 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: bcl1dso
Date: 2008-10-13 19:21
Anyone know whats going on with the New York Phil audition? Who made semi's?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: claritoot26
Date: 2008-10-15 16:44
Stephen Williamson and Richie Hawley are the finalists, according to the Clarinet Jobs group in facebook, and that poster heard it from Guy Chadash.
Lori
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ryan25
Date: 2008-10-15 19:35
Mark Nuccio is also a finalist.
"....is this to be Drucker's replacement?"
Yes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rvazquez
Date: 2008-10-15 22:42
List:
Though I have not confirmed this information with him, I heard that Philly has given Ricardo a very good reason to stay there a while. Ricardo told me a few days ago that he is indeed staying with Philly.
R
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ryan25
Date: 2008-10-15 23:56
No winner was chosen after the finals today in New York according to the Clarinet Jobs group on Facebook. Each finalist played for an hour. Congrats to them for reaching the final round in what must have been a very competitive audition.
Back to square one I guess.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2008-10-16 01:17
But you know it does make one wonder where it all will end?
There are plenty of great players at the Chicago Audition, and those 3 for the NYPO each would have done a tremendous job in the gig.
So it makes you wonder just what are they waiting for???
jeez
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: grifffinity
Date: 2008-10-16 01:36
I wonder if they did NOT pick Nuccio so they wouldn't have to replace him?
Does anyone know if final round was behind a screen?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2008-10-16 01:40
It really makes me wonder what they're looking for, especially given that they passed over Mark Nuccio (who's already assoc. principal, right?). Maybe I don't understand how this works, but my understanding was that generally the associate principal (in addition to playing Eb) fills in for the principal.
It would seem that a guy who is already playing with the orchestra (often in the principal's chair) ought to have no problems fitting in with the ensemble. So that doesn't seem like that's the issue.
Obviously if they promote him to principal, they have to hold another audition for assoc. principal (which is, I suppose, one could see as a disadvantage). But by not picking anyone, they're going to have to hold another audition, anyway, so I guess that's not a factor (unless they don't think there are any good eefer players out there to audition).
It seems like they have some very specific quality they are looking for in a new principal player, they haven't found it, but they're sure it's out there.
I wonder how many people auditioned for this job total.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clariknight
Date: 2008-10-16 02:01
Maybe they're just waiting for me to be ready to audtion? It seems to me like these high level orchestras will take exceptional players on as assoc. principal, but will accept nothing less than virtuoso as principal. I haven't heard much of Nuccio (only with the orchestra, nothing solo) so I can't really comment there, but perhaps it is that difference between top of the line and THE top of the line that they want for their principal vs. assoc. principal. In Chicago, it seems like they could have easily accepted one of the other finalists (don't remember who they were) on, but because they couldn't have Ricardo they didn't want any of them. Same thing perhaps for New York? If so, like David B so rightly asked, where does it all end?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bcl1dso
Date: 2008-10-16 03:09
I agree with David....what are they waiting for? Honestly if you think about it, those three finalists today were some of the 3, if not the 3 best players in the country. So, unless they're waiting for Ricardo, who isn't going to come, then I think they have made a serious mistake.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2008-10-16 04:02
In the spirit of the presidential debate I think NYPO is wasting tax payers; money
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2008-10-16 04:13
I always knew that Stanley Drucker was irreplaceable!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dallask622
Date: 2008-10-16 06:34
actually Michael Rusinek did go for it along with many other great players...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2008-10-16 07:04
Here's a question (which may or may not be readily answerable):
Is there something (stylistically or tone-wise, I mean) about the way the three finalists play that would seem similar to each other, but would perhaps distinguish them from other players of similar calibre? Or is there any kind of "common stylistic thread" to them at all?
Another question (which is either easily answered by someone or not answerable at all):
Did the finalists play different excerpts for the final round than for the prelims/semis? If so, what were they?
Third question:
How would you describe Pascual Martinez-Forteza stylistically/tone-wise in comparison to these three finalists? (Incidentally, both he and Hawley studied at one point or another with Yehuda Gilad)
If one could answer these questions, then it might shed some light on what the NYPO is looking for. The first question basically asks what was it that got them to the final round. The second question basically asks what it was that they were looking for in the final round that the three finalists didn't have. The third question entertains the theory that perhaps the NYPO is specifically looking for someone who will fit in well with NYPO's 2nd chair (who is the newest appointment the NYPO clarinet section, if I remember correctly) and/or that Mr. Martinez-Forteza represents the stylistic direction they want the section to go in (to me, based on what I've heard, he seems to be stylistically quite different from Drucker--at least as a soloist). I also wonder how much impact, if any, the fact that they are changing directors has on this process.
My gut feeling (and that's all it is, because I honestly don't know much about it, despite the fact that I am following this with great interest) is that these sorts of competitive auditions--at least at this level--are more about style than ability. As David noted, all three of these players possess sufficient ability for the job.
Another question (I guess, primarily for David, but I'd like to know others' opinions on this):
What do you think distinguishes Ricardo Morales from these other guys? (I know he's really good--but what I want to know is what makes him *better* than the rest, in so many peoples' opinions? What, specifically, does he do better than everyone else? And why is it better?)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: michal
Date: 2008-10-16 07:43
WOW! I am intrigues by the outcome of this audition. I think you all made strong points and asked important questions.
For what it's worth, I think that it is impossible to decide on a solo clarinet position. This player must have much more than a great sound, or great fingers. There is the IT factor and it is extremely difficult to bring that out in a simple one on one audition. It must be tested by giving the finalists a chance to show their knowledge and musicianship in real time.
If anything, I would think best would be to try and respect those who made it to the finals by letting them play a few concerts with the orchestra. The orchestra can still decide not to take anyone after that. But to send those who got so far and worked so hard, home, empty handed, is a crime.
As for the Ricardo q- those who know and follow his career know he has the IT factor. It is not something u learn in school...it is something in you that comes alive when u play and people can recognize it, wheather they are pros or just music lovers.
That being said, looking for star quality in an audition- a bit unreal, as most players can't express that during a screened audition. I believe that all these great players who played are amazing musicians and should be given the chance to show it.
Mark Nuccio was my teacher- he is an increadible player and can play the eflat like butter as well as the bflat. If anything, for the NY phil to have to replace him would have been much harder.. I agree this might have been a point of debate for the committee.
I hope that orchestras would be more felxible about their decisions regarding top positions in the future- it might make a difference if they let finalists play during the season.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dileep Gangolli
Date: 2008-10-16 14:26
A job like principal in the NYPO is really the summit of Everest for music.
While in the past, being a great player who could nail the excerpts (with a great tone, articulation, etc was enough to win the job), the standard for a job like this is that they want a soloist - like a Perlman or Lang Lang on the clarinet.
And there are some players at that level - Carbonare and Morales. Like Drucker's playing or not, he had that soloistic flair that very few clarinet players have and could play in the orchestra as well.
While the finalists may all be qualified and do a great job at playing principal, given that this is the biggest clarinet job in the world.....(NYC being the epicenter of music in my mind), they have every reason to hold out for the best.
My guess is now they can invite players to come at will and not have to pretend to have an open audition. This, in the end, may be a better way to do it and achieve the best result.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dgclarinet
Date: 2008-10-16 14:37
I just don't understand all this. Maybe I've been out of this type thing for way too long, but when the best players come to audition and you don't hire any of them, aren't you kind of outhinking things just a little?
I've heard the NYPhil many times...they must not have used this same philosophy in some of their other hires because it's not "the Everest for music"..at least for me. Maybe in the 50s with Bruno Walter it was close to this, but now...no way.
If they used this same criteria for hiring a conductor, Loren Maazel would be still sitting and waiting for a phone call. He has "IT" about as much as I have "IT".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ryan25
Date: 2008-10-16 14:51
I agree that Nuccio's E-flat playing is really amazing but I would highly doubt that the orchestra is worried about replacing him. Eflat does not play every concert. There might be many weeks with out Eflat. The principal chair is part of the core sound of the orchestra and is always hard to fill. It is much more important than the eflat player, no mater how good he or she is.
I also agree that New York Phil is a huge job that holds a lot of significance and prestige but this is not the New York Phil of the Bernstein era. I have heard many concerts on PBS and have purchased some recent recordings of theirs that lets just say are not that impressive. It's crazy that you have an audition where the top players of the day are applying and not pick anyone? There are many amazing players in this country that I am sure took the audition. Players that are principal in other orchestras. I just don't think you are going to do better than what you heard over the last 4 days.
I was confused about the Chicago audition but I will give them credit for at least picking someone. Poor Larry Combs who is exhausted is still having to go in and play some concerts with the CSO and tours while they start their audition over again.
2 of the biggest jobs in the country and both orchestras seem to be looking for something that is not available or does not exist.
Congrats to those who advanced or were in the finals of both of these auditions. It's a flawed process and sometimes an unfair one. I continue to believe the European model is better where you play concertos and pieces in the first few rounds before playing excerpts because it gives you a chance to show more of your "it" factor. For some, its hard to show "it" in an excerpt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2008-10-16 14:55
NYPO is looking for someone special, today's Marcellus, Leister or Wright. Someone who can redefine the notions of tutti playing, chamber playing and solo playing. Apparently, whoever played last week end did not have "it".
Take Wright as an example, he did not sound like anyone else, his solos in the orchestra and in chamber music settings were always beautifully phrased, so personal, yet so true to the music in front of him. But he also had the ability to blend with anyone in the most delicate way. There is very few players who can play the flute or the bassoon on the clarinet, he was one of them.
I think what is happening today to the clarinet world (and maybe to the music world at large) is a sort of homogeneization of sound and style that makes it very difficult for anyone to be successful without conforming to these standards, yet makes every player a little too much like every other one.
I just really feel for all the finalists who spend very valuable hours of their lives preparing for these auditions, and are basically told they're not good enough, even though some of them already sat in that NYPO principal chair...
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dileep Gangolli
Date: 2008-10-16 15:32
I disagree about the Old Guard winning in this climate.
I do not think that Marcellus would be the type of player the NYPO is looking for. (And I am a Marcellus student!!!). Nor would Bud Wright be either.
By today's standards, their playing would seem too contained and certainly not "soloistic" enough.
From the times I have heard Nuccio play, he is the epitomy of what the Marcellus approach is all about, so they obviously want something different.
While I also admire Wright's playing, from what I have heard directly from a former woodwind principal in the BSO, they had to blend with Wright not the other way around.
Times are different and the American school of clarinet playing is changing. And expectations of what and how a principal wind player should play is also very different.
I think that is what we are seeing in these results and the audition processes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2008-10-16 15:50
Interesting comment about Wright's blend. I always found him to be so delicate, the chamber music recordings he put out certainly show his ability to blend with anyone, didn't know he was inflexible in the orchestra.
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2008-10-16 16:19
DavidBlumberg wrote:
> answering the question. A bad playing day for him is a good
> day for others - he's that good.
Wow! You see, I haven't heard much of his playing (just his Bartok recording, which is really, really good, by the way--probably the best I've heard), and I've never seen him play in person, so I'm relatively unfamiliar with him, despite how many times I've seen his name in posts here.
So I was curious as to what other people admire in his playing--you know, some players are characterized by great technique, for some players their tone quality stands out, and some people just have a natural gift for musical expression that's hard to characterize (I put Itzhak Perlman in this last category). Sounds like Ricardo Morales is one of those Itzhak Perlman types--good at everything, but especially good at making MUSIC out of that great technique and tone.
That talent comes out in the Bartok recording I own, to be sure, but it's not like hearing him play Mozart or Debussy, you know--some piece where you *really* get to hear what the player is capable of in a musical sense. That being said, he makes the Bartok sound *really easy*--and I guess for him it is (I've never played "Contrasts," but I think it's a pretty safe bet that it's quite a bit harder than Ricardo makes it sound!).
He really ought to make more solo recordings. Do you know if he features prominently on any orchestral recordings? I realize he hasn't been in Philadelphia that long--so there may not be that many.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2008-10-16 16:49
Playing next to him is nothing like listening to a recording.
But he does make everything sound easy including playing the Mozart Concerto and a recital afterwards while playing with a big split lip - right down the center too. He got that from laughing too much during a cold winter day and his lip split.
Didn't affect the performance any, just painful.
Andre Watts would have probably cancelled......
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jmsa
Date: 2008-10-16 18:53
Could it be that along with sound, and technique, perhaps the person that they choose must fit into the orchestra's politics as well.
jmsa
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2008-10-16 19:04
I wouldn't think that would be much of a factor in them not choosing anyone. Maybe if they had picked one, but not rejecting all 3 who are wonderful players.
So we have 3 giant orchestras without a chosen principal player
Chicago, NY, and Berlin
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
Post Edited (2008-10-16 19:50)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2008-10-16 20:09
add the concertgebouw to that list
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2008-10-16 20:33
Dileep Gangolli wrote:
<<From the times I have heard Nuccio play, he is the epitomy of what the Marcellus approach is all about, so they obviously want something different.>>
What does that mean, exactly? What is the Marcellus approach all about?
Don't mean to put you on the spot or to start a debate. I'm just curious as to what that means in a general sense, because although I am an American and have probably been unconsciously influenced by Marcellus's ideas (as well as Bonade's, no doubt), I have no affiliation with the "Marcellus school," per se, and I don't consciously try to emulate his playing. I've read plenty of posts and articles about Marcellus teaching this or saying that, and I have a few recordings of Marcellus I play from time to time, but I still don't think I could define "the Marcellus approach" or to say clearly how my own or someone else's playing style differs from or bears resemblance to the Marcellus archetype.
Post Edited (2008-10-16 20:47)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rvazquez
Date: 2008-10-16 21:05
List:
Wasn't the Berlin job offered to someone recently and the person turned it down?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dileep Gangolli
Date: 2008-10-16 21:57
Re: Marcellus approach
I am referring to definite and unique ideas about:
Phrasing
Articulation
Sound
Finger work
Musical interpretation
I don't have the time or ability to go into more detail here in cyberspace.
That's why you study with a teacher.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2008-10-17 01:56
Dileep Gangolli wrote:
> That's why you study with a teacher.
I think I must not have phrased my question well, because I wasn't really looking for that level of detail--I'm not really looking to learn how to play according to the Marcellus approach.
What I was really after was some description of the general characteristics of the Marcellus approach vis-a-vis other schools of clarinet playing. For instance, imagine for a moment that you're a non-clarinetist musician such as Lorin Maazel, let's say, and you're hearing clarinetists audition for your orchestra. You don't know or care about a lot of the technical details of clarinet playing--you're listening for style and interpretation and stuff like that. How would you describe--in general terms--the playing of "Marcellus-school" players as compared to the styles of other players (such as other non-Marcellus-influenced American players or European players of various schools)? What are the big-picture ideas underlying the Marcellus approach?
I think you mentioned something in a previous post about the Marcellus style as being "contained" as compared to other styles. I'm sure there are more of these sorts of general characteristics you can use to describe the Marcellus style than just "contained"--what would you say some of those characteristics are? That's the sort of question I was asking.
Basically, if the NYPO is not looking for someone who epitomizes the Marcellus approach, what does that mean, in a more general sense, about what they want/don't want?
Post Edited (2008-10-17 06:04)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brandon
Date: 2008-10-17 12:40
What happened to Steffens, the former solo clarinet of the BPO? I enjoy his playing and hate that he isn't with the orchestra.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarionman
Date: 2008-10-17 16:20
I thought that they would have chosen Mark Nuccio since he has covered the first chair part. It must feel like a slap in the face to him not have been the one getting the position. It also makes wonder who is making the decision since Lorin Maazel is leaving at the end of the season.
Is Stephen Freeman also leaving the orchestra because I saw that there is a position for bass clarinet.
Post Edited (2008-10-17 16:23)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2008-10-17 16:35
I was told that Alan Gilbert was part of the finals committee; can anyone confirm this?
Stephen Freeman is indeed retiring after a long and distinguished tenure.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2008-10-18 22:35
Let's not forget, Drucker is an icon. The orchestra has heard him play his style for so many years; the committee may want someone with the same flair. Sure the others are very good players, but do they play like Drucker? Who knows what the committee and the conductor really wants, it's a tough field. ESP
www.peabody.jhu.edu/457 Listen to a little Mozart
PS. Darn, I knew I should have applied for the job.
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
Post Edited (2008-10-19 03:15)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: marshall
Date: 2008-10-19 03:14
"I thought that they would have chosen Mark Nuccio since he has covered the first chair part. It must feel like a slap in the face to him not have been the one getting the position."
The same thing happened in Chicago with John Yeh...I heard they didn't even consider him for Principal.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2008-10-19 14:55
I’m just speculating so don’t jump on me, I’m not saying this is the reason but I’ve seen this in other orchestras, including mine. Maybe the other principals don’t want Nuccio, maybe they’re not comfortable with him as principal, or there’s a personality conflict with one or more principals. There could be more to this then the general public knows. There’s no doubt that he’s a very fine player but that doesn’t mean everyone on the committee, including the conductor, wants him as principal. We will never know for sure, just like John Bruce Yeh, another really fine player. ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2008-10-19 14:58
Ed Palanker wrote:
> PS. Darn, I knew I should have applied for the job.
Well now you can
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2008-10-19 21:35
Ed Palanker wrote:
<<There could be more to this then the general public knows. There’s no doubt that he’s a very fine player but that doesn’t mean everyone on the committee, including the conductor, wants him as principal.>>
Here's another thought, related to this. Both Nuccio and Martinez-Forteza joined the orchestra under Kurt Masur. Perhaps Maazel (or the new director, if he's on the committee) has different ideas about how the section should sound than Masur did.
By the way, didn't Hawley and Martinez-Forteza used to play together in the Cincinnati Symphony?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Peter Mueller
Date: 2008-10-23 13:55
Has anyone heard if the NY Phil auditioned for bass clarinet? If so, did they select a winner?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2008-10-23 14:08
Hold your horses, the resume deadline just passed. The audition won't be for a few months.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
