 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2009-11-15 22:10
I miss Stanley Drucker at the NY Philharmonic. I loved hearing him from the audience, and lucky enough to hear him, close up, while playing in his section at the Phil.
This was the a great Drucker performance 20 years ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SR9oxnm66bY&feature=player_embedded
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
Post Edited (2009-11-15 22:10)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: jcfasanar
Date: 2009-11-15 22:28
i dont understand why Drucker is considered a "great" clarinetist. At least this performance of the weber concertino sounds mediocre for me. Completely out of style. Anything about his playing is great.
The same can be applied to Marcellus, or Morales. All overestimated clarinetist. In europe any of these clarinetists are considered great. There are hardly known.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2009-11-15 22:49
WHAT???
I don't understand...you don't like Drucker or Marcellus or Morales...not great?
OK, I love them, who do you love to hear play the Clarinet beautifully?
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
|
|
|
|
|
Author: hinotehud ★2017
Date: 2009-11-15 23:05
It is hard to believe he is 60 years old at this performance. He looks about 45.
Thanks for posting!
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-15 23:51
I for sure would take Walter Boeykens or Håkan Rosengren over Drucker,Marcellus og Morales. Jonathan Cohler is also great.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2009-11-16 00:06
Wow--I wish I had his fast tongue. However, I also consider his performance to be musically mediocre, especially the opening. Much more nuance is possible, even in the faster sections where his technique is machine-like perfect, but lacking in musical phrasings. Not the best performance I have heard.....sorry, but I think he could have done (and should have done) much better.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: jcfasanar
Date: 2009-11-16 00:09
John,
I would not say this Drucker version of the concertino is played "beautifully" indeed.
probably if you didn't know who is playing, your comments would be more in agreement with me.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-16 00:53
I find it hard to believe that anyone in Europe or anywhere else does not consider Morales to be a "great" clarinetist as Icf inferred. When Marculles was performing in Clevland he too was considered one of the great orchestra players. Of course there are many other great clarinetists as well, it's a matter of opinion and personal taste but Morales is a great clarinetist. That doesn't mean everyone thinks he or anyone else is "the greatest". As far as Drucker, his playing has always been controversial in so far as his tone and phrasing but to say he was, or still is, not a great player is kind of ridiculous. I can't imagine any learned clarinet player not knowing Stanley Drucker and his accomplishments. One just has to listen to his Nielsen recording and know when it was recorded to realize just how great he is in his own right. That doesn't mean you have to like his style or tone or whatever but you have to respect his ability. He did things with the clarinet before players knew they were even possible. He may not be your "cup of tea" but he's a great player amongst other great players. ESP http://eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-16 01:21
Sorry but people have the right no matter how much the player has accomplished to find the player not so great. I mean why has it take so long time to find new solo clarinetists to replace Stanley Drucker and Larry Combs no matter how many great clarinetist have auditioned? Maybe it's because the jury members have other ideas about great clarinetist then say the jury members for the Concertgebouw orchestra might have or just any other orchestra in USA and worldwide?
There was an audition for solo clarinetist in the late 70's for the Icelandic symphony. The two best players who were auditioned had learned in different countries one in London with Bernard Walton and John McCaw and the other one in Vienna with Rudolf Jettel. The lead director of the orchestra at that time was the French conductor Jean-Pierre Jacquillat previously the conductor was Paul Pampichler Pálsson(had to take Icelandic last name) an Austrian conductor,trumpet player and composer from Graz. The player who studied in London got the position but the saying is that the one who studied in Vienna would have got it if Paul would still had been the lead conductor.
Since then the player who studied in Vienna has been to London to study with John McCaw among others and now sounds more soft now so they two have no problem today blending in the orchestra.
So because one player gets some position does not necessarily mean that he is better than the other. It's also about taste and tradition.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: jcfasanar
Date: 2009-11-16 01:30
his Nielsen is mediocre too. Ok, he's a decent player (I must claim it to be "politically" correct?) There are millions like him, if not better. Nothing makes his playing so special. Same goes to morales.
Its not an subjective question.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-11-16 02:01
jcfasanar wrote:
> There are millions like
> him, if not better. Nothing makes his playing so special. Same
> goes to morales.
BS. Millions? Troll.
> Its not an subjective question.
Of course it is if you had a question.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ryan K
Date: 2009-11-16 02:08
If we're going to bash a clarinet player with an unquestionably impressive tenure with a great orchestra, we're doing going to do it based on generalizations. Lets put some specifics up here that we can actually discuss. jcfasanar, you're arguing at an incredibly elementary level, lets take this to a more professional manner, shall we?
Iceland, it would be nice if you could testify to the inner workings of that audition. Until you do, however, we must take that "saying" with a large grain of salt.
Ryan Karr
Dickinson College
Carlisle, PA
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2009-11-16 02:59
I have tremendous respect and admiration for Drucker. Over the years I have heard him play beautifully and with the greatest ease and finesse. I have heard him play brilliantly and with lots of style, character and excitement. His technique and command of the instrument is second to none. There is never any question that he is in complete command in all respects. His recordings of the Bartok Contrasts and the Corigliano Concerto as well as others are second to none.
One could never accuse him of boring playing. He injects lots of energy into all of his performances. One may not always agree with his choices, but there is always musicality and lots of personality. That personality and individualism is purely him.
I don't think there could possibly be any question about this monumentally talented musician.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2009-11-16 03:23
Jcfasanar-
Your comments about Ricardo Morales are false. He's been invited (and has played) with the Berlin Philharmonic and got nothing but rave reviews from many of the "star" players in the wind section. So, I wouldn't make generalizations about all of Europe- you are entitled to your opinions, but not a distortion of the facts.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: jcfasanar
Date: 2009-11-16 07:57
Ed,
If you call play jazzy and out of style, agressive, with an ugly sound, as a "always musicality and lots of personality. That personality and individualism is purely him" thats ok!
like i said, if you guys dont know who is playing this video, probably you would say is only a decent player.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: salzo
Date: 2009-11-16 10:30
"His recordings of the Bartok Contrasts and the Corigliano Concerto as well as others are second to none. "
His recording of the Contrasts is ferocious. No one comes close to shining SDs shoes on that one.
When I was younger, clarinetists would opine about the different players of the Drucker era and before. there were so many excellent players- Drucker, Marcellus, Wright, Silfies, Gigliotti, etc. One could always find some fault with any of them, but they said something with their instruments. There was something unique about each one of them(and others). Love them or hate them, they said something that no one else was saying.
these daysw, I do not hear anything unique coming from the "big guns". I hear people rave about them. Whenever someone raves about ________, or _________, or ___________, I ask "What is it that you like about their playing?"
The answers are usually quite base "oh he is so musical, oh I love his sound, etc." SOund? They all sound the same to me. Pale and Pasty, diffuse.
Ill take Drucker over ANYONE out there right now.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2009-11-16 10:48
jcfasanar-
"The same can be applied to Marcellus, or Morales. All overestimated clarinetist. In europe any of these clarinetists are considered great. There are hardly known."
--
Wow! "Overestimated"!?!?!?!? OM_G!!!!!
Post Edited (2009-11-16 10:48)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: jcfasanar
Date: 2009-11-16 13:09
skygardener,
sorry, my english isn't very good.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Menendez
Date: 2009-11-16 14:01
Well,
About Fasanar comments about Drucker, I want to say I am agree with him in some questions.
I think Drucker does improper use of vibrato, and his sound does not reflect my personal concept about clarinet sound quality. But in his favor I must say that its expressiveness enjoys great lyricism. His personal style can be good for some particular music styles, but there are many different musical styles. Therefore I think Drucker can not be considered a reference, and in that point I am agree with Fasanar that Drucker is sometimes overestimated.
Saludos, Jonathan.
P.D.: coincidí contigo en la Banda de la Federación, jejeje.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-16 16:39
jcfasanar wrote:
> There are millions like
> him, if not better. Nothing makes his playing so special. Same
> goes to morales.
I usually try to be very polite in my posts but I have to say that this is one is one of the most unintelligent statement I've ever seen posted on this board. I didn't read anyone saying that Drucker or Morales was the greatest player that ever roamed the face of the earth but to deny that either one of them is a great players is nonsense. Of course there are other "great" players as well and to some degree that is certainly a matter of taste and opinion. To judge one's greatness based on weather you like someones tone, or based simply on the way they phrase, or the way they play certain styles is ridiculous. If that were the case I would assume there may have never been a great player of any instrument because everyone can find something about everyone that they don't like if they look and listen hard enough. Tone, style and phrasing are subjective.
You may feel that a player from Iceland, or Canada, or China or Iran or where ever is a greater player than Drucker, Morales or anyone else mentioned above, that's fine, but to say that those players are not great players is just being stubborn and immature. I really think your argument is based on your prejudices, jealousies and envies. ESP (formally very polite)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-16 16:55
Ed Stanley Drucker is not my cup of tea. Walter Boeykens and Håkan Rosengren on the other hand are my cup of tea. Satisfied?
Nb did you notice that I didn't use the terms great,bad,overrated etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-11-16 18:00
Menendez wrote:
<<I think Drucker does improper use of vibrato, and his sound does not reflect my personal concept about clarinet sound quality. But in his favor I must say that its expressiveness enjoys great lyricism. His personal style can be good for some particular music styles, but there are many different musical styles.>>
Exactly. My main criticism of Drucker is that it seems he only knows how to sound like Drucker. (And his own style of playing seems to be a product of the big band era in which he grew up).
Drucker is an energetic, highly entertaining performer, and I think we could all learn a thing or two from the level of energy he is able to bring to a performance. Nonetheless, I feel he at times falls short in channeling that energy in stylistically appropriate ways.
Weber is not Drucker's style, so although he gives an entertaining performance, many of us with prior musical training who have studied and/or performed Weber before may find this performance a little off in certain ways (myself included). I think Drucker's extensive use of vibrato gets in the way of the music, for instance.
On the other hand I love Drucker's Corigliano Concerto recording. But that piece was written specifically for Drucker by a long-time friend and former clarinet student. It was specifically written to sound good when executed in Drucker's playing style.
Post Edited (2009-11-16 18:26)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2009-11-16 18:44
Thanks for posting this video JM!
While I may not agree with some of Drucker's interpretive choices, I always love hearing him play in the Philharmonic or solo. I find his performances refreshing given the amount of dull and uninspired clarinet playing one hears.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-16 18:59
Iceland said "Ed, Stanley Drucker is not my cup of tea. Walter Boeykens and Håkan Rosengren on the other hand are my cup of tea. Satisfied?".
My answer to Iceland is yes, that's the way you should have posted it in the first place because that makes sense. I've heard them both play and they are indeed very fine players indeed. There are many really fine players today and yesterday. By the way, although I consider Drucker to be a great player he has never been on of my "favorite" players though I've always admired his ability. Morales, on the other hand, is one of my favorite players, perhaps even my favorite, after all , he did study with me. ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: salzo
Date: 2009-11-16 19:51
MRN wrote:
" My main criticism of Drucker is that it seems he only knows how to sound like Drucker."
So in other words, you would be less critical of him if he could sound like someone else.
just what we need, more chameleon clarinetists.
Post Edited (2009-11-16 22:46)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Menendez
Date: 2009-11-16 20:38
Salzo, i didn't say this:
"My main criticism of Drucker is that it seems he only knows how to sound like Drucker."
Mrn was who wrote that.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: jcfasanar
Date: 2009-11-16 20:51
Ed Palanker,
"I didn't read anyone saying that Drucker or Morales was the greatest player that ever roamed the face of the earth"
All people in this board talks about Drucker, Morales, Marcellus and others, like they were the GODS of the clarinet, if they were intouchable (mostly people from USA). I simply cant agree
Post Edited (2021-08-30 23:04)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Menendez
Date: 2009-11-16 21:28
Pues sabía que eras tú porque alguna vez hablamos, ya que yo me sentaba al lado de Visitación Arranz, y alguna vez que hablaste con ella hablé yo también, jaja. Pero por lo general tampoco me relacionaba mucho con la gente de la Federal. Yo estuve dos temporadas, cuando dirigió Vilaplana y cuando dirigió Andrés Valero, que tú estabas con el requinto.
Respecto al tema, es normal que se viertan aquí ciertas opiniones, puesto que como pasa en muchos otros aspectos, en EEUU hay mucho ombliguismo y se desconoce bastante lo que pasa en el resto del mundo. Sin embargo también te encuentras con gente muy abierta de mente que se preocupa por lo que ocurre en otras partes del mundo, no solo clarinetistas, sino fabricantes.
Este foro está muy bien, entra gente importante del mundillo, y se aprende bastante. Yo ya hace un par de años que estoy por aquí pululando.
Saludos.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-11-16 21:42
jcfasanar wrote:
> All people in this board talks about Drucker, Morales,
> Marcellus and others, like they were the GODS of the clarinet,
> if they were intouchable (mostly people from USA).
Well that's just silly. I'm an American, I frequently post here, and I don't idolize any of those guys. My favorite players are pretty much all European, as a matter of fact.
You really shouldn't make generalizations like that.
(Por cierto, algunos de "estos yankis" pueden leer en español.)
Post Edited (2009-11-16 22:08)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-11-16 21:51
salzo wrote:
<<So in other words, you would be less critical of him if he could sound like someone else.
just what we need, more chameleon clarinetists.>>
No. I'd be less critical of him if he'd do more to adapt the way he plays to the requirements of the music. Instead, he tends to adapt the music to fit the way he plays. It has nothing to do with sounding like other players.
Post Edited (2009-11-16 21:53)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-16 21:56
Ed said:
"My answer to Iceland is yes, that's the way you should have posted it in the first place because that makes sense. I've heard them both play and they are indeed very fine players indeed."
Thank you very much. Point taken. I have to admit when it comes to criticize players I often take it too seriously. Maybe it's because I've not heard much talked here on the BBoard about my favorite players(top 10 or so that I really like).
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2009-11-16 22:13
The performance of the Concertino wasnt't outstanding in any way.
There are lots of players young and old who can do it as well...yeah and even better. His main accomplishment was playing the same gig 60 years on and living a long time.
Some of us who have rolled over many years know that living a long time doesn't make you anything but old...though you can get a Senior Citizen discount now and then....
Clarinet Redux
|
|
|
|
|
Author: salzo
Date: 2009-11-16 22:46
Menendez-
My apologies, it has been corrected.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2009-11-17 01:25
jcfasanar-
*All people in this board talks about Drucker, Morales, Marcellus and others, like they were the GODS of the clarinet, if they were intouchable (mostly people from USA).
You like it or not, these players are in some cases only decent or average players outside the usa. In some cases are totally unknown.*
--
There is some merit to this... some. Generally, it is normal that people know most about those in their own area. This has little to do with national boarders. For example, does anyone here know about Prof. Henry Miyamura at the Universiy of Hawai'i? Very good teacher, but outside Hawai'i very few know of him.
People in NYC might know of a few really big names in California, but people in California know more; and visa versa. Extended from that is national boarders- people know more about those in their own country more than in other countries. This is exacerbated by countries that do not share the same language.
This BBoard is mainly all in English so most people using it are in English speaking countries- UK, US, Canada. So you will hear the most from people in those countries, and they will praise what they know.
So, "Yes", Eroupians probably know less about American clarinetists than Americans. By the same token, Americans only know of a fraction of the clarinetists that Europians know of.
jcfasanar, whom do you reccomend that we listen to???
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Dileep Gangolli
Date: 2009-11-17 03:36
People why can't we just all get along?
How about Stadler......can we all agree that he was a great clarinetist?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2009-11-17 03:40
Stadler was a hack; Americans didn't listen to him.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: tdinap
Date: 2009-11-17 06:12
Something people seem not to be talking much about is actually hearing these players in person. I haven't heard enough of Drucker in person or recorded to feel comfortable forming a detailed opinion on the entirety of his playing, but I do know that there are aspects of his (and every other clarinetist's) playing that are significantly different in each medium.
Since the vast majority of Drucker's career was spent playing live concerts, I don't think it's fair to totally dismiss him based on a few recordings. I agree the Concertino performance was not his best, but everyone's entitled to an off day (I sure wish my "off days" sounded like that!)
I enjoy discussing and comparing different clarinetists' performances as much as anybody, but it doesn't make much sense to me to directly, competitively compare someone who you've only heard on a couple of recordings to someone you've heard live multiple times and probably fall into line with more in terms of subjective interpretation and schools of thought.
On a more subjective note, I thought the two times I heard him in person this year were very well done and enjoyable to listen to, and the energy he brought to the performances was impressive for anyone, to say nothing of the fact that he's 80 years old!
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-17 11:42
Skygardener said:
"This BBoard is mainly all in English so most people using it are in English speaking countries- UK, US, Canada. So you will hear the most from people in those countries, and they will praise what they know.
So, "Yes", Eroupians probably know less about American clarinetists than Americans. By the same token, Americans only know of a fraction of the clarinetists that Europians know of."
I knew about Stanley Drucker and Jonathan Cohler long before I started to participate. But I remember I listened to a Cd I believe it was from Deutsche grammophon with Leonard Bernstein and Aaron Copland on the cover. It included the Clarinet concerto and Salon Mexico and more. This was maybe 12-15 years ago and I didn't know Stanley Drucker then and definitely not that he was principal in one of the world best orchestra. What I do remember is "woww this concerto is great but I must get my hands on better performance."
You might be right about the English but I really have to say that it gets to my nervous when I go abroad and people not only don't speak English and don't understand it they just don't want to. I mean you could(before the crises) go to a low cost supermarket here in Iceland and 90% of the staff were from Poland and most of them didn't speak English or did very poorly. Nb we don't have a strict laws about people working here should speak Icelandic not like they do in Norway.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-17 13:54
I think there are a lot of great players all around the world! ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: salzo
Date: 2009-11-17 14:23
Well, as a whole, American clarinetists are BY FAR the superior players. With the exception of Arrignon and a handful of others, European players are not in the same league as American players.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-11-17 14:25
salzo wrote:
> Well, as a whole, American clarinetists are BY FAR the
> superior players. With the exception of Arrignon and a handful
> of others, European players are not in the same league as
> American players.
Please don't step on the little people at the end of the bridge ...
|
|
|
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-11-17 15:32
Was't Karajan caught in New York once at a record store with a load of lps. Apparently he was catching up with how good North American's play... One of his favorites was Munch in Boston doing La Mer. When asked about it he stated that Munch does things he could never do in that piece...so being a student of music he studied recordings.
As to the idea North Americans don't know what is going on across the water is junk. Didn't Leonard Bernstein conduct the Vienna Phil for about 20 years! Not bad for a boy from Lowell Mass.
Drucker on the above recording I feel is not great..but maybe he was a little off that night. Are we not human or machines? I have heard many awful recordings both live and studio from Europe. As a student in Paris I heard some really awful playing so this line of thinking does not hold water.
The bests
Szell Cleveland Beethoven cycle..still my favorite
Bernstein New York Sibelius cycle!!\
Mahler Soti Cycle
and a soft spot for Bruno Walter's Brahms Cycle..
Karl Ancerl's Martinu concerts intoronto were legendary!
Did you know Finnish conductor Osmo Vanska just completed a Beethoven cycle with the Minnesota Orchestra..and it is fantastic!
It has also achieved great acclaim in press throughout the world..not just in old Europe.
I always thought Europeans to be very open minded and am dissapointed that some think we don't know what is going on out there.
ps. Maybe some of the Europeans out there should be forced to listen to Solti's Bruckner cycle..it is incredibly good. IN fact Solti's Beethoven and Mahler cycles in Chicago are in the top 5 recordings of all time!
David Dow
Post Edited (2009-11-17 15:46)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2009-11-17 15:57
JJM originally wrote: "This was the a great Drucker performance 20 years ago."
Disagreem abounds!! Perhaps JJM could explain to all of us amatuers (cheesehead clarinetist from Wisconsin, incl) what we are missing here??
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2009-11-17 16:34
I believe that that video was made during Drucker's "leaving" the orchestra tour. It was when he announced his retirement --not in '89.
I get this from seeing that vid in the context of a 2008/9 NY Phil broadcast.
Bob Phillips
|
|
|
|
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2009-11-17 17:00
Hi again,
Just a little explanation:
I guess what I meant was, that video was the "great Stanley Drucker" playing the von Weber "Concertino", perhaps not his best, but a live broadcast.
Please know that Stanley is my long-time friend & colleague, and he has matured and evolved over the many years he played with the NY Phil. In that video, whatever year it was made, he played with lots of vibrato and movements that didn't enhance his great abilities to communicate with his audience, but I believe sounded quite good.
Years later, there were hand movements that Stanley liked to enjoy doing during live taping sessions, he didn't need to, but he still sounded great!
He played many different clarinets, reeds, and even a few new mpcs. Still, Stanley, a great master of the clarinet, sounded great!
I can't really explain what it felt like for all those 30+ years, sitting next to an ever-evolving Stanley Drucker, but I'm thankful I had that opportunity.
There are many great clarinet players out there, on every Continent, in every Country, in many small & large Cities. For me, Stanley is, and will always be, one of those truly "great players."
Some of our mutual friends talk fondly about Stanley, give it a listen, it's fun!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZh1k-OaWyg
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
Post Edited (2009-11-17 17:13)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: A Brady
Date: 2009-11-17 19:07
Thanks for the posting. Mr Drucker is a wonderful live performer; seeing him in recital years ago was very influential in my approach to performing in general. Frankly, I believe many "classical" players could learn a great deal from his energy, drive, and absolute connection with the music, conductor, orchestra, AND audience.
That said, I am always amazed by the astonishing lack of respect shown on message boards (not just this one) to virtuoso performers and others who have accomplished levels that very few will ever attain. It's really not about liking one style over another, or international school of performance, it's simply a matter of integrity: acknowledge the achievements of rare performers such as this, and realize your criticisms are almost always over style more than substance. Stanley Drucker is, no doubt, a supremely talented individual, but hard work has been just as much a factor in his remarkable success.
The Internet is a great democratizer, but please retain some humility: this is the key to personal evolution as a player and as a person.
My opinion, FWIW.
AB
AB
|
|
|
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-11-17 22:43
Another really neat video (it's 8 of them actually) is an interview with him at an event at Barnes and Noble.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx2T_cAN2AA&feature=PlayList&p=1AF972F08806CE49&index=0&playnext=1
I watched these the other day, and after having watched these and the tribute video John linked to above, I started to understand in a deeper way what makes Stanley Drucker a special musician--and it's not something that's necessarily apparent to those sitting in the audience listening to him play.
On one of these Barnes and Noble videos, Drucker mentions his childhood/adolescent years studying with Leon Russianoff. Something Drucker mentioned really put things in perspective. It struck me as nothing short of amazing, but it seemed to be completely lost on the audience attending this talk. What he said was that although he didn't practice much as a youth/teenager, Russianoff would give him a new etude book to study *every week*. He'd play every day, he said, but he didn't really do much real practice.
Now think about that for a second. A WHOLE BOOK a week....that's like playing Rose 32 one week, Uhl Vol. 1 the next week, Jeanjean the week after that, etc....
After he said that, I suddenly realized why they hired this "kid" to play with the NY Phil. in the first place (he was only a teenager, remember), and how he's managed to stay in the principal's chair for so long. Stanley Drucker is one of those truly rare talents for whom everything comes so easily to them that there is basically nothing you can throw at them that they can't handle. And the stories relayed on the tribute video John provided a link to basically point to the same thing.
Tony Pay has written a number of times on the BBoard, from the perspective of a member of an audition panel for a professional orchestra, about how difficult it is just to find someone even *capable* of handling the demands of the job. In that light, someone with Drucker's level of talent and ability has got to be every conductor's dream. It is also no wonder he is so loved by the musicians who have worked with him.
So while Drucker may not be everyone's ideal soloist and there are things about his interpretational choices, tone quality, etc. that we as listeners may legitimately find fault with, in my mind none of that really takes away from Drucker's greatness as a musician, especially as an orchestral musician.
Being a great orchestra musician isn't really that much about interpretation, anyway (ultimately that's the conductor's job, after all)--at least based on my experiences in playing in various ensembles, it's more about having the skill to handle confidently (with limited rehearsal time) a large and challenging repertoire picked by someone other than yourself, the flexibility to be able to follow the conductor's demands whatever they may be, and an ability to react to what is going on around you on-the-fly. It seems to me that these are qualities Stanley Drucker possesses in spades--so it is no mystery to me that he is considered to be a great orchestral clarinetist.
Post Edited (2009-11-19 21:26)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-18 00:10
One of the definitions in my dictionary of the term "Great" is IMPORTANT. Can't we just all agree that who some players thinks is one of the most important players of the past 60 years is Stanley Drucker and leave it at that. Just because a few people prefer ten or a hundred players better than Drucker doesn't take away the fact that has been one of the most important clarinet players in the last half century, at least in the USA if not the world. I'm getting a little tired of some of the petty posts on this subject. Lighten up everyone. ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-18 00:41
Ed I find Walter Boeykens to be much more important. I mean my life would not be the same if he would not been around.
Sorry but this is all about taste and preference. I mean do you guys think that artists like Spice Girls are important even though they have sold much more albums and are(have been) much more popular than any clarinetist ever ?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-18 01:30
Icleland, you'er simply missing the point of anything I, and many others, have said. Walter Boeykens, who I agree is very good, even a great player, could be the greatest clarinetist that ever lived. He could have sold billions of records, it has nothing at all to do with Stanley Drucker being an important if not " a great" player also. Iceland, you're just not willing or unable to see the point that regardless of who else is or is not a great player, that many people think that Drucker is, if you do or not. When you get on your band wagon you just won't give up, but I do. I can hear people laughing at you. Goodbye! ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-18 01:44
sorry but obviously I and some others here don't agree is that a crime ?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2009-11-18 03:22
My dear friends on Mark's great clarinet BBoard, please have Mark close this post. I believe we have all made our "points" and enough has been said about Stanley Drucker. Thank all of you for your thoughts and posts.
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
|
|
|
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2009-11-18 09:25
I would like to add to mrns post above...
It's much harder to "walk the walk" than talk about it....
I have had to perform on long term contract in "acting positions" where i felt i was being compared to the player i was replacing, and this made me acutely aware of the challenges and stress that confront a player in a pro symphony orchestra. One may criticise this player or that player, but actually having to deliver the goods- perfect at the first rehearsal, often performing with only one rehearsal, concerts broadcast live on national radio etc...
that's tough
And yet, I hear students here criticise this player or that player, "so and so is rubbish" etc. I might have made these kind of statements in the past (when young and foolish)- but not any more now i've had to deal with the heat!
Drucker may not have played Weber how I'd like it that particular night, but there is no way I will say a word against him- he has made history, he has made art and he did it "his way".
dn
|
|
|
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-11-18 10:15
Drucker will always be a god of the clarinet ...imagine 60s years AS ONE of the top orchestras principals. Pretty offensive not to respect that track record. I have certainly heard alot worse Weber Concertino's from other supposed greats. So in a nutshell this line of thought is offensive and supercilious at best.
When Iceland was in diapers I am sure Drucker was wowing them in New York. Has any of these people heard Drucker's Nielsen recording? Maybe not but I think it far better than Frost and Sabine Meyer's recent version. Drucker will always be ahead of his time!
David Dow
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-18 10:23
But have you heard John McCaw's version of the Nielsen concerto ?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2009-11-18 10:42
MRN,
What a wonderful spin you have put on this thread. I hope others read and re-read your thoughtful words about what it really takes to be an orchestral musician.
But perhaps my wife (not a musician but a covert and very astute observer of life) has the best take on things like this when she always reminds me "Nobody gets it all, even Tiger Woods."
HRL
PS The Barnes & Noble interview is really excellent. Drucker's stories are insightful, charming, and very interesting. But I do wish he had not leaned into the mic so much but...
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2009-11-18 15:27
Why close this thread, it's just starting to get good.
A lot of fulsome praise for Drucker has finally been put in content, and we havn't heard from Tony Pay yet!
No admirer of Drucker should get out of shape because of it. After all even I keep my cool when everyone bad mouths my baby Emma Johnson!
Clarinet Redux
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-18 16:33
Iceland said "sorry but obviously I and some others here don't agree is that a crime ?" What in the world does that mean and what does it have to do as to whether or not Drucker is considered a "great" player or not by so many others?
Then he said, "But have you heard John McCaw's version of the Nielsen concerto?
Well I know I said I give up answering him but I must answer Iceland about this because his posts are really getting ridiculous . He obviously does not like Druckers playing and I don't have a problem with that, as I said before, there are many things about his style and tone I'm not crazy about myself but I still think he deserves the title of a "great" player.
In any case my comment to Iceland is this. I've heard the McCaw recording, I think it's wonderful, he plays it beautifully. What does that have to do as to whether or not Drucker is considered a Great player or not. Not a thing.
Just because you, and some other players, like some other players better, that has nothing at all to do with Drucker being a great player or not. There are many players I like better too but I still think he's a great player. I just don't understand why you are the way you are. You sound very young, are you? That would explain a lot. Now I'm done, unless of course you say something else that doesn't make sense and I feel compelled to answer. ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ryan25
Date: 2009-11-18 17:57
This post has been both sad and interesting. I happen to be someone who has a ton of respect for Stanley Drucker. I think he is an amazing musician and I have heard many recordings of his that are outstanding. Shosty Symphony's with Bernstein, his Bartok Contrasts and Nielsen as well as many others. Do I play the way he does or sound like him? No. Is he my favorite player? Sometimes he is along with many, many other players.
My only comment to all the people on here saying I don't like his playing at all...have you heard so and so? Someone like Walter Boykins for example didn't get as accomplished as he has by being close minded about music making or clarinetistry. I really didn't see any negative comments on this thread about Stanley's playing besides people don't like his sound or his use of vibrato. There is so much more to music making and clarinet playing than tone. It's a shame that so many people really can't make comments about a player besides his tone. Someone said his playing in this Weber performance does not fit the style of Weber. What is the Weber style? Even when a post tries to comment on something past "tone", the comment still has no basis to be discussed because it is incomplete.
Everyone has an opinion and that is their right. I would hope that musicians would always try and keep an open mind about other players. Stanley is a great, talented, amazing clarinetist weather you want to admit it or not. There is a lot more to him than his tone and judging him on a rough Weber performance is foolish, immature, and close minded.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-18 20:16
Bravo Ryan25! ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: classicalguss
Date: 2009-11-18 21:18
Double Bravo Ryan25. I find that as I get older (60 coming next week!), I have developed a much stronger appreciation for differing playing styles. When I was young at Conservatory, not so much. Stanley is a GREAT player. There is no question, and anyone who doesn't hear that needs to maybe get a little older and grow up. We all sound different in our inner ears. Just because a player doesn't sound like you like, doesn't make it bad, just different.
Many thanks to the "sane" posters here. Notice that John and Eddie, in particular do this for a living and neither sounds like Stanley, but appreciate great playing when they hear it. Many Thanks.
Best Wishes,
Roy Gussman
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2009-11-18 22:04
It's a waste of time to argue about whether or not to confer 'greatness' on any individual clarinet player, in my view. (After all, let's face it, ALL of them are just clarinet players, for heaven's sake:-)
Rather, point out what you think are their good qualities, and their less good qualities, GIVING REASONS -- it's much more useful.
Of course, whatever you do, you get into trouble with small-minded people -- you're not showing SUFFICIENT RESPECT for THEIR HEROES, you see, and therefore (they think) not showing sufficient respect for THEM.
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2009-11-18 22:32
I wrote:
>> Rather, point out what you think are their good qualities, and their less good qualities, GIVING REASONS -- it's much more useful.>>
I want to unpack that a bit more, because it's not much good generalising about someone's playing without referring it to a particular musical context.
So, it helps if you DO refer your evaluation to a particular musical context.
It's even better if you can tie it down to a particular performance, and even better if that performance is one that's available to your readers.
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-18 23:16
"Of course, whatever you do, you get into trouble with small-minded people" I think what Tony said here just about sums it up. Yes, Bravo Tony!
I think I'll have to stop posting on this thread. I've heard from a few of you via e-mail telling me there's no way I will get Island to understand that you don't have to like everything about the way someone plays to realized that they might still be a great player.
Stanley Drucker, at age 17, become principal of a small major orchestras, the following year principal of a higher rated orchestra, a year later at the old age of 19, (how old are you Island) became assistant and Eb of one of the worlds great orchestras and several years later became their principal. Sixty years as a member of the NY Philharmonic, in the hot seat for most of that time under all the worlds greatest conductors. Performing as a concerto soloist hundreds of times, including several world premiers, how many have you done Island? If that in it self doesn't make someone great in it's own right I don't know what does. I guess Islands definition of great is someone that he/she likes the way they play, forget their accomplishments and history. Good bye Island, I'm not going to point out your weakness anymore, everyone already realizes them but you. I'm not even going to read this anymore, it's gone far enough. Great is Great period. You don't see it, it's your problem. By the way, I don't think Alexander the Great was really so great, do you? I think he used vibrato. Bye Bye! ESP
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
Post Edited (2009-11-18 23:24)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2009-11-19 00:01
Ah, chill out Ed. Iceland's OK. What's a BB for if not to absorb a bit of opinionated ignorance and impudent contempt now and then.
Iceland has some good posts now and then. Drucker has said he doesn't double tongue and doesn't use circular breathing etc. I dont' see how Cavallini could do his Caprices right without circular breathing.
It would have been known at the time...glass blowers have been using it for centuries.
He (Cavallini) must have been amazing to do the things he did with the clarinets of the time. I wonder what those guys sounded like. Lazarus said Cavalling had a great technique but a rough tone. GBS said Lazarus had a marvelous beautiful tone. But standards change, maybe for the worse...maybe those clarinetists of the time were better than anyone since!
Clarinet Redux
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-19 00:19
I only said he wasn't that great to me but he is nether bad. I never said he is overrated I only said he wasn't my cup of tea. I mainly said that I can have this opinion no matter what he has accomplished. What I have known for a long time is that some people like him a lot and I respect that. I mean I'm not going to tell everyone to like Walter Boeykens that would just be silly.
I know it but just to be sure then I hope that everybody here that found Drucker to be great before this thread still do because my opinion was not intended to change peoples mind only to show that there are different opinions on this.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: LKKlarinet
Date: 2009-11-19 09:49
For me, he does deviate from the tradition and heritage of clarinet music, including skills, which was the way I was taught.
LKKlarinet
Borbeck V12 Bob Harrison S-1Buffet
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2009-11-19 20:19
Ed (check out my website) Palanker said:
>> [Tony said, ] "Of course, whatever you do, you get into trouble with small-minded people."
I think what Tony said here just about sums it up. Yes, Bravo Tony!>>
Huh.
As usual, this guy doesn't get it, does he?
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Joarkh
Date: 2009-11-19 20:33
Perhaps "Of course, whatever you do, you get into trouble" is more true...
Joar
Clarinet and saxophone teacher, clarinet freelancer
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2009-11-19 23:46
I wrote:
>> As usual, this guy doesn't get it, does he?>>
See, what I want everyone to understand is that IT IS IN FACT VALUABLE for people to criticise even 'great artists', when they do it in a way that contributes to the understanding of clarinet playing.
When I criticised Kell (and praised him too) IN DETAIL, I got a lot of crap from the PoohBah in the corner and the Dow in waiting, for being DISRESPECTFUL.
Please, stop this nonsense.
One way of doing that would be to encourage Iceland be specific, and then deal with the detail that he produces.
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-20 00:31
He is not bad,great,overrated etc. To me he is just not my cup of coffee!!!!!!!! End of story.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2009-11-20 00:45
Iceland wrote:
>> He is not bad,great,overrated etc. To me he is just not my cup of coffee!!!!!!!! End of story.>>
Oh, don't think I was defending YOU. You're quite incidental.
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Zenia
Date: 2009-11-20 01:52
Tony Pay wrote:
> Iceland wrote:
>
> >> He is not bad,great,overrated etc. To me he is just not my
> cup of coffee!!!!!!!! End of story.>>
>
> Oh, don't think I was defending YOU. You're quite incidental.
>
> Tony
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Zenia
Date: 2009-11-20 01:55
We should all consider the wise words of M. Charette when referring to a poster as BS and then proceeded to call the poster a 'troll'. How inspiring to the debate.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-11-20 02:03
Bravissimo...
"Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate."
David Dow
Post Edited (2009-11-20 02:15)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Clarimeister
Date: 2009-11-20 09:37
You know what's great? Well what would be great? Is if this thread was thrown over a fire and deleted. This is pointless guys. Most of you are being immature and pointing fingers and it just doesn't seem to me that is even a discussion anymore. It's "well, my opinions are right and yours are wrong" which that in itself is wrong. Grow up guys. Sad
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-11-20 14:51
I don't think it's about right or wrong. It's about having respect for peoples opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2009-11-20 15:08
When will this thread--which has degenerated hopelessly--be closed???
|
|
|
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2009-11-20 16:29
Probably when everyone stops posting to it. :-)
Karl
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2009-11-20 19:34
Stanley Drucker is a historically great orchestral performer, every one knows that.
On the other hand, Emma Johnson has never been "Principle" of any world class band...but she has made dozens of CDs which have sold in the hundreds of thousands, had a number of solo clarinet works written especially for her, and has done more for the propagation, appreciation and understanding of our admirable instrument than almost anyone living.
A bit aside, what's with this "Principle Clarinet" and "Co-Principle Clarinet" baloney. Is nothing safe from the stupidity of political correctness?!
Clarinet Redux
|
|
|
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2009-11-20 20:04
What's your problem with "Principal" and "Co-Principal?" and what does it have to do with political correctness?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2009-11-20 21:33
William wrote:
>> When will this thread--which has degenerated hopelessly--be closed???>>
Well, hang on a minute.
We're now in the position where we can see that the conversation that consists of posts that say, "X is great", contradicted by posts that say, "X isn't great", go nowhere.
But, the structure of those posts is interesting in another way. When a relative tyro says of an oldtimer like Drucker that he is overrated, you can see that other oldtimers on the list always weigh in on the first oldtimer's side, willynilly. I think they do so because he represents THEM, and their era.
The tyro is of course just expressing his young enthusiasm for musical quality as he sees it.
But the effect is that the actual positive or negative qualities of the famous oldtimer (let's stick to calling him Drucker) are sidelined. You're not allowed to question them; when you do, the conversation is diverted into metaconsiderations, like Drucker's positive influence on the popularity of the clarinet, or his astounding longevity in his NYPO position.
Notice also that these oldtimers typically don't actually DO what Drucker does when he's criticised. Drucker is an orchestral player mostly; but what is usually criticised is his solo work.
So Drucker's defenders don't play solo gigs -- or, mostly, hold down principal positions in major orchestras. For example, taking what you might charitably call the 'professional cream' of the oldtimers, Dow might be thought to be doing only what Drucker does MOSTLY -- admittedly on a much lower level. Similarly Palanker. They get by, or have got by, as orchestral players.
Of course when they write, both of them signally lack communication skills, in the sense that they can't write proper sentences or combine them into coherent arguments -- but let's forgive them that for the moment.
What I want to concentrate on is that they don't ever play solo gigs like Drucker.
By contrast, because I DO play solo gigs like Drucker -- and hold and have held principal orchestral positions -- what I say about Drucker might be thought to be of more interest.
However, I've said several times here that I avoid talking about the playing of colleagues like Drucker. I feel that whatever criticism I have of them should consist of my own performances, BECAUSE I DO WHAT THEY DO.
So I don't say what I think of Drucker.
But I do think that what the small-minded people on this list say about him when he's criticised is quite amusing.
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2009-11-20 23:05
They're called Principal and Co-Principal because some politically correct nitwits think calling one the first clarinet and the other second clarinet would offend the psyche of the second clarinet!
In the day they were designated 1st clarinet and 2nd clarinet, if there was more than one 1st she would be called the solo clarinet!
Clarinet Redux
|
|
|
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-11-20 23:47
Old Geezer wrote:
> They're called Principal and Co-Principal because some
> politically correct nitwits think calling one the first
> clarinet and the other second clarinet would offend the psyche
> of the second clarinet!
It was my understanding that co-principal meant two players share the same principal job and switch off; second clarinet is a different position.
The second clarinetist is the most indispensable member of a full-size clarinet section. Principals (assuming you have more than one) are interchangeable. The bass clarinet player only shows up when they need him. The second clarinet is the one guy you can't live without--he's there for every concert. 
Post Edited (2009-11-20 23:48)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2009-11-21 03:49
Geezer-
You obviously have no experience with this. As mrn alludes to, some professional orchestras have co-principals in addition to second and bass clarinets. The MET Opera Orchestra plays seven concerts a week- no one in their right mind would expect one player to play principal on seven operas in a week, especially at that level. The MET has about two orchestras on call, and thus, two principals- each having, on paper, equal stature. It has nothing to do with "political correctness" and it certainly isn't a modern invention. If you have a committee with "co-chairs," the purpose is share duties that are too much for one person to handle in order to handle- it's not some feel-good measure. They are still designated first and second, as they were "in the day." "In the day" they also had co-principal designation in some orchestras as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: srattle
Date: 2009-11-21 06:46
Can I just mention that the title of this thread is:
Great Drucker performance 20 years ago!
not:
Great Drucker 20 years ago!
If we're talking about someone's performance practice, we should leave their history, life accomplishments etc. at the door, and talk purely about their abilities as a musician.
I don't agree with 99% of the posts on this thread for various reasons. I am also completely intimidated from you all to post my thoughts on Stanley Drucker's PLAYING, because clearly it's not allowed to have an unbiased opinion of a great player.
Would it be the same not to like Pascal Moragues? He's held a position in the National Orchester de Paris since he was 18 or 19.
Why is it so bad to question the musical preferences of someone, no matter how great that person is in other aspects?
I say, when talking about someone as a musician, leave their other qualities at the door, and converse unbiasedly, otherwise we don't gain anything, or learn anything.
Sacha
p.s. I respect Drucker's achievements
|
|
|
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-11-21 12:59
Tony
There are also many of us who have a wife and children(in my case 4) and many students and concerts etc. who don't have time to sit on a board and write carefully posted diatribes.
Some day if you are married (?)and have to work as hard as some of us you might understand something.
Raising a family to me is far more important then ranting on this board... and in many regards far more difficult. Hopefully Tony is happy in his personal world as some of us...we just can't put the time in he does on carefully selecting the next verb.
Drucker will always be famous and justly so becuase he connects with an audiences as a person.. Something few other can do. That is more important than academic anemic waffling which many indulge here.
:"Some walk the walk..
and others just talk the talk..."
Well you guys can talk the talk for certain. Today is a beautiful sunny day and does not change one iota how I think and feel on this or any other suject. I am going for the walk.
Music is a living thing...and is best lived. Same with our relationships with others. If you got a pile of time to spend on the internet one could be enjoying life in 100 more ways than that....
So I am resolved for every 5 minutes on a computer to spend 20 minutes with someone...
In my life family is first, music second, and there you have it.
David Dow
Post Edited (2009-11-21 13:12)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2009-11-21 13:58
Mr. Pay,
I beg your pardon but I take umbrage in you including me in "but let's forgive them that for the moment" in your post above. As I humbly remind you, let's is a contraction of let us. I do not wish to be part of the editorial we.
Perhaps your communication skills need attention as you might have wished to say "Let me...." instead. But I chose not to attempt to speak for you. Please refrain from speaking for me.
Respectfully,
HRL
Post Edited (2009-11-21 14:14)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-21 15:08
Hank and David, and most everyone else as well should begin to do what I began doing last year. I refuse to read Tony's ravings. I did make the mistake of reading one above and actually quoted him is saying Bravo, a big mistake on my part, I promise it won't ever happen again. I've received personal e-mails from several members telling me not to let Tony get to me, that they appreciate my offerings and help I offer to many of our readers. I simply tell them that I no longer read his rantings so he doesn't bother me. I know of several fine contributors to our bboard that no longer contribute because of Tony's insults, ranting and ravings. I decided last year after putting up with his insults to me as well as so many others not to ever read anything he writes on this board again. I know he's very knowledgeable about many things clarinet and music wise but the trash talk is simply not worth the intelligent talk. Actually half the time I couldn't even understand what he was trying to say because of the way he writes. At first I assumed it was the "Queens" English but then I realized that others from the UK don't write that way, I don't have any trouble understanding what they write. I guess Tony will just say that I'm to dumb, he might be right. I'm sure if he reads this he will insult me and waste many words doing so but, as I said, I simply won't read it, you shouldn't either. Life is to short for listen to his garbage, I agree with David Dow posting above, I have four grown kids, and I'm going out to mow my lawn and pick up leaves, I might even practice later. ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2009-11-21 15:23
BRAVO, ED!!
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2009-11-21 15:23
"vin" writes " no one in their right mind would expect one player to play principal on seven operas in a week." Oh my goodness, seven performances in one week, they must be so tired. Don't the second clarintets get a little rest too? Are those seven different operas vinny?
Actually the Met Opera Orchestra lists two different "Pinciples"...no Co to it.
Clarinet Redux
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-11-21 15:24
Apropos to not reading posts because you don't like the tone:
"Science doesn't work because we're all nice ... Newton may have been an ass, but the theory of gravity still works." - Gavin A. Schmidt, climatologist at NASA
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Sarah Elbaz
Date: 2009-11-21 15:35
David and Ed,
Yes, it is very surprising that although Tony has a family and a very busy and amazingly successful career, he finds the time to write on the BB.
Sarah
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2009-11-21 16:36
Tony is now becoming an icon of the BB. It is due to his writing and thinking and not his resume. Is he really a great BB poster? There are thousands of much better BB 'would be' posters in Europe.
Freelance woodwind performer
Post Edited (2009-11-21 17:22)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2009-11-21 17:18
Arnoldstang wrote:
> Tony is now becoming an icon of the BB. It is due to his
> writing and thinking and not his resume. Is he really a great
> BB poster? There are thousands of BB would be posters much
> better in Europe.
>
Tony is not that influential; no one reads his BB posts in America. I prefer Iceland Clarinet's posts.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Joarkh
Date: 2009-11-21 19:12
With all due respect,
David: Whether you have a family and have better things to do than posting on this BB is not relevant. You are moving away from the topic. If you think Mr. Pay's posts (which I find informative and have no trouble reading, but that's not the point either) are wrong, inappropriate or in any other way faulty, I suggest that you come up with reasonable arguments. I find dragging in your family, implying that Tony does not have much contact with other people and enjoys putting others down quite immature, to be honest. Tony at least sticks to the subject in his posts.
Ed Palanker: I feel that perhaps reading each of Tony's posts for themselves and then reason against them, if you feel like it, is a better way to go than to declare that you have stopped reading his posts because some feel insulted by him. Mr. Pay also expresses himself quite clearly, and masters the English language as well as any. In fact, I would say that concerning language, he writes better than any other poster on this BBoard.
I'm sure Mr. Pay also has a lot to do and enjoys a life outside this BBoard. It seems to me that when Palanker and Dow have no further well-reasoned statements to come up with, they excuse themselves and claim to have better things to do. Well, we all have lives.
I suggest that if anyone has a problem with a certain post, they should answer directly what is in it instead of making excuses for why they don't bother anymore or even tell people not to read all of this contributor's posts.
PS: This does not mean I do not respect mr. Dow or mr. Palanker. I find their contributions to the Board useful and informative in most cases, but, as you may have understood, not in this one.
Joar
Clarinet and saxophone teacher, clarinet freelancer
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-21 19:56
Mark, It's very simple, I just don't think it is necessary to be nasty, arrogant, mean spirited, a cruel with your words at times to get your point over. So even though I have found his writings to be very informative at times, as I said, he's chased several very good people off of this board and I simply won't let him do that to me with his sarcasm and arrogance. Yes, I actually do understand him enough to understand when he puts people down even the way he writes. He's always much clearer when he's being nasty then when he's being informative. If he could learn to answer in a more respectful way I would be happy to read his posts even when he would not agree with me or criticize me. I can actually take it. I actually have a rather thick skin and he probably could never chase me off anyway, I'm just sick of reading the mean things he says to anyone and everyone he disagrees with. He's a very small man indeed. So rather than get angry at him and constantly have words over this board the quality of my life is much better not reading his posts in the first place. So Mark, you may like to see people like Tony act the way he does but I don't, it's not necessary to have a good dialogue. I pity his kids if he treats them the same way he treats people on this board. Good Bye! ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-11-21 20:43
Ed Palanker wrote:
> Mark
I think you don't understand the quote.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2009-11-21 20:44
Geezer-
I don't quite understand your point- do you disagree that seven operas a week is a lot of playing? The second players don't play all those dates either- in order to keep the players at their best James Levine instituted a policy that musicians play no more than 4 operas a week (that's concerts, not including rehearsals).
The MET has two equal Principals, not and Associate or Assistant Principal and a Principal as many other orchestras. "Co-Principal" means two people share the same title. A quick google search yields equally titled clarinet principals in the MET, the LA Phil, the New Zealand Symphony, London Chamber Orchestra, Jerusalem Symphony, Helsinki Philharmonic and many others, some of whom are designated as "Co-" and some as equal Principals. Robert McGinnis ended his career as "Co-Principal" of the San Francisco Symphony in the 60s. For other instruments as well, this is a common title. The Chicago Symphony had "Co-Concertmasters" for several years as well as "Co-Principal Horn." The Concertgebouw Orchestra has had "Co-Principal Trombones." The Pittsburgh Symphony has had "Co-Principal Oboes." The MET does now, and for many years, listed "Co-Concertmasters. In 1949-1950 Stokowski was "Co-Principal Conductor" of the New York Philharmonic. You seem to think that because you haven't heard of this that it doesn't exist.
I'm still itching to know what "political correctness" has to do with any of this.
I also have a family, but that's my business.
Post Edited (2009-11-21 20:47)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-21 21:28
Mark, I did understand the quote, but he didn't post on a clarinet bboard.
I get your point but I still feel the same.
By the way, for Gezzer, and anyone else, I just posted something about principals, co principal etc. I hope it clears that up, it's pretty black and white.
Gezzer has to know how much time it takes to practice a three hour opera, that's a lot of pages of music to learn or review and they often play more than one opera a week. Have you ever seen what a Strauss or Berg opera book looks like? It's enough to give one a heart attach and they have to learn a great many different operas each year, some new and some standard. It's a tough job, you never take the horn out of your mouth. When they had a bass clarinet opening years ago I wouldn't even audition for the Met because I never enjoyed sitting in the pit for 3 to 5 hours when we played operas a few times a year in Baltimore. It's a long haul. ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-11-21 21:35
Tony has offended most of the people on the mailing list..
Here is his post. A simple search in the achives will bring it up
http://test.woodwind.org/Databases/Klarinet/2004/03/000895.txt
[Please don't cut & paste articles. Since you found this in the archives, a link will do. Along with the fact that you edited it. mark c.]
So why would anyone consider that acceptable here or anywhere. And yes that is the bad word! Bad boy Tony...
of course we know this is really his level.
David Dow
Post Edited (2009-11-21 21:48)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Joarkh
Date: 2009-11-21 21:38
Ed Palanker wrote:
"(...)I never enjoyed sitting in the pit for 3 to 5 hours(...)"
Yes, it is demanding. I know about a clarinetist in the Norwegian Opera who changed reeds from v12 to Rue Lepic so that his reeds would last a whole performance (thicker reed).
Joar
Clarinet and saxophone teacher, clarinet freelancer
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2009-11-21 21:53
My post was tongue in cheek as it referred back to the original question of greatness.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
|
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-11-21 22:12
Now, back of John Moses...his post was meant as a tribute. Not a academic discussion of what is or constitutes greatness. Hijacking his post is most rude.
Mr. Drucker will always be considered on the greats based on his accomplishments as a clarinetist. If others want this thread to some semantic discussion on performance maybe a different thread is needed.
David Dow
Post Edited (2009-11-21 22:19)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-11-21 23:33
D Dow wrote:
> So why would anyone consider that acceptable here or anywhere.
It isn't acceptable HERE. It's most certainly acceptable THERE. You should already know the difference.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-11-21 23:35
D Dow wrote:
> If others want this
> thread to some semantic discussion on performance maybe a
> different thread is needed.
I think you and others have had a heck of a lot more fun hijacking this one ... more than enough blame for all.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-11-21 23:41
Ed Palanker wrote:
> Mark, I did understand the quote, but he didn't post on a
> clarinet bboard.
No, you didn't Ed ... or you would not have tried to explain yourself again. And, by the way, that quote is from a few days ago in the NY Times I believe, and is apropos considering the venom in the scientific arguments that engendered it. If being quoted in the NY Times in the context of a heated debate isn't considered a public forum then I don't know what is.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-22 01:15
Heh? I didn't think I had anything to explain. I'm not the problem here, I'm usually answer respectful to every one. The only thing I'm guilty of, along with most everyone else, is keeping this thing going so long and off topic so I'm not going to read it again, that way I won't be tempted to answer it again. Bye! ESP
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2009-11-22 01:40
Ed P. sez he's not going to post or read this thread again...WAIT!
Ed Wait, I've got some exciting news about Emma Johnson.
You'all remember Emma Johnson, the world's greatest living clarinetist!
I'll post the info soon...just as soon as the football game is over.
Clarinet Redux
|
|
|
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
