Klarinet Archive - Posting 000941.txt from 2001/10

From: "Keith" <100012.1302@-----.com>
Subj: [kl] RE: klarinet Digest 30 Oct 2001 21:15:02 -0000 Issue 3424
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 19:54:43 -0500

Tony,

Thanks for the Wheeler reference and for your pointer to the archives. I
missed this at the time, and it is fascinating.

I should have been more precise. I do think that "impedance matching" is the
correct description of the transfer of energy into high notes from the oral
cavity system; but I agree that there is much more to playing high notes
than this.

Your analysis of the artificial embouchure is pretty convincing. I don't
think this negates the idea of impedance matching; since the reservoir was
so large and stored so much energy, there was no need for efficient energy
transfer since there were buckets of it available. As you say, in a mouth
the situation is so different, that the subtle variations are more
significant and may dominate. I like the idea that all the difficulty is
caused by our mouths being too small. Now I know why I started clarinet
playing on an eefer!

".... it would seem to argue against the possibility of true hippopotami
virtuosi on the clarinet. The effect of changes of mouth cavity on the reed
would be really negligible, because the walls are so far away. So what is
an initial lack of difficulty for the hippopotamus ultimately is a
limitation. Instability implies the possibility of precise control,
stability implies the lack of it. "

Rather like modern fighter planes!

Keith Bowen

--------------------------
From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subject: Re: [kl] RE: klarinet Digest 30 Oct 2001 09:15:00 -0000 Issue 3423
Message-ID: <20011030.182529.70@-----.uk>

On Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:26:17 -0700, 100012.1302@-----.com said:

> I think this is a good description, Elise. I think that what is
> happening technically, is "impedance matching". In an audio amplifier
> you match the output impedance of the amp to the input impedance of
> the speaker. This is so that you maximise the power transfer to the
> speakers. I think this is an exact analogue; one's oral cavities are
> the output of the breath/support stream, and these need to be matched
> to the vibrating system of the clarinet. Practically, how one does it
> is as you describe, making ones mouth smaller for the high notes (yes,
> eeeeek!). A way of thinking it is to think of singing the note (yes I
> know we can't sing that high but the effect is the same). I think this
> is separate from airstream considerations.

That something *like* this occurs when we play is certainly true.

But, there's a paper by Professor Raymond L Wheeler, Central Washington
State College. (I saw it as a photocopy sent to me by Abe Galper, of an
article in 'The Clarinet', perhaps Spring 1978, reprinted from an
earlier appearance, in Spring 1977, in the Journal of the National
Association of College Wind and Percussion Instructors, NACWPI.)

It's called, "Pedagogic concepts for reed instrument performance, based
on cineradiographic research of the oral cavity".

For me, the most interesting bit of it was the simplest, namely the
assertion that the back of the tongue moves down and forward -- *has to*
move down and forward -- as the frequency of the played note increases.
So, for higher notes, the back of your tongue is lower, and for lower
notes, higher in the mouth.

But Wheeler also says that you can't feel yourself doing that directly.
So it's something you have to find out by trial and error.

Raising the *middle* of the tongue, however, I agree can help in the way
you mention.

And -- sorry to keep referring to this, but the information is
fascinating:

http://www.sneezy.org/Databases/Logs/1998/12/000764.txt

It shows that 'impedance matching' can't be the exact analogue of how we
play high notes.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay

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

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