 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-01-27 20:40
I'm not sure there's a better resource out there on the pros and cons of using a Double Lip Embouchure for clarinet play than this is bboard.
Searches here on the subject matter yield a plethora of information on the technique, from the kinds of players it might not work best with (e.g. those with receding jaws) to those who believe that their incorporation of the technique has all but "cured the cancer" in their playing.
As a single lipped player, I too have tried double lip now and then, and found it produced what, at least I thought (albeit a bad yardstick--you need to ask others) a better sound, and helped me voice some difficult legato passages better.
As many know, Ricardo Morales, an important (but yet just one) presence for our instrument advocates a philosophy that, to paraphrase, essentially states that only good can come from one assuming the double lip embouchure.
And I like the analogy (if I remember correctly) that Keith Stein made is his book, as it regards double lip playing, on how it opens the oral cavity as if "one were concealing a yawn."
======
BUT--with all this said, what I haven't seen (and of course that doesn't mean it fails to exist), is much on the HISTORY of why this embouchure has become less in favor since the 1950's. This has caused me to consider (although perhaps incorrectly) the premise that if double lip was all it was made out to be, that one would expect it to have not only better survived, but thrived in Post WW II clarinet playing.
So here's my premise, for which I hold no particular emotional attachment either way.
"The marginal differences in better play, if any, for double lip embouchure don't justify the greater difficulty in assuming this embouchure."
Defend or Reject that.
But before you do, here's the history I (at least I think) I know.
* Back in the real old days, when reeds where on the top of the mouthpiece, double lip embochure was necesssary: sinking one's top teeth into a reed was simply not a viable option.
* For the beginning player, the differences in sound between double lip and single lip embouchure do not favor double lip, in fact, its difficulty might make things worse. So players learn single lip, some progress on to high degrees of proficiency, and then don't want to "relearn." a new embouchure.
I would truly love to hear more about the history of the double lip embouchure, why people (think) it fell out of favor, or where my assumptions are wrong.
Cheers.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-01-27 22:03
A thoughtful board member very appropriately (and privately) asked for more information on Ricardo Morales' double lip philosophy, and the degree to which he practices said philosophy himself.
As to his believes, my source was as follows:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZUOfN-wQEY
As to whether he practices these beliefs in his own playing, I simply don't know.
Perhaps others on the board who know (better of) him can chime in here.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Elifix
Date: 2014-01-27 22:33
My first teacher said she met many double players and in a long recital, she has seen them sitting down to perform. Perhaps its due to fatigue that the double contributes and in a extended long concert, it can be a "pain". Thou I think that can be overcome to a certain degree by stamina practising.
Maybe comfortability and convenience of the single lip took prominent? An it is of course very troublesome to re-learn a fundamental aspect from a single to a double and then build it up again.
I think it is possible to a certain extend to achieve a double lip sound on a single lip. In a class with Janet Hilton (if I recalled correctly) she said that sometimes, she thought the single lip could replicate even better what a double could do (of course, one had to practice double on a single).
When I record myself, I prefer my tone on a single than compared to a double since I had always strive to replicate the various aspects of the double on a single. But one thing I think beats the single hands-down is that due to the inability to produce a grip like the single, the double has a more even and rounded tension over the MP and that leads to having the air more freedom and a better allowance through the body to the instrument.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-01-27 18:07
ThatPerfectReed wrote:
>
> As to whether he practices these beliefs in his own playing, I
> simply don't know.
>
He actually refers pretty consistently over the length of the video that he basically uses double lip situationally but generally plays single lip. He says several times that he regrets not having adopted double lip more consistently.
FWIW, Anthony Gigliotti, who studied at Curtis with Bonade and played single lip through his career, wrote shortly before his death in a column in The Clarinet that he tried when he was young to play double lip and couldn't do it comfortably because of his lip structure. When he suggested it to me as a way to straighten out some problems I was having with single lip, he meant it to be a training exercise, but never pressured me either to continue with it or go back, and I did as Ricardo Morales says he does - back and forth for several years for many of the same reasons Morales mentions. The most important thing for me was that playing double, my embouchure pretty much formed (forms) itself, while playing single I have constantly to be paying attention to all the things Morales mentions - chin flat, lips firm on the sides, upper lip pulled back - to get the same result.
To your second point about beginners, I'm not sure I've found over the years that double lip is any harder for a young player at the beginning. In fact, most kids when they first put a mouthpiece in their mouths don't on their own put their top teeth on the mouthpiece. They have to be taught to do that. Many of my beginning students complained about the tingling (or worse) that the mouthpiece was transmitting into their teeth. So they avoid touching the top with their teeth on their own. A patch can lessen this problem, but not completely eliminate it (that's the other big reason why I eventually adopted double lip - playing without a patch was sometimes like having my teeth drilled, the vibrations were so uncomfortable, and even with a patch the vibrations still sometimes get through). If you let a beginner persist with double lip, of course, the lips need to be brought back over the teeth, not stuck out in front. Even then, I've known players who studied with X or Y famous player who insisted that the famous player taught them not to use the teeth to support the lips.
In clarinet, as in most things, there are few if any constants. The result is what matters.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2014-01-27 23:10
Ricardo Morales studied with me for five summers as a teenager, 13-17 years old, and he always played single lip. I see him often and it is my belief that he still plays that way. I think he just feels, as I do, that athough there are advantages to playing double lip for some players it is not necceassary to get the same result and benefit for many players to play single lip, In other words, it depends on the player. Because I agree with the statement that Keith Stein made I would often ask my students to play double lip for a few minutes a day to feel the opened of the oral cavity and try to copy that when going back to single lip. Playing bass clarinet helped get that feeling as well for me and many of my students.
Anthony Gigliotti had a method of using a rubber pad on the top of the mouthpiece, felling like the top lip, and tucking the top lip into but not over the top teeth. This method comes very close to imitating the feeling and benifit of double lip and opens the oral cavitey as well. My advice is that if a person is having trouble getting the kind of tone their looking for they should try Gigliotti's way as well as double lip. If the result is more satisfying playing double lip then work at it until it's comfortable, which could take some time.
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GaryH
Date: 2014-01-27 18:17
He states in the video, at 5:22, that single lip is the normal way that he plays.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-01-27 23:52
Developing a large yet manageable oral cavity reminds me of the reason I never liked Vd's Profile 88 MPs. They are just one more thing to compromise the volume of the oral cavity - on the theory that every little bit counts.
(Sorry, hope I didn't hijack this topic.)
Which reminds me of my surprise when I recently realized that I don't seem to tuck my lower lip over my lower teeth, and probably never did, but instead just next to the teeth, with a very tight peri-oral "sphincter" all around, with a conscious effort on keeping the "sphincter" small and tight.
b>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-01-27 20:58
I am aware of what Mr. Morales says about his in playing style (double or single lip) from the video I cited, itself from 2013. I just didn't want to say definitely that he's a single lip player because all is subject to change, including, yes, his philosophy on double lip playing, and I don't know the man.
Since philosophys, I reasoned, take longer to change than trying the very approaches advocated, I figured it was safe to say that if double lip being superior was Mr. Morales' mindset in 2013, it probably still is today.
Thank you to those that confirmed beyond the video his playing style.
By way of example as to why I hesitated comment on his embouchure, please refer to the Legere Reed example. Today Mr. Morales is a Legere Artist. Was he in 2013? (I just don't know.)
Things change.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-01-27 21:11
Karl: your thoughts about how students initially grab the mouthpiece certainly makes sense--their likely having the only other similar paradigm in the lives to that point being the soda straw to which they assume a double lip embouchure so as to (without conscience thought) not restrict the air flow.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-01-28 07:53
A temporary period of double-lipping it can be remedial. It will help with:
Intonation, which immediately gets much better
Jaw-pinching the reed/mouthpiece
tense hands and fingers,
tonal strength,
endurance,
formation of a better embouchure - fast!
stronger peri-oral musculature leading to much better control of sound
much smoother legato
reduction in squeaking
easier altissimo,
a larger, more open oral cavity, leading to
a darker, more mellow tone,
a greater range of MP insertion allowing better control
easier upper register tonguing.
Does it hurt? Sure, at first, and there are remedies; short playing periods and longer rests, covering the upper incisors with a thin pad. Nothing is lost in progress because the DLE (double lip embouchure) improves so many parameters and corrects so many bad habits so fast that the shorter playing times are more than compensated for.
Do I practice what I preach? Yes, once in a while, depending on need or to get myself straight again.
Bruno>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-01-28 05:25
Double-lip, which I've just about always played, gives me a greater feeling that the instrument is an extension of my body. The only drawback that I see is that you have to practise regularly to keep up your stamina. For people that only take the instrument out a couple of times a week, it won't work. Double-lip also makes it possible for me to make those subtle, little adjustments that make all the difference: intonation, coulour, etc.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2014-01-28 11:15
Karl is right that many beginners naturally start playing double lip. When I was a beginner back in the 60s, that's how I played until I was instructed that the top teeth were supposed to touch the mouthpiece. Many of my students naturally want to do the same thing. A mouthpiece patch helps for many, but yes, there are some young players who can't tolerate mouthpiece vibrations against their top teeth.
I played single lip for a long time until switching about six years ago. I tried double lip back in college, but never got comfortable with it. It takes a lot of work and patience to adapt to it.
Here's my theory about why double lip players are in the minority (at least in the United States) and why band teachers seldom teach it--and usually discourage it. Most of us started playing in public school instrumental music/band classes. We may have had private lessons at a young age, but the opportunity to play in a school band was a real motivating factor. Some of us also played in school orchestras, but that was something that came later, and only for a limited number of players.
Many of us joined the marching band when we got to high school. In some places, marching was required for high school band membership. For those of us with music ed degrees, marching band was either required or strongly encouraged in college. I marched when high step marching was in vogue, and the double lip/high stepping combination doesn't work well. It is easier to play double lip with today's marching styles, although I would think that single lip is still easier.
Band directors want to get as many students marching as possible, and there's nothing wrong with that. They don't want clarinet (and to a lesser extent, saxophone players) coming up to them and announcing, "I can't join marching band because I play double lip and marching makes my lips sore." It's much easier for them to have everyone play the same way, single lip.
Post Edited (2014-01-28 06:16)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Claire Annette
Date: 2014-01-28 20:13
My personal experience in playing double lip exclusively for the past five years (vs. single lip for 40+ years):
*Less embouchure fatigue, believe it or not.
*More open oral cavity and awareness of open throat.
*Improved tone.
*Ability to stand or sit when playing.
*Less pressure on the reed with bottom lip.
I have a student who naturally started playing double lip as a fifth grader and, three years later, still does.
Adapting to a double-lip embouchure was not an overnight experience. It took time and patience and even some pain to become comfortable with it and to become confident that my clarinet was not going to fall out of my mouth when I tongued fast passages or had to stand and play. I started by only playing legato and/or slow passages DL. It was a gradual process but I do not for one second regret making the change. For me, it was a definite improvement in my playing technique and sound.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-01-28 15:38
You haven't gotten much historical context, which you originally had asked about. I can't contribute much except to say that Daniel Bonade, who at Curtis Institute taught many of the well-known American clarinetists of the 2nd half of the 20th century, played single lip and taught explicitly that the upper lip should be pulled back against the teeth to simulate the position it would take in a true double lip embouchure. So Bonade was familiar enough with the double lip approach to want to emulate it without the need to put the upper teeth on top of the lip. Bonade was born into a musically active family in Switzerland and later studied at the Paris Conservatory with LeFebvre and, apparently, Mimart. Students don't always follow their teacher's practices, but I guess we can surmise that single lip may have been the embouchure of choice of Lefebvre in particular and the faculty at the Paris Conservatory in general. I've read, but can't document, that the Italian players of the same period generally favored double lip and that some Italians still played with the reed on top, which would have required double lip.
I don't know that I've read anything about early 20th century English, German or Russian players' preferences. Maybe someone else has?
Karl
Post Edited (2014-01-28 20:40)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2014-01-28 23:48
Try everything, choice what works best for you with all aspects of clarinet playing and don't be afraid to change when you find something better.
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2014-01-29 01:42
Your thoughts on double lip mirror mine pretty well.
Playing music is a compromise between "results" and "efficiency of said results". What I mean by that is ultimately, you want to sound good and play well. Like anything in life, there's a sliding scale involved between results, and what's necessary for the results. Some musicians practice four hours a day without fail as that is what gets them the results they want. Others are happy with the results of one hour of practice five days a week.
As far as double-lip and different embouchures go, people experiment with different embouchures all the time. Enough people realized that the effort of double lip, to them, wasn't necessary and the easier to maintain single lip still gave the sound they liked. Some people never thought so and stuck with double lip. It's why we try new mouthpieces and clarinets too. Honestly, we can all play on pretty much ANY mouthpiece, with ANY embouchure, on ANY professional level clarinet if we dedicate enough time to it. But we hunt for a mouthpiece that plays with less effort, and embouchure that we can maintain, and a clarinet most in tune with itself so we can devote concentration to other things.
Myself, I use single lip, but don't bite at all. It's probably closer to double lip. I don't roll my top lip over my top teeth, but still support the mouthpiece with the top lip and my teeth barely touch. I put a ton of mouthpiece in my mouth so I don't have to squeeze the reed for it to vibrate (try to find the natural point of where the reed touches the curve instead of putting in less and moving that point), concentrate on forming a "seal" around the mouthpiece with my lips, and because I don't pinch at all or need a lot of effort to hold the mouthpiece or get the reed to vibrate, my embouchure doesn't get tired as quickly as it used to. I also will go back to double lip embouchure for slow legato pieces (or rather slow legato solo sections within a piece) that I feel really need that "extra touch", but only when seated. And I don't do a lot of seated performances anymore.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-01-29 01:56
In response to Karl:
You are right to bring the subject back to the historical slant, which is the real subject of this thread, rather than the virtues of double-lip embouchure.
I studied in Italy in the late 60s, and double-lip was then the norm. My own teacher wasn't all that old, so it wasn't just a question of generation. 10 years later, it was gone, for reasons unbeknownst to me. Also, in the 60s in Italy, everybody was playing Italian clarinets and 10 years later all had switched to Buffet.
In France, the great Cahuzac played double-lip, but seems to be the exception. His first-half-of-the-twentieth-century contemporaries all played single-lip. He had a round, mellow sound and his "rivals" had the bright, reedy sound that was in fashion in those days and which one associates with French playing of the period.
Russians? I am meeting with the clarinetists of the Marinsky (spelling?) theatre in a couple of weeks and I will ask them.
My personal interpretation for the demise of double-lip is the "rough and ready" approach of modern-day musicians: they just can't be bothered doing anything that is "needlessly" difficult. I have spoken to clarinetists that play period instruments, but single-lip. That seems contradictory to me. Here you are striving to appear authentic and you cheat!
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Steve Becraft
Date: 2014-01-29 01:56
When I began a DM program in 1998 I was a double-lip player who had switched to it after my master's degree. In one of my classes I created an "ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SELECTED LITERATURE PERTAINING TO PLAYING AND
TEACHING THE DOUBLE-LIP EMBOUCHURE ON THE CLARINET." It's not super-scholarly, but if anyone would like it I'd be happy to email it to you. Some sources were in very old Clarinet journals and some things were on microfilm, so you might need to have access to a big college library!
Incidentally, despite all of the fantastic benefits to my tone and finger technique (it's actually not hard to play double lip standing up once you are in shape!) I could never quite develop the endurance I needed. One recital included bleeding…
Frank Kowalsky was eventually able to pinpoint the unknown element that led me to double lip: some throat tension. Once we addressed this, I was able to switch back to single lip (5 years total on double lip) and haven't looked back. Do I wish I could still play double lip? Yes. But as Alexi said, everything is a compromise and single is what I need to do.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TJTG
Date: 2014-01-31 20:58
I started to use double lip embouchure 2 years ago, and switched to it full time about a year and a half ago. I've learned a couple things.
First, I'd never have a beginner student do this. It takes serious muscle strength, built up from constant use, to allow you to play like this, not to mention standing while doing so. The student who plays 4 or 5 hours a week may very well hurt themselves trying use this. I certainly do after a 2 week vacation from practice.
I think it has a couple other benefits beyond tone production. It quickly shows you how hard you actually tongue. When I switched I noticed in an excerpt like Shostakovitch 9 it was almost unplayable with double lip because I was no longer anchoring the clarinet with my teeth. I had to refine my tonguing and it lightened up my articulation.
Eb clarinet is easier than it has ever been before. I'm in tune, I can move notes more easily and I do not fatigue on the instrument like I did with single lip. I can actually play an 8 hour day with a 2 hour Eb rehearsal if need be.
Personally, it has helped with my TMJ disorder. While I still have attacks, they are not caused by over practicing or biting of the mouthpiece.
I do not believe it makes it any harder to play standing up with the correct practice. Long tones on the open G or high C slowly allow you to gain control of the instrument. That isn't to say I wouldn't still use a pinkie key to stabilize my high C, or that I don't use resonance fingerings for throat tones. As far as the marching band argument goes, I walk around my apartment playing Mozart and excerpts... it doesn't hurt with correct practice.
I do believe it does take 100% commitment to double lip to really develop the strength. Also, playing so that there are absolutely no leaks from the sides of your lips go toward developing a better hold of the mouthpiece. To get to where I am though, I've never used single lip since I switched. Not once.
John Yeh taught me how to do this, and it certainly took commitment. He is a very strong advocate of it, but knows it's not for everybody. I hear him play though and wonder why everybody isn't doing it... (I believe Steve Williamson does it full time as well, but I wouldn't be quoted on that)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Globus
Date: 2014-01-31 16:16
I have to disagree with the previous comment about "serious muscle strength" required to play double lip. The muscle strength required for double lip is no greater than what is required for single lip, in my opinion.
It's also no more difficult to stand up playing double lip than single lip. One's legs may get tired but that's another story.
Proper embouchure mechanics are proper embouchure mechanics irrespective of which style of embouchure one adopts. Want proof? Listen to great players from today and from yesteryear and you'll discover that there are as many in one camp as in the other (and, if anything, it is the single-lip players who outnumber the double-lip players).
I play double lip but only because it's more comfortable for me. And to whatever degree I can play well, I attribute it to much more than my style of embouchure.
Paul Globus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-01-31 21:48
Having read the responses so far, I need to ask a heretical question:
Why is ease of playing while standing a value that's important enough to dictate our playing mechanics? Most of us play in bands or orchestras or perhaps quintets and we sit in all those ensembles. Clarinetists play standing up only when performing in marching band, as soloist in recitals or concertos with orchestra. There are no doubt a number of players on this BB who do play recitals and probably a couple of handfuls of clarinetists here who actually play as soloists with orchestras. We have students here who play in marching bands (but may not after high school and almost certainly will not after college). But for the majority of casual players and even for many professional ones, the times they (we) play standing are few and far between if any. Most of us are ensemble players and play recitals and concert solos rarely if at all. The last time I played standing *on a regular basis of any kind* was during lessons when I was a student.
And then comes the next heretical question:
Why is it so important as a recitalist or even as a concert soloist to stand? Cellists can't stand when the play. Bassoonists don't. Is Itzhak Perlman any less effective a player because he must sit when he plays? I have heard stories, though I never saw him in a live recital and can't vouch for it myself, that Harold Wright played solo performances seated.
I understand that many players feel that effective breathing is easier when they stand and prefer it - they might even stand when playing in an ensemble if they were permitted to. But why is it so important an ability that we would choose an embouchure style or any other part of our technical approach based on whether or not it made it more difficult to play when standing?
I do have my flame-retardant suit on, but I wonder after all why these questions are truly so heretical.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-01-31 17:26
Having seen soloists sitting and/or standing in Alice Tully Hall so many times, my feeling is that If I were to solo there I would want to stand (dream on, Bruno!), for it lends a certain authority and confidence to the performer that sitting in a chair just doesn't provide.
Of course if one HAS to sit for one reason or another, then so be it, but over the centuries, standing if possible has always been de rigueur.
B>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-01-31 23:48
Bruno wrote:
> Of course if one HAS to sit for one reason or another, then so
> be it, but over the centuries, standing if possible has always
> been de rigueur.
>
True, but then if a player finds the advantages of double over single lip overwhelming, choosing single lip only to maintain tradition seems questionable. The more important question should be, how do you play better?
ThatPerfectReed wrote:
> Did Harold Wright sit BECAUSE he was a double lip player(which
> he was)? ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif)
>
That's what I've heard, but, again, I never saw him except in the Boston Symphony and only met him in person once.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2014-01-31 19:28
Most of Woody Allen's playing I've seen he's sitting.......
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2014-01-31 20:36
Richard Stoltzman plays double lip and stood while soloing with orchestras all over the globe.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2014-02-01 11:31
Ruben wrote: "I have spoken to clarinetists that play period instruments, but single-lip. That seems contradictory to me. Here you are striving to appear authentic and you cheat!"
What evidence do you have that Stadler, Baermann, et al played double lip? Mühlfeld had metal plates (yes, metal!) put on top of his mouthpieces to avoid bite marks in the wood!
Even amongst the earliest players, who played with the reed touching the top lip, there were already exponents of both single and double lip embouchure. Vanderhagen (Méthode, 1785) suggests supporting the mouthpiece with the lower teeth.
As far as "striving to appear authentic" goes, I don't believe that is what most period instrument players are setting out to do. But that's another discussion.
For more information on reed above/below and double/single lip embouchure in history, check out "The Clarinet in the Classical Period" by Al Rice.
Post Edited (2014-02-01 06:50)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-02-01 11:46
To Liquorice: Thank you! I stand corrected. I assumed that up until a certain time, all clarinetists played double-lip, but that's what one gets for assuming.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2014-02-01 18:17
New Orleans jazz musicians often sit while playing as a matter of tradition. There are practical reasons as well (playing hours long dance parties in 100 degree heat, etc). Like a classical string quartet, however, there are various set-ups that many NOLA players feel work best for their music. So when you see a NOLA clarinetist sitting when he solos, chances are it has nothing to do with embouchure.
This isn't a universal 'rule', but anyone interested can check out Bill Russell's book New Orleans Style for more information (including lots of great vintage photos and thumbnail autobiographies of many NOLA jazz clarinetists--including Ed Hall and Raymond Burke.)
Eric
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2014-02-01 19:53
Going with the spinoff...
sitting vs standing....
One thing is a visual aspect. Not necessarily moving around, but if you're backed by an ensemble and you are standing, it's VERY obvious when you are playing and when the focus of the audience should be shifted back to you.
Another is a more mental aspect. I've met many people and had lessons with a few teachers who recommended I stand when I practice as this makes you more expressive. Does that mean you can't be expressive sitting? Nope. But something about standing and having the "freedom" to move (greater range of motion) tends to allow your emotions to translate to the instrument. So for many people, it's possible that subconsciously they are holding back while sitting, or at least expressing more when they can stand and move around. You'll hear people play that move a little, and some that move a lot, but for all of them, it's more subconscious and what they "need" to express the music.
Back to double lip aspect, I've practised playing double lip. I've practised playing it standing and sitting, with and without a neckstrap. I've even used it on the marching field while walking around to see if I could. I've practised with the reed on top just to see what it's like. I've practised with reed on top double lip and also single lip (bottom teeth on the mouthpiece). It's hard. It can be done, but it's hard. And frankly, if I had to prioritize it, I'd put double lip standing pretty low cause frankly, for the effort, I don't see that it's necessary. If I can play with 95% of my best tone with single lip, I'd rather do that than have to focus so much effort (let's assume twice as much embouchure and stability effort) into maintaining a double lip while standing or sitting for 5% more tone. Cause for me to not slip with a double lip embouchure, frankly, I just lose concentrating on the music cause of worrying about the stability and embouchure.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
