 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2013-12-31 23:14
In a previous post from another contributor, the question was raised "how does Larry Combs sound the way he does." Or rather, "how can one sound like Larry Combs." I took the opportunity to speak of supported, uninterrupted, well focused AIR. I also mentioned that I had recently learned of just how important it was for Larry to teach articulating with the very tip of the tongue upon the very tip of the reed. He demonstrates a visualization for the student by drawing a pencil dot at the very center of the very tip of a reed, and saying that you tongue must connect at this point.
As I started my first feeble attempts at changing a forty year old habit of tonging a point on the reed about a quarter inch down on the reed with a point on the tongue just back from the very tip, it was clear that the starts and stops of notes were much clearer - NO QUESTION (this is because the business end of the tongue meets the business end of the reed). But it was also becoming apparent that my sound was more concentrated and even more resonant. As I worked this more (surely there will be many more months to follow) it became all too obvious that my sound was getting BETTER. Why is this?
I think now that as my tongue got even higher up the reed and the tip of the tongue got closer to the roof of my mouth the focus of the airstream literally became the tip of the mouthpiece/reed system (even more than before........and I am already a strict adherent of the "EEEEE" sound position of the tongue).
If this is true, then it makes it even more clear that focusing of the airstream is the MOST important element in producing a good single (and double) reed sound.
One way to hear this concept for yourself (without even picking up a clarinet) is to pucker your lips and blow a fine stream of air, starting with your tongue back in your mouth. Now, slowly bring the tip of your tongue closer and closer to the back of this hole in your lips until the air stops flowing. Just before you reached the point of stopping the flow of air you will have heard a pronounced hissing sound. It is at that point that the air flowing outward is moving as fast as it can (same volume of air moving through a smaller and smaller aperture moves faster and faster). This is in short what I believe happens when your tongue is in the the "tip-of-tongue-to-tip-of-reed" position. And THIS is how anyone can sound like Larry Combs.
I wanted to hurry and post this before midnight because I made a New Year's resolution to be less controversial. Of course I've also resolved to eat healthier, lose weight and save more money.
It's gonna be a rough 2014.
Happy New Year Y'all
.......................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rtmyth
Date: 2014-01-01 01:19
David brings up an important issue. I would like to hear Larry play several different makes. a short few phrases each, in succession. Assuming all instruments were in acceptable playing condition, would I or anyone else notice a difference in timbre ???
richard smith
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2013-12-31 23:04
I agree with David that clarinetists with good ears would hear the difference if Larry Combs (or any other leading professional orchestral clarinetist) were to play the same passages (for example from the first movement of Bartok's Contrasts with all the high notes you have to coax out) on the following succession of instruments: Buffet R-13, Wurlitzer Oehler System, Backun Cocobolo Mo-Ba, Leitner and Kraus Reform Boehm, Yamaha CSG-III, and Selmer Signature and Selmer Privilege.
Each of these instruments is used throughout the world by principal clarinetists of symphony orchestras, yet each has a distinctive timbre and way of speaking. It might be difficult to put the differences in words, but they definitely exist. For example, almost everybody would hear the recorder-like sound of the altissimo on the Backun Cocobolo versus the tighter, edgier (and usually less in tune) sound of the Buffet R-13.
A great clarinetist working hard to deliberately fool you might succeed, but over the long haul, each instrument would begin to assert itself.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2014-01-01 20:00
I use some of his old reeds to sound like him. Actually I always make the same New Years resolution. That is to keep sounding like me so I never play his old reeds in public. :-)
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
Post Edited (2014-01-01 20:03)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2014-01-01 20:03
Quote:
A great clarinetist working hard to deliberately fool you might succeed, but over the long haul, each instrument would begin to assert itself.
Am I the only one who has the opposite take on this? That the longer the performer played the instrument, the more they would adjust to generate the sound that is solely them -- and that individual instrument characteristics would be minimized?
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-01-01 16:19
Tobin,
We are both right. As you imply, the longer a performer plays on a new set- up, the more he or she tends to regress toward the mean; that is, to return to the overall sound that usually characterizes their playing. I believe Larry Combs himself said as much.
But, If a player switches to a clarinet that is designed to give a very different sonority from the old clarinet he is used to, that new sonority will, at, least at first, be very much in evidence Take for example Richard Hawkins' recent switch from the Leblanc Opus to the Backun Mo-Bo in cocobolo. At
http://www.richardhawkinsmouthpiece.com/soundclips.html listen first to him playing excerpts from the Brahms sonatas on his Opus with a Hawkins R mouthpiece. Then scroll down and listen to him playing excepts from from the Elliot Carter Clarinet Concerto on his new Backun Mo-Ba in colobolo. (I am assuming he is using his new clarinet on this piece; if not, then I have just lost my argument).
What a difference! I wondered at first if I was listening to a different player. And he is using the same R model mouthpiece(probably with Legere reeds) on both. The Opus selections have a ping and a rather concentrated sound, and the Mo-Ba selection has a more covered, veiled and woody sound. It is like wine, wherein one tastes hints of strawberries or citrus in one and blackberry and purple plum in the other.
So, will Hawkins eventually regress to the mean (assuming that his former Opus sound is the mean) and sound pretty much as he did before? I would venture that he might get closer to the way he used to sound but the Mo-Ba set-up will assert its own personality and resist the regression--especially if he wants it to. What the player wants to do matters.
Another point worth considering is that until recently, many brands of clarinet were playing the game of trying to sound like Buffet. Selmer, Yamaha, and Leblanc each took their turn. It is one thing for a player switching from an R-13 to an Opus to regress to the original sound (more or less) and quite another for one switching from an R-13 to a cocobolo Mo-Ba to regress. The design gap between the two is much wider in the latter case.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2014-01-01 17:03
I can say this:
I have a Buffet Prestige Set, and I just obtained a Clarinet that has a sound quite like Combs. There IS a noticeable difference, my Buffet (with Backun Barrel/Bell) IS brighter than my XXX Clarinet.
The XXX Clarinet has a gorgeous sound, that I like better than even my Prestiges.
Of course "bright" is quite relative, as I have/strive for a dark sound. The other one is more "German" dark. I feel like I did playing Michele Zukovsky's Clarinet 
A Flutist friend of mine heard both, and she liked my sound on the Buffet better, but that would be what she is used to.
That's all I'm saying now about the XXX, but it is pretty wild - LOVE IT.
Has Silver Keys just like the Prestige. For a long, long time, I was a strong Buffet guy, but this one gives me a LOT of pause.
Not saying what/which brand, as not sure about the availability.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-01-01 17:12
Paul Aviles wrote:
> As I started my first feeble attempts at changing a forty year
> old habit of tonging a point on the reed about a quarter inch
> down on the reed with a point on the tongue just back from the
> very tip, it was clear that the starts and stops of notes were
> much clearer - NO QUESTION (this is because the business end
> of the tongue meets the business end of the reed).
Paul, I'm uncomfortable with calling the tip of the tongue its "business end." What exactly does that mean?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2014-01-01 23:14
Paul, Regarding the "Hiss". Are you saying the tongue should remain this close to the reed after the attack?
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-01-01 18:34
First the general clarification. The main idea here, is that one (anyone) can play with the fullest, richest tone possible on THEIR clarinet (whatever brand that happens to be) IF one were to use their air column properly (which many MANY don't).
In my new found channeling of the air column experiment the tip of the tongue is not only the "damper" for the reed, but it is also now the delivery system for the air flow to the reed/mouthpieces system, hence "business end."
The "hiss" reference was part of my analogy so that YOU can experience this idea without all the clarinet stuff getting in the way. Another analogy would be if you take an inflated bicycle inner tube and use some implement to release air at the valve (a long thin, concentrated channel) you'll hear quite the hissing sound as the air is released. If however you were to take a very sharp implement and puncture that inner tube with a small hole, the air would NOT rush out with the same intensity and therefore would NOT make as dramatic a "hissing sound."
So I think that there is a very minute channel being created between the teeth on either side of the mouth, side-to-side, and between the roof of the mouth and the top of the tongue, up and down. As this channel becomes MORE concentrated with the tongue in a higher position, the air becomes MORE energized where you most need it AT THE TIP OF THE REED.
.....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-01-01 23:55
On David's "XXX" clarinet: Every now and then you come across a chameleon of a clarinet that can change colors easily. The last one I encountered was a Selmer Privilege with the reverse-taper barrel, relatively large bore, and resonator pads in the lower joint. French, English, German, Viennese, American, Dutch--you name it--this clarinet can do it, given the right mouthpiece and reed. The basic sound pattern was very complex, encompassing elements of bright and dark, broad and concentrated at the same time. All the player has to do is nudge the desired elements out and downplay the undesired ones. The instrument I tried held the tone all the way into the biggest fortissimo with no over-blowing or ballooning--qualities I don't hear in the Buffet Tosca or the new Divine (both of which sound great at low volume but not so good when pushed).
Was David's XXX maybe the newest Privilege model?
By the way, if the XXX Boehm really feels and sounds like Michelle Zukovsky's Wurlitzer, I want one! It will be my next horn.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-01-01 19:13
No, a non-German bore, non-German mouthpiece clarinet WILL NOT sound like one no matter how hard you try. But if you want you Wurlitzer 100cs to sound their best, you had better apply a healthy airflow them.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2014-01-02 04:36
Dear Paul,
Your whole airflow theory may work very well for you. But I don't blow anything like the way you describe and I believe that I sound OK. (I am principal clarinet in a top European orchestra- I could send you some recordings if you're interested). Maybe it comes down to using different material, like mouthpieces, etc. and how you have to blow differently on different equipment? Or maybe it's just a different sound concept? Anyway- it bothers me every time you write about how you subscribe to one definitive way to blow the clarinet. You're so convinced about this, but there are many excellent players who simply don't play
the way you believe it should be done.
On the topic of "German bore":
Every 2 years we have auditions in our orchestra for our Orchestra Academy, which I think is what you would call a cadet position? The applicants are all students who have basically finished their Bachelor or Master, but don't yet have a permanent job in an orchestra. Our auditions are open to French and German system players and are held behind a screen. For my own amusement, I always make a note of who I believe to be playing on which system. What amazes me every time is how often I'm wrong. It's often easy to guess because of the different intonation tendencies of each system (even if you can't judge the timbre), but even here I've been wrong. Sometimes you get a Korean student (for example) studying in Germany , who plays with all of the intonation idiosyncrasies of a Wurlitzer, but using a Buffet clarinet! This always blows my mind. But in terms of hearing which bore and mouthpiece they are playing on, I really cannot tell.
Post Edited (2014-01-02 04:37)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2014-01-01 23:54
Concerning whether one is able to tell what equipment others are playing...
A friend of mine from the jazz clarinet ranks (well known, heavily recorded, etc),
once sent me a batch of recordings and asked me to guess which horn he was
playing on each tune. Over the course of 16 or 20 tracks, he played a Wurlitzer,
Leblanc, Rossi, and possibly a Selmer (very different instruments made with very
different sound concepts in mind). I got nearly all of my guesses wrong.
Regarding air and sound production, Paul repeatedly makes an assertion common
in many quarters of American clarinetistry. Like Paul's presentation, I've always
heard this practice presented dogmatically, and as though "all good players"
do this--no matter how many examples can be brought against it. I began
ignoring people who talk this way in the Fall of 1998.
Eric
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-01-02 02:02
Just for the record the title of this post is "how to sound like Larry Combs." I am pretty sure that I have a firm grasp of this sound production and the methodology behind it. If you want to sound like Jack Brymer or Alfred Prinz I'm afraid I can't help you. Though I suspect there are sound production elements of good players from around the world that are quite similar.
"Liquorice," I am aware of your credentials and defer to your expertise. As I dust off my memory of the different sounds one expects from German clarinets, there was a moment I had similar to what you describe. Awaiting a joint recital by Larry Combs and Professor Riechoff of the Berlin Hochschuller, we heard a very robust clarinet warming up in the studio next to the recital hall. I assumed that the German clarinet was ALWAYS recognizably subtle and creamier in sound so naturally I assumed this was Larry. Much to my surprise it was Herr Riechoff.
I had played Oehler system Wurlitzers for 13 years or so, all in American ensembles without suffering any calls to force me to change horns and assume that I was able to blend well enough. Although from the standpoint of playing both Buffet and Wurlitzer I can tell you the difference in the feel and the sound (side by side, one after the other) is pretty substantial.
.....................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}
