 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: moose6589
Date: 2003-07-23 08:38
Trying to pick out new mouthpiece again, would you say from experience a closed mouthpiece gives a more "classical" sound and an open mouthpiece gives a more "jazzy" sound? I realize that there are multitudes of other factors at work here to determine the tone, but just wondering if from experience people have noticed whether different openings help achieve different types of tone? I'm asking this because I almost exclusively play classical music, yet I am more partial to an open mouthpiece, which seems to be a contradiction if my "theories" are correct. Wouldn't I supposedly be using a "jazzy" sound on classical pieces? Just curious.
Also, another question, my teacher said that crystal mouthpieces tend to be more resistant? Is there any truth/reason to this? At first I thought it was rubbish, but after testing out the Pomarico Emerald vs the Vandoren M15, I've found that the M15 is less resistant, even though it is supposedly more open? Anyone have any experiences with resistance because of crystal?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roger Aldridge
Date: 2003-07-23 12:25
We have to be careful about generalizations. While there are narrow=classical and open=jazz trends, some classical clarinetists use fairly open mouthpieces and not all jazz players use really open pieces.
I've used a range of tip openings over the years for both jazz and classical playing on clarinet and saxophones. My core sound didn't change in going from one tip opening to another. Thus, it's been my experience that your sound -- your tonal conception and style -- is what you bring to your equipment. I think of differences in mouthpieces, reeds, ligatures, and instruments as being the icing on the cake.
Out of curiosity, what type and size of mouthpiece are you using? I'm wondering what you consider to be an open mouthpiece.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gretchen
Date: 2003-07-23 14:45
just a quick question about close mouthpieces while we're on the subject here...(moose 6589 sorry to ask a question on your post)...I bought a somewhat closed mouthpiece last year that was from a zinner blank, and I had an extremely hard time playing a good forte or louder. Was that the particular mouthpiece and how it was faced? or is that a characteristic of most closed mouthpieces, where their dynamic range is more limited because their tip is smaller, not letting as much air through? Just curious. thanks!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2003-07-23 15:58
Pete Fountain, "King" of the New Orleans jazz scene, has been quoted as using a "classical" mpc/reed set-up. He says that his "fat sound" is largely a result of having the "best sound engineer in the business." Others of us have to rely on pure accoustical output of our equipement for this "fat" soloistic jazz sound, which leads to another issue--ensemble versus solo sound.
Years ago, during a techniques class being offered by he local university professor of cello, he was discussing the quality of sound desirable for string quartet playing--which was his specialty--vs the sound used for solo performances. His point was that in the quartet, his goal was to produce a sound with less overtones present in order to avoid intonatinal issues with the upper strings which would result in better total ensemble sound for the entire group. To do this, he intentionaly bowed closer to the fingerboard which produced, by itself, a more subdued, "flat" (not pitch) sound lacking the overtones, but one which ultimately blended more readily with the viola and violin sounds producing a richer ensemble sound. For solo performances, however, he bowed more conventionally between the bridge and fingerboard to produce a sound with more overtone presence and resonance.
My point is that perhaps this is why classical clarinetists prefer the "dark" sound, somewhat lacking in rich overtones but one that blends more effectively for their predominatly ensemble playing, as opposed to the jazz clarinetist who prefers the brighter sound, rich in overtones, for those wailing jazz solos projecting over everyone else in the group.
In my own playing, which includes both classical and jazz, I use a predominately classical mpc/reed set up exclussively. Specifics: Chicago Kaspar #14 w/V12's, 3.5 (on LeBlanc Concertos) or a custom "Glenn Bowen" mpc w/V12's, 4.0 (Buffet R13's) Using a consistant sound for all playing venues works for me, and those that listen.
Bottom line, however, is always--when it comes to "sound", intonation is the most important component!! Hope this helps a bit--good luck.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2003-07-23 17:11
I'll open this thought and let others who know more expound if they like. We focus a lot on tip opening, and it's true . . . that is important. I can play either, but I have to concentrate more with an open mouthpiece to play in tune.
However, there is also the issue of facing length to consider. Now we're into embouchure issues. I simply can't play a long facing length without re-inventing my embouchure. I've got to put much more mouthpiece in my mouth to play one, and I don't really care for that. That being said, they can produce quite a nice sound, and many doublers (bass clarinet, saxes) that are used to a mouthful of mouthpiece, feel right at home with a long facing length. So do many "non-doublers" that either learned that way or have adapted. I believe (distant memory) that I found a long facing length to be capable of greater volume than a 5RV of Greg Smith Ched +1. But I still couldn't outblow the trumpets.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2003-07-23 23:10
" My point is that perhaps this is why classical clarinetists prefer the "dark" sound, somewhat lacking in rich overtones but one that blends more effectively for their predominatly ensemble playing, as opposed to the jazz clarinetist who prefers the brighter sound, rich in overtones, for those wailing jazz solos projecting over everyone else in the group."
Good point - I have often wondered why the classical players prefer one type of tone to the jazz player who generally prefers something more "full".
There is no "normal" tone then is there? It's really what each individual creates on each individual instrument.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: krawfish3x
Date: 2003-07-24 03:15
i think that a lot of jazz players prefer the bright sound is because jazz is energetic and exciting and a dark tone doesnt blend well with that aspect. this is vice versa for classical.
it could also just be a sense of how you play the music because a minor chord may not sound as good with a bright tone as it would with a dark one.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2003-07-24 03:27
Another way to look at it, would be to view it as Stability vs. Flexibility.
Close facings and hard reeds stay very stable and in control--particularly when you have to play with precision in your altissimo. You can exploit your entire range without your airflow getting out of hand. You can also count on more consistent pitch IMO because these setups don't tolerate a lot of foolishness with the embouchure.
Open facings and soft reeds are very inviting to manipulation, including vibrato, tracking pitch by lip, and extreme bending. They also have a reedier sound (which clarinet players seem to hate but listeners seem to love), tend to be very reed-friendly, and allow a lot of airflow.
Reed friendliness and easy responsiveness help a lot with the conversational nature of many jazz pieces. It also helps with pitch because heavy airflow tends to push pitch down, and many doublers use short barrels to keep throat tone pitch up while heavily 'lipping' in other regions of the instrument. A more stable setup would make this more difficult.
The airflow issue is important partly because of the the need for lots of volume in many cases, and partly because so may players double saxophone and want to have a similar feel between the instruments.
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: moose6589
Date: 2003-07-25 05:40
Roger Aldridge: I"m using a B45 as an open mouthpiece and a Pomarico Emerald Bright as the closed mouthpiece.
Here's another question then: wouldn't you want to have maximum projection in a classical orchestra situation that an open mouthpiece would provide? Yet a closed would supposedly give greater stability in pitch and everything else. so what exactly would be best for that situation? and also, why is it that some open mouthpieces are more reed friendly than closed mouthpieces? my b45 plays almost every single reed as a great reed, yet my pomarico emerald only plays one great reed out of an entire box, and this is with the same box of reeds. I'm not sure i would want stability of pitch if it means sacrificing 9 out of 10 reeds. anyone have any ideas on this? thanks.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Pinner
Date: 2003-07-25 07:49
As a dedicated jazz player I can tell you that there is as much variety in the choice of tip openings between jazz players as there is between classical players. I was using a Pomarico diamond for a while with 1 to 1 1/2 reeds. Great woody sound but it was just too hard to persist with. Generally I use a Selmer with an opening of 120. Yamaha has just given me a custom 6CM hard rubber which is also 120 but longer in the curve. Both are perfectly good for jazz playing. The 6cm is supposedly a classical style of mouthpiece and the Selmer an all rounder. The same applies to saxophones on which I also play legit and contemporary. Generally these days there is a preference on tenor towards larger tip openings, using Otto Link as a benchmark most of my colleagues are using 7* and larger up as large as a 10* in a couple fo cases. Coltrane however used no bigger than a 4*. When I use a Link I use a 6* but the majority of the time I use a much more open Berg Larsen but with the same strength reeds as the Link. On alto I favour more open mouthpieces. I am currently using a Beechler Diamond Inlay 7 small chamber as I do a lot of lead playing and it assists with volume. It also plays well soft and I have no trouble with the legit repertoire, no more than normal that is. I personally think it comes down to the tongueing technique you employ. Open mouthpieces allow a bit more flexibility in attack and make slap and anchor tongueing a little easier. There is also the volume question. Some people swear blind that an open tip will almost automatically produce more volume. This is open to debate. One of our previous principal clarinettists in the Sydney Symphony used a very open mouthpiece with Vandoren blue box 1 or 1 1/2 reeds. The current principal uses a closer harder set up. Horses for courses I think.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2003-07-25 17:48
i have 4 mouthpieces that are usable (another 2 are just too terrible).
vandoren B45 (tip 1.19 mm)
pomarico crystal Ruby Mellow (tip 1.09 mm)
pomarico crystal Diamond Mellow (tip 1.25 mm)
pomarico ebony wood #2 (tip 1.25 mm)
the vandorem is ok but not even close to the pomaricos. the pomarico crystal diamond is pretty open, and a little hard to blow, but it has a great sound. the pomarico crystal ruby is my favorite mouthpice. it's more closed then open but it's not really closed. i've never tried any mouthpiece that is even close to this one and i've tried many. it has the most focused sound i know and a more calssical sound i would say but i like it for jazz too. i like the mellower and a little darker sound no matter what i play. the pomarico ebony wood #2 is also great. if i had bought it today, i think i would get the #1 model instead of #2. it's just a little too open for me but it has a sound i think most clarinetists like it as a jazz sound.
that's just my experience, hope it helped.
also i must add that at least 90% of the sound is the player's skill. my sax player friend (he was a clarinetist too a few years ago) tried my clarinet with my favorite mouthpiece and he sounded totally different. not bad, but different.
Post Edited (2003-07-25 18:29)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2003-07-25 18:18
Jazz tone is not easy to define, and I would add also that alot of jazz clarinet players sound jazzy on the most closed facings!
Its also alot about embouchure and approach to sound!
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: moose6589
Date: 2003-07-28 06:21
just wondering about pomaricos: they have bright and mellow versions on their mouthpieces. I've always assumed that that referred to the tone being mellow or bright. However, I recently read, I think on IMS, that mellow works better for chamber music, and bright works better for orchestral/band situations. is this true?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2003-07-28 08:05
i have 2 Bb clarinet poamrico crystal mouthpieces and they are both mellow, but the sound is good for everything!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
