Klarinet Archive - Posting 000381.txt from 2006/08
From: "danyel" <rab@-----.de>
Subj: Re: [kl] Re: higher pitch standard in Europe?
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 08:30:07 -0400
Hi,
always interesting to read your statements.
as to:
"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."
I have an English tuning fork from the 20s/early 30s inscribed: "New
Philharmonic Pitch" giving 438Hz, which is a very nice pitch indeed (the old
Philharmonic pitch is supposed to have been horrible 455 something Hz, I
also have several 19th c. clarinets in the region of that pitch (depending
on the mouthpieces which are mostly not extant).
The Viennese still stick to the 444Hz, some German Orchestras play at 442
Hz.
I have heard rumours that Joseph Goebbels, the nazi propaganda minister was
mobbing in favour of 440 Hz set up as an international standard. Is there
any evidence? I think if that is true we should opt for either 438/439 or
442/444!
I think the Radio Improved horns were supposed to have been refined using
some futuristic sonometric methods (radio as in using rays for measuring
something). Is that actually nothing but jive?
Best regards,
danyel
www.echoton.de/clar.html
----- Original Message -----
From: <kurtheisig@-----.net>
To: <klarinet@-----.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: [kl] Re: higher pitch standard in Europe?
> 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
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org
