Klarinet Archive - Posting 000107.txt from 2005/01

From: "dnleeson" <dnleeson@-----.net>
Subj: RE: [kl] RE: Klocker
Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 22:01:40 -0500

I'm sorry Adam. I don't understand your question.

My statement was simply that its hard for a clarinet to play a
cadenza because it can't create harmonies with itself as can a
piano or violin. I was trying to give a reason why Mozart did
not include a cadenza. In fact I'm not sure if he ever wrote a
cadenza for any instrument that could not produce a harmony with
itself. There is no cadenza for the bassoon concerto, or the
flute concerti. I'm not sure about the horn concerti.

Dan Leeson
DNLeeson@-----.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Michlin [mailto:amichlin@-----.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 6:49 PM
To: klarinet@-----.org
Subject: RE: [kl] RE: Klocker

Dan,

At 12:53 PM 1/8/2005 -0800, dnleeson wrote:
>And one of the reasons why 622 does not have a cadenza is
>because, unlike the piano and violin, it's hard to make
>interesting harmonies on a clarinet (though today with what a
>clarinetist can do with harmonics, that would be an interesting
>challenge).

How would this account for the honest to goodness, tonic in
second
inversion, cadenzas in the first movements of the earlier wind
concertos
such as K.191, K.299, K.313, and K.314? Additionally, many J.C.
Bach wind
concertos (for bassoon and flute, at least) of around the same
time also
seem to contain such cadenzas.

Or am I missing something?

-Adam

-----------------------------------------------------------------
----
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc.
http://www.woodwind.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org