Klarinet Archive - Posting 000732.txt from 1998/07

From: Bill Hausmann <bhausman@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] About the Mozart concerto on B-flat clarinet
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 01:17:13 -0400

At 08:01 PM 7/21/98 EDT, you wrote:
>Someone took exception to someone's view (maybe mine) that playing the
>Mozart concerto on a B-flat clarinet was not necessarily the best thing
>to do for the work. And the reaction was that pitch standards have
>changed so much that it doesn't really matter that much.
>
>I don't have the note in front of me so forgive me if I have not
>gotten the essence correctly.
>
>I think that such an attitude is class A doo doo.
>
>A work of music is not a collection of notes. It is a collection of
>specific notes in a context, one of whose elements, at least for music
>of the 18th century, is the key of the piece. Another is the instrument
>on which the work is executed. Another is one's demeanor while playing
>it. Executing the Mozart concerto naked and while standing on one's
>head would alter the context of the work substantially.
>
Two different postings took exception to your posting. One poster (not me)
referred to the different pitch standard of today, which subsantially
alters the "original" key, thus poking substantial holes in the theory of
the importance of the original key. But MY point was that, if one does not
posess the unfortunate faculty of "perfect pitch," the original key is
irrelevant! Within the first few notes, people with the more common
"relative pitch" will become comfortable with WHATEVER key the piece is
being played in. Just as popular songs are routinely transposed to suit
the vocal range of a given singer and nobody pays it any mind, clarinet
pieces can be played on instruments of the "wrong" key and only a handful
of people will even notice (without peeking), let alone really care. Prior
to the introduction of the well-tempered scale, key did indeed make a MAJOR
difference. But in a well-tempered world the difference is no more than
the difference between a RECORDING of a normal performance and a RECORDING
of one in which the performer was naked and standing on his head: if I can
neither see nor hear the difference, even if I KNOW it is there, the
alteration of context is not relevant.

>Such a work is the sum of its constituent parts and, if one should
>remove one of those parts (such as substituting a flute for a clarinet),
>then the context of the work changes. I think that should matter to
>clarinet players and it saddens me to hear people suggest that these
>elements are not important.
>
Substituting a flute for a clarinet DOES alter the context of the work, but
not so much that it loses it's value. This is why trombonists play the
Mozart Bassoon Concerto. If the work was destroyed by this, they wouldn't
bother. Is it BETTER than the original version for bassoon? Probably not,
unless you happen to be a trombonist.

Which would be the more authentic version of Mozart Clarinet Concerto: One
played on a modern A=442 A clarinet, or one played on a clarinet from
Mozart's time, but pitched in Bb?

I greatly respect your depth of knowledge on performance practice, etc.,
and do not in ANY way mean to suggest that the context of a piece is NOT
important. But let's get realistic. Only a small handful of schools I
visit in my territory even HAVE orchestra programs, and thus, any need for
or access to A clarinets. The lack of availablility of a highly
specialized form of the instrument should preclude a student from
experiencing the crown jewel in that instrument's literature? Poppycock!
To grade a high school student down for playing the Mozart Concerto on a Bb
clarinet is the most ludicrous display of intellectual snobbery I can
imagine!

Bill Hausmann bhausman@-----.com
451 Old Orchard Drive http://www.concentric.net/~bhausman
Essexville, MI 48732 http://members.wbs.net/homepages/z/o/o/zoot14.html
ICQ UIN 4862265

If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the band is too loud.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------