Klarinet Archive - Posting 000636.txt from 2002/11

From: Stan T <rthomson@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Dark Sound - Famous Players
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 23:57:44 -0500

Dan Leeson said:

>But Walter, I am not proposing that there is some mystical, universal,
and agreed to understanding of dirty with respect to sound character.

I do not agree with this. Perhaps not 'mystical', 'universal' or
'(universally) agreed to' understanding, but an understanding
nevertheless. You in fact are indeed proposing that we would gain some
understanding of what you meant by describing the sound as
'dirty'-otherwise why use the adjective at all? If it was only meaningful
to you, why burden us with such a detail?

>Nor am I proposing that it is a good thing to achieve and would,
therefore, have to be prepared to describe seriously how to achieve it. It
is my personal interpretation of a particular person's sound, and I did not
propose it as a standard.

Perhaps not, but you do seem to be advocating that it is a good thing to
avoid, and you do describe-albeit not that seriously-how to avoid achieving
it. I submit this amounts to an explanation of refining, or at least
altering one's sound to obtain a more pleasing result; which is one
of the reasons for the terminology debate.

>It is you, on the other hand, who is one of many who suggests that a dark
sound has some general and universal meaning that is clear to all, and, as
you know, I think that it is offered to all as adopted clarinet terminology
but is really a vague idea gone amuck.

"Some general meaning" perhaps, but not "universal (meaning) that is clear
to all". It is unfair to put words in one's mouth and then argue that
point. Many on this list have pointed out the difficulty that comes with
using terms applied to tone colour, but still find value in
their discretionary use.

>I argue against dark because I think it has no meaning. My effort is
serious, though you are welcome to perceive it as being misguided. You
argue against dirty simply because you are trying to bust my balloon. In
effect, I question your motives because your inquiry is not serious.

I think your effort is well-intentioned, as is mine. I don't know on what
basis you can infer Mr. Grabner's intent-it seemed to me to be a perfectly
reasonable contention.

Regards,
Stan T.

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

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org