 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-04-30 19:59
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=mozart+clarinet+concerto
You be the judges. Who do you think played it best?
The rules:
* The player's redition of the work must be on Youtube.
* The players redition by no means need be available solely from the link above: again just on Youtube.
* Any conflicts of interest or biases must be stated. (E.g. "here's my daughter playing the 2nd movement with such feelings it brings us to tears." E.g. I studied with "XYZ.")
* Judges need to tersely state their reasons why they feel the way they do, citing musical attributes.
* Judges can and should discount appropriately where acoustics of a live performance may not only be compromised, but where players don't have "15 takes" to get in right, as might be the case in a studio recording.
Notes:
* This is in no way meant to conflict with my favorite post on this board: David Blumberg's Youtube performances post.
* The player need not be named in the video. Just give us the link.
A perfectly acceptable answer: "Check out this 5th grader poor his/her heart out on this piece and make plenty of errors, but put his/her life in to it."
====================
Okay. That said, here's my vote:
====================
Each of the performances from this link had brilliance in them. From Sharon Kam's artistry, to Frost and Bliss' technique, to others whose names aren't mentioned. But my vote is a tie between Sabine Meyer and Jon Manasse. Meyer's artistry and technique are as wonderful as Manasse's artistry and clarinet tone, which to me sounds so pure, it sometimes borders on sounding synthesized (I mean that as a complement, but others may find that an issue).
Biases: Manasse's an age peer that I played with in High School and knew he was destined for greatness, so maybe my pick is self righteous. And when it doubt, I always favor Meyer because of not only her briliance, but because of the unfair gender bias I think she has received in her career http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabine_Meyer.
Post Edited (2014-04-30 20:01)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-04-30 21:54
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsvgIW2YMWA
Etherial; sublime; completely musical
...................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2014-04-30 23:11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9390xDUuPuU
(Seconding Liquorice's nomination of Tale Ognenovski).
Since we're supposed to give reasons, here are some of mine:
1. Ognenovski's iconoclastic orchestration, which most scholars suggest is a hybrid of historical performance practice and his own style. (One thinks of Mahler's Beethoven orchestrations--a pairing of this Mozart with some Mahler/Beethoven would undoubtedly make a satisfying evening).
2. His legato fingering is inimitable.
3. Staccato passages are rendered with striking rubato--an obvious departure from the more pedantic versions littering the web.
4. The photo montage, which is carefully synchronized to the music, was well ahead of it's time when first produced in the early 1980s.
5. He takes all of the repeats--including many that have been lost to posterity, and are so arcane that musicologist have yet to argue them. This is therefore an example of a version that creates discussion, in the most intelligent sense. Just as it is difficult to interpret certain pieces by Copland in a way too far divergent from Bernstein's readings, so sympathetic to composer's aim are they, so we feel a need to incorporate the musical mind of Ognenovski when performing Mozart once we have heard his version of the Concerto--even if we are playing in the pit for Cosi. There is a certain symbiosis between Ognenovski and Mozart which transcends the centuries.
Eric
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2014-04-30 23:24
Rudely truncated, but here is the third movement. Anybody find the Adagio?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbUqKvpmPfU
"Tale Ognenovski's performance is the most beautiful and the fastest performance of Mozart's clarinet concerto of all time." (...or not!)
"Perhaps this is unique recording where every notes of measure numbers III/311-313 from the Third movement: Rondo: Allegro are played by Tale Ognenovski exactly as they are written in Breitkopf & Härtel edition." (...or not?)
" the distinct Balkan flavor and improvisations are extraordinairy" [sic - pun intended?]
Post Edited (2014-04-30 23:27)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-05-01 00:00
Paul.. Thank you for including Leister.
I'm not sure Mr. Ognenovsky's performance would get him into Curtis but who am I to judge art. ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2014-05-01 01:09
The "best" performance of the concerto is the one that moves you, the indivdual listener not anyone else, musically.
Individual characteristics like staccato legato etc should not really register if you are listening to the music rather than listening as a clarinet nerd.
I know in my early clarinet playing days I tended to listen to every piece of music, even symphonies, as clarinet demonstration excepts. Fortunately I grew out of that phase many years back.
Take time out away from clarinet and listen to great artists of every instrument and voice - listen to the music..
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Filettofish
Date: 2014-05-01 05:21
I love the suggestions so far, but I can't help myself I find Mr. Manasse's performance of the concerto reserved, yet blissful and sweet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-05-01 08:05
I second Katrina's choice of Thorsten Johanns' rhythmically and melodically vigorous performance on the regular (Oehler) clarinet in A (with no basset clarinet extension). anr a performance on a clarinet with a basset extension my choice is would be Emil Jonason for the beauty of the string playing, the deep and colorful sound he draws from the clarinet, resonant and large even to the lowest bass notes, and the meandering cadenza he sustains with circular breathing. Such an organ-bellows excursion would probably have amused Anton Stadler, who was, on occasion, fond of practical jokes and quirky exhibitions.
Post Edited (2018-01-01 06:17)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JKL
Date: 2014-05-01 15:23
Lorenzo Coppola on a period basset clarinet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbXnIBzxsEA
because
- of his virtuosity
- he shows us how far we moved away from the origins of our instrument
- he inspires us to discuss philosophically how to define "progress" in making classical music, in performing as well as in constructing clarinets
- he is less boring than most of the other players (well - the requirement was to be "tersely", so in this few words it is a bit too provocative)
JKL
Post Edited (2014-05-01 21:14)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-05-01 17:35
Wow! Lorenzo Coppola "knocks the ball out of the park!" You've got to think things can't be easy on that historic clarinet he's playing and yet he played better than many who approached the work with modern instruments: plus the orchestra was first rate!
One of my teachers said his hardest gig was one where he had to learn to play and perform on a historic clarinet like the one in this video.
Many phrases were articulated that we normally don't find in more recent interpretations. I wonder if that made it even more difficult, or was necessary in order to avoid the risk of hitting extraneous notes had difficult fingerings been effected legato.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-05-01 19:29
I enjoyed my short sample of the Coppola historic clarinet performance as well. I guess I was expecting a more dramatic difference in sound, and was surprised how similar it really is to modern clarinets. Certainly to many unsophisticated listeners they would seem identical. On the other hand, I also am mightily impressed by such a performance on a period instrument. Period mouthpiece / barrel? or modern? (how much would it matter?) How about period REEDS or at least period reed material types and methods? Plus I wonder how a period player would have felt about a modern instrument and accessories- whether of pro or student grade.
I suggest an experiment, might work best in a university setting. Somebody play random samples of this and 2 or 3 of the other "modern" ones to a group of musicians (clarinetists?) and ask them to vote on which one is the period clarinet. You'd have to be careful to take the samples from portions with no articulation differences.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2014-05-01 19:36)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dibbs
Date: 2014-05-01 20:04
You have to use a (copy of) a period mouthpiece and barrel with those instruments. Modern ones won't fit and probably wouldn't work properly if they did. I don't know about reeds but the mouthpieces had very narrow long lays at that time.
It is surprising how similar they sound to modern instruments when you hear a one played, but when you play one yourself you get the impression that they sound totally different. In fact every note sounds different from the one next to it.
I made a classical clarinet on a course with Daniel Bangham last November and I love playing it though it's hard to say why. The intonation in the chalumeau is all over the place, it's tone is uneven, it's very resistant, the dynamic range is limited and the fingerings make otherwise easy passages incredibly difficult. Of course, it would be surprising if all those things hadn't improved dramatically in the last 200 odd years.
An early player would have probably been astounded by the intonation and evenness of scale of the cheapest student instrument available today.
fskelley wrote:
> I enjoyed my short sample of the Coppola historic clarinet
> performance as well. I guess I was expecting a more dramatic
> difference in sound, and was surprised how similar it really is
> to modern clarinets. Certainly to many unsophisticated
> listeners they would seem identical. On the other hand, I also
> am mightily impressed by such a performance on a period
> instrument. Period mouthpiece / barrel? or modern? (how much
> would it matter?) How about period REEDS or at least period
> reed material types and methods? Plus I wonder how a period
> player would have felt about a modern instrument and
> accessories- whether of pro or student grade.
>
> I suggest an experiment, might work best in a university
> setting. Somebody play random samples of this and 2 or 3 of the
> other "modern" ones to a group of musicians (clarinetists?) and
> ask them to vote on which one is the period clarinet. You'd
> have to be careful to take the samples from portions with no
> articulation differences.
>
>
> Post Edited (2014-05-01 19:36)
Post Edited (2014-05-01 20:13)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-05-01 21:19
You know, it does make perfect sense that- however different modern clarinets might appear or feel to observer or player, compared to period clarinets- they sound essentially the same. All through the history, every new design has been compared to the originals, and any substantial change in sound would be rejected and that instrument not used for the serious stuff. Even if maybe it did sound nice or even nicer in its own right.
OR- the sound of a reed on a stopped pipe of approximately these dimensions is pretty much always going to be the same, or (since we do get minor? variation by how we play) something close to the historic "ideal" sound is always going to be available with varying degree of skill required. Even on a $29 1955 Sears Silvertone from Elkhart, Indiana.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-05-02 02:21
All right, this one may be a bit controversial.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0mIhjhUnjQ
First, some acknowledgements:
* Ms. Nadja Drakslar is a brilliant technical player with a great sound and intonation, who just got in front of hundreds as a young musician and did a better job than I could in the privacy of my practice room.
* Ms. Drakslar may have been playing the piece according to instructions, like the conductor's, that may not have been her choice way to play the work.
But I feel the problem here is that, and I admit, I'm being critical of an otherwise (near? age?) professional clarinetist, is her lack of contrast in sound levels.
Again--others may review this good or bad and for different reasons.
I also suspect I am pointing things out that in 2 years time since this video, Ms. Drakslar has, with musical maturity, ceased to do anymore, assuming the lack of dynamic was even her choice to begin with.
She's also rushing a bit too, but Sabine Meyer's been no less guilty of this occasionally too. Maybe rushing is a bad word. I normally associate rushing with players desiring to play at the concert speed, but playing too fast. Here, picking up the tempo may have been desired.
Post Edited (2014-05-02 02:23)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2014-05-02 08:33
Warning, I'm trolling here.
When I listened to the Coppola performance, I thought, "Wow! I have to hear more." I watched all three movements then went looking for other performances by him. On the other hand, I stopped listening to Drakslar about eight minutes into the first movement. That was more than enough for me.
What do you find in the Drakslar performance (besides the last half of the first movement) that you don't find in the Coppola performance? Do they add or detract from the performance. What is present in the Coppola performance that is absent from the Drakslar performance?
Best regards,
jnk
Post Edited (2014-05-02 08:34)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2014-05-02 18:00
I don't use youtube to listen to recordings, as if it is a commercial release not by the Label, it's piracy. Some goofball would have illegally uploaded the tracks.
My favorite recording that I have heard, was a tape Abe Galper gave me of Chen Halevi.
He played recently solo with the New York Phil (a Chamber Concerto)
And also Michael Rusinek with the Pittsburgh Sym live broadcast was fantastic.
Marcellus is the standard by which all others are measured by.
The Authentic Clarinets (reproductions, etc) are quite easy to articulate quickly on.
I dislike their sound almost always.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
Post Edited (2014-05-23 06:23)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Funfly
Date: 2014-05-02 18:24
While I know that Mozart's Clarinet Concerto contains some of the most beautiful melody but I have always found it painful to watch it performed.
First the 52 bar wait for the soloist. We watch him/her fiddle with his reed and move from foot to foot, sometimes standing there trying to look absorbed. Whatever the truth, we, as the viewer, start to think about his plight and nerve and we will the music on to get to the soloist's start.
Then the clarinet finally starts we are treated to the wonderful clarinet music, perhaps the most 'mood' melody ever written for clarinet.
However as the soloist progresses our mind starts to concentrate less on the music and more on the skills of the player. We are treated to more and more musical acrobatics and eventually our mind will leave the music itself as we become engrossed by the the musician's ever complex fingering.
As the concerto continues we then start to appreciate not only his/her abilities but stamina and memory - we can't stop these thoughts from intruding into our awareness and it's more like watching a marathon run than a piece of music.
![[right]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie8.gif)
Martyn Thatcher Mature Student Cheshire U.K.
Clarinet - Yamaha SE Custom
Alto Sax - Yamaha YAS 480
Guitar - Yamaha FG 375-S
Post Edited (2014-05-02 18:25)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-05-02 18:38
"What do you find in the Drakslar performance (besides the last half of the first movement) that you don't find in the Coppola performance? Do they add or detract from the performance. What is present in the Coppola performance that is absent from the Drakslar performance?"
Fair question.
I am amazed at what Coppola was able to bring forth in that period instrument, assuming--I think correctly, but I am not certain--that it must have take a lot more work to make it shine--than a modern clarinet. You have custom mouthpieces to contend with, and a need for finger accuracy where tone holes are more prevelant than the levers on today's instruments. I'm assuming that there were many obstacles to overcome, including good intonation in all registers: which still eludes clarinets and players today.
This is not to discount the difficulty of our instrument at any point since its introduction, nor Ms. Drakslar's talent. Music, I think, needs to tell a story through the conveyance of changes in dynamic, amoung many other attributes, that while Ms. Drakslar did, wasn't as apparent as I think it perhaps should or could have been with her modern instrument. But then again, who knows what comes out of microphone on a Youtube recording, and as mentioned, who knows if the music was rendered by her with her choice of the artistry that she would have preferred to play it with.
If Mr. Coppola had played as he did on a modern instrument I suspect I wouldn't have been as impressed. (Again, I am picking fine points of play with extremely gifted musicians.) His rendition reminds me of just how virtuosic Anton Stadler must have been http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Stadler on his clarinet of the day, when he first played Mozart's work.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2014-05-03 01:03
I played it best because I played it just the way I like it. Ok, next stupid question, please...........
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-05-03 23:27
One note on the admiration for Coppola's fingering skills: The early clarinet is a lot like the recorder in its fingering because, of course, Denner was a recorder maker. The added keys have spoiled clarinetists into thinking that playing on an instrument with few or no keys and rings is more difficult than it really is. Today, there are dozens of virtuoso recorder players who can toss off the Flight of the Bumblebee at blazing speed on instruments that have no keys whatsoever. Even a few tenacious amateurs have been able to manage this. Coppola isn't--so far as fingering goes--doing anything that many advanced recorder players couldn't do either right away or with a few days' or weeks' practice.
Also, I agree that compared, for instance, with the round, woody sound that Ricardo Morales draws from his Selmer Recital basset clarinet in his excellent Youtube performance, the old authentic instrument gives a very small and thin sound of limited dynamic range. Thorsten Johanns' performance seems to be more expressive and much fresher in phrase driving, accentuation, and overall interpretation than Coppola's.
Post Edited (2016-03-13 22:10)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2014-05-03 23:51
My two personal favorite recordings of the Mozart concerto are Tony Pay's and Jack Brymer's. However, I hesitate to answer this question because the whole idea of "best" (as opposed to personal favorite) makes me uncomfortable. That's because my idea of "best" involves variety: I greatly enjoy hearing exceptional clarinet players come up with different ways of reading this piece of music that just about everybody plays. These players teach me new things about the music -- new ways to read the score.
I hasten to add that I don't want to hear difference just for the sake of difference. I want to hear a valid reading from someone who's studied Mozart, not just gone tootling off on an ego-trip. But favorites? -- yeah, can't help having favorites, and the Pay and Brymer recordings are the ones I listen to the most, by far.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JKL
Date: 2014-05-04 14:28
Lelia Loban wrote:
> I want to hear a valid reading from
> someone who's studied Mozart, not just gone tootling off on an
> ego-trip.
source/example of clarinetists playing the Mozart Concerto "tootling off on an ego-trip"? (I don´t want to discuss R. Kell here!)
For me the problem is just the reverse: the players are awestruck by the genius Mozart and create an atmosphere of noble boredom. At the same time they don´t care to play 180 - I guess - wrong notes, notes which Mozart never wrote in his life, ignoring the results of research and science. This is - at least for me - the main problem with this piece today.
JKL
Post Edited (2014-05-04 22:24)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-05-04 17:27
It is such a charged atmosphere that there is no "right answer". If your performance is a rehash of what has come before, well- you're not very inventive, are you? In fact, you're just a copycat. If it's really different, who are you to have such chutzpah? But all music is like that. Jimi Hendrix was ridiculed for years, and lost gigs right and left- and it easily could have ended that way and nobody would remember him- until he got in front of the right people at the right time.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2014-05-05 19:38)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Johan H Nilsson
Date: 2014-05-15 13:19
Jon Manasse must be in the same category as Karl Leister: They let the music and clarinet talk and don't try to be overly artistic. The concert belongs to the classical music era.
If Leister is the representative for the German sound, Manasse must be his American counterpart. The sound is as dark as my coffee, almost synthetic as ThatPerfectReed put it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Andrez444
Date: 2014-05-15 19:22
Andrew Marriner's performance of the concerto with chamber players from the LSO is one of the best from both a musical perspective, and his approach.
The clip starts with some very enthusiastic insights from Andrew around the work.
Well a worth a listen to through the link below
www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwP5hfkyN9I
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TomS
Date: 2014-05-16 05:35
I think Tony Pay performed the Mozart on a reproduction of an early clarinet, as would have been used in the 1790s. The orchestra was low pitched as well, with a darker, softer sound. It was great!
Both recordings I have of Jack Brymer are good ... his sound changed during the span of the recordings ... I don't know which I prefer. (A number of years ago, our principal and 2nd clarinet in the Arkansas Symphony were so impressed with Mr. Brymer's playing, when heard live, that they each purchased B&H 1010 instruments. As I remember, they had all kinds of tuning issues until new MPs that were compatible with the 1010's bore were used.)
Of course, many people consider the Robert Marcellus recording with the Cleveland Orchestra as the standard to compare against.
Some of these new players do a fantastic job as well ... too many to mention.
Tom
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: johnhcl
Date: 2014-05-16 07:54
Harold Wright plays it the best. He always play it the best.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: johnhcl
Date: 2014-05-16 07:54
Harold Wright plays it the best. He always play it the best..
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Johan H Nilsson
Date: 2014-05-22 12:47
The user "mugge62" on youtube has a great channel with recordings from the Danish Radio. The sound and TV production are usually excellent.
Just watch this performance of Gran Partita:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ES0Sc84RSw
A recording with Martin Fröst was uploaded a few days ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKy967puebk
It seems Fröst has too much energy for this concert. In the recordings I have listened to he seems to overdo things. But I found this performance a bit more relaxed.
Post Edited (2014-05-22 12:48)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarinet4hire
Date: 2014-05-23 07:37
"Harold Wright plays it the best. He always play it the best."
I too enjoy his playing. The man was amazing!
Hard to choose between Wright and Marcellus! I couldn't do it. I like them both.
Wright takes a wonderful departure from the traditional dynamic interpritations... especially at the beginning!
Marcellus is flat out perfect in every perspective. 'Nuff said. 
Brian
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony F
Date: 2014-05-23 08:56
For me, the Jack Brymer did it best. I also enjoyed Gervase de Peyer's rendition. I like the "English" sound, and these are what I was brought up with.
Tony F.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
