 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Krisat
Date: 2003-12-06 03:11
I have to play the song "Bugle Call Rag" for my jazz band concert. I'm pretty good at the song, however I don't think my clarinet sounds "jazzy" enough, its more of a mellow sound no matter what I do. Any suggestions for reeds, etc. to make it sound brighter? Also, switching to a softer reed (currently a Mitchell Lurie 4.5) isn't an option because I have to be able to go from a high A, to the octave A above it! Thanks, and sorry if something like this has been discussed before.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2003-12-06 06:36
All the 'jazz' players, as well as "legit" players I've ever known or heard via recordings all have their very own distinctive sound, however subtle that may be. No one else sounds just like you, nor will you ever sound like someone else, no matter what you try to do about it. Just be you, have fun with it and... Let 'Er Rip!!!
Artie Shaw comes to mind. The most upbeat, bright, jazzy numbers he performed still had that underlying mellow quality that gave enormous energy and substance to what might otherwise be quite ordinary (even frivolous) tunes.
I would have suggested a slightly softer reed but I'll take that back, since that's not an option for you and you know it better than anyone else. You should be fine just the way you are. Personally, I wouldn't change anything. Whatever is most comfortable for you is the way to go - trust me 
Happy Tootin' !
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jeff Forman
Date: 2003-12-06 09:54
You might try a Van Doren 5JB mouthpiece. It's touted as the quintessential jazz plaer's mouthpiece. My teacher hates it when I use it because it definitely has the jazzy, kazoo-like sound, and he is a straight up classical guy. It's a much easier blow than the M13 I use regularly, and I get the jazz tone, as advertised.
You can''t go much more than a number 3 reed with that mp, but I believe it will still let you get that high note. I read somewhere that Benny Goodman used 2.5 reeds and he certainly hit all the highs.
Ron B has point in saying that you are going to sound like you pretty much no matter what you do. I believe a lot of it has to do with the way you individually attack, how focused your embouchure is, how tight your fingering is, your way of syncopating and/or phrasing runs, etc. But minor equipment tweaking might just give you the subtle change you are looking for.
Good luck,
Jeff
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2003-12-06 11:58
Perhaps it is the stiffer reed that is at the heart of your problem. I'm not convinced that one needs reeds stiffer than 2 1/2 to reach the rare air....given the right mp and embochure.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: paulwl
Date: 2003-12-06 14:15
Yes...Playing jazz on a 4 1/2 reed is like dancing the Lindy Hop in a body cast!
The clarinet is one instrument that can work nicely in jazz with a more-or-less straight tone. BG and Shaw actually had fairly "legit" sounds. (Especially Shaw!)They inflected with pitch bends and various speeds of vibrato. But the basic tone was very correct, although brighter than accepted classical tone today, due in part to the big bore horns used then.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ken
Date: 2003-12-06 19:16
For now, until you achieve your ideal concept and application of what you consider your utopian "jazz" sound, your natural sound is what it is and that is sufficient. When playing the swing, there is absolutely nothing unmusical having a more unassuming "mellow" tone. If I had to guess, I suspect "projecting" is more the central issue, not necessarily a brighter "jazzier" sounding tone. If it was me, I wouldn't make any sudden "hard" equipment changes ... there's no need to re-invent the wheel here, besides the more plumbing can stop up the drain that much quicker. For instance, a mpc change could produce short term control ... an annoyance you don't have the time or inkling to deal with. If you ultimately decide being more "stylistically authentic" means "brighter" you could:
1) Resurrect a good older, edgier reed from your over the hill pile, one that is preferably softer at least 1-strength plus.
2) Select one of your best reeds that your willing to sacrifice and sand it down to desired softness (I would shave the vamp only tip to heal, if it's a good broken in/performance reed it's already well balanced)
3) Pick up a cheap box of Regular Ricos, 1 to 2 strengths softer ... they generally make great offensive honkers.
Other quick fixes are intentionally blowing with a looser, drop jaw, less focused (or what I call chewing bubble gum) embouchure. If you're applying even a tight vibrato (and you should be) your chops are already open. Don't be shy about playing out and leading the section/band, that alone will improve projection. Hey, as long as you play controlled and reasonably in tune it's a swing standard ... the whole band is probably blasting away anyway.
Have fun or don't even bother! v/r Ken
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stickpoet
Date: 2003-12-06 19:49
My two cent's worth:
As fah as I'm concerned
More open mouthpiece is good for mah jazzy sound
'Cause it's easy, mucho easy, to manipulate the tune
Without realy altering the pitch in a nasty way, ya know
Although sometimes, just sometimes, it's so cool doing that
I highly recommend open plus mouthpiece for jazz sound
For jazz sound and tune mah most favorite is Pomarico Diamond
Respectfully followed by Pete Fountain
With kinda soft reed, but mind you, not Benny-Goodman-thin
I never use those stuffy closed mouthpiece playing jazz
With the potato-dropping stiff and round sounding reed
But again, it's me
You is different from me, I reckon
With Fondness, Ryan...
Post Edited (2003-12-06 19:55)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: john gibson
Date: 2003-12-06 21:11
The sound of Jazz comes not from the reed or the mouthpiece or the instrument of choice but.....from life's experience. Same with classical, Rock,
Mambo, Hip Hop, JuJuBee....etc. You get the picture? You play what you feel and that's JAZZ!!!!!!!!!1
JG
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Pinner
Date: 2003-12-06 22:43
Is it sound you are talking about or approach? I doubt whether there is a definitive jazz sound. There is little comparison between Barney Bigard and Artie Shaw in this regard. If you want a brighter sound try a thicker blank reed such as a V12 or Grand Concert thick blank.
If you a truly playing jazz you have some poetic licence, if you don't want to, or can't, play an altissimo A play something else.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: paulwl
Date: 2003-12-07 00:37
Alt A isn't too hard to learn. Just finger alt E and eeeee it on up there!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: pplateau
Date: 2014-02-21 00:17
I'm looking to play louder with a faux Dixie group: trumpets, a sax ?, drums, etc. they are always asking for louder from me. I play a closed tip mp and have a very good tone, I'm told; should I try an open tip maybe the VD JBL? jazz mp? what think?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2014-02-21 05:37
I believe that a close tip mouthpiece with slightly lighter reed than "expected", will give a nice palette of colors, and also be able to cut through when needed.
For what it's worth, when I play in dixie type scenarios (not often, and not well yet, but I'm getting better), my soft-side reed and mouthpiece are clearly heard from an audience perspective unless the band is DELIBERATELY trying to force me out.
Alexi
Hmmmm.......is that why they're always playing the background so loud during my solo sections
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cyclopathic
Date: 2014-02-21 15:28
pplateau
> I'm looking to play louder with a faux Dixie group: trumpets, a sax ?, drums,
> etc. they are always asking for louder from me. I play a closed tip mp and
> have a very good tone, I'm told; should I try an open tip maybe the VD JBL?
> jazz mp? what think?
yes, this is worth trying.. the same MPC with more open facing (if available) and softer reed will give you more volume w/o changing tone too much.
also is miking an option?
Post Edited (2014-02-22 14:04)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-02-21 17:00
A jazz sound is not so much about the mouthpiece as it is about phrasing, what you choose to play, developing skills at playing arpeggios, using tritone subs, and developing your ear for the changes (if you can't learn to hear the changes then you'll have to memorize them).
Any mouthpiece will do the job. If you don't play the right riffs, changes, and progressions, no one who loves jazz will mistake you for a jazz player no matter what MP you use.
Learn this in all the common keys: (play them up from the bottom, up from the top down, backwards from the top, backwards ascending from the bottom).
CEGB
DFAC
EGBD
FACE
GBDF (tritone sub is Db7th)
ACEG
BDFA
They represent every chord you will use/need in whatever key you're playing in.
P.S. I'm not near an instrument. I may have made a mistake or two.
bruno>
Oh yeah - if you're just doing that one tune - Bugle Call Rag - just do what the old jazz players used to do; stick a small piece of used chewing gum inside your mouthpiece on the baffle. That'll make you feared and respected.
Post Edited (2014-02-21 22:04)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2014-02-22 00:05
Quote:
A jazz sound is not so much about the mouthpiece as it is about phrasing, what you choose to play, developing skills at playing arpeggios, using tritone subs, and developing your ear for the changes (if you can't learn to hear the changes then you'll have to memorize them).
Any mouthpiece will do the job. If you don't play the right riffs, changes, and progressions, no one who loves jazz will mistake you for a jazz player no matter what MP you use.
Learn this in all the common keys: (play them up from the bottom, up from the top down, backwards from the top, backwards ascending from the bottom).
CEGB
DFAC
EGBD
FACE
GBDF (tritone sub is Db7th)
ACEG
BDFA
They represent every chord you will use/need in whatever key you're playing in.
I don't have time to thoroughly pick this post apart, but here's a few issues I have with it:
First, your list of seventh chords does not "represent every chord you will use/need;" it represents many of the chords that are used in jazz.
Secondly, correct voice-leading and playing the changes are interdependent. I don't really care if someone can play a tri-tone substitution if their voice-leading is poor. In fact, being able to play chord substitutions would be very, very, very far down on my "to do" list for a beginning improviser. Moreover, why would someone even want to play substitutions on a big-band swing-era tune?
Anyways, to return to the point: although being able to play chords is a necessary skill, being able to approach and resolve those chords is equally important. I think it's a mistake to stress the importance of chords and arpeggios as an abstraction (such as, learn these seventh chords in every key). What would be a better exercise is to play ii7 V7 I in every key with correct voice-leading (i.e. sevenths resolving downward, leading tone upward, etc). What would be an even better exercise is to listen to great player x,y, or z play a ii7 V7, transcribe the passage, and learn that in every key.
These exercises, at the least, allow students to practice outlining chords in the sort of syntactic order in which they appear in tunes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-02-22 03:07
Lee Konitz taught this concept to me, and sorry for you, it's valid.
I'm not going to list all the conceptual mistakes you made. I wasn't writing a book on chord structures and their resolution.
I will just remind readers that your quote of my sentence "They represent every chord you will use/need IN WHATEVER KEY YOU'RE PLAYING IN." conveniently left out the last part of the sentence so that it becomes untrue.
However, it IS true. We're speaking of jazz and pop standards, and in those contexts the chords I have listed - one on each note of the key center's scale represent all the chords necessary in a jazz line or pop-standard melody IN THAT KEY.
How to resolve them is another topic entirely.
B>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2014-02-22 05:14
Quote:
Lee Konitz taught this concept to me, and sorry for you, it's valid.
I'm not going to list all the conceptual mistakes you made. I wasn't writing a book on chord structures and their resolution.
I will just remind readers that your quote of my sentence "They represent every chord you will use/need IN WHATEVER KEY YOU'RE PLAYING IN." conveniently left out the last part of the sentence so that it becomes untrue.
However, it IS true. We're speaking of jazz and pop standards, and in those contexts the chords I have listed - one on each note of the key center's scale represent all the chords necessary in a jazz line or pop-standard melody IN THAT KEY.
How to resolve them is another topic entirely.
Firstly, your sentence "they represent every chord..." is untrue in its entirety, unless you don't want to consider augmented triads, minor triads with major sevenths and any sonority with a 9th, 11th, or 13th to be a chord. So no, your list does not represent "every chord you will use/need IN WHATEVER KEY YOU'RE PLAYING IN."
Secondly, how to resolve chords is not another topic entirely, which is why theory textbooks deal with a chord and its voice-leading in the same section. Jazz harmony is primarily functional, and if you don't understand how a chord operates in the progression and how it arises via voice-leading, you will run into issues.
Thirdly, I know that you weren't trying to write a book on chord structures: you were giving rather poor advice to a beginning jazz student. It is much more important (in my opinion) for a beginner to listen to players and build a basic vocabulary than to learn tri-tone substitutions. I happen to love Lee Konitz's playing, and I've transcribed some of his solos (his album Motion is one of my favorites). At any rate, I remember reading an interview where Lee outlines his approach to improvisation: he begins by embellishing a melody or tune with passing-tones, neighbor-tones, etc and gradually adds more complex ornamentation. He says that this sort of practice (playing tunes solo) and listening to players is much more beneficial than drilling scales and arpeggios.
Post Edited (2014-02-22 11:10)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2014-02-22 13:16
"Instead of all that theory, why don't you teachers start by telling your students to just try to play something cool sounding?" Chick Corea.
(We've got generations of dudes with diplomas in jazz studies who don't know this yet. And no, "sheets of scales" [sic] isn't the least bit cool sounding anymore. Even Trane said that was a transitional bit of study for him--though so many of his followers have made careers off it.)
The Lee Konitz 'embellishment to variation to development' is not only very smart, IMO, it's a thumbnail of jazz history. Buster Bailey once said that "embellishment" was the word used in earlier jazz--not a concept of soloing as we consider it now.
All the talk of voice leading, scales chords...well, it's all good, and necessary, but there are many ways to approach jazz. One is dominantly cerebral and visual, another intuitive and aural--and we all have a mix of talent in those areas. While my own playing is certainly aware of voice leading, and while I am vaguely conscious of the theory behind what I do when I'm dong it, I didn't learn voicing by theory--I learned it through the natural tensions of the ear--and no book with charts and diagrams ever did more for me than confuse the matter (and I have a bachelors and masters in clarinet performance and music history, respectively). I firmly believe music stands should be banished from all small group jazz for at least a decade.
Jazz is like mountain climbing. The steeper you climb, the more you have to use your arms, legs, maybe even your teeth to hold the grappling equipment for a moment. Use all you've been given: your intellect, your ear, your heart, your soul. Jazz transforms YOU, you don't learn IT. Let it in, and let it out by any means necessary. Mostly, live it. Be a beautiful cat. Learn everything and forget the rest [sic]. (You'll understand that if you get there).
Eric
PS. Needless to say, this is a virtually useless post for a beginner--it was more a musing on the Bruno/brycon posts before it.
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2014-02-22 16:59
Great post, Eric!
I completely agree on the importance of an aural education, which is why I had such an issue with the advice of "learn these chords and have at it." Wish I would have just stated the point as simply as you did.
Anywho, I also initially learned voice-leading by ear- Bird, for example, was pretty strict about resolving the b9 of a dominant to the 5th of the following minor triad. For me (and for most single-line melodic instrument players I think), the way to move from chord to chord is just as important as playing the changes. If, for instance, you leap from the 7th of a dominant chord to the root of the following tonic chord, you were not playing a true dominant chord. You could learn this from a theory textbook, or you can listen to the masters play ii V I's and figure out what they're doing. For a beginner, who perhaps doesn't have Bird's ears, his practice regimen, or his opportunity to sit in with a band every night of the week, stressing chords in the abstraction without tying it to the aural experience of music making can be counterproductive.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2014-02-22 18:20
You know I dig your posts, brycon. I think we have similar understandings of music, though I'm fairly sure you have more talent and affinity for theoretical analysis than I do. At my core, I'm an aural blues player (with all that entails--including emphasis on range and timbral language)--even my abstractions tend to follow the contours of blues abstraction. I'm more likely, for instance, to place myself in a continuum that runs Bechet--Ellington--Monk--Ornette, while others might find themselves more comfortable in a different chronology. (I've known musicians who heard themselves much more in a Lennie Tristano--Miles/Gil Evans--Bill Evans continuum, which can be very far from my way of going about music--I think we all need to know who we are before we can make progress).
I get the sense you learned the theory of what Bird was doing after you already knew it aurally (and practically). If that's true, it's what I experienced with Monk once--I was thrilled when I learned he spelled his chords more the way I did, rather than the way the second generation of bop players renamed them. While seemingly a small matter, it speaks to how Monk heard what he was doing.
A few years back, when I decided to abandon all classical performance and focus solely on jazz, I asked a friend to give a theoretical outline of how to go about filling in my jazz theory gaps--a shortcut through the verbiage of jazz method texts. (He sometimes posts here so if he's reading, might recognize this conversation). This cat is very solid on theory--like you he's peered deeply enough into it to know how inexact it can be, but also appreciate it's complex depths. Well, he gave me an outline of basics as he saw them, and I remember being shocked..."but I know all this!" I realized. Well, yeah...that's the point. Get on with it--open your ears, you can fly (to misquote Chick).
Final ramble: I went to college with Jimmy Greene (who is in many ways the definition of a beautiful cat). I asked him around the same time--about four or five years ago--what he would recommend, regarding practical theory. He said "Whatever you do, don't forget that jazz is an oral tradition, best learned aurally." Sound advice.
Eric
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Matt74
Date: 2014-02-24 01:52
This is an ancient thread, but since it popped up...
Five quick and easy ways to a Jazz clarinet sound (I should charge for this):
First: Spend 15 minutes on youtube listening to early and big band Jazz. Start with anything Benny Goodman, Artie Shaw: Begin the Beguine, and Fats Waller: Louisana Fairy Tale.
Then do the following:
1. Lots of vibrato.
2. Use more lip support than usual.
3. Practice pitch bends.
4. "Pop" when going from notes with more fingers down to less fingers down, or from lower to higher.
5. Use the third register.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
