 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Bartmann
Date: 2006-10-26 14:29
This is a quote from a newsletter from a music group. The writer was a professional clarinetist who is now plays the cello.
"I would put it like this, with a clarinet you might have a basic palette of, say, eight colors. With a string instrument you start with a palette of millions of colors – and [you] have to learn how to use them!"
I found this quote interesting because I hadn't realized the clarinet had a specific tonal palette. However, once I began playing a second instrument, the flute, I realize that especially with the use of vibrato, there are tonal colors that the clarinet doesn't have. Certainly the clarinet has colors that the flute doesn't have but what I'm discussing is total range.
I argue that perhaps 95% of the flute sound is created by embouchure. Whereas about 20% of clarinet sound creation controlled by the embouchure and 80% is created by mouthpiece and reed combination. So even without vibrato, the flute has more tonal possibilities as a result of embouchure changes. I've discovered a musical phrase played by the flute has more stylistic possibilities than the same phrase played by the clarinet. And in reference to the quote above, I would imagine the same phrase played on a violin or cello would have many more tonal possibilities.
So the clarinet might be a box of 8 Crayola crayons, the flute 16, and the violin a whopping 64 colors!
Bart
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2006-10-26 15:15
I can easily squeak in a million ways.
For me it's a bit different to tell where one tone colour ends and where the other begins. We're in an analog (vs. digital) world and so it ain't that easy - for me at least.
How does one tell tone colours apart?
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2006-10-26 15:48
This is a topic upon which I for one would welcome guidance. We often read here of tonal variation, but it is hard to find discussion about how to achieve these variations. (I mean by playing differently, not by changing equipment.) Maybe this is something that can only be taught in a lesson.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2006-10-26 16:06
I am not an acoustician so this is not a definitive treaty on clarinet acoustics.
My understanding is that when you play a note say A=440Hz, you get not only 440Hz but also many many more harmonics. The type of harmonics and their respective amplitudes are what makes the color or timbre of a note. I may be wrong, A=440Hz at a given amplitude shoudl sound the same no matter how it is produced. It just so happens that the clarinet has a very particular set of harmonics, which are not quite the same of a flute or a violin. I am not sure that a clarinet has less harmonics than a violin or less ways to alter these harmonics. I am more enclined to believe that clarinet players in general do not make use of the full color palette of the clarinet, but tend to stay in the well accepted range of no or very little vibrato, nice and round sound. It may not be the instrument or that player as much as the current culture of what is acceptable to do on a clarinet.
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2006-10-26 16:23
Sylvain,
The purest sound (physically) is a sine wave as it doesn't deliver any harmonics at all. A violin's "voice" resembles a sawtooth curve while a clarinet's is more like a rectangle wave ("la mer" for cubists ![[tongue]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie6.gif) ). This physical difference alone will yield very different sound impressions. We might want to go into Fourier transformations a bit, then again we might not be inclined to do so. ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif)
I agree with you that a clarinetist is - generally - not eager to explore new sounds, just imagine what immense variability in shape our mouth can form and thus influence the sound (-> jew's harp). Might be that we all have "that specific sound" in our ears, and when someone sounds slightly differently (I don't want to mention Emma J.'s name again) he/she is bashed to no end.
Duh, maybe the mother of all colour pallettes is in our brains or ears, not in the instrument.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2006-10-26 16:30
ben, sylvain - I'm fine (up to a point) on the physics and the Fourier transforms. That gives me no help at all in exploring what the instrument can do in terms of tonal variations.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: xxColorMeJoshxx
Date: 2006-10-26 16:43
This is absolutely ridiculous! Especially the part about the embochure making 20% of the sound and the "mouthpiece/reed combination" making 80%!!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bennett ★2017
Date: 2006-10-26 16:48
This is an interesting topic but I think it needs some definition. The cellist-clarinetist was referring to how much more control s/he had over the sound of the cello as compared to the clarinet, (not that the clarinet is predominantly odd overtones). Things like vibrato, which part of the bow is used and how close to the bridge can shape the sound (i.e. music) coming from stringed instruments. We can try to improve/alter our tone (alternate fingerings for throat tones, e.g.), different reeds/mpcs for different styles of music (jazz vs. chamber, e.g.,) but we don't seem to have the 'palette' of variations open to the violin. Most of our embouchure effort seems to go into playing in tune.
To my ears, the range of articulation in the violin, etc. is wider than that of clarinet - pizzicato is more striking (no pun intended) than our staccato but we've got, I think, wider dynamic range (ppp to ffff) at least in some of our registers.
We do have some bizarre sounding multiphonics, various growls, squeaks, and squawks but the opportunity to use them is thankfully very limited.
8 colors vs millions does seem a bit hyperbolic however.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2006-10-26 17:05
My experience in this realm was after years of pure wind music I had hired some ringers to do the Brahms Trio. At the very first rehearsal within a few bars of a transition, the pianist and cellist stopped to explore how the color had just changed and how we needed to deal with that. At first I thought I was dropped into the middle of someone elses conversation. But after collecting my ego up off the floor, the change was addressed and fixed and the rehearsal continued in the same vein with MUCH learning on my part.
For what it's worth the main idea seemed to be one of style that you address in the typical ways such as LOUD SOFT SHORT LONG FAST SLOW, it is just that stringed instruments (and piano) do produce a more marked difference in the sound as they execute these and are used to refering to these differences as COLORS.
Nothing to get all worked up about, just use the idea to shade your phrases better.
.........Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BelgianClarinet
Date: 2006-10-26 17:43
Well, string players, it's a different kind of people :-)
I know some that actually believe that playing a woodwind (or brass) is just a matter of opening and closing the right holes to make the 'note'.
Those of you that might think the same, think again or start playing violin :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John O'Janpa
Date: 2006-10-26 19:05
There are definitely different "colors" available on a clarinet. Sidney Bechet doesn't sound a whole lot like Robert Marcellus, etc., etc.
The Wind Symphony I'm in has a saxophone performance major playing clarinet this semester. Any clarinetist who listens to our players could instantly pick out which one he is, even though he is playing with excellent intonation.
The colors in the spectrum are measured in Angstroms and there are many.
The colors on a clarinet are measured by the listener's ear. The violin may cover a wider spectrum, but if the listener's ear is well trained, the clarinet still
reveals a fairly wide pallet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2006-10-27 11:21
This must be to do with personal experience. Personally I can hear loads of colour in a clarinet, a fair deal in a violin, and very little in a piano...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Koo Young Chung
Date: 2006-10-28 01:09
Are we talking about different colors from different players or different colors from the same set up and player?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EEBaum
Date: 2006-10-28 03:05
BelgianClarinet wrote...
>Well, string players, it's a different kind of people :-)
Indeed. A conductor (violist) once repeatedly said "you're REALLY flat" during rehearsal toward my really flat B natural (below the staff... or maybe it was a Bb) on bass clarinet. It was a long, exposed, sustained note. Both my hands were full, I was biting all I could, and I nodded slightly in acknowledgement of the flatness. And yet, he continued to say "No, you're REALLY REALLY FLAT" in my direction.
I pushed in after the note was finished, naturally, but am still bewildered as to what he expected me to do about it while continuing to play the note.
-Alex
www.mostlydifferent.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2006-10-28 12:56
He may have thought you could bring the pitch up by changing fingerings. Indeed opening the Ab/Eb key may bring the pitch of these notes up a tiny bit. You can't expect a viola player to know which notes can be tuned and which cannot. After all, if you'd been conducting and it had been a bassoon playing, for example, would you have known?
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Cuisleannach
Date: 2006-10-28 17:43
I'm also not sure about the allocation of "blame" (20% embouchure and 80% equipment). IMHO Most players who are set in their ways (and are playing on decent mp's to begin with) will not sound noticeably different upon switching mouthpieces, provided they are playing on reeds that give the combo the feel they are used to. The combination might feel better to the player or be easier to play but the sound probably won't change all that much.
-Randy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2006-10-28 22:58
To my ears, Harold Wright was a master of phrasing colors. I definately hear more than 8 different colors in his performances. I do agree though, that, many clarinetists (but violinists too) don't strive for enough different colors. The ones who are the greatest musicians pay attention to color more than most, it seems to me. Colors are not in the score; It all starts with your phrasing imagination, the sound in your mind's ear. Perhaps the violin does have more, but until we are all thinking as musically as possible, it doesn't matter who has more. Both instruments, when played well, are remarkable in their own rights.
I also dispute that people who don't like Emma Johnson's sound only strive for a remote width of colors on the clarinet. I am wildly pro-color! I just don't like her tone.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BelgianClarinet
Date: 2006-10-29 06:35
Randy,
last year I switched MP"s and I can guarantuee that there is a difference. Maybe not that much in 'colour', but definately my B40 sounds less 'raw' than the old Leblanc L5, or the B45 that I tried first.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Cuisleannach
Date: 2006-10-30 04:30
Point taken...I should perhaps be more careful in qualifying my blanket statements! I guess I was talking mainly of the very high-end hand-made mp's. I went through a period of mp shopping, trying tons and buying 3, and no matter what I ended up sounding the same. Also, many really established players like their sound the way it is and will adapt to make sure it remains the same. My current beak of choice, by the way, is a Robert Scott.
-Randy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alexis
Date: 2006-10-30 06:56
I don't think there's any doubt that one player will have a different 'colour' to the next.
I think that "colour" (whatever that actually is) is very deeply connected to the character of the music. Compare the beginning of the second movement of the Mozart clarinet concerto with the 2nd movement clarinet solo in Shostakovich 9. The registers and notes are quite similar, but if you played with the some sound in both you would be missing the point in at least one of the pieces.
I personally just think there is a trend in clarinet playing towards some sort of perfect, clean sound which really doesn't appeal to me that much. And I think that we have to constantly challenge ourselves to find new avenues into the music through manipulation of tone colour, rhythm and character (which is heavily influenced by the former).
The reason I do this is to stop myself getting bored. I think that our use of colour and rubato is something akin to ornamentation in folk music or baroque music, or even something like chord voicings in jazz/comping etc....
I play piano for a pretty decent choir and I will often get given some seriously dreary accompaniments. And sometimes I get given some ok ones, which start to pale after the first time I play them. So whats the solution? For jazz charts I'll often add a few more chords/substitutions, maybe some little countermelodies. For classical arrangements, maybe complexify the harmony a little more (but with discretion) or attempt to change the colour of the sound in certain passage through different weighting of my fingers...
I think its the same with clarinet music. What is the point of playing the piece in the same way every time? Or even with very minor changes?
Everybody in the world thinks differently, but because we have all these recordings available I think that really limits the way we approach the music because listening to recordings can take away the hard decisions.
I think the moment that you codify what colours can be made and how to make them the whole creative spirit of the enterprise is quashed. This aspect of clarinet playing should definitely be the performers prerogative to find new sounds and new ways of approaching the music they play. I think the reason that cellists may 'have more colours' is that cello playing is less homogenised than clarinet playing. I really don't think its anything intrinsic to the instruments.
That all makes sense in my head, but I'm not sure how it looks in print.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2006-10-30 07:54
Alexis,
Full ack. Else we might as well use a synth plus good samples and replace musician X with a MIDI track or an MP3 stick.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
