Klarinet Archive - Posting 000915.txt from 1997/09

From: "Tahna Britton" <tahnab@-----.com>
Subj: Re: Human Decency (was: Tabutea)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 14:42:57 -0400

Okay, wait, I was taught that I should never have to adapt to a substandard
reed, because I should always have 5 prepared, "good" reeds in my case.
Why should you have to "learn to adapt" to substandard reeds? If you
always have reeds broken in and in good condition, you shouldn't have to:
should you?

----------
> From: Neil Leupold <nleupold@-----.edu>
> To: klarinet@-----.us
> Subject: Re: Human Decency (was: Tabutea)
> Date: Friday, September 19, 1997 10:20 AM
>
> Dan Gross wrote:
>
> > Although some semblance of reason has finally overtaken this thread,
please
> > let me know when your next gig is. I would be willing to fly to Texas
so
> > that just before your performance I can smash your best reed against
the wall
> > to give you the priviledge of "learning to adapt."
>
> You're shooting the messenger here, Dan. I merely passed the
> story on to the list, and then clarified to a puzzled member what
> Tabuteau's rationale was for his alleged action. Your sarcastic
> post suggests that I subscribe to Tabuteau's methodology and
> have perhaps even attempted to advocate it to others on the
> list. That such an inference was made reveals more about the
> interpreter than it does about the transmitter of the information.
> My experience has shown me that the talent of adaptation to sub-
> standard reeds is invaluable, especially given the cost vs. quality
> of reeds these days. As for intentionally smashing a student's
> good reed, I think it's horrible (although there is an element
> of triumphant catharsis in smashing my own when they've produced
> their last sine wave).
>
> Neil