Klarinet Archive - Posting 000651.txt from 1997/11

From: "Jerry Korten" <jerryk@-----.com>
Subj: Re: Dan's material apprehensions...
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 11:48:48 -0500

>...SNIP..
>
>OK. I accept the premise of the experiment though I am not ready
>to agree that, even if the material that a clarinet is made out if is
>vibrating, the material affects the sound of the clarinet. But in
>a spirit of moving things along, I'll say I understand. Not agree,
>mind you. Just understand.

>>
>> <<
>> I was wondering if you had 5 clarinets, one wood, one bamboo, one
>> glass, one plastic, and one metal. And you did this experiment
>> on all 5 and you then heard differences of a similar nature
>> no matter which clarinet was playdoughed.
>>
>> What would this establish?
>> >>
>>
>> I now know that each instrument you propose would probably sound
different,
>> if their geometry is similar to the one we currently use, and that each
would
>> be affected by the playdough.

>Now this is a hot reponse. "I now know that each instrument would
>probably sound different."
>Holy semolians!! On the basis of no experimentation, no data, no
>opportunity to do this thing (because you said all of your clarinets
>are grenadilla), you KNOW THAT THEY PROBABLY(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
>SOUND DIFFERENT?????????
>Forgive me for shouting. I must get control of myself.
>There. I'm calm again.
>I am concerned about a world in which absolute and total conclusions
>are drawn which are PROBABLY true.

The word probably was used precisely for that reason! It is not an absolute
statement, but a statement about probabilities (a likelyhood). If the
material is vibrating, and changing those vibrations affect the sound, and
different materials vibrate differently, then changing materials will
affect the sound (at least in the bell of the clarinet). This is argument
by the law of commutivity, or something like that. A process of inference.
No more data than the original experiment, I agree.

>>
>> <<
>> It seems to me that it would establish exactly the opposite of
>> what you have said, namely that no matter what the medium of
>> the instrument, putting playdough on the bell affects all the
>> instruments in the same way. Therefore, the medium can have
>> no influence on the sound.
>>
>>
>> To quote Jonathan WRONG. :-)

>Is there someone named Jonathan WRONG??
>Er, um, ah, who is Jonathan, and if you are going to quote him,
>you should have written "WRONG." So, in effect, you are saying
>that Jonathan (whoever he is) has already answered my question
>and you are reminding me what the answer is. Do I have that
>correctly? I really must apologize for not having seen what
>Jonathan X wrote and wasting the bandwidth of this group by
>restating a question already answered.
>Is it at all possible that Jonathan X said that I was "probably
>WRONG"??
>I must get calm again. Hmmm. Hmmmm. I'm humming the Ginastera
>variations. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm (very high passages).

OK so you point out a typographical error. Mark tells me that is not nice
netiquette. I will however take your criticism to heart and remember to use
quote signs. (This is probably the result of an early progressive
education. But we are in a new era beyond liberalism now. Rest assured that
my new right thinking mind will not allow these mistakes to happen in the
future.)

You probably missed his post where he began each paragraph with the word
"wrong". So yes perhaps Jonathan Wrong is an appropriate appellation. No he
did not accuse you of being wrong (boy you're a sensitive old fart). He
appears to like to accuse me of being wrong. But I don't mind at all.

Keep singing Dan, I like that tune.

>> Each will be affected yes. How they are affected depends on how the bell
on
>> each is ringing.
>>
>> <<
>> Of course, this was not your experiment and it's very iffy, but
>> why didn't you repeat the expermiment changing to clarinets
>> of differing material?
>> >>
>>
>> Can you loan me an instrument of different material? All mine are
grenadilla.
>So, in addition to not having done a more thorough experiment your
statement
>seems to say (a) you can't because you don't have the equipment, and (b)
>it doesn't matter anyway because it probably would support what it is
>you have already decided on.

It is obvious from the simple playdough experiment that the "classical"
assumptions about how the clarinet sound is generated are incorrect. That
was the only purpose of my posting the results of this experiment. You are
inserting the phrase "probably doesn't matter", not me. In fact, I bothered
to pursue the issue to make this discovery for myself. You on the other
hand appear to be arguing for the sake of it and not making any
investigation into the matter yourself! Have you tried changing bells? Have
you tried damping the vibration on a bell?

Indeed I now have a very specialized 2.5mm pressure sensing catheter
(Milar) with a frequency response of 20KHz which I plan to use to probe the
ACTUAL ACOUSTIC BEHAVIOUR of the clarinet (yelling for emphasis, we are not
talking only from books now).

>I am concerned about the state of the world where such fact-find curiosity
>is driven by preconceptions about what is and/or is not true.
>But please, give my best regards to Jonathan.
>Is that Jonathan Cohler? But he and I are in agreement about the
>material not having been proven to affect the sound. It might.
>It might not. The data is not in. So Jonathan would say, "RIGHT,"
>wouldn't he?
WRONG! Some data are in. None from you yet... en garde!

>=======================================
>Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
>Rosanne Leeson, Los Altos, California
>leeson@-----.edu
>=======================================
Jerry Korten
NYC