Klarinet Archive - Posting 000436.txt from 1998/10

From: HatNYC62@-----.com
Subj: [kl] American WW Playing
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:35:18 -0400

In a message dated 10/10/98 8:17:30 AM, klarinet-digest-help@-----.org
writes:

<<I don't like this idea at all. It could explain a lot about the
bad properties of American
woodwind playing (not denying there are good ones, too)......>>

Can't help but call you on this one. Could you please elaborate on this? In
the first place, there isn't a consensus on what IS American woodwind playing.
Just hearing the various personalities on the list argue about various
American clarinetists should make you realize that.

The Philadelphia Orchestra had a woodwind section in the 20s that could pass
muster in today's world, far ahead in terms of refinement from any European
orchestra of its time. Of course, 3 of its 4 principals were European-born,
which was normal for that era. It took many years for other countries to
'catch up.' Listen to Beecham's orchestra from that time and you'll see what I
mean.

Our woodwind schools are of European origin (although Continental, not
British). Until the late 40s, 3 of our 'big 5' orchestras had principal
clarinetists using German-style instruments. Boston's principal bassoonist of
the 30s-40s era used a French instrument. The Flute influence was generally
French, virtually all used metal instuments (unlike the British, who took
longer to switch from wood).

And yes, Tabuteau was the dominant oboe influence. However, I don't believe
his rhythmical phrasing ideals are still generally taught today as a GENERAL
RULE of phrasing. They were certainly modified in the 3 wonderful oboists who
played in Cleveland under Szell (all were Tabuteau students). Freedom from the
bar line is an important concept to understand, but it can be over-applied. If
you listen to Tabuteau's own playing, what strikes you is its spontinaity and
it expressiveness. Not allowing the bar-line to dominate one's phrasing
decisions is part of this, but it is not the most important one! Therefore, I
think that taking this 2341 thing out of the context of Tabuteau's whole
approach to playing music is shortsighted and neglects all of the other
virtues of his playing and teaching.

David Hattner, NYC

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