 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: bkmorton
Date: 2005-10-18 16:00
I am doing a paper on the clarinet systems such as mazzeo, boehm, german (auler system), and Albert System. Do you have any recommendations of books, papers, dissertations, or anything you can think of. I know Colin Lawson has written a great deal on the history.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-10-18 17:31
Here are 4 books to start you off:
The Clarinet - Excellence and Artistry - Rosario Mazzeo
The Clarinet- Jack Brymer
The Clarinet - F Geoffrey Rendall
The Clarinet - Oskar Kroll
There is also additional information in Lee Gibson's book: Clarinet Acoustics.
Don't forget to check back issues of The Clarinet magazine for relevant articles ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2005-10-18 17:42
I've seen a dissertation on all woodwind systems, and the clarinet systems included detailed diagrams and descriptions of simple system, Boehm, full Boehm, Mazzeo, Marchi, Oehler, Pupeschi, Romero, etc. although I cannot remember the author's name - only that his name sounds Dutch. And I don't think the paper is for public viewing yet (and there were a couple of things that I saw in there that needed correcting).
Reason was that I was looking for patents for fully automatic octave mechanisms on oboes, and checking that the mechanism I have devised isn't infringing on any patents - and fortunately I can see my design hasn't yet been used.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Terry Stibal
Date: 2005-10-18 21:09
I've either got or have read all of the above, and with that in mind I maintain that there is no "one source" place to get it all laid out for you. The Brymer book covers most all of them in text, but very little in diagrammatic form. The others don't even go that far.
And, the so-called "Oehler" system is really just one maker's take on the traditional "German" clarinet. While most German maker's horns are similar, there are enough differences as you "move up the lines" to probably call each one by its maker's name.
In effect, a "Oehler" horn is just the most developed version of the original "simple" clarinet, the old six key minimum horn that was the basis for what Mozart wrote. The "Boehm" horn (really the Klose horn, but why quibble) took the original six key horn and made some major changes to the hole layout as well as the mechanism. Since diverging back in the 1830's the two systems have grown and matured separately, and despite one or two attempts (Reform Boehm and the like) are really two different ways of constructing the same instrument.
There's nothing wrong with this per se. There are multiple versions available of all of the woodwinds: flute (Continental and English), oboe (French and German), bassoon (French and German), clarinet (basically, French (Boehm) and German (Oehler), and saxophone (Selmer (French) and Conn (American)). Each of these has its adherents in certain isolated areas (in the case of the minority system), while the rest of the world marches on.
So, in France you've got French style bassoons (which are pretty well exclusive to France), French oboes, clarinets and saxophones, and continental flutes. In Great Britain, you've got German bassoons, French saxophones and clarinets and oboes, but a sizable minority of English flutes. German clarinets are largely restricted to Germany, while American saxophones are pretty much only found here.
What plays havoc with the "system" is when you introduce a French bassoon into a German bassoon section, a German oboe into a French oboe section, or an English flute just about anywhere. Each of the minority horns (for the want of a better term) has some wonderful attributes that are missing from the "modern" versions of same, but that resonance/facility/whatever almost always comes at a price (intonation, tone quality difference, etc.
In the clarinet world, most of you (and you know who you are) will never handle or play anything but a straight 17/6 Boehm horn, just as few fag players outside of la belle France will ever see a Buffet bassoon in action. Since these horns cost so much, that's only to be expected, but there is something to be said for taking a ride on the primitive side and trying out an Albert (early "French" style) clarinet. As these can be had at reasonable prices, it's worth the effort for the serious student of the horn to experience the difference.
leader of Houston's Sounds Of The South Dance Orchestra
info@sotsdo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2005-10-18 22:22
Chris, You are getting more info than [I'll bet] you even planned on ! Thats what comes from asking widely-read and clearly-understanding folk on our BBoard. From my first good cl, a Penzel-Mueller Full Boehm, I've been a collector of "unusuals" like many of us here, having a Stubbins, a Bundy Mazzeo, a McIntyre, a Pupeschi [have some info from Bettoney article, Al Rice and patent on it]. Having "fought" the oboe/Eng Horn] on back and, being interested in improvements beyond the Trieberts-Barret [read Baines], ?why not a Boehm system??, I found a set of 5? patents [1960-70] by Paladino, of Las Vegas [then], which may be it's most recent [comprehensive] US patent activity. If you wish, I'll supply those pat #s and make a pat search re: the ill wind, if that's your main focus. Research is great, keerect? Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2005-10-18 22:43
One day I'll get round to making myself a set of truly Sax-fingered oboes (not the Uebel type) so I can get around them all a lot easier!
And a Sax-fingered Heckelphone for what it's worth.
I've yet to start drilling holes into my set of Series 9s to fit a low F, E and Eb correction mechanism.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Terry Stibal
Date: 2005-10-19 17:15
An English flute is the "original" instrument, more or less, before ol' Theobald Boehm started fitting his "spectacles" (rings) and rods to it to equalize the tone of the various notes. It's a "natural" flute, more or less and for the want of a better term.
They were still being made as recently as the 1960's ('cause I saw a relatively new one around about 1965 or so), but they have never had much following outside of That Sceptered Isle.
Look for long, "clapper"-style keys on older paintings of flute players, and you're looking at one. They're made of wood (all that I've seen), generally don't have a riser and lip plate, and have far, far less keywork than a Boehm instrument. I understand that there are still some traditionalists scattered about who prefer same, just as the German oboe occasionally crops up here and there.
All of the "odd" instruments (French bassoons, German and Albert clarinets, German oboes, Conn saxophones) share a common characteristic, that of using more of the "traditional" tone holes to sound the notes. Some of these were good, some not so good, but the whole effect is different than their "common" (like the Boehm flute and clarinet) counterparts.
Look at a French bassoon sometime; you'll occasionally see one on eBay France. Very few keys (compared to a German (Heckel) system bassoon, and lots of the "old style" clapper keys.
The original "holes" in the older horns sometimes produced muffled tones that were compromises based upon mechanical limitations. However, some of the "original" notes on these instruments are richer in tone/timbre than the more "averaged" sounds that result from the "modern" horns.
leader of Houston's Sounds Of The South Dance Orchestra
info@sotsdo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2005-10-19 18:18
I've never heard the term 'English flute' before. They were more popular in Eastern Europe in more recent times.
No orchestras in the UK have seen or used simple system conical flutes for well over a century - after the Boehm system came into use, the 1867 system soon followed which was used by some players and it too has given way to the Boehm, but this was a cylindrical flute like the Boehm with a more elaborate key system.
Now in some UK orchestras the trend seems to be going back to wooden-bodied flutes with Boehm system keywork, or wooden headjoints on metal bodies. At one point Philip Hammig were the only wooden flutes still on sale, but now the majority of top makers offer a grenadilla-bodied flute in their lineup.
The only place the aforementioned 'English flutes' still have solid ground is in Irish folk bands - they still use the 8-keyed conical flutes, and the ideal instrument being a Rudall-Carte 'Nichollson Model' with large toneholes as it has more power, which is what inspired Theobald Boehm to design a flute with large toneholes, and then all his other radical designs followed.
I think the Vienna Phil was probably one of the last orchestras to give way to metal Boehm-type flutes, but they've still held onto the Vienna oboes and cors - even if they do use Yamaha-built Vienna oboes now. When Yamaha started out making pro instruments, they based their instruments on the most popular design from the top orchestras, but got it wrong with their oboes as they only copied the Vienna model to start with which has little following outside Vienna, and later started making Loree/Marigaux-style oboes which have more worldwide appeal.
Currently the most popular system of oboe in the UK, and all the beginner models made tend to be 'thumbplate system' (that lingered on here in the UK while Triebert's System 6 took hold in France and elswhere) - where Bb and C are made by taking the left thumb off the plate on the back, below the back octave key.
The thumbplate can be added to modern Gillet conservatoire instruments to make them 'dual system' where both thumbplate and conservatoire fingerings for Bb and C can be used (one with more degree of success than the other depending on how the Bb and Cs are tuned) - and I think the 'dual system' is much better than solely thumbplate or conservatoire instruments as it's the best of both worlds, and even more - eg. a tremolo from G4 to Bb4 can be done easier on a dual system than the others. I prefer to use conservatoire fingerings as more fingers are held down, but use the thumbplate mainly for arpeggios.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Terry Stibal
Date: 2005-10-19 22:03
Glenn's list, followed by my commentary:
"The Clarinet - Excellence and Artistry - Rosario Mazzeo"
Probably the best one for looking at the whole picture. Rosario had a wonderful outlook both on life and on our instrument (probably developed during all of that time he spent playing bass clarinet). He also was one of the few in the field who ventured to change things from "the way things are". I've not seen the book in years, but I would recommend same.
"The Clarinet- Jack Brymer"
Not as good as either the one above or the one below. A lot on clarinet playing, but very little on history (except as through personality).
"The Clarinet - F Geoffrey Rendall"
The classic, a book I first read back in the 1960's. Good on history, but very poorly illustrated (both diagrams and photos; the photos are so small that you can barely make out any detail). Has the advantage that it is widespread
"The Clarinet - Oskar Kroll"
This one is going to be hard to come by. In German, it's not a problem; paperback editions are readily available through Amazon. Not so in English. I first saw the book in the Peoria Public Library in the early 1970's, and then not again until I had a rare book search done and paid a pretty penny. On clarinet systems, Oskar was somewhere between Mazzeo and Rendall. As a bonus, there's a lot of coverage on the German clarinet that's not seen elsewhere (Kroll had a direct line of communication to the Oehler folks), and it's the only place that I've ever seen the factoid that bass clarinets were added to Luftwaffe bands in 1939. (Kroll died while serving in the Luftwaffe during World War II, according to his wife.) He also is catholic enough to include a treatment of the saxophone in his book.
"There is also additional information in Lee Gibson's book: Clarinet Acoustics."
I've only glanced through it, so I can't comment on same.
To this list, I would add the book (title unknown) that Stubbins wrote back in the 1950's. Aside from a close look at clarinet mechanism (prompted in part by his own improvements in that area with the S-K clarinet), there is also an extensive discussion of practical musicianship towards the rear of the book that anyone would benefit from reading. I photocopied the section on transposition tricks, and there's not a year that goes by that I don't refer to it. Too bad I can't find the book...
"Don't forget to check back issues of The Clarinet magazine for relevant articles "
This is a particular sore spot for me. Both The Clarinet and The Saxophone Journal are particularly heavy on what I call the "personality" approach to history. In reality, they contain very little in the way of information on how their respective namesake instruments got to where they are today.
In a magazine coming from a group interested in the name instruments, one would expect some history, some technological discussion, some personality, some peripheral stuff, and so forth.
Instead, what both magazines give you are endless numbers of interviews with "personalities" that deal with airy artistic issues and the inevitable questions about one's "set up" ("Yeah, I play a short lay Nilo Hovey mouthpiece with Rico 2 1/2 reeds and a stock George Bundy ligature.")
If it could be possible, I would say that The Saxophone Journal is worse in that it spends most of its "spare" capacity dealing with jazz idiom. There, the talk often isn't even about music per se, instead featuring some jazz dude gassing on about how Bird and 'Trane influenced him and how the changes running through his head kept him awake at night.
What little that is included about the history and technology of the instruments is generally shoved into a small compartment (Paul Cohen's old column in The Saxophone Journal, the instrument museum curator's column in The Clarinet). And, it seems that we see less and less of this as time goes on (I don't recall seeing Paul's (he and I look alike, by the way...scary thought that) the last time I found a Saxophone Journal).
And, in the case of the the gal in The Clarinet, it appears that she is somewhat removed from keeping up with what's going on in the world. The last issue or the one before had a piece on the full Boehm that ended with words to the effect "Is anyone still playing these?" She must not get out much...
There are a few articles on the history of the clarinet in The Clarinet, but I'd not bet the farm on finding what I wanted to see there.
(There was (a long time ago) an exhaustive article on the Romero clarinet. Perhaps it was the exception that proves the rule.)
"...GBK"
Just for the sake of consistency, '...TLS'
leader of Houston's Sounds Of The South Dance Orchestra
info@sotsdo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2005-10-19 22:48
VG commentary, Terry, I have [found!!] a pb copyof Stubbins,"The Art of Clarinetistry", many pages to be read, but, forgiving repetition, contains much history and discussion. I believe I mentioned Baines "Hist of Woodwind Insts",earlier, excellent, and Groves "Dict of "M & M". A search of Amazon and/or B&N will turn up a few more histories. Al Rice has 2 excellent books , [a 3rd under way, I believe] on Baroque, Classic, and ?"modern" clarinets, I'll add it when available, Al. Those "good books" plus some info from some of us "oldsters" should keep you "historians" busy. Terry, please be a bit kinder re: Dr. Debbi Reeves, ICA's "Historically Speaking" , her analyses/ discussion/pics in answer to VG questions is excellent. I have some of the "systems" she has written on, and I learned beyond what I had discovered. Much luck to our new history buffs. Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
