 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: William
Date: 2005-01-22 16:55
I am sorry to report and reluctant to do so, however.............
Last night, I braved a severe Wisconsin snow event to hear David Shifrin play the Mozart Clarinet Concerto on his basset clarinet accompanied by the Wisconsin Chamber Orchestra. Most of the audience--little over half a "house full"--gave him a standing ovation at the end of his performance. However, I did not.
Why?? Basically, his interpretation seemed too overdone, especially in his liberal use of rubato in an attempt to emphasis musical phrasings. It seemed as if his attitude was, "here we go again and I have to make this sound good". But he over did the phrasings to the point of sounding "made up to impress", rather than a natural part of the music. Also, I was surprised at his insensitive use of vibrato. At least, Stolzman makes his vibrato sound (for the most part) musical--Shifrin made his sound like someone who is just learning. He put wide vibrato on some notes with no artistic preparation--it sometimes just came from "nowwhere" and stopped as abruptly. His sound was lyrical--even etherically beautiful--in the upper register, but became rather hollow in the lower range and in the extended basset clarinet low notes, more of a pitched buzz than a true sound. It really sounded as if his embouchure was "not up to it" last night. Often, the lower basset noteswhile well played--were inaudible from my mid-section audience perspective, but that was also do to the Chamber Orchestras overplayment of the accompaniment. Still, a better sound might have projected more clearly.
Technically--aside from interpretation, vibrato and basic sound--David's performance was error free. His technique was flawless, hitting "all the right notes" even in the extended lower note passages. He played without music and employed ample body movement to emphasis the flow and ebb of the music. He did not use any neckstrap to support the exta heavy basset clarinet and stood throughout the solo, often swaying back and forth to the orchestral interludes and sometimes playing with the orchestra, especially at the very beginning and end. I reasoned that he was just testing his intonation at the start and just trying to be involved with the final musical statement. His "additions", however were inaudible due to the WCO's overpowering tutti dynamic level.
The Chamber Orchestras conductor was not up to the task of accompaning the Mozart, especially in terms of envoking dynamic restraint in the ensemble during the clarinets solo passages. Also, his choice of tempo for the second movement was much too rushed with David (obviously frustrated) trying to slow it with every entrance. There may have been just too little rehearsal time envolved, but still, a better conductor should have been able to better control his ensembles tempi and dynamic levels. (I know that) The members of the orchestra are much better individual musicians than was demostrated last evening. Too bad for them and for David Shifrin.
So, *bottom line*, David Shifrin played Mozart last evening.......and Mozart won. And I really think that the audience was mostly applauding Mozarts music rather than the Wisconsin Chamber Orchestra or the soloist on stage.
(now. out to snowblow my driveway)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ken
Date: 2005-01-23 20:37
The Mozart is probably the absolute worst and most volatile piece to perform (audition or contest) before other clarinetists. The Concerto is such a "personal" work with all having their own interpretations and favorite recording-artist ---- everyone are such ideologues. Many angles to consider on this one but to me, William's musical observations are creditable. He dares to tread where others fear with a subjectively honest, but convincingly supportable review.
He raises a number of provocative "big picture" issues facing many top industry classical clarinetists as they go about earning their living and making the solo, chamber and clinic circuit.
So, is there an inherent conflict we performers face in, "over playing and dramatizing" a standard work to the degree it becomes stale or robotic, even offense in its delivery?
Should Mr. Shifrin, in the name of musical integrity (and at the cost of his pocketbook) "set aside" a particular solo, giving it a periodic rest for a fresh approach later? v/r Ken
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bob49t
Date: 2005-01-23 21:34
William - thanks for your personal appraisal of this performance of the Mozart.
From your text, my guess is that you may have enjoyed immensely, the performance that I witnessed last year, here in Dundee, Scotland.
I have attached an abridged version of an article that I was encouraged to write, from the "inside" and was published in the Clarinet and Saxophone Society of GB (CASS).
(Mark and GBK - please scrutinise for any possible problem areas and indeed remove it entirely if you see fit)
I have appended it really to assure fellow "boarders" that the Mozart is alive and well and being played with reserve and feeling without huge embellishment, here in UK.
BobT
Post Edited (2005-01-23 21:38)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BlockEyeDan
Date: 2005-01-24 15:53
Hi,
I heard David Shifrin play K.622 with the RI Philharmonic last March. In a word, it was SUBLIME. He played with what I imagine was the same basset clarinet that you heard. I did not have any issues with his performance; his legato-style interpretation was almost a polar opposite to Stoltzman's style of performance. Perhaps he was having an off night? The rehearsal factor you mentioned might have had something to do with it. Anyway, I am a big fan of Mr. Shifrin, and I'm sorry to hear that you didn't really enjoy the performance. Everybody is human, and perhaps it just wasn't his night.....
Thanks,
Dan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-01-24 16:20
Shifrin does not believe in playing the Mozart like Brahms - there are many now a days who seem to do!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2005-01-24 16:47
It seems entirely possible to me that this may have been an off day for him. Severe snow and a thin audience can be a mood-killer from the get-go, and I'm sure that concert soloists feel considerable pressure to make a piece their own. And audiences who have an idea of what such a performance requires are going to also fee pressured to give impassioned positive feedback--no doubt confusing the artist as to the effectiveness of whatever he's experimenting with.
And perhaps this is the very issue that Shifrin was dealing with. One of the criticisms most annoying to me (and most fearful, possibly, for these performers) is that the artist didn't bring anything new to the plate.
The need to be 'different' is probably the single most productive source of bad taste of every arena of music. I think that part of it is due to having this ethic installed as we are 'taught' to interpret and express in college, and a residue remains after we have shaken off the top layers of contrivance.
It sounds like Shifrin decided to try some things and they just didn't work out. Maybe the lesson here is to just relax and play. I am not put off by the notion that an artist brings nothing 'new' to a 200-year-old work. I am disturbed, though, to hear that the artist threw in everything but the kitchen sink.
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2005-01-24 16:51
David Shifrin may not be paying his dues in the practice room. I heard a live broadcast last week of the Bartok Contrasts, in which he simply wasn't up to the difficulties. The wheels fell off again and again.
This is disappointing. For me, Shifrin got better as the years went by, and I was more and more satisfied with his musicianship.
The same sort of decline happened to Gervase de Peyer a few years ago, but he managed to recover. I hope Shifrin does the same.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2005-01-24 18:09
Well, one thing for certain its a pretty darn tough business trying to play the same music over and over again without getting bored to tears.
I really think David Shif deserves a bit more respect in some regards...I also know for a fact instead of dogging it out in an orchestra he has the guts to put it on the line so to speak, and go on < TOUR>
As to fluffs. ...well I wouldn't worry too much about it until you find he can't get through a movement without a mistake. Maybe some people are forgetting, but live music is just that. Added to that travel, fatigue and all these factors and you really have the recipe for a tough way of living.
The great (pianist)Wilhelm Backhaus said once "My finest interpretation of Brahms 2cd Piano concerto had numerous errors in the right hand- but musically it was the greatest ever."
This was an old interpretation of the work with Karl Bohm on Decca.
As to David Shifrin he is a great artist and if he quit today he would merit attention from the lowest clarinetist...
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2005-01-25 02:33
I'm sure that all these guys have their ups and downs to a certain degree. In regards to Gervase De Peyer, I recall reading an article in the 1980's in which he said he was getting bored with the concert stuff, and had taken to conducting a chamber orchestra. Glad he rejoined the greats, though.
And I think that we've also see ups and downs with Richard Stoltzman, if you recall the review that was posted of his performance last year in Richmond. Benny Goodman had some ups and downs as well.
Things probably go best when nature simply takes its course. And accurate feedback may be needed by the artist. If he goes off the deep end a bit and gets an obligatory standing O, he might be encouraged to wander further off. If his performance for some reason has not really reached the audience, he needs to know. And this can be difficult accomplish in a subgroup of the human race that is especially attuned to what it means (and what it takes) to be an artist.
Most of us are not going to be comfortable criticizing a guy at this level, but perhaps William is right to examine the Emporor's new clothes a little more closely.
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2005-01-25 06:38
I never played a basset clarinet, but I was told by a great clarinetist that the basset clarinet is not a great instrument, comparing a regular A clarinet. I remember someone wrote a post about collins (I think it was him) who actually had to stop and restart again because of his basset clarinet.
Also, if I went to a concert of the Mozert concerto and it was played the way I want it to be played, I would be happy, but if it was played in a way I wouldn't play it, I would be much happier. I prefer to hear it played in a way I wouldn't think of, something unique to the clarinetist.
I hope you still enjoyed the concert.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Aures22
Date: 2005-01-25 09:42
Wow, what a way to degrade a well-known clarinet player. This type of review should not be posted on a public site like this because not everybody was there to hear the performance. If you feel strongly about your opinion, send a letter or e-mail to Mr. Shifrin, personally. Unless the review of the live performance is positive, most people do not post these type of things-it should mostly be kept inside and not be spout out with condeming and critical language. And, what does this really accomplish? You shed light on 'flaws', but the truth is not everybody plays the way you think a piece should be played and there is no one way to play the mozart concerto. If you wish to teach Mr. Shifrin how to play, I'm sure he'll gladly take your advice. Live performers should not be placed on a microscrope like this because it causes more problems and stress then necessary. No wonder some musician become tired and agitated in performing live music.
Post Edited (2005-01-25 09:53)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-01-25 10:39
Aures22 wrote:
> Wow, what a way to degrade a well-known clarinet player. This
> type of review should not be posted on a public site like this
> because not everybody was there to hear the performance.
Do you think that all reviews should be positive?
A review is a review, and this one was put together well. Reviews are always via the viewpoint of the reviewer, and as long as they explain themselves, positive or negative, it belongs on public view.
It was a heck of a lot better than our ordinary "I like ..." "I don't like" discussions. If you wish to discuss the points of the review, do so.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-01-25 12:57
Sometimes it's a question of respect. There was a live broadcast of a quite famous english player on a period instrument of the Mozart that I was horrified with his performance, but out of respect, I didn't comment about it.
I'd wager that Shifrin's performance was brilliant compared to that one.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2005-01-25 13:32
Mark
I would agree if not for, opening: "I am sorry to report and reluctant to do so...."
Really? So what was the need that drove the reviewer to report? Certainly not a shambolic lack of preparation by Mr. Shifrin. All the points were to do with taste, both tonally and musically.
In what way was the review well put together? You have ignored the typo errors I suppose. I do not see how this has greater authority or better content than many of the threads talking about players we like or dislike (except that those often become a list rather than an analysis). As to William braving the snow: good thing Mr Shifrin also did and that musicians usually do, or William would have no concerts to go to in the winter. I had the disappointment of turning up to a Richter recital in a heat wave in London to find he had cancelled owing to the heat. I am sure we don't want to give performers an incentive to call off performances for fear their audience's critical faculties will have been made less generous by the adverse weather conditions.
Clearly, people can inform us if they did not like a performance. If that seems tasteless or disrespectful to others then I think that's fair for them to say so. It also seems fairer if others on the BB were at the same concert to share views. Without that we shall never know if William is riding a hobby horse or has a point.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-01-25 14:20
graham wrote:
> I would agree if not for, opening: "I am sorry to report and
> reluctant to do so...."
I would agree with you here ... that wasn't a necessary part.
> In what way was the review well put together? You have ignored
> the typo errors I suppose.
We always do ...
> I do not see how this has greater
> authority or better content than many of the threads talking
> about players we like or dislike (except that those often
> become a list rather than an analysis).
In general many of the threads where people talk about likes and dislikes there's very little specificality. This report had the specifics, though we're all welcome to disagree.
> It also
> seems fairer if others on the BB were at the same concert to
> share views. Without that we shall never know if William is
> riding a hobby horse or has a point.
That's happened a few times, and the diversity of views is amazing!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John O'Janpa
Date: 2005-01-25 21:36
What would be the point of writing a review for others who were there?
Thank you for the review William.
Although I doubt that Shifrin will show up in Wilmington North Carolina, if he does I'll still go to the concert. Then I'll have a better idea if William and I are on the same wavelength. Until then it makes for entertaining reading.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
