Klarinet Archive - Posting 000996.txt from 2004/10

From: Adam Michlin <amichlin@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] Joe Allard
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:59:08 -0500

It is also interesting to note that the approach taught to by Mr. Wright is
infinitely superior to the extreme opposite sometimes used (but rarely, in
my experience, codified) practice of tightening the lips in a smile.

The advantage (and hence attractiveness) of smiling is that it thins our
lips out, lessening the dampening of the vibration of the reed and thus
creating more sound. Unfortunately, the muscles which we use to smile are
very much connected to the muscles in our throat. Try to smile (a silly
'Chesire Cat' kind of grin) and talk. You will feel the tension in your
throat. I hope Tony won't take me to task for suggesting a tight throat is
not conducive to an efficient clarinet tone. I promise to not say my
teacher learned this from Joe Allard. Oops. Sorry.

My goal is to to thin my lower lip (thus allowing the reed more freedom to
vibrate) without smiling (thus keeping a relaxed throat). I find this,
combined with a correct understanding of how to breathe, creates the most
efficient tone on both clarinet and saxophone. YMMV and more importantly
you may not *want* an efficient tone. Lester Young made some absolutely
beautiful music with a extremely inefficient tone (on a metal instrument,
no less). The point of understanding the most efficient way to play is
exactly so you can pick and choose your sound quality at will.

We are often faced with the lack of knowledge as to *why* a particular
method was suggested to a student. This is, of course, is the problem with
anecdotal arguments prefaced by "My teacher said this..." or "I studied
with so and so...". Those people who take to time to study the pedagogy of
Joe Allard will understand he was never the kind of teacher to teach by
anecdote. In fact, he spent his life questioning and studying cause and
effect.

I'll share an anecdote which deflates the absolutely illogical myth that
the famous pedagogues were perfect and should be meticulously followed
merely because they were famous (also from Dr. McKim's dissertation). Joe
Allard's own words:

"When I was a student, I played saxophone with a little jazz band in order
to earn the money to take private lessons. And I remember when I took my
lesson from Hamelin he said, 'I see that you play saxophone - if you want
to study with me, you'll have to give up playing saxophone.' I said, 'All
right, if I have to give up playing saxophone, I will.' And I did nothing
of the sort; I went right on playing saxophone. About a month later,
Hamelin said, 'Now that you're not playing saxophone, everything's coming
along fine.' I was very proud of the fact that he had not recognized that I
had just played a dance job the night before."

One of the many reasons I don't take offense with Tony is he and I really
do preach the same things (I'm sure he'll dispute this, but I hope he will
come to know me better some day). I just refuse to ignore the source of my
information. I completely understand why Tony would initially assume I'm
just referencing long dead pedagogues instead of reasoning things out for
myself. I'm sure he's seen it at least a thousand times in his career (way
beyond this list, I might add). I like to think I've backed up everything
I've said with facts as well as names and furthermore that I have been
quite willing to admit when I am wrong.

To those who would accuse me of anecdotally referencing Joe. I can't see
how posting a few excerpts of a larger document is anecdotally doing
anything. I strongly encourage everyone to read the documents and make up
your own mind. I would love to post the entire document, but copyright
prohibits me from doing so.

-Adam

At 07:07 PM 10/31/2004 -0500, Karl Krelove wrote:
>There's more, of course. Sometimes "method" is the result of some offhanded
>or even deliberate remark that a teacher makes in the course of making some
>point. The student then, for any of several reasons, elevates it to the
>level of an "approach" or a "method" and passes it on as such. Wright's use
>of the "rubber band" image (also "gasket") at the one lesson I took with him
>40 years ago is an example - he only meant it as a graphic way to describe
>something. Nothing more. I'm sure I was pinching the daylights out of the
>reed and these were his attempts at correction. I'm sure he used the same
>image with many students as needed, but not as any kind of generalized
>"method" or "approach" (much less *his* "method" or "approach"). Evidently,
>so did Keith Stein in his book, but by putting it in print he apparently
>made the elevation process easier.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org