In this regard, a number of people have been asked to submit information covering a wide range of subjects, which will be presented in the order received.
Finally, since Brass Bulletin is a magazine for brass players by brass players, this writer will endeavor to respond to any reader questions or requests concerning the column's subject matter.
At this juncture, for the first and hopefully the last time, I would like to use this column for the expression of certain personal views concerning an issue I believe to be very significant.
Put as succinctly as possible, it is the concept of having an international standard of excellence in musical performance.
I served as a member of the jury for the Maurice André International Competition held in Paris this past June. The results of the contest are now history. Most certainly it was as fair and open an affair as anyone could expect; however, one element of the proceedings did raise the specter of the concept of internationality in such events, as well as in the music community at large.
The term "musical" was often expressed by jurists as well as members of the general audience when discussing the relative merits of the candidates.
In the context of the competition, the general connotation of musicality seemed to be that, in addition to the correct notes being played at the correct time at the correct dynamic level, there was a beauty of tone, nuanced phrasing, and a certain degree of personal warmth projected into the music.
These are certainly worthy attributes; however, what is pretty or lyrical and sensitive to some people might seem overly sentimental and affected to others, just as what could be conceived as proper stylistic restraint by one party could be considered sterile and academic to another.
It is not a matter of right or wrong, but rather of legitimate differences of opinion.
General musicianship, it should be noted, can involve an infinite variety of musical considerations: the composer; the times, region, culture, and performance practices existing during his compositional life; the formal structure of a composition, including the nature of its thematic material and the relationship and delineation thereof; and such rudimentary matters as consistency of style when articulation, ornamentation, timbre and tempi are concerned.
These are all germane to the total musicality of any performer; not necessarily in place of the earlier mentioned qualities, but in addition to them.
The above hardly represent revolutionary ideas. To the contrary, attendance at a string or piano master class, or at a conducting seminar, given by a world class artist, would show these concepts to be quite commonplace.
In view of this fact, it would seem utterly inconceivable for anyone to cling to the simplistic notion of a monostylistic idea of what is or is not musical.
After all, music performance practices, barring a few idiomatic considerations, don't change appreciably because the vehicle is a trumpet.
Moreover, doesn't it appear ludicrous that any country, geographical region, or individual would lay claim to having the final word on any or all matters musical?
Yet one is often confronted with exactly this attitude in many areas of the world, including my own country where its nature is more regional than national.
Legitimate national traditions, concepts, and individual performance styles are to be commended and nurtured as they represent very positive elements in any musician, but when this leads to shortsightedness, intolerance, or a general musical prejudice, it becomes a truly restrictive negative force.
The question then becomes, whether in competitions or simply in the minds of many: is it possible to have an international standard or perspective in music performance which allows for legitimate national, regional, or personal conceptual or stylistic differences?