Klarinet Archive - Posting 000542.txt from 2002/11

From: Daniel Leeson <leeson0@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Is my taste in clarinet tone getting "darker" in my old
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 23:56:10 -0500

Deidre Calarco wrote:
> On 11/12/02 2:20 PM, "Daniel Leeson" <leeson0@-----.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Annie dear, the very idea of calling a tone "golden" and "darker" in the
>>same sentence shows the futility of using colors to describe the sound
>>character of an instrument.
>>
>>"GOLDEN" is what one might use as a metaphor for something so bright
>>that its sparkle and brilliance hurts the eyes. How is possible by any
>>stretch of the English languae for anyone to conclude that something
>>which is golden is, simultaneously, dark???
>
>
> Okay, I just joined the list, but I knew what she was talking about. By
> "golden" she meant "rich." And, everyone knows what a dark tone is. It's
> full and well supported - the opposite of bright and shrill. It's probably
> a sound which includes only harmonious under- and overtones and is well
> balanced and consistent.
>
> What's wrong with using metaphors to describe sound? They can be so concise
> and meaningful. Or am I opening a can of worms...?
>
> -DC

If there is any perspective that shows the futility of using color
metaphors to describe sound character, this posting is it. In order to
achieve an understanding of what was meant, DC must select the opposite
of what was said, and how he would know how to do that escapes me
entirely. And then DC says "It's PROBABLY ..." Could it probably be
something else entirely?

--
***************************
**Dan Leeson **
**leeson0@-----.net **
***************************

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