 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: William
Date: 2010-03-08 15:20
I posted this question to ESP on another thread, but though it might merit a feature of its own. The question: should college undergrad clarinet students be taught multiple tonguing skills as part of their course of study? If for no other reason than coping with the conductor who insists on taking the "William Tell Overture" or "Mid Summers Nights Dream" scherzo at 'warp speed' tempi.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2010-03-08 15:29
It almost seems a necessity these days. When I was a student, the few players known for such technique were really FEW, and NOT known to be in major symphony spots (except for Stanlely Drucker of course).
Charles Neidich used to say, even back then, that anyone can learn to double and triple tongue. I think now we all need to heed that advice.
.............Paul Aviles
Post Edited (2010-03-08 15:54)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-03-08 15:40
William, I just answered it in the other posting but here it is as well.
I think all students should learn to single tongue as clean and fast as possible and not rely on double tonguing at an early stage. With that said, at some point in their studies I do think it's a good idea to experiment with double tonguing especially if they can't single tongue very fast. It should not be used as a crutch though but comes in very handy when needed. The problem is that many teachers, especially orchestra players that teach, do not double tongue so they can't teach it themselves though there are many articles on the subject today.
When I was a student, 50s-60s, almost no one double tongued. We used to say it wasn't possible but that's changed. It is also becoming more important in playing contemporary music and as I stated before a student should learn to play all styles of music to make a living. So the short answer is, yes but not until a student has mastered single tonguing as well as possible first. ESP http://eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2010-03-08 16:11
Ed Palanker wrote:
> It should not
> be used as a crutch though
Ed,
In general:
If I could double tongue as cleanly as I single tongue and I decided to double tongue all the time, why would you consider it a crutch? Why wouldn't I want to depend on it? Why would it matter at all to the performance if no one could tell?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-03-08 17:25
Mark asked "if I could double tongue as cleanly as I single tongue and I decided to double tongue all the time, why would you consider it a crutch?" If you could double tongue and sound as good as you do single tonguing it's no longer a crutch, it's an alternative because you are able to single tongue well and choose to double tongue it instead.
It wouldn't matter at a performance at all. What I mean is that a student should learn to single tongue as well as they can. If they rely on double tonguing as a crutch to soon they will not learn to single tongue well. I'm talking about students in the learning stages of learning. They should learn to do both as well as possible, not one at the expense of the other. In my opinion it's a matter of which comes first, the chicken or the egg, or learn to walk before your run, in this case I believe single tonguing first, then double tonguing. That's my opinion and experience as a teacher of 45 years. ESP
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
Post Edited (2010-03-08 18:14)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2010-03-08 18:28
Ed Palanker wrote:
> No it wouldn't matter at a performance at all. What I mean is
> that a student should learn to single tongue as well as they
> can. If they rely on double tonguing as a crutch to soon they
> will not learn to single tongue well.
Again, Ed, (and belaboring the point ):
I hope that if someday you encounter someone who naturally double-tongues to start and sounds great you don't force them to single-tongue. It might never happen, it may never have happened ever, but why would a teacher work on things that don't matter in this student's case?
You say you always teach single tongue and then maybe double, and that this system has always worked for you. I don't doubt your veracity on that, but as we've been talking in other threads about such matters I'm bringing up the requirement for teachers to be very flexible.
I have found many teachers and professors - though almost all I have worked with are outside the musical realm - to be very inflexible when it comes to teaching, though they espouse that they are flexible. The assumption (a very human one) is that if they can't do something, there's no way a student can, and if a student does accomplish something they can't do, the student must be doing something wrong.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Barry Vincent
Date: 2010-03-08 19:09
I can easily double tongue and even triple tongue on Oboe and it sounds as good as the flute , but with the Clarinet it's possible but never convincing. Worth having a go at though. As a single reed instrument the Sax seems to respond to multiple tonguing better for some reason.
Skyfacer
Post Edited (2010-03-08 19:14)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-03-09 00:33
Mark, I'm not really sure where you're coming from. I've been teaching for many years, I don't think you have the same teaching experience. I've never had a student that could double tongue better or quicker than they could single tongue, never. I've had students that could single tongue faster then I could and I've taught many students that ended up being able to do the same thing after a few years of teaching them. If I ever had a student that could double tongue and sound really good at it I would never change them. I never tried to fix anything that wasn't broke. I would help them improve it. If I did ever get a student that could double tongue like that I would concentrate on teaching them how to single tongue properly as well, assuming they couldn't do that already. It's not a matter of one or the other. If a student can single tongue at say 16th notes to 132 they probably could get by without having to learn to double tongue though it would not hurt them to learn. On the other hand if a student could not single tongue fast then say, 16th notes at 112 they would have to learn to double tongue in order to compete. So I don't understand what you're trying to say. You can either tongue fast and clean when it is demanded of you in the music or you have to learn a technique to do it, period. I can't speak for all teachers but for me being flexible doesn't mean that I shouldn't teach the student do to things better. ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2010-03-09 01:14
Ed Palanker wrote:
> Mark, I'm not really sure where you're coming from.
Yes, I understand you missed the point.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2010-03-09 01:16
I agree with Ed completely.
You see this very often in flute players, and to some extent with saxophonists. They can double tongue, but they learned to double tongue before working up their single tongue to its maximum speed. Many times they end up with a margin of tempos they cannot articulate fast enough single tongue, or slow enough double tongue. This usually is between 120-132 or so.
To me, teaching double tonguing to someone who's young is like teaching them to circular breath before they have learned how to use proper breathing mechanics to get the maximum from what they have.
That being said, I'm now working on these techniques...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cxgreen48
Date: 2010-03-09 01:39
Mark,
Are you saying... if a person can double tongue perfectly well at any speed, would there even be a need for single tonguing at all?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2010-03-09 01:46
If there comes a time when I can double tongue better than I can single tongue at certain speeds, I'd have no problem doing it. Learning to double tongue has value and merit, but I'm not sure if I would suggest it to young players, or players who had a deficiency in their articulation to start with.
I have heard very few people who can double tongue that well. (maybe one?)
I asked my teacher about double tonguing a while back and if it was worth learning. He started playing a piece (can't remember, piece for orchestra) that had articulated triplets at an unreasonable tempo. His point was that some things are impossible to single tongue, and impossible or near impossible to "fake" (adding a slur hear or there...), and that the notes still HAD to be articulated.
Did his articulation sound as good as single tongue? no. Could you tell if you weren't sitting next to him? Probably not. The only indicator to the audience would be if they knew that it was not possible to single tongue at that speed.
As Ed says, and my teacher said also, it's basically learned out of necessity. Who wants to tell Kent Negano "sorry, i can't tongue that fast"?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2010-03-09 02:11
cxgreen48 wrote:
> Mark,
> Are you saying... if a person can double tongue perfectly well
> at any speed, would there even be a need for single tonguing at
> all?
As an analogy for a way of teaching ... yes. Why spend time on something that's useless to you, when there's so much more to explore? Maybe sometime the person might experiment on their own with another way, or through intellectual curiosity ask for guidance, but it certainly shouldn't be mandatory - there's nothing gained except the teacher's ego.
Most teachers, in my experience, have a set form for their teaching and are dogmatic, even though they don't think they are. If something is outside their experience they tend to dismiss it as not interesting or not worthwhile, or say that some other way is better without understanding - or even pretending to understand - the situation at hand.
My comments were not aimed at anyone in particular, but at teaching - music and other subjects. I once had a professor tell me I couldn't use a perfectly valid formula to come to a solution because "I hadn't learned it yet." I told that professor that if I hadn't learned the formula I couldn't be using it, and perhaps he needed a refresher course in logic.
I was young back then. But ... I'd say the same thing today. That's not teaching, it's "communicating by rote."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-03-09 02:45
Mark, without be disrespectful, what does your statement above have to do with a students need to be able to single tongue well, before or at least together, with the need or ability to double tongue. Just how many conservatory level students have you taught from being a freshman to graduation? When you say "most teachers" you might very well be right, I don't know because I don't know "most teachers". I do know some teachers that fit into that mold but I also know some that don't. I can't imagine any respected clarinet teacher that would not teach their students how to single tongue well if they are deficient at it. So I still don't get your point. Is it OK to be able to double tongue well and not be able to single tongue well when necessary? I just don't understand what your comments have to do with a student that can't single tongue well. Are we teachers supposed to ignore that deficiency in their advancement just because they can do something that many other students can't do, like double tongue? This conversation can go on forever and we'll never reach a conclusion because there are teachers that actually try to teach a student to be a complete player and you're commenting on what you believe to be "most" teachers. I've said my piece so I guess I'm done. A good clarinet player should be able to single tongue well before or along with the ability to double tongue if they can master that technique too. ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2010-03-09 03:01
Ed-
Nothing personal, but I find it incredibly contradictory that you've just spent time talking about how Russianoff was so great because his mentality was (in a nutshell) "whatever works." Now you are talking about the exact opposite. Mark's given you a situation, albeit hypothetical, where a students double tongue is great and you are mandating working on single tonguing. Are you for "whatever works" or are you not?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2010-03-09 03:02
Ed Palanker wrote:
> Mark, without be disrespectful, what does your statement above
> have to do with a students need to be able to single tongue
> well, before or at least together, with the need or ability to
> double tongue.
Respectfully, Ed - you don't get the point, and I don't think you read my posts carefully. It's not about you.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2010-03-09 03:22
The hypothetical student that can double tongue better than single tonguing...what tempos are we talking about here?
If it's 16ths slower than 126-132 that the student can't single tongue there's work to be done.
"Whatever works" is a statement too often used to cover up things. If there was a player who played a stock buffet mouthpiece and had a decent sound, a sound that was passable, a teacher shouldn't say "Whatever works". A better piece of equipment would unlock a much higher potential with that student (and they could use the buffet for the doorstop that it was meant to be).
"Whatever works" doesn't mean that if someone can articulate notes, then there's no more work to be done. It doesn't mean that if they have a reasonable sound then there's no more tonal work to do.
I'd like to edit my previous statement about double tonguing. I've NEVER heard someone double tongue in the area in question, say 120-132, and have it sound better than single tonguing. The only person I can think of is Bob Spring that sounded about the same as single tonguing.
This question posted is like saying "If a student is playing on a vito with a stock mouthpiece and rico royal reeds and sounds good means that they should never look for better equipment".
If I had heard someone sound professional on that equipment, then I would say of course not- why spend money on something they don't need? The fact is, that for me, the question about "what if someone can do something that I've never heard anyone do" to me is not relevant.
Perhaps other people have heard people double tongue better than Dr. Spring, or have different levels of acceptability for articulation...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2010-03-09 03:25
For the first question, maybe, sure, why not, at least in some situations. But:
>> If for no other reason than coping with the conductor who insists
>> on taking the "William Tell Overture" or "Mid Summers Nights Dream"
>> scherzo at 'warp speed' tempi.
"College undergrad clarinet students" is something far too general and hopefully the approach of their teachers is more specific to each student. This assumes a specific goal but there isn't one. Like when Ed wrote "compete" referring to something very specific that IMO isn't.
In a situation where the above example is relevant, then yes, it is always necessary for someone to learn a technique if that person wants to play something that they couldn't without this technique. But to say that generally about something specific is just impossible.
Post Edited (2010-03-09 06:52)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2010-03-09 03:26
To address the original question. Should college students be taught how to double tongue. Yes they should. Assuming the teacher can do it well themselves. It should be saved for after the student has a reasonably good single tongue and monitored so that their single tongue does not deteriorate while or after learning to double tongue.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: grifffinity
Date: 2010-03-09 04:10
NBeaty:
Quote:
To address the original question. Should college students be taught how to double tongue. Yes they should. Assuming the teacher can do it well themselves. It should be saved for after the student has a reasonably good single tongue and monitored so that their single tongue does not deteriorate while or after learning to double tongue.
I agree. It's a valid technique to have in one's bag of tricks, We all have to walk before we can run.
Mark:
Quote:
Most teachers, in my experience, have a set form for their teaching and are dogmatic, even though they don't think they are. If something is outside their experience they tend to dismiss it as not interesting or not worthwhile, or say that some other way is better without understanding - or even pretending to understand - the situation at hand.
I think style of teaching is also generational. I studied with a student of Bonade at my first school. This teacher was dogmatic, down to issuing every student the same mouthpiece personally refaced by him. My next teacher was 25+ years younger than the former and her style was completely different. She had her beliefs and preferences, but these were also reasons why I chose to study with her. At the end of the day, if it sounded good, she left it alone. She had suggestions if I had issues, but nowhere in the vacinity of "This is the only way to do this" attitude of teaching.
I'm 33 and have had my private studio for over 4 years. I approach my studio as a laboratory. Each student is unique, with their own set of issues and strengths. Some issues I've never seen before (keeping pinkies bent under the clarinet ?!?!?!) and I'm always coming up with ways to resolve issues. Two students with similar issues don't always have the same resolution. Each lesson allows me to learn how to teach more effectively and creatively.
I am deducing that you are probing Ed as to the why of requiring a student to learn single tongue if they have the most fantastic double tonguing technique which is indistinguishable from single tongue. To do so, just because you believe it to be an important technique, may not be in the best interest of the student and in fact a waste of valuable lesson time.
A more comparative example to highlight your point would be a student who anchor tongues being changed to the tip of tongue/tip of reed technique simply because the teacher only knows this way as correct. But if the anchor tongue is successful for that student why make the student change? Although anchor tongue may not be the best option for most clarinetists, to say it is the worst option for all clarinetist is being close minded. However, it would also be close minded of a student to not at least experiment with the possibilities of introducing a new point of view into their playing.
Post Edited (2010-03-09 04:12)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2010-03-09 07:14
>> If it's 16ths slower than 126-132 that the student
>> can't single tongue there's work to be done.
So anyone whose fastest single tonguing is 16ths at 126-131 is hopelessly forever stuck in oblivion! Where is the nearest nuthouse?!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2010-03-09 11:34
No. If thats the fastest single tongue then theres nothing to worry about! Free to move on to DT
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2010-03-09 11:47
It's not that I think double tonguing is necessary or unnecessary. That was irrelevant to my post.
It's that many teachers, in this case Ed, claim they are not dogmatic and are into "whatever works," when they are in fact not. I am not necessarily against dogmatism (the bundy was a good example above), but I am for anything that helps students and teachers figure out what is actually happening in their playing and teaching.
This contradiction of philosophies can be confusing for students and doesn't actually help anyone.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2010-03-09 13:19
>> No. If thats the fastest single tongue
>> then theres nothing to worry about!
I'm not worried... about that. Let me try another direction. To beat me in a race, you'd have to run the distance in no more than 12.40-13.10 seconds... Can you do that while single tonguing 16ths at 126-132 BPM?
Post Edited (2010-03-09 13:22)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2010-03-09 22:06
About a week ago, a high school student asked about double tonguing. In the response I posted, I mentioned that I don't care for traditional brass and flute double tonguing on the clarinet. However, I do like the method proposed by Michele Gingras and David Pino, and I think it really works.
Many years ago I studied with Keith Stein, and near the end of his life, he was intrigued by a student with a very quick tongue. If I remember the story right, the student used a slight side to side motion. I regret that I never had the chance to discuss this with him. I took this approach and combined it with Roger McKinney's suggestion of tonguing with "n," and was able to achieve some great tongue speeds.
I can single tongue most things, but here's something that has always given me fits (although I haven't encountered a lot of clarinet passages like it):
quarter note=128 or greater, straight sixteenth notes with two notes on each pitch such as CCBBAAGGFFEEDD. Many of you can probably single tongue this, but things like this have always been my Achilles' heel. After experimenting with these two double tonguing methods, I was finally able to get it to work.
Post Edited (2010-03-09 22:08)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-03-10 00:42
Vin, I'm not being contradictory, whatever works doesn't mean a teacher should not teach a student to play the clarinet properly. If a student can double tongue really well that's great, but they also need to single tongue well too. I don't know what's contradictory about that. If a student can play a great forte does that not mean you shouldn't teach them to play softly as well. Come on, I've never heard of a professional player that could not single tongue, at least pretty well. Double tonguing is an extra, it's great if you can learn to do it well, A decent single tongue is a necessity. It's that simple, any teacher worth their weight in reeds will teach a student to single tongue as well as possible. I'm sorry, if that's contradictory then I'm guilty. Even Russianoff would agree with me on that.
Mark said, "I once had a professor tell me I couldn't use a perfectly valid formula to come to a solution because "I hadn't learned it yet." I told that professor that if I hadn't learned the formula I couldn't be using it, and perhaps he needed a refresher course in logic."
Mark, I know you were not talking abut me, I didn't take it personal. It's just that there are teachers and there are teachers and they can't all be painted with the same broad brush. Just because you had the experiences you did don't mean that's necessarily the norm for ALL teachers, except me of course. If I'm still missing the point then so be it, I'm missing the point. Sometimes I just don't get it. Unless you've studied with "all" teachers you can't condemn them all for doing what you experienced". Some are that way, some are not, and I know it has nothing to do with me. ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-03-10 00:55
With all these posts listed here after William asked me this question I am standing by my original answer listed right under his question. In short, double tonguing is great to be able to learn how to do well, single tonguing is a necessity. ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2010-03-10 02:15
Ed-
Of course you'd work with someone on something that is deficient, but that's not what we are talking about. You're really missing the point entirely. I give up.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2010-03-10 09:17
You can't learn how to single tongue fast in a few lessons, nor with double. In fact, from experiece, it's much harder to double tongue cleanly; where the audience can't hear the difference. You need to be able to single tongue evenly and clean then work on the speed. After a player masters this, the person can and should learn how to double tongue. I can double tongue without issues, such as when an overzealous conductor on steroids decides to take the tempo of Mendellson's 4th Symphony to 150.
Without the skills of clean single tonguing you will never nail a symphony gig and if you want a job in one of the military bands you need to have fast fingers, be a really good sight reader, and be able to articulate really well.
So my feeling is if a person cannot keep up with the music, and you blow it during a concert, as a professional, well you have to learn to double tongue. As I said above you need to be able to articulate cleanly with single tonguing first before taking on the challenges of double tonguing. Most clarinetist need to spend a lot of time developing both skills, sometimes as long as a year or more.
Most clarinetist, with slow single tonguing skills, actually suffer from fingers not keeping up with the tongung. For example, if you record yourself practicing and you mess up a somewhat easier passage such as from the Mozart Concerto or the quintet, then play back the recording at a slow speed you will find the fingers react slower than your tongue and that's why you mess up.
With strong practicing skills your brain will learn to work together as one with your fingers and your tongue.
Some of you may think I'm not correct, maybe nuts, about the fingers being slower than your tongue, therefore I would strongly suggest recording yourself playing and I would say I'm right about 90 percent of the time or more. Recording yourself playing will surely add great value to your practice sessions; not just tonguing, but your sound, playing in tune, controlling the high register, as high as C4.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2010-03-10 20:47
The Fable of the Fortran Fanatic
Once upon a time, a college student enrolled in a basic computer programming course. One day, the instructor made a difficult program assignment in assembler language. The student, who was bright and stayed ahead of the course found he couldn't solve the problem in assembler language but, because he had read ahead, he realized that the solution was a snap in Fortran. So he wrote the program in Fortran. When he submitted his solution, the instructor said, "This is no good. You haven't learned Fortran yet." (Meaning, "I haven't introduced Fortran into the course, yet.") The student, however, responded, "Well, if I haven't learned Fortran, how could I have used it to solve the problem. You need a refresher course in logic." Shortly thereafter, the student dropped the course and went to work as a freelance programmer. He became an expert at using Fortran. There wasn't a problem he couldn't write a Fortran program to solve.
One day the former student was called out on an emergency. A problem threatening world destruction needed an immediate computer solution. He analyzed the problem and quickly wrote out several lines of brilliant Fortran code. The problem was solved and the world saved .... or would have been except, you see, the folks he was working for didn't have a Fortran compiler.
Moral: Sometimes it's worthwhile to learn how to do things the hard way even when there may be a shortcut at hand. (or, perhaps: Flexibility ≠ Whatever Works.)
Best regards,
jnk
Post Edited (2010-03-10 20:48)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2010-03-10 20:55
Jack Kissinger wrote:
> The problem was
> solved and the world saved .... or would have been except, you
> see, the folks he was working for didn't have a Fortran
> compiler.
>
And considering that the assembler course that the instructor had taught was for a Honeywell DPS 6 Level 66 computer and those don't exist anymore (AFAIK), the assembler course wouldn't have helped either.
> Moral: Sometimes it's worthwhile to learn how to do things the
> hard way even when there may be a shortcut at hand. (or,
> perhaps: Flexibility ≠ Whatever Works.)
Or perhaps the moral is that learning never stops, and relevance of your skill set to the environment is important.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-03-11 17:20
Well Vin, I'm going to try one more time but perhaps, as you said, I just don't get it. A direct answer to the original posted question. Yes, I think it would be a good idea to teach multiple tonguing as part of an advanced students course of study.
The only problem I see that many teachers and players don't know how to do multiple tonguing themselves so it may be very difficult for them to teach it because those players have not had to need to learn it being that they can single tongue fast enough, especially most orchestra players.
Now, as far as the secondary question that came out of my answer to "what ever works". I didn't mean that you don't teach the students the basic fundamentals just because they are able to do something another way. There are times that double tonguing is great to be able to do but there are also times that single tonguing might actually sound better. By "whatever works" I meant in a given passage, I wasn't clear on that I guess. If a student can sound really good doubling tonguing a passage like the Mid Summers Night Dream passage I agree that there's no need to force them to single tongue it. I'm sure, as Mark has suggested, that there are teachers that would do that. I don't think a teacher should do that and I think Russianoff would have agreed with me. What I meant is that you should still teach a student to be able to single tongue well too, not in place of, but in additional too.
There's also the point that I didn't make, that student may become a clarinet teacher in the future, don't you think they need to know how to single tongue too, I do. I know some teachers make all their students play exactly the same way no matter what, I don't agree with that teaching philosophy and anyone that reads my posts knows that. Teach to the student, not to the book. I've experienced both types of teachers in my learning days so I know the difference. When I was studying bass clarinet with Joe Allard he asked me to bring in my regular clarinet once and told me I was tonguing wrong so he showed me the "correct" way to tongue. After it was obvious that I couldn't do it "his" correct way he concluded that my tongue was to long or big to do it the correct way so advised me to do what I've been doing. That was the reason Russianoff never tried to change me because he said my tonguing sounded good so it didn't need to be changed. He just gave me some exercises and etudes to work on to help improve the speed. ESP
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
Post Edited (2010-03-11 20:50)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
