Klarinet Archive - Posting 000222.txt from 2003/06

From: "Steve Fuller" <sfuller@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] clarinet vs sax mouthpieces
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 19:17:56 -0400

As a very long-time doubler on sax and clarinet, I must tell you that the
same thought has struck me as well. It's long been my contentention that
the biggest contributors to the sound of an instrument, aside from the
overtones, are the embouchure and airstream. (How else can you acount for
the fact that two players with the same instrument/mouthpiece can be
instantly reconizeable? There's a lot of BS out there with regard to the
mouthpiece/reed myatique.

Steve Fuller
----- Original Message -----
From: "William Edinger" <wde2@-----.com>
Subject: [kl] clarinet vs sax mouthpieces

> The mouthpiece experts all point out that on the clarinet (at least the
> shorter ones), subtle differences in bore dimensions, the chamber shape,
> and even the gap between a mouthpiece and barrel can make big
> differences in its effectiveness, and I am sure this is correct.
> However, just looking at a saxophone and the way the mouthpiece connects
> - there's always a huge bore change between it and the neck, markedly
> altered as you adjust intonation - makes me wonder if the same
> principles apply. Or is the saxophone such a crude, neolithic
> monstrosity that it is not subject to any forms of subtlety?
> (Personally, I find the alto sax irresistably beautiful.) I'd like to
> hear what the experts say about this obvious and gross disparity between
> the way the two kinds of mouthpieces attach to their respective
instruments.
>
> Bill Edinger
>
> ***************
> Music and wine are one.
>
> Ralph Waldo Emerson
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/