Klarinet Archive - Posting 001015.txt from 1998/12

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl]Shrifin Recording
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 19:07:50 -0500

> From: MX%"klarinet@-----.35
> Subj: Re: [kl]Shrifin Recording

>
> In a message dated 12/26/98 11:42:12 PM, clarinettist@-----.com writes:
>
> <<Does anyone have the David Shifrin recording of the Mozart concerto and
> the Mozart clarinet quintet (the CD's cover has Shifrin holding two
> clarinets)? How do you feel about the recording? I know that there are
> tons of recordings of the Mozart out there. How does this one compare
> to the rest? Naturally, we assume that all replies are no more than
> personal opinions, but I would like to hear some opinions of this CD.
> Thanks.
> >>
>
> Yes, I have the Delos DDD recording of Shifrin. It is good. He does it on an
> extended range clarinet. It used to be my favorite recording of it until I
> heard another in about 1995 of ......Oh, I can't remember. I think it was one
> of the players everyone was raving about at the time... I think he was from
> Finland, but I really liked it. Shifrin has a nice cadenza, nice
> interpretation and style, and a consistent sound.

There is no cadenza in the Mozart concerto. And I mention this not
because a venal sin has occurred by calling it a cadenza, but rather,
if you call it that, you might be tempted to do cadenza things when
you play it. Typical of the errors wrought by the use of the
word "cadenza" when something else entirely is needed was the famous
(or infamous) edition of K. 622 as prepared and edited by Jaques Ibert.

Now certainly Ibert was a gifted composer and he wrote for the clarinet
beautifully. But since everyone had been calling what is found in
K. 622 (and in three places) "a cadenza," Ibert got conned into
writing one. It has to be two full pages long and takes about 7 minutes.
Lovely music. Belongs to some other work, not to K. 622.

Every clarinet player who studies and plays this work has got to come
to grips with the issue of terminology of the 18th century. It is not
that there were no cadenzas in the 18th century. There were, but not
in K. 622. And there are other concerti that don't have them either.
And there are even concerti that have both cadenzas and this other thing
that I have not identified but that you must.

My suggestion to the writer of the note is that s/he go to Groves
Dictionary and look up the words "cadenza" and "eingang." Examine
the difference between the two and then examine those passages in
K. 622 that you have thought were cadenzas. See if you can tell
the key differences between those two forms.

Then take a look at the quintet for piano and winds, for there
you will find a genuine cadenza written out for all 5 players. See
what is different about that thing from those three places in K. 622.

The same problem of identification occurs in K. 581, both in the
slow movement and in the variations, or more specifically, in the
connection between the next-to-the-last variation and the last one.

Then go in and startle your teacher with all this great knowledge
you have gotten on your own and for which you will probably be
punched in the nose by him/her.

It is not only clarinet players who have to come to grips with this
element of performance practice, but singers do too.

>
> Is my description of his playing "KLC" (Klarinet list correct)?
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
=======================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
leeson@-----.edu
=======================================

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