 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Mark M
Date: 2001-10-31 19:06
Can someone direct me to a place that has a pretty good history description of the clarinet? I've spent some time searching "Sneezy" but really haven't come up with anything except it's ancestor is the Chalameau (sp??) pipe. And I have to spend some time here rewriting bylaws for the Symphony. UGH!!!!! Thanks.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: IHL
Date: 2001-10-31 19:45
there are heaps of websites about clarinet history! here are some I have found:
http://www.clarinet.org/Research.htm
ww.klorg.com/adam/history.html
http://hem.passagen.se/eriahl/clarinet.htm
just do a search on the net, you should be able to find plenty.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mario
Date: 2001-10-31 19:49
Gosh, there are so many things to say about our lovely instruments. History is interesting when it gets out of the dry date and progression venues. Annecdotes are why bring history to life.
My favorite "clarinet" annecdotes: (This stuff has been posted before and is coming from books).
When Mozart arrived in Vienna, he (like Glenn Miller 150 years later) needed a new sound to capture the revolutionary ideals of the time. The oboe tone was associated with the old, aristrocratic way of scoring winds. Mozart did not really fancy the flute (although he wrote marvels for it). Mozart had known the clarinet for quite a while, and was already using it (especially in its basset horn configuration) for mystical massonic music. Bingo! Mozart started to use the clarinet as the fundation of its wind section, creating a new sound, and establishing the trend followed for 100 years by the great 19th century composers (Beethoven and Brahms in particular). We own our presence in the symphonic orchestra to Mozart. Without Mozart, we might have been confined to wind orchestras and to the odd appearance such as it the case for the saxophone. In the study of the history of the clarinet, understanding the linkage between Mozart and our instrument is key.
Mendelsoon (there is a "h" somewhere I know) had two good clarinetist buddies in the person of Braerman, father and son. The son was a fabulous strudel cook. Mendelsonn simply loved these strudels. They stroke a deal: You come to my house and cook your exquisite strudels while I compose concertos for the both of you. This is how the two mendelsonn concertos for clarinet and basset horn were created. Rumour has it that the growling melodies entrusted to the Basset horn is to convey the noisy stomach of a hungry Mendelsoon, while the cold, remote melody of the Bb is to protray to immense vistas of Russia (where the two Braemen were heading next).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2001-10-31 19:59
As for the clarinet: Mozart wrote to his father on December 3, 1778 after returning from Mannheim and hearing their orchestra - "...Ah, if we too had clarinets! You can't conceive what a wonderful effect a symphony with flute, oboes and clarinets makes...Alas! our music might be much better and more beautiful if only the Archbishop were willing ( to add clarinets)..."
That about sums it up nicely...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mario
Date: 2001-10-31 20:20
We tend to play classical music very formally and severely today. We forget that some of the great composers were actually fun-loving, a bit crazy, characters who valued diversity and experiments much more than we think. While great music must always be played to our best, we should keep an image of the growling Mendelsonn in mind next time we play his concertos.
Because we classical musicians confuse serious music with severe music, it might be why audiences are deserting us. When I play, say, the Mozart concerto, all (the audience and myself) assume a stance that says: this is a formal moment: behave! Then I throw in an Ambersold CD with Misty on it, let my hair down, and everybody (including myself) is having fun.
In the history of the clarinet, its golden age is linked to time (1750 to 1820) where tons of amateurs (in local military bands in particular) played the instrument, with a few great composers gracing our repertoire with marvels. Then the clarinet disappeared into relative obscurity and was revived with jazz (off all things), culminating of course with Benny. Then it disappeared again.
yes, I know, some great composers created a few pages for us during that time. But it is nothing compored to what was done for the violon, flute or piano. Writing great music for the clarinet became (and is still today) something exotic for most composers.
The previous does not hold for Kletzmer and Eastern european music where the clarinet is at the core of the music. If you are a person active in your local jewish community, and if you play the clarinet well, you are a popular contributors to all manner of jewish events, especially the most joyful ones.
What the clarinet needs is a strong presence in the western popular culture in order to take its proper place. Classical musicians tend to hate this fact, but most of them have a tough time making a living because they have no popular platform to fall back on in order to pay for the rent. Clarinets are still around today in substantial numbers because countless wind ensembles in numerous high-school keep it alive. It is sad that this popularity in high-school does not tranlate to popular support later in life. Except maybe for violon players, there must be more former clarinet players out there than anything else. Why don't they collectively create a demand for clarinet-centric concerts???
It would be interesting to understand why high-school clarinetists do not support their instrument later in life (at least as audience). I have several hypothesis, my favorite one being that clarinet is so badly tough in high-school that most people only remember frustrating evenings of squacking and choking. A recent incident: I played the clarinet in a musical house where the daughter (an accomplished singer with a PhD in Voice) learned the clarinet in high-school. After a few pieces, the head of the household said: Wow! I never thought clarinet sounded like that." Later in the conversation, people were saying: "I have the impression that I ear this sound all the time on the radio." Of course! Clarinets are everywhere, but nobody recognizes it *** BECAUSE OF HIGH-SCHOOL INADEQUATE TEACHING ***. Pianists, voice and string players are superbly organized today. Nobody would give a violon to a kid without paying for a few lessons, especially if he/she is involved in any kind of ensemble. But the staple instrument of the wind ensemble (itself the most prevalent musical formation in school today) is not taught by specialists. How many band leaders are former clarinetists? Why, why, why? We need some historical perspective here.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2001-10-31 21:49
Mario -
From what little musical history I know about, it seems that good old fashioned funky jam sessions are nothing new.
- ron b -
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-10-31 22:41
Learning history from the Internet is fraught with ... inaccuracies might be the kindest words.
head over to your local library and have a librarian point out the <b>Groves Encyclopedia of Music</b> to you. Always start with a thoroughly peer-reviewed reference before looking on the Internet, especially when you need facts.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2001-10-31 22:47
What interesting posts above, fine stories, prob. very true. All of our "good books" with clarinet in the title [every library should have at least one] will have the history of our great horns. Also, Grove's Dictionary of Music has many pages re the clar family, well worth reading many times. Read up!! Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alphie
Date: 2001-10-31 23:27
Mario! Your history teaching is a worse piece of mish-mash than Baermann's strudelpot. Why don't you study more facts before you put any more litanys on this board. Your own theorys and strange conclutions are funny reading if you don't present them as if they were the truth. People who really want to know the truth might believe you.
Alphie
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sarah
Date: 2001-11-01 01:36
Mario said: "What the clarinet needs is a strong presence in the western popular culture in order to take its proper place. "
What is the proper pace? I am happy playing classical music, jazz, and klezmer. If someone wnatd me to play clarinet in a rock band I wouldn't hesitate, but I'm not waiting only for that opportunity. There are MANY classical music fans. If people think the youger generation only watches MTV and listens to that kind of music they are wrong. I personally know many other young people that like classical music.
Mario also said: "Of course! Clarinets are everywhere, but nobody recognizes it *** BECAUSE OF HIGH-SCHOOL INADEQUATE TEACHING ***. "
High school teachers are trying to so many things, how can he/she be an expert on every instrument? Some schools don' even have music programs. I was lucky enough to go to a high school that had a small, but good program. I am just a college student, but I can't imagine why anyone would insult teachers in such a way.
sarah
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mario
Date: 2001-11-01 12:50
On the Mozart anecdote: Colin Lawson, in his exellent book on the clarinet, and in the notes of his fabulous CD set "The History of the Clarinet".
On the Mendelshon's anecdote: Liner notes of one of the many CDs I have on this concerto (whose exact title escape me at the moment - I am on the road).
Alphie: Do you have better, more historically verified sources that you could use to enlighten us about Mozart, and/or Mendelsohn and the clarinet? Until your credentials are established, I will humbly defer to the numerous folks you grace CDs and write books on the subject.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mario
Date: 2001-11-01 13:53
Sarah: While I agree that high-school teachers have to contend with a difficult context and cannot be expected to know all instruments, the fact remain that clarinet teaching in the high-school system lag way behind piano, string and voice teaching. In fact, aspiring clarinetists often do not get any clarinet training at all (they are given the instrument with minimum instruction and left to their own device as far as the instrument proper is concerned).
Clarinetists are not in demand out there (compared to other instruments). It is a sad state of affair since the sheer number of high-school clarinetists should generate a large enough audience later down the road to allow many more clarinetists making a good living out of it.
Compare the explosive popularity of folk violon music these days. In my community at least (and this is a figure provided to me by local private music schools), more people learn the violon today than the piano and the guitar, thanks to the great success of numerous folk fiddlers. The violon (fiddler style) is in great demand because many fiddlers are well-known and are becoming role-models. The violon is now part of the popular culture, of the music folks of all walks of life recognize as their own.
There are many more people making a living playing the violon than playing the clarinet. Look around in dance halls and summer festivals everywhere.
Nevertheless, the violon is extremely difficult to play and require (for all idioms) quite a bit of formal training (even for folk music) in order to be acceptable by the audience. Nobody is given a violon and is expected to sort things out by themselves the way many high-school clarinetists are (I sometimes wonder whether "marching" skills are not more sought after than musical skills).
Private music schools (ie: schools that earn a living selling lessons to people) have well-established strings (including guitar), voice and piano activities. The woodwinds teachers that have regular customers are the saxophone and the flute ones. Very few (if any) teach the clarinet. There is no demand. Yet, go to your local high-school and see the frustrated struggling clarinetists trying to go beyond middle C. Why aren't these young clarinetists supported like the young violonists?
Go ask your local private music schools (who tend to be real close to the market since they must make a living) and analyze numbers. See if your community and mine are similar.
Except for Kletzmer, music of slavic origin, music of the Bavarian part of Germany, the clarinet is not part of popular culture. Yes jazz and the like! But most clarinetists making a living playing jazz actually play dixieland. This is again a specialized idiom, fun to watch every now and than, but by no means part of the everyday culture of our community (the way folk music is today).
The clarinet remain an exotic, specialized instrument. In spite of its prevalence in the school system, it is stuck in a black-hole with opportunities way below its potential. My readings indicate that it was not always the case and that the lack of interest of the people toward our instrument is actually fairly recent (a few decades). It would be interesting to understand why.
I have good friends involved heavily in folk music of celtic origin (Ireland, Scottland, Brittany, French Canada, Cape Breton, Newfounland). So, by osmosis, I am developping an understanding for this extremely popular form of music, at least in the North-East of North-America and in the British Isles. Some of the melodies are simply beautiful. It is not complex music (although it can sometimes get very technical). It is sharp-centric since it is meant for fiddles. I have started playing them on my "A" clarinet. By choosing well, one can fine celtic tunes that are simply perfect on the clarinet. In my small network of friends, this adaptation of traditional music is making them look at my instrument with a new look. In this circle of musical friends at least, the clarinet is slowly becoming associated with the music of the prevalent culture. Go to Halifax and listen to Chris Norman on the Irish flute. He now has a following similar to the most popular fiddlers of today (remember the Titanic's theme? the singer is Celine Dion, the flutist is Chris Norman) and the Irish flute is experimenting a revival. So, the problem is not with our instrument, the problem is with the music we choose to play.
Many years ago, a rock group (whose name escape me at the moment) composed a tune called "Color my world" with a fabulous flute solo (well-suited to high-school slow dancing). Instantly, the flute became "cool" (at least for a little while) and young flutists could listen to a popular tune that was giving them some idea of the tonal attribute of their instruments. Many an amateur rock band started adding a flute here and there. It lasted only a few years since the success of the flute in a rock band was never repeated.
Imagine the same thing happening to the clarinet (i.e.: a very popular group using it for many years instead of the soprano sax for instance), the clarinet becoming "cool", and many more clarinetists making a living. And once you hook an audience on the instrument, you have a chance to expose them to more refined form of music later. How many people out there listen to piano Bach sonatas today because their idol Herbie Handcook (of jazz-rock fusion fame) has brought them to classical music?
From a historical view-point, we clarinetists missed a couple of turns shortly after WWII and were left on the outside looking in, wondering what happened. We were just not paying attention to what people where interested in listening. We clarinetists have a lot of work to do to get back front and center in the popular culture the way we were in the first hald half of the 20th century.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jim Lee
Date: 2001-11-01 14:20
McDonalds sell more burgers than anybody. If I want a great burger I do not go to McDonalds. Pop is just that, popular to the great masses. I consider my taste at least one level above pop. Final answer, let everyone listen to what they enjoy and not worry too much about it.
Jim
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mario
Date: 2001-11-01 16:07
It is always dangerous to equate "mass appeal" with low quality. At its most fundamental level, a society prospers because a core set of value and cultural activities bind us together. To argue that "pop" music is instrinsically bad because it has wide appeal is as mistaken as arguing that English as a language is bad because 1.5 billion people speak it.
This discussion on why the clarinet is not popular is relevant to the student of the history of the clarinet. And studying history of our instrument can help us identify the real issues at hand, and how to solve them.
Even amateurs like me (who do not make a dime playing music) must be sensitive to what the audience thinks of what we play, if we intend on being part of the cultural fabric of our family and friends. My amateur guitarist and singing friends enrich our social lives because they share musical moments with all. As an amateur clarinetist, I want to contribute in a similar way and be part of the lives of others. That means that I must find ways to reach them. The responsibility is mine, not the audience's. A simple, beautiful folk tune played with honesty and integrity can work wonders. And then you expose your audience to more so-called serious music, a bit at the time. Be gentle and patient. And have no contempt for the music of our culture.
I will re-iterate my point: We clarinetist missed out on opportunities at the end of WWII and became confined to speciality music. As a result, we collectively have a tough time being appreciated. The challenge for us to to join the main stream cultural foundation of our society while keeping our musical integrity intact.
Amongst jewish people for instance, Kletzmer music has "mass appeal." I challenge here anybody who claims that Kletzmer music is a lesser music because of it.
Naturally, if somebody is happy playing in the privacy of his/her practice room and does not care whether somebody else ever find solace on one's music, then this discussion has no purpose.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sarah
Date: 2001-11-01 16:34
I think that classical music, and other music that the clarinet is most commonly written for is popular. Just not nsync or britney spears popular. There are plenty of people who love listening and playing classical music.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jim Lee
Date: 2001-11-01 16:44
I do not see the popularity of the clarinet as a problem. If you want to appeal to folks who like folk and pop sung using a guitar for accompaniment then maybe you should learn to play a guitar. A good friend of mine has a PHD in music with a major in percussion and has made a living teaching and playing and now has taken up blue grass guitar and is having a geat time. I never intended to "put down" any form of music. I just think that you (not just you but anyone) need to find an outlet for your talents that will satisify your needs.
Jim
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Randy
Date: 2001-11-01 20:01
I always thought the blues was a form of folk music and much of the music that I have from early in the 1910's to about the 40;s has some wonderful clarinet parts also wasn't classical music once the pop music of those times
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark M
Date: 2001-11-01 23:50
Wow!!!!! All I wanted is some direction to where I could get some historical facts on the clarinet!!! Web sites above (way above) are good. Thanks. Back to Symphony by-laws. ARRGGHH!!!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2001-11-02 07:37
Mario, you raise some valid points, and I can see some of these things in my own experiences.
Actually, the flute has done very well in rock and pop. There are a number well-known pieces on top of Chicago's Color My World (based on a piece by Varese, I believe). Well-known examples include "Goin' Up The Country" (Canned Heat), "Heard it in a Love Song" (Marshall-Tucker Band), "Down Under" (Men at Work), and any number of pieces that didn't make it onto radio playlists. I'm only scratching the surface here.
The clarinet can't claim as much. "When I'm 64" (Beatles) and "Women I've Never Had" (Hank Williams, Jr.) come to mind, though. Actually, the latter piece might've used a soprano sax. You'll be glad to know, though, that Van Halen uses a nice jazz clarinet on an album cut called "Big Bad Bill." Overall, though, we probably suffered a major blow when Stan Hasselgarde died.
But your concerns are valid, and some of your solutions provide a good example for others. Perhaps you should start a new thread and discuss them where passers by will see a subject line that alerts them to the discussion.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mario
Date: 2001-11-05 14:49
Just to emphasize again (if it is still necesary) the fork that the clarinet missed at the end of WWII, picture the following:
Swing as a innovative jazz genre was the rage from about 1935 to 1945. Swing roughly followed on the footsteps of dixieland and New Orleans jazz (starting after WWI). That means that, for a period of about 30 years, the clarinet was solidly implemented in the popular culture of the days.
Take the swing era. The innovators included Bennie Goodman, Artie Shaw, Woody Herman, Jimmy Dorsey (often of the clarinet). Glenn Miller and Duke Ellington made use of the clarinet "strategically" in their music (think about the famous Glenn Miller's sound). At the local level, hundreds of dance orchestras had great clarinetists on board and were never shy to make good use of them.
In a book on the history of jazz I read a few years ago, the author started "during the swing era, there was a convergence of jazz and popular culture - this convergence did not exist before jazz, and never existed since." For about 10 years, swing WAS the music of everybody.
In a great Time Life picture book on Pearl Harbour (the usual Time historical picture books on major events that have shaped America), there is a section on how the countless US military (either at home, or on ships, or in Europe/Asia, etc.) were finding rest and confort, listening on the radio (it was quite new then) or on the PA system to broadcast music from home. This music was swing music, clarinetists were heard 100 times a day. The same book pictures Bennie Goodman, clarinet in hand, shaking hands with a sailors somewhere out there. BG (a clarinetist's clarinetist was, after all, the King of Swing).
During WWII, any farm boy from Iowa, any factory worker from Cleveland, any fisherman from the Grand Bank, any logger from the West Coast (either at home or abroad fighting from us) knew what a clarinet was, knew how it sounded, knew a few Grand Masters, and could probably hum one or two clarinet-based tune. Swing Music (and one of its leading instrument) was the music of WWII.
The same author stated in his book: "Swing music came to vehicle the aspiration of the emerging America middle-class". Again, like in Mozart's day Vienna, the clarinet was associated with the winds of political and demographic changes.
Listen to "Sing, Sing, Sing" from Bennie Goodman to undersand the level of energy generated by our little instrument. The fact that amplification became feasible at about the same time is of course part of the success of the clarinet.
Then, Be-Bob hit us. Non-withstanding why Be-Bob replaced Swing (Be-Bop, from a musical view-point, is an evolution indeed, but from a political view-point, it is a regression way back in time where Jazz was stricly a black specialists affair), it is surprising why the clarinet did not make the cut. Be-bob, technically, is frantic music to the point of being agitated. To play be-bob in 1947, you had to have super fast fingers. Sheer technical virtuosity became everything. Only two horns survived as staple horn of the genre: the trumpet and the sax, with only a few on the trombones, clarinet and flute suceeding as boppers. Now, the clarinet can run figure-eight circles around trumpets and saxes; The clarinet (through Dixieland and New Orleand jazz) was well-known by black jazz mucician. But no bob leader picked it up as core instrument. It is amazing that our cherished instrument just died on the spot, and is still in a black-hole as a specialist instrument.
In interesting annecdote about Charlie Parker (again, coming from one of the may books that I read on jazz). In about 1951, CP heard the Mozart Concerto played by one of the then Grand Master (I believe it was Marcellus, but do not hold me to this). He fell in love with the instrument AND STARTED PRACTICING IT 10 HOURS PER DAY. But his support infrastructure (friends, mentors, agents, relatives, etc.) essentially told him to stop since playing the clarinet was going to kill his career. Just to put things in perspective, it is also at this time that CP recorded many albums with a string orchestra. CP was moving away from the narrow Be-bop style and might have seen the clarinet has a way out. But his environment put a stop to that harshly: "yes, you can play with strings, but do not appear in public with a clarinet". Why, even then in the hands of a grand master like CP, was the clarinet's reputation so bad as to represent the artistic death of somebody like Parker who could have simply taken our instrument to the moon.
Again, link this failure of the clarinet to consolidate its leadership after WWII to the fact that it is an extremely popular instrument in high-school, and you start wondering what high-school is doing to us.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mario
Date: 2001-11-05 16:02
The linkage between high-school clarinet teaching and its lack of popularity afterward might appear tenous to say the least. For now, let's state it as a hypothesis only (i.e.: something yet to prove that might not be right).
As a professional, I am an IT expert with advanced degrees in Computer Sciences and 25 years of experience in the business. It might be a surprise to many on this Board, but enrolment in Computer Sciences has been going down steadily since the beginning of the 1990's, in spite of the fact that these are great careers with plenty of opportunities. The reason for this phenomenon has been studied in depth (for instance, by the Canadian Software Human Resource Council), and the guilty party is **** HIGH-SCHOOL COMPUTER EDUCATION ****, which has made our profession extremely unpopular with kids (louzy equipment, un-skilled teachers, stupid assignments, etc.) . In fact, kids come out of high-school thinking that computers are for weirdos, are boring like hell, require too much work any way, and are not as cool as many other exciting careers. To quote the head of the Computer Sciences department in one of Montreal's university, "At the moment, most students singing up for Computer Sciences are mediocre to average - with a only a few really talented individuals." Wow!
This research is well backed up and is based on 10 years of logitudinal analysis.
So, when I put, as an un-proven hypothesis, that maybe, just maybe, the way we expose high-school kids to the clarinet might be why it is dropped like a led ballon after high-school, it is a piece of lateral thinking that might be right on the button.
"The clarinet is for weirdos, is boring like hell, require too much work anyway, and is certainly not as cool as the Tenor Sax..." One can easily imagine high-school students stating that about our instrument. I wonder which instrument the absolute bests (the emerging young musical elite) of the high school kids choose.
This would be a very interesting piece of research for a clarinet PhD student somewhere that would look at the clarinet TODAY instead of restating old historical facts or obscure interpretation of history.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
