 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2010-07-19 11:56
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KOZzoSXrts
Who's the principal clarinettist in this clip? He's playing a Buffet Tosca here - I thought the Berlin Phil's manifesto specified the use of Oehler systems. Unless they make the exception for some music (and as Stravinsky was based in Paris at the time this was written, maybe it's only fitting to go for a French instrument).
Jonathan Kelly (principal oboist) is seen playing a dual system Marigaux 901 - he's originally from Petersfield so mos likely would have started out on a thumbplate system.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2010-07-19 12:07)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: srattle
Date: 2010-07-19 12:46
The Clarinetist on this concert was Pascual Martinez Forteza.
They had been looking for a principle clarinetist for about 3 years now, and were just trying many people out for single concerts (the week before they had Paul Meyer, also using french system)
It was a very nice concert :D Was nice to see and hear a Boehm clarinet play in that orchestra! even for just a week.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lam
Date: 2010-07-19 14:58
No offence for Sir Simon Rattle, but what special qualities from the player was he looking for (eg. great tone, musicianship, experiences etc or the combination of all of that).
Certainly I believe Andreas Ottensamer is a great clarinettist. What special quality that A.Ottensamer stand above all the masters that also play with the BPO eg. Dirk Altmann, Sebatian Manz etc.) ? or is that a decision in order to form a homogeneous Vienna sound clarinet section ? (again no offence for Vienna sound, I love it).
By the way, Jonathan Kelly is certainly the best oboist, I like his sound more than Albrecht Mayer's.
Post Edited (2010-07-19 15:00)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-07-19 15:36
When Ricardo Morales performed with them for several weeks a year or two ago he played his own clarinets as well so that seems that's the way things are going over there. It will be interesting to see if the person that gets the job offer will be required to change clarinet brands in order to keep the tradition of using the German system in tact. That could be a job stopper for some. ESP http://eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2010-07-19 17:43
The Principal Clarinetist of the LA Phil took a year off to study with Karl L. and learn the German system.
The difference in sound between systems exists mainly in the mind and predispostion of the auditors. Though, I must say at times the German clarinets sound rather dank...something like an alto recorder.
Clarinet Redux
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JJAlbrecht
Date: 2010-07-19 18:09
There is a slight difference in the sound, but how much of that is due to the player, and how much comes from the instrument? Does our sound depend more on the instruments we play, or the instruction in playing we have received?
Jeff
“Everyone discovers their own way of destroying themselves, and some people choose the clarinet.” Kalman Opperman, 1919-2010
"A drummer is a musician's best friend."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2010-07-19 18:39
Listen to a recording of the Berlin Phil from the '40s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjsPJRVfixs and you'll hear a clarinet sound that is truly unique. Sadly due to the expanse of the media and easy travel, that clarinet sound and others that were of particular regional distinction are becoming more universal and losing their identity.
Dieter Klöcker's recordings still show this German sound, though with current trends this sound won't last. The Vienna Phil players still have the nearest thing to the classic German sound, but that too is becoming more universal.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2010-07-19 18:40)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: srattle
Date: 2010-07-19 19:42
Chris, I agree with you that clarinet (and many other instruments) are losing (or have lost) their regional identity. I think the German clarinet probably sounded totally different from a french instrument 50 years ago. I don't know how much 'tone' you can hear from that old recording (impossible to tell what is done by the clarinetist or the recording equipment)
Ed: They already hired a new principle (German System) We'll see how his audition year goes, and if they'll have to go looking again.
I know that the conductor doesn't really get a full say in who gets hired, but rather it's a full democratic vote within the orchestra (I think there needs to be a 60 or 70% positive vote to get the job)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2010-07-19 19:57
I share the sense of awe regarding the old German clarinet sound tradition, Chris, and would certainly share the sadness if I thought that sound really would disappear.
But I remain optimistic, seeing the new openness of the BPO to Boehm system clarinets as a good thing--in the same way that the "one sound/one brand fits all" that once strangled the American clarinet market (and orchestral culture) has now finally relaxed.
Thanks for posting the Furtwangler recording link.
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
Post Edited (2010-07-22 00:25)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dileep Gangolli
Date: 2010-07-20 04:24
Mr Marcellus never went to Hans Moenig to sound German. That's BS. He went because Moenig was the best person around at the time and he took the time and care to do great work. Marcellus always thought of himself as carrying the French-American sound.
Many would consider the German sound to be lacking in overtones and rather dull. I won't voice an opinion though I think it is an encouraging sign of the times that the type of instrument one plays no longer eliminates one from a position in the Berlin Phil.
However, I lament the day - soon to come - where every major orchestra will sound like the next. It won't take long. The conductors travel everywhere, the players are trained around the world, and the flame of tradition in the great orchestras is no longer guarded with the care or reverence that comes with Nationalistic dogma.
As did LeBron, cast off your shackles, for you are now free to roam about the world.
Post Edited (2010-07-20 04:27)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2010-07-20 12:31
I wonder if Jonathan Kelly wears a Barbour? Everytime I'm in Petersfield it seems everyone around town wears Barbours!
(another famous Petersfield resident was the author John Wyndham)
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-07-20 14:42
National tone qualities are becoming a thing of the past more and more as the years go by. I've heard German, and other East European, orchestra's clarinet players sound like others and I've heard others sound like what one would think was there's. Sometimes when I turn the radio on and hear a clarinetist I'm surprised at the end of the performance to find out who it was. I think more and more it's the player, the concept, the reed and the mouthpiece. There was a time when I was a student that I could pretty much tell what country a clarinetist was from when listening to a recording, I can't do that anymore unless I recognize the players sound and know who it is, and even then I'm surprised many times because so many soloists do not sound the same to me on every recording. We're all influenced by others and their recordings and it's become a very small clarinet world. I don't think there will ever be one sound for all because even here in the USA there are many very different tone qualities amongst soloists, orchestra players and teachers. I often hear dark, bright, thin, full, harsh, big and small, and any combinations of those. Many I really like, some I really don't like. ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2010-07-21 03:26
Very interesting thread. I would have ranted over just how different the German sound is because of the fundamental acoustic difference set up by the substantially smaller mouthpiece and substantially smaller reed.
Of course..............just the other day I was treated to an AMAZING recording of Weber's Second Concerto. I thought for sure it was a someone like Carbonare - strong, Boehmy, masculine.
It turned out to be Sabine Meyer !!!! So I fall into the "you could have knocked me over with a feather" camp............ for now.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2010-07-21 03:41
Paul,
If you get the chance check out her Weber 1 as well--it was released on the same CD, along with the Concertino....there is absolutely nothing like her combination of power, depth and bouyancy (all at the same time!) Those recordings haunted me when I when they first came out 20 years ago...
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2010-07-21 05:40
Robert Marcellus really does deserve to be credited for his unique artistry, musical judgement, and that special personality in his sound and playing that, amidst the plethora of celebrated clarinettists, makes his playing easily identifiable, even unmistakable.
To understand his innate abilities in shaping music through sound, style and phrasing is to understand a highly flexible clarinettist and musician who, whether playing Wagner or Vaughan Williams or Ravel, had in his possession a commanding control and deep understanding of what he heard to be the best representatives from the schools of playing of differing nationalities of his day.
It shouldn't be lost on anyone that this was not only the strength of Robert Marcellus but the orchestra that he was associated with. A great orchestra and it's players have the ability to be flexible in their expression of style no matter the repertoire.
It's unfortunate that perhaps these musical things are sometimes under-appreciated, especially in relation to discussion about the mechanical means of production via which he chose to express himself.
Gregory Smith
Post Edited (2010-07-21 05:42)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2010-07-21 19:01
Eric, how are you defining 'major types' of clarinet (if not Boehm and Oehler, which add up to just two types)?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2010-07-21 19:20
Bad terminology on my part, David...
I really meant brands--as you probably know (or vividly remember), there was a time when there wasn't much flexibility on the American Orchestral scene regarding what brand horn you were 'supposed' to play. But the Chicago section really broke that mold in many ways, with different guys playing LeBlancs, Yamahas, Buffets and even Wurlitzers (German system) at times.
I don't mean to suggest that other sections didn't do this as well (the Indianapolis section was mixed as too--and yet blended brilliantly), and of course Gigliotti in Philly played a Selmer 10G (though it was based off of his Moennig altered R-13).
But for guys like me, who were in college in the early '90s, it was the high profile Chicago clarinet section that seemed to be shaking things up--and that shake-up has been better, I think, for all of us. As a player who was frustrated with the "one horn fits all" mentality that was dominant when I was coming up, I can say that I'm really grateful there was a section out there comprised of players like Larry Combs, Gregory Smith, John Bruce Yeh, and Laurie Bloom--their openness made a difference in the attitude of many of us out there, and inspired us to look into the best options for ourselves, rather than just following the crowd--or trying to cram our concept into a horn that wouldn't yield it (for us).
Thanks for the question....it gave me a chance to think it through and clarify.
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2010-07-21 23:03
I will be a little more direct so there is no misunderstanding about what I have posted and why. This information is based on my experience knowing Robert Marcellus' playing for 40 years - knowing him first as his student and later personally and as a colleague.
There has been a claim made on this bboard that may be interpreted incorrectly, leaving the wrong impression not only about Robert Marcellus, but about the example he lived and made music by.
A claim has been made that Marcellus took his clarinets to Hans Moennig of Philadelphia in order to sound more "German". This claim may be taken out of context and therefore too literally by others.
I can tell you what he told me over many years about both Moennig and about what nat'l schools and players influenced his musical approach. Some may already know this information if they ever attended his summer masterclasses at Northwestern University or studied with him privately for a period of more than just a couple lessons.
Much of his philosophy is included in print through various sources including outstanding interviews published by both The Australian Clarinet Journal and The Clarinet periodicals.
Robert Marcellus took his clarinet to Hans Moennig to enable him to be able to sound more like himself - to allow him the flexibility to express what he heard in his head as his ideal. That's because Moennig was simply the best in the business for many decades at what he did - modify clarinets in a way that allowed the artist to express themselves with more ease. Moenning was Bonade's and just about every other top woodwind instrumentalist's recognized master artist/repair person for this very reason.
If you know about the linage of the French school of clarinettistry, you'll know about Rose/Lefebvre/Bonade/Marcellus. They were quintessentially French school in their approach right down to the new clarinets they played which departed from the original German design, namely the development of the Klose/Buffet system (mistakenly referred to as the Boehm system although the key mechanism that Boehm developed for the flute was then applied to the clarinet).
The "new" acoustical design starting in the mid-19th century was developed to obtain more tonal flexibility and to get away from forked fingerings that were considered inferior by it's developers.
This more flexible acoustical design was exploited by each succeeding generation of French clarinetists. As Bonade put it, each generation "purified" itself, a rather interesting way at that time to describe the evolution taking place that he had heard over his lifetime.
Robert Marcellus certainly exploited the vast array of timbre made available to him through this alternative design and he did it with one purpose in mind - to serve the composer.
If he were playing The Lark Ascending, he attempted to sound as British as he could by listening to recordings of influential clarinetists from Great Britian of that day that Vaughan Willams may have heard and had in mind.
If he were playing Wagner he would have in mind the sound of Leister or others and "flex" his sound in that direction because the music called for it.
If he were playing Debussy he would have in mind the French sound of the early 20th century - glowing and colorful and ringing - the kind of stuff the music in the Rhapsody explicitly called for (see "doux et penetrant in pianissimo for example).
One may have a hard time discerning this because the overwhelming impression that is left in the end is that you are hearing the personality of Robert Marcellus - not Robert Marcellus trying to sound like ________.
Also there's the issue of the composer writing the music in a certain way that it only follows that the instrumentalist will sound more Germanic or more French, etc, due to the music itself.
To say that he took any of his equipment to anybody in order to sound more like any particular nationally identified school (whether one belives in thinking that way about nat'l schools or not), is in and unto itself simply not a complete or comprehensive explanation of his approach to making music through his clarinettistry.
If one searchs the archives on this bboard, they will find that there have been many, very long, illuminating threads about these very subjects.
Gregory Smith
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2010-07-22 00:34
Let it not be said that I wouldn't listen to reason or respect the well crafted expositions of experts.
Please note that I have amended or deleted the post that Gregory Smith found suspect regarding his former teacher, Robert Marcellus. His first hand information ought to be respected. And rather than be the source of misinformation, I would rather set a mistake to rights.
I thank Mr. Smith for his understanding that my comment, even as it was, was not quite intended to be taken comprehensively; though in order that no misunderstandings take place, I have deleted the comment entirely.
Thank you for your attention, sir.
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
Post Edited (2010-08-22 20:58)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2010-07-22 01:08
Obviously with Berlin Phil's auditioning procedure, they wouldn't take anyone on if their playing and sound didn't 'fit'.
As there now seems to be a convergence of sounds where players of both German and French intruments are becoming indistinguishable from one another, Pascual Martinez Forteza had the sound and playing style that is currently considered ideal for the position of principal clarinettist at the audition.
And as he's not the only non-Oehler player that has been in this seat, I can only assume it means the Berlin Phil are heading in a more encompassing direction. Whether that is good or bad is a matter of opinion - but it is sad that the Karajan era (which I'm a huge fan of) has gone and things have moved on, though is still available to those through the medium of vinyl, tape and CD.
Like so many things, universal acceptance is pushed to the fore and nationalism has taken second place. I wonder how things will change when Simon Rattle retires?
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2010-07-22 01:15
Eric -
I understand that you may not have meant your remark to be taken comprehensively by others. I thank you for allowing me to clarify why it important that if they did, why they should not.
Gregory Smith
Post Edited (2010-07-22 01:18)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2010-07-22 03:34
Eric there is a question on the American Würlitzer site asking Why The Würlitzer Reform-Boehm and I have to ask the same question myself. You refer to George Pieterson as to good quality Reform-Boehm playing and pardon me but I just don't hear most of the time with his playing any differences from a English player playing on either standard Boehm clarinet or Wide-Bore clarinets.
Emma Johnson plays on Eaton Elite Wide Bore clarinets and Victoria Soames plays on Selmer Recital and I don't hear much differences yet the design of those two instruments is very different.
Why spend 2+ years making the switch for maybe the same result ?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lam
Date: 2010-07-22 12:02
Yes, George Pieterson surely sounded English, with lots of vibrato, like De Peyer.
Wenzel Fuchs, Karl Leister, Sabine Meyer, Karl Heinz Steffens all used the same model instrument, but they all sounded very differently from one anothers.
Andreas Ottensamer and Wenzel Fuchs both belongs to the Viennese school. But I find that Andreas sound more like his father (more resonance), and Wenzel Fuchs sound more like Peter Schmidl (darker and warmer sound). so now the clarinet section of BPO sounds more and more similar to VPO, which has departed from the Berlin school of Leister.
I would suggest BPO to hire a third solo-klarinettist for playing French system clarinet, lol.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: srattle
Date: 2010-07-22 12:29
I think a lot of people here are quite misinformed about the german school, and the Berlin Philharmonic. I don't want to write much, but just clear up a few things.
(disclaimer: I have studied 5 years in Germany, with both Karl Heinz Steffens and Wenzel Fuchs but still play and have always played french system)
First of all, the Berlin Phil is not opening their doors to french system. They have tried out a couple of people for a single week, but they have absolutely not had an audition with french system.
Also, you guys mentioned a lot of players who play german system, and associate them with the 'german' sound, whatever that exactly is, and it's a little bit of a misconception.
Wenzel Fuchs, although from vienna, and playing with some wiener material, doesn't play in the wiener style, and doesn't really sound very viennese.
Karl Leister, in Germany, is not considered to have a particularly 'German' sound.
It's just good to know these things before clumping people into one mind set of sound and style, and then using it as an argument.
Anyway, carry on
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2010-07-22 12:34
Iceland,
Thanks for your question.
The choice of an instrument and what that instrument can 'give' you is a personal one--and the likelihood that two players will react in exactly the same manner on exactly the same set-up is minimal in the extreme.
Those of us who make the switch to the Wurlitzer Reform-Boehm do so for one reason--the only real reason worth the challange--and that is that we have found that the Reform-Boehm gives us more flexibility, power, subtle shadings, and tone colors than any other instrument available. And when a dedicated player in search of the highest levels of artistry finds such an instrument, the logistical details regarding the switch become worth the investment of time and effort.
Now as to the portion of your question regarding George Pieterson, I'm sure you'll understand that I can't speak through experience of anyone else's ears! If you do not hear the difference between certain players, there is little I might do to help you, other than perhaps sitting down with you and some recordings and 'pointing out' things as others are able to hear them. Though I'm not sure what the point of such an exercise would be.
For the record, I can hear a difference between George Pieterson's playing and just about anyone. Indeed, the first time I heard his recording of the Brahms 5tet, it was a revelation. Then again with his 4tet for the End of Time. I would never mistake his playing for that of Emma Johnson, nor for any of the other great players who play on Eaton clarinets--or the older wide bore B & H clarinets--though I have a deep respect and fondness for that style and that sound concept. Nor would I mistake him for the great English players of the past, such as Jack Brymer, any more than I would mistake him for Leister. I actually hope that as the Wurlitzer Reform-Boehm becomes more popular here in America, more Americans will become familiar with his recordings. They deserve, in my opinion, the same consideration that we give to the deservedly 'classic' recodings of Leister, Marcellus, Wright, and others.
For me, the different sound concepts of the different clarinet makers is fascinating, enjoyable, and very real in a aural sense. I enjoy the differences between Wurlitzers, Selmers, Buffets, Leblancs, Eatons, and others. There are players on each of these instruments who thrill me and have my greatest respect. But there is a difference between listening to someone else and playing one's self, and that is where, for me, the Wurlitzer Reform-Boehm came in: it was the only instrument that gave me the sound I needed--my own proper clarinet voice.
The Wurlitzer Clarinets America site is designed for players who are looking for a solution. If you feel that need, we'd love to help you attain it. If you don't feel that need, or think you can find it somewhere else, well, that's the beauty of this journey: it's your journey--you get to call the shots. I'll just reiterate what I've said elsewhere on this BBoard: I'm very glad that we live in a more open age than times past, and that players around the world can access horns that, in previous generations, would either have been impossible or close to it.
Thanks again, Iceland: feel free to ask anymore questions you'd like, either here or through my email.
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lam
Date: 2010-07-22 14:42
Thanks Sacha for clarifying the my misconception of the Fuchs and Leister tone issue. You are right, although Fuchs used Viennese material, he has his specific tone.
And as you've pointed out that hiring a Solo Klarinettist needs approximately 60 or 70% positive vote from the orchestra, then surely these members agreed the A.Ottensamer has got the required musicianship, tone, talent to fit the job. So its his overall ability that enables him to get the job, not only his tone.
Now I get a clearer picture about what is going on about the 3-year vacancy of the BPO solo position. Thanks
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2010-07-22 15:13
Sacha's post has gotten me thinking, and having "stepped in it" once in this thread already for having spoken to flippantly and vaguely, I'd like to clarify a couple of points, as I see them:
At one time it was much easier to speak of specifically national (and even regional) styles. Music is a mysterious thing, and is related to various other aspects of our humanity--language is profoundly related to song, and therefore related to instrumental concepts derived from song (there have been many studies done on the impact, for instance, of language upon melodic shape in opera, which is one of the more obvious places to study the phenomenon).
Dance is another art that directly impacts musical styles--or perhaps better put, whose history is enmeshed with the development of music. The way peoples' bodies are shaped, the language they speak, how the have chosen to express their emotions through those media over the centuries, etc, etc, effects how they approach instrumental sounds, approach, etc.
The differences between the old method books--Klose vs Baermann for example--show a difference in instrumental approach, and probably a difference of instrumental ideal. How much of these things may be attributed to difference of culture (including language, dance, civic structure and its impact upon musical opportunities and expressions) can certainly be debated and investigated. Over the years, though, perhaps fed by an era of intense nationalism in the 19th and early 20 centuries, musicians had a shorthand way of referring to these difference--national styles or regional styles were the common means of saying it.
I don't think it behooves us to beg the question whether such a designation has merit. It certainly does. But we are indeed well advised to keep in mind that shorthand is only that--shorthand. It is not particularly specific.
I also do think the development of instruments (including bore shapes, mouthpiece design, etc) is impacted by these subtle cultural aspects, and like others on the board, I shudder to see these disappear. It would terrible if we all had to eat only one sort of food, likewise it would be terrible if we all had to play one type of sound concept.
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2010-07-22 16:09
"Karl Leister, in Germany, is not considered to have a particularly 'German' sound."
----------
In the 60's while Von Karajan's and the Berlin Philharmonic's principal clarinetist, I can see why one would consider him a key exponent - he is German and plays the German clarinet in the most prominent of German orchestras - and for a long time.
Again, there have been many illuminative posts - indeed entire threads - on this bboard about nat'l schools and why it is/isn't a good idea to categorize clarinetists. They constitute some of the most interesting reading on this or any other clarinet-related bboard.
Please, search!
I just made an argument for NOT categorizing. Clarinetists are a product of their personalities. That's what's most important. Marcellus thought in terms of nat'l schools when the music world was a completely different place and I can see his rationale for choosing key exponents - but I am sure that he knew there were problems with categorization per se. He was too perceptive to fall into that kind of trap.
If one wants to read into any particular clarinetist a "school" of style/sound, it can be instructive if not taken too far. There are convincing kernels of truth in much of what is a very complex subject.
Discussion can only bring out those kernels in order for each person to decide what they believe for themselves.
Gregory Smith
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lam
Date: 2010-07-23 01:29
I believe that Sacha just wanted to clarify a few little misconception among us about those German players like Fuchs and Leister and there differences between the more traditional Viennese and German schools of playing.
For example, apart from the BPO(in Karajan time), there were many top orchestra in Germany like the Munich philharmonic(Celibidache), the Bayerishce Rundfunk, NDR(Wand)etc.. and upon listening to their recordings, especially those clarinet orchestral solo, one finds that these principal players sounded (with a thinner and lighter sound that cut through the orchestra) totally different than Leister. The tone of Leister is that when you hear several Karajan's recording and one could distinguish whether it was Leister on solo in the recoriding or not. That's his beautiful and singing "Leister" sound, and is actually, as Sacha has pointed out, quite different than the traditional German sound.
From my limited knowledge, I could name a few German masters from the older gerneration that I believe the Germans will find them sound "German". eg. Guenther Fortmaiser (owner of the Viotto G3 facing) , Hans Deinzer (teacher of so many distiguished German soloists eg. Sabine Meyer).
Post Edited (2010-07-23 01:53)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris22311
Date: 2010-07-25 06:27
Srattle,
who did they hire for the current year?
Chris
PS From what I understand, A. Ottensamer is Principal in Deutsche Berlin (I had talked to him a few months ago), there were several posts indicating that he was principal of Berlin phil. I was not very clear on what has been put out there on this bulletin board.
Chris
Post Edited (2010-07-25 06:28)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lam
Date: 2011-12-11 14:41
Hello,
In my previous post, I have expressed my doubt over the ability of the young Andreas Ottensamer to be the principal of BPO as such young age.
However, after watching the BPO digital concert hall for a few months, I am actually surprised by his playing, I would say he is in the same level as his father, or even surpass him. Everytime I hear his solo, my jaw really open down, absolute perfection, and highest precision in ensemble playing. (I am not exaggerating) Does anyone has any idea how he could acheive this highest playing standard in such young age ?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinete09
Date: 2011-12-12 02:44
I have a question, why is the berlin philarmonic looking for a principal clarinet if they already have Wenzel Fuchs? Is he leaving or they want two principals players?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lam
Date: 2011-12-12 13:58
yes, in Berlin Philharmonic there are 2 solo position for each wind part, eg. Flute with Pahud and Andreas Blau, and Oboe with Jonathan Kelly and Albrect Mayer. I think its necessary to have 2 solo player in such orchestra.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2011-12-13 02:31
Lam, Your earlier post regarding preferring Kelly's tone to Mayer on oboe is quite something. It shows how incredible the wind section is. My only listening to Mayer is via Youtube but even this makes it evident that he is one of the most magnetic and engaging performers on the planet.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lam
Date: 2011-12-13 13:54
Arnoldstag, actually I start to like Mayer's tone and musicianship. At the time of my previous post I found his tone too harsh, but after months of listening of the BPO of many different concerts, I start to love his playing and his musicianship and his tone too. This is same as my experience with the clarinettist Jacques Lancelot, with his super excessive vibrato, I hate his playing at first hearing, but after hearing over a few time I found that he is a great musician and i found that his tone really nice, phrasing and imagination are super. And you are right that Mayer is one of the most magnetic and engaging wind player on the planet. And his tone could really cut through the whole BPO, which is essential for a top class oboe orchestral player.
One other experience is the recording of Alfred Prinz/Karl Bohm Mozart recording, on first hearing I found it super boring, but after a few time I found that its one of the most expressive performance of the Mozart concerto
And to tell the truth, on a few occasion when I listening to the digital concert hall of BPO, I found some oboe solo amazing and the tone is super, and I thought "The solo player should be Kelly!", but when I switch on the screen to see, it was Mayer. I actually could not distinguish the playing of both of them. And therefore, I find my negative comments about Ottensamer's ability and Mayer's tone in my earlier post quite annoying, and thats why I post again.
Post Edited (2011-12-13 14:40)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxnorman
Date: 2011-12-13 20:13
Srattle wrote:
"The Clarinetist on this concert was Pascual Martinez Forteza.
They had been looking for a principle clarinetist for about 3 years now, and were just trying many people out for single concerts (the week before they had Paul Meyer, also using french system)"
Is there a recording available of the concert in which Paul Meyer played principle? I would love to get my hands on that.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: srattle
Date: 2011-12-13 22:18
@maxnorman
There should be one on the Digital Concert Hall. Also the one with Chen Halevi. I just don't know which programs they played
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lam
Date: 2011-12-14 05:21
here is the link of the Halevi's one
http://www.digitalconcerthall.com/en/concert/329/robertson-capuçon-liszt-ligeti-bartók
and this one seems to be by Philippe Cuper with his Buffet
http://www.digitalconcerthall.com/en/concert/258/harding-jansen-bartók-britten-strauss
still finding the one with Paul Meyer.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
