Klarinet Archive - Posting 000163.txt from 2007/05

From: "Kevin Fay" <kevin.fay.home@-----.net>
Subj: [kl] R. Kell revisited
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 00:53:53 -0400

On 2/21/07, Ted Casher wrote:

<<<Off topic---I just got the boxed set of the complete recorded works of
Reginald Kell. I studied with him in the Fifties---an unforgettable
experience! What a wonderful set of CDs!>>>

Tony Pay responded:

<<<Although Kell was my boyhood hero, introducing me to the Mozart concerto
via his 78rpm recording, I never heard many of these until recently. I
thought I would write a considered review at some point, because they're
worthy of detailed comment, and are easily available at not so great
expense. Perhaps others would like to invest in them in the meanwhile, and
consider their own reactions, blow by blow.

I was particularly amazed to hear the Stravinsky....>>>

I'd heard Reginald Kell before, years ago, and then only on old scratchy
recordings obtained secondhand whose sound quality left much to be desired.
With comments such as these, I couldn't resist buying the box.

My oh my. I think I can understand the sturm and drang of his arrival in
the U.S. - to the legions of American clarinet players, taught by Bellison
and his progeny to run from the use of vibrato (see Avram Galper's post at
http://test.woodwind.org/Databases/Klarinet/1998/01/000749.txt), plus the
pressure of George Szell and folks like him to homogenize towards an
"orchestral" sound, Kell must have seemed like some sort of space alien.

. . . which is a shame, since I found these recordings to have moments of
truly inspired playing.

While much has been written about Kell's use of vibrato, I think the big
shocker ws his tone quality. Many American clarinetists would wrinkle their
nose at the "buzziness" in his tone in the chalumeau, for example. It would
be labled a "bad" tone, of which nothing of any beauty could be made with.

OTOH, I can easily see how non-clarinetists (including the players of other
instruments) would appreciate the musicality much more. Indeed - while
listening, I forced myself to think of him playing some sort of wood
saxophone as opposed to a clarinet, just to push preconceptions out of my
mind.

Kell's Debussy is stunning. (As in good). I will steal ideas from it.

Kell's Stravinsky Three Pieces struck me as . . . bizarre, though. Someone
posted that Igor was a big fan of this recording? (The same Igor Stravinsky
who carefully made all those tempo markings and insisted on strict adherence
to them?) The second movement in particular is so much s l o w e r
than marked that I can't help but wonder if Stravinsky was merely being
polite. Let's just say I've never heard it played quite like that before
(or since).

I do not like it. It strikes me as more of Kell's ego insertion than a fair
reading of what the composer wrote; too far afield from what's on the page
to be a credible performance.

IMHO, of course.

kjf

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