 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: cojo489
Date: 2007-04-07 04:24
Hello,
I recently became interested in the jazzier side of the clarinet, and I have noticed that there is a signficant difference between the tone of a clarinet played in classical compositions and the tone of a clarinet played in jazz compositions. I was wondering why that is. Is there a specific mouthpiece or clarinet necessary? or is it all in the embrasure?
Thanks
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kilo
Date: 2007-04-07 09:31
Jazz (and klezmer) clarinet usually requires more volume, more ability to color notes (growl, flutter, and speechlike effects), and more flexiblility to bend the pitch compared to classical ensemble playing where blending and ability to hold the tonal center are more important. Jazz clarinetists typically choose mouthpieces with larger tip openings, shorter lay (I think), and prefer clarinets with a larger bore — Boosey & Hawkes, Selmer Centered Tone. Check out this monograph about the style of Johnny Dodds (recently posted here by GBK) for some insights into early New Orleans jazz clarinet:
http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-0118103-203326/unrestricted/Martin_dis.pdf
There are dozens of great jazz clarientists to listen to and study — as far as current jazz clarinetists go, you really can't beat Ken Peplowski.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jmcgann
Date: 2007-04-07 12:12
Ken Peplowski and Eddie Daniels (among others) play first rate jazz and classical music on clarinet...
www.johnmcgann.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2007-04-07 12:51
There are a lot of posts on this Board that there "is" or "is not" a jazz clarinet, "is" or "is not" a type of jazz clarinet mouthpiece, etc. Suffice it to say that there are many opinions on this and most are strongly held.
Of course there are also a lot of jazz clarinet styles. Since jazz places a premium on individuality, individual phrasing, improvisation, and a unique tonal sound, to say that Eddie Daniels or Ken Peplowski or Don Byron plays a modern, smaller bore instrument (in Daniels' case for both jazz and classical if you believe he really plays what he endorses) typically used for classical performances does not really prove or disprove anything. Dr. Michael White plays in quite a different style of jazz with quite a different tone and apparently uses 20-30s period clarinets as do a number of others who play in the rough, smoky, older New Orleans style. Could an accomplished artist like Daniels or Peplowski or Byron get their "sound" from an old Selmer BT or CT clarinet from the 1940s or even an older Selmer K series clarinet from the 20s/30s -- probably. Can Dr. White get his sound from a modern greenline Buffet -- probably. But with how much effort? And can the final 2% of nuances from the different clarinets styles be achieved if the jazz players' style and sound (ranging from Byron to Daniels to Peplowski to White and Goines) be achieved if there is a mismatch between horn type and style? It is this last 2% of performance that probably is the key element in the arguments about whether there is or is not a jazz clarinet. And in jazz, it is this last 2% that often determines individual "style" since ideally there are as many styles as accomplished players in jazz.
It seems to me that the real issue is how the player's techniques and intentions are matched to the specific characteristics on one clarinet or another (perfect or wide 12ths, flat bottom F, mechanically enhanced keywork that makes faster note changes possible, etc.). If the technique, intentions, and clarinet characteristics are optimally matched to produce an individual style that achieves the "sound" the jazz player is striving for, then she or he is playing a jazz clarinet.
George
Post Edited (2007-04-07 12:58)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jane84
Date: 2007-04-07 20:08
Most jazz clarinetists play on a lot lighter reeds, too, no?
-jane
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevesklar
Date: 2007-04-07 23:46
When I play my Selmer CT in bigband I either use a larger tip mpc and a slightly softer reed 3 to 3-1/2 or on my crystal a 4. So you could say it depends. When I play "classical" on my LL or Classic II or SML I play my smaller tip mpcs and normally a 4 reed.
problem is when I blow harder I have to use a harder reed otherwise it tends to close up more frequently. Then you get the issue that the clarinet is my double on sax and the cane reed dries up, so I may opt for a softer reed to get better initial response - - i really have to try synthetics one of these days.
BUT, the clarinetest that I know that are not trained clarinet players tend to play softer reeds in general.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2007-04-08 05:38
I use the same mouthpiece for everything I play and all other jazz clarinetists that I know or spoke with too, so that's possible. I'm guessing some jazz clarinetists use different mouthpieces for different music.
When you say you heard a difference between the sound of classical playing and jazz playing - imo those definitions are too broad. There is also sometimes a very similar sound in some jazz and some classical.
About the specific mouthpiece/clarinet - I've played (tried) many clarinets including a couple of big bore ones and too many of the normal French ones, and the one I play is sort of "French style" but has a slightly bigger bore than most. Usually (but not always) I played them all with my mouthpiece. I sounded pretty much the same on every clarinet. There were some differences, but in general I always sounded like me.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: redwine
Date: 2007-04-08 12:48
Hello,
I strive to have a "good" sound whether I'm playing classical or jazz clarinet. I use the same set-up for both. It is true that I manipulate the sound more for jazz, but the core is still there. It's my uneducated theory that the reason the clarinet lost favor in the jazz world was at least in part because some clarinetists had such awful tone.
Ben Redwine, DMA
owner, RJ Music Group
Assistant Professor, The Catholic University of America
Selmer Paris artist
www.rjmusicgroup.com
www.redwinejazz.com
www.reedwizard.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roger Aldridge
Date: 2007-04-08 16:16
Ben,
Have to disagree with you on your last sentence.
When it comes to specific jazz clarinetists tonal beauty is in the ear of the beholder. Johnny Dodds, as an example, did not have a clarinet sound that would work in an orchestra. But, my goodness, he produced beautiful music with his sound. I can listen to Johnny Dodds and other early players hours on end.
It's not possible to take close to 100 years worth of jazz clarinetists and lump them together. More discernment is needed. Superb clarinetists can be found in every period of jazz history.
Today's jazz clarinetists and doublers are in a different world from our forebearers back in the 20's and 30's. Many jazz clarinetists now are also classically trained and have beautiful tones. Even going back 50 years I can think of musicians like John LaPorta, Phil Woods, Gene Quill, and others who had really nice clarinet tones. If memory serves, John LaPorta studied clarinet (and composition) at the Manhattan School of Music and Phil Woods was a clarinet major at Juillard.
It's my sense that the clarinet can be perceived as having a somewhat lesser role in jazz not because of tonal quality but because many of the hugely powerful innovators primarly played saxophone (Coleman Hawkins, Lester Young, Charlie Parker, John Coltrane, Sonny Rollins) or trumpet (Louis Armstrong, Dizzy, Miles). Of course, this is a simplification. But, I'd be hard pressed to think of a clarinetist who had such a profound influence on the evolution of jazz as an improvisational art form as Armstrong, Parker, or Coltrane. Sidney Bechet comes close but his influence is shared with the soprano saxophone. On the other hand, I have a LONG list of jazz clarinetists who were and are extremely gifted players. These guys are my heroes!
Roger
Post Edited (2007-04-09 00:01)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2007-04-08 16:42
Hi Ben,
Having listened to your jazz and classical CDs, I wonder if it is the 2-5% difference between how you approach bending notes in Sweet Georgia Brown as opposed to "purism" in the classical repertory is a significant part of what defines your own jazz style: fairly purist but interpretive of jazz classics, particularly the music of New Orleans.
As an example, were one to listen to your interpretation of SGB as opposed to that of Benny Goodman or Dr. Michael White or Victor Goines (who I saw brilliantly perform the song with Wynton Marsalis a few weeks ago), there would be some fairly obvious differences in the degree of bending tones, "growling," "reediness," and of course phrasing. If I had to put the four of you on a continuum from "jazz specific not like classical" to "smaller difference from classical" I would rank Dr. White as the most "jazz specific" and you as the most "smaller difference from classical." I would rate Mr. Goines as closer to Dr. White, and Mr. Goodman as closer to you, but only at the end of his career.
Larry Combs and Eddie Daniels have a CD together ("Crossing the Line," available on Amazon) in which they start by playing classical music, move to set "jazz like" pieces written by classical composers, shift to a set piece written by William (Bill) Smith who is well known for his work with Dave Brubeck, and then perform several straight-ahead mainstream jazz tunes (of which Blue Monk is the best, in my opinion). I would argue that each adjusts his style just a little (2-5%) as the style and "freeddom" of the music changes. But it is also true that one would not mistake either of these guys, playing modern small bore clarinets, for Sidney Bechet or Johnny Dodds or Dr. White. It strikes me that Mr. Combs and Mr. Daniels approach the "consistency of style from classical to jazz" much as you do. [Again, I have no doubt that Mr. Combs or Mr. Daniels or you could sound like Sidney Bechet if any of you wanted to, probably without a lot of practice, but when recording jazz none of you seem to want to do this.] The player who seems to most willing to shift from a pure classically trained approach (quite consistent with 20th Century music) to a growly New Orleans sound (with stops in Klezmer and movie studio music) seems to be Don Byron who seems to want to make these shifts, sometimes within the same song; these shifts appear to partially define Mr. Byron's jazz style.
George
P.S. If anyone wants to listen to short clips from the tracks of the Combs-Daniels CD, these are currently (April 2007) up on Amazon.com.
Post Edited (2007-04-08 16:58)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
