Klarinet Archive - Posting 000380.txt from 2006/08

From: kurtheisig@-----.net
Subj: Re: [kl] Re: higher pitch standard in Europe?
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 07:47:10 -0400


OK!

Sorry this will go a little long!

I just moved to Monterey (LOVELY!!) and my article on this is buried SOMEWHERE in my files!!!!
--
>
I
>remember asking him why the Europeans (especially the Berlin
>Philharmonic, under von Karajan, and, to a lesser extent, the RIAS
>Symphony) always tuned to the higher pitch. His answer was that it
>supposedly gave a brighter sound to the strings. I never gave the
>answer another thought, until now. Is there any emperical evidence
>that the higher standard pitch does affect the sound of strings, as
>well as wind instruments, or is this another effect that can be
>chalked up to psycho-acoustics?
>
>Randy
>(frustrated I.T. geek, musician and Mac user)

Back in the 20's---23?---27??

There was a conference to establish an international pitch standard.

At the end of the conference there was NO consensus.

The results were that American orchestras chose 440, American bands 439 (I tune my band, the Heisig-Hastings Symphonic Band in Santa Cruz to 439----gives a GREAT sound!), I think the English chose 435??, I also think that the Haynes pitch of the 30's was 435??, and on the continent pitches stayed as high as 447.

NOW---the concept of high (often a VERY BENT scale) carrying better...

This is MY conjecture from a lot of circumstantial evidence.

I remember an honor band conductor telling us in the early 60's that brighter (sharp) carried better. Where does this come from?

This is what seems to me to explain it ---POSSIBLY!

In the early days of recording, banjo and piano would not record well. Many myths came up about it, and also many sales gimics by the 30's. Were some of these gimics deceptive? Remember it WAS the depression and many companies did some STRANGE things to have one chicken a week for the kids!

In the mid 30's Benge came out with a couple of models that absolutely violated what Eldon claimed to have built the horns for (copy the pre-war French Besson). The 2x and 4x were claimed to "reach out to microphones". I don't know how many of you also play trumpet, but these horns HURT to play---STUFFFFYYY!!!!! They were also bright.

Selmer came out with the Selmer Super Sax about 1932. This horn is commonly called the "cigar cutter". but that is a nick-name for the shape of a part in the octave mechanism that looks like an old cigar cutter. About 1934 this sax appeared as the "Radio Improved". I don't know if there were actually any changes in the model, and from some conversations with Ralph Morgan I gather that the tenor did NOT have any changes.

In 25 years of working with Claude Gordon, I remember him telling many stories of the fads that musicians would get into. Like the character that set up shop to give trumpet players "lip massages" at $5 a pop---back then! Players would be lined up waiting for lip massages!!!

MY SUGGESTION IS THAT TUNING AN AMERICAN ORCHESTRA AT 442 WITH INSTRUMENTS DESIGNED TO PLAY AT 440 MAKES THEM PLAY SO POORLY THAT IT DOES INDEED MAKE THEM SEEM TO CARRY. PURE STRIDENT!

Kurt Heisig

Maker of fine saxophones, flutes and mouthpieces.

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

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