 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Phur
Date: 2003-10-04 12:26
I have been teaching Clarinet nearly twenty years. Have played at a decent level in shows, orchestras etc. I have given chamber music recitals and studied with a number of top Clarinet players.
Sorry to blow my own horn. But what follows next is slightly horrifying.
A friend of mine has his own recording studio. He asked me to come over and play some parts on a recording. After we finished we were messing around when I decided to play with the mouthpiece upside down. After a few minutes of initial discomfort I found I could produce the same tone as when I have it the right way up. (I don't know what this says about my initial tone) This was recorded and the results visually displayed. In fact upside down produced a slightly richer array of harmonics.
What does this say about the importance of emboucure? Should I now commit Clarinet heresy and recomend this new emboucure to others. P.S. I never do it (the upside down emboucure) in public due to the large amout of mirth it generates.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2003-10-04 13:02
Was the reed in the "normal" position resting on your bottom lip and in the "inverted" position touching your teeth? If so, I believe the harmonic difference could easily be explained.
IMO, the "softer" lip dampens upper partial harmonics and the "harder" teeth reed support will actually enhance harmonic output.
That being said, another topic could be brought up. Perhaps entitled: "Unusual playing positions".
I personally think there is no right or wrong here. I've seen some players with the clarinet in the right side of their mouth; some who play with the instrument perfectly vertical to their body; etc., etc.
Why not with the mpc upside down?
Dizzy Gilespie (spelling?) certainly didn't play a "normal" looking horn in a "normallY" accepted manner. He was innovative. He thought "outside of the box".
I'm pretty sure I wouldn't recommend the "upside down" position to new students. But, at the same time, I would try to enliven their curiousity as to innovative and creative playing techniques.
Who knows??? Perhaps the "upside down" position would help those with "bitiing" problems. (I've read where the double-lip position is helpful with this problem.)
Just my 2 cents worth.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2003-10-04 14:04
I recall a well-known pic in Grove's Dictionary of an 1800's cl'ist playing with reed on top, and I believe some text discussion of the two embouchures. On back, a student came to me playing "on top", I was amazed that she did reasonably well, tried it myself, have bad teeth formation, didn't work for me. I suggested she try the reed-on-bottom emb, she improved. Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2003-10-04 16:19
This position was the accepted norm in Italy in the late 1800s.
Emigrating musicians had to re-learn another position when they came here.
AS
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John O'Janpa
Date: 2003-10-04 17:40
OK - you got me. I went and tried playing with the mouthpiece upside down.
While the tone produced was acceptable, I was unable to tongue notes. They must have played legato only in late 1800s Italy.
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2003-10-04 20:50
The reed-upwards position was the accepted position everywhere in the early years of the clarinet. Stadler is thought to have played reed-downwards, but reed-downwards was adopted in the Paris Conservatoire as late as 1831. Articulation when playing reed-upwards involved the chest and throat as well as the tongue.
(Source: Cambridge Companion to the Clarinet, pages 140-141.)
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
