The union of Composer and Performer
July 27th 2006 02:00
Most of the famous composers we know about from the classical era and onwards were largely virtuosic pianists. Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms, Liszt, Chopin, Mendelssohn, Haydn and a great many more, composed a wealth of music for keyboard instruments which revealed their intimate relationship with the instruments they played. These composers also wrote works for solo instruments which they themselves had no experience playing. Beethoven is well remembered for his numerous string quartets, Brahms enriched violin and clarinet repertoire with several varied works, Mozart wrote the famous horn concertos(not to mention works for bassoon, clarinet and flute), and all of these composers at some point wrote works for the orchestra where they required a knowledge of every orchestral instrument. Their experience with the keyboard is obviously going to only take them so far.
To bridge this gap of instrumental knowledge, composers have tended to ‘buddy up’ with performers when writing for certain instruments. Usually, this is a win win situation for all involved. Think about it - performers gain the reputation of debuting works and having a composer write specifically for them, composers gain assistance in the composition process and an exacting control over their desired interpretation. Historical personalities such as clarinettist Anton Stadtler, and violinist Joseph Joachim would be practically unknown today if the former wasn’t the dedicatee of Mozart’s clarinet works, and the latter didn’t debut concertos by Bruch and Brahms. Performing compositions can turn musicians into legends.
Composers, too, if they want to get anywhere quickly, need this relationship to take place. There is nothing more irritating as a performer than being given music to play with notes that aren’t on your instrument, or with techniques that are impossible. With the help of an expert, composers are able to focus on bringing out the best of the instruments they write for, and keeping things as idiomatic as possible. Creating things that are technically difficult is not so much a problem, as long as it’s meant to happen for a musical purpose. As the composer Andrew Ford puts it: ‘It’s a bit like asking an actor to do a nude scene: there had better be a good reason’. What performers will always be more disdainful of are passages that are ridiculously difficult simply because the composer didn’t understand what they were writing - this can cause tension between the two camps, because if the performer makes a mistake in a concert, blame is thrown entirely on him when the composer should have probably put that note in a different register anyway!
From my own experience, unions like this are absolutely essential for composers today. Especially with the use of extended techniques in modern works, it is impossible to responsibly write for an instrument without taking the time to learn its ins and outs. It is rewarding as a performer making decisions that change the way the piece is composed, or changing a small feature which makes a passage sound infinitely better. One example I can give is a situation where a pianist was writing a work for a clarinet, violin, and piano trio I was part of. In a passage where the clarinet was given tongued semiquavers at a very fast tempo to try and imitate the tremolo of the violin, by substituting the tonguing for flutter tonguing, an extended technique, the result is a much more effective and definitely easier solution. It is making changes such as these that I find extremely satisfying.
For the future of music, and for if nothing else then simply enjoyment, I recommend the joining of composers and other instrumentalists wherever possible. The result is fun and immensely rewarding for everyone involved.
To bridge this gap of instrumental knowledge, composers have tended to ‘buddy up’ with performers when writing for certain instruments. Usually, this is a win win situation for all involved. Think about it - performers gain the reputation of debuting works and having a composer write specifically for them, composers gain assistance in the composition process and an exacting control over their desired interpretation. Historical personalities such as clarinettist Anton Stadtler, and violinist Joseph Joachim would be practically unknown today if the former wasn’t the dedicatee of Mozart’s clarinet works, and the latter didn’t debut concertos by Bruch and Brahms. Performing compositions can turn musicians into legends.
Composers, too, if they want to get anywhere quickly, need this relationship to take place. There is nothing more irritating as a performer than being given music to play with notes that aren’t on your instrument, or with techniques that are impossible. With the help of an expert, composers are able to focus on bringing out the best of the instruments they write for, and keeping things as idiomatic as possible. Creating things that are technically difficult is not so much a problem, as long as it’s meant to happen for a musical purpose. As the composer Andrew Ford puts it: ‘It’s a bit like asking an actor to do a nude scene: there had better be a good reason’. What performers will always be more disdainful of are passages that are ridiculously difficult simply because the composer didn’t understand what they were writing - this can cause tension between the two camps, because if the performer makes a mistake in a concert, blame is thrown entirely on him when the composer should have probably put that note in a different register anyway!
Joachim and Brahms, taken from www.harmonytalk.com
For the future of music, and for if nothing else then simply enjoyment, I recommend the joining of composers and other instrumentalists wherever possible. The result is fun and immensely rewarding for everyone involved.
| 76 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by andrew
Comment by Peter
Comment by Anonymous