 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2008-01-28 23:00
The following was emailed to me today by a member of the CSO.
Permission has been given to post this info on the clarinet bulletin board.
Results of today’s 1st clarinet position for the CS0:
Unscreened Pre finalists heard first: Nuccio, Morales – both qualified for the screened finals.
6 screened finalists:
-----------
Nuccio,
Morales,
Yeh,
Smith,
Asst. Principal Nat’l Symphony (?),
Scott Andrews
Morales was the only one to receive enough votes by the committee to qualify for the position. No decision has been made yet as to whom to offer the position.
The two other pre finalists that will be heard on Feb 18th will be Rusinek and McGill. They will be compared to Morales only if they receive enough votes from the audition committee. If they do receive enough votes, Boulez will then decide which one (if any) will be engaged – either after hearing them even further at that audition or after having heard them play in the orchestra.
...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: CharlestonDoubler
Date: 2008-01-28 23:23
GBK:
The Assistant Principal at National Symphony is Eugene Mondie. He was a finalist last year? for Metropolitan Opera Orchestra principal position as well. Great sound, great player. Not a surprise he made the finals........
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Blake Arrington
Date: 2008-01-28 23:33
I study with Eugene. He is an amazing player and a wonderful teacher. He went to Oberlin and studied with Combs while at DePaul for a MM.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2008-01-29 01:14
I went to school with Eugene. He is, indeed an incredible musician! Hope he continues with successes...One of his first successes was winning a position in the old American Soviet Youth Orchestra, I believe at the age of 16 or 17. He beat out tons of clarinet majors at that time. He's originally from Dallas TX and I think he studied with Forrest there...
Post Edited (2008-01-29 01:18)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J. J.
Date: 2008-01-29 04:35
"Morales was the only one to receive enough votes by the committee to qualify for the position."
I love this. Clearly, the other finalists weren't qualified to play in that position!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2008-01-29 14:27
J. J. wrote:
> "Morales was the only one to receive enough votes by the
> committee to qualify for the position."
>
> I love this. Clearly, the other finalists weren't qualified to
> play in that position!
I think that ANY orchestra would be extremely fortunate to have ANY of those top 6 clarinetists as their principal player.
The problem is, that most people look at it in the juvenile vein as having one "winner" and 5 "losers"
Please, let's not disparage Mark Nuccio, Greg Smith and the others who are clearly the cream of the crop of current players ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2008-01-29 15:44
Is Morales dissatified at Philadelphia or does he, or anyone, think the Chicago orchestra is better that the Philadelphia?
Maybe he's going to start changing positions as often as he changes equipment?!?!
Clarinet Redux
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: CPW
Date: 2008-01-29 15:57
Maybe it is used for leverage in contract negotiations.
Principals get more than the section players.
An extra 5 or 10K never hurts ones wallet.
Against the windmills of my mind
The jousting pole splinters
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J. J.
Date: 2008-01-29 16:41
Sometimes even the most sarcastic comments don't translate on here. I think that was an incredible list of players for their final round. Only a fool would seriously assert that they others weren't qualified or couldn't play in that seat. Dave is right that I am not being serious at all. I am instead laughing at the phrasing and grading system of the CSO that would give only Morales enough votes to qualify for the position. That is beyond absurd. Ricardo could win straight out and nobody could say he didn't deserve it. But according to this report they weren't even comparing candidates. They determined that only Ricardo was qualified. What if he hadn't taken the audition? Would they have voted down all of the candidates? Gievn the list, that's an unbelievable thought. I believe this leaves them open to more questions about the process, but one thing is for sure. There was more than one person on that list "qualified" to be principal of the CSO.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dgclarinet
Date: 2008-01-29 16:47
That's the reaction I had to reading it too J.J. If nobody else on that list (except Morales) is qualified, what does the CSO do next (if Morales doesn't take the job, which is apparently highly possible)? I really don't think they're going to find too many more folks that can play like Morales, or anybody else on that list. This isn't exactly the CSO of Fritz Reiner either...their announcement just sounds kind of strange.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: CPW
Date: 2008-01-29 17:25
Who was on the committee?
Did Coombs participate in the vote?
One factor often overlooked:
It is NOT the BEST player, but the one whose playing they believe will FIT the orchestra the best which determines the vote. It can also be the one who will not overshadow the "star" of another section. Just speculation.
There are divas who do not want the tenor to outshine them, and vice versa.
Against the windmills of my mind
The jousting pole splinters
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J. J.
Date: 2008-01-29 17:39
CPW, I'm not sure your assertion about divas has any real-life foundation.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris22311
Date: 2008-01-29 18:22
Honestly. I believe we are all talking at another level here. Principal of Chicago requires an immense amount of talent and experience. Obviously the members of the orchestra have very high values in their decisiveness in their selection for a position that may be filled for decades to come.
All 6 finalist have a HUGE spectrum of styles. To say that all of them are qualified would be a very naive statement. As someone stated earlier, it is a matter of who will best fit in the orchestra.
If Morales was the only one who received enough votes to be selectable, it is indicative that he was the only one who presented himself at that level.
Chris
Post Edited (2008-01-29 18:22)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2008-01-29 18:35
There is a difference between "qualified for the job," which all the finalists are, and "qualified" in the audition sense, which means one needs a certain number of votes. Morales was the only one to get that number of votes. No one is ragging on any of the other finalists. None of us heard the finals, but I obviously Morales played in a manner more pleasing to a majority of the committee. "Qualified" is a term that has more than one meaning; in this case it means "got enough votes." This isn't rocket science. This isn't strange. Someone played a better audition than someone else and got more votes. The rest is semantics.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J. J.
Date: 2008-01-29 18:57
It may be semantics, but these details mean things. GBK's intitial posting said:
"Morales was the only one to receive enough votes by the committee to qualify for the position. No decision has been made yet as to whom to offer the position."
As you say, in an audition setting, the term qualified does mean "got enough votes." In this instance, though, I read it as not being a comparison between Morales and the other candidates. This was an up or down, yes or no vote. This is standard operating procedure in an audition, but the interesting thing here is that he was the ONLY one who played that they deemed acceptable by the commitee as a whole. If every member of the committee followed the letter of the law, then there is no other way to read this than, "the committee found only Morales to be an acceptable candidate." Of course we all know the others are truly qualified. It is the audition procedure which has said otherwise, without the need to even compare Ricardo to the rest of the group. And the procedure, and how it was carried out, is exactly what we are laughing at here.
I stand by my initial query of what would have happened had Ricardo not been in the group? Is everyone rejected? Does someone else play more? And if so, does that call into question the process as it played out here? And this is not even bothering to ask how the board will be able to fairly assess Rusineck and McGill when they play a month later. The orchestra is in a tight spot here, knowing the identities of the candidates. Dismiss both and take Ricardo and that looks awful (again, he's more than deserving, but you get my point). Comparing their auditions once they've "qualified" is next to impossible. Have all the remaining candidates play in the orchestra? Well, that seems alright, unless someone predicted that would be the case well before the audition.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2008-01-29 20:33
Ricardo playing in a section is like Heifetz playing in a section. There was only one Heifetz, there's only one Ricardo.
I'm sure that the other winds in the Orchestra aren't looking at if there's a candidate who could show them up or not, they want the best player for the job.
---------------------------------
CPW wrote:
One factor often overlooked:
It is NOT the BEST player, but the one whose playing they believe will FIT the orchestra the best which determines the vote. It can also be the one who will not overshadow the "star" of another section. Just speculation.
There are divas who do not want the tenor to outshine them, and vice versa.
----------------------------------
That HAS happened to Ricardo before, but it wasn't for a Principal job and he was *really* young (before Florida). Was told to me by a member of that audition committee.
Major Orchestra too
But it wouldn't happen at all with Chicago where each section leader is a major, major figure. He's not going to show them up as that isn't what it's about, he will contribute to an amazing section already. (if he gets it, or whoever does - it ain't me....., ((didn't audition ))
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinboy
Date: 2008-01-30 00:08
Vin is right on. I've been on audition committees and he's right. Sometimes the committee is split because everyone is looking for something different. Getting more votes than others means that more members liked what they heard, not that the others played poorly. It could be tone quality, even though I'm sure all of these players have fine tones, they're all different. Could be musicianship, we all have different concepts of how a certian phrase should go, etc. These are all polished players but they have different styles, tone quality etc. That's why some really fine players don't get to the finals many times and then get a great job. It's being in the right place at the right time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BG ★2017
Date: 2008-01-30 00:36
My philosophy about auditions and getting high profile jobs such as this one, is that there are many, many great players out there that could definitely hold the job if given the opportunity, but only one can win it on that particular day for a variety of reasons, many of which are listed in the above posts! Obviously some big shoes to fill up there with Larry's retirement!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tom Puwalski
Date: 2008-01-30 03:02
It seems to me that no one on audition committees want to hear R-13s anymore! Aren't the other two "finalists" playing Leblanc and Selmer? Maybe it's something as simple as equipment, maybe the rest of the woodwind section finally doesn't have to try to compensate for the lousy intonation of the R13.
But all these questions about auditions, and the best player doesn't win it, ya da, ya da, doesn't address a bigger mystery? In this day and age, where any form of discrimination is taboo, how does Hooters only hire hot looking waitresses? It's been my experience that there are more women, who think they are hot enough to work at Hooters than there are clarinetists that think they could make the finals of the Chicago symphony. Do they hold interviews behind a screen? How do they get away with that?
Tom Puwalski, former soloist with the US Army Field Band, Clarinetist with The Atonement, 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. Go to my facebook site to hear a few premature release tracks from the Atonement's soon to be released CD.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mnorswor
Date: 2008-01-30 03:22
Tom, the level that you've now sunk to has hit an all time low, even for you. I'm amazed that you even hit the post button. Pointing your finger at instrument makers instead of giving credit where credit is due, to the players who've worked so hard to become the experts in our field. Bravo to all of them and shame on you Tom.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: hartt
Date: 2008-01-30 03:45
kudo for you, Michael.
Without belaboring any prior meaningful comments, who cares.
I've heard of demigods but perhaps some posters really need to petition the Queen of England and the Pope.........
perhaps they will have Ricardo knighted and sainted
Sir Ricardo and Saint Ricardo..........that has a real nice 'ring', ya think ?
but it's not as good as the tonal coloring of a Buffet.
Is this horse dead yet? on to the next thread until 1/28
dennis
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tom Puwalski
Date: 2008-01-30 04:34
Hey Michael, I wouldn't have cared if they called Ricardo up and gave him the job over the phone! He's a known element, you can hear him on Philly broadcasts, met broadcasts. I personally thinks he plays the crap out of any piece I've heard him play! If you like the way someone plays and you want them in your ensemble hell, hire them! That's the way I do it when I need someone for a band I'm playing with, I hire the guys I want to play with! I don't hold auditions, I only give someone new a shot if the guys I want can't do the gig.
Now I know that's not the way they do it in the high paying, fast paced world of orchestral clarinet playing. And I admit I might be a bit miffed if I had shelled out plane fare and hotel and time to be one of the 250 who showed up believing that there was even the remotest chance that I might make the next round. If an orchestra really knows they only want one of a hand full of people, don't waste everyones time!
One story comes to mind about the Chicago symphony auditions: Iggy Gennusa told me that back in the day, and I don't remember what years, Iggy was invited to play with the Chicago symphony for a week, Mitchell Lurie and Earl Bates? might have been the other 2 clarinetists there for the audition week. They alternated playing solos and various pieces. When they were finished Iggy had gotten the gig. This is what he said of the experience, " Tom, they had one opening and listened to 3 of us. Any one of us could have done the job, now-a days there still are 3 -4 people showing up that can really do the job and 200 that can't"
Iggy lost that gig when most of the woodwind section was fired!
As far as " the level I have sunk to" Have you ever read or believe the Dogma that is bandied around on this board? Did I really "dis" any players- all I did was point out that none of the people who could still get "the" gig plays a Buffet. If I still played one maybe it would bother me maybe it wouldn't. Maybe mine would be on ebay (woops to late they already were). Maybe Buffet didn't raise their price enough. It happens, I once lost a really nice gig for my Klezmer band because we didn't charge enough, that never happened again!
Alright I'll confess, I still have a really nice Buffet prestige bass clarinet and basset horn. But the clarinets I perform on everyday are Leblanc symphonies! And I am a leblanc performing artist!
Dennis, I'm still panning through your post trying to find a coherent point? Sometimes, "what he said" works!
Tom Puwalski, former soloist with the US Army Field Band, Clarinetist with The Atonement, 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. Go to my facebook site to hear a few premature release tracks from the Atonement's soon to be released CD.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2008-01-30 10:35
Tom Puwalski wrote:
> And I am a leblanc
> performing artist!
Which, of course, is a very important little fact that needs to be out there ANY time you promote or dis any manufacturer. It's been a requirement of the BBoard.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2008-01-30 10:53
When did Greg Smith stop playing Buffet?
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2008-01-30 11:06
I think we are all missing the point.............the wings at Hooters are really not that good!!
...........Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2008-01-30 11:14
Paul, (and I love a good bar) I completely agree. Horrible food.
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tom Puwalski
Date: 2008-01-30 13:45
you ain't kidding, I've been in a hooters maybe 5 times in my life, the food is bad, and I'm amazed at how willingly guys will overpay for it(the food I mean). Having 2 daughters of food service age will stop any dad from willing going to a hooters. But I still don't understand how they get away with selective hiring practices.
Lets not forget Anna Nichole Smith started in a hooters, and where would the world be without her?
Tom Puwalski, former soloist with the US Army Field Band, Clarinetist with The Atonement, 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. Go to my facebook site to hear a few premature release tracks from the Atonement's soon to be released CD.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: CPW
Date: 2008-01-30 14:05
I think that the auditioners should receive a complimentary dinner at Hooters (or similar/opposite venue of their preference...trying to stem the tide of PC flames), since that is what this thread is now about.
Against the windmills of my mind
The jousting pole splinters
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2008-01-30 15:11
What this does show in that audition is that Women are still in the minority **at that level** on the Clarinet (in that audition at least).
why?? It can't be training as women nowadays are getting identical training. Finger Dexterity wise women have been proven to be more dexterious.
So why????
Would it have gone differently if it were a position in which a woman was already holding the position? ( LA Phil. for example - would there had been more women in the finals?)
Wonder how NYPHIL will end up with the finals?
Speaking of Hooters, will have to someday tell you about meeting Donald Trump there in A/C. (amusing story, and true)
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: L. Omar Henderson
Date: 2008-01-30 15:28
Laura Ardan principal of the Atlanta Symphony is no slouch and is among that elite corps IMHO in a principally "boys club". I do not know if she auditioned.
L. Omar Henderson
www.doctorsprod.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2008-01-30 15:53
Praises must be given to Elsa Ludewig Verdehr, who got the Michigan State job in 1964, in a male dominated world. She was part of the Marlboro festivals alongside Harold Wright and has been a beacon of perfect music making for decades.
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2008-01-30 15:54
I think that if Michele Zukovsky, Elsa Ludwig-Verdehr or Sabine Meyer wanted the Chicago job, any of them would have it in a blink. Nobody plays better.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DrH2O
Date: 2008-01-30 16:00
What's the ratio of women to men in undergraduate and graduate music performance (clarinet) programs? Does the imbalance start there or do more women than men step back from the high stress effort of pursuing a major position after they get out of school?
Anne
Clarinet addict
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2008-01-30 16:57
At my school the women are severely outnumbered- only 2 compared to 10 guys. Whether or not other colleges are similar, I cannot say.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2008-01-30 17:17
Ken,
Unfortunately, I am really not sure that would be the case. Even if there was a female carbon copy of Morales, I am not sure she would get the job. The male-bias is ever present in our society, no matter how much we like to think otherwise.
Although I have no verified numbers to back my claim, I see a lot of women entering conservatories (as many as men), but only a very limited few getting the high profile jobs.
-S
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ABerry
Date: 2008-01-30 17:22
According to the Buffet site, Mark Nuccio is still listed as a Buffet Artist...Has that changed, or does he still play a R13?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2008-01-30 17:47
---------------------------------
I think that if Michele Zukovsky, Elsa Ludwig-Verdehr or Sabine Meyer wanted the Chicago job, any of them would have it in a blink. Nobody plays better.
--------------------------------
They are great players, but their younger counterparts didn't have a showing in this.
And I doubt that Sabine could beat Ricardo at this point. Probably for the Met job way back, but not now....
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2008-01-30 18:43
Hi Tom, it's Eddie. Let me first say that "Iggy" was not fired. He told me when he left Chicago, remember it was many moons ago, it was because they would not hire his wife to play violin so he took the National Symphony job, then came to Baltimore because at that time Peabody was part of the deal and they hired his wife too. If you knew both of them as I did, you would know why, she as very overbearing. He quit Baltimore because they fired her. His thinking was if he treatened to quit they would keep her, it didn't work in Baltimore either, they let him quit.
As far as Morales and Buffet goes let me first say that he would sound great on a Bundy. In his case it could certianly be said it's not the gun but the gunner. As you know he studied with me for five summers from age 13-17. By the time he was 17 I'm not sure which one of us was learning more from the other. What a talent. He has to be one of the greatest clarinet players that ever lived.
As far as Buffet goes. I use an R13 A clarinet but bought a Selmer Signiture Bb two years ago because I just loved the tone. I picked it out of about a half dozen and had to work on it for several months before I got the intonation the way I wanted it because every player voices certain notes differently. I also replaced the bell and barrel with Backun for an even richer tone and better intonation. I still use my R13 sometimes too. I also use a Selmer Bass clarinet. The point is, it's the player that plays in tune not the make or model of the clarinet. Buffet, like Selmer and Leblanc, all make very fine instruments, some of them play pretty well in tune off the shelf, and some of them are terrible off the shelf. We all get our instruments tuned to our likeness and ears, replace the bells and or barrels and then we learn to play it in tune, or not. Morales would make a Bundy sound great and in tune.
Edward Palanker, member of the Baltimore Symphony and Peabody Conservatory of Music
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2008-01-30 19:18
Thanks GBK,
I asked about Smith rhetorically, because the point being made was that Buffet was underrepresented in the finals. The fact is that several of those players perform Buffet's horns.
Underrepresented in that they are not the majority? Maybe.
I also concur with Eddie, above!
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LarryBocaner ★2017
Date: 2008-01-30 21:34
Well, it's "set the record straight" time again! Despite what Iggy Gennusa might have told you, Ed, he was fired by Music Director Rafael Kubelik from the Chicago Symphony. As part of a "Saturday night massacre" in 1951 Iggy got his pink slip along with principal flutist Rene Rateau and first bassoon Sherman Walt. This was all part of a package deal to obtain the great Julius Baker as first flute and Leonard Sharrow as first bassoon. They were members of the CBS Symphony in New York, and bringing along Clark Brody as first clarinet was in the package. Iggy Gennusa's playing in the CSO was exceptional and admired by colleagues and students alike. He was my section coach in the Civic Orchestra and I was happy to avail myself of a few private lessons at the time.
Iggy's tenure in the National Symphony was prior to his year in the CSO.. His wife's desire to play violin in the CSO was not an issue in his Chicago termination; more likely his rationalization of this issue was a form of denial from a very traumatic episode!
One of Gennusa's fellow "victims", Sherman Walt, went on to a highly distinguished career as principal bassoon in the Boston Symphony. All of these shenanigans went on in the dark days before issues like tenure and peer revue ever surfaced in the symphonic profession. Looks like recent events in Seattle have turned the clock back -- at least in that venue!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris22311
Date: 2008-01-31 02:20
For some reason Mr. Palanker, I believe Mr. Bocaner has a convincing argument.
Chris
Post Edited (2008-01-31 02:21)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2008-01-31 03:51
goodness me, I can't believe Ed stated that clarinets are about players and ability and not brands, go figure!! (tongue firmly in cheek)
Without music, the world would be grey, very grey.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2008-01-31 17:15
I'll give it up to Larry , he's probably correct about Iggy. It's been over 40 years that Iggy told me that and I probably got it wrong or he miss lead me so I'll give it up to Larry. I really thought Iggy came to Baltimore directly from the National Symphony but Larry used to play in the Nat'l symphony so he's probably right about that too. I know I'm correct about Iggy leaving the BSO because I was here at the time. Larry didn't challenge that though. I got something right. Oh well, if that's the only thing I'll ever get wrong so be it. Oops, to late for that.
I'm going to break my worst reed out of frustration now. I'd break my best one but I don't have one of those. End of story! Eddie
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2008-01-31 17:48
Ed Palanker -
When I heard you play at the ClarnetFest in Columbus several years ago (and very well, by the way), I'm pretty sure you were using a low-C Yamaha bass. Have you switched to a Selmer, or were my eyes playing tricks.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2008-01-31 18:24
Hi Ken, thanks for the compliment. I think your eyes were playing tricks on you. I've never played anything other then my low C Selmer for 43 years now, a low Eb Selmer before that. I've never found one that plays better for me. Of course I've had alot of work done on it over the years. Take care, Eddie
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
