|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2005-06-20 20:42
Glenn,
As it turns out my earliest edition of "The Clarinet" is Volume 23, Number 4, so I can't track the article down quickly and I'm hoping you might be able to answer a couple of questions I have. First of all, who is the author of the article and what is his/her basis for concluding that Copland revised the work because it was too difficult for Benny Goodman. I'm looking at Charles Neidich's liner notes for his 2000 recording of the original version for Chandos. There, he seems to suggest that Copland made the revisions on his own to conform to his idea of technical standards of the time. Does the author of "The Clarinet" article have specific quotes from Copland or Goodman to support his/her conclusions or are the merely speculation on the author's part. (Or was Charles Neidich the author?)
On the recording, it sounds to me like Neidich plays the notes you identify. The biggest difference to my ear, however, is the section between 443 and around 470. He starts this an octave higher than the published part and things get pretty wild with more notes and higher notes than the published part. That section sounds like a bear and I can see Benny Goodman (and probably just about any other clarinetist of that era) finding it a challenge. That is about the only part that I could see giving Goodman any particular trouble, however. Unfortunately, in the recording, quite a bit of this is somewhat covered by the orchestra. To be honest, while I find the original version interesting to compare with the published version, I don't think the piece lost much in revision -- but I could be biased in favor of what I'm used to.
One other point. In the Chandos recording, Neidich (to my ear, anyway) plays the piece pretty "straight" -- not a jazzy interpretation. I think that is also true of Goodman's approach. This interpretation is in line with my bias. I have always felt the piece is more an American concerto (in the vein of Piston) than a jazz concerto (in the vein of, e.g., Siegmeister). The fact that it can stand up to so many different interpretations, however, is perhaps testimony to its greatness.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-20 13:36 |
|
Kevin |
2005-06-20 15:58 |
|
GBK |
2005-06-20 17:39 |
   |
Re: Neidich's Copland vs. Goodman's Copland? new |
|
Jack Kissinger |
2005-06-20 20:42 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-20 21:26 |
|
davyd |
2007-09-19 17:35 |
|
GBK |
2005-06-20 21:12 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-21 03:07 |
|
diz |
2005-06-21 09:17 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-21 13:18 |
|
clarnibass |
2005-06-21 14:47 |
|
William |
2007-09-18 18:30 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-21 17:29 |
|
Bob A |
2005-06-21 22:39 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-22 03:53 |
|
clarnibass |
2005-06-22 05:56 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-22 13:51 |
|
Ryan25 |
2006-02-19 19:22 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-22 13:57 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-22 14:21 |
|
Bob A |
2005-06-22 16:59 |
|
Mark Charette |
2005-06-22 17:06 |
|
Bob A |
2005-06-22 20:14 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-23 13:50 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-23 19:14 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-24 03:06 |
|
SueSmith |
2005-06-24 03:22 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-24 03:42 |
|
SueSmith |
2005-06-24 03:50 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-24 22:26 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-24 19:55 |
|
SueSmith |
2005-06-24 23:55 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-25 01:30 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-25 15:05 |
|
ken |
2005-06-25 03:14 |
|
SueSmith |
2005-06-25 17:44 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-25 22:23 |
|
Ken Shaw |
2006-02-20 00:45 |
|
Tony Pay |
2006-02-20 03:26 |
|
Tom Puwalski |
2006-02-20 12:24 |
|
Ryan25 |
2006-02-20 15:13 |
|
David Spiegelthal |
2006-02-20 15:51 |
|
Tom Puwalski |
2006-02-20 17:14 |
|
allencole |
2006-02-20 17:16 |
|
crnichols |
2006-02-20 17:21 |
|
John J. Moses |
2006-02-20 18:36 |
|
Phat Cat |
2006-02-20 21:00 |
|
aberkow |
2006-02-20 22:02 |
|
BobD |
2007-09-18 22:44 |
|
Mark G Simon |
2007-09-19 14:43 |
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
