Milhaud Clarinet Concerto Maurice Gabai

[@gerardbegni2806]

This concerto is quite typical of Milhaud's general style. He loves the instruments and always takes intrumetal and tone consideration into due account, as well as instrumental balance in chamber music, symphonic mui sic and concertos. His harl monic sysytem was once upon a time considered as revolutiony and an alternative option to atonality, but actualy most of the time his polytonality is only an expansion od tonality and the attarction of a tonic solves the polytonlity by a tonal conclusion. Polytonality is senn by him as a way to enhance melody and harmony by a greater differention into conrapunctic lines, but by w no wyas he deies the power of tonality.

[@jimmeven1120]

I've always loved Milhaud's music but apart from three big hits (you all know what they are!) it is very rarely played in Britain. I first heard this work in a broadcast concert over 40 years ago. Only one recording was available at the time (I think it was this one) and there are only a couple even now. I'm still waiting to hear a live performance. Is the clarinet concerto repertoire so huge that soloists can afford to overlook a gem like this?

[@jdoggtn7]

What hurts Milhaud is the sheer volume of his work. He reached (if I recall correctly) beyond 500 opus numbers, and while most of his music is masterful, there was a growing astringency and a repression of his former lyricism during and after the 1960s, a period when he undoubtedly felt that his style needed to catch up with the times. Having always longed to hear his "Music For New Orleans" of 1966, when I finally did, from a recording of indeterminate origin, I was astounded at its austerity and severity. It certainly did not evoke the city, and was a hard listen indeed. That has generally been my opinion of the late works of Milhaud which I have heard. But from about 1910 to 1956, he wrote beautiful, lyrical music, even if he was considered something of a radical.

[@jamescorwin1151]

Such outstanding playing-one of the greats-too bad he is not better known here I n the U.S.!

[@jdoggtn7]

This the composer's second or perhaps third work after immigrating to the United States. It was written in 1942, and if I am not mistaken, was intended for Benny Goodman, who was perhaps the most famous clarinetist of the day. I am not sure he ever played it, however.

[@David_Hattner]

Goodman never played it. I don't know of anyone playing with Orchestra in the USA. The piece is unreasonable in many ways as a concert work. The first movement has a few bars of rest near the beginning and then not even an eighth rest from there on.

[@scottjoiner1262]

@@David_Hattner My grandfather was the clarinetists for the premiere with musicians from the National Symphony in Washington DC, which didn't happen until 1946.

[@scottjoiner1262]

For my doctoral thesis I interviewed William Bolcom, who was a student of Milhaud. In his view, Milhaud and the French school of that era were not given their due partly because their music was fun, attractive and had a healthy sense of humor. These were not considered "academic" qualities at the time.

[@ghoulcaster]

Thanks for taking the time to upload this! I guess Goodman commissioned Milhaud to write the concerto expecting something like Scaramouche, and got this labyrinth

[@markovelikonja5399]

@@scottjoiner1262 Interesting. I see what William Bolcom meant. That's definitely how I've thought of Jean Francaix, whose music I find delightful both to play and hear (and whose clarinet concerto I rank in the same class as Nielsen, Copland, and Corigliano, with Mozart the forever champion). I like this one, if not quite as much as Francaix.

[@Forestier1]

David, your channel is a treasure trove. But I can’t help but find this concerto dull. In terms of musical interest, it puts me in mind of another Goodman commission, Hindemith’s Concerto. We can be thankful to Goodman that he helped bring into being works for clarinet by Copland and Bartok.