 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Koo Young Chung
Date: 2007-02-28 23:21
What aspect of a clarinet affects the blowing resistance?
This is a technical question.
I hope someone give me insights.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2007-03-01 06:10
IMO "resistance" is an ill-defined term, hence ambiguous.
Could it refer to the air pressure and lip support needed to play a note? One cause could be how hard the reed is. Another could be mouthpiece characteristics.
Could it mean a reluctance for notes to sound quickly and clearly? One cause could be small leaks.
Could it mean that feeling of struggling, when certain keys have to be pressed down hard to get pads to seal?
Could it mean other things?
Post Edited (2007-03-01 06:11)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2007-03-01 09:43
'Resistance' definitely seems to mean a few different things. There are definitely high-pressure and low-pressure set-ups, depending on the technique of the player - a beginner will (probably) not blow as hard as an experienced player, for example. Then there is the volume of sound achieved for a given effort, which I think is different. And then again there is the amount of air going through the instrument: how long does a breath last? (Ease of forming notes I'd call 'articulation'.)
There are occasional posts here about 'free-blowing' setups - what on earth does that mean?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2007-03-01 11:09
I agree with Gordon, there are too many variables and too many things to which you can refer.
One example I can give is that I am now much more enthusiastic about a mouthpiece with a much longer lay than before (an M15 Vandoren vs a 5RV Lyre). As I go back to the 5RV Lyre the shorter lay seems more resistant, stuffy, muddy, less responsive to me.
Of course then there is the age old tenant that one needs a clarinet that is not TOO free blowing. In this sense, a little resistance allows for a more resonant timbre.
And NEVER EVER play on a clarinet with leaks. You start with all the pads sealing perfectly.....or else.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2007-03-01 11:19
I've noticed changes of resistance with different parts of the clarinet too. I change a barrel, and the resistance can change. Sometimes drastically, sometimes it doesn't seem to change at all (depends on the barrel). I change the mouthpeice and keed the barrel the same, and the resistance can be changed.
Sometimes, I try to "counter" resistance with another part. For instance, if I have a mouthpiece that is very free blowing (TOO freeblowing) and I don't feel I can control the sound, I will swap a barrel for a more 'resistant' barrel so I can keep the very good mouthpiece (assuming I love the articulation and way it feels and sound it gives) and still be able to have a comfortable amount of resistance.
I find that different ligatures change resistance subtly. I know that if I use a vandoren optimum, it seems to change the resistance compared to a rovner, or a string ligature. So sometimes I will pair a mouthpiece with a ligature to try to make it most comfortable for me.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chalumeau Joe
Date: 2007-03-01 12:48
"Resistance" should not be so much viewed as an ambiguous phenomenon as a fundamental (albeit complex and typically time-varying) characteristic of the instrument.
All musical instruments can be viewed as being "systems", that is, for some given "input," they will produce an "output". The input, in the simplest case, would be an excitation mechanism, usually from the the vibrations of the reed or lips; this flows through an air column (resonator). The output is (obviously) the resultant sound that you hear.
The "stuff" in between the input and the output is referred to as a "system", and the way technical folks (BTW, I'm an electrical engineer) characterize systems is by way of something known as a "transfer characteristic" (also known as as a "transfer function").
The resistance of an instrument is simply all those factors that oppose the input from flowing through the resonator. These factors can include how the movement of air is delayed through the system, internal reflections, mechanical changes (e.g., embrochure), the geometrical differences of the bore, temperature, humidity, frequency dependencies, and a whole host of other complex factors.
I hope I wasn't too pedantic in my attempt at a "simple" explanation. Accurate determination of an instrument's transfer function is a complex matter, and there are many scholarly articles on the subject. It's a fascinating topic, and if you want to learn more, then Google such terms as "acoustic transfer function"...that should be enough to get you started.
Joe
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2007-03-01 15:11
> a mouthpiece that is very free blowing (TOO freeblowing) and I don't feel I can control the sound
See, I can't relate to this at all. What on earth does 'free blowing' /mean/?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EuGeneSee
Date: 2007-03-01 16:24
Try blowing through a soda straw, then blow through a kitchen paper towel tube. The former offers more resistance than the latter, just as each of my clarinet/mpc/reed set-ups differs in resistance, albeit to a lesser degree than the straw/tube comparison . . . the tube was pretty free blowing. EU
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dano
Date: 2007-03-01 18:17
To put it simply, think of it as, the more obstructed the hole, the more resistance you will encounter. The less obstructed the hole, the more "free blowing" it will be.
Try blowing through your clarinet without a moutpiece at all. That, is free blowing at it's best.... or worst, depending on if you like resistance or not.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2007-03-01 20:30
Well, that makes sense. Guess I like a fair bit of resistance... essentially up to the point where I can't blow a clean note on the thing any more. Beyond a certain point pp is impossible and everything turns to fluff and your brains dribble out your ears. But neither do I like things too soft... the tone runs away on me. There's a balance to be struck. The right reed is critical. But I guess the 'sweet spot' for resistance depends what mouthpiece you're on.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Koo Young Chung
Date: 2007-03-02 04:33
I was hoping some deeper insights,but most people here have no clue
what it is ,even though it is spoken frequently.
As Chaumeau Joe pointed out,resistance(or more correctly ,impedance)is not an abstract vague term.
It has a well defined,precise meaning just like electrical resistance has a
specific value.
Let me give you an example.
If you hit a piano key with same force(or speed) each piano makes different
volume of sounds.When it makes a big sound we say that piano has a low
resistance(impedance).
Likewise,a clarinet sounds differently in volume even though you use exactly same mp,reed,barrel and blow same force with same embouchure.
Each clarinet(or any instruments) radiate sound differently.
Some radiate easily.(big sound with less effort)--->low resistance
Some radiate not so easily(smaller sound)---> high resistance
If I rephrase my question,what features makes a clarinet more resistantor less?
Foe example,is it the taper,bore radius,under cutting,polishing or anythung else?
Of course diff. mp reeds change this property,but here, let's assume same
mp,reed and barrel for simplicity.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chalumeau Joe
Date: 2007-03-02 06:07
Koo Young Chung: You may find some good overview and references here:
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/pasp/Woodwinds.html
(Goes into some detail on the effects of tonehole impedance, main bore admittance, etc.)
The writings of Arthur Benade may also be helpful:
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/marl/Benade/writings/70s.html
Also,
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/marl/Benade/documents/Benade-Impedance-1982.pdf
(Good reference on impedance and impulse response measurements, if you want to try your own hand at it.)
Make sure you check out the John Backus Archive at the ccrma.stanford.edu site, as well. Not much to download, but a lot of potentially relevant references that are available from the "Journal of the Acoustical Society of America". (As I recall, full membership is ~$125/yr, or you can buy individual articles for ~$25.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2007-03-02 09:31
Arguably, from an engineering point of view, a clarinet is actually a negative-resistance device: the harder you blow, the less air goes through the instrument. Eventually the reed clamps shut. For moderate air pressure, the instrument becomes an oscillator.
If you're talking about /volume/ as a function of /power input/, that to me sounds like 'efficiency'.
Big sound with little effort = 'efficient'.
'Resistance' describes better the pressure at which the best oscillation is obtained. Best sound at high pressure = resistant; best sound at low pressure = free-blowing.
I haven't played enough clarinets to comment on the effect of the clarinet bore. But the mouthpiece has a very large effect. Some mouthpieces give a huge sound - the payback is usually a loss of control and refinement. This is an important balance to find.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
