Klarinet Archive - Posting 000966.txt from 2000/07

From: Daniel Leeson <leeson0@-----.net>
Subj: [kl] If the sound is lovely, this must be France
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:51:45 -0400

Here is an article I wrote for another list, but since I own it, I can
post it here. It's in two parts. If you want to see the second part,
you have to ask, otherwise I'll presume that no one read these golden
words. It addresses the issue of National Sound Character.

=========================================================

If The Sound Is Lovely, This Must Be France

National Sound Character: A Theme And Two Variations

THE THEME

It began simply enough. Someone posted a derogatory comment about
"the awful English sound" of a certain player and, before anyone
realized where we were heading, the discussion broadened to include
"the lovely French sound," "the dark German sound," and "the
personalityless American sound." The Russian sound was spoken of
but not given a descriptive adjective. There was no reference to
an Italian sound.

Like many discussions between clarinet players, there were unspoken
assumptions at work, and, in the absence of protests to the
contrary, there appeared to be a consensus. In effect, people were
speaking of a uniform and universally agreed-to understanding of
the subject. Was I home sick during that lesson?

It was as if the "awful English sound" had been officially and
numerically rated on some awful sound characterometer by the
"International Awful Sound Character Regulation Authority," an
organization whose existence, was unknown to me. Assertions were
made that a player's nationality could be identified simply by
listening to him or her play, not only in the solo repertoire but
even as a member of an orchestral section.

Considering the fact that most Americans buy French clarinets,
French reeds, mouthpieces based on French design - if not French
mouthpieces - and study with teachers many of whom can trace their
musical heritage back to French players like Gaston Hamelin and
Daniel Bonade, this made little sense to me. Logically and
historically we Americans should fall in to the "lovely French
sound" category. Were these simply examples of French chauvinism,
German nationalism, English jingoism, and American fanaticism?

As for the English players having an awful sound, has the world
gone mad? Tony Pay has an awful sound? Reginald Kell had an awful
sound? Jack Brymer had an awful sound? Thea King has an awful
sound? God should grant me such awful sounds. I don't think I
ever heard an English professional clarinetist with anything other
than a captivating sound.

Did I understand the problem correctly? Was the discussion dealing
with character of sound or national styles of playing, the latter
being much more an issue of performance practice than instrumental
technique? I am not sure that I would be able to tell a French
clarinetist by either standard, but I did want to be precise with
respect to what was being discussed. However, as more and more
comments were posted, the more "sound character" was clearly
defined as the issue, though it was very common to fall back on a
phrase such as "national style." In context, however, the passage
dealt with sound character.

Not every citizenship was involved in the discussion, only five:
American, English, French, German, and, to a much lesser degree,
Russian. Italian clarinet playing was not mentioned a single time
during the discussion except for a very minor and non-topical
reference. Other countries were dealt with in an ad-hoc fashion.
Austrian and Dutch clarinetists, for example, were said to sound
German. Belgians were said to sound French. I doubt that the
Austrians, Dutch, and Belgians, particularly the Flemish, would
have agreed with this assessment.

To my ears the whole discussion had a ring of racist thinking to
it; i.e., a class of players - the class being defined by
citizenship - were said to be alike in a specific way. Clearly, it
was time to stir the pot; another notion that "everyone knows to be
true" needed a closer examination.

VARIATION 1 - THE VIEWS

The following chronologically arranged submissions to the KLARINET
list show the breadth of views held on the subject of national
sound character. Deliberately omitted from the discussion, except
where noted, were any postings that dealt exclusively with national
styles as opposed to national sound character. I suggest that
these two subjects are only distantly related, though the original
submissions often spoke of them synonymously. In some cases, it
was necessary to edit the text heavily.

Personally, I learned a great deal from the discussion - which
lasted two months - and being involved in it was not only
enlightening but fundamental to an ability to speak of the issues
involved in a structured fashion.

1. "There was a note from someone who suggested that he or she
heard such differences and actually picked out players as
German or French or English simply by the character of their
sound. I think that what is happening here is reverse logic.
One of the players was Sabine Meyer and the listener picked
her out as being German, which is quite true. But Meyer's
performances are so distinctive, so unique, so full of her
personality, that she is recognizable through her playing, not
her sound (which I find ravishing, incidentally). So I
suggest that a collection of subconscious events created a
monologue that went like this:
'Who is this person?
Ah, that's Sabine Meyer.
Her playing is so distinctive.
Meyer is German.'
And then out pops the conscious thought:
'That this is a German player is obvious from the
character of the sound.'
For what my opinion is worth, 'German' is not the correct
phrase to describe Meyer's sound character. The correct
phrase is 'superior by any standards.'"

2. "Maybe it's my tin ear, but I could never detect anything
French in Louis Cahuzac's playing, anything German in Karl
Leister's playing, or anything Italian in Gino Cioffi's
playing. The idea that the clarinet sound is one thing in the
hands of a Frenchman and another in the hands of an
Englishman, and that these idiosyncratic sounds are somehow
caused by the nationality of the player, is another example of
the kind of old wive's tale that thrives in clarinetdom. A
subjective observer will assert that Delecluse has a French
sound, but an objective observer would have great difficulty
in supporting such an assertion with specifics. I ask someone
to tell me what the characteristics are the make Delecluse
sound French. Be specific."

3. "I fling out the gauntlet: the idea of a national sound is
a subjective statement that has no basis in fact and could not
pass a blind test."

The submitter of the next note speaks of "national styles" and
"national schools," but the context of the postings shows that
sound character is the central issue. Furthermore, the submitter
broadens the context of the discussion to include a national
characteristic to the sound of an entire orchestra.

4. "OK, I fling back your gauntlet regarding national sounds!
There are certainly national styles of playing in terms of
entire orchestras, identifiable by the collective sound of the
woodwind section. For instance, a Leningrad Phil recording of
Tchaikovsky's 4th Symphony sounds quite different from a New
York Phil recording. This has more to do with oboe sound than
clarinet sound, but still, the difference is there. I think
this is especially true of recordings from the 50's and 60's,
less true of today's recordings. My husband, who is a Russian
violinist, swears he can tell English, Russian and American
violin sections on symphonic recordings."

5. "I just returned from London where I had the pleasure of
presenting several master classes with advanced students from
Estonia, Bosnia, China, Germany, and of course, Britain. Don't
tell me there aren't different sounds of clarinet performance!
I remember performing the Mozart Concerto years ago with a
guest conductor from Vienna. And his comment after the
concert was, 'Not a bad sound for a Boehm system!' In my
first orchestral position, the flutist was from Germany, the
bassoonist from Bulgaria, the oboist from Vienna, and me! We
had many an interesting rehearsal and the conductor just about
gave up on all of us! Jack Brymer once told me that, 'You
American players all sound the same!' He was right, too. I
didn't think so at the time, but after listening carefully I
found there was much merit to what he said. I remember at the
time racing considering all the individual players I knew in
the States and thinking, 'How could he say that?' But, he
heard us from a distance, and was right."

6. "I went to my record collection and start pulling out
clarinet records to see if clarinetists from different
countries sound different. No, let me rephrase that: it has
always been obvious to me that they sound different, so I
wanted to find out more specifically was why, and whether
other musicians would agree. The only willing subject I could
find in the house was my wife who is a professional
flute/piccolo player, so I sat her down and made her listen to
11 clarinet records, only a few seconds of each and just long
enough for her to either guess the nationality or form an
opinion of the sound. Her first reaction was 'I might be able
to identify the North American ones, but I don't know what the
Europeans sound like.' Sure enough, she identified the
Americans; guessed that the French ones were from the same
country, but didn't know which country; and identified
similarities in the Brits and Germans, though less
consistently."

The next posting makes a reference to French clarinet playing style
(which is used interchangeably with sound "character") and includes
Eduard Brunner in that group. Brunner is not French but Swiss. He
was born in Basle, and was formerly principal clarinet of the
Bavarian Radio Orchestra (Munich) then under the leadership of
Raphael Kubelik. He is now professor of clarinet at the Hochschule
fur Musik in Saarbruecken and lives in Munich. However, Brunner
plays a French system clarinet (Buffet). The fact that one of the
leading clarinetists in Germany and a key teacher in the Hochschule
system plays on a French clarinet suggests either that the
assertion of a national sound character is not a defensible
statement, or else - if the assertion is true - that a national
sound character is not a function of the clarinet itself.

7. "Although, as many people point out, national playing
styles may still exist, the relatively marked differences that
existed in the 1950s have narrowed and become blurred today
because of equipment improvements and the communications
explosion, which permits players worldwide to hear everybody
else more easily. But consider what was going on in the
1950s. The players that produced the so-called French-style
sound weren't always French. In fact, many French-style
players weren't French. One of the French-sound standard
bearers was Ralph McLane of the Philadelphia Orchestra, who
played with a double embouchure. I never heard his teacher,
Gaston Hamelin, whose sound McLane emulated. Two other
important proponents of that sound during that era were the
principal players from the Suisse Romande Orchestra and the
Oslo Philharmonic. The British standard bearers were Reginald
Kell and Jack Brymer. Kell's vibrato and distinctive style
virtually reinvented British clarinet playing for that period.
I take it that [X] might not have heard as much of Kell as
others of us had, which might account for his thinking that
Kell sounded weird. Even if most people, including
contemporary English clarinetists, no longer play like Kell,
the man left a noteworthy legacy of style. During the '50s,
I found both German and British sounds similar in their being
more diffuse than the French sound. The English players were
usually distinguishable from the Germans because of stylistic
differences. The players whose sound in those years
represented the German style for me were Leopold Wlach and
Alfred Boskovsky. My earliest recollection of a departure from
their style was when I heard the brilliant Franz Hammerla,
with his hard, glassy sound, playing the Spohr Concerto No. 3.
Regarding contemporary players, I'd like to add a few comments
and observations to those already made. First, the French
players. Jacques Lancelot has been recorded a lot. He has a
bright sound, but the most dominating characteristic is his
fast, narrow vibrato, which may be one of several French-
school styles, but not the one I think is the most appealing.
I've only heard small samples of Eduard Brunner's playing.
Brunner, who I think is French, though I'm not certain, is
considered by many to be an important player, because, like
Benny Goodman, Brunner has influenced and motivated the
composition of some important 20th-century works. My favorite
contemporary French players are Maurice Gabai and Paul Meyer.
Gabai reminds me a little of Harold Wright, and his muscular
sound is certainly nothing like the French sound of the '50s.
Wright, of course, was McLane's most famous student, and, like
McLane, played with a double lip."

8. "All this talk about national schools led me to do some
research on my own. Have you ever thought of the language of
the countries? The speech and accents are different in all
languages right? Therefore the clarinetist's speech of music
will also be different. It is also said that the various
vowel sounds from the player's language makes a difference.
The vowel sounds in the mouth are oo, eee, oh, aw, and the
French ou all have their own flavor in the sound pattern and
their characteristic equivalent sound. `aw' is typically
English (except in military schools where `eee' is more
common; ooh seems to belong to German, and `ah' to be the
American. All have been ingrained and made more permanent by
the mouthpieces, reeds, and instruments used in each case. It
is up to the modern player to unearth them, to learn to
produce them all."

9. "[X] has terrific ideas. Some pan out. Other may not.
Most recently he voiced the thought that, perhaps, national
language differences could be responsible for differences in
clarinet sound character. He offers the fact that certain
sounds in French do not exist in English and could contribute
something that Americans can't do. His point was that the
differences in languages cause different vowel sounds to be
blown when playing; i.e., aw, ou, ee, ooh, etc. Nice thought
but I don't think this one will fly. There is a great deal of
difference in regional accents in the U.S. People from
Brooklyn used to speak in a way that was absolutely
impermissible anywhere else. Other regional differences in
American English exist that are, to some extent as distinct
from one area to another as American English is from British
English. But those regional differences never added up to an
inherent Brooklyn clarinet sound."

The following posting makes several references to national playing
styles and national schools of clarinet playing, but in context,
the remarks refer to sound character.

10. "We have a contributor who seems to be denying the
existence of national schools of clarinet playing. Here's one
way of looking at it. I'm sure we can all agree that Robert
Marcellus, Karl Leister, Michel Arrignon, and Jack Brymer have
different sounds. We might not even get as far as agreeing on
words to describe those differences, but we would agree that
they sound different. I would argue that each of these players
represents his respective national school of playing. Karl
Leister sounds the way he does, not because he was born in
Germany, but because he plays German instruments and a German
mouthpiece, and he plays them because they help him to achieve
the sound he has in his mind, a sound inherited from a long
line of German clarinetists playing German instruments going
back to the Baermanns. Michel Arrignon plays French equipment
in order to produce his distinctly French sound. Here's a
quote from MA himself (from an interview in The Clarinet
magazine, v16 n4, July '89): 'all of that helped me to arrive
at a more personalized style of playing, albeit one which is
largely based on the French school of clarinet playing.' If
Michel Arrignon says there is a French school, who are we to
argue with him? At this point, I would like to refer to the
article 'An Acoustical Comparison of French and German
Clarinets,' by Gregg Miller, The Clarinet, v19 n2 (Feb '92).
Miller used computer analysis of their overtone structures:
his conclusion is 'the data shows that a quantifiable
acoustical difference between the two types of instruments
does exist...' Comparing his findings with research done by
James Pyne, he notes that 'because French clarinets produce
stronger even-numbered partials in the chalumeau register and
stronger higher-numbered partials in the clarion register,
they do indeed have a brighter sound than German clarinets'.
This is one of about a dozen references to national styles
that I found in my back issues, and my collection only goes
back to '87. Each one indicates that national styles are
indeed a valid concept, even if some are less prevalent than
they used to be. Exempli gratia: v20 n4, August '93: 'Alive
and well', by Victor Slaymark: '...it was the Boosey & Hawkes
1010 model which became synonymous with the British style. The
uncommonly large dimensions of the 15.24 mm bore, parallel
until the bell flare, requiring a mouthpiece with an untapered
cylinder of the same diameter, gave this clarinet its
distinctive tone quality with a characteristic bark in the low
register.' He goes on to mention Jack Brymer as one of the
leading exponents of this style. Charles Stier discusses the
American school in an article in v18 n4. In his prologue to
his reasons for switching to Wurlitzer Reform-Boehm clarinets,
he talks about the great European clarinetists arriving in
America after WW2 and their influence on the next generation's
choice of instruments and sound, and the combinations of
modifications and mouthpieces used by Americans to achieve a
dark and lyrical sound on French instruments. He mentions
Marcellus along with Harold Wright as examples of this next
generation. One contribution to this discussion pointed out
that American and French players use the same equipment. I
think it's quite rare for French clarinetists to import
American mouthpieces such as the Kaspar, Pyne, Johnston, and
many others which contribute to achieving a darker sound on
the French instrument. The American school has a different
sound from the French, though they share much in terms of
background and equipment, because over the years a different
concept of clarinet tone has evolved, one that leans more
towards the dark, German sound while retaining what Stier
calls the 'fast French fingering system'."

The following contribution is almost exclusively devoted to the
issue of national schools of clarinet playing style and, thus, is
not arguing the issue of national character of sound, the topic of
the this discussion. But it clarifies the dialogue considerably
because the analysis shows how easy it is to speak interchangeably
of style of playing on one and character of sound on the other.

11. "I have been watching the exchange of ideas on national
schools with some interest over the past weeks. First, I would
like to add the following: this debate appears to pertain
strictly to symphonic (i.e. classical, chamber music, etc.)
players. For some reason, no one has stated this important
limitation. If one would look at the ethnic clarinetists,
distinctions according to nationality are readily apparent to
anyone familiar with the music. Klezmer players, for example,
have a fingerprint that is quite clearly identifiable. The
same holds true for performers of other ethnic styles. I think
that it is a mistake to hold a discussion on this subject
without drawing a distinction between these two genres of
performers. Second, it would be safe to say that one must
also draw a distinction between the generations of players
when this issue is being discussed. A player such as Cahuzac,
can, for want of a better term, be referred to as a first
generation player in that he spent most of his formative years
studying with local masters and became steeped in the local
tradition. Second/third generation players have more than
likely done quite a bit of traveling and absorbed a more
cosmopolitan exposure via electronic means, which would be
reflected in their performance style. A look at immigration
to this country would provide an illustration of this line of
thought. The immigrant is likely to keep the traditions,
language, dress styles, diet and so on of the country of
origin; while his/her offspring will become more or less
assimilated, losing to a varying degree, many of the
distinctions of ethnicity. I think that this model hold true
for instrumentalists as well, except for those that make a
conscious effort to maintain the traditional practices of
their respective schools."

12. "I am not at all sure that we are not 180 degrees out of
phase on this one. In what way does ethos have to do with the
matter of identification of the sound of a player by national
characteristics? You used as an example, the Klezmer player.
How would you distinguish the nationality of an Afro-American
Klezmer player with the Boston New England Conservatory
Klemzer band from that of a Klezmer player born, raised, and
trained in Rumania ca. 1910 on the basis of sound alone? Here
is a case where Klezmer players make a serious effort to take
on the generic sound of a Klezmer player; i.e., one modeled
after a now defunct period, not citizenship. While you are
correct that the discussion on national sound character has
been limited to players in the classical arena, it is as one
leaves that arena that whatever national sound characteristics
exist (and I am of the opinion that there are none, in any
case) tend to be completely eliminated. If I try to duplicate
a Greek clarinet player doing his or her local ethnic thing,
all you could do would be to identify my playing as either
good or bad playing of Greek ethnic music. You could not
possibly tell that I was trained in America, Britain, France,
or Germany. Depending on my nationality, I might find it more
or less difficult to master the skill of Greek ethnic clarinet
playing, but once I mastered it, the only sound left is that
of ethnic Greek, not ethnic Greek with an American flavor. In
effect, the wrapping of the player in a non-classic national
ethnic tradition eliminates the very thing that you say can be
used to identify them. Sure I can tell a Klezmer player, but
can I tell a Rumanian Klemzer player from a Hungarian Klezmer
player, from an American Klezmer player? I don't think so."

13. "Well, I have sat here patiently for the last several
weeks and read everything that crossed the board on national
sound character. Several posts were particularly thoughtful
but, in my opinion, none have brought any cogent evidence to
support what I perceive as a preconception of what the world
is and then hunting for evidence to support that
preconception. As for the assertion that there is a national
sound character based on a variety of things, I can't swallow
it. Performing style (such as Austrian waltzes with the
delayed om pah) is not a national sound characteristic. It is
a performing practice that can be emulated by any orchestra in
the world. What started all this brouhaha was the assertion
on someone's part (I forget who) that suggested that players
with different nationalities sounded sufficiently different
(for reasons that were never made clear), that one can spot a
German playing or a Frenchman or an Englishman, etc. simply by
listening to the character of their sound. That critter still
does not wash. Frenchmen and women use the same clarinets,
reeds, mouthpieces, ligatures, etc. as American players? Do
they sound differently? If so, and if hardware is not the
source, then what is it? Is it vibrato? Unlikely. Too many
American players use vibrato. Is it simply because they were
born in France? Is it because their training was exclusively
French? Lots of Americans get good training over long periods
in France. Bottom line? Of all the playing styles mentioned
thus far, other than the German players, it was the French who
were supposed to have such a characteristic sound. But from
what? Garlic? Frog's legs? Then there was another note from
someone who suggested that he or she heard a difference and
actually picked out a player as German or French or English
without knowing who the players were. I think that here is
the possibility of recognizing the unique voice of a
particular player and then working backwards. Clarinet
players, like singers, have very distinctive voices. Some of
them are so very distinctive (Benny Goodman was another, Giora
Feidman a third) that we recognize them because of the
character of their playing and the sound of their voice, a
sound which I continue to assert is independent of the
geography of their training or their nationality. One of
America's best players is an Oehler system performer. I have
not heard anyone cite her as sounding German. That is, of
course, Michele Zukovsky who used to be a Boehm system player
and switched in mid life. Thus far, however, I have not read
a single cogent argument putting forward objective evidence
that clarifies the problem and enables one to identify the
possible reasons behind a national sound character or even
that the statement is true. I notice that some of the posters
hit and run, not responding to ardent requests for thoughtful
analysis. And I also notice that the vast majority of the
arguments are 'Of course there is a national sound character.
I hear it. So it is there.' This shows me that clarinet
players can be talked into anything. Let someone put a
reasonably logical statement on the table (even if it has no
validity or even data to back it up), and in 5 years it has
become a truism that all know as gospel. What makes Giora
Feidman's playing identifiable? I think he was raised in
Chile or Uruguay or someplace in South America. Yet he
sounds, in his klezmer playing, as if he came out of the
ghetto of Lvov. But he was also the bass clarinet player in
the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra so he certainly did not play
that way when he worked with them. That orchestra is
cosmopolitan, having Americans, Germans, Israelis, goodness
knows what else. Before Feidman left the IPO to pursue an
international career as a klezmer player, he was offered the
position of bass clarinet with a major American orchestra. He
turned it down, but if he had taken it, would he have been at
a disadvantage having a Chilean-Israeli-Klezmer sound? The
former principle flute of the Berlin Philharmonic is an
Irishman. He certainly did not sound like 'When Irish Eyes Are
Smiling' when he played in the BP. He sounded like a flute
player, and a great one at that. Now he plays in America a
great deal of the time and sounds no different from when he
played in the BP. So is there a flute sound based on national
characteristics? Sabine Meyer was in San Francisco 5 years
ago to do the Mozart concerto. All the players in the bay area
heard her and drooled, wanting to sound just like her. That
did not mean they wanted to sound German (whatever that is).
They just wanted to sound like her. I want to sound like her.
I want to play like her. Jerry Kirkbride, who teaches at
Univ. of Arizona in Tucson, had considerable training in
Italy, and he played professionally in Italy as an orchestral
musician. No one noticed that he was an American. He sounded
like what he was: a clarinet player. When Kell came over to
America after WW2, his playing frightened the American players
out of their wits. Stories were invented about the 'English
sound' or the 'English vibrato.' And it ruined Kell's life,
his health, and ultimately, his interest in playing clarinet.
John Denman, an English clarinetist who lives in Tucson, took
an audition and, before he played a note, was asked not to use
'the usual English vibrato.' John said, 'I never played with
a vibrato in my life. Do they think that all English players
do?' If I were to assert that no national sound character
exists because I listen and can't hear a difference, I would
probably be mailbombed. But, except for only a few remarks on
this subject, the converse of this argument is all I have been
reading for several weeks."

=======================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
leeson@-----.edu
=======================================

--
***************************
** Dan Leeson **
** leeson0@-----.net **
***************************

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