Klarinet Archive - Posting 001234.txt from 2003/04

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: Re: [kl] Tony Pay's thoughtful comments about the instrumentation of the Gran Partitta
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 18:44:43 -0400

On Sun, 27 Apr 2003 13:33:16 -0700, leeson0@-----.net said:

> But Tony raises the issue to a more elevated musical level by saying,
> in effect, something like the following: "We have a duty as players to
> take what the composer wrote and discern what is really needed."
> (Notice that he does not say the far more questionable thesis of "What
> is really meant.") I have to be careful here because I don't want to
> go too far in interpreting what Tony said about the specific. However,
> I think I have the general idea.
>
> And using this general principle, he then goes on to say, "But passages
> here and there in the G.P.are more suitable for a contrabassoon so we
> may have to violate Mozart's explicitly declared intentions and use the
> instrument that is better suited and really needed." (That is not a
> quote, of course, just my way of putting Tony's words in my mouth.)

What I was getting at was that you attacked the *argument*, not the
conclusion. (I agree with you in attacking the conclusion.)

And the argument didn't have the form you put in my mouth, it had the
form, "But passages here and there in the G.P. are more suitable in some
ways for a contrabassoon, so we may have to play them on the string
contrabass in such a way as to get as close as possible to that
character."

I continue to maintain that this is a useful and in my view, correct way
of approaching musical problems.

So the point is, your argument below,

> But in making such a statement we then come to the fine issue of
> judgment and taste. Who is to say that my (or Tony's) perspective is
> more suitable than the composer's explicit description, which can
> certainly be taken as the composer's persepctive? And on that issue,
> there is no true resolution.

...dismisses my own version just as much as it dismisses the version you
put in my mouth.

What I'm trying to say is, *ALL WE HAVE is our judgement and taste*.

> But I don't grant that refinement of taste is the key that allows one
> to make that kind of decision.
>
> Besides, I think Mozart's taste was better than Tony's and it
> certainly is better than mine.

But where did that opinion come from, if not from your judgement and
taste????

If we throw away our judgement and taste, we throw away everything, you
see.

> So I don't accept the argument that "this passage is much better
> exploited on a contrabassoon than on a string bass" is one that
> permits the kind of substitution that Tony has in mind, EVEN IF HE IS
> RIGHT, because I have no way to confirm that. In the final analysis he
> says, "It sounds better (or works better) with a contrabassoon," to
> which I once again replay "I think it sounds better with tenor saxes."

You would never say that, though.

> But I have very good ammunition which may be something much better
> that "you say - I say.". I have what Mozart wrote as opposed to what
> Tony or I think might be a more suitable choice of instrumentation.
> And I'll take that opinion over both of ours.

And so do I in this case.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE http://classicalplus.gmn.com/artists
tel/fax 01865 553339

... See that ZX81, That's your Strong-Arm Hydra that is.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/