The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-01-23 15:58
I went to a memorable concert on Wednesday night – the Staatskapelle Berlin at Carnegie Hall, conducted by Daniel Barenboim in an all-Schumann program. They played the Piano Concerto, with Radu Lupu, and the Second Symphony.
Berlin is down to "only" seven orchestras these days. The SB is the orchestra of the Berlin Staatsoper and is, probably, the #2 orchestra in Berlin, behind the Philharmonic. I had frankly mistaken them for the better known Staatskapelle Dresden. The SB seems to be like the Vienna Philharmonic, which has a large roster of players who rotate between opera and concert performances. The SB roster is huge – 126 players, with at least two on every part (including bass clarinet and tuba) with the sole exception of Eb clarinet – but the group that played on Wednesday was only around 100. There are some women – 16 out of 126 – a relatively small number, but ahead of Vienna, though well short of US standards.
The SB, unlike the Berlin Philharmonic, retains a distinctly German tone and style. (Almost all the names on the roster are German.) The strings play with a less vigorous – and less unanimous – attack than other in orchestras, but they "nourish" the sound more. Barenboim talked about this in an excellent interview in the New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/23/arts/music/23STAA.html?pagewanted=all , where he said that it is partly mechanical. "If you compare German instruments with non-German instruments — a German clarinet as opposed to a French clarinet; a German Steinway from Hamburg as opposed to an American Steinway — the instruments themselves have much more resistance. They resist the player trying to play them: in the flow of air, or the weight of the key, you feel a kind of resistance of the instrument, which makes the sound less harsh and less direct. It's a little bit like the sound of the German language; you go through the whole process of the consonants, and the weight of the consonants, until you get to the bloody vowel."
The SB brass have a gentle attack and a burnished rather than brazen tone. The tympanist is a star, mounted on a platform and taking the lead at every entrance.
The woodwinds cultivate a blend rather than contrasting sounds. Each of them can step out and play a distinctive solo, but each then steps back into the tapestry. Unlike American orchestras, where the flutist usually leads the woodwinds, the SB woodwinds are led by the first oboist, Volkmar Besser, who is clearly the star woodwind player. He has a sound unlike anyone else – both rich and plangent, rippling with gorgeous colors.
The clarinetists are Matthias Glander, Heiner Schindler and Tillmann Straube, with Eb player Udolf Wäntig and bass clarinetists Hartmut Schuldt and Sylvia Schmückle-Wagner. My seat was too low to see whether they used two or three clarinets, but I’m sure that only Glander, Schindler and perhaps Straube played. Glander has a wonderful, creamy tone, with great power, precise technique and long, beautifully arched phrasing.
The orchestra as a whole also played with a more blended tone than we’re used to. This is obviously what they and Barenboim want, but part of it is the physical setup. They were seated all the way at the back of the Carnegie Hall stage, under the domed stage area and well behind the proscenium arch. Also, they used only two sets of risers, with all the string players on the stage floor. Finally, they use an unusual and old-fashioned seating layout – from the left, 1st violins, cellos, violas and 2nd violins, with the basses on the left behind the 1st violins and cellos. Toscanini used this setup, saying that the two violin sections were the shoulders of the orchestra. The effect was quite obvious on Wednesday, particularly in the Symphony, where phrases are frequently passed between the two violin sections.
The Piano Concerto was superb. Radu Lupu is one of the great pianists, and his glowing tone easily filled the hall. I’ve heard a number of pianists in Carnegie Hall over the last couple of years, including Alfred Brendel and Evgeny Kissin, but none of them came "over the footlights" like Lupu. Also, unlike many soloists, Lupu, Barenboim and the orchestra really listened hard and reacted to one another as they played. They weren’t afraid to pull back to pianissimo and whisper beautiful phrases back and forth, even in the fast movements.
The Second Symphony was equally fine. Barenboim wanted very quick tempos, and the orchestra gave a thoroughbred response. They set the style in the first movement, which took off after the slow introduction. The second movement, Scherzo: Allegro vivace, went like the wind – by far the fastest version I’ve heard – and the long phrases coalesced perfectly. The third movement, Adagio espressivo, was truly espressivo, and the fourth movement, Allegro molto vivace built tremendous momentum to the volcanic coda.
Barenboim has been criticized for "overconducting" and subdividing the beat so as to kill the longer phrase. He certainly didn’t do that on Wednesday. In fact, he often didn’t even give a downbeat, but got the music going and then just outlined the larger phrases. Unlike many orchestras (e.g., the NY Philharmonic), the SB played really "on" Barenboim’s beat, so that when he did give a nuance, the orchestra was right with him.
Barenboim and the SB have just released a boxed set of the Schumann Symphonies. It’s high on my want list.
This was a thrilling, memorable concert. The Staatskapelle Berlin has its own distinct voice, unlike any other orchestra. Hear them if you can.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2004-01-23 19:13
Thanks Ken. Your reviewing skills are obviously much more comprehensive and illuminating than most critics I've ever read. Kudos to you!
Here's a review from their Chicago residency. Unfortunately I wasn't in town to hear them!
http://metromix.chicagotribune.com/reviews/critics/mmx-g8m1cq71u.5jan19,0,223146.story?coll=mmx-critics_heds
One thing I want to mention is DB's comment about the idea that there is more resistance "built into" German clarinets. Resistance to the tone becoming harsh or strident, perhaps - but I do not notice any appreciable difference in blowing resistance.
If anything I find that the Wurlitzers (at times played in our orchestra) feel freer and indeed sound mellower. The beauty of the German system is the eveness of resistance and response from the lowest note to the highest. There is little discernable or no "acoustical kickback" when changing registers as with the French system. All notes in all registers have an equal amount of resistance and responsiveness. There is far less (if any) "voicing" of notes or registers required than with the French clarinets.
Gregory Smith
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2004-01-23 19:53
thanks for great review and for informative comments (Mr Smith too...). Interesting to hear that they play "on" the conductors beat (having toured the same Opera with two orchestras- one who played "on" and the other "after" i know which i prefer!!!!!).
if only orchestras would tour to NZ- you are so lucky!
donald
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-01-23 20:12
Greg -
Thanks for the nice words.
I tried a Wurlitzer Bb at the Columbus ClarinetFest a few years back. It wasn't really a fair test, since I had to use their mouthpiece and reed. It was certainly mellow, and I noticed the evenness and easy movement from one register to another, but I found it hard to blow. If I had time to set up reeds and get used to it, maybe my impression would change. Certainly the keywork, fit and finish were far better than my Buffet.
I talked to Larry Combs about playing the Wurlitzers. I said that they were frustrating for me, since, while they made a wonderful sound (which I couldn't easily make on my Buffet), I had trouble making more than one sound. It was a feeling of "blow in here and it comes out there." Larry said that was his experience, too.
It's two sides of the same coin. You don't need to "voice" particular notes, but you can't voice them when you want to, either.
Again, it's probably a matter of playing them a lot. Certainly Sabine Meyer, for example, can get many colors.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2004-01-23 20:27
Ken ... sounds wonderful, shame they played such a boring program.
Having said that ... Radu Lapu is my FAVOURITE pianist and the Schuman concerto is sublime.
I actually meaned they could have played something more showy like Alpinesinfonie or Ein Heldenleben. Seems a shame to tour an orchestra and leave most of them at home.
Without music, the world would be grey, very grey.
Post Edited (2004-01-23 20:32)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-01-23 23:50
The program was anything but boring. Actually extremely satisfying and rewarding. The SB is presenting a Schumann orchestral minifest at Carnegie. They have concerts tonight (Friday), tomorrow and Sunday. The symphonies are being rationed one per concert with a concerto (-like) piece to accompany.
I agree with Ken and possibly even more so. The piano concerto was a WOW experience. What I really appreciated was the creative way they brought out the phrases and the wonderful rhetorical characterizations of the playing.
Regards,
Mary Vinquist
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2004-01-24 02:40
GBK - intersting article - adds another shade to Ken's view.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2004-01-24 04:49
Ken Shaw wrote:
"...It was a feeling of "blow in here and it comes out there."
...It's two sides of the same coin. You don't need to "voice" particular notes, but you can't voice them when you want to, either.
Again, it's probably a matter of playing them a lot. Certainly Sabine Meyer, for example, can get many colors."
=================================================
Good point Ken...although the colors are drawn from a different spectrum of the timbral palette than a French instrument. I imagine that the acoustical difference dictates that to a large degree.
Whether the French clarinet is, as claimed, capable of *more* timbral flexibility due to it's design, is questionable IMO. I haven't the depth of experience with the German system as a player to be able to compare the two types fairly, but I suspect that they are both capable of much tonal flexibility within their own worlds. As a listener though, the example of SM is a good one and is clearly illustrative of that assertion.
Gregory Smith
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-01-25 13:29
GBK-
I just read the Newsday review. Unlike many misguided reviews, I had the feeling that the reviewer was actually at the same concert. He missed the point, in both small and large matters, though.
First, and most important, he didn't give Barenboim and the orchestra the leeway to give give their own performance. The symphony worked VERY well at the fast tempos, and the tender performance of the third movement was all the better for the contrast. I have the feeling that the reviewer decided "too fast" a few seconds into the symphony and filtered everything through that snap judgment. I've read that Brahms once heard what others thought to be a misguided rendition of one of his symphonies, and said, "Ah, so it can be played that way, too."
Second, I heard the moment-to-moment playing as thrilling. The orchestra felt the energy and practicually levitated, particularly during the scherzo.
As Artur Schnabel said, great music is better than any one performance can be. This performance deserved to be reviewed on its own terms. At least for me, I now think differently about the Schumann Second, and the version I carry around in my head is the better for it.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: paulwl
Date: 2004-01-26 01:43
Being intrigued by Ken's review, I hied myself over to Carnegie to hear the Staatskapelle play Schumann's 3rd Symphony and 2 piano/orchestra pieces (Ops. 92 & 134).
Jonathan Biss was soloist. His delicacy, sensitivity and maturity at age 22 amaze me (I am 37 and will never be that grown-up!). These pieces are all about the interplay between soloist and ensemble, and that was very satisfying indeed.
The 3rd Symphony has some prominent clarinet work in the 3rd movement. Ken's comments about the section applied well to the 2 players on today's concert. "Dark" is not quite the word; too limiting. The sound was rich, round, full, lush without being luxuriant.
All in all, at least where I was sitting ("dress circle", ie: mezzanine), the Germanic tone concept of the orchestra was evident. The strings are mellow: they don't bite, don't get in the way. The wind complement wasn't huge (17), but it was nicely prominent.
Yes, maybe Newsday's reviewer had a point in saying Barenboim is a little too"zing-boom" as a conductor. But his interpretation worked – it put over the romantic spirit better than a cool, clinical performance would have done.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-01-26 12:30
I have been a huge fan of the German conception of orchestral timbre...and to no surprise I see the positive feedback above about an orchestra I never heard. Many years ago I had the great fortune of seeing Sinopoli conduct Statskapelle Dresden in a concert and can say I never before heard Richard Strauss sound so "right". The Death and Transfiguration was beautiful...the clarinets covered in tone and the warmth of the cellos and bass clearly a deciding factor....the other piece was the Alpine Symphony and can say the Brass was burnished with a dusky opulence....
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2004-01-26 18:20
Greg -
You tell us of the evenness of response of the Wurlitzers you play, compared to the French instruments.
I'm interested to know whether that same evenness can be found in more moderately-priced German-bore instruments. As I understand it, Wurlitzers are hand-made to a much greater extent that Buffets or Leblancs. Is this evenness really a consequence of the basic design, or is it achieved by a huge amount of manual adjustment at the factory?
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-01-26 18:59
Just playing the devil's advocate, I feel that the eveness thing can be taken too far. American orchestral players are accused of this more than European players....
I certainly find the Altissimo on the Oehler somewhat less than pleasing in terms of the register change....and by this the register upper clarinion c C# to the D etc......
Eveness of response in my experiece with Wurlitzers is as much of a problem as the uneveness of the Boehm scale...my personal preference in the matter is the reform boehm and its tonal opulence...
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-01-27 15:38
I think its pretty easy on this side of the ocean to underestimate the level of some groups in Europe. When you consider how fine some of the newer ensembles are in Western Europe, it begins to stagger the imagination ....for example
Ensemble Modern out of Koln....tremendous contemporary music ensemble..
Ensemble Incontemporain...Boulez ..
The Fires of London...incredible new music group
Netherlands Wind Ensemble...
The Statkappelle Dresden...one of the finest groups anywhere
Polish National Orchestra Katowice...unbelievable ensemble with great brass
Orchestra of the Beethoven Academie....in Belgium
Moscow Soloists....
Ensemble Walter Boeykens...great chamber group in Belgium
Orchestre Nouvel Philharmonique de France.
Netherlands Philharmonic Orchestra...fine group with superb recordings...
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-01-27 15:52
D Dow wrote:
> I think its pretty easy on this side of the ocean to
> underestimate the level of some groups in Europe.
Or of some of the groups in Asia, like the Tokyo Kosei Wind Orchestra
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-01-27 15:57
Don't forget the Chamber Orchestra of Europe -- formed from the best young players, and better than almost any of the older ensembles.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2004-01-27 16:40
Ken; if you like Schumann up tempo trying getting a copy of Adrian Boult's 1950s mono set of the sympnonies recorded by Pye Nixa. They are very fast indeed. Boult's view was also roundly criticised, but my guess is that this is the tempo many original instrument ensembles might do them these days. And as to the speculation that Barenboim's tempi are fast because he is a jet set conductor, Boult travelled very little at all (thus significantly limiting his career), and did not even drive a car. No shortage of drive in his Schumann tempi though. (It must be admitted that the orchestra does sound breathless).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: paulwl
Date: 2004-01-27 17:00
(D Dow) >> I think its pretty easy on this side of the ocean to underestimate the level of some groups in Europe. <<
Is this just because we don't know them as well? Or have we somehow come to think of them as inferior, because different?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2004-01-27 18:27
i often wonder if the german clarinet doesn't record as well as the french one- i hear edgy sounds on recordings, then hear the same player with a lovely sound- i know which one i believe and like!
Joachen Seggelke put forward the theory i can half remember about "as the orchestras got louder after WW2, the clarinets were built in a way that allowed them to project better by emmiting more high frequencies". i wonder if this has also contributed to the "hard sound" i notice.
just a thought- almost every time i've heard a German system player live, i've loved the tone.
donald
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
|