 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: psychotic lil clarinet girl (don't as
Date: 2004-07-16 23:16
Ok, so according to my tuner, I'm really sharp about high C D E and up... In tune on everything in between, until I get to my low F and low E, which are flat... Could anyone answer my question as to why this is happening... I keep the same emboucher the whole way through, and I think a new barrel may solve the problem, but I want to know what everyone else's opinions are... thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Author: larryb
Date: 2004-07-17 01:25
you're normal - keep playing
|
|
|
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2004-07-17 01:57
Hi, Li'l Clarinet Girl --
Years of experience has taught me to form an opinion that happens to agree with Larry's observation. Hold onto your money and keep on tootin'. The more you play the better it gets.
- r![[cool]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/cool.gif) n b -
|
|
|
|
|
Author: davor
Date: 2004-07-17 08:38
Stay normal!
|
|
|
|
|
Author: RAMman
Date: 2004-07-17 11:08
You're in tune the whole way in between?
Think you've mastered it!!
lol
|
|
|
|
|
Author: idahofats
Date: 2004-07-17 13:10
First, be sure to warm up thoroughly before checking with the tuner. After that, my own experience was similar to yours. One can always lip the high notes down, but there may be a limit to lipping low E and F up. The addition of a new/shorter/longer barrel might make you chronically sharp or flat. Anyway, in my case, I had given up and decided to live with the problem...then I got a mp with a longer lay (5RV Lyre) and started using harder reeds, and LO! the problem with flatness went away.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: psychotic lil clarinet girl (don't as
Date: 2004-07-17 13:37
I have a Vandoren 5RV mouthpiece also... I'm still a beginner though, so I'm just wondering whether it's supposed to be that way or not...
|
|
|
|
|
Author: John O'Janpa
Date: 2004-07-17 14:13
Although you can't really say it's supposed to be that way, that's the way it is
(inherent design problem) with almost all (if not all) clarinets. Years of practice and listening will improve your ability to lip these problem notes into tune.
Keep on tootin.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Author: idahofats
Date: 2004-07-17 14:56
Regarding the 5RV, perhaps it is the best compromise that you and your instructor have worked out for now. However, everyone's oral cavity, tooth structure, lung capacity, etc. are in some senses unique, and will change with time. You may find that the current mp, barrel, bell help you develop your other capacities for now while leaving you unable to adjust certain aspects of intonation to your satisfaction. When a problem becomes unbearable,though, it's time to start tinkering with the setup, changing one factor at a time. Just don't kid yourself that, because a certain $200 barrel worked for someone else, it will be the sure solution to your problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Avie
Date: 2004-07-17 15:00
After warm up a longer barrel or pulling out your present barrel will bring notes above C,D, and E in tune but will only make every note below C flater. A shorter barrel will make notes below C in tune but the notes above C sharper! Cant win! A new mouth piece and practice may eventually help but i am inclined to agree that it is a inherent clarinet design problem in most cases and will improve as your ear developes.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2004-07-17 17:31
After an adequate warm-up period, tune your clarinet by first checking the G4 for sharpness (normal). Pull the barrel until it is right on. Then, check your G5 and if sharp, pull your middle joint, but not so much as to make your F5, E5 or C4 flat. Then, check your "long" B4 and, if sharp, pull your bell. It is normal (and desirable) for a warmed up clarinet to play a bit sharp because you can always bring the notes down to pitch. Its a more difficult task to bring a flat clarinet up to pitch. Ideally, you should have a barrell that is of the correct length that will play "in tune" when totally warmed up and that is why many "pros" have barrells that play at 440 and 442, the usual pitch standards for orchestral playing.
After tuning these notes on your clarinet, the high notes--D6 through G6--may still need to be lipped down (or up) depending on your particular instrument. On my LeBlanc Concertos, I need to add my RH "bananna" key to correct a flat F#6, and I have to lip up my Eb6s. C#6, D6, F6 are usually quite good, but I have to use special fingerings to control my G6,. which is hoplessly sharp. I use either TR XOX/XXO EB, TR X00/XXO Eb or TRXOO/OOO Eb (overblown B4). In any case, you need to know your own instruments pitch tendencies for these higher notes and then lip or finger then to be "in tune". Playing pp on these notes makes tuning even more fun. Good luck, psyco.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2004-07-17 19:50
Without spending any money, try a Moennig barrel if you can. Some of the older clarinets were very flat on the low E and F, and this seems to have been improved on newer models. It might be a good idea to find an expert clarinet tuner and have him/her take a look at your instrument. We all have some of these problems. Air support is often a great help.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-07-17 20:31
A resonance hole drilled in the bell (if the right size and location) can raise a flat low E (and possibly low F) ...GBK
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Avie
Date: 2004-07-18 13:43
Clarinet Girl. I am curious as to the age, brand of clarinet, mouth piece, barrel, and reed you are using. Thanks. AV
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2004-07-18 13:50
Although drawn according the flat and imperialistic logocentric concept of homogenity and well-temperedness, all windinstruments have dynamic and fluid plateaus their ambitus, in relation to which their intonation microtonally (an 8th-tone and smaller partials) varies. THIS IS A PLUS, this is something that makes them extremely flexible and individualistic (and still they´re able to intonate "in tune", if such an encrusted and dead rigid instrument as the piano "demands" it). So, please don´t change it, keep that wonderful "aberration" of Your instrument, cultivate it, differentiate it. Develop Your own sound and timbre-spectrum, not that of an nonpersonal impostuous authority.
Markus
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-07-18 14:19
Markus Wenninger wrote:
>
LOL!
|
|
|
|
|
Author: larryb
Date: 2004-07-18 14:51
I love the fact that all wind instruments have dynamic and fluid plateaus their ambitus.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2004-07-18 15:12
Huh??? Markus wrote, "Although drawn according the flat and imperialistic logocentric concept of homogenity and well-temperedness,"
All wind instruments are, in fact, based upon the natural series of overtones found in nature known as the "just" temperment system, not the man-devised "tempered" system of tuning--as is used in all keyboard instruments. It is true that we try to "fine tune" individual notes, but what we are really doing is adjusting harmonics sounding above the fundementals, not "tempering" the fundamentals themselves. But I do agree that we are lucky to have that capability of "extremely individualistic" tuning and that we should all strive to develop our own sound rather than that of some "nonpersonal impostuous authority".
(darn, I wish I could write like that)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2004-07-18 16:51
I was referring to the change in the grounding concept of how an instrument is devised, up to let´s say 1945 (speaking for the Western World - whole Asia never fell for this illsuion of rationally equal distances between notes or between two instruments) playing an "a" had to be the same throughout the whole orchestra, timbre being as sort of colouring out the precise lines of what was considered to be "harmonically correct". The winds always were sort of love-hate friends, being capable of very distinct and unmistakable voices but for the price of instabile intonation (it doesn´t matter whether G.Gould or Mr xyz hit the key, if tuned correctly, the "a" sounds exactly the same; which doesn´t negate the fact that a piece is indefinitely more complex than just hitting keys at the time proper...but every wind-performer knows how categorically relevant it is who blows the note on the particular horn - and energy in extremis has gone into nivellating this disturbing instability that every horn is different as every player is). The natural overtone-series is not a static series, as accoustics might suggest (look at how the internal relations of a multiphonic on the clarinet,e.g., change with air/roomtemperature, embrochure, diaphragm pressure et al, the whole concept of timbre trills relies on this). Nowadays music, instead of trying to cut off all instabilities in favor of a homogenous sound, developed a way of using those infintely differentiated voices of the instruments to realize pieces that change categorically with the performers and performances (not only gradually so, as it was always the case). This is emphatically the case with the string- and the windinstruments, those being freed from the shackles of absolute (between instruments and instrumental categories) and relative (in repsect to the registers internally to an instrument) just intonation ("just" just being another term for "the same") put forward the question of what it means to intonate at a completely new and higher level.
Markus
|
|
|
|
|
Author: psychotic lil clarinet girl (don't as
Date: 2004-07-18 18:51
to AV:
Currently I am playing on a buffet evette wood clarinet... It looks very old, but I got it off of EBAY, so I don't know how old it is... I'm playing on a Buffet Evette 65 mm barrel... 5RV mouthpiece, and a size 3 vandoren V12 reed... Like I said, maybe if I got a 66 mm barrel it would help the tuning along...
to Markus:
So, are you saying just don't worry about it, and use it as a part of my clarinet playing?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: hans
Date: 2004-07-18 19:43
A longer barrel will make your low E and F even flatter.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: larryb
Date: 2004-07-18 23:20
Mary -
I think Markus is saying something to the effect of: "it don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing..."
|
|
|
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2004-07-19 04:15
> William wrote:
"All wind instruments are, in fact, based upon the natural series of overtones found in nature known as the "just" temperment system, not the man-devised "tempered" system of tuning--as is used in all keyboard instruments. It is true that we try to "fine tune" individual notes, but what we are really doing is adjusting harmonics sounding above the fundementals, not "tempering" the fundamentals themselves."
Technically, this is not correct---the harmonics of any given fundamental are always a perfect integral multiple of the the fundamental-e.g. precisely 1X, 2X,3X, 4X, etc. One can adjust the relative proportion of these harmonics (that's what gives the differences in tone quality or timbre), but one cannot alter the frequency relationships. When we "fine tune" the pitch of a given scale note to agree with some particular flavor of "tempered tuning", we do alter the fundamental; the overtones merely follow as a matter of course. (For more on this, consult any text on Fourier Wave analysis.)
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2004-07-19 05:00
This may be theoretically true, but is this absolutely true in real life?
In my understanding, which may of course be flawed, at least some overtones of a note played on a piano are mathematically out of tune with the mathematical interval, hence producing beat frequencies with the sam note which is the fundamental of another string. This is one of the reasons for 'stretching' the octaves of a piano, in order to slow down those beat frequencies and make them less conspicuous. As far as I know, these anomalies are caused by the inherent imperfections of the string itself, especially the stiffness where it crosses the bridge, some compensation being made by where the windings of bass strings finish - short of the bridges.
Seeing there are equivalent imperfections in the air column in wind instruments, I would expect similar anomalies in them. Is not the pitch of each harmonic dependent on the length of the air column, and does not that EFFECTIVE length of this column extend beyond the first open tone hole, and does not the distance of this extension depend on the frequency of the particular harmonic?
And is it not true that the taper in a sax/oboe/bassoon bore is adjusted to get those harmonics in tune? are there not anomalies in the effective bore diameter in clarinets too, on account of the tone holes.
Perhaps there is somebody here more enlightened than myself?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-07-19 10:39
Gordon (NZ) wrote:
> In my understanding, which may of course be flawed, at least
> some overtones of a note played on a piano are mathematically
> out of tune with the mathematical interval, hence producing
> beat frequencies with the sam note which is the fundamental of
> another string.
This is due to the gross mass of the strings used, especially in the bass section; the mass (diameter) is increased to compensate for the fact that the strings, even on a 9' grand, are significantly shorter than what they would be if they represented the true length of the wave that composes the fundamental.
The air column in a clarinet exactly represents the fundamental length of the wave in air; therefore the partials end up exact multiples. I've measured up to the 13th partial on a digital recording of a clarinet using a calibrated mike, preamp, and A-D converter running at 96KHz (at Dr. Jim Pynes studio) and if there was any inharmonicity it was not measurable, even at the 13th partial.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2004-07-19 11:04
What do you mean by the "true length of the wave that composes the fundamental."?
It is the frequency that determines pitch, and always, the frequency is a function of a variety of factors, eg the mass of the string, the tension of the string, the length of the string, the flexibility of the string.... the density of the gas in a clarinet.... There is no fundamentally 'true length' for any given frequency.
By true length, do you mean the length that a bass string would have to be if it were the same material, cross section, and tension as a treble string? (Wouldn't such a string would have a pathetic, weak sound?)
Regarding your clarinet experiment, was your result simply because it was a particularly well-chosen, well-played note on a particularly well designed clarinet?
I am interested in how you address the issue I mentioned about EFFECTIVE length of air column depending on pitch, for any given fingering.
To support your case though, I am SLIGHTLY inclined to believe that a fixed frequency of vibration of the reed (at the fundamental) may force the overtones into being mathematically perfect. But I wonder - can a reed vibrate at the fundamental, WHILE it is also vibrating at an out-of-tune overtone in sync with an out-of tune overtone in the air column. after watching a piano string pulsing irregularly under a strobe light tuned to it, I can believe that anything can vibrate at many different-of-tune frequencies all at the same time.
Where is Benade when I need him, or do I really have to wade through his books for enlightenment?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-07-19 11:05
Gordon (NZ) wrote:
> What do you mean by the "true length of the wave that composes
> the fundamental."?
The wave's length in air.
I measured plenty of notes on different clarinets - not one showed any inharmonicity.
A clarinet uses direct air column coupling, not indirect coupling.
You don't need Benade - there are plenty of acoustics texts out there other than Benade that discuss mass-related inharmonicity.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2004-07-19 13:59
It is important to understand the differences between the harmonic spectrum of a given note (which must be only integral multiples) and the less than perfect relationship of the overblown notes (twelfs on clarinets, octaves on saxes, oboes, etc.) to what we have called "the fundamental". The octaves may not be in tune due to the complications Gordon mentions, but any note's spectrum will still follow the perfect integral multiple rule. Mark, thanks for sharing your experiment. Fourier wins again!
|
|
|
|
|
Author: idahofats
Date: 2004-07-19 14:53
Psychotic,
If you're still reading these, a couple more suggestions. First, as you said, a 66 mm barrel might help...maybe your local music store has a few you could try in-store with your tuner. Next, read all the old posts on this site about glissando, smears and pitch-bending, and play with developing different combinations of breath support, as well as tongue and jaw position. And finally, although your experience may vary from mine, try shifting the ligature farther toward the base of the mp to increase vibration of the reed and sharpness in the low tones. One last thought, as far as the altissimo, look at David Pino's "The Clarinet and Clarinet Playing, or a similar source. Pino in particular discusses which notes in the range are notoriously sharp or flat, and offers alternative fingerings, speaking specifically about Buffets.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: sbbishop
Date: 2004-07-19 16:13
Hello all!
I now understand why when I pick up my 50 year old clarinet, my dog runs to the farthest bedroom, my wife goes into the kitchen and turns up the TV. But I solved the problem by only playing in the RV thats parked out by the barn. I think I sound relatively nice given the problems of the clarinet combined with the problems of an even older player.!!
LOL!! I love it!!
|
|
|
|
|
Author: psychotic lil clarinet girl (don't as
Date: 2004-07-19 19:36
This is weird, because y'all got way off subject and then are starting to get back on, but thanks for all of your advice...
|
|
|
|
|
Author: larryb
Date: 2004-07-19 19:50
oh, and another thing: play your sharp notes flatter and your flat notes sharper.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Todd W.
Date: 2004-07-19 20:10
plcg(da) said: "This is weird, because y'all got way off subject and then are starting to get back on . . ."
It's normal for this bboard to get way off subject in a thread; what's weird is the thread getting back on subject.
Todd W.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Vic
Date: 2004-07-19 21:11
So, how about those Yankees?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Avie
Date: 2004-07-19 21:24
I did get the impression that the conversation became a bit deep at least for a person with my limited background and knowledge. Although what i understood was very interesting and i am always grateful for in depth knowledge i was relieved when idahoefats finally got the the conversation back on track to try and solve lil clarinet girls tuning problem in simple terms. I am under the impression that there is no simple remedy to tune a clarinet. I was interested in the topic because i also use a 5RV lyre mouthpiece, a #3 reed and a 65 MM barrel and have similar problems with tuning my buffet. This common problem is discouraging but it gives us something to work on for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2004-07-19 22:11
Thanks Mark and Saxlite for enlightenment. What you wrote, Saxlite, was something I was not aware of. I wonder why this is so? Does the interaction between the overtones and the reed/fundamental ensure that they are 'dicked' back into sync?
Re Benade, I have been told that his work is some of the EASIEST to read. I am the sort who does not go on to the next paragraph until I fully understand the current one, and some of Benade lost me altogether.
"A clarinet uses direct air column coupling, not indirect coupling." also has me lost because of the (obviously technical) term 'coupling'. Can you explain?
Sorry about the topic diversion. Once a topic does stray, it is only a moderator who has the power to shift all the relevant posts (to maintain the sense of context) to a new heading.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-07-19 22:51
Gordon (NZ) wrote:
> Thanks Mark and Saxlite for enlightenment. What you wrote,
> Saxlite, was something I was not aware of. I wonder why this
> is so? Does the interaction between the overtones and the
> reed/fundamental ensure that they are 'dicked' back into sync?
The air column vibrates at a resonant frequency; the pressure wave travelling back to the mouthpiece forces it closed (or nearly so) a positive feedback scenario. Harmonics (partials) are re-enforced by the pressure wave - only those of an integral multiple survive (since they must exist within the fundamental - the end nodes of the fundamental and end nodes of the harmonics have to be coincident - think of a rope tied at one end and the other in your hand - you can have an integral number of "waves" if you move your hand back and forth, but trying to get a non-integral number doesn't work - the wave dies out).
>
> "A clarinet uses direct air column coupling, not indirect
> coupling."
The sound is created by a vibrating air column - it directly causes a sound wave (direct couple - air to air) . Non-wind instruments (such as string or percussion) cause a medium other than air to vibrate (indirect couple - vibration to material to air).
|
|
|
|
|
Author: larryb
Date: 2004-07-19 23:04
Mary -
follow same directions as to Carnegie Hall
|
|
|
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2004-07-20 00:10
(sorry to be so off-topic, folks, but just to finish up here......)
Gordon--no, the overtones of a given tone are not "dicked" into sync. Many studies of waveform analysis confirm that the harmonic spectrum of any constant tone from whatever instrument, sound or noise is made up of the fundamental plus only integral multiples of that fundamental. Laws of Physics at work here. Not surprising that Mark reconfirmed this. But, as you are well aware, saxes and clarinets or even flutes don't overblow perfect octaves (or twelfths)--this is because the "octave note" is, in itself, a new fundamental with a slightly different air column length than a perfect 2X, due to frequency-related end-effects, tone holes and less than perfect octave pip locations, sizes, etc. Again, it is important to keep these two concepts separated. Hope this does it.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2004-07-20 06:54
Actually, I hate it when it swings, anything one can stomp one´s feet to gives me the creeps. And there´s just no such thing as a simple answer back on track, not nowadays anymore, if there ever was one (somebody plowing the fields of musical history might point out that integrally musical questions at all times were threatened to be answered "simply and straight out" by authority). Not even a simple question.
Yes, Mary, I am uttelry convinced that You should use this "molto instabile" capability of a windinstrument to Your performing´s advantage, make use of those subtle alterations just Your very own playing is able to muster. In the very altissimo register, the distances between the notes are very close together (if You´re plaing bass or contrabass cl), and the slightest change in embrochure, airpressure et al changes the intonation considerably, which is wonderful to exploit perfromingwise, whereas in the low registers YOu can always think of wedging just another tone in between let´s say an eigthtone sharp F and the quartertone above f#. In fact, there are not too few situations in regards to intonation when just so-called "false" intonation is able to produce the desired effect, especially as far as multiphonics go, all timbre-questions (trills, portamentos, glissandos, colourtrills ...etc), and partials smaller than a halftone in the chalumeau register.
It is worth everthing to change something just for the change´s sake, just because one can do it - there´ll be many cases when such a conduct doesn´t result in something fascinating or a new perspective, but even this teaches something, but in just as many cases the most dull aspects of a composition/a performing practice will radiate something cuttingly new and beautiful.
Markus
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2004-07-20 09:57
Thanks, saxlight.
"Many studies of waveform analysis confirm that the harmonic spectrum of any constant tone from whatever instrument, sound or noise is made up of the fundamental plus only integral multiples of that fundamental."
Yes, but where does this fit into your statement.....
It is well accepted by piano tuners that these integral multiples are often indeed out of tune with the fundamental, at least for piano. It is the job of the bass string designer/maker to attempt to reduce this to a minimum, using complex formulae to assist in choosing appropriate core wire thickness, winding wire thickness, number of layers of winding, winding length, etc.
There are many references, e.g:
http://www.fact-index.com/p/pi/piano_acoustics.html
http://www.auditory.org/asamtgs/asa94mit/3aED/3aED12.html
I agree with your 'integral multiples', but at least for piano, are these not approximations that depend on a range of parameters? Of course the theory can be idealistic, but the reality with pianos is rather different.
What I don't understand, is that you guys seem not to be accepting this phenomenon with piano strings. And what confuses me.... if it happens with piano strings, why should it not happen with air columns?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-07-20 10:41
Godon - piano strings are the "wrong length" - the wound strings are shorter than the wavelength in air, so mass is added to make them vibrate slower than they otherwise would. That vibration is then coupled to the air via the soundboard.
The act of adding windings to the strings makes all sorts of changes; the mass isn't uniform and just the act of adding mass changes the whole situation. The partials do some non-linear things becuse of that (along with some other problems - getting the soundboard to vibrate reasonably, picking the exactly spot for the hammers, etc.) ... it's a well-known physical phenomena, and explainable.
Wind instruments use the air column, which is essentially massless and is directly excited. Different principles are involved.
Benade wrote a book on string & woodwind sound production - do you have that one?
|
|
|
|
|
Author: jbutler ★2017
Date: 2004-07-20 11:51
Mary,
May I suggest the book: Intonation Training for Clarinetists by Larry Guy. It is available through Van Cott services, a sponsor of the BB, among others.
jbutler
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Avie
Date: 2004-07-20 12:22
Funtamentals of musical acoustics by Arthur Benade is available on amazon.com.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: larryb
Date: 2004-07-20 14:08
Markus wrote:
"Actually, I hate it when it swings, anything one can stomp one´s feet to gives me the creeps."
I got that sense from your posts.
Actually, one of the most swinging pieces of music for me is Purcell's "Sound the Trumpet" from "Come all Ye Sons of Art." I can't stop from stomping my feet.
|
|
|
|
|
Author: psychotic lil clarinet girl (don't as
Date: 2004-07-20 16:02
To jbutler:
Thanks I'll check into it..
everyone else:
This is really weird, because it's like two completely different subjects goin on here... I suggest you start a new thread to talk about that... Haha, but y'all do it all the time, so I'll let you be...
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2004-07-20 17:26
Mary - why should a conversation be any different from any other system comprised of 2 or more partakers? ![[happy]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smiley12.gif) ...a true solioquy doesn´t exist as well...Such a game (as in "game theory") consists more in fighting off all those by-voices and -semantics popping up and changing the sound-to-noise-ratio, than having one´s say about a singular topic. Nobody speaks in just one voice, and never about just one thing.
Oh, Purcell - I love his stage-works actually (might be that I can be caught unawares to be wriggling my toes along the beat...shame shame), and the intonation before Purcell is again sounding so very modern and untouched, naturally, by the dreadfull "every A´s got to be the same, every instrument and every voice!", so that Old and even what can be reconstructed of Ancient Music is intriguing and very fascinating to my ears, all those wild leaps and ondulations, and strange harmonics too.
Markus
|
|
|
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
