Klarinet Archive - Posting 000975.txt from 1998/02

From: "David S. Naden" <dnaden@-----.net>
Subj: Re: who has the best trill?
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 14:38:59 -0500

In response to Kevin:

I did not restrict myself to these two excellent clarinetists. I was
responding to Nicholas's post which specifically named these two
clarinetists. To clarify in relation to Kevin's post, clarinetists that I
find exceptional include the following:

Walter Boykens Thea King
Charles Neidich Janet Hilton
Eddie Daniels Sabine Meyer
Paul Meyer Wolfgang Meyer
Richard Stoltzman Dieter Klocker
Hans Rudolf Stadler Karl Leister
Harold Wright Emma Johnson
Phillipe Cuper Alain Damiens

The list is posted in no particular order, and is not complete.

David S. Naden, Graduate Student
Cal State University Los Angeles

Kevin Fay wrote:

> I too vote w/ Nicholas. If you want to paint a picture, you gotta have
> paint. Trills are one color we work with.
>
> David has restricted himself, though, w/ these two clarinetists. While
> their overall performance is probably the best, at a purely technical
> level I'd have to side with either Charlie Neidich or Stanley Drucker.
> For a comparison of just how big a gulf in technique there can be, check
> out Stolzmann's recording of the Corigliano concerto, and compare it to
> Drucker's--Stanley is prob. the only person alive who can really play
> it. (I've been told that Larry Combs plays the hell out of it, too, but
> it hasn't been recorded as far as I know.)
>
> kjf
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "Martin" <dmartin@-----.NET>
> To: <klarinet@-----.us>
> Subject: RE: who has the best trill?
> Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 23:04:46 -0900
> Reply-To: klarinet@-----.us
>
> On Sun, 22 Feb 1998, David S. Naden wrote:
>
> > Why are you focussing on one minute (very small, and in the BIG
> picture,
> > insignificant) aspect of clarinet playing? You stated that although
> > different, both "took your breath away," which I interpret to mean
> that
> you
> > enjoyed both. Comparing clarinetists is okay, but should we not focus
> on
> > total musicianship and playing, and not just one aspect?
>
> I find Nicholas' inquiry perfectly valid, and I see no
> reason for him to be taken to task for posing it. The
> consummate musician is somebody who has addressed the
> most microscopic of issues, enlarged each of them to
> the degree of an entire subject of study, and then
> integrated each of those intense studies into a unified
> and polished composite approach. Even the ones who seem
> to have a natural gift (i.e.; Morales and his amazing ear)
> would never discount the close attention paid to the tiniest
> of details in their playing. When all of those tiny details
> are refined and perfected, then the depth and sophistication
> of superior musicianship is truly able to come forward without
> inhibition. The reason players like Morales and Leister and
> Stoltzman and Meyer, etc. are able to make it sound so easy
> is....(drumroll)...because, for them, it is. This doesn't
> happen by mistake.
>
> Neil
>
> I couldn't have said it better myself. I completely agree.
>
> Garrett
>
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com