 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Vick
Date: 2004-04-09 06:30
I have been wondering if any of you know any tips on how not to get undertones when tonguing staccato notes in the higher register? I have been having problems playing A Midsummer’s Night Dream. It usually depends on the reed that I have, but 50% of the time, I do get undertones with bad reeds. Any remedies that you guys have? I would appreciate it! Thanks.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2004-04-09 13:45
My recommendation is a good airstream and I discovered a good mouthpeice makes a WORLD of difference. I had pretty uncontrollable undertones on my gigliotti P in the higher clarion/altissimo notes until Dave S. refaced it. Then they magically dissappeared! And I don't believe my Greg Smith knows the meaning of the word "Undertone".
I don't know what you are using for a mouthpiece, but sometimes the problem JUST ISN'T YOU! Don't rule out the possibility.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vick
Date: 2004-04-09 16:33
I actually have a pretty good mouthpiece! It's Bay H3, MOM. When I first got it, it played beautifully. Maybe I did something to it? My friend has the same mouthpiece, but her's seems to play better than mine....so I don't know.....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: OpusII
Date: 2004-04-09 17:27
Vick,
How long do you play this mouthpiece? The tip will wear out after 3 years if you play very much! You will then have probably difficulty in finding a good reed and playing the high notes...
Eddy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2004-04-09 17:59
Eddy,
I'm curious about the phenomenon you describe about a mouthpiece tip wearing out after three years of steady playing -- what do you think causes this? Erosion from air moving past the tip? Impact of the reed slapping against the tip? (These are rhetorical questions --- I don't believe this problem exists --- if the tip is wearing, it's probably due to abuse or repeated swabbing with a rough material, that sort of thing. Please correct me if I'm wrong.) A mouthpiece should last for decades if properly cared for.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2004-04-10 12:33
Quote:
I actually have a pretty good mouthpiece! It's Bay H3, MOM. When I first got it, it played beautifully. Maybe I did something to it? My friend has the same mouthpiece, but her's seems to play better than mine....so I don't know..... Well Bay's are handfinished so it's IMPOSSIBLE to have the same exact finish on them. Very close, yes. But the exact same? Not gonna happen. Maybe you can contact Mr. Bay and ask if he knows whether this could be a mouthpiece problem and if yours might be 'touched up' or not. Describe to him how another of his mouthpiece's doesn't seem to have this problem so you suspect it might be YOUR mouthpiece. Can't hurt to ask, right?
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-04-10 15:09
Undertones (grunting) are usually related to improper air speed and support. Faster air will most likely solve the problem.
Undertones (specifically on the Buffet A clarinet) can also be relieved by a change or alteration to the register key vent tube. A slightly shorter tube often makes a big difference in the response of the clarion register...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ben
Date: 2004-04-10 15:51
Don't play on bad reeds....use more presure downward with your top li, to prevent over clamping off the vibrations in the reed....also try having the tounge arched a little higher in your mouth, like saying the word 'teeth'.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ginny
Date: 2004-04-10 19:55
I am learning to tongue on the notes up to G in higher register. High tongue placement seems to be very related, and this naturally increases the air speed. When I get it clean it seems to hinge on this not on the particular reed.
In fact last week I noticed all my reeds were good!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: OpusII
Date: 2004-04-10 22:10
Quote:
I'm curious about the phenomenon you describe about a mouthpiece tip wearing out after three years of steady playing -- what do you think causes this? Erosion from air moving past the tip? Impact of the reed slapping against the tip? (These are rhetorical questions --- I don't believe this problem exists --- if the tip is wearing, it's probably due to abuse or repeated swabbing with a rough material, that sort of thing. Please correct me if I'm wrong.) A mouthpiece should last for decades if properly cared for.
David,
Repeated swapping is indeed the worst thing that you could do with your mouthpiece
But I’ve had the same problem with my mouthpiece, it played beautiful for about 4 years and after that time I had sharp high notes and it was difficult finding a good reed….
I contacted Dutch mouthpiece maker who sells the brand Viotto and they explained to me that the vibration of the reed also wears the mouthpiece every time that it’s slapping against the tip.
Eddy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2004-04-10 22:15
"I contacted Dutch mouthpiece maker who sells the brand Viotto and they explained to me that the vibration of the reed also wears the mouthpiece every time that it’s slapping against the tip"
Eddy- Don't you think Bas de Jong might tell you anything to try to sell you a new mouthpiece?!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: OpusII
Date: 2004-04-10 22:26
Maybe he did Liquorice... but I’ve compared the same mouthpiece that a friend of my was playing (Viotto N1+2) and the tip wasn't the same size as the tip from my mouthpiece. So I have to say that I believe it, i can't explain it els (i didn't swab the mouthpiece very much). I ordered a new one and my problems where gone.
PS it's not that i'm promoting their brand, because i'm currently not a Viotto player anymore
Eddy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-04-11 00:09
OpusII wrote:
> Maybe he did Liquorice... but I’ve compared the same
> mouthpiece that a friend of my was playing (Viotto N1+2) and
> the tip wasn't the same size as the tip from my mouthpiece.
Mouthpieces are notorious for being of differing proportions between the exact same model even when new, and of course hand-finished ones by definition would be different.
Not to say that there isn't any wearing - in fact there must be some. I don't know the degree, however - someone whould have to take precise measurements when new and compare to sometime later.
Some wear might actually improve some mouthpieces, too ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2004-04-11 08:26
Eddy wrote: "I’ve compared the same mouthpiece that a friend of my was playing (Viotto N1+2) and the tip wasn't the same size as the tip from my mouthpiece"
Eddy- how did you compare the tips? Did you measure them? Play testing them isn't a way of comparing them. Viotto only refaces existing mouthpieces, so internal differences in the chamber could make a huge difference.
Mark- Viotto's mouthpieces aren't hand finished- all his work is done by machine, with a laser measuring system.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vick
Date: 2004-04-12 05:10
Hey guys, just to let you know...I've gotten better at the whole thing. I wasn't using fast enough air. It sounded beautiful. Thanks to all of you! I just needed to hear that I needed more air, even though I knew...just being lazy.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Grabnerwg
Date: 2004-04-12 19:08
Some mouthpiece FACTS:
Good hard rubber mouthpieces do not wear out in three years unless they are mis-handled.
No two hard rubber mouthpieces are or can be exactly the same. They are rubber, not steel. I don't care if you are using hand methods or lasers, the material gives a bit as it is worked. No two mouthpieces have exactly the same density.
Certain areas of the mouthpiece are extremely difficult to measure unless you saw the mouthpiece in two.
Two mouthpieces can measure the same in every way you can get to them, and still play quite differently.
Walter Grabner
www.clarinetxpress.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2004-04-12 19:38
Walter is 100% correct, and remember too that the mouthpiece measurement process (the almost universally used "Erick Brand" approach) using feeler gauges is inherently imprecise: it only gives a few points ('digital snapshots', if you will) of the facing curve, which is of course a continuously varying geometrical entity and not a group of points connected by straight lines --- the gauges don't tell you anything about what the facing curve is doing BETWEEN the measurement points. Nor can you make a feeler gauge thin enough (or your hand steady enough) to exactly determine the location of the all-important transition of the flat table to the curved facing. So until we find a means to EXACTLY measure every point (infinitesimally small) along the entire mouthpiece curve, and design a machine sufficiently precise and accurate to cut such a completely-specified curve, on a material which is COMPLETELY stable dimensionally forever ---- we will have variations from mouthpiece to mouthpiece. And we haven't even talked about the mouthpiece interior yet. Such is reality......
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Henry
Date: 2004-04-12 20:56
David S.: Is it true then that the "ideal" facing curve(s) has (have) not yet been described in some convenient mathematical form? That's truly amazing! I would assume that the curve must approach the flat table asymptotically and that the curvature must increase towards the tip. It would seem to me that there are only a few simple mathematical functions that describe such behavior. The interior of the mouthpiece is a different matter, of course. There, the possiblities seem endless!
Henry
Post Edited (2004-04-12 21:20)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2004-04-12 21:30
Henry,
The facing obviously must work in concert (no pun intended) with an organic, highly-imperfect, extremely variable, inhomogeneous and anisotropic (sorry for the jargon) acoustical sound-generating device: the reed. What makes you think a single 'perfect' facing shape exists to work properly with such imperfect reeds? And how about the extreme variability in the acoustical and mechanical impedance, pressure-generating characteristics, etc. of that other important element: the player? I wish it were as simple as you suggest --- if it were, the 'problem' would have been solved many decades ago.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Henry
Date: 2004-04-12 21:54
David: Why is it too simple to suggest that there probably is a favored mathematical function to describe the shape of the mpc facing, assuming a "good" reed and a reasonably accomplished player? (I realize that no good mpc can be designed for a lousy reed and a lousy player!) I can envision a simple equation with two variables that determine the tip opening and the facing length, each of which may be fixed by the preference of an individual player. You say that "if things were that simple, the problem would have been solved many decades ago". But has anyone at least tried this approach? If not, how do mouthpiece makers and refacers (including you) determine their preferred curve(s)? Just trial and error? (And how does your design protect against lousy reeds and/or lousy playing ability?)
Again, I realize that the interior of the mpc is a whole different and much more complex story!
Henry
Post Edited (2004-04-12 22:04)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2004-04-12 22:12
Don't mind Henry. That's just the engineer talking!
I wonder sometimes too if there's some sort of magical formula. Of course it'd be much more than TWO variables. Tip opening, facing length, rail width, table concavity, curve 'steepness' (for lack of a better word at the moment), tip curvature (to match a certain reed of course), smoothness of table (perhaps TOO fine a table creates problems?), etc. It'd certainly be one impressive calculation/formula!
But even when you figure all this out, how deep are you going to go? To what "sig fig"? And then, will you be able to find a machine that can replicate this particular mouthpiece time and time again while taking into account (as Walter pointed out) that not even any two BLANKS are the same due to a difference in cooling, the mixture of the rubber and whatever other additives (if any) are in there, etc. And what about your machines? To have something so finely tuned would require constant care of the machines. You can't jar any of them else your measurements get skewed, you have to replace the sandpaper/bits often enough so that you get a better match from one to another etc.
The only person I know of that has a machine do the mouthpieces to a "custom facing" is Peter Eaton. I read in an article (or perhaps it was a post?) that he uses CNC machines to duplicate and create his mouthpieces claiming (and probably rightly so) that a laser precision piece of technology can get a mouthpiece closer to HIS ideal facing than he ever could by hand (a few millionths of an inch would be easier measured by a machine than by your hand). So as far as I know, he's the only one out there really applying your mathematical formula idea succesfully time and time again. (I have to add that last part because, if we just look at the majority of mouthpiece makers, aren't they ALL attempting to duplicate the same mouthpiece over and over? How many Vandoren B45's have you seen! However they don't seem to come as close as Peter Eaton says he does.)
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2004-04-12 22:20
In addition to above, on the subject of Peter Eaton mouthpieces, here is a quote from the ICA article available on his website about the facings on his mouthpieces . . .Quote:
The level of facing definition that I now achieve, and the level of accuracy that I can cut, with the aid of computer-controlled equipment, is far higher than the material can sustain. This directly supports that he is trying to replicate again and again whatever specific facing masurements he has found to be the best. Maybe he didn't FIND them mathematically, but he's trying to keep whatever combination he stumbled upon the same time and time again. And it also points out what Walter has said. The mouthpiece material ITSELF won't guarentee a perfect match. Even if you get all the measurements correct.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
Post Edited (2004-04-12 22:22)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Henry
Date: 2004-04-12 22:31
Sfalexi says: "Don't mind Henry. That's just the engineer talking!"
Alexi, I always like your posts but, in this case, you disappoint me. I thought you were a math major! In the first place, I'm NOT an engineer; I'm a chemist. Secondly, it seems to me that mouthpiece designers and refacers must have SOME formula they use to design their supposedly superior mouthpieces. But what is it? Is it just luck, intuition, or simply "reputation"? Perhaps we should start a new thread on this very topic!
Henry
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2004-04-13 03:27
Quote:
Alexi, I always like your posts but, in this case, you disappoint me. Sorry Henry!![[frown]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie2.gif) I mistook you for an engineer because I thought I remembered you saying something about teaching aeronautical engineering (Sorry. I've been fairly tired today due to a hard day's work and a packed schedule today. I must've been confusing/mixing your statements with those of others or my own mind as a former aeronautical engineering major)
Secondly, it seems to me that mouthpiece designers and refacers must have SOME formula they use to design their supposedly superior mouthpieces.
You're right. Mouthpiece refacers DO have their own formulas. They all have their own set of homemade tools and reamers and their patterns of what to do and when (whether they start with the baffle and then move to the facing or maybe first ream out the chamber then work on the curve of the lay, etc.), and their books and charts of measurements of what's worked. I'm willing to bet that some of them even have to wear their "lucky underwear" when tackling a new mouthpiece blank (not saying that they all do, but I know whatever I'm wearing when I crank out my winner will be)
But what is it?
What their PARTICULAR secrets are, I doubt they'll ever tell, since then people could learn to replicate their work and wouldn't have to go to them anymore!
Although I'm curious as to how one gets started. There's a great article on yahoo's mouthpiece group roughly describing the different curves and baffles and the effects of each one. However it's just a VERY basic overview of them. It takes a real artisan to know that in order to make your clarinet's upper clarion notes a little less stuffy the baffle must be scraped a bit RIIIIIIGGHT . . . . here.
Is it just luck, intuition, or simply "reputation"?
I'm willing to bet that's probably a combination of those above. I remember someone's advice for learning on how to modify and reface mouthpieces was to buy a simple mouthpiece refacing kit, some measuring gauges, order a crapload of mouthpieces on Ebay (find one of those "100 mouthpiece" sales), and take good notes on what you do and their effects as you proceed to scrape and cut and roughen and probably destroy every one of them.
But eventually, you start to figure out what does what. And then you start to have 'hunches' on how to fix certain problems based on your past experiences. And the next thing you know, your name is getting thrown all over the clarinet BBoard as you humbly refuse from posting in that thread to avoid any possible "self-advertising". Not that you need to because by this time everyone KNOWS about the Henry "quack" series (cleverly named after the shape of the 'duckbill' shape of the tip)
Yeah. It'd be nice to have some good informative threads in here about clarinet mouthpiece procedures instead of having to sign up and join with Yahoo just to have to filter and search for the clarinet ones (being primarily a sax group). But I'm not angry about not having those threads here . . . . ![[mad]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie9.gif) . . . .
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-04-13 14:37
I would ascribe undertones to improper embouchure development or even the wrong resistance in the set up...(ie reeds). There is very little that can be added to the wisdom of above mouthpiece technicians and makers. However, what I have seen is the problem to more pronounced on certain types of mouthpieces and the inexperience the player has in getting the right "resitance" to work for their set up. Some of the lower tones can also be caused by pads and springs not set up properly and therefore causing a great deal of problems.
The best test for undertones is the Beethoven 5 Scherzo on the repeated A's at pianissimo...it takes a very finely honed embouchure and air technique to have these sounds emerge beautifully...(high a's just above the clef)>
take these and practice the quarters staccatto slowly
)...
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2004-04-13 19:32
Thanks Dave S. I must've confused my "H" names. Sorry to both of them for the mixup.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
