Klarinet Archive - Posting 000143.txt from 2009/10

From: Jonathan Cohler <cohler@-----.org>
Subj: Re: [kl] New articles published on the web!
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:21:30 -0400

>On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Jonathan Cohler <cohler@-----.org> wrote:
>> At 3:02 PM -0500 10/12/09, Michael Nichols wrote:
>
>> 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 :-)).
>
>Well, OK. I'll concede that that the term "continuous vibrato" isn't
>that descriptive, but it is the term that I've seen used the most
>often for the technique. We could always make up a new name for it,
>such as "habitual vibrato" or "non-ornamental vibrato" or something
>else. I think you know what I'm talking about, though--it's the
>customary use of vibrato on all or most sustained notes.

All vibrato is ornamental in the sense that it adds an independent
dimension to the sound. Few renowned, world-class players that I
know of on violin, cello, or clarinet for that matter, uses a
"habitual" "non-ornamental" vibrato, so I don't know why you brought
the subject up.

Every string player with whom I have ever played uses both vibrato
and non-vibrato.

My article discusses use of vibrato, not use of "habitual"
"non-ornamental" vibrato. Clearly, any good musician would use
vibrato in musical ways to enhance the music. Clearly, Muhlfeld used
vibrato. Clearly, the vibrato was a striking aspect of his playing.
Clearly, this had an impact on Brahms.

>In any case, Brymer's source (at least as relayed by Brymer) never
>says that Muhlfeld customarily used vibrato (which is what your
>article appears to assume); all he says is that during that particular
>performance Muhlfeld played with a fiery technique, a warm tone, and
>vibrato. We don't know from this eyewitness how Muhlfeld would have
>played the Sonatas or the Trio, for instance.

No, as I said before the Brymer-cited eyewitness is one piece of
evidence in addition to dozens of other pieces of evidence that I
provided in my article to prove pretty convincingly that Muhlfeld
used vibrato and that this was a striking aspect of his playing.

> > 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.
>
>No, but it does suggest that the players were not using vibrato as a
>matter of course throughout. If the players in the ensemble
>customarily played with vibrato, there would be no need for Brahms to
>ask for a particular section to be played with vibrato.

No. Read the quote. It says that Brahms suggested the used of vibrato
"TO CREATE A MYSTERIOUS EFFECT." You are reading that to mean that
the mere use of vibrato creates the mysterious effect. A dubious
reading, given that vibrato, depending on how it is done can create
many different kinds of effects. I would read that sentence to mean
that Brahms wanted them to use a TYPE of vibrato that would create a
mysterious effect. This in no way implies that they wouldn't be using
other TYPES of vibrato elsewhere in the piece.

> It also
>suggests that Brahms would have approved of at least some other
>sections of the piece being played largely senza vibrato, because
>otherwise Brahms could have simply asked for the players to play with
>vibrato throughout.

No. See above.

>
>> 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.
>
>Yes, and there are apparently places in some of Brahms' pieces where
>he specifically wrote in an instruction to use vibrato. Of course,
>for Brahms to write in an instruction like that suggests that he did
>not assume that everyone would use vibrato throughout his music, which
>was the point I was trying to make.

No. Once again discussions about the types and amount of vibrato to
use in particular sections of pieces does NOT imply in any way that
one assumes the use of no vibrato elsewhere. Musicians are always
talking about types, size, speed, shape of vibrato for particular
passages. This does NOT and has never meant that all passages where
this has not been discussed are to be played senza vibrato.

>It's the opposite of, say,
>Copland's giving an instruction to string players not to use vibrato
>because regular use of vibrato on sustained notes on strings was
>customary by Copland's time. I wasn't trying to say that Brahms hated
>vibrato, just that he didn't expect performers to employ it all the
>time and that he was also fond of the sound of (obviously vibratoless)
>open strings.

What evidence do you have for the statement, "he didn't expect
performers to employ it all the time"? Also, what do you mean by "all
the time"?

I think you are simply wrong here. Vibrato was in common use well
before Brahms by the vast majority of musicians. This whole
non-vibrato (habitual vibrato, continuous vibrato) and, in general,
vibrato bigotry is a recent invention by music historians looking for
something to talk about. :-)

>All of this just shows that the situation was and still is more
>complex than "vibrato is good" or "vibrato is bad." Vibrato is a
>technique, like any other, and it can be used well or poorly; likewise
>it can be overused or underused.

Vibrato is clearly good. No question about it. (In the sense that
people, in general, like and prefer it over non-vibrato.) Otherwise
it wouldn't exist in EVERY music in the world (all developed
independently and at different times, I might add). The question of
how, where, when and how much to use are all questions of taste and
style. But vibrato itself is unquestionably good, and is used by all
musicians throughout the world in all music, with the notable
exception of early religious music where it was specifically banned
by the church, and individuals such as clarinetists and some horn
players who have been brainwashed into believing that it is a bad
thing.

>The truth is, neither you nor I were there to hear Muhlfeld, so we
>don't really know what his playing was like. Maybe he used "habitual
>vibrato" as part of his customary performance practice. I don't know.
> For all I know you could be entirely right.

For the umpteenth time, I never said anything about "habitual"
vibrato (which is a meaningless term). You seem, however, to be
obsessed with it. It is true I never heard Muhlfeld, but there is
plenty of evidence, which I presented in my article, that shows it to
be highly likely that Muhlfeld used substantial amounts of vibrato in
his playing.

>But, at the same time, I don't think that one person's recollection of
>one performance of one piece is enough to tell us about the way
>Muhlfeld played on other occasions or to tell us that it was
>Muhlfeld's vibrato that inspired Brahms to write his clarinet pieces.

No and I didn't base my article and argument on one person's
recollection. I, in fact, presented copious other supporting evidence.

>Indeed, there are alternative explanations (such as the theory I just
>presented) that are consistent with the evidence, but that do not rely
>on the assumption that Muhlfeld customarily played with vibrato.

You have not presented any evidence to the contrary, and your
explanation as I have shown above doesn't hold water.

>So
>we really can't conclude that Muhlfeld customarily played with vibrato
>based just on the evidence we have.

You can conclude whatever you like, but I have presented copious
evidence to support the proposition. You have provided none to
support the dubious conclusion (which you are entitled to make) that
he used no vibrato.

>Brymer's source *does* suggest that someone might want to employ
>vibrato somehow in performing the quintet, though. To me, the most
>logical place to do so is in the gypsy section, where it might enhance
>the ethnic flavor of the music.

That's your opinion. You are entitled to that, but it is not evidence.

Best regards,
--
Jonathan Cohler
http://jonathancohler.com/
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Jonathan-Cohler/54146714115
http://youtube.com/cohler59

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

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