|
Author: Tom Puwalski
Date: 2006-02-20 12:24
The problem with this discussion is in the definition of not swung or " Straight" playing. It seems to me that any playing that's not totally absolutely "even", rhythmically perfect, to the point of not expressing meter, is considered by a lot of clarinetist as being "swung". In my opinion Goodman doesn't "swing" the Copeland, nor does he use that "boring, classical wind playing rhythm," that is so incredibly prevalent in clarinet playing these days.
I've spent a lot of time listening to violin and cello students over the last few years. To my ears they're being taught how to "Divide" a beat into more musical subdivision while wind players are trying to play sixteenths with a Dr. Beat.
So I would like someone to answer this question, so I can understand it. If you play the clarinet and it's improper to use vibrato, you get a tone that is not capable of any flexibility, and you divide up a beat into perfect subdivisions of a beat, just how are you supposed to play something and make any kind of music out of it what so ever?
I've been lucky my whole professional career to have computer equipment for writing and playing back compositions. Anytime I heard playback of something I put on the computer played back, I always considered the playback the way of playing that should be avoided at all cost. The people making these programs have been working hard over the years to get a playback that more closely resembles "human" performance, why have clarinetists been busting tush to sound like the computer?
Tom Puwalski, former soloist with the US Army Field Band, Clarinetist with Lox&Vodka, and Author of "The Clarinetist's Guide to Klezmer"and most recently by the order of the wizard of Oz, for supreme intelligence, a Masters in Clarinet performance
|
|
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-20 13:36 |
|
Kevin |
2005-06-20 15:58 |
|
GBK |
2005-06-20 17:39 |
|
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 |
   |
Re: Neidich's Copland vs. Goodman's Copland? new |
|
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}
