 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-12-22 01:24
.......or
"Do we Boehmophiles still have anything to learn from the Germans?"
I have been somewhat intrigued by the notion put forth on the Gerold Clarinet website regarding a wooden 'plate' onto which the thumb rest is affixed. According to Gerold Angerer: "Due to its position close to an oscillation node, this grenadilla wood thumb plate also has a very positive effect on the clarinet's oscillation behaviour." It is my understanding that it 'decouples' the thumb from the resonance of the clarinet (at least at that point).
THEN.......... I encountered a video of Ulrike Burger of the Nuremburg Symphony http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_Qn-ywn4TM in which she turns her clarinet over and you can clearly see a large piece of cork glued to the back of her horn just below the thumb rest (at 3:32).
Naturally, I immediately ran to glue a piece of cork to the back of my horn after seeing this, and I obtained a really pronounced ring to the sound particularly in the chalumeu but also in the altissimo !!!!
You can try this without glue (I would think) hanging a piece of cloth or foam rubber off your thumb rest.
Have ANY of you tried this ?!!!!!?
...................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2011-12-22 02:34
Considering the thickness of the walls of a modern-day clarinet, I doubt the placement of anything on the outer wall would have an audible effect....
I think there is a bit lost in translation with "oscillation node" from the original German. I have to assume 'resonance node/peak' is what is meant, but I cannot read German, alas.
---------------
But just as a thought experiment.... assuming that the placement of something on the outer-wall can exert an effect:
If extra wood, or cork in this case, placed specifically at one resonance peak could somehow widen that peak, it would "catch" and strengthen a larger range of wavelengths. However, it would not necessarily affect every note, and would only strengthen certain harmonics of any given note.
But given that the resonance/harmonic interactions are governed by acoustic/air flow; i.e. the interaction occurs at the tone-holes themselves, I don't know how added mass at the instrument's outer-wall could change resonance behavior.
Maybe someone better acquainted with acoustics than I could chime in as that is all I can muster.
--------------
From the video, it appears that the cork is there (with a quite thick thumb cushion) for comfort, or perhaps a hand position issue.
But if it makes a change, then heck, by all means use it. I'll even give it a shot and see what happens.
-Jason
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: srattle
Date: 2011-12-22 02:34
I'm pretty sure this is more to do with opening up the hand rather than anything else. I've found that even slight changes in hand position can change (or at least make me perceive change) the sound produced. That's the whole point of Tom Ridenour's thumb saddle, right?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Le9669
Date: 2011-12-22 02:42
Sounds skeptical. Would you humor us with 2 audio clips of the same passage one without the cork and one with?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2011-12-22 03:49
Sacha,
I do think it is more a perceived change; if I place the music stand very close to me, more of the sound is reflected back and thus I sound "fuller" to myself.
Alas, if only that were the case out in the hall...............
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2011-12-22 12:37
Wouldn't the cork patch be glued there more for comfort? Tom Ridenour advertises with his thumbrest cover that it mainly is to open up your right hand. This could create a more relaxed hand position that is more open. I feel as though I've seen this before or heard of this before (gluing cork below the thumbrest for comfort and hand position) but I can't remember where...although I do remember it being touted as a way to have a more comfortable hand position as opposed to a way to provide more resonance or change the sound.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2011-12-22 15:43
I have to agree with Buster. I couldn't understand a word they said so I don't understand the principal but since one's thumb touches the body of the clarinet too I would think the larger or smaller your thumb is the more your tone would differ too. I just don't buy it sorry. ESP eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-12-22 19:26
The way I am thinking of this system is much like a marimba bar or individual chime in a set of orchestral bells. If you want to stop the sound you damp it.
To me the clarinet DOES vibrate (you do feel it vibrate under your fingers so there must be some element of the sound influenced by this constituent).
I am ONLY putting the idea of the Gerold clarinet website together with the IMAGE of the video......... the interview is only about clarinet playing in general. The only significance to the posted video is the view of the back of Ulrike's clarinet.
And my post was really only EXPOSITORY as far as my experience. I KNOW that I achieved more resonance immediately. I only wondered if anyone else had this experience and wished to throw it out there for consideration.
In all the years studying in the States I have never run into this myself either. Perhaps it may be worth considering. After all, a piece of cork is much less expensive than a lot of mouthpieces and ligatures out there.
......................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2011-12-22 20:18
If that makes a difference to the listener perhaps you should try gluing or taping pieces of cork or wood on different parts of the clarinet. Perhaps under the LH thumb, on the barrel or on the bell or just above the bell. Try it all and let us know how much difference it makes and which place and material works best. ESP
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2011-12-22 21:02
Paul,
Again, if it elicits a positive change then by all means use it. I truly am not attempting to dissuade you, nor convince you that you are incorrect; I am attempting to figure out why it could occur.....
Re. orchestral-chimes, marimba.... That is a different relationship as the body of the chime/bar is being struck to produce sound; the input is percussive, not pressure driven. Also, each chime/bar is responsible for sounding one note, not many as the clarinet is designed to do. As Ed suggests, if this is changing the sound quality, placing material at any of the other "resonance peaks/modes" would also have an effect.
I do feel vibration in my fingers while playing, but as this is felt at the tone holes, I have never actually checked if any vibration can be felt at the outer wall.
As I said, I'll give it a shot and see what occurs; simply have not had the time.
-Jason
Post Edited (2011-12-22 21:13)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2011-12-22 21:03
on my part
I mean no ill will nor degradation
-Jason
Post Edited (2011-12-22 21:04)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-12-23 00:42
I feel the whole clarinet vibrate under my fingers. I am only following the same sort of logic (???) that dictates that a ringless barrel is more vibrant, or bell without metal rings, or a Rossi clarinet without a juncture point in the middle of the clarinet body, or a ligature that has fewer contact points.
At any rate if you just take a small piece of a discarded mouse pad (the rubbery kind) or place mat or shoe insole and just hang it on your thumb rest (like hanging a picture) you will achieve the same idea. Just try it yourself (remember it is not load bearing at all, it merely comes between you and the clarinet body).
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2011-12-23 03:28
I didn't find any difference.
We need a Fournier machine to actually determine this. or not
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-12-23 13:24
Hey Jason,
My crude attempts at a 'search' didn't yield good results.
What is a Fournier Machine?
.....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2011-12-23 19:30
What we need is a computer/machine set-up to analyze all the frequencies (harmonics) present in any sounded note.
-Often referred to as a spectrum-analyzer (or sometimes, crudely, a Fourier Machine; an incorrect colloquialism of sorts I guess.)
What is seen on the "analyzer" is all the composite frequencies (harmonics in our case) that are present in a periodic wave. (A superposed standing-wave in our case.)
The "de-composed" frequencies that are seen are the integer harmonics present in the sounding wave; and can be mathematically predicted by Fourier transform equations. Also, they can be mathematically represented by the Fourier series. Fourier analysis/transform is a branch of mathematics that serves to break down wave functions into their composite frequencies. ---Thus the Fourier Machine reference.--- (The equations can be quite complex, and admittedly go beyond my realm of knowledge. They also apply to studies far beyond that of acoustics and actually grew from the study of heat dispersion if memory serves.)
What we can see with a visual analysis is the presence all the sounding harmonics; the more harmonics present, the more complex (or "full") the sound is said to be. With a spectrum analyzer, we could see exactly what effect any material placed on the outside of the clarinet body has on the complexity of the resultant sound. However, the difficulty would be removing the human element from the equation as the results could still be skewed by our input. It would be necessary to have a way to play to clarinet with a machine capable of true steady-state input..... a device which I do not have the funds to construct.
Thus if it works for your ears then by all means use it.
It didn't change anything for mine so I won't.
......or not
-Jason
Post Edited (2011-12-23 19:48)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2011-12-23 22:11
The software is intrinsically simple for Fourier analysis (DFT or FFT). It's the calibrated microphone and high quality a-d systems that cost real bux...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2011-12-24 00:53
Mark,
yup.
For any others following,
**And even the most precise Fourier graph doesn't truly represent the "quality" of the sound input; it merely shows how many harmonics are present (or how complex the sound: subjectively perceived timbre.)
An extrapolation of timbrel differences can only be made if at least two graphs are compared consisting of the same fundamental pitch (in Hz), input at the same volume (amplitude.) This is somewhat difficult to accomplish even by the most skilled musician.
This site gives more information and visual representations. Pay particular attention to the last few paragraphs:
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/sound.spectrum.html
**As stated, we cannot objectively extrapolate what any visual Fourier graph will "sound" like; it must be "heard" by our subjective ears. Also, acoustic impedance plays a part in what any given instrument sounds like. (Or why a clarinet can sound like a clarinet.)
see: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/z.html
**Sound quality (and pitch selection) is also reliant on the physical input of the player themselves.
Re. vocal tract tuning etc... see: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/SaxTract.html
Though the study was performed with a saxophone, it is equally applicable to the physical act (and involved aural feed-back loop) of clarinet performance.
------------
These links give a good basic picture of why we can sound as we do... though much more in depth reading of the complexities can be done at the reader's discretion.
-Jason
Post Edited (2011-12-24 01:12)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2011-12-25 19:03
If you feel there is a perceptible difference and it makes you more confident, good for you, you've just improved without practice. Otherwise, there is NO substitute for good practice. Get back to the practice room (as soon as Christmas is over...)!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dharma
Date: 2011-12-26 23:25
Yoi don't really need Fourier.
Make two recordings of the same single note, one with the doobry, and one without. Ask someone to play back the recordings at random and see if you (or someone else) can identify each.
If you can great, it works for you. If not...
-----
A horse is drawn to water, but a pencil must be lead.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-12-27 15:58
I'm just a little appalled at the suggestion that a 'recording' can somehow be a better judge of sound that we ACTUALLY HEAR IN THE ROOM. Perhaps many of you are thinking of it just being one person and 'flipping' the perspective around requires mechanical means. Of course I am referring to an effect that is patently obvious.
Perhaps those who are so attached to their recordings had better spend more time at their local concert hall............. I'm just sayin'
..................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
