Author: OboePrince
Date: 2015-10-01 01:55
Rigoutat is brighter, there is no denying that, but in a nice way. It has a sweet quality, it's not abrasively bright, but it's more for playing solo/principal.
I am obviously biased against Loree's (the Royal bore is better, but they are still so fickle) because of the temperment and I don't think they have enough UMPH. It's very middle-ground, which is fine if you like that. I like to play in extremes. If it's Rossini, it's as bright as I can play without sounding ugly. If it's Brahams, the darkest I can play without losing all my color and going flat.
We're all different, I just don't like Loree oboes. I muh prefer my Rigoutat to even a pro Loree model, and the Rigoutat pro models are all very different and (except for the symphonie) all superb.
Rigoutat also sounded a great deal different in the 90's. I think Roland was still making the oboes then. Phillipe has geared his skillset more toward a modern sound but with the flexibility that people love about Rigoutat.
I would try a Rigoutat, Howarth, Bulgheroni, Mariguax, Covey, and even probably Fossati and MAYBE even a Patricola (and most of those are horrifying) before I would play another Loree again in my life.
BUT, we are all different. I have heard plenty of Loree players with awesome sounds. The horn just doesn't agree with my approach.
|
|
The Oboe BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
