Klarinet Archive - Posting 000849.txt from 1999/01

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: Re: [kl] Subjective and Objective
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 07:38:18 -0500

On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 01:24:49 -0500, klarinet@-----.net said:

> Tony,

> What I mean by this is that the clarinet "experts" at the time had
> gotten very used to their instruments and have even learned to
> rationalize some of their difficulties, imperfections and inequities
> by saying it was a part of the instrument's character and they even
> had figured out how to use these imperfections as "expressive devises"
> on occasion. Muller's instrument, more fluid, more facile and more
> even removed many imperfections and made some things previously
> difficult to impossible quite easy.

> They had become so fixed on their instruments and had so much of their
> personal lives "invested" in learning it that they were unwilling to
> consider anything else......even when it clearly had improvements.
> Those who call imperfections in instruments today "character" are in
> the same boat. We, as players, should determine the character, not
> have it de facto, like it or not, in this or that area of the
> clarinet.

Yes, I do take your point. And you know, even though I want to add some
things to the above, I want you to know that I am absolutely supportive
of your commitment to improving instruments.

You say, we as players should determine the character. But it does seem
difficult to do that without a physical challenge actually present,
either in the music or in the instrument. Or, rather, it does seem true
that characterful results usually arise from an instrumentalist
overcoming difficulties inherent in a given situation.

Now, I suspect that the irritating thing for you, or anyone involved in
designing and improving instruments, would be the complacent assertion
by another instrument maker that defects in their instrument that they
could actually remove with a bit of effort were 'a part of its
character'. And you should certainly fight against that.

But it's perfectly possible *as a player* to come at the situation from
the other way around. Some players may indeed have "so much of their
personal lives "invested" in learning [a particular instrument] that
they [are] unwilling to consider anything else"; but others of us
deliberately choose certain limitations -- like 5 key clarinets --
because we find, after considerable effort, that we wind up with
something different, interesting and expressively generative. And
sometimes our audiences agree, too.

It's a paradox. On the one hand, I'm making the umpteenth visit to the
man who made my boxwood instrument, trying to find out what would help
me do something I'm finding impossible; but on the other hand, it was I
that *chose* to play the bloody thing (rather than an Opus, or whatever)
in the first place!

You can see that something rather like that might also occur when
someone deliberately chose a modern instrument with a particular defect,
because of its other qualities. Perhaps you would say that in this
case, the choice had been made for the 'right' reasons, and not because
of complacency or herd instinct.

Why don't I, as some people suggest I should, try learning to play the
early clarinet with the reed uppermost? Only because, IMHO, the
problems involved with doing that *wouldn't be interesting or
generative*.

In fact, I take a stand even further back from this extreme by not
playing the Mozart Concerto on a 5 key (plus basset extension) clarinet
like Erich Hoeprich. (My instrument has an extra 3 keys, that Stadler
*might have had*, but we don't know, because the drawing of his
instrument is too small.)

The reason is that I think the problem of playing the important
chalumeau notes B, C# and D# clearly and in tune on such a clarinet
likewise isn't an interesting problem.

But Erich does, and good luck to him.

Anyhow, Tom, I've always said that you can't judge an instrument until
you've lived with it for a period of time, so there's no disagreement
between us there, if I give your Opus a go. But even so....

...what I'm remembering is that I recently listened to an old disc I
made on E.J.Albert Boehm clarinets; and I found myself asking why I
didn't play like that now on my Buffets, or whatever. I'd decided that
their inconsistency was too much to cope with. But was it just the
recording, or is there something missing now...that I've forgotten...?

Oh dear.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE GMN family artist: www.gmn.com
tel/fax 01865 553339

Believing Truth is staring at the sun
Which but destroys the power that could perceive.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org