 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: MaDxClArInAtOr
Date: 2007-12-03 00:49
i've noticed quite some controversy over tempo.
i'm working on the first movement for an audition and i find that the technique isn't impossible, however, its bringing the music to life thats extremely difficult.
my previous teacher had given me an area between 120-126.
my current teacher says 120 max.
what tempo feels right to you?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2007-12-03 00:56
How about, "brisk without sounding frantic." For me that's about 118.
But as you say, the music is EVERYTHING. Just play through phrases not being concerned about barlines.
...........Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2007-12-03 01:19
I'm in agreement with Paul.
I think that it can be performed 112-120. The best can execute the passages without sacrificing expression, and perform it 126+.
The expression must be the most important consideration!
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2007-12-03 13:09
Paul Aviles wrote, re K622 first movement:
>>....as you say, the music is EVERYTHING. Just play through phrases not being concerned about barlines.>>
Since K622 contains little in the way of musical instruction from the composer APART from barlines and phrases, it seems perverse to ignore the one and "just play through" the other.
In fact, a very large part of the power of Mozart's music lies in the subtle ways in which it can be seen to play off phrase-structure against bar-structure, and both of them against harmony.
I just led a 5-hour seminar for the Orchestra of the Age of Enlightenment entitled 'Bar-inflection and phrase-inflection in Mozart', using K622 and the G minor Symphony as examples -- so clearly it isn't as simple as you make out.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2007-12-03 17:07
Tony -
Do you plan to write up your seminar, or, better yet, was it recorded? I'd be VERY interested in seeing your ideas in action (although I know that your Phrasing in Contention article covers the same ground).
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2007-12-03 22:58
I have an almost 20 year old metronome called Dr Beat. It's about the size of a present day iBook (well, almost!) One of the innovative features when I bought it was the "tap" function, whereby one can tap units of time and the metronome gives the equivalent m.m. readings. I've tried tapping along with various recordings of classical music (including the Mozart concerto) and the most striking thing is how tempi change from bar to bar. Even the Mozart recording by such an esteemed soloist as Sabine Meyer can have tempo variations of 18 m.m. in one movement.
I personally think that this is a good thing and gives classical music life.
But for the original question- which bar would you like a metronome mark for? :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alexis
Date: 2007-12-04 10:58
I suspect that bringing the music to life is a problem caused by the musical complexity which Tony highlighted.
The article "Phrasing in contention" is an excellent starting point...
I would also try and listen to as many recordings as possible, and see how they shape the sound. You would not do badly to imitate a professional performer at this stage.
While that isn't a very creative avenue, at least it will give you some ideas on which to build.
(many composers learnt by copying other composers scores...)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2007-12-04 11:46
Ken Shaw wrote:
>> Do you plan to write up your seminar, or, better yet, was it recorded?>>
No, but it might be worthwhile posting just the summary, so that you see what I was on about:
"What we do in the OAE is by its very nature difficult to do really well. At least a part of it might be thought to be something like: to present our best shot at playing in the context of what the best players of the time aspired to. Notice, not necessarily presenting a version of what we think they did.
"Because, then as now, whatever that is has a lot to do with a blend of conscious and unconscious response. Then as now, I suggest, we admire someone as musical not just because they produce a particular something, but because they have, and demonstrate, an understanding both of the demands of the music and of the demands of the circumstances in which they play -- including what others do. And that understanding need not be (indeed, must not be) a product only of conscious thought, but of a blend of conscious and unconscious response. It's something that happens instinctively, 'on the fly'.
"In the eighteenth century, the unconscious bit was the style that everyone 'swam in', though clearly there were good and bad players then, as now. And for the good players, a style that included, say, representation of bar-structure, would necessarily have included degrees of representation of bar-structure -- different inflections of the bar -- varying through very light application to powerful insistence.
"I claim that we in the twentieth century have no hope of recreating the rich environment that allowed variety of interpretation within the eighteenth century style unless we can reproduce those degrees of representation without thinking -- which means that we have to practise them to the point that their variation may become a part of our UNCONSCIOUS response to the music of the time. Then, mastery of their variation allows us to produce naturally not only very subtly expressive inflections, but also to offer more extreme versions that are shown to be musically justified when they are taken in combination with what happens in other parts -- something that may not always be obvious from within the orchestra.
"To get a sense of that cannot happen in a moment, and is often therefore passed over in rehearsals that are geared to 'get the job done'. So, I want to take two pieces of Mozart -- the clarinet concerto, which I will play, and the G minor symphony, which I will direct -- and investigate what I've called Classical Stylistic Structures (CSSs) within those pieces. The intention is to create the beginnings of a greater awareness of the expressive possibilities of CSSs, and to draw the expressive instincts of the members of the orchestra closer together.
"Note, the intention is NOT to produce a performance."
Tony
Post Edited (2007-12-04 11:49)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2007-12-04 12:04
Tony, that's really interesting. If you do another could you let me know as i would have loved to have been there.
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
