 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Exiawolf
Date: 2015-07-06 12:42
As I sit here late at night listening to different great works I have come to realize something. I like the "Old and vintage" clarinet sound over what's generally sought after today. Hearing recordings dating all the way back to WWII has given me a respect and desire for that old kind of classical clarinet tone, opposed to say Ricardo Morales (Not saying one is better than the other, just that I'm beginning to find the sweetness in both). I've spent so much time on chasing a modern tone that I think I may have forgotten the simple things that older generations of musicians strived for. I've seen it said before and I think I agree with it, most older clarinetists seem to have been more concerned with phrasing and expression than say just their tone... That's a new concept for me. What are your thoughts/opinions and experiences?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2015-07-06 13:18
listening to scratchy WWII era recordings and comparing it to digital renderings of today's sound will inevitably give you a skewed result.
Neither of the two types of "preserves" comes close to a live performance, acoustically and all.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Exiawolf
Date: 2015-07-06 13:27
That's fair, however, even with the scratchy grainy quality, I still think you can hear a difference in sound idea.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2015-07-06 23:19
I have many LP recordings made in the 50s and 60s and I find that there is often a greater emphasis on focus and clarity (I exclude many of the old 1010 players in this) in the sound that for me is preferable to the "darker" sounds that are in fashion at present.
To quite an extent I also find this with oboe players too.
In recordinds from even earlier, whilst recording quality is not as good one can still hear the inherent sound quality shine through. Just listen to Kell's 1937 Brahms quintet.
A lot of those earlier players seem to be enjoying their music more with less emphasis on achieving 100% technical perfection.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2015-07-06 23:23
I too prefer, as a general rule, the older styles to the new. Variety, and an emphasis on musical communication over a letter-of-the-law (or Korg, as the case may be) musical fundamentalism.
I agree that Kell is a great one to listen to.
Eric
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-07-07 03:20
Well my theory is that (particularly here in the States) there has been an OVER emphasis on note perfect, "controversy free" interpretations. To me that has resulted in very safe, very bland training, practicing, and performances.
Also couple that with quotes we've heard on this very forum not that long ago that go something like,"If I had to audition today, I'd never get this job."
You do require consistent, predictable playing to get a good gig, but I think that is part of what is driving this bland train. It even appears there may be some correlation between "safe/bland playing" and the lack of audience count these days.
One last quote. Just the other night I heard this in regards to a recently constructed hall. The conductor was asked "how many seats do you need in the hall to reach a profitable margin." The answer was, "You're asking the wrong question. The question should be what number of seats can you fit in a hall that has wonderful accoustics. If the hall doesn't sound good, no one will want to come hear anything in it."
God Bless that decision !!!!!!
...................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: grifffinity
Date: 2015-07-07 20:48
Quote:
Well my theory is that (particularly here in the States) there has been an OVER emphasis on note perfect, "controversy free" interpretations. To me that has resulted in very safe, very bland training, practicing, and performances.
Also couple that with quotes we've heard on this very forum not that long ago that go something like,"If I had to audition today, I'd never get this job."
So many stories of the great orchestral players of the past start with "So and so's legendary teacher sent him to play for so and so great conductor and then they started their tenure with this great city orchestra." The whole audition process as we know it is perhaps more "fair" with blind auditions and committees...however, I think an overall musical vision for an orchestra is lost when a great conductor doesn't truly have control over the sound of their orchestra - which includes picking the musicians in your orchestra. Of course, there are horrible stories from the past about the tyrannical conditions of playing under certain conductors...but you can't deny how powerful some of these performances are today.
The human cost for great art....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-07-08 20:10
For a conductor the mechanism for controlling the sound is easy: You stop and say, "No, I want it to sound more like this." The problem arises with lack of time to stop, the conductor's inabilty to put it into words (or be concise or fast enough), the conductor's lack of a set idea what the piece should sound like BEFORE rehearsal.
As far as the "sound of a group" is concerned, it is 98% conductor. As you can see here on this very board, no two musicians will completely agree on any form of interpretation (particularly the better musicians) so you need that ONE POINT to which all will gravitate.
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EaubeauHorn
Date: 2015-07-08 20:25
I think a lot of the requirement for note-perfectionism has come from the ability to manipulate recordings to take out wrong notes. A friend who records solo cello pieces uses software that will cut and paste specific notes, so that if one D sounds just ever so slightly better than the next D, the better one can be put in place. That affects what we expect to hear in performance, although basically no one can achieve what is on their own recordings. And we end up with auditions that select, often, the most note-perfect player over the most musical player.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: KenJarczyk
Date: 2015-07-08 23:17
Okay, I'm an "old guy." But I do really appreciate a lot of what I hear in today's clarinettists. It is true that there has been an evolution in sound, though. I was greatly influenced by my first "real" clarinet teacher, Mr. John Blount, of Chicago history, living in Evanston, Illinois when I "took" from him. To this day, all the way back to the 1960's, I can close my eyes, get kind-of quiet, and hear Mr. Blount play. His sound really swept through a person. He was probably himself from the Daniel Bonade School, or at the least a contemporary of his. Mr. Blount played in the original Chicago WGN/NBC Radio Symphony Orchestra, and was/is the major influence on any type of classical interpretation I possess. He was a quiet man, but a very good teacher, as well as a player. But his sound... Hard to really grasp it - to try and describe it, although I still constantly hear it!
Ken Jarczyk
Woodwinds Specialist
Eb, C, Bb, A & Bass Clarinets
Soprano, Alto, Tenor & Baritone Saxophones
Flute, Alto Flute, Piccolo
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: KenJarczyk
Date: 2015-07-09 02:17
David Blumberg - Interesting - What a tool people have today with You-Tube! When I was coming up, it was live performance or the Music Library at my college, checking out as many albums that I could carry! Anyway, for a recent gig needing the Third Movement of the Weber Second, David - there you were on You-Tube in your Senior year in High School, I believe. You were fabulous back then! Probably a total monster now! Carry the torch, Brother!
Ken Jarczyk
Woodwinds Specialist
Eb, C, Bb, A & Bass Clarinets
Soprano, Alto, Tenor & Baritone Saxophones
Flute, Alto Flute, Piccolo
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2015-07-09 02:34
For a delightful comparison of old and new classical sounds, search on YouTube for
Louis Cahuzac Cantilene and Ricardo Morales Cantilene--two great clarinets of two different eras playing the same composition for clarinet and piano.
Morales' finger technique is a bit smoother in a few difficult spots but both clarinetists have tremendous presence. If Cahuzac were alive today he would probably darken his tone a little in the direction of Morales to blend with today's orchestras. Still there is something in the Cahuzac sound that cuts into you--a telling resonance--that may not be equalled by any of today's players. It has the quality of an afterimage that stays in memory long after you've heard it.
One can only wonder how Cahuzac would sound today on the best recording studio equipment.
Post Edited (2015-07-09 04:15)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: KenJarczyk
Date: 2015-07-09 17:13
Dave Powell - That was a touching example of your father's influence on you! Yes, get a turntable! There are some on the market now that have a USB to directly transfer your music. As for me, I have an ancient, but well maintained Kenwood that was a broadcast-quality model from the late '60's. Those old records still sound wonderful.
I remember my mother taking me to the Chicago Public Library to check out records, starting when I was 5 years old. What a marvelous woman she was. We had fun, too - sorting out what I should listen to - from classical to klezmer to jazz. She would stand behind me while I practiced, holding a long "swizzle-stick" often helping my time reading by tapping on my shoulder, or when I was getting a wee bit off - tap on my head!
Ken Jarczyk
Woodwinds Specialist
Eb, C, Bb, A & Bass Clarinets
Soprano, Alto, Tenor & Baritone Saxophones
Flute, Alto Flute, Piccolo
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
