Klarinet Archive - Posting 000492.txt from 2000/10

From: rgarrett@-----.edu
Subj: Re: [kl] Mouthpieces - long post
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 05:54:50 -0400

Apologies for such a long post:

At 10:56 PM 10/09/2000 EDT, you wrote:
><< It takes a long time to learn how to blow on a Pyne mouthpiece with an
open facing,
> but, in my opinion, it is well worth the effort. >>
>*********************************************************
>It seems to me, implicit in this statement is the notion that something
>extraordinary is available to one if they are willing to work extra hard at
>what it takes to play a mouthpiece like this. In my opinion it is not
>necessary to feel as though one needs to work hard to make a mouthpiece play
>beautifully and reliably when it can be done just as well with less effort.
>
>In fact, I would say that this extraordinary effort detracts from a players
>ability to free themselves of their equipment to get to the act of actually
>making music and that if the mouthpiece is right for that person, no such
>correlation between extraordinary effort and result exists.

The final qualification, "......if the mouthpiece is right for that person,
no such correlation between extraordinary effort and result exists," does
not exemplify what I was saying. I stated that, "It takes a long time to
learn how to blow on a Pyne mouthpiece with an open facing, but, in my
opinion, it is well worth the effort." This implies that there is learning
involved - not that a person is already at their pinnacle in playing and
wants a change in setup. I went to Jim Pyne at the Arizona ClarinetFest in
the mid-90's and showed him my old mouthpiece. I wanted him to match it
for me. He suggested I try out several - it was his experience that many
people ended up moving to new mouthpieces when they began looking for
spares to match. I was skeptical - but I tried out the 20 or so he had on
the table. I found three that were very similar to each other and to my
(then) current mouthpiece. I bought them, fixed reeds to them, and learned
to play on them. Did they change my playing? No. Did I have adjustments
to make in my approach? Yes. Were they somehow causing me to be less free
of music making? No. I had a goal of having a mouthpiece and a spare to
play on - I changed my setup to accomodate that goal.

While I agree that a player should not be hampered by their equipment when
they play, I was not saying that learning to play a Pyne mouthpiece would
hamper a person's playing. I feel that, in a way, is what Greg has assumed
above. Further, the implied assumption that every player is somehow
blowing "correctly" - that is, using air and embouchure correctly together
- is an assumption that should not be made easily. Many students and
clarinet performers do not use air properly, thus leading to a qualified
use of embouchure and muscles in the face and surrounding the nose -
perhaps not using those muscles much at all. In many instances, the reason
students play this way is by virtue of their equipment. Of the 20 students
taking clarinet lessons at IWU, at least 3 fall into this category. More
than one student has arrived at our school wanting to imitate the sound
they hear on a recording but not blowing through the horn in such a way as
to achieve the sound they want. In fact, many of them believe that what
they are hearing up close is the same or similar to what they hear on the
recording. Sadly, most of them have not trained their ears to imagine what
it sounds like 5 or 10 feet away. In their striving for the ultimate
"dark" tone, they don't recognize the characteristics of "negative" sound -
as indicated by lack of air/embouchure work. In most cases, one can take a
beautiful mouthpiece (asymetrical or symetrical) and have the student play
on it and it feels "stuffy" or blows "resistant." Such is nearly always
the case in a mouthpiece that is both open and asymetrical. But there are
aspects about the mouthpiece that cannot be duplicated with a symetrical
mouthpiece (in my opinion).

When I went to Richard Hawkins to learn basic mouthpiece facing skills, I
played on his mouthpiece for the first time. I was also able to observe
him in his approach to playing (Richard is an extraordinary player by the
way!), and, later, I was to perform with him in recital at Illinois State
University. He also tried my setup - including the Pyne M mouthpiece with
the asymetrical facing and a 1.20 tip opening. His comment was, "Pyne's
mouthpieces always have a great sound." He then went on to qualify that he
wouldn't be able to perform in the opera with that mouthpiece - because it
would wear him out. He felt that the smaller tip opening would allow him
to play "all day" and "all week" without an endurance problem. His
reasoning - in order to get the sound he wanted, he would have to really
grip the mouthpiece with his embouchure - something he didn't want to do.

Therein lies my point. What works for one person does not necessarily work
for another. I have seen some people write that any pressure from the
jaw/embouchure is, in effect, "biting" or squeezing. But what seems to be
undue pressure for one person may be the perfect amount of pressure for
another. From a personal standpoint, I have played on many mouthpieces -
from 1.02 tips to 1.26 tips, skewed rails and symetrical rails. I make
mouthpieces that have symetrical rails. I play on a mouthpiece that has
skewed rails. Why? I like it. And learning to play it was one of the
aspects of my development that led me to understand how to use air and
embouchure to play efficiently and "correctly" (if that can actually be
said). I remember the day Shifrin handed me the mouthpiece and said, "Here
is one of my spares - try it out and see what you think." It took me two
months of long tones and flexibility studies during my student teaching
semester to master the use of that mouthpiece. I also remember one of my
early student heros at U. Michigan, Mitch Blatt, principal clarinetist in
the symphony band my frosh year letting me try his new Pyne mouthpiece - my
reaction (and I quote), "way too stuffy for me....." That mouthpiece
didn't sound stuffy when Mitch played it.....and my Pyne doesn't sound
stuffy to me now......but many students who try it say, "too stuffy." In
my opinion, the student is not blowing enough air and using that air
efficiently enough to differentiate between what is stuffy and what is
faulty in their approach. What is REALLY interesting to me is when that
same student works their way up to a more open mouthpiece and then, several
months later, tries the Pyne again and really likes it. They have evolved
in their playing. They may then decide if that sound and approach is best
for them, or if they would rather play on a more "free-blowing" mouthpiece
with other characteristics that suit them better.

What I am NOT saying is that everyone should buy a mouthpiece that has an
asymetrical facing so that they can learn how to blow correctly on the
clarinet. But with some, it takes that experience to know how to. They
become better players and musicians by doing so, and they then are free to
express themselves musically.

I have to agree with Greg's comment in an earlier post, that we part
company on this particular issue. My personal experiences in playing, and
in teaching students (ages 11 - adult - and we are talking beginners and
average players as well as advanced) for the last 18 years says that there
is value to my original statement above, which is: "It takes a long time
to learn how to blow on a Pyne mouthpiece with an open facing, but, in my
opinion, it is well worth the effort." There is no one way to learn to
play a clarinet. I really do believe that learning to blow on such a
mouthpiece is well worth the effort.

I'm not advertising for Jim Pyne. I don't need to convince anyone on this
list that he sells great mouthpieces. Greg Smith sells great mouthpieces.
Richard Hawkins, Clark Fobes, and a host of others sell great mouthpieces.
I simply believe that if great players such as the ones I mentioned in my
earlier posts like what they experience on a mouthpiece with an asymetrical
facing (and the Pyne mouthpiece was the example), than that should be
strong evidence to support that there are very good reasons for considering
a mouthpiece like this.

I hope that this clarifies my original statement - and that Greg and others
do not view my comments as somehow insulting to Bonade, Marcellus, Maclane,
McGinnis, and Wright - all of whom I have admired in their wonderful playing.

Roger Garrett
Professor of Clarinet
Director, Symphonic Winds
Advisor, IWU Recording Services
Illinois Wesleyan University
School of Music
Bloomington, IL 61702-2900
(309) 556-3268

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