Klarinet Archive - Posting 000615.txt from 2002/06

From: efarmer <efarmer@-----.net>
Subj: RE: [kl] Re: "Buzzy" Sound (Stoltzman)
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 02:35:23 -0400

One thing I think you have to give Stoltzman a lot of credit for is he
will try new works and ideas -which is very risky. This whole line
started with a reaction to a new work that the writer had never heard
before and didn't like it, so did he not like the work, the player or
both? Mr. Stolzman did his classical works years ago and I imagine if
he feels he had something new to add he'd go back and redo them, but how
many repeats of the same works will the market support? I've never
understood pop music groups covering a song just like the original song
was done. If you haven't got anything new to add to a song, why bother?
To fill out a CD??
I think he would be a good orchestral player if he wanted to be
-but only as long as it held his interest, and after that he'd go do
what he is doing now. Part of the envy comes from his freedom to do
whatever he wants.
I love his version of New York Counter Point, even heard it live
(well one clarinet was!) at a concert with Nexus. In a hundred years
I'd bet some of this "modern" stuff is still going to be around.
Edward

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniluk, Bill [mailto:bdaniluk@-----.com]
Subject: RE: [kl] Re: "Buzzy" Sound (Stoltzman)

I think that Stoltzman would make a crumby orchestral player - the best
symphony players can emerge for the solo parts and blend back into the
ensemble when needed, and it seems to me that Stoltzman is ALWAYS front
and
center. I don't think that either the soloist or the ensemble player is
a
"better" musician, though I'm impressed by the flexibility of those who
can
go back and forth. For me, Stolzman's strength is his incredible ability
to
apply the ultimate contrast in dynamic range and make an extremely
musical
line. I remember hearing my teacher playing me his recording of the
Schubert Arpeggione Sonata transcription in the early 70's and being
extremely impressed. A good 50% of the clarinet players disliked him
then,
and it looks as if that's still the case. I don't believe that it's
envy
though (there is certainly plenty to envy!). I think that he has taken
so
much liberty with the tone of the instrument that some feel he has gone
beyond what is appropriate for the 'classical' repertory. And then
there's
the vibrato, which some people find distasteful. For me, the beauty of
the
line is more important than the beauty of the tone, and I don't mind the
vibrato, though I can certainly understand why others may have differing
points of view. I prefer his serious stuff more than the new age and
Amazing Grace/Summertime/etc things.
Bill Daniluk

-----Original Message-----
From: Gene Nibbelin [mailto:gnibbelin@-----.com]
Subject: RE: [kl] Re: "Buzzy" Sound (Stoltzman)

Edwin -(and anyone else who has an opinion)

In your opinion, how would Stoltzman have done in the recent
Philadelphia
audition?

Also, in your opinion, who are the better "musicians",
soloists/virtuosi/super stars or major symphony principals?

Gene Nibbelin

-----Original Message-----
From: Lacy, Edwin [mailto:el2@-----.edu]
Subject: RE: [kl] Re: "Buzzy" Sound (Stoltzman)

From: JEDISUSHI@-----.com

> I think it's because he's made money.

<<<I disagree. I believe Stoltzman has done more for clarinet and music
in
general than a lot of "superstars" have by making it more mainstream and
increasing exposure.>>>

I would like to ask who you would consider more of a "superstar" of the
clarinet than Stoltzman. If superstar-dom means recognition from the
general public, whether or not based on actual musical accomplishments,
I
can't think of any clarinetist who is more qualified for the title of
superstar than he is.

Ed Lacy
University of Evansville

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