 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Bob Schmedake
Date: 2002-07-19 14:55
Up until last week, it has been 27 years since I played the clarinet. Yesterday, I started to play a Jazz Fake version of Stormy Weather in A-major and the first note on the sheet is a B-sharp. I didn't remember there being a B-sharp. Is this supposed to be a C natural?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2002-07-19 15:05
Yes, it is C natural.
But, given that A# is Bb, why isn't B# then Cb? And why are there sharps and flats in a whole tone scale? Grades will be posted by student number. ;^)
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Poulsen
Date: 2002-07-19 16:03
Jack's post reminds me of a joke I heard ages ago in junior high band. It seems that on a certain London bus route the double-deckers with the open upper levels had to go under a particularly low bridge. To warn the passengers of the danger, a sign was posted on the bridge: C# or Bb.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vytas
Date: 2002-07-19 16:08
jnk wrote:
>why isn't B# then Cb?<
You're right and wrong at the same time. How is that possible?
"B" in European terminology means "B flat" as opposed to "H" which is "B" natural.
B# = Cb – YES! (europe C,D,E,F,G,A,H,C)
B# = Cb – No! (US &...C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C)......V
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: javier garcia
Date: 2002-07-19 16:27
if you play the C# mayor scale, you have the B# and the E#, to save the diatonic passage.
if you play the Gb mayor scale, you have Cb...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Arney
Date: 2002-07-19 20:57
First of all, Bob Schmedake, welcome home. You have come to the right place. Why did you stay away so long? Don't be bashful, you wouldn't believe some of the stories some of these "older geezers" tell.
Secondly, Don, my older Brit friends would say I was as "dim as a Toc H Lamp", but I don't get the joke about the Bus Route. Being as thick as a plank I need a little nudge. Break it to me gently.
Bob A
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Todd W.
Date: 2002-07-19 22:08
Bob A --
Not to keep you in suspense in case Don has left for the weekend:
If I'm sitting on the top, open deck of that double-decker bus, and we are approaching that low bridge, I had better C# (see sharp) and notice that we are about to go under that bridge, or I will Bb (be flat) -- or at least a little shorter than I was.
Todd W.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Todd W.
Date: 2002-07-19 23:40
Bob --
Yowch! Hopefully not as bad as the one Dennis Hopper suffered in "Speed".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2002-07-22 18:38
The language of music, as with any other, is full of compromises and liberties. There is actually a difference of a couple ninths of a tone between B# and Cb. Many string players find this out at a very early age. In western music culture we've grown accustomed to meeting in the middle (more or less) and, for practical purposes and to keep peace among the wind instrument players in the family, we're happier that way
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Kelly - Australia
Date: 2002-07-25 07:39
Not a concern for me, I'm self taught and play mainly by ear on a Bb instrument . When I do need to read something I look for the piano version of a piece [I'm not a classical player!] and read from it. I call my notes by concert pitch [ie] C for me is, register key open + 3 fingers LH + 3 fingers RH - strange but true!
I am yet to figure out why our musical forbears did not organise the whole business like this in the first instance. I can see the logic in having a multiplicity of clarinets [and other horns] to cover different ranges of the scale, but can't see the logic in having C [for example] on the piano sounding different to C on the clarinet. For the classical player when he/she plays C [on a Bb instrument - LH 1,2,3 & RH 1,2,3, + pinky] it sounds like piano Bb or A#, if you like. Can't see why it's not jolly well called Bb and be done with it.
Not being trained classically - I may be missing something here - but perhaps someone may be kind enough to explain in non-technical terms. Many jazz players do it this way - it just seems simpler and more logical.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Todd W.
Date: 2002-07-25 20:39
John Kelly --
I don't have an historical answer for you as to how and why the system developed as it did, but I have a couple of thoughts as to why we don't change it.
When the typewriter was invented, the (English language) keyboard layout was purposely made less efficient than it could be because the manufacturers were concerned that typists would otherwise type too quickly for the mechanism to respond and thus cause jams. As more efficient typewriters were developed, and of course, now computers, keyboard layouts could be redesigned for greater typing efficiency. (One of the better systems, apparently, is named after the inventor, Dvorak. I believe he is a relative of the composer.) However, imagine how complex it would be to make the switch now that there are countless people using the existing system. Plus you have the strongest force in the universe -- inertia -- working against the change. Similar problems (and the same force) would be encountered in switching fingering terminology for clarinet (and other transposing instruments). And what about all the existing scores with the "old" clarinet parts? Would they then have to be transposed by those using the "new" fingering system?
More to the point, though, when we are considering the clarinet, is that there are still in common use (particularly in orchestras) clarinets in keys other than Bb, namely the A clarinet and the Eb clarinet. (Not to mention the less commonly found parts for D clarinet and the continued production of C clarinets.) With the system now in use, the fingerings for all of these clarinets are basically the same. If we changed to a "concert" key system of fingering, players would have to learn a different set of fingerings for each instrument (Bb, A, Eb, etc.). This disadvantage would outweigh (in my opinion) the advantage of not having to transpose (in one's head or by writing them out) concert key parts.
For your use, have you considered getting a C clarinet? Of course, then you would have to "re-learn" your fingerings. What we need is a clarinet "capo". :+))
I hope this has made some sense.
Todd W
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Kelly - Australia
Date: 2002-07-26 00:00
Thanks Todd - your keyboard analogy was quite informative although I was of the understanding that the QWERTY keyboard was developed because it places those commonly used keys within easy reach of the typist/e's fingers.
As for my using other pitch clarinets - I have a C [not in working order] and an A which I occasionally use to test myself when playing in Bb [to records of course!]. I can see that a classical orchestral player would find these of use particularly if he/she has to read a score in A - try doing that on a Bb - it just makes sense to have a bag full of horns! I guess that the jazz scene is so different to classical that if the clarinet player in the band pulled out a different horn for different keys it would be considered that he could not play his instrument properly!
I was listening to some of my collection last night and those big bands of 30s 40s 50s and the like arranged scores of popular and original numbers and often went through 2 or 3 or 4 keys changes in 2 or 3 minutes often at a rapid tempo and those guys just HAD to be able to play in those other keys on one horn as there was no time to pick up another. I have dozens of tracks where multiple key changes or just plain DIFFICULT keys were used to accomodate a STAR soloist usually a singer, who just preferred singing Night & Day in D or E [concert that is]!
A good jazz player will aspire to do it ALL on the one instrument - besides it's less to carry around!
Thanks for the feedback though.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-07-26 00:15
Todd W. wrote:
>
> John Kelly --
> When the typewriter was invented, the (English language)
> keyboard layout was purposely made less efficient than it could
> be because the manufacturers were concerned that typists would
> otherwise type too quickly for the mechanism to respond and
> thus cause jams.
That, of course, is an urban myth.
The first keysboards were laid out alphabetically, and commonly used sequences were near each other and caused the keys to jam. John Sholes designed the Qwerty keyboard to make the commonly used in succession further apart, to eliminate the jams. It was not made to slow down the typist, but to eliminate the jams by spreading out the letters. In fact, typing speeds <b>increased</b> when the Qwerty keyboard was introduced.
See http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Hardware/Peripherals/Keyboards/Qwerty/ for some interesting pages.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Todd W.
Date: 2002-07-26 20:20
Mark C. --
Thanks for the correction to my "type-o". A reminder to be cautious about "common knowledge." Although the various sources on the site you cite have slightly differing explanations, the consensus seems to be that the QWERTY keyboard was indeed designed to change the mechanical setup of the machine to prevent jams caused by the first keyboard setup. (Still, of course, not designed for the typist's greatest efficiency.)
Urban myths . . . I was just this morning perusing the wonderful snopes.com site that tries to verify or debunk various myths/media inaccuracies/stories about celebrities/etc.
John --
I guess I didn't make myself clear on the "other" clarinets. I didn't mean to suggest that one should change to a different clarinet every time the music changed keys. What I meant was that composers (usually "classical") have written parts specifying the use of those other clarinets and that when the player picks up, say, the A clarinet to play such a part, s/he can use the same fingerings for the written note that s/he uses on the Bb clarinet. A great convenience. If the fingerings for each instrument were changed to "concert" pitch, each clarinet (Bb, A, Eb) would have different fingerings for that same note.
Todd W
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
