Klarinet Archive - Posting 000140.txt from 2009/10

From: Jonathan Cohler <cohler@-----.org>
Subj: Re: [kl] New articles published on the web!
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:57:46 -0400

At 3:02 PM -0500 10/12/09, Michael Nichols wrote:
>Now, as for Muhlfeld, it may very well be that Muhlfeld did use
>vibrato, but I would be surprised if he employed continuous vibrato.

My article didn't discuss "continuous" vibrato, because, first and
foremost, it is a meaningless term. Nobody does now, or has ever
employed, a "continuous" vibrato on any instrument (except perhaps
the motor-driven vibraphone :-)). Violinists, cellists, singers,
flutists, oboists, and, yes, clarinetists, vibrate on longer notes.
On the fast notes there is no time for vibrato. Since vibrato occurs
at a rate of between 2 to 6 pulsations per second, typically, most
notes that are shorter than 1/2 to 1/6th of a second don't have any
noticeable vibrato. These notes account for the majority of notes in
most music.

At 3:02 PM -0500 10/12/09, Michael Nichols wrote:
>I question whether Muhlfeld's use of vibrato was limited to the
>"gypsy" section of the Adagio mvt. of the quintet, since the unnamed
>person Brymer cites seems to have been referring specifically to the
>gypsy section of the Adagio

No, that is not what the quote says. Here is the quote for reference:

"Of the clarinetist's playing he was most enthusiastic, saying that
three things mainly stuck in his memory. 'He used two clarinets, A
and B-flat, for the slow movement, to simplify the gypsy section; he
had a fiery technique with a warm tone-and a big vibrato.' Asked
again by a startled questioner if he didn't mean to say 'rubato' the
old man looked puzzled. 'No' he said, 'vibrato-much more than
Joachim, and as much as the cellist.'"

The quote refers to three independendent things about Muhlfeld's
playing. The reference to vibrato has nothing to do with the gypsy
section of the piece. Neither does the "fiery technique" for that
matter. By extension of your logic, the "fiery technique" and "warm
tone" comments would apply only to the gypsy section as well, and
this clearly makes no sense. Furthermore, the passage where Muhlfeld
used the B-flat clarinet is only a few measures long and consists
mostly of very fast notes none of which could be vibrated in any case.

At 3:02 PM -0500 10/12/09, Michael Nichols wrote:
>and there is apparently some support for
>the notion that Brahms asked for *that specific section* to be played
>with vibrato by the entire ensemble. (I read a web article at
>http://www.cello.org/Newsletter/Articles/brahms/brahms.htm that cites
>another reference for this proposition--I have not consulted the cited
>reference, but it sounds like a legitimate one, at least--it would be
>worth following up on.) That would also suggest that Brahms did not
>expect the ensemble to play with continuous vibrato, since he
>specifically had to ask the ensemble to use vibrato in this particular
>section.

Your reference here says that during one of the first readings of the
Clarinet Quintet, "Brahms suggested that the entire quartet make use
of vibrato in the central section of the Adagio to create a
mysterious effect." This in no way implies that he didn't want
vibrato elsewhere.

At 3:02 PM -0500 10/12/09, Michael Nichols wrote:
>It would also more easily explain how the listener Brymer
>mentions in his book would have had occasion to compare Muhlfeld's
>vibrato to that of Joachim (since Joachim was not in the habit of
>using much vibrato).

The listener says that Muhlfeld's vibrato was "much more than
Joachim, and as much as the cellist." The cellist was Hausmann, who
was known to use a substantial vibrato at this time.

Noted Brahms scholar Styra Avins writes, "We know for sure, too, that
some of Brahms's favorite instrumentalists-David Popper and Robert
Hausmann come to mind immediately-played with vibrato, Popper in
particular using it much as it is used today. This was true of his
playing even in the 1860s, something documented in an amusing
contemporary newspaper controversy. Popper, by the way, was appointed
solo cellist at the Court Opera in Vienna in 1868, and it is hard to
believe that he gave up his vibrato for the occasion. By his later
years, Brahms himself was asking for vibrato in his music, neatly and
specifically documented by an eye- and ear-witness to a run-through
of his C-Minor Piano Trio with his friends, the great violinist
Joseph Joachim, and Hausmann. Joachim too-whose name often comes up
in "no-vibrato-in-Brahms" conversations-was altering his conception
of violin playing; see his directions for one of the Hungarian Dances
arranged by him for violin and piano. The violinist Bronislaw
Huberman was Joachim's last great pupil, and played Brahms's concerto
for him while still a lad. Brahms so approved he promised a new piece
for the youngster, but died before he could turn intention into
reality. A recording by Huberman, made almost directly after Brahms's
death, clearly displays vibrato."

At 3:02 PM -0500 10/12/09, Michael Nichols wrote:
>Further, there is additional evidence that Brahms did not favor the
>use of continuous vibrato (at least in string playing) because of what
>he wrote to Joachim about his fondness of open strings (which is cited
>as a footnote to the web article I provided a link to--in this case,
>however, we can be confident that these are Brahms' own words, since I
>found the letter in a book of Brahms' letters published by Oxford
>University Press: "Johannes Brahms: life and letters," on page 499).

Again, your logic is faulty. First, the letter you mention was
written in 1876 almost 20 years before the Trio. Second, it says, "To
me, fingerings are always just evidence that something is rotten
about the violin writing. But a few open strings here and there
delight my eye and calm my spirit," which in no way indicates that he
disliked vibrato. In fact, it implies the exact opposite. The fact
that he mentions "a few open strings here and there" (obviously
unvibrated) implies that he expects the majority of the non-open
strings to be less "calm" which could mean they are vibrating.

>Anyway, that's just a theory of mine, but it seems at least as likely
>as the theory that Muhlfeld used continuous vibrato in his playing.

Once again "continuous" vibrato is meaningless. Doesn't exist. Never
has. Furthermore, my article presents much more circumstantial and
supportive evidence for Muhlfeld's use of vibrato that you didn't
mention above and beyond the Brymer quote.

>Most violinists of that day would not have used continuous vibrato

Not true. See previous letter by Styra Avins. There are also numerous
papers on the subject debunking the Norrington promulgated
non-vibrato myth.

Best regards,
--
Jonathan Cohler
Artistic & General Director
International Woodwind Festival
http://iwwf.org/
cohler@-----.org

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