Author: Gene Wie
Date: 2000-08-13 07:16
It seems to me that everyone has a different concept of what a "good clarinet" is. Having run through a good number of different instruments, I can honestly say that I would have been happy with any one of them given enough time. Buffet, Leblanc, Selmer, or Yamaha; it makes no real difference in the end run. I'm sure we've all seen fantastic artists everywhere with the entire span of clarinet models from every major (and many minor) manufacturer(s).
In fact, I recall not really caring *what* my instrument was until someone decided to point out to me that his [insert brand name here] was a superior instrument to everything else my compatriots and I were playing on. While I felt rather inadequate at the time with my weathered and beaten selmer signet, as did most of us come audition time, we had nothing to worry about. Mr. Expensive Instrument Boy had the musicality of a concrete slab.
...and up to this day I think my former clarinet teacher could easily play circles around me with a "bundy." =)
Being a violinist as well, I have to take a realistic look at this situtation: I'd rather pay for the car, mortgage, and groceries than throw in my year's salary to obtain an instrument. I'm never going to be world class performer with that attitude in any case, but if I lead myself into believing that I can't perform well because my $5000 instrument can't cut it in the face of quarter million dollar antiques, I'm not going to have much fun as a musician, am I?
I'm glad to be fortunate enough to currently own an extensive selection of clarinets. But every once in awhile, when I'm tempted to blame my instrument for some failure to complete a passage, I pull out that battered signet once again, work until I can play it perfectly on it, then go back to the buffet/leblanc/whatever and prove to myself again and again that it's 99% player and 1% instrument.
Thoughts?
Best regards,
Gene Wie
gwie@uci.edu
|
|