 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-10-20 10:07
In the past I've had several snotty comments directed at me for using an A clarinet in pit bands.
To me, the whole point of clarinet playing is you have a set of instruments to avoid playing in remote keys or to make certain things easier, so if there's a part written out for Bb clarinet but is much easier on an A, then I'd use an A. I'm sure most of us would as we all know it's much easier and fluid to run around in written C Major than it is in written B Major.
The comments made were along the lines of 'you're cheating' or 'an A clarinet has a completely different sound', both comments coming from other clarinet players, one of which wasn't even up to playing a simple tune in two sharps. If you have an A clarinet in your possession, then why not use it? That's what it's there for and why you bought it in the first place.
But if a clarinet part in any given reed book is only scored for Bb (as is often the case) and there are a lot of show numbers written out in five or six sharps and there's plenty of time to change from one clarinet to another, then to me it makes perfect sense to use an A clarinet in these instances if it makes things much easier. And without being accused of being a cheat as it's only being resourceful.
Has anyone else experienced this sort of thing from other players for using the 'wrong' clarinet?
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2011-10-20 11:26
Hi Chris,
I had this some years ago by a person in a pit. Frankly this person should have been ashamed to call themselves a clarinettist. I basically said as much during the run.
I see no problem in it whatsoever, the differences are negligible in my opinion. A parts do exist in some shows like Into the Woods.
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-10-20 13:27
For someone to be complaining about you using an A clarinet instead of a Bb is pretty ridiculous especially considering that many of the pit orchestras I've seen have several of the parts being covered by someone playing an electric keyboard due to budget cuts. They should probably be grateful that there is someone playing an actual instrument instead of a synth.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2011-10-20 13:31
The standard argument against substituting clarinets in "classical" music is that it violates the expressed preference of the composer (who may or may not have been able to tell an A or C from a Bb). In the case of pit music, the orchestration is often not even done by the composer. It's altered, sometimes drastically, from the "original" for smaller local or touring groups and "updated" for revivals.
Case in point: It incenses me, for example, that the big clarinet part in The Farmer and the Cowman Dance (Oklahoma!) in the most recent revival version was re-assigned to a *soprano sax!* (the only reason I can think of is to give someone an extra doubling fee). Yet someone like the ones who are making the snarkey comments to you would complain if you used an A clarinet for that otherwise really awkward bit in the introduction to Oh, What a Beautiful Morning. If they can substitute soprano and tenor saxes where there weren't saxes of any kind in the original or a synth for the entire string section even in professional theaters, who cares - even if the Bb and A clarinets sound a little different - what clarinet you play on? It's still a clarinet, at least. They threw both Rodgers's and Bennett's expressed intentions out the window long ago.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Elkwoman46
Date: 2011-10-20 13:45
Hi, Chris,...I know I sound completely amateur by saying this, but for me the truth is, that when children are instructed to begin various instruments: the trumpet, the clarinet, the saxophone, etc., and all their youth they are never told that, for example, a C is really not a C on Clarinet but a Bb, and so forth, I think in the musical world it already sets up a failing because the child's ear is getting confused when later they try to hear other instruments that are C, instruments for example. It is all just one big blur, in my opinion. There is no finite sound for C in the brain because it has to cross over the walls of re-hearing it correctly from what they grew up with.
I think this really causes hearing issues.
I completely understand that all these things were done so that fingerings were the same for all clarinetists on all clarinet instruments, for example, but I just wonder if it really helps...that is for the sake of hearing correctly.
In that regard for the backwardness of it all, I think the help of the different keyed clarinets to play faster, even if it altogether even more confusing hearing wise because the sounds coming from the other keyed instruments in the clarinet just add to the incorrectness of the actual notes, still makes it easier to play along with others.
In that regard, it is essential to have the other instruments at hand...for that is and was the whole purpose of the clarinet fingerings in the first place...to be able to have the same fingering for all the clarinets. But I do believe this is a real hardship for all people who play keyed instruments that are not in C.
Frankly, I don't know what I would do without my tuner...I'd be so lost because of all of this. Take for example, in a band, you are tuning your instrument to THEIR concert pitch C, but you have to be perfect in Bb...how would you really know if the other instrument is hitting C, but if you are a kid in school, how would you even know where you stood if they did not even tell you that you were not playing a C but a Bb? So you are looking through a fog of confusion. But then when you find out the truth of the matter, you have to do a major rewind of hearing and the brain. But later after years of playing along with the band, I think in a way the hearing is still a bit confused and confidence is lacking. Because every note is off on the sheet music, so you are ALWAYS hearing each note incorrectly from what you see on the paper.
Perhaps one day, sheet music of old will be converted to a play reality notes and clarinetists and others will actually be playing their Bb clarinet differently. Perhaps.
In the meantime, I think you are blessed, Chris, to have these other clarinets where you can salvage some of the complexities created by these fingerings that are not actual. I do read that C Clarinets have not been really perfected and are a minority in the Clarinet world, but oh, I so believe it can be perfected. Perhaps one day the world will see a new invention for the Clarinetist where the notes will be actual, sound great, and be easy to play--along with all C music, and even perhaps, other instruments will also be all on the same page, and all old music will be updated...would that not be wonderful????
I think it would be good for all children who love instruments and who want to develop good musical ears, hearing correctly, not having to be retrained to hear, etc.
Furthermore, I just wanted to say, I have never seen a Clarinet beginner book (and I have lots of other books for various kinds of instruments as well) that explains this, what I have been talking about above, to show the child that they are indeed not playing a C but a Bb per the instructions given. Never. These books just start teaching a child the notes as if these were true actual notes per the sheet music given in the book.
By the way, I have never checked into A clarinets...Chris, where do they stand on the sheet music: how many semi-tones are they from a C? Down or up? Are they larger instruments? Sorry, I don't know, but I would like to know more about them. Thanks.
I went to our local music store yesterday, and there was not a single clarinet on display. Just some trumpets and some flutes for band instruments. Life in a small town...
Karen MSC
Post Edited (2011-10-20 14:21)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JamesOrlandoGarcia
Date: 2011-10-20 14:26
I think it is a wise approach. Personally I try to get the darkest most matched sound from bass clarinet all the way to Eb. A great example of this ideal would be the Chicago Clarinet Trio recording where you cannot tell which clarinet is which in parts even though its a trio composed of an Eb, Bb/A, Bass.
When taking an audition at Idyllwild when I was 18, I played a section of the waltz on A clarinet because the trills sounded much better (G/A trills opposed to F#/G# etc). I was told later that it was part of the reason why I was principal of the orchestra that year over mostly college and graduate students.
I just played Barber of Seville and I played the the C clarinet part on A. It makes more sense because of the key signature and then I didn't need to switch horns for the whole overture.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2011-10-20 14:46
I once played an E-flat clarinet part on a B-flat because it didn't go very high. Conductor had no idea, orchestra had no idea (except clarinet section), audience had no idea. In the scheme of things, not a big deal. The piece didn't fall apart. I imagine it went the same way it would have even with the E-flat in. It was a violin concerto and she wasn't wearing much so I don't think anyone was looking at the 3rd clarinet chair...
Same goes for your situation - ridiculous that someone even used the energy to comment on it! And tell him from the bboard that we hope he enjoys B major!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2011-10-20 15:20
Author: kdk
Elkwoman46 wrote:
> Hi, Chris,...I know I sound completely amateur by saying this,
> but for me the truth is, that when children are instructed to
> begin various instruments: the trumpet, the clarinet, the
> saxophone, etc., and all their youth they are never told that,
> for example, a C is really not a C on Clarinet but a Bb, and so
> forth,
I'm not Chris, but I have some reactions:
The truth is that many teachers *do* teach this to their students at a fairly early point in the students' development.
> I think in the musical world it already sets up a
> failing because the child's ear is getting confused when later
> they try to hear other instruments that are C, instruments for
> example. It is all just one big blur, in my opinion. There is
> no finite sound for C in the brain because it has to cross over
> the walls of re-hearing it correctly from what they grew up
> with.
For most kids (or for that matter, I believe, most adults) this doesn't cause confusion at all and they grow up with no more or less a clear, "finite" sound for C in the brain than their colleagues who play non-transposing instruments.
> I think this really causes hearing issues.
>
With absolute respect, indeed maybe a little envy, I'm beginning to suspect that your difficulties with this may stem from a particular ability *you* as an individual may have to recall a clear imprint of specific pitches in your imagination (your "mind's ear"). Many people call this ability "perfect pitch" but regardless of what you call it, it is possessed by a minority of people who variously find it a gift or a curse. I do know an oboist with perfect pitch who at one time also played clarinet and gave it up, among other reasons, she says, because she couldn't come to terms with having a C come out sounding like a B-flat. So for some people it can be a genuine problem to be dealt with. You may well be one of those people.
But for most of us, we would find it difficult or impossible accurately to pull a given pitch out of the blue. Some of us have a kind of learned tactile sense of what specific notes feel and sound like on our instruments and can find a pitch that way, but I truly don't believe that most of us who have played enough to have acquired that kind of pitch memory have any problem doing the translation that's needed to hear/feel an F5 in our imaginations (I always imagine notes on a B-flat instrument) and identify it as an E-flat.
> I completely understand that all these things were done so that
> fingerings were the same for all clarinetists on all clarinet
> instruments, for example, but I just wonder if it really
> helps...that is for the sake of hearing correctly.
>
It may very well cause problems for you, but for most of us, I believe, it doesn't cause the hearing confusion you describe and does ease the learning curve that would result from having everything named differently on each instrument.
> Frankly, I don't know what I would do without my tuner...I'd be
> so lost because of all of this. Take for example, in a band,
> you are tuning your instrument to THEIR concert pitch C, but
> you have to be perfect in Bb...how would you really know if the
> other instrument is hitting C, you have to play the Bb which is
> actually the C, but if you are a kid in school, how would you
> even know where you stood if they did not even tell you that
> you were not playing a Bb but a C? So you are looking through
> a fog of confusion.
First of all, if I understand what you're saying here, it's the other way around. The clarinets are playing C, which is really a B-flat. And of course it really doesn't matter much to me as an individual player in a band (or orchestra) what note anyone else is playing. My only connection to what anyone else is doing pitch-wise is though my ear - what interval am I playing with another part? am I in tune with the pitch environment around me? where do I fit in the harmonic scheme? It really doesn't make a difference to me as a player what anyone calls their notes or what their written parts tell them to play. So, in effect, I'm not looking through a fog of confusion. I'm not looking at anything except my own part (and sometimes the conductor). I'm listening to everything else without the mediating influence of pitch names.
If it's only a question of knowing what note to play when tuning, that can be learned easily enough.
> But then when you find out the truth of
> the matter, you have to do a major rewind of hearing and the
> brain. But later after years of playing along with the band, I
> think in a way the hearing is still a bit confused and
> confidence is lacking. Because every note is off on the sheet
> music, so you are ALWAYS hearing each note incorrectly from
> what you see on the paper.
>
Again, I truly believe you may be describing a relatively unique reaction to a problem that doesn't even occur to most people. My students "find out the truth of the matter" relatively early - pretty much as soon as they begin playing with a piano accompaniment. The letter names are just that - names to be applied to whatever pitch they're producing on the instrument they're playing. It doesn't bother them (or me, to personalize this just a little more) that the note we call A on the piano and the note we call A on the B-flat clarinet (or that I call A on an A or E-flat clarinet or any of the saxes) all sound different.
> Perhaps one day, sheet music of old will be converted to a play
> reality notes and clarinetists and others will actually be
> playing their Bb clarinet differently. Perhaps.
>
Probably not because it would be a solution without a problem to most people.
>
> I think it would be good for all children who love instruments
> and who want to develop good musical ears, hearing correctly,
> not having to be retrained to hear, etc.
>
I'd need to see evidence that all children who want to develop good musical ears are actually capable of developing the kind of pitch memory I think you're describing. Again, I believe it's a special ability, whether it be gift or curse. The best evidence of that, for me, is that most of the string players and flute, bassoon or trombone players I know have no better sense of absolute pitch than I do.
> Furthermore, I just wanted to say, I have never seen a Clarinet
> beginner book (and I have lots of other books for various kinds
> of instruments as well) that explains this, what I have been
> talking about above, to show the child that they are indeed not
> playing a C but a Bb per the instructions given. Never. These
> books just start teaching a child the notes as if these were
> true actual notes per the sheet music given in the book.
>
Books don't teach. Teachers teach. Books only provide material. Though I'm not certain that some of the standard methods don't bring this up in the second or third volume. There is nothing to stop a teacher from including the concept of "concert" and "transposed" pitch at a very early stage.
> By the way, I have never checked into A clarinets...Chris,
> where do they stand on the sheet music: how many semi-tones are
> they from a C? Down or up? Are they larger instruments?
> Sorry, I don't know, but I would like to know more about them.
> Thanks.
>
A clarinets are slightly longer (and often narrower-bored) and play a half-step lower, so a written C sounds a "concert" A (440 hz, unless you play in Berlin, Moscow, etc...).
Karl
Post Edited (2011-10-20 15:22)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2011-10-20 15:46
Thank you Karl, for taking the time to write out my thoughts!
I'd like to add one point: What we call "C" is relatively arbitrary anyway! Pitch is not necessarily an absolute. If you're playing at A=415 you'll be confused anyway...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Trevor M
Date: 2011-10-20 17:33
That's ridiculous, especially in a pit orchestra. There's plenty of spots even in proper orchestra literature where it's traditional to transpose stuff onto the easier horn– the discipline of transposing ('cheating') more than trumps that of reading something in F# major, to my mind.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: davyd
Date: 2011-10-20 18:23
In my experience, accusations of "cheating" in these circumstances typically come from players of other instruments, who don't have the option to switch to an alternate. They don't have a B oboe or a D alto sax or whatever, and wish they did. It's envy, pure and simple.
Of course, you had better make darn sure you pick up the correct instrument every time. Pick up the wrong one, and you'll never hear the end of it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Elkwoman46
Date: 2011-10-20 22:31
Dear Karl and all,
I know I probably deserved the micro scrutiny of what I wrote, but my point for saying all that I did is thus...
"In that regard, it is essential to have the other instruments at hand...for that is and was the whole purpose of the clarinet fingerings in the first place...to be able to have the same fingering for all the clarinets."
Thereby, my comments were in full agreement with Chris...for this is the very reason clarinets were designed with the same fingerings, in order for the clarinetist to play any or all of the kinds of clarinets there ARE.
I was thinking later after I wrote this, that when I think about old orchestra and symphony pieces, I believe that there must have been a mind set of the composers that the composers did all the work, and the musicians were only expected to play the pieces as composed. Thereby, they could switch to other clarinets, trumpets, etc., as the composer made music for them.
Furthermore, I think that it is unfortunate that today Bb clarinets rule because it seems like such a loss for probably what was intended early on in the music world. I mean then, what is the point in making a Bb instrument in clarinet? Why not just make it in C (if of course it was perfected)? Seems very complicated to me without a better purpose, such as the composer writing for the various instruments and making life at one time easier for the musician. I don't believe today it is easier, and that is essentially why I hammer on the confusing aspects for the beginner who is learning notes that are off from actuality.
By the way, many people today are self-teaching themselves via CD and DVD's. It may be the only way they can afford to learn. The good side to it of course, is a 24 hour a day tutor and what they hear it typically in perfect pitch. One need only skim YouTube to see what people are doing on their own and mentioning it.
I was in a discussion years ago on a trumpet forum and when I pointed out the written note versus actual, I believe some did not even know they were off, they were only going by what they were taught. It can be really a shock to some people who have not been informed of this, and are new to the music world for only a couple of years or so...and feel like they have been playing their heart out and then realize they were actually learning everything off from actuality.
In the early days of eBay I bought a huge box of various music books and I have not seen in any of these books any careful explanation to the beginner what was what. If the lessons start with the note G, I think most beginners actually believe they are playing a G. Truly, I DO NOT see the mention, oh by the way, this really is not a G, you are actually playing an F, by the way. And let me explain why that is...
But Karl, I was just writing with the zeal that I thought we all were allowed to do here, get on our soapbox and tell how we feel about our view of clarinet. And I confessed openly that my view is amateur...
So, I would love to see your opinion in your own dissertation, please, for I really got a lot from what you wrote so far. Thank you.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2011-10-21 00:52
Elkwoman46 wrote:
>
> Thereby, my comments were in full agreement with Chris...for
> this is the very reason clarinets were designed with the same
> fingerings, in order for the clarinetist to play any or all of
> the kinds of clarinets there ARE.
Well, yes, or maybe more to make all the chromatics needed for the various keys available. The trouble, as I understand it, was that with the rudimentary fingering system on the early clarinets you couldn't get all the sharps you needed to play in, for instance, E Major, so you had to make a clarinet that would sound in E Major without all the extra keys to produce potentially 5 sharps (including the A-sharp that would often come up in secondary dominant harmonies). An A clarinet turned out to be suitable - only F-sharp in the key signature and an occasional C-sharp accidental. Likewise with keys needing more than a couple of flats, say A-flat or D-flat Mahor a B-flat clarinet produced the (sounding) notes more reliably than a clarinet pitched in C (or, certainly in A).
There were D clarinets in heavy use, apparently, in the early years of the clarinet's existence. The early clarinet was used to some extent as an indoor (softer) substitute for trumpets, and maybe 18th century musicians associated D Major with something heraldic, suitable for trumpets. So I'm not sure that the primary purpose of all those different-sized instruments was to make things easier for the players. It was to make the music better in tune by making the instrument's fundamental scale closer acoustically to the sounding key of a composition. That the convention developed of naming the fingerings all the same on all the instruments almost certainly *was* meant to make learning them easier. But I don't think it was the main reason for making all the different instruments in the first place.
What has always puzzled me in this regard (maybe someone with a better knowledge of 18th century woodwind instruments could supply some insight) is why flutes, oboes and bassoons were able to play in more keys without resorting to building different-sized instruments. The obvious difference I see is that the others all overblow octaves, so tuning is less problematic - you don't need to make the compromises between the upper register and the lower one that you do on a clarinet, which overblows twelfths.
>
> I was thinking later after I wrote this, that when I think
> about old orchestra and symphony pieces, I believe that there
> must have been a mind set of the composers that the composers
> did all the work, and the musicians were only expected to play
> the pieces as composed. Thereby, they could switch to other
> clarinets, trumpets, etc., as the composer made music for them.
>
Someone else would need to comment on this - I'm not so sure composers had as much to do with any of this as did the players themselves, who had somehow to make the instruments play in tune. I'm sure some composers cared what clarinet was used and others didn't. This is a whole area that has been discussed nearly to death here and I hate to open it up too far. The explanation often made here and on the Klarinet listserve when this comes up is that composers (at least through the mid-19th century) followed conventions about which instrument to use for which keys, but then composed with the character of that particular clarinet in mind.
> Furthermore, I think that it is unfortunate that today Bb
> clarinets rule because it seems like such a loss for probably
> what was intended early on in the music world. I mean then,
> what is the point in making a Bb instrument in clarinet? Why
> not just make it in C (if of course it was perfected)?
I don't think C clarinets were the earliest ones. From what I've read, clarinets in D were used early on. C clarinets would, I think, have developed along with the others, not ahead of them.
> I don't believe today it is
> easier, and that is essentially why I hammer on the confusing
> aspects for the beginner who is learning notes that are off
> from actuality.
>
I don't think that today it's much easier, either, when we can produce an entire chromatic scale on one instrument. Again, oboists, flutists and bassoonists just have to put up with key signatures that sometimes include 6 sharps or flats. So, playing everything on a C clarinet wouldn't be any more of a hardship for us. Of course, you alluded to the main reason, other than tradition, why there would be resistance to discarding the other instruments: C clarinets are notoriously under-engineered and, unless you find a rare one, difficult (not impossible - but more difficult than a B-flat clarinet) to play in tune. I don't honestly know if there's an acoustical reason for that or it's just that mouthpieces have for over a hundred years been optimized for B-flat clarinets and don't work as well on a C (or an A, for that matter).
> By the way, many people today are self-teaching themselves via
> CD and DVD's. It may be the only way they can afford to learn.
> The good side to it of course, is a 24 hour a day tutor and
> what they hear it typically in perfect pitch. One need only
> skim YouTube to see what people are doing on their own and
> mentioning it.
>
Oh, I know, and I'm dinosaur enough to think those are inferior ways to learn something as personal as playing an instrument can be. There's no substituting, in my mind, for the feedback you can only get from a live teacher in the room with the student.
> I was in a discussion years ago on a trumpet forum and when I
> pointed out the written note versus actual, I believe some did
> not even know they were off, they were only going by what they
> were taught.
Again, I think this is a result of careless teaching.
> It can be really a shock to some people who have
> not been informed of this, and are new to the music world for
> only a couple of years or so...and feel like they have been
> playing their heart out and then realize they were actually
> learning everything off from actuality.
>
Again, I don't think this fundamentally changes anything for most people. Playing their hearts out doesn't depend, I don't think, on what they named each note.
>
> But Karl, I was just writing with the zeal that I thought we
> all were allowed to do here, get on our soapbox and tell how we
> feel about our view of clarinet.
I don't think I criticized you for writing what you did or suggested that what you wrote was inappropriate. If I did without meaning to, I apologize. I meant only to disagree with your position that this is a serious problem for a majority of people who play transposing instruments. If I seemed to imply any more than that, I'm sorry.
> So, I would love to see your opinion in your own dissertation,
> please, for I really got a lot from what you wrote so far.
> Thank you.
My opinion about what? I thought my last post was fairly opinionated (not to mention this one). I wrote my opinion earlier about the criticism Chris got for using an A clarinet in the pit (I think the criticism was silly). I'm not sure anyone else is interested in my adding any more - I've already taxed everyone's patience enough, but let me know what else I can harangue you with - maybe we can start a separate thread, since we're in danger of hijacking this one from Chris.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Elkwoman46
Date: 2011-10-21 02:01
Dear Karl,
I tell you what...you are blowing my mind with your knowledge and intelligence on all these matters. Also, I honestly do not know what has been discussed to death on this forum. So, also, thank you for that.
I think I am going to print out what you wrote and study it.
Thanks so much...teacher.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-10-21 02:11
I've used an Eb clarinet in 'West Side Story' instead of Bb (on the reed 4 book where you're already playing eight instruments) as it was in unison in the high bits with the 3rd reed player who was also playing Eb clarinet at that point. I thought it was best as both of us were on Eb so the tone colour match would be better instead of Eb and Bb, especially as the part for Bb is in the altissimo.
I also forgot to mention in the original post that the one who called me a cheat played one of the clarinet solos in 'Anything Goes' on soprano sax, so to turn around and brand me a cheat makes the words 'pot' and 'kettle' spring to mind.
I have played soprano sax instead of clarinet in 'Sweet Charity' where I felt it was more in keeping with the Latin style of one of the numbers (I forget what number it was in), plus the clarinet solo there was mostly throat and lower register LH notes which didn't seem to project too well with everything else going on around it at the time. Similarly in 'Thorough Modern Millie' where there were some bendy upper register Ds bending down to B (middle line) which I could do much easier on soprano sax, taking the D in the lower register using the high Eb key which offered more pitch flexibility. In both instances I cleared it with the MD first and they were happy to oblige - and they also preferred it.
One instrument I'd love to have to make life easier is a Db oboe for playing military band transcriptions of orchestral pieces which often get shunted up a semitone from the original orchestral versions to make them Eb/Bb friendly. And maybe a Gb cor anglais as well for the same purpose!
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Elkwoman46
Date: 2011-10-21 02:39
Wow, Karl, I re-read all that you wrote carefully...you sure know your instruments. THANK YOU! You have given me such a better understanding in all this. I really appreciate it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: concertmaster3
Date: 2011-10-21 03:48
OOOOh I'd LOVE to see a Db oboe and Gb cor! I mean...there are Db piccolos and flutes! Why not oboes? Playing the orchestral arrangements that you know and learned in one key, only to have big excerpts in a-whole-nother key is annoying! (Looking at you William Tell Overture EH part!)
But go for it. I'm considering taking part of one of our pieces for the Symphonic Band on A or Eb clarinet because a melodic figure goes throat Bb to C# and back very quickly is very much a nuisance!
Ron Ford
Woodwind Specialist
Performer/Teacher/Arranger
http://www.RonFordMusic.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-10-21 11:23
Fact is, they wouldn't know by listening if it was a Bb or A clarinet being played unless anyone told them, regardless if they reckon an A clarinet has a completely different sound to a Bb - if that was the case, then no-one would've written anything for it so a lot of big orchestral solos and other important works written for A clarinet wouldn't exist.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: annev
Date: 2011-10-24 02:52
This is for Elkwoman:
I've been reading some of your posts about struggling with the fact that the clarinet is a transposing instrument and I agree with Karl that you may have what some people call perfect pitch. I have also been told by various music teachers that I probably have perfect pitch. For me that means that when I hear a note I can tell you what the pitch is and whether it is sharp, flat or in tune. It's rather like having a tuner in your head.
I just want to encourage you to keep reading the music, playing with the standard clarinet fingerings and listening to the pitches, even if they seem "odd" at first. I play two C instruments as well as Bb and A clarinet. My experience is that with gradual repeated exposure things sort themselves out. I think maybe some of the learned tactile sense that develops helps make connections between the notes and new pitches - I'm not really sure, but the physicality of the experience (just playing the instrument) is important, as is consistency and time. I love your enthusiasm and wish you lots of joy in your music!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2011-10-24 02:57
Stinks. Play what works.
I've been told once or twice that I'm not doing this right, or that right, or that my sound is wrong. I calmly reply, "With all due respect, I think I'm doing ok. And until the boss tells me to change (point at the conductor at this time), I'm going to continue doing it this way."
Not the answer they want, but there's a ring of truth in there. It's not what THEY think, it's what the person that pays for you to play thinks.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Franklin Liao
Date: 2011-10-24 07:28
C clarinets, up to the age of Auguste Buffet, were fielded alongside Bb and A. On the topic of C, I find it interesting that the differences going from the Bb to C are very noticeable for the player, when it is unpronounced for most of the audience. A player that I've run into piqued once that A to Bb is less alienating than from Bb to C. Come to think of it, I would like a C with extended range to match that of an A clarinet.
(I actually wonder if the brightness is a desirable trait for the C horn, given that one gets the impression of having a little trumpet in hand with it...)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Elkwoman46
Date: 2011-10-25 00:11
Hi there, Anney,
Thank you also for the kind message...I think the damage that I did to myself in my teenage years (played an out of tune instrument that would not stay in tune) and sent me on a path of "retrain the ear" for years that followed...but I do believe there is something to what you and Karl said, for I want to hear it correctly, correctly, and correctly...it is disturbing to be off musically via sheet music and actual sound in the various keyed instruments other than C instruments. Hence, all my elaborate dissertations above. Plus, there are other things in my life that accentuated my concerns. But lately, the joy of progress...
Also, after reading various articles here and yours, I do believe in spite of its setbacks in intonation from what I gathered, I do believe a C Clarinet is on my wishlist. For various reasons it would be perfect for me because of the sheet music that I have and love to abide in.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-10-25 01:52
One instance where I used the wrong clarinet by accident was in Mahler 1 where I picked up my Eb instead of a C clarinet during a rehearsal and couldn't make what I played fit even though I was positive I was playing the correct written notes. Then a quick glance down the left underside of the instrument showed it had no middle socket ring!
There are singers with perfect pitch who have trouble with singing at Baroque pitch - one local singer I know had rewritten out everything a semitone lower. More recently she took up clarinet and that took her some getting used to with it being pitched a whole tone lower than concert pitch.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: gsurosey
Date: 2011-10-25 03:01
Perfect/absolute pitch can be a curse, as was said above. I wish I could turn it off, but I can't. I hear what I hear.
I can tune my clarinet by ear (after warming up of course), then turn on my tuner and get a green light on A440 (or within a couple cents), pretty much every time. Where I get thrown off is during rehearsal when instruments around me aren't at A440 and I try to tune to where the majority of the orchestra is (usually sharper).
The student conductor of one of the orchestras I play in says if he has questions about intonation, he looks over at me; if I have that fingernails-on-chalkboard look on my face, he knows better that something is off.
I was at a Baroque period instrument concert last year (harp and violin duo). After they tuned, the harp player turned to the audience and mentioned that they were tuning to A415 (I must've not been the only one with a funny look on my face for him to announce that)!
As for the pitch sound vs. name issue, I learned the difference while in elementary school (and it was accidental). I got a small battery-operated keyboard for Christmas and I thought it would be fun to play my band music on it. I couldn't understand why a C on my clarinet wasn't a C on the keyboard at first. Once I found that C really was a Bb through trial and error, I played around some more and found that the pitches were different by the same interval. It took a little while, but once I got it, I got it. I think that if kids are taught this (or figure it out), they will latch onto it.
Younger people learn relatively quickly. I used to think the same thing about the confusion aspect (like it being a bad idea to start a small kid on Eb clarinet because they would have to re-learn sounds, but that's a whole other issue where embouchure and other basic differences would trump the pitch differences).
I hope some of that makes sense. It's kinda late here and I'm starting to incoherently ramble...
----------
Rachel
Clarinet Stash:
Bb/A: Buffet R13
Eb: Bundy
Bass: Royal Global Max
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2011-10-25 06:02
Rachel, I've always wondered how people with perfect pitch learn what A is in the first place.
You describe being able to produce a 440 Hz A by ear. But how did you learn that A=440 Hz? Most orchestras, even if they tune to 440 initially, end up higher within a few minutes of tuning. It's an open secret that orchestras in many major cities tune to different pitches - A440 is not by any means a universally accepted standard. There's no natural equivalence that says A is 440 Hz and not 445 or 435 - the definition of A440 as a standard is completely arbitrary. Even American piano tuners sometimes tune higher (I don't know any European or Asian piano tuners) and orchestral and band mallet instruments are deliberately tuned a couple of Hz above 440 to allow for the upward pitch creep as an orchestra warms up, since they can't adjust once they leave the factory.
So when, if you remember, did you learn that A was 440 Hz and that a 445 Hz A was sharp? And how far away from 440 Hz does a note need to be before it isn't an A anymore?
I've always been curious about this.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2011-10-25 07:59
>> You describe being able to produce a 440 Hz A by ear. But how did you learn that A=440 Hz? <<
I think of it like colours. You learned what e.g. "red" was and now you recognize it. You could have called it "blue" and then you would just call it blue. It is recognizable enough that you remember what it is, like certain pitches are for someone with perfect pitch. I guess a high A could be a brownish red, it is still red, but not just red.
I'm colourblind, which is more or less the same as someone without perfect pitch. You can sometimes recognize colours, but you can confuse them, or not be sure what they are at all. But non-colourblind people can also vary in some colours they don't completely agree about, not often, but occasionally. People with perfect and non-perfect pitch can also vary in how perfect pitch or non-perfect pitch they have.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: annev
Date: 2011-10-25 13:55
Hi Karl,
I'm not Rachel but I have a few thoughts. I think that learning that an A is A at 440 is reinforced by continuous hearing-doing-processing (a kinetic-aural response, if you like) that sets up those neural pathways in the brain. I started playing piano when I was 5, and my father kept our piano in tip-top shape because he was also sensitive to pitch (I suspect he also has perfect pitch). I can hear minute differences. A friend of mine recently had her piano tuned, and as she was playing it I commented that it sounded a bit sharp. She was surprised and said that the piano tuner had made it 3 cents sharp because she teaches flute and when the piano settled a bit he didn't want to take the risk of it being slightly under pitch. Last week I was at a concert and one of the harps drifted off pitch during the first half (I'm not picking on harpists, I understand this happens pretty often!) and my toes were curling until the intermission when she retuned it. My husband didn't notice a thing.
Occasionally our choir director will transpose something on the organ that we are singing and I find that I can't sing it (I have to close the book and sing by ear). It's not just that I hear/think a G when I see one, it's that my body also knows what if feels like to sing a G. So again, I think there's a kinetic-aural link in the learning curve.
I've been able to hear whether a note is in tune for as far back as I can remember (childhood). I still had to develop my voice like every one else. It can be a real source of frustration to know that a pitch is not where it should be as you learn. For me the sensation of pitch is like something I feel around my ears. When the pitch is on, there is a smoothness and silkiness. When the pitch is off it's like the edges of a scarf that are unravelling. I hope that makes sense!
(edited for typing errors)
Post Edited (2011-10-25 13:59)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2011-10-25 18:50
clarnibass wrote:
>
> I think of it like colours. You learned what e.g. "red" was and
> now you recognize it. You could have called it "blue" and then
> you would just call it blue.
I understand that this would get you in the general area of a pitch. But I have "normal" color vision and I can't associate a given hue with its wavelength. How does a person with perfect pitch learn that 440 Hz (as opposed to 435 or 445) is A or that 330 Hz is middle C and onward through the rest of the audible range of notes? Do people with perfect pitch hear notes as they exist in true temperament or as they've been exposed to them on keyboard instruments tuned to equal temperament? Does someone with perfect pitch in Berlin learn their tuning and someone who grows up in Leningrad or Moscow learn a different tuning? Does each feel discomfort listening to performers who play at different tunings from the ones the person with perfect pitch grew up with?
This is probably beyond the point at which it's really appropriate within this thread. I will start a new heading if anyone's interested in pursuing this topic.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
