Klarinet Archive - Posting 000057.txt from 1999/02

From: TOM RIDENOUR <klarinet@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Embouchure question
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 03:20:16 -0500

Roger wrote:
>Tom's article is very good for describing some basic elements of
>embouchure. While it is quite wordy, it describes a basic approach to
>embouchure that can start a student on his or her way.
>
>What is omitted from the article is the entire concept of the upper lip
>and the muscles around the nose and in the cheeks. In fact, it is these
>muscles which affect the chin much more drastically than the lower lip or
>jaw.

Roger,
The guy just wondered how to go about playing without biting; that is the
only reason I recommended my article; it's what it's really all about.
What affects the chin, much more than upper lip is the tongue position.
Correct tongue postion goes a long way to perfecting the chin muscles.
I omitted the information about the upper lip as that is a personal thing:
some curl the lip, some don't. Some, as I, play double lip all the time.

Biting is simply defined as applying too much pressure from the
>lower teeth/jaw to the lower lip to the reed in such a way as to hinder
>the reed from vibrating properly.

Excuse me; what gauge is there that tells you what "too much" pressure is,
and when one crosses the line into biting?
In my estimation the instant someone bites they have already crossed the
line; they are already doing something detrimental to the end result of
their playing and hindering the reed from vibrating properly.
Biting is not defined in my dictionary as applying too much pressure (how
ever much that is) to the reed from the lower teeth/jaw; biting is defined
as applying pressure at all from the lower teeth/jaw; _any_ closure of the
jaw on the reed is biting and harmful to the sound.....it also kills the
reed.
The embouchure best optimizes the paradox of tonal freedom and control
when it is essentially passive; exerting no energy actively.
Don't ever let any one tell you that you must bite to play the clarinet; a
little bit, a lot; it's all biting. Biting is not necessary at all.
I believe I understand where Roger is coming from, because for years I
didn't know how to play without biting. My teachers told me not to bite.
But my efforts at not biting caused me to to conclude that they must
really be meaning "don't bite too much", because without biting at least
some I could hardly center the sound adequately.
When I understood how to control the reed without biting, really saw how it
worked, it was the dawn of the day; great teachers like Keith Stein
understood well what not biting was and how destructive biting is. Stein
presented an excellent article many years ago, late in his life, in the
Clarinet magazine, where he takes up this issue of biting; I recall he
mentions how so many players do it, and how everyone would play better
without it; From my experience, I believe he is right on the money.
I am sorry I can't remember the year he contributed the article, but I
think it was some time in the 80's, but it may have been earlier. One
should be able to look it up easily. It's worth the read; he was a great
pedagogue.
His article on double lip playing in The Art of Clarinet Playing is very
good too. I think it is a good compliment to my own article in the
Clarinet 1991 (I think).

But to say you must simply avoid biting
>is much, much too simplistic.

To say you must avoid biting is to ignore or not fully understand how the
reed must really function to realize in the fullest sense the enigmatic
elements of freedom and control; both of which are essential to the sound.
Both biting and avoiding biting by not putting pressure on the reed
invariably compromises or sacrifices one of these elements for the other in
some degree. Control must be gained an entirely different way than biting
or avoiding putting pressure on reed at all. They are just flip sides of
the same coin: tweedledum and tweedledee

There are the issues of how much lower lip
>goes over the teeth, how much mouthpiece is inserted into the mouth, how
>far down the reed the jaw/lip should extend, and what speed air causes
>what kind of tone. Tone is not simply a result of embouchure and how it
>affects the reed. Tom's article states that the embouchure is what
>controls the reed (not his exact words) - but it is actually the air that
>controls the reed with the embouchure acting as a supportive structure
>(which Tom does say).

The air does not control the reed in any way; this is a fiction; the air
fuels and energizes the reed with the tongue acting as a sort of
carburator. The embouchure manages the vibration of the reed accordingly;
that is, it controls the reeds vibration as energized by the air.

Frankly, one can achieve a wonderful sound by
>applying plenty of pressure from the entire structure - if the teeth/lips
>are far enough down the reed - resting against the heart of the reed, more
>reed vibrates but the lips/teeth have a more difficult time squeezing off
>the reed.

Tweedledum. Could we call "squeezing" simply a euphemism for "biting"? or
"Not biting too much" or "biting that you don't really call biting because
it isn't biting too much.......in your opinion"?

>My point is - read the article and glean from it what you can, but
>understand that it does not present specifics regarding the other issues I
>have mentioned here - as the mouthpiece article does not, etc.

My articles make no claim to be inclusive or exhaustive; it is skeletal and
seeks for simplicity and clarity. One thing it does do very clearly, I
think, is help one to understand how to control the reed without biting;
which is why I recommended the article in the first place; the guy wants to
eliminate biting in his embouchure technique. I think my article will help.

>
>There are several schools of thought regarding sound production, and Tom's
>is one of them - enjoy your reading!
>Roger Garrett
>Professor of Clarinet
>Director - Concert Band, Symphonic Winds & Titan Band
>Advisor - Recording Studio
>Illinois Wesleyan University

Roger is most correct here; there are as many ways to skin a cat as there
are cat skinners; but some ways are more efficient than others; biting
doesn't hack it, not unless one thinks expedience is a viable substitute
for true acoustical efficiency.
Further, Roger seems to claim much more for me, albeit obliquely, than
I do for myself.
I have not desired to or pretended to present a "school" of thought
regarding sound production (though I'm from the French/American double lip
school, personally) ; all I've tried to do is present the humble mechanics
of the interworkings of the elements involved in making that sound; the
subjective, artistic, and esoteric aspects which combine to create a
characteristic style one might call "school" is really tied up with other
elements; way beyond the scope of the much more rudimentary matter I try to
communicate.
I know that my articles don't contain every thing Roger thinks you need to
know....or even remotely everything I would like to share myself, but I
believe the ideas and concepts are sound, and hope some of you are helped
and encouraged by the information that is offered there: not trying to be
exhaustive, just helpful.
Perhaps if one feels strongly enough about it, one should put up his own
site and offer a complete, cohesive and exhaustive pedagogy for us. I,
for one, would be interested to see it.
Later for the list; I'll be out for the TMEA the rest of the week. Hope to
see some of you there.
tom ridenour
clarinet specialist

No good deed goes unpunished.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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

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