 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.98.71.242
In Reply to: You don't like vibrato? - Read this posted by Chris from Lafayette on March 18, 2007 at 19:35:38:
It's almost a gut-level feeling- In the context of classical performance, to me, vibrato in the brass never sounded right, nor has it sounded right with clarinet. I don't think it's appropriate for Bach, Handel, or Vivaldi. I also think vibrato is too often overdone. It should be done in moderation. Better light and tight than heavy and atonal.And it's even that way outside the classics. When done light and tight, the effect can be breathtaking.
Follow Ups:
vibrato in the brass never sounded rightYou know, I like performances of, say, Daphnis and Choloe by American and British orchestras as much as the next listener does, but I think we would all be very much the poorer without performances such as the Cluytens/Paris Conservatory.
And in certain Russian and Eastern European works, many performances without brass vibrato just sound so. . . sterile.
Personal taste.
I think brass vibrato is less-offensive in contemporary works. Although I disagree about "Daphnis et Chloe".If there is one classical passage where vibrato in the brass is appropriate, it's the re-capitulation in the third movement of Rachmaninoff's Third Concerto. The trumpets basically play the main melody for the second time, and then the melody is "finished off", ending in a full orchestral climax. That melody is one of very few I actually prefer *with* vibrato. (And is played as such in a lot of cases.)
Another case is the trumpet melody in Resphigi's "Pines of Rome".... Even Bernard Adelstein does this with vibrato. Mainly because it is a "contemporary" melody, as opposed to a strict brass structure in a classical work.
A case where I think this is "optional" is the opening to the Ravel orchestration of Mussorgsky's "Pictures at an Exhibition"..... Although I personally prefer it played without vibrato. Another case is Prokofiev's Fifth Symphony.
But gawd, I also heard this done with the horn melody in the final movement of the Brahms One, and it was **horrible**. Brahms should **never** have vibrato in the brass.
In section work, no vibrato. For a solo passage, vibrato is an option, assuming the conductor is cool with it. That's how it works. As a stupid example, in Nutcracker I play a little 16 bar solo with vibrato, the rest straight tone.Don't know why everyone else in the orchestra is allowed to sing ('cept the poor clarinets) but not the brasses. You are free not to like it. ;-)
To Chris' point, the way the French brass players used to play vibrato is/was annoying, because it was very fast and very constant--no expressive use, just turn it on or turn it off. The Russians and Eastern Europeans used to play that way, too. Now that we have a world-wide corporate orchestra sound, that particular annoyance has abated.
. . .the way the French brass players used to play vibrato is/was annoying, because it was very fast and very constant--no expressive use, just turn it on or turn it off. The Russians and Eastern Europeans used to play that way, too.Well, you're talking to someone who loves Svetlanov's recording of Bruckner's Eighth! (But even I have to admit that this performance hardly sounds idiomatic - one reason being that wild Russian brass vibrato!) :-)
Never heard it, hope I can someday.I'll never forget hearing the Leningrad Phil in Symphony Hall in the early seventies. Unbelievable precision! (It was that or the gulag!)
But also the sound of ripping sheet metal whenever the brass got loud.
x
On reflecting that we apparently hold diametrically-opposed opinions on most matters and thus may normally never find an element on which we are in agreement, your above posting may prove to be "the exception that proves the rule"!...I hope that you are having a pleasant week...
Bill.
I was unable to discover any indication in the article (and I only managed to skim about half of it) that Hurwitz understands the distinction between vibrato as a means of tone production (modern-day practice) and vibrato as an expressive ornament (baroque practice--sometimes called the "close shake" by the 17th English).
s
vibrato preference is a little wider, and usually terminal. However, Ms. Andrews is a superb Broadway singer, and far be it from me to question her singing technique, especially in that genre!
n/t
Vibrato is an expressive device, though not at all in the same way trills and other decorations are.Vibrato can indeed be "on" all the time with no lack of expression; witness the thousands of players who have played that way. It is understood to be on all the time to the extent that composers must mark "non vibrato" on passages where they want it "off."
What is essential for it to be expressive is for the width (pitch variation) and speed to vary, one hopes with the expression of the music. Perfectly possible to leave it running all the time, or nearly so.
The idea that it should be sprinkled about a piece like confectioner's sugar while maintaining a straight tone otherwise may be more authentic, but sounds anachronistic--or worse--to modern listeners. To each his own, of course.
at least for flute players, although there is and probably always will be plenty of controversy on the general topic of vibrato, and not just for 17th and 18th century music. The most insightful and funniest treatise on vibrato (including when not to use it) I have ever read is in Comment J'ai Pu Maintenir Ma Forme, or How I Maintained My Form (or, How I Stayed In Shape) by the great French flutist Marcel Moyse.Moyse, perhaps the most famous and influential flutist of all time, lived from 1889 to 1984, worked with and personally knew Debussy, Ravel and Stravinsky, and was in the orchestra for the 1913 world premiere performance of Le Sacre du Printemps, among other things. He was old enough to remember a time when vibrato was much less prevalent (though apparently not entirely absent), and considered by many to be in very poor taste.
However, Moyse himself, though he did a great deal to bring a lot of baroque music back into the standard repetoire, had no interest in the "historical performance practice" movement he lived long enough to see, and would dismiss playing without vibrato, or even playing on original baroque instruments, as ridiculous.
. . . when the subject is winds. I should have made clear I was talking about strings.With winds/vibrato I find it slightly weird that the flute, oboe, EH, and bassoons (not to mention saxophones) are allowed to sing, whereas the poor clarinet is not, according to some people's tastes.
There are a few classical clarinetists who use vibrato, but still the majority do not.
Imagine Benny Goodman without vibrato! ;-)
"Imagine Benny Goodman without vibrato! ;-)"That's why I stressed "classical".... [-;
Although in my recollections, Goodman didn't use it the few times he did classical.
Good point. The whole issue of the clarinet and vibrato (or lack thereof) is an interesting one, but I guess a bit arcane for this discussion group.Meanwhile, for a classical clarinettist with seriously heavy vibrato, listen to David Oppenheim in the Brahms clarinet quintet with the Budapest String Quartet, if you haven't already. I'd be interested in your opinion.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
