Klarinet Archive - Posting 000540.txt from 2000/10

From: "Gregory Smith" <Gregory@-----.com>
Subj: [kl] Re: Mouthpiece discussion
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:31:42 -0400

------@-----.30E1D720
charset="iso-8859-1"

I suppose that I'll go back to my original post regarding my belief =
about asymmetrical facings. In response to a question about symmetrical =
vs.asymmetrical facings, I posted:

********************************************************************
>>>>Here is an excerpt from Tom Ridenour's website explaining the =
phenomenon. It=20
is a somewhat controversial subject and although Tom and I differ in the =

style of mouthpiece making in other areas, I personally believe that Tom =
has=20
gone a long way in enunciating the problem of asymmetry as I see it.=20

May I add that in every case that I have encountered, without exception, =

straightening uneven rails has led to the improvement in the playing=20
qualities of the mouthpiece.

Gregory Smith

Tom Ridenour writes about:

ASYMMETRICAL FACINGS

Some mouthpieces have side rails which do not share the same curve. We =
refer=20
to such facings as asymmetrical or crooked facings. Makers who make =
such=20
facings are usually seeking to achieve something specific in tone color. =
=20
While this feature might achieve the timberal goal in a limited area of =
the=20
clarinet, achieving such a goal by means of facing askewity creates =
other=20
problems, especially in the area response. Further, it should be =
understood=20
that askew rails extend into the tip rail, causing the most open part =
of the=20
tip to be off center. This profoundly affects tone color in the upper=20
register negatively (causing a tendency towards excessive thinness and=20
brightness), makes upper register response unpredictable, insecure and=20
undependable, as well as makes properly balancing reeds much more =
difficult=20
than it ought to be.

Askew or crooked facings are not recommended for they are commonly =
either a=20
major contributing factor to, or the root cause itself of the following=20
playing problems:

1. Force the habit of biting (upward jaw pressure) in order to begin,=20
control, center, or clarify the tone, especially at softer dynamics.

2.Cause difficulty in finding good reeds, make reed balance precarious =
and,=20
depending on the degree or severity of askewity, can totally frustrate =
the=20
reed balancing process altogether.

3.Cause insecurity and unevenness in slurring or playing attacks in the =
third=20
register or upper clarion, especially at softer dynamic levels.

4. Make playing the full dynamic range of the clarinet with an even =
tone=20
color difficult, causing breathiness in the tone to be a chronic =
tendency,=20
especially at softer dynamic levels.

5. Make the tone difficult to center, especially at softer dynamic =
levels.

6. Cause an inordinate degree of embouchure/air pressure exchange to =
achieve=20
the full dynamic and pitch range of the clarinet.

7.Cause a tendency for brightness and edge in upper register tones.

8.Cause a perpetual feeling of stuffiness in many cases even when softer
reeds are used.

For these and other reasons asymmetry in facings ought to be avoided. In =
this=20
authors opinion, asymmetry is a Lorelei that tempts many and shipwrecks =
not a=20
few. What it seeks to create in tone color can be achieved better in =
other=20
ways without the unacceptable sacrifice of response and "reed
friendliness." No essential musical phenomenon should ever be =
compromised or=20
sacrificed for the sake of another. The greatest opportunity the player =
or=20
the mouthpiece maker has to do selective damping to darken the tone is =
the=20
reed itself. Askew rails as a solution to tonal brightness is no =
solution at=20
all because of the whole array of other problems such a "solution" =
creates. (END)>>>>>>>>>>
*************************************************************************=
*****************
=20
In ending my part in this discussion now, all I have to offer are the =
essentials of my original posts:

"Perhaps it is true that one can probably accommodate playing allot of=20
different things in different ways. I suppose my general question is,=20
rhetorically speaking, where does one draw the line in ones own best =
interest=20
about how far they - in practical terms - need to go?"

and:

"...my point is that each of these individuals have a "point=20
of diminishing returns" after which they become encumbered by their=20
mouthpiece/reed combination in terms of effort exerted regarding blowing =

resistance, response, articulation and quality of sound."

and:

"I agree to the extent that even as a practical matter, I wouldn't make =
it=20
past the first half page of the Brahms 1st in the orchestra with this =
style=20
of mouthpiece - and believe from experience that it would be harmful to =
my=20
playing to learn to do so."

and in response to:

"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."

I respond once again:

"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=20
what it takes to play a mouthpiece like this. In my opinion it is not=20
necessary to feel as though one needs to work hard to make a mouthpiece =
play=20
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=20
ability to free themselves of their equipment to get to the act of =
actually=20
making music and that if the mouthpiece is right for that person, no =
such=20
correlation between extraordinary effort and result exists.

Orchestral players in North America whose playing that I know of and =
admire=20
in the last century - Bonade, Marcellus, Maclane, McGinnis, Wright - =
played,=20
as I understand it, traditionally styled mouthpieces that were to them=20
efficient, comfortable and reliable in their response, articulation and=20
timbral characteristics without needing to resort to any extraordinary=20
efforts to play them."

Beyond this, how this discussion got so convoluted as to ascribe motives =
to mouthpiece makers is far beyond me.
How statements would be interpreted to be ignorant of the successes of =
others is not, in the least bit, understandable.

I do believe that my statements are as objective as otherwise subjective =
statements can be.
Thoughts concerning these matters are stated as clearly as I possibly =
can.=20
Up to this point, I think what people want to ascribe to them says more =
about their beliefs than it does about my own.

All the best,

Gregory Smith =20
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=

Clarinetist
Chicago Symphony Orchestra
Mouthpiece Handcraftsman
=
2737 Hurd Avenue
Evanston, Illinois. 60201-1209 USA
1.847.866.8331
1.847.866.9551 (fax)
Email: Gregory@-----.com (NEW)
Website: WWW.gregory-smith.com
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=

------@-----.30E1D720--