Klarinet Archive - Posting 000949.txt from 2000/05

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: Re: [kl] Tone -- online experiment
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 14:09:45 -0400

On Sat, 20 May 2000 07:46:30 -0700 (PDT), Bilwright@-----.net said:

> I'm beginning to wonder whether the words 'dark' and 'bright' -- even
> though they appear to be dramatic opposites from a linguistic point of
> view -- are actually closely related and require experience in order
> to recognize and distinguish them?

Yes. How I'd rather put it is to say that they are both relative
concepts. When applied to unchanging sounds, they lie at the opposite
ends of a continuum, at one end of which you have a sound with
relatively little energy in its upper harmonics, while at the other end
you have a sound that has relatively more energy in its upper harmonics.
(The sounds are 'oo' and 'ee', if you like.)

But when somebody plays music well, they switch between these things,
often very quickly. As I said, this can happen between one semiquaver
and the next, *even in slow music*. So the very beginning of a long
note can be more 'ee' than 'oo' for a very short time. Appoggiaturas
are more 'ee' than passing-notes, mostly. And so on.

I mostly don't want to say that someone has a 'nice dark sound'. But if
I did find myself saying it of someone, in a complimentary way, what I
would probably mean is that their sound didn't *lack darkness* when
darkness was necessary for the music. And if that were so, I'd most
probably want to say their sound was a 'rich' sound, because if it were
to be just dark, it would probably very quickly become boring in most
music, because it wouldn't speak that music effectively.

The word 'speak' is quite crucial. Most music needs to speak, even
though some music doesn't.

So I think the problem with the 'nice dark sound' is that when it means
something, it's being applied as the opposite of 'unremittingly bright'.
Otherwise it doesn't mean anything much at all. And it has to be
thought of as being applied by someone who understands the music,
otherwise it's like saying that a great picture 'has nice colours', and
obviously opinions about *that* are going to be all over the place.
(I'm reminded of a post here by someone who claimed to have demonstrated
that vibrato was a 'good thing' by playing a passage with and without
vibrato and asking the audience 'which they preferred'.)

You do want to say that a sound is 'unremittingly bright' on occasion.
Too many reeds, of course, have just this defect -- they have an energy
in their upper harmonics that you just *can't get away from*. If such a
reed had instead the possibility of that energy, but also the
possibility of the opposite, then it would be a great reed.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE www.gmn.com/artists/welcome.asp
tel/fax 01865 553339

... What was the best thing before sliced bread?

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