 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-06-01 17:06
Isn't he using double lip embouchure ? I've been told that in around middle of the 20th century the double lip embouchure was much more common than it is today. Isn't it the case ?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dileep Gangolli
Date: 2009-06-01 18:17
Believe me....I like understated, elegant playing. But this sounds boring to my ear. Nice sound however.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: aero145
Date: 2009-06-01 19:43
I find everything (except all the strings) pretty boring. Especially the sound that comes from Lancelot’s horn.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-06-01 21:46
If you like it then you must like Karl Leister and Alfred Prinz. Straightforward,cold and flat.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2009-06-02 01:54
Being put in a group with Karl Leister is not so bad!
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-06-02 02:12
well I take colorful players like Walter Boeykens,George Pieterson,Håkan Rosengren,Jonathan Cohler to name few always over black and white players such as those three named above.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2009-06-02 02:58
All very fine players. Not to drag this out but what do you mean by "color"?
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clariknight
Date: 2009-06-02 03:23
I like the dramatics of players like Cohler, but I find that none of them (that I have found at least) have the absolute pure tone that Leister accomplishes. A trade off? Perhaps, but I'll still listen to Leister or Lancelot any day of the week.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-06-02 11:49
Ok Arnoldstang. I don't think that German style players can't achieve a colorful sound but it's more difficult for them do to the nature of the German bore. George Pieterson for example can it on his reform Boehm Würlitzer. For German style playing then I would say that players like Sabine Meyer,Wolfgang Meyer,Wenzel Fuchs and even Peter Schmidl all have more colorful and varied flexible sound. But not near as colorful as Walter Boeykens and Håkan Rosengren. I'm not going into much details here but it's mostly(equipment helps too) about how you voice the notes and form your embouchure how colorful and flexible your sound is.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2009-06-02 15:28
Is it possible that the role of the clarinet was different in 1971? It seems to me that today we have far more clarinetists that exude romanticism. They move back and forth and emote like a string player would in this style.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-06-02 16:32
Arnoldstang wrote:
> Is it possible that the role of the clarinet was different in
> 1971? It seems to me that today we have far more clarinetists
> that exude romanticism. They move back and forth and emote
> like a string player would in this style.
Interesting you mentioned this because Lancelot's lack of physical movement stuck out at me, as well. There doesn't seem to be a lot of shape to Lancelot's phrases, either. I'd say a little more romanticism is needed here--it is Brahms, after all (and he even writes "con sentimento").
Another criticism I have of this performance is that there seems to be a lack of musical relationship between the clarinet and strings. One of the things I like about this piece is how well the clarinet blends with the strings at times to become a real *ensemble* (as opposed to a soloist with string accompaniment, as in the Weber quintet). But in this video, Lancelot seems to be in one world and the strings in another (at least it seems that way to me), and the strings seem to leave behind or overpower him at times. They're together in terms of time (precision), but they seem not to be together in terms of blend and phrasing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: oliver sudden
Date: 2009-06-02 19:49
...he also wasn't playing an 1/8-tone sharp with a vibrato you could drive a truck through but more power to him for it.
(Seriously, there are moments where vibrato turns unambiguously to wobble, especially up top there from Brainin. What's a clarinettist supposed to do? I love the moment at about 3' (letter F) where Lancelot brings in the transition back to the main Presto theme... a ray of clarity in the wilderness.)
Hm, attempts to find something else from Lancelot on YouTube lead me only to this:
Almost certainly not Jacques Lancelot
Or perhaps this might be more entertaining:
The use of the knees in achieving extra dynamic projection in the early Romantic chamber repertoire
...not one of Leister's better evenings, that second one.
Post Edited (2009-06-02 20:08)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LarryBocaner ★2017
Date: 2009-06-02 20:14
Sometimes serenity is what is called for in the particular music performed -- like the 3rd movement chorale- like theme of Brahms here; as a contrast to the wild romanticism of the preceding music. Unfortunately we hear the words "out of context" too often! I find Lancelot's restraint and serenity just right for this music -- elegantly played and not at all "boring."
I find Arnoldstang's observation that things were different in 1971 to be very insightful. However, dignity and respect for the composer's intentions never goes out of style! Long live Leister and Prinz and a lot of other wonderful artists!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2009-06-02 20:49
It's funny how Napster got shut down for illegal music yet Youtube has a ton of it there. (link at the right of one of the links above had Emma Johnson's Weber from the CD on it). Even the Lancelot is most likely used without permission..
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DAVE
Date: 2009-06-02 21:12
I liked it. To me this is a window into how things were played many years ago. I miss hearing clear ringing clarinet tones. Many of today's clarinetists are producing these "woofy" tones that are just plain annoying.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ryan25
Date: 2009-06-02 21:55
"I miss hearing clear ringing clarinet tones. Many of today's clarinetists are producing these "woofy" tones that are just plain annoying."
Absolutely agree with this statement. Many players today ( some big name people) have a sound like a black hole. Such boring playing listening to these people play on popsicle sticks and do everything they can to inject focus and color into the sound. I wonder if it has to do with the German and French influences in this country. It seems like people try and have the rich, "Dark", thick sound of a German setup with the flexibility and color of a French set up.
I have only heard one person actually do this successfully, Ricardo Morales, and it still does nothing for me. No denying Ricardo is a beast of a musician, but I still find his playing a bit boring. I'm still waiting to hear a recording/performance by anyone that comes close to the expressive and charismatic playing I hear by Harold Wright on his Weber Quintet recording. Nothing I have heard comes anywhere close to it for me. And to top it off, that recording is a live performance.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dileep Gangolli
Date: 2009-06-02 22:45
Ryan and others,
I too agree that some modern American clarinet playing has veered off it's French roots and borders on "woofy". Yet there are still some wonderful players that have a lively, focused sound with overtones and color.
But to say that Riccardo's playing is boring is totally ridiculous. He is by far the best clarinetist of this present era in America and I bet in an audition situation (behind a screen) would have been able to beat Wright, Marcellus, or Drucker. These guys were (are) all great players, but Morales has each of them beat in certain areas of his playing while not showing any chink in other areas of his playing. So I think of him as having Marcellus' sound, Wright's subtlety of phrase, and Drucker's technique. All combined into one player.
Riccardo has combined the various threads of national schools of clarinet playing (French, English, German, and intentionally I might add) and created a truly unique American style that will be used as a model going forward.
I, myself, am too old to change the way I play (and I am happy with how I sound) but I have to admire that Riccardo has found a way to fuse several national styles and let his ear guide him to something truly special.
Regarding the Lancelot recording that started this thread, while I really do enjoy understated and elegant playing such as Wright and Marcellus (one of my teachers), I found this Brahms clip to be overly dry and lacking phrasing and punctuation.
But I am glad that others here enjoyed the performance....that's why they make ice cream in flavors than just chocolate or vanilla.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ryan25
Date: 2009-06-02 23:19
"But to say that Riccardo's playing is boring is totally ridiculous. He is by far the best clarinetist of this present era in America and I bet in an audition situation (behind a screen) would have been able to beat Wright, Marcellus, or Drucker. These guys were (are) all great players, but Morales has each of them beat in certain areas of his playing while not showing any chink in other areas of his playing. So I think of him as having Marcellus' sound, Wright's subtlety of phrase, and Drucker's technique. All combined into one player."
Totally ridiculous? That is a little strong. I agree that Ricardo is an amazing player, but his playing doesn't speak to me. Musically I find it a bit boring, thats my opinion. Technique and all of that stuff is only that...technique and stuff. There is no denying his complete mastery of the instrument but that alone does not make a musician speak to me in an artistic sense. Furthermore, comparing his sound to Marcellus is a total failure. Saying he would win an audition against legends of the past is pointless. Different era and auditions are fundamentally flawed. Auditions never have and never will be a lone indicator of a musicians worth. My point is, not everyone likes the concept Ricardo employs in his playing. Different strokes for different folks. This is in no way meant to trash him, he was probably better than I will ever be by the time he had been playing for 6 months. What I am saying is, Ricardo's playing, while superb, does not excite me emotionally. I find it to be bland musically.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2009-06-03 18:06
I have never heard Ricardo live nor have I heard Harold Wright or Leister live. Given this I still prefer the tone of several other clarinetists over Ricardo. In any case, I am sure he is spectacular and doesn't need my approval or appraisal.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-06-04 17:54
I heard the Philadelphia orchestra play Brahms 3 a number of years back with Morales and I was quite dissapointed with not only his playing but more over his phrasing which seemed dull and overtly even. However, others do like his him. I find his playing somewhat cold and straight. Be nice to hear him something like Gershwin Rhapsody in Blue. Morales to me is too straight laced.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DAVE
Date: 2009-06-04 18:42
Agreeing with Mr. Dow and Arnoldstang, Ricardo's playing IMO is just boring. I heard him live play the Mozart and was amazed that someone so well known could be that dull. His sound was difficult to hear and did not project at all.
OTOH, I have his French Portraits CD and I also have his Contrasts recording. Hearing him play Buccolique is astounding and the Contrasts are amazing. However, when I hear the Saint-Saens or Poulenc I am struck by the dullness. It's almost computer-like.
I am kinda wondering these days if all this flirtation with a so-called dark tone has caused us to forget what the clarinet really sounds like. Just my two cents...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
