > accustomed to calling these added touches "improvisation". To me
>improv is
>> > much more of an involved process than a turn, a neighboring tone,
>passing
>> > tone, etc. Possibly I am wrong, and please correct me if I am, but I
>have
>> > understood improv to be using the tonal structure of the written music
>and
>> > actually changing the line, etc to be related to the piece being
>played
>> > however very different in character. I have not been extensively
>> > introduced to improv on clarinet and embellishments of any kind were
>> > called just that. I recently played the Rossler Concerto and added a
>great
>> > number of embellishments to make the piece bearable due to the
>repetition
>> > of arpeggios, etc which were quite boring as played. I have not done a
>> > great deal of investigation on changes on the Mozart, but did do extra
>> > things to it when I played it to keep myself entertained. I do worry
>about
>> > changing the character of the music. I believe that it was intended to
>> > sound a certain way and anychanges that are made should remain in that
>> > character and be compatible. Sorry to ramble. The Mozart is very close
>to
>> > my heart. It really is a masterpiece.
>> > Lynnette
>> > --
>> > Todd & Lynnette Staley
>> > email: nette@-----.net
>> >
>> > ----------
>> > > From: Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
>> > > To: klarinet@-----.us
>> > > Subject: Re: Improvisation (2)
>> > > Date: Saturday, June 14, 1997 8:46 AM
>> > >
>> > > > From: MX%"klarinet@-----.86
>> > > > Subj: Re: Improvisation (2)
>> > >
>> > > > Craig,
>> > > > Is there a really good reason that you feel the need to change the
>> > Mozart?
>> > > > I have never heard of anyone changing it. There are places for
>improv
>> > but
>> > > > 622 is not, IMHO one of them. If by improv, you mean adding turns,
>> > etc, it
>> > > > may be acceptable in spots but the piece has served many in the
>past
>> > with
>> > > > no changes at all.You really could change the character of the
>piece.
>> > > > --
>> > > > Todd & Lynnette Staley
>> > > > email: nette@-----.net
>> > >
>> > > Todd, with great respect, I am forced to disagree with your thesis
>> > which,
>> > > if I understand it, suggests that K. 622, among other works of that
>> > > era, should not be subject to performer created ornaments,
>instantan-
>> > > eously created; i.e., improvised on the spot.
>> > >
>> > > On the contrary, I suggest to you that Craig's request is a very
>> > > reasonable one, that it has serious historical precedent, and that
>> > > any performer of that era was expected to do exactly that in any
>> > > performance of not only solo works, but chamber music, and even
>> > > orchestral playing.
>> > >
>> > > And let me make my point even more specific: doing this thing has
>> > > nothing to do with the music needing it or not. The central issue
>> > > rotates around the role of the soloist in the late 1700s; i.e.,
>> > > was the player a reproducer of someone else's music, or what the
>> > > player a participant in the creative process?
>> > >
>> > > You are correct when you state that "You could change the character
>> > > of the piece" but that is nothing more than a challenge to
>> > > improvise without doing that thing. It is for this reason
>> > > that I am being so inquiring of Craig who simply says that
>> > > he wants to do it. And if, with no understanding of the
>> > > parameters involved, he simply goes ahead and does it, it is
>> > > absolutely certain that what he will arrive at is something
>> > > so badly out of character that anyone listening to it will
>> > > say, "The guy is crazy."
>> > >
>> > > You have touched on the heart of problem when you agree that
>> > > it might be OK to add turns here and there. The question is
>> > > "What can you do, and where?" "How" comes later.
>> > >
>> > > But for you to suggest that it was not done in Mozart's time
>> > > by every and any competent professional performer flies in
>> > > the face of history.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > ----------
>> > > > > From: Craig E. Countryman <cegc@-----.net>
>> > > > > To: klarinet@-----.us
>> > > > > Subject: Improvisation (2)
>> > > > > Date: Saturday, June 14, 1997 8:54 AM
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Any information about either classical or jazz or both would be
>> > great.
>> > > > > For instance, in the Mozart Concerto. Also, if I need to improv
>> > some
>> > > > > jazz stuff where do I begin?
>> > > =======================================
>> > > Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
>> > > Rosanne Leeson, Los Altos, California
>> > > leeson@-----.edu
>> > > =======================================
>> =======================================
>> Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
>> Rosanne Leeson, Los Altos, California
>> leeson@-----.edu
>> =======================================
a