|
Author: EEBaum
Date: 2008-10-09 22:12
Lelia wrote:
" The mere fact that we're questioning whether these interpretations work means they don't work. If they worked, it wouldn't occur to us to question them."
I'll have to disagree with that. Different people have different criteria for something working or not. One might not question whether an interpretation works, whereas another person might be aghast as to how much something doesn't work.
Also, with something like the Copland, there is so much discussion about what to do with the cadenza and what works and what doesn't in the clarinet community that many of us would likely, before the performer plays a single note of the piece, already have going through our heads, "I wonder what they'll do with the cadenza, and if it will work."
I do agree with what I think both Lelia and Ed are saying, though, that listening to something just to copy it in whole (carbon copies) or in part (disorganized jumble) can tend to miss the point. Rather, listening to a bunch of different interpretations, I think, is more useful to offer ideas for the *type* of thing you might interpret differently. A sort of give a man a fish vs. teach a man to fish situation.
In other news, I tried playing the cadenza with some Carmen Miranda flavor the other night. It's really tricky to keep up the momentum, especially since I haven't worked on it in a while and usually tend to fermata and rubato the living daylights out of it. I like the feel, and I think it can, erm, work really well once I get it back up to performance level.
-Alex
www.mostlydifferent.com
|
|
|
orchestr |
2008-10-04 02:15 |
|
Tony Pay |
2008-10-04 10:25 |
|
Tony Pay |
2008-10-04 11:36 |
|
EEBaum |
2008-10-04 15:38 |
|
EEBaum |
2008-10-04 15:48 |
|
NorbertTheParrot |
2008-10-04 16:17 |
|
Ed Palanker |
2008-10-04 16:19 |
|
NorbertTheParrot |
2008-10-04 16:54 |
|
Ed Palanker |
2008-10-04 17:38 |
|
Tony Pay |
2008-10-06 01:09 |
|
orchestr |
2008-10-06 02:08 |
|
Ed Palanker |
2008-10-06 14:36 |
|
William |
2008-10-06 14:37 |
|
davyd |
2008-10-06 17:04 |
|
mrn |
2008-10-06 18:27 |
|
EEBaum |
2008-10-06 21:06 |
|
nielsen57 |
2008-10-06 22:08 |
|
Ed Palanker |
2008-10-07 01:10 |
|
Tony Pay |
2008-10-07 05:45 |
|
mrn |
2008-10-07 05:43 |
|
clarnibass |
2008-10-07 10:15 |
|
Tony Pay |
2008-10-07 13:30 |
|
clarnibass |
2008-10-07 14:27 |
|
Tony Pay |
2008-10-07 19:27 |
|
orchestr |
2008-10-07 19:27 |
|
Ed Palanker |
2008-10-07 19:34 |
|
mrn |
2008-10-07 22:44 |
|
Ed Palanker |
2008-10-07 22:54 |
|
mrn |
2008-10-09 04:32 |
|
Lelia Loban |
2008-10-09 18:26 |
|
Ed Palanker |
2008-10-09 21:46 |
   |
Re: Copland Cadenza Interpretation? new |
|
EEBaum |
2008-10-09 22:12 |
|
mrn |
2008-10-10 00:52 |
|
EEBaum |
2008-10-10 05:01 |
|
mrn |
2008-10-10 15:28 |
|
clarnibass |
2008-10-11 16:44 |
|
Tony Pay |
2008-10-14 03:04 |
|
orchestr |
2008-10-13 22:05 |
|
mrn |
2008-10-14 01:50 |
|
clarnibass |
2008-10-14 08:53 |
|
EEBaum |
2008-10-14 17:21 |
Keepers
