Klarinet Archive - Posting 000503.txt from 1998/02

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
Subj: The Primitive Early Clarinet
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 21:54:33 -0500

First, I gave the wrong name for the article on Stan Geidel's
clarinet web page that deals with the matter of A, B-flat,
and C clarinets and what conditions caused the peculiarity
that most players face today.

Second, rather than chase after the right one, I decided simply
to post it for those interested.

Third, and most important, is that there have been posted several
comments suggesting that the existence of multiply-pitched
clarinets was due to the primitive nature of the 18th century
clarinet. And that frosted my cake.

So here is the article I did for Stan's website and it addresses
not that approximate issue, but the very issue. It is a long
note, for which I apologize, but it is a complex subject and
it takes time to even try to make it clear.

It takes no time at all to suggest that the problem has to
do with the primitive early clarinet, but that turns out not
to be the culprit at all. It's simply too superficial a
solution to a very complicated problem, one that every
clarinet player faces on almost a daily basis.

This article has been modified and submitted for publication in
an important musicological journal. Because it has not yet
been accepted, it is inappropriate to name it. Bob Levin and
I co authored the piece which is both much longer and more
far ranging than the material below.

=================================================================

THE EARLY CLARINET: JUST HOW PRIMITIVE?

Daniel N. Leeson

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
One aspect of clarinet playing that is unique, at least as contrasted with
the other members of the woodwind family, is the fact that clarinets are
manufactured in such a wide variety of pitches. Even today, a clarinetist
who deals in classical music is obliged to have a minimum of two
instruments: one pitched in the key of B-flat and the other pitched in the
key of A. But also available for sale from the major manufacturers are
clarinets pitched in the keys of F, C, D, and E-flat (given from largest to
smallest), and that's not the end of it. There are clarinets in G used in
performing Turkish and Greek ethnic music, or in A-flat used as a piccolo
clarinet in European bands. Furthermore, now-obsolete clarinet pitches of
B-natural and E-natural are also well documented. For example, Mozart wrote
three compositions that call for a pair of clarinets in B-natural and which,
because such instruments are no longer available, are executed on clarinets
of different pitch. Even this inventory may not be fully exhaustive, nor
does it include basset horns in F and G, which are not the same as clarinets
pitched in F and G.

Exactly what does it mean when one says "clarinet pitched in the key of A"
or "clarinet pitched in the key of B-flat"? Unlike brass instruments which
often take their pitch names from the lowest (practical) executable note,
clarinet pitch names are derived from an orthodoxy that is neither easy to
understand and explain, nor is given much real meaning by the
supposedly-descriptive titles. Simply put, the convention exists and one is
obliged to learn it. Even after it has been learned, it appears to be the
kind of information that is retained by the mind about as long as cash
remains in the wallet on Saturday night.

Now stop! and begin to read the next paragraph very slowly and methodically.

Reference to the pitch name of a clarinet requires a discussion of two
notes. The first - a "C" as seen by the clarinetist eye and executed on a
clarinet of any pitch - is called "the written note." The other is an
identically-sounding note executed on the violin (or any "non-transposing"
instrument). THE NOTE PLAYED BY THE NON-TRANSPOSING INSTRUMENT IS THE PITCH
NAME OF THE CLARINET.

Confusing? You bet! Let me give some examples.

Clarinets in A are given that name because, when one of them plays a written
C, the violin must play an A to produce the same pitch. That is why the
clarinet is said to be "in A." Clarinets in B-flat are given that name
because, when one of them plays a written C, the violin must play a B-flat
to produce the same pitch. That is why the clarinet is said to be "in
B-flat." In effect, when written C for the clarinet sounds the same as pitch
X on the violin, then the clarinet is said to be pitched "in X."

Ready for a test? The clarinet plays a written C. The violin plays an E-flat
in order to achieve the same pitch. What is the pitch name of the clarinet?
That's right!!! It is a clarinet in E-flat. Once more. The clarinet plays a
written C. The violin plays an F-sharp in order to achieve the same pitch.
What is the pitch name of the clarinet? Right on the money!! It is a
clarinet in F-sharp, or I should say it would be if such an instrument were
to be made, which it is not.

An added complication arises from the fact that this convention is of no
help in practical situations. If an orchestra tuned to a clarinet playing C,
that would be one thing, but orchestras tune to oboes playing A. So when one
picks up the E-flat clarinet or the F basset horn to tune it, it takes a
moment to figure out what the tuning note is on that instrument. Ask
yourself this question: one picks up a D clarinet which must be tuned to the
oboe's A. What note on the D clarinet is equivalent to a concert pitch A?
(Hint: it's a G.) So the simple act of learning about clarinet pitch names
is not much help when things get even slightly more complicated.

Who is responsible for this unwieldy system of naming multiply-pitched
clarinets? Budding students have little enough time as it is, and to this is
added the labor of learning yet another musical tool, particularly one as
singular and mind-numbing as this? Do flutists have to do this thing? Is
there an oboe in D or a bassoon in B-flat?

The subject of multiply-pitched clarinets was dealt with in a previous
contribution to this web site. You may wish to read it for background. The
title was "Give me an A! An Essay On The Subject of Pitched Clarinets." But
the perspective of that contribution was quite different. There, the
question was the necessity to use the clarinet specified by the composer. In
effect, what was explored - in a quasi round-table fashion - was a dynamic
system in which multiple clarinet types exist with the inquiry centered on
the performer's obligation to execute on the composer-requested instrument.
While no resolution of the matter was achieved, a number of views were
offered and, hopefully, everyone learned something.

What was not discussed in any depth was why this condition existed. Though
not ignored, the subject's consideration was superficial. However, one
technically important fact was brought into the discussion: the addition of
touchpieces to instruments that overblow an octave, such as the oboe, flute,
and bassoon, is a different and more easily-solved technical problem then
the addition of touchpieces to an instrument which overblows a twelfth, such
as the clarinet. Specifically, it is more difficult to modify a clarinet and
still retain satisfactory intonation and sound character at intervals of a
twelfth.

But some speculation is involved here. By concluding that this
"overblow-a-twelfth" condition was the main culprit behind the existence of
multiply-pitched clarinets, we make a leap of faith by saying "Early
clarinets were too primitive to play well in all keys." It sounds probable
but what evidence supports the hypothesis? Just how primitive was the early
clarinet? How flexible and amenable was the instrument to playing in all
keys?

Ask any serious clarinet player "Why do multiply-pitched clarinets exist?"
and the answer will almost certainly be "Because the early clarinet was
primitive." But to get beneath the surface of the word "primitive" requires
some heavy analysis. It is one of those words that every knows but, about
which, few can be precise.

If the early clarinet was as primitive as we hear it asserted to be, how did
Anton Stadler negotiate the complexities of the Mozart Concerto, K. 622 and
the Quintet, K. 581? Those works are not so easy even on contemporary
clarinets. As one clarinetist who I quoted in the previously-mentioned
article on pitched clarinets ("Give Me An A") said so eloquently, "There is
not one jot of evidence that suggests that the virtuosi for whom Mozart
wrote his wind music were not able to produce results that our present-day
ears would regard as adequate." So the word "primitive" does not necessarily
mean the inability to play rapid passagework. There must be a subtlety of
"primitive" that requires further consideration. As it turns out, that
subtlety is the main culprit in the development of multiply-pitched
clarinets.

It is in an examination of how clarinets were treated by composers in the
late eighteenth century, that the specific nature of what has been called
"primitive" becomes clear. As it turns out, the instrument wasn't so
primitive after all since the only significant restriction had to do with
which key signatures were appropriate and which were to be avoided. Thus,
the question came down to this: what do clarinet tutors and texts on
orchestration of ca. 1750 to ca. 1825 describe as the performance norm on
this question. An examination of many of those published in that time period
gives an immediate answer to the question "What was the main reason behind
the selection of a particularly-pitched clarinet in the eighteenth century?"

Here is what those sources uniformly demonstrate: When a composer of the
late 19th century called for a clarinet in C, B-flat, A, or whatever, the
only motivation for doing so was the apparent inability of a clarinet to
exercise rapid passagework in keys of more than two sharps or four flats.
Even the key signatures of two sharps and four flats are tolerated only in
the later sources, with the earlier ones being even more restrictive. Let me
explain how that conclusion was achieved.

Every examined clarinet tutor of the era, without exception, either
explicitly indicated the key signatures that were considered appropriate to
use when writing for a clarinet, or else implicitly indicated that same
thing by providing exercises only in those key signatures and avoiding any
key outside the narrow range of acceptability. For example, the "Clarinet
Preceptor, or the whole art of playing the clarinet rendered easy to every
capacity ..." by an anonymous author and printed in London between 1800 and
1809 states:

"As airs, etc. are composed in different keys in which clarinets
can play in concert with other instruments, it is necessary to
have two: one in B[flat], the other in C. The B[flat] clarinet
must be used if the piece is in the key of E[flat] or B[flat] and
the C clarinet if it is in the key of F or C. These four keys,
B[flat]-C-E[flat]-F, are the only ones in which these instruments
commonly play." (The text of this passage was edited for
contemporary usage of spelling, capitalization, and punctuation.)

An even more impressive demonstration of what keys were permitted to be
played by clarinets - thus causing a specific clarinet type to be selected -
is given in the clarinet tutor of Jean Xavier Lefevre (1802 and reprinted at
various times after that). Of importance is the fact Lefevre's book is
published both in French and German (by the German publishing house of J.A.
Andre of Offenbach near Frankfurt) by which one can conclude that, whatever
orthodoxy and convention was in place, it was in place in both France AND
Germany.

What Lefevre says, and in no uncertain terms, was that, for this or that
concert key, one is obliged to chose this or that clarinet to the exclusion
of all others. (In two cases, a key was said to be applicable to two
different-pitched clarinets.) The combination of pitched clarinet and
concert key always wound up with the instrument playing within a limited
range of written key signatures with that restriction more severe in keys
with sharps than with flats. Here is a chart that made up from the data
explicitly given in Lefevre:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Concert key Clarinet pitch Sharps/Flats in
written key

C major/a minor in C no sharps/flats (OR)
in B-flat two sharps

C-sharp major/ B-natural two sharps
a minor

D major/b minor C two sharps (OR)
A one flat

E-flat major/ C three flats
c minor

e-flat minor B-flat four flats

E major/ B-natural one flat
c-sharp minor

F major/d minor C one flat

F-sharp major/ B-natural one sharp
d-sharp minor

G major/e minor C one sharp

A-flat major/ C four flats
f minor

A major/ B-natural two flats (OR)
f-sharp minor A no sharps/flats

B-flat major/ C two flats (OR)
g minor B-flat no sharps/flats

B major/ B-natural no sharps/flats
g-sharp minor

b minor B-natural three flats

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite the fact that this table demonstrates some inconsistencies, it is
still clear that a composer, choosing to write in a particular concert key,
is told which clarinet s/he is obliged to use. All of this seems to say,
that the clarinet's characteristic sound appeared to have no influence on
the decision making process to use a clarinet of a particular pitch.

One can argue (indeed, I do) that, once the instrument was chosen and within
the key-signature limitations imposed, its characteristic sound was
exploited; but before the fact, the instrument choice in terms of pitch
selection was made on very precise and well-understood technical and not
aesthetic grounds.

In effect, the orthodoxy of pre-1825 clarinet writing seems to have said the
following in every country for which clarinet tutors and instrumentation
texts were written (and that includes at least two tutors printed in
America):

The keys in which a clarinet is obliged to play by virtue of its
primitive ability in the management of many sharps and flats,
should be kept simple. Preferable keys are written C, F, and G. In
flats, one may use up to as many as four, but in sharps, no more
than two. Should the key signature of the composition compel more
sharps or flats than these for the clarinet then in use, the
composer must mandate a change of clarinet so as to reimpose the
key-signature restriction.

All of this had the ability to change practically overnight when, in 1825,
Iwan Muller published his tutor on "La nouvelle Clarinette ..." which, by a
combination of new touchpieces and "corps de rechange," was said to give the
facility of playing in keys of up to seven sharps. In fact, one of the
features of this new clarinet is said to be the elimination of the necessity
of having multiple clarinets, though clearly this wish was never achieved,
not even closely.

It appears, therefore, that, in the early days of the clarinet (and when
models existed in at least 8 different pitches), the standard recommendation
was that one should choose a clarinet pitched in a key that would enable the
instrument to stay within the bounds of one flat or one sharp. This
restriction was modified over a period of about 25-50 years so as to
tolerate up to four flats and two sharps. The constraint was a function of
acoustical and acoustical problems that were not fully solved for a century.
A preconception of sound character appears to have had nothing to do with
the clarinet selection choice, at least before composition. The choice of
clarinets was automatically determined by the composition's principle key
and changes of clarinet were to be expected as the harmony flowed from one
tonality to another. Nowhere is this seen better than in the Mozart operas
where, in the longer scenes, clarinets changes are requested almost every
time the key signature is altered.

One would think that, with the advent of instruments which eliminated these
impediments (i.e., theoretical enablement of satisfactory execution in all
major and minor keys), the strange practice of having multiple clarinets
would go away. But as can be seen, except for the rarely used clarinets
(such as B-natural or E-natural), it is a way of life for contemporary
players. A competent professional might prefer playing a work in few sharps
and/or flats, but s/he can bring it off well no matter what key the
composition is in. The ability to change instrument so as to provide a more
easily executed key is a luxury not available to our colleagues in the
woodwind section and, in the final analysis, is not a technical necessity
for clarinetists. We play on A/B-flat (and occasionally C) instruments
mostly because we respect what has been written and, underneath it all, we
recognize the effect that the particlar clarinet's distinctive sound has on
the composition's character.

There is little doubt that some composers writing after about 1850 chose
their clarinet pitches with sound character in mind. When one sees how
Richard Strauss, for example, uses clarinets in C and B-flat or C and A at
the same time, there is no conclusion one can reach except that such action
was taken on aesthetic grounds and not based on suggested technical
limitations of the clarinet. But in the early years of the clarinet, with no
real date set when the practice changed completely, the concert key of the
composition was the sole determinant for selecting the pitch of the clarinet
to be used. And if, once the default clarinet pitch was in place, it was
exploited for its characteristic sound, that is a conclusion that can only
be reached subjectively. Alternatively, one can argue that a composer might
have chosen the key signatures of his/her compositions with deliberate
intent to use a clarinet of a certain pitch, but that would also fall into
the realm of guesswork.

In the final analysis, the composer's motivation for a clarinet of specific
pitch is irrelevant. If one presumes the existence of an inner ear as
profound as that which Mozart is alleged to have had, whatever clarinet
pitch he employed is part and parcel of that composition's sound pallet as
he envisioned it in his head. It can, therefore, be argued that the player
is obliged to do as directed and not use the valid technical argument of the
early clarinet's primitive nature to circumvent an explicit composer
directive.

Copyright ) 1996 Leeson, Daniel N. All Rights Reserved

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

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