 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: chlpuduk
Date: 2010-04-24 21:18
Hi all,
I will be finishing up my undergrad in engineering next year, and I am writing a thesis about physics of clarinet.
Does anyone know a good place to start with (e.g. any books or webpages that would focus on this subject)?
In addition, could you think of any topic at undergraduate level? I am thinking of looking at how each part of clarinet vibrates in response to a certain frequency, and how overall tuning in different range is affacted.
The reason I've chosen this topic is that I can't get away from playing clarinet! I've been playing it seriously, so hopely it wouldn't be too hard for me to play long tones with wierd equipments on my clarinets.
Any advice would be appreciated, and please feel free to e-mail me as well.
Jong
Post Edited (2010-04-24 23:55)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2010-04-24 22:03
I would highly recommend that you look up the physio-acoustic properties of a "stopped cylindrical pipe".
The clarinet's sound, layout, physics are all based on this characteristic. If you start there you will have a firm foundation upon which to move forward.
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phat Cat
Date: 2010-04-24 23:59
Google Arthur Benade. He was a physicist whose career was dedicated to the acoustics of instruments, focusing on woodwinds and especially the clarinet. S. Fox produces clarinets based on Benade's designs.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2010-04-25 00:02
Phat Cat beat me to it. I'd also suggest checking out the writings of Arthur Benade. I saw him at a lecture many years ago, and he was a fascinating guy.
One thing I remember was his "tacet horn." If my memory is correct, the bore was modified in such a way that it was impossible to get a sound on this clarinet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2010-04-25 16:31
The University of New South Wales has done a lot of great work on wind instrument acoustics. Look here:
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/reprints/AAclarinet.pdf
and branch out.
Good luck.
See also the thread here on clarinet material properties.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rsholmes
Date: 2010-04-26 01:51
In addition to Benade, try "Acoustical Aspects of Woodwind Instruments" by Cornelis Johannes Nederveen.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: timg
Date: 2010-04-27 13:23
How are you planning to tackle the subject? I've always wondered if it would be possible to model the air-column in three dimensions (taking the clarinet walls as being perfectly rigid). If you could make a simulation which matched reality reasonably closely, I think a lot of people would be interested.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tdinap
Date: 2010-04-27 21:36
If you're wondering about topics, there have always been a couple of things I've wanted to study more in depth, but definitely don't have time to at this point:
1. The effects of after-market barrels and bells on the physics of the air column and properties of the sound. I don't know how much mathematical research has been done in this field, but if it's not totally covered already, it would be fascinating. I'd imagine it would be significantly easier to simulate and model than mouthpiece-related issues, too.
2. Materials--how different types of materials affect the sound given an identical design, and more interesting to me--how wood is affected by short- and long-term playing and how it affects the sound.
3. The physics of various musical techniques--could be as basic as how register-switching works to more complicated things: multiphonics, physical interactions between multiple instruments' sound (in unison or harmony), interesting concepts relating to integrating electronics into clarinet-based music.
4. If you're really ambitious and into mathematical/computer simulations, perhaps analyzing some of the nonlinearities and other issues that prevent computers from producing anything close to a passable clarinet sound.
It sounds like you're interested in play-testing a lot of these things--if I were you, I probably would try to set up a more controlled environment than that for your primary work, at least if you're planning to get as quantitative as I would expect from a thesis. It's always good to have a practical, real-world reference to compare to, but the most "rigorous" (if slightly less fun) way to do this kind of thing would be to do it in a very controlled way.
Dang, now you've got me wishing I did one of these...
Tom
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: chlpuduk
Date: 2010-04-27 22:48
Thank you all for great comments/references. You really dazzled me!
Tom, I totally agree with your "rigorous" point, although I will have to spend whole summer learning how to simulate with MATLAB or other language. But, it seems very interesting, and I will keep this in my mind too.
Jong
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: hhuey1
Date: 2010-04-28 19:55
For my graduate physics lab project, I looked & compared the frequency spectrum of various brands of clarinets back in the days when frequency analyzers were spinning drums!!!
This meant I had to record the notes of each clarinet and weigh in the frequency response of the tape recorder. Boy did that take a long time.
Today you can play into a mike and the frequency analyzer will give you an instantaneous frequency spectrum.
After that I built an artificial embouchure and succeeded in producing notes that did not sound too horrible.
Herb
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: CWH
Date: 2010-04-28 21:00
A great resource is ""Clarinet Acoustics" by O. Lee Gibson isbn 0-253-32576-5
Study, Practice, Play and Enjoy.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2010-04-29 01:54
I cannot recommend Gibson's book --- in my opinion it's barely more than a brochure, and is pretty much a hodgepodge of clarinet folk myths, "urban legends" and unsubstantiated anecdotal information --- except when he quotes Benade, which begs the question, why not just go to the source and read Benade?
Post Edited (2010-04-29 01:55)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 78s2CD
Date: 2010-04-30 19:19
As many have mentioned, the work of Art Benade is an excellent starting point. However, a striking feature of any of his work that I've read is that he treats the reed a valve that simply opens and closes in response to the vibrations of the air column. This model does not allow for the exploration of the effects of the resonance behavior of the reed and its coupling with the vibrations both in the air column of the instrument and in the body cavety. I'm sure that work along these lines has progressed since Benade's time. However, as far as I know, there still seems to be a disconnect between the common dismissal by acousticians of the importance of reed and body cavety acoustics and what we, as musicians, know to be the case. Disclaimer: I'm not working in this field and am not up to date on the relevent literature.
Best regards,
Jim Lockwood
ex-physical-acoustician
Rio Rico AZ
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2010-04-30 22:21
Jim, I suspect there's been little if any new research because there's little if any money available to pay for the research. And little if any market for truly new or innovative clarinet designs. Sad.........
Post Edited (2010-04-30 22:32)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tom H
Date: 2010-05-01 21:02
Look into the fact that unlike most other (wood)winds, the clarinet overblows a 12th instead of an octave. This makes it a more difficult instrument to play in tune, as the clarinet is the worst for being "in tune with itself".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevensfo
Date: 2010-05-01 22:10
--"http://www.woodwindcourse.co.uk/user/image/clarinet_bore_design.doc"
..speaker bush?
...reverse cones?
... mode frequencies?
......antinodes?
Proofreading?
Steve
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2010-05-02 08:22
stevensfo wrote:
> --"http://www.woodwindcourse.co.uk/user/image/clarinet_bore_design.doc"
>
> ..speaker bush?
>
> ...reverse cones?
>
> ... mode frequencies?
>
> ......antinodes?
>
> Proofreading?
Steve,
In 2008, you posted this link yourself, commenting:
>> I thought this might be interesting. Rather nice explanation of different bores and the importance of undercutting.>>
I agreed with you then, writing:
"To the extent I understand these matters, the article seems a fair if simplified summary of the situation."
(This is contra Ken Shaw's assessment:
"I read it last night. While it has some interesting material, it's FULL of errors and misinformation. For every good idea, there's an idiotic one."
...which he continues to refuse to either withdraw or substantiate, thereby forfeiting any respect I might previously have had for him.)
Did you yourself change your mind? Do you find the terms you list above to be confusing?
With regard to errors of historical fact in the article, I can state that Daniel was a close friend and colleague of the late lamented Nicholas Shackleton -- in fact, he supervised much of the cataloguing and transfer of Nick's huge collection of old clarinets to Edinburgh University -- so he was certainly in a position to know something about, for example, the degree of undercutting and bore sizes implemented by manufacturers of instruments before the modern era.
The acoustics is simplified, as I said.
I can correct one thing: Daniel writes:
"[Benade] also made several recommendations on how to improve the clarinet, culminating in his own design for an improved clarinet. Sadly no manufacturer to my knowledge has ever incorporated any of his ideas in an instrument."
Daniel has forgotten that Stephen Fox makes the NX clarinet:
http://www.sfoxclarinets.com/Benade.html
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
