 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2009-04-10 18:51
I am revisiting Brahms clarinet trio and am struggling with making "floating" lines.
The best example may be the opening of the Adagio where I am trying to play the first 4 bars in one long swoop.
The first two bars are the most challenging to me as there is no dynamic swelling written and I simply sound terribly "noty", and can't seem to connect the notes.
There is something similar in bar 22, although a little easier for me.
Any tips would be most welcome. On the recordings I have many players do a little crescendo into the moving notes, but I am not sure this is the answer I am looking for. I want no dynamic shape, just one long line of suspended notes until the swell in bar 3.
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: grenadilla428
Date: 2009-04-10 20:41
Have you tried singing it?
Also, don't be afraid to stretch some of the figures at the ends of measures... the scoring gives you a little liberty with time. Might help the "noty-ness."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: oliver sudden
Date: 2009-04-10 22:56
I'm not quite sure where you're coming from here... is it a technical or a musical thing? Just achieving the legato you want, or animating the line musically once you've done it?
"I want no dynamic shape, just one long line of suspended notes until the swell in bar 3."...OK, if that's what you're after it seems simple in itself, just a matter of doing it ;-)
Musically it's a trickier business. The line doesn't quite make sense on its own but it isn't meant to. Knowing that under the crotchets in bar 1 the piano is playing the notes you're about to play might help? (You'll be doing the same in bar 5.) To me the tempo has to be not too slow (I take the basic tempo for the movement from the second subject, that seems to be a bit more unambiguous about having a 'right tempo') - that helps the first four bars hold together.
But I think you also have to be aware of the other units within the first four bars - there's already an 'opening out' in bar 3 of the material that the clarinet and piano have both had in fragments in the first two bars. I wouldn't be afraid of a bit of rubato in bar 3 to point up the high point of the swell (it's together in the clarinet and piano on the & of 3 (not on the third beat! - and the cello has it on beat 2)) - you could try pushing a little and then slowing up into the A... then move on again a bit and give yourself room for the long diminuendo (you're on your own on the downbeat of bar 4).
I don't see a problem if the first two bars sound a bit 'blocky' - that's after all what the chap wrote, for all three instruments. The big long line is certainly one way to do it but I admit it wouldn't be mine.
Brahms is pretty involved, isn't he? And that's just one crank's opinion. Stand by for plenty of different ones.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-04-11 01:08
Check Alfred Prinz on Eurodisc..easily one the greatest feats of clarinet playing ever of this piece. Another fine recording is Leopold Wlach.
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2009-04-12 15:30
Thanks for the insight and recording recommendations.
My question I guess is two fold.
1- Technical: How does one achieve absolute legato without making dynamic changes. Or are subtle dynamic changes inherently part of a long legato line, that seemingly appears to be floating with every note connected to the previous one.
2- How do you interpret the first few bars of Brahms trio.
My current attempt, is to really make the first 2 bars as longitudinal as possible with as little dynamic (vertical) motion as possible so that the swell in bar three feels like deep "breath in/breath out" motion, rather than a dramatic "ocean wave". It feels like such an intimate moment that I want to try to make it work with no drama, hence little dynamic and tempo rubato, especially the first 2 bars.
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rtaylor
Date: 2009-04-16 20:47
Rosario Mazzeo had one of the best descriptions. He would tell students to imagine that the notes slowly meld one into another like two opposing wedges coming together that fit together perfectly. This is paraphrased from him words but it works for my students very well.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: elmo lewis
Date: 2009-04-17 00:40
Question 1: airstream must be unchanging-like you are playing a single, very long note. I like to imagine that the air has no idea what the fingers are doing, it is just there. Fingers need to open and close the toneholes and keys as slowly and softly as possible. Noone should be able tell if you are moving 1 finger or 9 fingers.
Question 2: I don't see a swell in m. 7 (Peters Edition). Brahms likes to put in hairpins (see cello in m. 15 and 17) so the absence of any cresc. or decresc in m. 3 is an important clue. What is the musical line? You start on G, move to D, stay there awhile, and return to G. From the D in m. 6 to the D in m. 8 there is no forward motion-it's basically just one long D with a very nice adornment. M. 7 doesn't really take you anywhere new, it just leads you back to the D. I think your basic idea is correct-this is a simple (but beautiful and wistful) theme with a simple, sparse accompaniment. Keep it simple, there's plenty of opportunity for drama in the rest of the mvt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: oliver sudden
Date: 2009-04-17 05:24
elmo lewis: I have a feeling you're talking about a different piece but I'm darned if I can figure out what piece that is!
At least in the Henle edition of the Brahms A minor trio op. 114 there are swells in bars 3 and 7. (The swell in bar 7 peaks on beat 4, by the way, despite what it looks like in most editions of the clarinet part. Unless you want to change it to conform with bar 3 but you'd want to talk about that with the cellist.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2009-04-17 19:42
To set the record straight we are talking about the second movement of Brahms trio op114.
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-04-17 23:06
Playing legato in a phrase like this, or any for that matter, involves two different things. One is the air column, keeping the air moving at an even stream so that the more resistance notes are equal to the freer blowing ones. The other is the use of "legato" fingers. Placing your fingers on the keys in a very smooth fashion, no jerky or accented fashion. The fingers should move as though they have something sticky on them so they don't snap up or snap down. Then of course there's the "singing" element so that you use the air to make a beautiful phrase. Check out my website for several articles and stuff. ESP http://eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phurster
Date: 2009-04-18 10:21
“I am revisiting Brahms clarinet trio and am struggling with making "floating" lines.”
I love the Brahms trio. I did a performance of it about ten years ago. I thought it went extremely well. Later I was at a party and by coincidence got talking to an airline stewardess who had been at the concert. She enjoyed most of it but found the Brahms “boring”...Ouch!
Anyway I like your idea of the floating line to a point. I feel it needs a little phrasing though. That passage in the Poulenc Sonata first mvt is my idea of the ultimate floating line. The part marked “Très calme”. Here the music demands (IMHO) that each note blends effortlessly into the next. The texture is transparent. I often use the metaphor of a calm lake with no ripples to describe this passage. I don’t really see this passage in the Brahms in quite the same way.
Playing on the “A” Clarinet gives a “darker” more solid feel to this passage. The melodic contour starts on a high C. This is marked piano and dolce. The melody descends to an open G in the second bar. Unless a subtle gradual crescendo is given the passage sounds like it is getting softer which gives a feeling of anti-climax.
“The best example may be the opening of the Adagio where I am trying to play the first 4 bars in one long swoop.”
Yes, this would be ideal in terms of phrasing. However, I found when I tried this I had to play faster than I thought I should simply to make the distance. A discrete breath after the C in the second bar means it can be played without obvious discomfort.
“The first two bars are the most challenging to me as there is no dynamic swelling written”
The fact that no swelling is written does not mean that it shouldn’t be added to the music. Though, I do like your idea of simplicity and clarity (At least in regards to phrasing). With Brahms my idea would be to carefully watch the tempo. Keep it moving forward, very easy to get bogged down.
All the best,
Chris.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2009-04-19 14:53
Thanks for all the tips. Concert is today at 3pm so I'll let you know how it ends up working for us
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2009-04-21 21:05
I compared your two performances of the Brahms Trio (June 6th 2004 and your recent one). Both were very musical interpretations with excellent ensemble playing from your group.
However...I preferred the clarinet sound of your 2004 recording.
Did you change your set-up?
...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2009-04-21 22:11
Yes, I did indeed change mouthpiece.
6/2004 - M15/V12 #4/olegature
4/2009 - Chris Hill/Rico Reserve #3.5/old BG (very similar to rovner dark ligature)
The room and recording set up may have a lot to do with too...
The reasons I switch:
1- M15 had such a long lay the reed felt like it was "closing on me" after 30 minutes of playing.
2- I was not getting enough power.
What I feel I lost:
a little bit of flexibility
a little bit of color (high frequencies)
What aspect of the sound do you like better? I am very curious.
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2009-04-21 22:32
Sylvain wrote:
> What aspect of the sound do you like better? I am very curious.
I realize that the acoustics of the room and different microphone placements can certainly account for some of the differences in the sound. However, I thought the 2004 recording showed a clarinet sound that was more interesting and complex in color (more audible overtones?) than the 2009 recording.
The clarinet sound on the 2004 was a bit darker but more flexible. (was the resistance higher?) I think it fit the character of the Brahms better than the brighter sound which you now have.
Don't get me wrong - both sounds are extremely mature and quite musical, but my preference is for the 2004 version. ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif)
...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2009-04-22 02:36
Thanks for the comment and please no sugar coating!
I'd rather hear it like it is, than keep on doing the same mistakes over and over because no one tells me what's wrong.
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
