Klarinet Archive - Posting 000619.txt from 2003/04
From: b1rite@-----. Rite)
Subj: Re: [kl] Different sorts of authority, and the 'barrell'.
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 00:39:15 -0400
<><> Tony wrote:
The internal dimensions of a barrel are almost entirely determined by
intonation requirements. There are some small variations possible --
hence the 'reverse cone' -- but if you're looking for a significant
change in sound, there's no room to play about. The tuning is just too
sensitive to any modification.
Here are two things that I have tried --- neither of them being
'spheroidal' because I'm still getting my feet wet with 'normal' shapes.
Comments are welcome, if anyone wishes to reply:
(1) I have built several 'forward cones' and several 'reverse cones'.
Metaphors always fail, but to me, the two shapes have different sound
characters. The forward cones (so far) have all sounded more "open" or
"big" or less "focused"/"centered", and they emphasize the lower
partials (or perhaps they create more resonance of lower partials?)
My dimensions and hence intonations are --- unavoidably at the moment
--- sloppy. Perhaps, as you say, it will prove impossible to bring the
intonation into line with the shapes that I'm trying. My shapes are
truly cone-like with sloping walls, not a series of successively smaller
cylinders. However, both shapes (forward and reverse) have the same
sloppiness and yet the two sound characters (to my ear) persist.
(2) I have built several forward cones, each with a 'restriction ring'
in it --- smaller diameter than the remainder of the cone and
perpendicular to the barrel axis and 2.5 mm long. There are many
combinations that I haven't tried yet, but generally speaking, replacing
a narrow bore with a wider bore and then making up the increase of total
volume with a ring seems to provide the more "open" sound that I want.
<><> Exactly the opposite is true of a bell. There are many possible
shapes that work, intonation-wise. For example, had you considered that
everything below the low E of a basset clarinet can be regarded as just
a quite complicated bell for a normal instrument, when the basset notes
aren't being played? Indeed I can even modify that bell in real time on
my period basset, because the basset keys aren't linked to the low E the
way they often are on a modern instrument. I often use them to change
the character of notes in the 'clarinet' register.
Yes, I can understand this. It's another form of 'resonant
fingerings'. We've talked in the past about how this relates to
'action at a distance'. Actually, this same thought flashed through my
mind when I posted to Rebecca about playing with the bell in a bucket of
water. Could the bucket of water be a resonant fingering of sorts?
<><> You should also know something else that might give you pause:
namely, that you are set fair to join a whole cranky community of barrel
nuts. Most of them, though, concentrate on such things as small slots
cut into the bore because those don't affect the intonation
significantly.
You've got me there! <smile> I've did try some slots yesterday, but
it didn't seem to accomplish anything (to my ear).
<><> The *vibration* of the barrel is another thing. That would have
little effect on intonation, but might well impact the sound, as Keith
Bowen was posting recently. I suspect that this effect explains why
different barrels of seemingly identical dimensions have different
playing characteristics, and also why we seem to find it difficult to
reproduce those characteristics reliably.
I suppose the thought is: "The vibrational energy is more intense in the
barrel as opposed to lower down in the instrument, where it spreads out.
Therefore energy absorption/radiation may play a role in the barrel,
whereas it does not lower down."
Obviously this drags the "materials don't matter" debate into the
conversion. One craftsman absolutely refused to make a Delrin barrel
for me because of this particular issue.
<><> I think that word [polycylindrical] applies to a manufacturing
technique that produces a clarinet bore consisting essentially of a
series of cylinders of very slightly different diameter. I don't know of
any polycylindrical barrels.
I understand your point, which is why I said in (1) above that my
barrels so far have been approximations of true cones, not of
poly-cylinders.
<><> The thing is, Bill, that although I seem to be being quite hard on
you, I respect very much your enthusiasm and energy. It's just that
according to my actually rather well-worn and weather-beaten compass,
you're very much not on the right track you claim you are. I think it's
a pity for you to waste that energy and enthusiasm on something that
won't go
Yes, I understand the distinction --- which is why I began my previous
post with "I don't hold a grudge."
Also, don't forget that many weekend painters enjoy sitting out in a
field and painting landscapes without any hope of hanging on display.
It's sort of like talking to oneself, which is often disparaged, but
people do it. There is more than one motive for experimenting. Once
or twice during the last week, I've played a barrel that is grossly out
of tune, but I said to myself, "Okay, this isn't right, but --- darn it
--- I sort of like it anyway."
Thank you for the reply, and cheers,
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/
