 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: theclarinetist
Date: 2003-10-19 23:29
Hey everyone. I'm preparing the Martinu Sonatina for the ICA contest thing... I just got a recording of it yesterday, and I have to say, I'm not all that impressed... The first time I listened to it, I absolutely hated it. It has since grown on me somewhat... One thing I did notice though, the rhythms are so odd at times that if I followed the music while listening, I got more distracted by following the rhythms. I found that just by listening to it, the more "oddly" rhythmic parts sound pretty normal when you aren't staring at the music...
I guess I don't have any questions about it... I was just wondering what everybody else thinks about this piece... It seems to me that alot of it is just busy sounding, and it's hard to hear the harmonies (it just sounds jumbled alot of the time)... This could be due somewhat to the performers though, I'm not sure (I got the Michael Edwards recording on Crystal Records - sidenote: that guy (Edwards) has some of the ringiest throat tones I've ever heard).
Anyway, just let me know what you think. I don't have to like a song (it's like they say... you can please some people all the time, all people some of the time, but not all people all the time... good advice for aspiring composers!), however, it's much easier for me perform a piece well when I like it (or at least "respect" it).
Thanx
Donald Hite
theclarinetist@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Pinner
Date: 2003-10-20 02:37
You have to consider the period of the compostition to understand where he is coming from. Bohuslav Martinu was born in Bohemia (Czech Republic) in fairly impoverished circumstances around the 1890's but lived much of his life in France and Switzerland and a brief period if my memory serves me in the USA. A great many of his works were composed around the first world war and the period leading up to the second world war, a period of great upheaval would be an understatement. Much of the composition from this period displays anger, angst and many other negative emotions. Martinu could also be considered part of the avant garde and consequently he displays rebellion against the musical traditions of the Romantic and Nationalist periods as did his avant garde contemporaries Schoenberg, Berg and Webern. Viewing his works in context may help. This is a fairly general explanation of where he was coming from a bit of reading may help you to understand more.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2003-10-20 05:52
Sorry, what's not to like about Martinu's music?? He's folksy (need a better word here), inventive, his scoring is crystal clear and almost as beautiful as lucid as either Debussy or Ravel (in my opinion). As to your reference to his music being "busy sounding". Perhaps the early 20th century isn't your cup of tea? I would class him as a prototype minamalist - repetative, and blocks of harmonies that seem to clash, always very orderly, however and beautifully folksy.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rachel
Date: 2003-10-20 06:31
I played it earlier this year, and I thought it was cool. I also thought that the harmony added to the piece. I liked the fact that the piano had a more equal relationship with the clarinet than in a lot of the Classical/Romantic repertoire- I get bored with playing music where it feels like I'm using the piano as a metronome, and I'm sure accompanists do as well.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ChrisC
Date: 2003-10-20 15:58
I'm not familiar with the work in question, but I think that grouping Martinu with the Second Viennese School (Schoenberg, Webern, Berg) is a mistake. Martinu always struck me as a Stravinsky-esque neoclassicist, with strong similarities to Hindemith as well, with his avoidance of conventional tonality without utilizing atonality or serialism. His music is obviously not as lyrical or Romantic as his Bohemian precursors like Dvorak or Smetana, but what do you expect?
That said, I find that Martinu's music is not always that easy to like; however, that's not because it's all that modern avant-garde. He was probably among the more conservative composers of his generation.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2003-10-20 17:23
I would personally not classify this piece in the Vienniese tradition, however, the harmonic language and the rythmic language is fairly complex.
It is generally one of the pieces that clarinetists shy away from because of the fact the whole thing is rather tricky. In other words: It does not offer a performer even a second of relaxation.
I think in many ways it is an austere beautiful work, however, a teacher or a performer who knows the knots and loops of the piece should help a bit with developing a way of getting the student to work on intervals and style that give an insight into the difficulties of interpreting this underestimated work!!!
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katfish
Date: 2003-10-20 19:01
I dig it. I has a good beat. You can dance to it. I'd give it a 73.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2003-10-20 22:53
And ... if you like this piece, try the six symphonies ... they're a blast.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: theclarinetist
Date: 2003-10-21 03:24
I've actually liked most of Martinu's music. I heard one of the symphonies (6, I believe) and "The Frescos of Piero della Francescan". I don't know, I just thought the Sonatina was a little abrasive... It's grown on me some though (the first time I heard Berg's 4 Pieces I thought it sucked, now it's one of my favorite pieces, so I can't be too sure how I'll feel tomorrow).
Don Hite
theclarinetist@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Pinner
Date: 2003-10-22 04:05
I did not group Martinu with the Viennese tradition. I was putting him in a temporal context and pointing out that there were those that were more 'outside'. I also pointed out that he lived predominantly in France but couldn't off the top of my head think of a French contemporary although Darius Milhaud now springs to mind. His output was fairly wide, prodigious and inconsistent in both style and quality.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2003-10-22 05:51
Mark ... I read your thread and saw absolutely no connection with the Viennese tradition ... your reference was timeframe oriented, right? In which case I agree with you about him as a composer (except I haven't yet heard anything I'd call 'bad' - not suggesting that lack of quality and style is particularly wrong ... take Beethoven's King Stephen overture, as an example, which is utter crap, compared to Egmont, Fidelio for example - IMHO).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2003-10-22 07:03
diz wrote:
> take Beethoven's King Stephen overture, as an
> example, which is utter crap, compared to Egmont, Fidelio for
> example - IMHO).
Still, not as bad as "The Ruins of Athens" ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
