 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2006-09-11 15:00
... but I know what I like.
I'm pleased with the feedback you folks have given me based on my dinigration of Schstokovich in another thread. The title of this tread is a strong admission of where my musical tastes lie.
The reason for this query is simple:
How does one acquire the maturity to move from one's comfort zone into contact with new music --whether "types" or composers --or even phases of a composer's works.
Example: John Williams blew me away with the plaintive fiddle solo in "Schindler's List," but he sets my teeth on edge with his clarinet concerto. I remember having a bright, hippie friend recommend Shosh-talk-a-vitch to me and the shock of hearing a completely foreign bash of an orchestral work. That shock has kept me away from him for 30+ years.
Other example: I think that I did Mozart's wind music, but Tony Pay comes in here, pulls back the rug and shows us some of the unexpected "dust" hidden in those compositions --stuff I had to be shown to even know existed.
On the other hand, I've gotten my hands on some pretty "interesting" modern stuff --so far too difficult for me to perform --and to "far out" to tackle at this stage of my re-development. Some of this stuff is really interesting in that the phrasing and use of the clarinet is completely new to me.
I don't have the music-theoretical background that allows me to recognize the structure of music. I recently intered all of the arpeggios of the Cavalliini #3 into Finale and got it to help me extract the chord progression. (I'm not sure what I learned from that.)
I'd like to discern the path to broader enlightenment. Any signposts to share with me?
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BassetHorn
Date: 2006-09-11 16:59
Speaking of Shostakovich,
https://www.vanrecital.com/events/event_list.cfm?all=yes&seasonBrowseID=0&venueBrowseID=0&typeBrowseID=0&season=19
Jerusalem String Quartet is playing Shosta's SQ cycle at Vancouver Recital society.
www.vanrecital.org
I can't afford it though......
Post Edited (2006-09-11 17:00)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2006-09-11 18:07
Hi Bob
You don't have to have the theory knowledge. More important is to listen to as much music as you can. It is like some chess players get very good from studying a lot, but others just play a lot and are just as good. One of the most important things to do imo, is try to explain (to yourself) why you don't like some music when you listen to it. Even try to be specific.
I can say about myself, that I was lucky to have a really great teacher. He brought some pretty "weird" music every week for class and explained a lot about it. Not just the theory, but the ideas, logic and even philosophy. The more I listened the more I understood, and I can tell you Amazon made a lot of money from me buying CDs 
To show what a big difference this understanding of music can do - about ten years ago I listened almost only to rock music, and not many different bands, but just in the last couple of days I listened to Saint-Saens, Benny Goodman, Mark Feldman (modern composition and improvised music), Evan Parker (that's over 20 minutes of soprano sax solo), Copland, Stan Getz, and Beyonce (yes, that American singer), and I liked all of them.
Hey BassetHorn, unless it is not Jerusalem String Quartet from Israel, they went to highschool with me (not same year)
Post Edited (2006-09-11 18:08)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2006-09-11 18:19
Random thoughts....
1. You don't have to like every piece or every composer. Someone who "loves all sorts of music" is usually someone who doesn't really listen at all.
2. The Shostakovich piano concertos, especially the concerto with trumpet, are tremendous fun to listen to; maybe you'll like those even if you find some of his heavier works off-putting.
3. allclarinets wrote: "Not every composer writes a gem every time. I'd say Mahler is the only exception". Maybe you've never heard the 3rd symphony, the "Endlessly Bombastic".
4. Don't always judge music from the CD. It's often better to approach a new piece by hearing it live. Especially true for opera. (Unfortunately, this doesn't work for Mahler 3, which is just as ghastly in live performance.)
-----------
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: BassetHorn
Date: 2006-09-11 18:58
After listening to almost exclusively classical and jazz for the last 8 years, my friends got me to listen to the band Tool, and I love it. Variety is the spice of life indeed.
Nitai, I think they are from Israel. Love to see them perform.
http://www.harrisonparrott.com/artists/Jerusalem_Quartet.asp
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BelgianClarinet
Date: 2006-09-11 19:37
I must like Bombastic Music ;-) because I love the 3rd
Actually Mahler is one of my top favorites, but I'm still struggling with 7, 8 and a bit with 9. But Bob, don't panic, it took me over 10 years to go from Mahler 1 to 2 and beyound (also for Mahler there seems to have been 10 years between the start of the first and the conclusion of the 2nd)
It also took me 5 minutes to love DS :-) , maybe just because I was in a 'lucky mood' and strangely enough it all began (euheum) with n°6, a forgotten symphony (I almost cannot find any reference to it), but with unbelievable clarinet solo's !!, a bit like riding on a rollercoaster.
There' s lots of music I don't like (yet?) and even more that I don't understand, but given the right setting (and indeed Graham live concerts still have that little more), the right mood, a good performance etc. things can change.
I even like quite a lot of Anton Webern ;-) This, I think (in contradiction to the Shos statement) will not start a new thread :-))
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: robertgh
Date: 2006-09-11 20:05
As regards the "another reason to ignore Shostakovich" on the other thread, I'm afraid this might be a case of not sampling enough of what is a broad, diverse musical feast; kind of like judging the realm of Italian cuisine on the basis of one so-so cannoli. Lucky for me my first taste was that electrifying Columbia recording of the 5th sym. with Bernstein and the NYPO.
I hope you get a chance to hear more; there's a good chance you'll find something in DS's remarkably diverse work that will command a closer look. After Brahm's, Mahler, and Dvorak there's probably nobody quite like DS for engaging use of the clarinet. Come to think of it, there's more than a hint of Mahler musical DNA in Shostakovich's symphonies.
As for moving beyond one's comfort zone, I guess the best advice is to listen to as much as you can as often as you can. If you have a college or university nearby with a decent humanities program, you might find recordings to explore. Try inter-library loans if you can't get things locally. If you are lucky enough to have a good classical music radio station nearby, check their listings for things you are curious about. For that matter, there's a lot of streaming audio content and station feeds on the Internet.
Of course, there's the real danger that your forays out of your comfort zone will take you down less-travelled roads and you'll find yourself scouring the web for import sites, obscure boutique labels and such in pursuit of something beyond the usual fare (I tried to explain that to the good folks at BMG record club several years ago). But you're going to find all kinds of cool stuff in the process.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
