 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: timtin66
Date: 2006-10-27 19:44
I may sound ignorant, but what is the reason you would tune to one, or the other????
Timothy Tinnirello
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2006-10-27 20:32
As in so many things, in England we follow the Americans rather than "Europe". Though right, or at least ISO, is on our side in this case.
-----------
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
|
|
Author: EuGeneSee
Date: 2006-10-27 20:59
Then some of the older pitches like A=436 (and even much lower) were in common use back during the Baroque and early Classical periods, as I seem to recall from my old music classes. Some of today's groups playing older music on period instruments use these lower pitches, possibly because the instruments can't be tuned upward to modern levels or (old harpsichords, for example) can be so tuned but would be damaged from the stress of doing such.
Also, I suppose 16th or 17th century music is supposedly more authentic if played in the original pitch, though like Ben, I doubt that I would ever notice the difference. I would probably have to hear two orchestras playing simultaneously, one in modern pitch and one in an older concert pitch, before I would get hit between the ears by the difference.
Eu
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Douglas
Date: 2006-10-27 22:32
If I set a, for example, Korg tuner to A=440, how many cents higher on the tuner would 442 be? (Please don't tell me 2.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2006-10-27 22:40
Douglas wrote:
> If I set a, for example, Korg tuner to A=440, how many cents
> higher on the tuner would 442 be? (Please don't tell me 2.)
8 ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tedm
Date: 2006-10-27 22:47
with artley 17s, we're tuning to reference tones relative to 438 and 440. I haven't bothered adjusting lengths or anything, because I think the varience is with our blowing at this time, but close enough to play with a 440 piano, just a tad flat.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2006-10-27 23:19
If i recall correctly i was having this conversation with the then principle of the Concertobow (forgive spelling, it's rather late) a year or two ago, the reason he said for Europe to play at 442 or higher is for the strings. The higher pitch gives the strings a much brighter quality, and to some extent i think this is true. We the English have always played at 440 since it was standardised many yeards ago.
Going back in time we know that in various parts of Europe, UK included the pitch varied greatly from 420 or lower to 445 or higher, no one place was the same. The reason why the Baroque, Classical pitch became standardised, as i understand it, is because of the instruments. When people started playing the period instruments back in the 70s the pitches were quite erratic as most were playing on the original thing and not reproductions. It was generally agreed in the case of classical instruments that the pitch 430 suited the woodwinds better. Those generally being German instruments. The English clarinets for example tended to play higher around the 440 mark. And so the pitches stuck.
Please correct me if this is not how the early music pitches came to be.
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Koo Young Chung
Date: 2006-10-28 00:54
What's happening in the orchestral world is absolutely horrible.
If every body else is playing at 442 or 445, some group will start playing
448 or 450. Where will it end?
In monetary inflation you can always change the exchange factor but
musical pitch is not the same.
It is detrimental to vocals and string instruments.
For violins it is not that pitch only which gets worse,string height gets higher
every year and string tensions gets stronger every year.
With the rising pitch the violins today are under 2-3 times more string tension than Stradivari time. Unfortunately many violinist,whether first class
player or average,and conductors don't realize the seriousness of this pitch
rising.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-10-28 00:58
Koo Young Chung wrote:
> What's happening in the orchestral world is absolutely
> horrible.
You mean what's happened. Pitch standards have changed immensely over the last 400 years or so. The minor differences around the world today are nothing compared to the major differences between towns in Europe not so long ago ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2006-10-28 06:12
Do you (i.e. countries that are not mine) play in only one pitch all the time? I am guessing no, but? Here I know the local university orchestra tunes to 442 usually, but the pianos are tuned to 440 so if it is a piano concerto they tune to 440.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Cuisleannach
Date: 2006-10-28 17:48
I'm speaking from relative ignorance on strings, but doesn't a tighter string give a more brilliant, cutting sound. I notice on my guitar that the tone gets "flabbier" the lower the pitch and the sound has more "cut" to it the higher the pitch.
Does this mean that the pitch inflation by the strings is right-string conspiracy to drown us out?
-Randy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-10-28 18:02
Cuisleannach wrote:
> I'm speaking from relative ignorance on strings, but doesn't a
> tighter string give a more brilliant, cutting sound.
As the whole orchestra goes sharp, the strings tend to want to stand out again, so they go sharp again to "stand out".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2006-10-28 19:19
> As the whole orchestra goes sharp, the strings tend to want to
> stand out again, so they go sharp again to "stand out".
In another 200 years, they'll be referred to as the "sting section" ![[tongue]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie6.gif)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bubalooy
Date: 2006-10-28 20:32
I find that the higher pitches do make the strings project more, but also make them less warm sounding and too strident. I once heard back to back recordings of a Haydn string quartet, one with 440 A on modern instruments. I thought nothing wrong with that (the quartet was a famous one) sounds great to me so what's all the fuss about. The second recording on period instruments at a lower pitch was magnificent. The warm sound just blew me away. Of course some of that may have been from cat gut instead of wire. But I think the pitch was also a part of it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J B Lansing
Date: 2006-10-28 21:12
Recorder players who are into baroque music have sets of instruments pitched at 415 Also harpsichords, but earlier Renascence instruments were sometimes pitched as high as 466 Amherst Early Music recently bought a full set recorders (from soprano to contra bass) at 466 for about 20 large.
J B Lansing
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jez
Date: 2006-10-29 23:06
tictactux
You say US orchestras favour 442 and European, 440.
In my experience the opposite is the case. I play with a european orchestra which strives to stick to 440. The only occasion I've played with a US orch. I rang beforehand to find out what they're standard was and was told 442.
jez
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: timtin66
Date: 2006-10-30 12:01
Thanks to all who answered. You helped more than you possibly know!!!
Timothy Tinnirello
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2006-10-30 12:09
jez,
maybe I should have stated "Continental Europe" vs "Anglosphere", that appears to be more correct. (But don't ask me what .au and .nz are using, I frankly don't know)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
