 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: DrH2O
Date: 2010-01-06 16:51
Do you stop the flow of air when playing staccato notes or just stop the reed from vibrating? My teacher commented that when I stop the reed there is still quite a bit of air going through the clarinet and up close at least, this is audible and distracting. It seems to me that even though I stop the tip of the reed, there is still a gap along both sides of the reed through which air can escape. Is that gap supposed to close?
Thanks,
Anne
P.S. I've been playing for almost 3 yrs, so I'm still in the developmental stage.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2010-01-06 17:42
Anne- everybody should be in the developmental stage! The minute you stop developing you start deteriorating...
Personally I think that touching the reed lightly with the tongue at the tip (rather than closing it against the mouthpiece) is most often the best way to tongue. The audible distraction that your teacher is referring to could be related to doing you tonguing too far down the reed? If you tongue at the tip then you only need the very slightest contact to stop the reed from vibrating. If you tongue further down then you can stop the sound but still have quite a bit of air going through the gap. This is most noticeable on the very lowest notes on the instrument. Try tonguing a low E. If you tongue far down on the reed and really softly with the tongue you can actually still hear a very faint sound of the E (kind of an echo tone). Experiment with tonguing further up the reed until the tip of your tongue makes a very small contact with the very tip of the reed. At that point you shouldn't have to push very hard with the tongue at all for the quiet "echo tone" to stop sounding.
Experiment with different tongue positions and force of the tongue upon the reed. See if you can makes different kinds of articulations- things that sound like "naa", "tat", "thhaa", "pom" etc. The combination with the way you use your air also effects the attack. Developing a range of articulation styles will make your playing more interesting.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2010-01-06 17:55
If the staccato notes are very fast and together, I will not stop the airflow at all. I'll only stop with my tongue up against the reed. With the slower staccato notes, I do the same, (start and stop the note with the reed), but might take a breath in between each one or just stop the airflow inbetween each one before starting it JUST before releasing the reed of the next staccato note. So as to minimize the sound of rushing air coming out of the clarinet.
Alexi
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2010-01-06 21:11
NEVER STOP THE AIR PRESSURE !!!!!
I was just looking over my copy of Daniel Bonade's "Clarinetist's Compendium" and Dan distinctly states that the air pressure continues, even at VERY slow tempi...... this is part of his Syncro Staccato exercise of which another important element is to switch immediately to the fingering of the next note as soon as the one you're on is dampened.
I feel this "exercise" helps not only with the development of staccato as stated by Bonade but also with re-enforcing fingering on a much deeper level.
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2010-01-06 21:27
Never say never.
Perhaps what Paul is quoting may reinforce the development of a basic technique. But I find that fluctuations in air pressure in combination with the tonguing help to produce the kinds of articulation which I sometimes require.
There are many ways to do things, and in music your ear should always be your guide.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DrH2O
Date: 2010-01-06 22:12
Just to clarify, I'm not stopping the air pressure - but even though I'm putting my tongue on the tip of the reed, air escapes into the clarinet. I think it's escaping along the sides of the reed becasue I don't close the reed against the mouthpiece, but just put my tongue on the tip.
I'll try experimenting with different tongue positions, but wonder if others expereince this same phenomenon. When my teacher demonstrates the air stops even though she is maintain air pressure. Not sure if this is a tongue anatomy or reed thing, or me thing.
Anne
Clarinet addict
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2010-01-06 22:40
I think about this a bit as I have a "needs improvement" tongue.
I find that if I totally stop the airflow with my tongue, I end up using a lot of force and my tongue slows a lot and fast tonguing becomes impossible for me.
At slower tempos I may stop the reed entirely.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2010-01-06 22:55
Paul,
What's the purpose of moving one's fingers between notes?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2010-01-06 23:24
brycon wrote:
> What's the purpose of moving one's fingers between notes?
The principles of finger movement and tonguing as set forth by Bonade are important aspects to successful clarinet technique.
Read the Bonade Compendium on "fingers ahead" and it will change your concept of tongue/finger coordination.
To reinforce the principles of "fingers ahead", play Rose etudes #6, #11 and #26 (all from the 40) at a slow pace, thinking of each finger movement as it moves ahead to the next note in the passage.
For legato work, Bonade would always use Rose etude #1 (of the 40), played in 8, slowing down the motion of the fingers. Again, paying attention to letting the fingers "melt" into the keys and then, the careful lifting of each finger, or groups of fingers.
It may seem like taking baby steps when you can already walk, but Bonade's methods are the most successful way to coordinate tongue/fingers for rapid, clean, technique as well as building seamless legato...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2010-01-06 23:48
GBK,
Bonade's concept for legato playing makes sense.
However, I don't see any purpose in moving the fingers between pitches. When practicing the prescribed Rose etudes at a quicker tempo, are the fingers still "ahead?" It seems unnecessarily cumbersome- to me- to move the fingers in a different rhythm than the tongue.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2010-01-07 00:23
It becomes nearly unconscious, but yes, the fingers are still slightly ahead of the tongue and rhythm at faster tempos. The whole point is to have the fingering prepared before releasing the note itself. When you move the fingers and release the tongue simultaneously you tend (many of us do, anyway) to sometimes set the fingers slightly too late, *especially* at fast tempos, resulting in hearing the change after the tongue has released (at the beginning of the note itself). Also, when large intervals are involved, the response is often better when the fingers are prepared for the second note of the interval. Bonade's whole point, I think, was to have the fingers (and consequently the air column) prepared and stable before letting the reed vibrate to produce the note.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2010-01-07 01:05
The goal is coordination. If Bonade's method helps you achieve it, great. If not, find something else that works and don't think twice about it. For what it's worth, Stanley Hasty thought the Bonade prepared fingers technique was a bunch of bunk.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2010-01-07 01:37
Sorry for belaboring this topic.
This "fingers ahead" just seems like a silly concept and something that should not be taught to students because of Bonade's reputation alone. If it works for someone- that's great.
Karl, a player's fingers don't "prepare" during legato or slurred passages. Is there any reason why it shouldn't be the same for staccato? I would think that moving one's fingers and tongue at different times would cause more coordination problems than it would prevent.
Vin, one of my teachers was a Bonade student, and like Hasty, he did not teach fingers ahead.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2010-01-07 08:40
GBK- "Read the Bonade Compendium on "fingers ahead" and it will change your concept of tongue/finger coordination."
-
To clarify, the rhythm of the fingers themselves is quite different if playing legato or when playing staccato, is that right?
At slow tempos this makes sense and is not difficult, but at faster tempos (16ths at 120+), how much time is there "between" the notes to prepare?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2010-01-07 10:07
I believe this is more a technique for "PRACTICE."
I use this all the time and makes my technique instantly more grounded and secure in the same way that "long tone" practice makes the sound more solid.
..........and I am willing to give Stanley Hasty some slack for giving us Larry Combs but if he did not see the benefit of this exercise it is only because he must naturally have had rock solid technique.
Remember, Marcellus claimed that outside of a few instances in college, he NEVER practiced.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2010-01-07 12:49
brycon wrote:
> Karl, a player's fingers don't "prepare" during legato or
> slurred passages. Is there any reason why it shouldn't be the
> same for staccato? I would think that moving one's fingers and
> tongue at different times would cause more coordination
> problems than it would prevent.
>
Well, the difference is that in legato there is only one action taking place - the movement of your fingers. There's nothing to coordinate with your fingers. In staccato there are two - the finger change and the release of the reed. If the reed is released *before* the fingers are firmly in place, you run the risk of an unintended "grace note," a fuzzy "attack" or even, in the case of a large interval, a squeak.
> Vin, one of my teachers was a Bonade student, and like Hasty,
> he did not teach fingers ahead.
Vin wrote:
> For what it's worth, Stanley Hasty thought the Bonade prepared
> fingers technique was a bunch of bunk.
I don't actually teach it, either. In fact I only came back to thinking about it recently but have found it very helpful with certain passages that had been problems for me in the past. Anthony Gigliotti, my teacher through both my undergrad and graduate years, had studied with Bonade, but if he ever mentioned prepared fingers, he certainly didn't stress it. My first exposure to it came as a much younger student from another teacher who had studied not with Bonade, as far as I know, but with Lucien Calliet. My return to thinking about it was sparked by reading something on this BB a while ago, I forget who mentioned it but it was someone too young to have studied with Bonade directly, which brought back those distant memories from 50 years ago, so I tried incorporating it.
I'm certain many - probably most - players don't use the prepared fingers technique for staccato, and at some point of velocity it becomes more a mental than a physical approach even for those who do. It's a useful, though certainly not essential, tool. Use it or don't (though I don't think Stanley Hasty's having perhaps called it "bunk"should be reason in itself to dismiss it out of hand, any more than Bonade's having espoused it is reason for everyone to do it).
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2010-01-07 12:58
In my own recent experience with this (see my response to brycon), I think the approach becomes more mental directly as the note speed increases.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2010-01-07 14:54
Karl,
My post didn't make sense- sorry. It should say: a player's fingers don't prepare during legato articulated passages.
A player is still coordinating the release of the tongue from the reed with the movement of the fingers; however, it is impossible to move one's fingers well in advance of the oncoming note as there is only a minute amount of space separating them.
This is why I think fingers ahead is a silly concept: players coordinate their fingers and tongue one way for a long tongue sound and another way for a shorter tongue sound. If a player can legato tongue without unintentional grace notes, fuzzy attacks et cetera, I -as of yet- don't see a reason why it should not be the same with staccato.
Post Edited (2010-01-07 14:56)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2010-01-07 15:45
I should say, I've found "fingers ahead" to be quite helpful in my own development, but I haven't used it recently and certainly don't think it's mandatory to learn. It's a practice tool- if you don't like it, don't use it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2010-01-07 16:22
brycon wrote:
> Karl,
>
> My post didn't make sense- sorry. It should say: a player's
> fingers don't prepare during legato articulated passages.
>
> A player is still coordinating the release of the tongue from
> the reed with the movement of the fingers; however, it is
> impossible to move one's fingers well in advance of the
> oncoming note as there is only a minute amount of space
> separating them.
"Well in advance" overstates the case - obviously, you have to do whatever you do in the time that's available. I've already suggested that as notes get faster (the space between gets shorter), the concept becomes more mental than physical. The same would be true with long but almost connected ("legato") articulation. You say "po-ta-to" and I say "po-tah-to." The fingers have to be there when the note starts, not after. If thinking about moving when the preceding note ends helps, then it does. If it doesn't, then it doesn't. No one will ever know as they listen to a performance what a player is *thinking* about in any case.
>
> This is why I think fingers ahead is a silly concept:
It's at this point that you move from reasonable argument to opinion, so I won't waste time arguing with it (nor can I argue with Mr. Hasty over his reported description of prepared fingers as bunk) except to say that if you don't see a purpose in it, then ignore it and articulate any way you find works.
Sometimes witchcraft is just witchcraft. but other times it's "alternative" medicine whose practitioners may know more than others give them credit for. :-)
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2010-01-07 18:07
Ok, I'll try another tack.
Larry Combs often stressed "muscle memory" in lessons. He got at this by using "exaggerated finger movements" at a S-L-O-W tempo with "exaggerated pressure" on the "down" stroke and "exaggerated pop" on the way up. Once you have done this on a difficult passage a couple of times, you shake it out, and then try playing at original tempo and fingers - it should be much improved.
I think this was also reffered to as "spinal memory (?)."
Similarly, the "Syncro Staccato" works as an exercise probably not much faster than eighth notes at 100 beats per minute. Same deal. It's an EXERCISE not a philosophy. Please don't confuse me with Britt Hume.
............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2010-01-07 18:31
As a practice technique, I teach the "fingers ahead" to all my students after about 3 or so years of playing. Before then there are too many other things for them to think about, and by this time it starts to become more applicable as they're playing faster and more complex music.
When a student is having a problem with a mixed articulation and/or tongued mixed-rhythm pattern, I ask if they practiced it using "fingers ahead" and they say "No" or "once or twice" all the time. When I've drilled it in the lesson as a practice technique on the passage in question, at least 7 times, they always see my point because they can play it successfully and more easily.
IMO it is an essential tool. Not for all difficulties, but many.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2010-01-07 18:40
KDK,
You didn't catch Fox News' assertion that Tiger Woods needs to become a Christian before he can start to get his life back together?
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-01-07 19:03
Paul, that's one reason I don't watch Fox news.
As far as the title of this post is concerned the answer is always yes. The air flow should not stop between each staccato note. If it did you would not be able to tongue very fast. You're probably not keeping the sides of your mouth secure enough so the air escapes or you're using to much air pressure for what you're playing. Try this exercise, blow through you lip in a whistle or pucker shape and as you're blowing put your hand up to your mouth and release and cover over and over again as you continue to blow. The air will stop from coming out but you will be keeping the air flow constant. This is the same principal as tonguing the reed. The reed stops vibrating but the air pressure stays constant. If you have long rests between the notes you don't have to keep the air flow of course.
Finger before the tongue is an exercise I've always used in my teaching to get a student to "coordinate" their fingers and tongue. Even when you're tonguing fast, if your finger does not move before your tongue does you will either tongue the same note twice or tongue in between the notes giving a "sloppy" effect. That's the reason for practicing "finger before the tongue", to get the coordination solid. ESP http://eddiesclarinet.com
PS. check my website on the clarinet articles page for some tips on tonguing.
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
Post Edited (2010-01-07 19:09)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2010-01-07 20:28
No. Tiger's not a Christian? I thought all athletes were. Drew Pearson and Jack Anderson must be turning in their graves.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2010-01-07 22:02
I would say that whatever value 'fingers ahead' has as an exercise lies in its demonstration to a student that tongue action and finger action need not be synchronised.
Or, more precisely, that neither the moment that the tongue TOUCHES the reed, nor the moment that the tongue LEAVES the reed, has to coincide with the moment of fingering change.
But what use is that? What does a student gain from that realisation?
In my view, it makes clear for them,
(1) that the tongue TOUCHING the reed stops a note that is being generated by airpressure
...and,
(2) that the tongue LEAVING the reed permits the sounding of a note that is POTENTIALLY being generated by airpressure
...and finally,
(3) that the fact that the notes in (1) and (2) may happen to be different is of secondary importance.
The effect is to have the students maintain airpressure throughout.
I have my own collection of metaphors:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=316748&t=316712&v=t
...to deal with the varying misconceptions that students may have built into their ways of construing staccato. Not all of those metaphors are useful for every student. But the fundamental structure is the same for all of them: namely, that the tongue stops notes that are already sounding, and then releases notes that are already POTENTIALLY sounding.
It never begins notes, because what begins them is airpressure.
What we're mostly fighting against is the seductive idea that the moment at which the tongue meets the reed should coincide with the change of fingering, and THEREFORE WITH THE BEGINNING OF THE STACCATO NOTE. That's what usually needs correcting in a student, especially a beginner.
'Fingers ahead' may help destroy that idea. But when it's destroyed, there is no special value in 'fingers ahead'. Fingers 'not behind' happens automatically.
(There is a wrinkle, brought up by Liquorice, to do with the modulation of the effect of the still constant blowing by diaphragmatic action in slower staccato. But that can wait:-)
Tony
Post Edited (2010-01-08 10:36)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2010-01-07 22:11
To Anne, I would say: don't worry about the air sound. Perhaps you are using an overly open mouthpiece, with a hardish reed, that you will 'graduate' away from. Perhaps your embouchure is too relaxed for your setup.
It's difficult to say without hearing you, but my guess is that you're already avoiding a much more serious problem by being able to blow even when your tongue is touching the reed. Not everyone can do that.
And after all -- take it from me -- the secret of clarinet playing is: put it in your mouth, and BLOW THE BLOODY THING!-)
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2010-01-08 10:12
"BLOW THE BLOODY THING!"
A pupil of George Garside (important British player of c. 1930s/40s) told me that Garside kept on mentioning that bit of advice in lessons...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2010-01-08 11:35
"BLOW THE BLOODY THING!"
It is so true. There is really no point getting bogged down in everything.
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2010-01-08 12:26
"My teacher commented that when I stop the reed there is still quite a bit of air going through the clarinet and up close at least, this is audible and distracting. It seems to me that even though I stop the tip of the reed, there is still a gap along both sides of the reed through which air can escape. Is that gap supposed to close?"
I have read through this thread, and I don't see that anyone has exactly answered her question.
Let me check if I have this right. Basically, you (Anne) )are saying that, between notes, you keep the air pressure AND the air flow. This means that your tongue only dampens the reed, but it doesn't stop the air. Kind of like if you are playing violin and then you lightly place your fingers on the string , but you keep the bow moving. The energy to start the next note is there, but your finger is stopping the string.
Your teacher wants you to play so that you push the reed and it totally closes off the space between the reed and mouthpiece. This would be like if you are playing violin and someone comes up and holds your right arm so it can't move. You are still pushing, but your arm (the air) stops moving . Once this person releases your arm, the sound will start instantly. Is that right?
I have this same problem. I generally do the first one. This is almost like "ghost tonguing" where you put your tongue on the reed, but the reed continues vibrating but with a different tone. The only difference when you use this as an articulation is that you use a little more pressure, a slightly different position, and then the reed stops. The space is still open and the air continues moving through the clarinet.
The main goal in this (for me) is to keep the tongue relaxed and use as little pressure as possible. If I totally close off the reed it is very easy to use MORE force than I really need and my tongue gets really slow.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-01-08 19:35
Peter said, "BLOW THE BLOODY THING!"
"It is so true. There is really no point getting bogged down in everything."
That may be a healthy philosophy for some things clarinet wise, once in a while you just have to say that to a student. But, when a student has a problem with something as elementary as articulation saying "Blow The Bloody Thing" does them no favor. There is no point getting bogged down in everything but it may be nice to actually help the student solve their problems when, and if, the teacher can identify them. There are many things that make a good teacher, one of them certainly is helping them cure what ever ails them, clarinet wise. If they are having a problem coordinating their finger movement and tongue movement saying "BLOW THE BLOODY THING" just won't cut it.
As I said above, I've used the finger before the tongue technique with great success for over 45 years of professional teaching and I don't ever recall having a student that worked on it that did not improve their staccato and coordination. There may be other methods that are equally successful but that one works for sure. It worked for me when I learned it and it works when I teach it. ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2010-01-08 20:30
Ed Palanker wrote:
>> Peter said [quoting Tony Pay in a previous post]:
"BLOW THE BLOODY THING!"
It is so true. There is really no point getting bogged down in everything.>>
Well, first of all, Peter's ridiculous use of what I wrote is very far away from what I meant. As my careful discussion of articulation shows, I am concerned that students understand not only how the tongue works, but that there is a fundamental background to it -- which is that you have to 'blow the bloody thing'.
Ed then went on:
>> ...when a student has a problem with something as elementary as articulation saying "Blow The Bloody Thing" does them no favor.>>
Yes, it does many students a favour. It's what many of them need to embody.
>> There is no point getting bogged down in everything but it may be nice to actually help the student solve their problems when, and if, the teacher can identify them. There are many things that make a good teacher, one of them certainly is helping them cure what ever ails them, clarinet wise. If they are having a problem coordinating their finger movement and tongue movement saying "BLOW THE BLOODY THING" just won't cut it.>>
Of course a good teacher has to go beyond that -- and I do.
>> As I said above, I've used the finger before the tongue technique with great success for over 45 years of professional teaching and I don't ever recall having a student that worked on it that did not improve their staccato and coordination. There may be other methods that are equally successful but that one works for sure. It worked for me when I learned it and it works when I teach it.>>
I explained why it probably works, not as a dogma, but as an exercise.
The trouble with both of you, Peter and Ed, is that the pair of you seem to be incapable of reading or understanding. So you don't bother to think about what I write, but simply use it as an excuse to regurgitate your own stuff.
Actually, that's consistent with the fact that the vast majority of both of your posts are concerned, not with the subject matter, but with self-promotion.
The hell with both of you.
Tony
Post Edited (2010-01-08 21:55)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2010-01-08 22:11
In my (much less than your) teaching experience, Tony, the middle-of-the-road students I teach need much more reminding on the "finger motion needs not be associated with tongue motion" than you have the good fortune to have experienced!
My American High School students need this reminder almost once a month, and sometimes more frequently. Our music ed system in schools (as you may know) focuses on band performance and not necessarily effective instrument technique. I have to fight the notion that I'm there only to help the kid with their (usually easy even for them) band music and instead attempt to make them a better clarinet player.
Many a day I wish America were more like the UK and the continent. Or maybe Venezuela with El sistema instead!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-01-08 22:15
Paul said, "Remember, Marcellus claimed that outside of a few instances in college, he NEVER practiced." I think Marcellus was a fantastic player, no doubt about it, but I've heard so many stories about how he prepared lessons without hardly practicing, how he would play through an entire difficult etude book with hardly even looking at it. If all the stories are true, and some probably are, he would have been the greatest clarinetist that ever lived. Maybe the greatest instrumentalist that ever lived, super human. Let's stop making these great players into something they're not. He was a terrific player, probably one of the best orchestra players of the last century, let's just leave it at that. ESP
PS. I know Tony Pay has written some answers on this post and someone e-mailed me telling me that he said something nasty about me, so what's new? I am sticking to my word, I refuse to read anything he writes about anything because even though I agree he is sometimes knowledge about many things he is also arrogant and nasty far too often and though he won't agree, he doesn't have all the answers. I did not read his post above, I just scroll past them when I see his name on it. There's enough nasty things in life, I don't have to read his. Happy New Year Tony! ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2010-01-09 01:38
Tony,
I feel your comments are unfair and unjust. I read all your posts and in this case agree with everything that you wrote. My slap dash post was a way of agreeing with you. Of course I could have gone into detail why and indeed quoted you but it was done in haste. Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered?
With regard to the self promotion comment I was actually quite hurt by this. As a student I looked up to you eager to learn from you and your vast experience but sadly felt I wasn't good enough for you and subsequently felt that I had learnt little. I still do look up to you as I try and make my way in a difficult profession. I, like you, want to try and help or indeed back up other people's comments that are just to the trials of playing the clarinet. I may not be as coherent as you or others but to say that I don't try and deal with the subject is extremely general and unfair.
I wrote:
"There is really no point getting bogged down in everything."
What was meant by this is that one should not worry and become too obsessed about a particular element as this can have a detrimental effect on other aspects of ones playing. If you let something become a "thing" then you will have more difficulty in trying to conquer it.
I'm sorry to hijack this post with this but felt the need to respond.
Coming back to the original post I was always told that the air is constant even during staccato in the general sense. So I wouldn't worry about the rushing air you hear. As long as no air is rushing from the embouchure when playing then I don't see anything to worry about.
Yours humbly
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2010-01-09 03:13
I was never taught "prepared fingers," but I have read about it Bonade's book. If it works for some people, that's great: who am I to say it's a bad practice method?
On the other hand, my personal feeling about it is that it is somewhat artificial inasmuch as the method (at least as I understand it) doesn't seem to reflect the way technically accomplished players really play. At sufficiently high speeds, the idea (that one can/should put the tongue on the reed, move a single finger, release the tongue, and repeat the process) starts to break down. At least when I play a rapid passage, I generally have multiple fingers moving simultaneously.
What you have to coordinate, then, is not movement of the tongue and fingers, per se, but the results of those movements. For the tongue, these results are contact with the reed and release of the tongue from the reed. For the fingers, these are sealing and unsealing of holes. For fingers and tongue to be synchronized, the *sealing or unsealing* has to take place while the tongue is on the reed. However, the movements that ultimately cause the sealing or unsealing may begin or end either when the tongue is on the reed or when the tongue is not on the reed.
What I find to be a more meaningful conceptual model at higher tempos is to recognize that there is difference between making contact with the reed and what most of us think of as tonguing ("ta, ta, ta", "da, da, da," etc.). If you try holding your tongue on your palate behind your teeth for a second, apply some air pressure, and then release your tongue to make a "ta" sound, you will recognize that the "ta" sound is not made by making contact with the tongue. Rather, "ta" is the sound made by *releasing* the tongue.
Now, obviously, what Bonade was (correctly) getting at was that you must have your fingers in position before you release the tongue--that is, before the "ta." Of course, the faster we go, the more difficult it is to get ourselves to do one thing very slightly before something else, which is one reason why "prepared fingers" seems to break down at high speeds. We are much better at trying to do things synchronously or with a slight delay than we are at trying to apply a measured amount of anticipation. I think that may have been the root of Stanley Hasty's frustration with "fingers ahead."
What I find more natural is not to try to make my fingers seal or unseal the holes slightly before each "ta," but to try to synchronize the sealing or unsealing of the holes with my tongue's *contact* with the reed (which comes before the "ta"). If I stop focusing on the syllables, but instead concentrate on the feeling of my tongue making contact with the reed (I've found it helps to make very light contact with the reed in order to feel this sensation), I can then make sure that I seal or unseal the proper holes in response to when the tongue sensation occurs. In fact, due to the fact that there is necessarily a slight time delay between when I sense the tongue contact and when I, in response, make any final adjustments to my finger movements in order to cause a sealing or unsealing of a hole to occur (because that's the way the nervous system works), chances are that if I am concentrating on synchronizing my fingers with the tongue sensation, the fingers will do their thing ever so slightly *after* the tongue contact, which is, of course, what I want to happen. The "ta," which begins the next note, then comes after the fingers are in position.
To this end, I find it also helps to realize that in order for the "ta" syllable to occur at the beginning of the note, the tongue contact must occur at the end of the previous note (as opposed to the beginning of the next), so what your tongue *feels* is a light touch that corresponds with the *termination* of the note---"ud, ud, ud" as opposed to the "ta, ta, ta" your ear hears. The trick with this approach, then, is to time what your fingers do against what your tongue feels, as opposed to what your ears hear.
In short, I try to achieve the same result as Bonade, but with a different timing reference. Bonade taught making your fingers anticipate the tongue release. I prefer to think in terms of the fingers following the tongue *seemingly* in an effort to seal/unseal at the same instant that the tongue contacts the reed, which for me seems more natural, especially at high speeds. In practice, because your fingers are *following* the tongue, even though you in theory try to make them seal/unseal almost instantaneously with the tongue contact, what actually happens is that they are slightly *behind* the tongue.
Post Edited (2010-01-09 05:31)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sarah Elbaz
Date: 2010-01-09 09:52
And after all -- take it from me -- the secret of clarinet playing is: put it in your mouth, and BLOW THE BLOODY THING!-)
Tony
Anne- take Tony's advice.
It is so right and healthy to use HUMOR to deal with the problems of the clarinet!
Sarah
Post Edited (2010-01-10 14:34)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-01-09 13:15
It's all about coordination at any speed, not so much how you actually stroke the reed, though of course that's very important. Unless you are fingering the next note before the tongue releases from the former note you will sound in between the two notes, fast or slow tempo. As the saying goes, "there's more than one way to skin a cat". I don't know why some people have trouble realizing that just because they were taught a different way to do something, or they themselves do or teach a different method, that someone else's way must be wrong. PLEASE, as I once wrote in an article for the Clarinet Journal, An Opened Mind is a Terrible Thing To Waste. The best way to do anything for you is the way you can make it sound the best. ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2010-01-10 12:15
Katrina wrote:
> In my (much less than your) teaching experience, Tony, the
> middle-of-the-road students I teach need much more reminding on
> the "finger motion needs not be associated with tongue motion"
> than you have the good fortune to have experienced!
>
> My American High School students need this reminder almost once
> a month, and sometimes more frequently. Our music ed system in
> schools (as you may know) focuses on band performance and not
> necessarily effective instrument technique. I have to fight the
> notion that I'm there only to help the kid with their (usually
> easy even for them) band music and instead attempt to make them
> a better clarinet player.
I'm sure you do a very good job reminding them, Katrina.
I suppose that what I've been suggesting here is that there are three systems involved in staccato runs: (1) the blowing system, which is fundamentally driven by a combination of abdominal and back muscles; (2) the tongue; (3) the fingers.
By far the most common difficulty is the relationship between (1) and (2).
I suggested, with others, that idea X: "finger motion needs to be synchronised with tongue motion" is a wrong one. But that's not, in my view, primarily because students then fail to have a proper relationship between (2) and (3).
It's because X tends to lead to an improper relationship BETWEEN (1) AND (2).
When discussion of the understanding of how that happens turns into assertions about the unquestionability of ways of teaching, I get frustrated. I tend to think that teachers' understanding is important in these matters -- like the attitude of Richard Feynman (an American with whom I DO feel presumptuous to compare myself) to the workers at Oak Ridge in the forties; see:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=238693&t=238446&v=t
Feynman was the supreme opponent of the attitude "I teach it like this," because he was promoting actual understanding, which is of course independent of any teaching system.
I applaud Mike's contribution to this thread, as usual.
> Many a day I wish America were more like the UK and the
> continent. Or maybe Venezuela with El sistema instead!
Well, I don't know about that. (Which bit of America, as Lelia might say?-)
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2010-01-11 12:20
This horse died long ago but I was never one to give up on the deceased.
It is merely in the spirit that a methodology may work that I toss out some that have helped me. I prefer to hear some of the ways folks have developed their talents whether it explains the end result or not. For instance Pavarotti once talked about his training at an Italian vocal school where the sheer screaming going on would make a casual listener think the students were crazy and the teachers even more crazy.
And as for the nascent nuclear development program during the war, I read some bizarre stories in a recent book detailing that crazy time where some of the scientists actually took these materials and brought them close together just to get them to "almost" react. This was known as "tickling the tail of the dragon." In one such instance, one fellow went too far and was bathed in a deep blue glow. This was the indication that his body had just absorbed a lethal dose of radiation and he had but a few months more to live.
Why would intelligent people who knew the FINAL result of such foolish daredevil stunts even try this? Perhaps it is just thrill seeking, but I think that there is a visceral need to EXPERIENCE learning something for oneself. And since syncro-staccato never killed anyone (that I know of), I think there is merit in giving it a whirl.
...................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rdc
Date: 2010-01-11 14:42
I have also used Bonade's "syncro-staccato" principle as an exercise to help students who have problems coordinating tongue and fingers in fast staccato passages. I think it is ironic that the exercise accomplishes this coordination by disassociating ("uncoordinating," if you will) the finger movement from the tongue movements-placing the tongue on the reed to stop one note and releasing the tongue from the reed to allow the next note to sound.
Bonade says to change the fingering quickly after the tongue is placed on the reed (and the sound is stopped), but I have added a rhythmic component to the exercise that has helped me and may help others. This component is to change the fingering halfway between the start of one note and the start of the next. For example, if playing the exercise as a tongued quarter note scale, change the fingering on the eighth notes in between. For me, having a specific time to change the fingering helps to keep the finger movement consistently disassociated from the tongue movements. (Another thought: this procedure actually keeps the finger change closer to the stop of one note than the start of the next because no matter how short the staccato note, it still has some length.)
Most of the time, students who try this exercise cannot at first keep the finger movements in between the notes for more than three or four notes before the fingers try to again move with the tongue movement. Persisting until a one-octave scale can be played up and down successfully in this manner is usually all that is needed for the benefit of the exercise to be realized. Increasing the tempo can be done beneficially, and Paul's "eighths at 100 beats per minute" is probably a reasonable upper limit, but speed is not necessary. I find that once the fingers can successfully move between the notes, they will continue to do so automatically at faster tempos. At that point, forget about when the fingers are moving and just do it.
Constant air pressure as if playing legato is assumed and is necessary if this exercise is to work.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2010-01-11 19:55
Back to the original question... Just blowing harder isn't the answer in my mind. It seems the problem here is either too much back pressure during the process which is unlikely(this would indicate "blowing the bloody clarinet too much" or just setting a firmer embouchure during the staccato to stop air loss. It's that simple......firmer embouchure.
I am not a big fan of analysis of finger/air/tongue coordination. Do it slowly then faster in practice. Make sure you lighten up the air speed and articulate a little lighter as you increase the tempo or it might bog you down.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2010-01-11 20:01
I must say that Arnoldstang hit the nail on the head with his post. This guy really knows his stuff. I'm really surprised at the depth of this guys knowledge. Arn you're the best!
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DrH2O
Date: 2010-01-11 20:49
Thanks for all the comments (and the good humor). I discovered that most of the problem was the reed. I started playing Forestone reeds a couple of months ago and it seems that a couple of the reeds aren't entirely flat. If I put them on a glass plate and then press down on the tip of the reed, the butt end comes up off the glass noticably. My cane reeds don't do that. I tried some staccato notes with the cane reed and found little to no air leaking into the clarinet, but with the "bent" Forestone reeds quite a bit a air leaked with the same technique. Two of my 4 Forestone reeds lift noticable and all of them have a shiny texture on the underside near the tip that looks like they recieve some extra (maybe too much) finishing.
Anne
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
