Klarinet Archive - Posting 000829.txt from 1999/01

From: George Kidder <gkidder@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl] Subjective and Objective
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 22:55:09 -0500

Just one $0.02 comment relative to Roger's post on this subject, in which he
quotes Tom Ridenour as follows:

>On Sun, 17 Jan 1999, TOM RIDENOUR wrote:
>> What, then is left? What is objective and in some degree
>> quantifiable in an instrument? What can most skilled clarinetists agree
>> upon, whatever their tastes?
>> 1. Whether the instrument responds evenly without the need to
>> adjust embouchure or air pressure over the middle and high break.
>
I draw your attention to Martin Pergler's calculations of the degree of
sharpening to be expected at the beginning of a new breath, and to Leonardo
Fucs (I think this is the right name and spelling - I couldn't find it on
the web just now, although I know its there) experimental studies on this.
Using an artificial embouchure (which is important) he measured a change in
intonation at constant air volume of about 20 cents, starting from room air.

This bears on the question of constant embouchure, because no competent
player would tolerate a change of that magnitude. The implication is that
we compensate for the change, often without being conscious of it. At
constant sound volume, it seems to me that this compensation can ONLY be
produced by a change in embouchure. I therefore conclude that all players
probably change their embouchure "automatically."

Having said this, I would agree with Tom that the less we have to do this,
the better. But surely we are not just a static system, like the artificial
embouchure.
George Kidder

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org