Klarinet Archive - Posting 000210.txt from 1994/02

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.EDU>
Subj: Do we have anything like a concensus?
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 1994 18:09:49 -0500

I count something like 40+ notes on vibrato since my original
posting and, while no one elected me to do so, I would like
to put a stake in the ground in terms of where we are.

1) Thus far, no one has expressed an absolute negative reaction
to the use of vibrato on the clarinet (as was generally the
case say 40 or so years ago when Kell was trying to make
inroads into the American music scene). I see this as a very
positive step.

2) There is a general concensus that vibrato can be a useful tool
when playing clarinet but the "when" to use it is somewhat vague,
very personalized, and somewhat imprecise. Perhaps my reaction here
is guided by a personal rejection of doing things because it
"sounds good" when done that way; i.e., too much subjectivity with
taste not being generally agreed to (and perhaps not even being
agreeable-to).

3) As to the issue of "what" constitutes vibrato and which of the at
least two types are appropriate whenever vibrato itself is appropriate,
there is less agreement or (in my case at least) understanding.

4) Concerning the mechanisms for achieving these two kinds of vibrato
(that is to say, the "how"), the matter is somewhat discouraging.
Several sources have been suggested as being the mechanism to achieve
vibrato (diaphragm and throat for impulse vibrato, jaw for pitch
vibrato, fingers and lips for other not entirely clear elements of
vibrato), but I do not sense either a general agreement or even a
full understanding. Other instruments (oboe, saxophone, bagpipes)
have been used as talking points under the assertion that they would
enable a clearer understanding of the clarinet mechanism, but I am
not at all sure that that desirable objective has been achieved.

5) There seems to be genuine consensus on "why" vibrato and this
was very well summed up in several notes that suggested that
vibrato is a way to simulate or imitate the human voice, or else
that in enables the musical equivalent of trembling with emotion.
In either case, the end product was thought to be improved when this
thing was done, but there is a lot of water to cross in the arena.

I am not trying to give my opinions here. I have done so on several
occasions during this most interesting discussion. Instead I am
simply trying to sum up where we are to give the subject some structure
rather than letting it go on in multiple directions simultaneously,
without achieving some useful substance or practical recommendations
that can be worked with and applied to our playing.

If someone sees our position from some other point of view, please
feel free to give your perspective of it.

====================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
(leeson@-----.edu)
====================================

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org