 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Curinfinwe
Date: 2012-11-05 12:52
Hi all,
I'm doing a paper on the historical development and characteristics of the "British" style of clarinet, and I'm having a bit of trouble locating resources that really quantify the distinct characteristics that it seems to have (or had). Would anyone mind throwing some ideas out there?
Thanks,
Anna
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dileep Gangolli
Date: 2012-11-05 15:58
Start by using Pamela Weston's books as a historical guide. Just as in the US, there are different schools of playing in the UK.
Google:
Frederick Thurston
Thea King
Bernard Walton
Jack Brymer
Charles Draper
Manuel Gomez
Langenus
Lazarus
Refer to Weston p 303 of More Clarinet Virtusi of the Past for a start.
Does not include the modern players.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hurstfarm
Date: 2012-11-05 18:47
Some comments in both of Jack Brymer's books: "The Clarinet" and "From Where I Sit". Also in David Pino's "The Clarinet and Clarinet Playing", and some discussion on Peter Eaton's website of how he came to start producing English wide bore clarinets in the tradition of the B&H 1010 after it was discontinued. I suspect a trawl through back copies of Clarinet and Saxophone (the Clarinet & Saxophone Society of GB 's magazine) would also produce some references.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2012-11-05 19:01
I would suggest you listen to as many recordings as possible. You can learn a lot by reading but more by listening.
The essence of the English style, imo, is the natural phrasing that many players had and the ease in which they did it. Bernard Walton is a fine example as is Reginald Kell, Jack Brymer and Gervase De Peyer.
Current players like Tony Lamb, Ian Herbert, Bob Hill and Richard Hosford are keeping this alive. I also like to think i'm adding to that in my own way. :-)
English playing is about turning a melody.
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paula S
Date: 2012-11-05 19:59
I also think the B and H 1010 epitomises the British School. I grew up just wanting a pair and eventually got them way later in life. They are like a slightly eccentric crusty old professor with a heart of gold and they sound like no other clarinet, You have to work very hard on them but the range of
dynamic expression is incredible and they can go from bristling and angry to the most sublime and lyrical pussy cat within a heartbeat. You have to work hard on the tuning but the sound is so resonant and rich. Peter Eaton has done an amazing job ,keeping the tradition alive and has improved the tuning to almost prefection. The quirkiness of the 1010 still draws me in though and even now I have trouble chossing between my Eatons and my 1010s. Jenny Brand did an interesting conference presentation on the 1010 but I can only find the abstract. http://www.music.ed.ac.uk/euchmi/galpin/gxh/gxhta.html#gxhtbrand
It might be worth you using your library services to locate the full transcript. I have read the full article in the past and it is fascinating.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2012-11-06 01:24
For a rather different take, try reading Patrick Hanudel's American Record Guide reviews of recordings by British clarinetists. 
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cgackle
Date: 2012-11-06 20:00
Attachment: Clarinet 001.JPG (1967k)
Have a Buckingham metal clarinet made in England and it plays wonderfully, however in adjusting the lower joint horseshoe key, I broke the key. Am looking for someone to sliver solder the lower joint F/C key or if there is a "extra" key laying around.
Cress Gackle
Hastings, Mn.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-11-07 00:55
Just so you know, it's pronounced Buckingham with a silent G and H - Bu'-ki-nam.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Curinfinwe
Date: 2012-11-07 02:22
Thanks so much! I had already read Weston's "Clarinet Virtuosi of the Past" but not "More Clarinet Virtuosi," which was very useful. David Pino's book was also particularly helpful in putting into words what my conception of the British sound was.
Jack, do you have any idea where I can find those Hanudel reviews?
I also did some sifting through all the back issues of the Clarinet journal and found some great stuff; I don't have access to the Clarinet & Saxophone one though. I'm going to spend some more time at the library tomorrow to see if I can track down that Jenny Brand article as well.
Peter, in your opinion is the 1010 a result of the British sound or is the British sound a by-product of the 1010? I've found numerous references to English players using large-bore clarinets before Boosey and Hawkes, but the British school really seems to come into its own at around the same time as the 1010s.
Also interesting is that you say the tuning is difficult, but I've read that Kell and others were noted for their intonation.
This article as well is interesting:http://www.legacyweb.rcm.ac.uk/cache/fl0026812.pdf
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2012-11-07 12:56
You can find Patrick Hanudel's reviews scattered through back issues of the American Record Guide for the past few years but I was really being a bit facetious. He really does not like the style/sound at all. E.g., he almost always criticizes British performers' tone for a tendency to spread at higher pitches and volumes with corresponding intonation problems. (But he criticizes just about everybody for this and also finds many performers use "too much tongue.")
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: chris moffatt
Date: 2012-11-07 13:34
I don't know about Hanudel but I note that Stubbins didn't believe that an 'english school' even exists - or existed. In fact he stated that all schools were derived from french and/or german schools. Brymer largely agreed with him in "the clarinet".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-11-07 13:56
Besides the B&H 1010, another favourite clarinet was the Louis "Chas Draper Model" which was based on Martel clarinets. These were made between the wars and were entirely handmade, just like the oboes they were famous for which were based on Loree instruments of the time.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2012-11-07 19:15
It is debatable if there ever was an "English sound" as such.
Sure there was a period when the wide bore 1010 was very widely used in UK.
Most of the teachers in the academies were at that time 1010 players so naturally their pupils followed their leader.
Many of these pupils tried to ape (often with only modest success) the Brymer sound and so for a period in UK there was a fair size community producing this pseudo Brymer sound.
However Brymer was a one-off player with a very strong physique and musical mind who could tame the wilder aspects of the 1010 and turn them to his own inimicable style.
But Thurston also played the 1010 and his sound world was vastly different to Brymer.
Kell played Martels (despite being the B&H US rep) and had a very different sound from either Thurston or Brymer.
Bernard Walton, arguably one of the greatest orchestral clarinetists around (even Karajan wanted him for Berlin) played on reform Boehm system clarinets and again was a different sound from the previous noted players.
Jack McCaw was yet another distinct sound and he used Buffet models, S1s I believe a one time.
So what was/is the English sound?
The 1010 period was quite dominant for some years (40s - 70s). This was also the time when the LP record started to dominate the music scene and UK orchestras had a high presence in the record industry at that time. So with the quite high percentage of the general clarinet fraternity using it then perhaps this became the sound many associated with the English.
But as as noted above at the very highest artistic level there was always a diversity of instrument and sound in the UK.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Peacock
Date: 2012-11-07 20:48
True, Brymer agreed with Stubbins that there was no specifically English school; but a little later he says that there are "...two types of sound which can now be said to be indigenous to only Britain itself. Both of these contain an element of vibrato." In essence, he goes on to say that one is proper vibrato and the other is a bad copy done with the lips. This fits with Norman's assertion that half the country tried to sound like Brymer and mostly ended up failing badly.
But I always assumed that Brymer's initial denial of an English school must have been largely an attempt at modesty: he can hardly have been unaware that he was to a large extent an archetype that very many people wanted to follow. And some did so with great success - Robert Hill of the LPO still (I think) plays on 1010s and has done so magnificently for decades.
And even though Walton & McCaw used different instruments, both used a good amount of vibrato. So while their sounds differed from Brymer's, they had more in common with him than with French, German, or American players of the period.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
