Klarinet Archive - Posting 000122.txt from 2007/03

From: "Kent Krive" <k.krive@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Bright and dark sounds
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:26:18 -0500

Dan, wasn't it Winston Churchill who said: " NEVER GIVE UP!"? You are
certainly in his league in terms of passion and eloquence! ...ammo and
reinforcements follow:

Our idea or concept of tone (and therefore, the student’s) is arguably the
single most important factor governing tonal achievement. IMHO, the
equipment in use has a most important influence on how efficiently this
concept can be realized, but that subject is for a different post...

The notion of characterizing clarinet tone (or that of any other instrument,
for that matter) presents one conundrum after another, having mainly to do
with the utilization of “non-physics” terms to represent a phenomenon
belonging to the world of physics. Would it be useful to identify timbre by
listing the relative strength/weakness of overtones? How cumbersome! And how
complicated (given that the tonal spectrum will vary from pitch to pitch on
any given instrument)! Perhaps if we chose one pitch to evaluate in this
way, we could at least get by with one description per clarinet. There is
ample evidence in the writings on the list that we could never agree on what
“light” or “dark” means.

My suggestion: to analogize tone quality with syllabic sounds. The vowel
sequence (both Anglican and Latin) provides a great place to start. Also, I
find it useful to identify other instrumental timbres that typify desirable
qualitative aspects of clarinet tone. My favorites: the marimba and
xylophone. I find the timbre of each both appealing and consistent.

As a teacher, I feel that syllabic and clarinet-played representations of
undesirable tone quality are necessary. If the student is producing a
“trumpet” sound on the clarinet, I work to emulate the faulty tone in order
to identify the related oral shape involved, compare that with the oral
impression of what I hope is a characteristic tone J, and proceed with
remediation.

As to the syllabic notion: “Good” sounds will be reinforced by syllables
produced with the lips in a round “o” and the tongue forward and down in
back with the jaw allowed to thrust moderately forward as if motivated by
the air flow.

“Bad” sounds will be characterized by syllables approaching the glottal form
of “ecch.” (Remember the little Oriental girl in the Meijer ads that says
“ecch” after test tasting both the store brand and the national brand of
spinach?)

To make an already too-long story come to an end, just keep in mind the
“funnel” concept. Think of the oral passage from the point at which the
tongue is attached to the point at which the air enters the mouthpiece. When
playing virtually any wind instrument “always keep the big end in back.”
When the funnel reverses, the tone “spreads” and loses “focus.” All of this
assumes a properly pressurized air stream, of course.

So, any ideas? What are your favorite characterizations of clarinet tone as
you describe it to students?

Kent

----- Original Message -----
From: "dnleeson" <dnleeson@-----.net>
To: <klarinet@-----.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:18 AM
Subject: RE: [kl] Bright and dark sounds

>
> I GIVE UP!!
>
> Dan Leeson
> DNLeeson@-----.net

------------------------------------------------------------------