Klarinet Archive - Posting 001009.txt from 2000/12

From: HatNYC62@-----.com
Subj: Re: [kl] Performance
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 16:48:09 -0500

>>>>><<Must have worked for him, few people ever hear Baker
miss a note.>>

Very true, but he and his clones phrase like
metronomes also! Technical perfection is only great
when it's used as a tool to express something musical.

So therefore, I graciously disagree about Baker being
one of the best wind virtuosos. To me, that would
mean having it all: style, ample technique, taste,
musicianship, ears, flexibility, etc. That's not to
say I don't appreciate a technical freak every so
often, just as long as they aren't boring! Give me
Zoon any day... missed notes and all. Only my
opinion. :)<<<<<

99.99% of the time I would not waste my time responding to a post such as
this. Your post was completely irrelevant to the point I was trying to make.
I have to assume you are a student because an accomplished musician who knew
anything about American woodwind playing would never make such an utterly
ignorant and obnoxious statement about Julius Baker. I am sure you thought
your post was clever and witty, but it merely reveals things about you that
you probably don't want out there.

Isn't it funny how most of those who say technique and consitency are
overrated have no technique and can't do anything consistently? No, technique
and perfection are not the most important things in music making. But is the
ability to play something perfectly and consistently important? YES, it damn
well fucking is. Because one can only be truly creative and spontaneous if
one is comfortable in one's own technical skin.

If you were to ask anyone who knows or who has played with Julius Baker, the
first things you will hear are about how beautifully he plays. . .his
gorgeous sound, his phrasing, the way he turns phrases, his perfect
intonation. His virtuosity is taken for granted, it doesn't need to be
mentioned. I mentioned it only in the context of the discussion we were
having about practicing. You will also hear how he was one of a kind, how no
one before or since has played like him (so much for 'clones').

So what? Well, in the 1930s, when Baker was starting out in the profession,
technical consistency, intonation, etc. were not taken for granted in
orchestral playing. Baker was 70 years ahead of his time. He played then the
way most musicians wish they could play today. That's rare. There are very
few musicians you can say that about.

When you are a student, it's awfully easy to criticize well-known
professionals. No one expects you to be able to compete yet. But eventually,
you learn that being a musician is hard and even playing decently for 10-15
years is incredibly difficult.

No one is above criticism, of course, and you are free to have your 'opinions
: )' Just be prepared to face a lot of resentment when you say something
stupid, ok?

David Hattner, musician who respects elders of accomplishment.

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