 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Alphie
Date: 2004-01-11 01:06
Recently there was a discussion about anchor tonguing and someone asked if anybody teaches this.
In Frederick Thurston's book "Clarinet Technique" from 1956 I read in Chapter VI: Staccato/Position: ...."Now try to find out which part of the tongue will contact the tip of the reed most easily. While the tongue lies relaxed in the mouth its tip can be felt just behind the bottom teeth. When you put the mouthpiece into your mouth the tongue must merely be but slightly forward and upward to make contact with the reed.
You will probably feel the reed (and perhaps the tip of the mouthpiece) 'cutting' across your tongue about 1/4 to 1/2 inch away from its tip. I consider this the normal position for most players"...
Being one of the most prominent clarinetists of the 20th century he had some experience and he writes "I consider this the normal position for most players". What do I miss out here, why do Americans claim the contrary that this technique should be avoided at any cost?
Later he writes: Do not use the very tip of the tongue against the tip of the reed. This generally involves a certain contraction of the tongue, and causes unnessecary tightening of the muscles".
This corresponds very well to the technique I've successfully used myself for almost 40 years and I just wonder what there is to be afraid of.
Alphie
Post Edited (2004-01-11 01:10)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-01-11 01:23
Alphie wrote:
This indeed is the way I was taught, and it is not "anchor tonguing". In anchor tonguing the tip of the tongue does not move, being fixed on the lower teeth. Rather, the tongue is "bowed" to make contact with the reed.
Though we say "tip to tip" the actual contact area tends to be in the range that Thuston says. The point that the tip of the tongue is moved fronm the lower teeth is the important one.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alphie
Date: 2004-01-11 01:41
This is very confusing. Is the tip of the tongue the tip of the tongue or is the tip of the tongue further up on the tongue?
Alphie
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-01-11 02:05
Alphie wrote:
> This is very confusing. Is the tip of the tongue the tip of the
> tongue or is the tip of the tongue further up on the tongue?
Near the tip. Some people (with short tongues) can go "exact" tip to tip - most people can't and go down 1/4 inch or so. In fact, even those people who think they tongue exact tip-to-tip are sometimes surprised if they get in front of a mirror and with a toothpick find out where they're tonguing - it's sometimes further back than they think.
As long as the tip is moving and the contact point isn't halfway down the tongue ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 2004-01-11 14:03
In anchor tonguing, the tip of the tongue is "locked" against the back of the lower teeth. In regular tonguing, it is not. Think of the tip of the tongue as a short range at the end of the tongue rather than a point or line for the phrase "tip to tip". Also think of the tip of the reed as a short range rather than a point or line.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alphie
Date: 2004-01-11 23:18
I really want to sort this out. I've never heard the term "anchor tongue" before I started to post on this board. It seems to be exclusively American. Even the problem as such.
So, when you say tip-to-tip, it doesn't necessarily mean the flip-flap movement "de-de-de-de" of the tongue as in recorder or flute playing? It can also include "ye-ye-ye-ye" as I do it and I think Frederich Thurston as well, as long as the tip is not locked behind the bottom teeth?
Alphie
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2004-01-12 08:23
Thanks Alphie. I had not seen this Thurston advice before, and it certainly conforms to the way I try to articulate and the way I find most successful.
Language gaps can be problems, but the idea that the Thurston explanation is the same thing as "tip to tip" only goes to show how inadequate the term "tip to tip" is. Brymer makes it clear he means the tip of the tongue on the tip of the reed. I see no ambiguity in that, and it is not what Thurston seems to say. (By the way, the articulation of the two players also sounds noticeably different).
If "tip to tip" is open to such a range of meanings that it cannot mean what it says, then how can we be sure that people mean the same thing when they talk about anchor tonguing? I know what MC means. He has described it. But does everyone mean the same thing?
I think the Thurston approach should be called "blade to tip", since that is a much closer description of what is actually happening. Then people who genuinely profess tip to tip can make the distinction.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2004-01-12 08:55
Instead of thinking "tip to tip" I think how Mark described it above. If the tip of your tongue is "anchored" behind your teeth, and some other part of the tongue is making contact with the reed, this is anchor tonguing. However if the tip of your tongue moves freely in your mouth each time you tongue, it's not.
It doesn't HAVE to be tip to tip, just as long as the tip of your tongue isn't permanently fixed at some point in your mouth while the rest of your tongue does all the work.
I don't use tip to tip, because the tongue is only needed to stop the reed from vibrating. You can stop the vibrations at the tip of the reed, or slightly lower if you want. And I find it much more comfortable and less problematic to touch the tip of my tongue to a broader part of the reed than to try to touch only the tip of the reed.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alphie
Date: 2004-01-13 22:50
I have been quite frustated about the discussions about anchor tonguing in the past. Not that I've been thinking that I'm doing anything wrong myself (I'm too old and successful for that), but I don't tip-to-tip tongue in my interpretation of the term and the point of the very tip is indeed "resting" behind the lower teeth, at least not moving very much.
My concern is with students who're using the same technique but don't have my experience and can sort out information. What do they believe when they hear the horror stories about anchor tonguing. The descriptions in the past come very close to the technique that Thurston teaches. It seems to be accepted even in the US and it's a matter of interpretation if the tongue is "anchored" or not. He doesn't say what the very tip is doing while the rest of the tongue is tonguing but there's no way I can avoid the tip from touching the lower teeth if I tongue 1/4 inch from the tip.
My hope is that students haven't gotten any silly ideas from the postings in the past. If they've been as confused as I've been about peoples meaning of the terms "anchor tongue" and "tip-to-tip" I ask God to bless them from doing anything stupid. This profession is hard enough without misleading information.
Alphie
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jez
Date: 2004-01-14 12:17
I think the point here is that often too much emphasis is placed on the way the tongue contacts the reed and the way it is removed to start the sound.
Often this is described as pronouncing de-de-de or similar. Alphie's ye-ye-ye is an interesting variation.
The mistake,as I see it here, is imagining that the tongue starts the sound. I believe the opposite to be the case. The function of the tongue is solely to stop the sound. If it is touching the reed the sound cannot come out, when it is removed it can. It is the breath which starts the note and not enough attention is payed to this. The way the tongue is removed seems to me to be irrelevant. We all find a way which is comfortable to use and there are many different styles in use by players of all levels.
An analogy I've seen is to think of an old record player. If the needle is touching the disc the sound comes, when it is removed it stops. How the transition is achieved is unimportant.
When teaching, I always encourage people to think of using the tongue to stop the sound and the breath to start it again. Differing note lengths, accents etc. are achieved by varying the time the tongue and reed are in contact and what is done in the breath while they are.
True anchor-tonguing, where the tip stays in contact with the teeth feels very clumsy to me and I can't get any speed or clarity, but that's only me and may feel comfortable to others.
Interesting discussion. Thanks Alphie.
jez
Post Edited (2004-01-14 12:18)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ray
Date: 2004-01-14 17:02
"The mistake,as I see it here, is imagining that the tongue starts the sound. I believe the opposite to be the case. The function of the tongue is solely to stop the sound. If it is touching the reed the sound cannot come out, when it is removed it can. It is the breath which starts the note and not enough attention is payed to this."
Here's a different viewpoint: The tongue starts the sound by releasing the air pressure which is already present. The breath does not start the sound. If the breath starts the sound, to start a note you must simultaneously remove your tongue from the reed and release the air with your throat. This technique produces a ragged attack which is audible.
To produce a clean attack you must begin by stopping both the air pressure (which you have already applied) and the reed vibrations with your tongue. I see two ways to do this. You can apply enough pressure to the reed with your tongue to close the mouthpiece opening with the reed. You can do this while anchor tonguing or not. Or you can put the tip of your tongue in the opening between the reed and the mouthpiece to block the air and the vibrations. Using the tip of the tongue is a more delicate approach that results in less muscular tension in the tongue. I prefer it. The action of pulling the tongue back to release the air pressure that already exist starts the note cleanly.
I believe that this is why "tip to tip" is preferred to anchor tonguing. It is possible to make cleaner attacks by using the tip of the tongue as a valve that releases the air to start the note.
"If the needle is touching the disc the sound comes, when it is removed it stops. How the transition is achieved is unimportant."
But, you can stop the note by stopping the breath with the throat or tapering the air pressure to nothing or touching the reed and allowing the air to continue or putting the tip of the tongue into the gap to stop the air and the reed's vibrations. These techniques create different sounding stops, don't they?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jez
Date: 2004-01-15 08:47
Ray,
If you believe it is the tongue and not the breath which starts the sound, try this simple exercise;
1. Start a note by just blowing and don't use the tongue at all.
2. Try to start a note by using the tongue and don't use any breath.
You'll find that 2 produces no sound.
If you were really to play as you describe it implies that you are using a separate puff of air for each individual note. An impossible feat at speed, whether you do this with the throat or whatever.
You are quite right that you can stop the sound without using the tongue, but the topic under discussion here is tonguing so other aspects of technique should not be confused with that.
jez
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2004-01-15 09:57
Ray's approach to tip-to-tip is the purest (or most extreme, depending on your view) version of that technique that can be applied. But surely it would prematurely age the reed. You would in effect be jamming the tongue hard against the very tip of the reed. I can't see how the reed survives that treatment.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
