Klarinet Archive - Posting 000233.txt from 2001/12

From: "David B. Niethamer" <dnietham@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl] scientists on the list
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:04:15 -0500

on 12/9/2001 2:37 PM, Cindy Field wrote:

>it is the ability to observe
>and ask questions that makes one a "scientist." Those of us with formal
>training are simply held to a much higher standard. But seeing with the
>artist's eye -- or in this case hearing with the artist's ear -- is not to
>be
>underestimated. Maybe we just have to wait a while for science to catch up
>(LOL).

It's interesting that a similar thread has presented itself on the FLUTE
list this week. Robert Dick, a flutist most well known for his use of
extended techniques, wrote the following, and gave me permission to quote
it here. I found it very articulate and interesting, and think it has
parallels to our discussion about materials and the place of science in
the discussion. Sorry - it's somewhat long.

>But let's not get personal for a minute and have a look at the nature of
>sound and a glimpse of how it works from the scientific side. The answers
>to why some headjoints help you project and some don't are easy and clear
>-- if you understand sound's behavior. LET THE LEONARDO DA VINCI FAN CLUB
>COME TO ORDER! To be a member, you must want to an artist who is informed
>by science, whose knowledge is a tool for artistic freedom and emotional
>communication. As a musician who plays the flute, do you want to join?
>Then start by reading Arthur Benade's incredible book "Fundamentals of
>Musical Acoustics" (Dover Paperback -- its even cheap!). You will be
>shaking your head and saying "So that's WHY!" over and again. If you are a
>student, take a course in acoustics. Its hard, but worth it.
>
>Low frequency waves travel furthest. On our planet, the waves that go
>farther than any other are tidal waves and earthquakes. In a flute tone,
>simple projection is the job of the fundamental (a.k.a. the first partial)
>and the second partial (the harmonic one octave above the fundamental). If
>these are strong and mixed properly so that the ear puts them together as a
>clear fundamental, with the fundamental slightly stronger than the first
>partial, then the sound will carry. But what will be carried? A simple
>tone without much color. High frequencies give color and directionality to
>sound. The higher partials in the flute sound are what make it "rich" IF
>there is a musically pleasing blend of higher partials over a strong
>fundamental and second partial. When this is the case there will be a tone
>with a lot of character that will project well. It is the blending of
>these higher partials that is the primary mode of creating different
>timbres and giving individuality to the tone.
>
>When a headjoint/flute tends towards fewer higher partials, it may sound
>powerful and pleasing to the player and project a relatively characterless
>sound a long way if there are not other instruments with more vivid
>harmonics playing at the sme time. (That's why its a smart idea to test
>flutes and headjoints while playing with a pianist. So many heads sound
>great when played alone and then just disappear when played with piano.) A
>headjoint/flute tending toward higher partials and a weaker fundamental
>will have a lot of brilliance up close and will articulate easily, but will
>not project well.
>
>Thus, we get to say THUS, or perhaps HARK, or my fave the hipster's DIG!
>Thus, hark, dig: the headjoint/flute setup that optimizes projection and
>color will have a strong findamental/second partial combination with many
>strong higher partials. On first blow, this setup may sound harsh because
>the high partials may not be under control. When the player learns to use
>the vowel shape of the mouth and appropriate embouchure adjustments, the
>maximum potential for a well articulated, clear, colorful projecting sound
>will be there.
>
>Long before I began to learn the scientific reasons for what intuition
>showed, Julius Baker demonstrated this type of sound at my first lesson
>with him. I had heard him play in the New York Philharmonic and knew he
>could project over the orchestra when he wanted to, and it sounded easy
>when he did so. Standing only two feet away when he picked up his flute to
>demonstate something, I braced myself, expecting to be flattened against
>the wall by a titanic blast of sound. What I heard was a tone barely
>louder than mine, but incredibly better. It was almost exactly the same
>tone I heard in the second balcony in the acoustically awful Philharmonic
>Hall before it was ripped out and replaced by Avery Fisher Hall. (Maybe
>this was his way of helping me relax my jaw, having it hit the floor so
>often... )
>
>The lesson was in the sonic composition of the sound. It didn't have to be
>loud to project, but it did have to have the right mix of bottom and
>harmonics. Julie did let me try his flute, an old silver Powell, a
>fantastic example of its genre. But before diveritng into rhapsody about a
>flute, let's refocus on the simple truth that the tone comes from the
>player, not the flute. A great instrument is the one that has the maximum
>potential for production of all the partials and shapes the overtone
>structure the least. That shaping is the job of the player, not the flute.
>Which means that a poor player on a great instrument will sound worse!

Robert has a web site at:

<http://www.robertdick.net>

David Niethamer
Principal Clarinet, Richmond Symphony
dnietham@-----.edu
http://members.aol.com/dbnclar1/

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

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