Klarinet Archive - Posting 000567.txt from 2002/11

From: "WILLIAM SEMPLE" <wsemple@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Is my taste in clarinet tone getting "darker" in my oldage?
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 23:56:35 -0500

Oh no, this can of worms was opened quite innocently when Bill Wright rolled
out his metaphor police in response to my use of the word "dark," then Dan
Leeson responded . . . the rest has made for a large, and I think very
interesting, weekly digest.

I believe the clarinet is one of the most flexible and colorful instruments
ever to grace the planet. I think it is why so many clarinetists make faces
when they play, or rock back and forth, or wiggle, or whatnot. I mean, how
many times can a bass player stick his instrument straight up in the air on
the conclusion of "Washington and Lee March." (Oh, they like to slap it and
twirl it). And then some (especially me) sometimes move their fingers as
balletically as possible ... another effort to convey expression. ..

I don't see many trombonists or trumpeters doing that -- although violinists
sway. But for sheer diversity of human expression, no one else in the band
comes close to the clarinetist(OK, I stand to be corrected. But I don't see
the piccolo player as especially emotive). Oh, there is this tympanist who
jumps around like a kangaroo . . . :)

That also explains why there is so much interest in the word "dark." As
Lelia said in an earlier post, the cat's out of the bag: Viva la difference!
But Dan's point challenges us to at least be aware of the differences. I
don't see him ever "winning" this one: too many clarinetists, but maybe that
is not the point, or should be.

There is no question in my mind that when I see words used by manufacturers,
I take them all with a grain of salt. But I do hear tonal differences among
my instruments, and so I believe there are differences that can be
described. But these differences are most meaningful only to me and my
relationship with my instrument.

So I believe tonal differences exist, they can be described meaningfully,
and the challenge (and excitement) is to do so that generally the terms we
do use are more commonly understood .. .

>From: Deidre Calarco <dleigh@-----.org>
>Reply-To: klarinet@-----.org
>To: <klarinet@-----.org>
>Subject: Re: [kl] Is my taste in clarinet tone getting "darker" in my
>oldage?
>Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 14:32:37 -0500
>
>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
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------

MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

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