 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: William
Date: 2003-03-14 16:42
The Principal clarinetist (of the regional semi-professional orchestra in which I play Second) is in disagreement with me regarding which is more important: tone quality or volume. She says a beautiful, "centered" sound is most important. He says (me), what good is a "centered" sound if it cannot be heard and contribute to the total orchestral sound--espcially in solo passages? I know that possessing both aspects in your playing is most desirable, but if you had to go with only one, which would you pick--a beautiful, centered sound that is dificult to project, or a sound that is not quite as "beautiful and centered" but has sufficient volume to project with and through the orchestra when needed. Playing perfectly in tune with both options is assumed and is not the issue. Also, I am assuming non-techno enhanced, live accoustical performance in the modern contemporary orchestral setting.
In conjucntion with this call for dicussion, this is my personal delema: I have recently discovered a Buffett clarinet bell that improves the overall "presence" of my A clarinet allowing me more flexability in the total volume department. However, my original Buffet bell plays with a much nicer and richer sound, but restricts my ability to play louder when volume is really needed. Both bells are in tune. (btw, true vintage R13 A, #81XXX)
Also, I am assuming that the mpc/reed/barrel setup is "perfect." Simply, my question is that if given the options of (1) playing louder with more dynamic flexability and musical expression or (2) with a beautiful, "centered" sound that restricts your ability to project when needed, which would you favor, and why? Quality or Quantity.............I know that the ultimate answer is "both", but what if you had to pick just one??
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2003-03-14 17:12
While I'm only a college student, here's my opinion on the subject. I would go for the bell with more dynamic expression. Here's my reasons.
A) "Tone" is a very subjective thing. You may think it provides less tone, while others may think that it's just as well, or perhaps even better.
B) I personally think that dynamic expression is a very important part of tone. I feel, even though you're second clarinet, your dynamic expression is a HUGE part of the music. You want to be sure that you can really "sing" on a certain note, and that while the other one may have let you do this, this new bell would allow more flexibility which will provide a more dramatic changes in your crescendos, fortes, or whatever you use it for.
C) As many people have said, a new mouthpiece will make you sound great for a few weeks, but eventually you'll always return to "your" sound. I assume the same with the bell. This bell, while you may think it comprimises your tone for volume, eventually, you'll get used to it and your embouchre will change subtly and slowly to acquire the same tone you had with the old bell.
That's my thoughts.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Synonymous Botch
Date: 2003-03-14 22:08
Before you work your knickers into a bunch, do a test....
Have someone listen to you play with each bell, and WITHOUT the bell.
If the audience can't hear it, you're spinning gears there Olly.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2003-03-14 22:51
A centered tone will naturally project more beautifully than any 'loud' sound will. It's just a generally known factor. A centered tone will also blend better. Afterall, it's not what YOU hear coming from the instrument, it's what the audience hears, which by the time it hits their ears, is different to what you hear. Consider this.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dfh
Date: 2003-03-15 03:05
I am in complete agreement with Morrigan! If a sound isn't centered, it will not project, no matter how much air you send through the horn. Although, a beautiful centered sound with no dynamic range will lend to a nice, but perhaps boring performance.
dfh
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Pinner
Date: 2003-03-15 03:24
Difficult question. I play a lot of accoustic clarinet and saxophone in non orchestral settings, mainly traditional jazz and folk music. I am in some ways lucky because I have had no trouble with volume and projection. I find that close up to my own ears my tone sounds more airy than it is at a distance. I find the airiness is a necessary evil. The sort of tone I am after is vastly different from an orchestral player but it doesn't mean that I neglect that aspect of my playing the tactics are just a little different. I think that there is a compromise between "quantity and quality" that needs to be reached regardless of the style you are playing in. I play legit bassoon so I know what you are going through. I have 2 crooks one of which is great for solo and chamber music and dreadful in a orchestra, the other is the opposite and allows a good deal more projection but the tone is very bright.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2003-03-15 14:17
A well focused and in tune sound will certainly project far better than a loose or shrill flubby airy sound with no centre. In fact, most players tend to spend alot of time emphisizing volume. Be careful to play with a great sound no matter the volume.
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
