 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2014-05-11 21:45
Along with the injunction 'not to bite', people often say here that you have to work over a period of time to 'develop the muscles in your embouchure'.
I would like to ask: what do the people who say this – and the people who listen appreciatively, and then chime in to agree – think is the purpose of this muscular development?
What, precisely, does it achieve?
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2014-05-11 22:00
I'm inclined to believe, Tony, that it:
1. Helps prevent air leakage between lips and mouthpiece and
2. Assists in the bending of notes and in pitch correction......
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-05-11 22:41
I can't speak for others, only myself.
The short answer:
Developing the muscles that produce your embouchure manifests good sound and intonation, and ability to produce that over a duration of time.
Spelt out:
When I think of developing the muscles that form the embouchure it's more about their ability to maintain their position over periods of time than their strength at grasping. Think "long duration arm wrestling," not "slam the mallet" on the high striker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_striker and win a prize.
Perhaps an analogy to fitness would be where trainers use smaller weights and request more repetitions from their clients to achieve muscle tone and longer periods of contracture than those training for pure bodybuilding competition where muscle size, as achieved by heavier weights with less repetitions is the more prevalent approach. (Please, no "bodybuilders do plenty of cardio and have to pose for long periods of time, or fitness athletes are 15X as strong." You're all great!)
That strength is a byproduct of stamina training, and vice versa, I certainly concede.
I've seen players return to their clarinet after long periods away and immediately produce great sound. Their ability to sustain it over 3 movements: that's another story. That comes with training and time, as does the wind to sustain that duration of play.
Another application of developing the muscles in the embouchure deals with "muscle memory" in quotes because muscles aren't cerebral--but your brain is. And over time, as a certain orientation around your mouthpiece produces positive results (using proper form of course), we are apt to repeat it, and get our brains use to it, as sure as it's a somewhat perishable skill without practice.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-05-11 23:48
For all its worth, I would like to offer a piece of advice for maintaining muscle tone of the embouchure when it isn't possible to practise. Putting a pen between your lips laterally-I play double-lip- and maintaining it in place while you read a book, brainlesslessly watch televison, etc.. The clarinet embouchure isn't like an oboe or a bassoon embouchure. It is more of a half moon than a full one.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2014-05-12 00:14
The most beautiful clarinet sound I've heard was from Walter Thalin of the Minneapolis Symphony who leaked a great deal of air all the time.
I'm not sure that you need to work at an embouchure over a period of time. When I've had to stop playing for a while, it doesn't seem to go away. Memory of the embouchure and musical efforts is retained in the brain for a very long time. I have no answer. In my present layoff due to a pending operation, I have no doubt that I can function about the same upon return to playing. An interesting question!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2014-05-12 02:51
I would have thought quite simply that the use of embouchure muscles in playing is introducing a new task to them that is not mirrored in any routine day to day activity e.g. talking, eating etc.
So main purpose is to train and develop the control of those muscles to assist production of tone and intonation.
Secondly to develop the stamina to maintain that control over longer periods of playing.
As a long time double lip player I certainly find that even a few days away from the instrument has a significant effect on stamina.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2014-05-12 02:52
For me, it's the ability to maintain a constant (or rather consistent) pressure on the reed as well as sealing around the mouthpiece, without biting nor squeaking or getting tired.
There are pieces that I could play without fatigue over extended periods of time, and there are others who kill my poor snout within minutes. It's the latter that make me think about further embouchure training.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2014-05-12 02:58
Tony, for me the need to strengthen the muscles in your embouchure has mostly to so with developing endurance. As a personal example - I have, first because of a planned vacation followed by planned hip surgery, been away from the clarinet physically for a little over two weeks. I know that when I sit down to begin playing tomorrow or, if my procrastinating half wins out, Tuesday, my first session length will be far shorter than I'll need to manage a reading of a Balakirev symphony we're doing Friday night. My lip muscles will just not hold up for more than a few minutes' time the first couple of days I try to play. But from experience I expect that by Friday I will be able to play the whole rehearsal.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-05-12 03:27
As an exponent of a "good platform" on which to set the reed/mouthpiece, I would like to say firstly that as the years go by I become less and less convinced of the embouchure's importance. The main ingredient to sound (for all winds) is the production of outgoing air and properly focusing that generated stream of air most efficiently.
For me, the use of the lip muscles around the mouthpiece reed are two fold: First the reed should be sitting on a firm lip not a flaccid one so that the lip does NOT act as a damper to the sound. You can achieve some "flattening" of the lower (and upper lip with double lip embouchure) lip with sheer jaw power, but then you are closing off the aperture (squeezing the reed down against the mouthpiece) and causing possible harm to the tissue of the lip.
The second thing the lip muscles do is allow one to contain the reeds vibration as you increase volume and/or move into the stratosphere of notes without engaging the jaw muscles to do this which would again invite more of the above stated problems.
..............Paul Aviles
Post Edited (2014-05-12 03:29)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-05-12 07:09
Let's go back to first principles. Many beginners can apply enough pressure using their jaw muscles and teeth through the lips to close the facing gap between reed and rails enough to completely choke out the sound. But they cannot play notes in the altissimo except as very flat screeches. Shaping and tuning these higher notes so they sound like music instead of squawks must require some combination of air pressure and pressure on the reed. .
Since the beginners can easily exert too much pressure for the reed to vibrate properly, the answer must lie in finding some way to have them use less pressure than their untutored jaw muscles are capable of providing. Now, the lip muscles are obviously not as powerful as the jaw muscles, so it is not unreasonable to suppose that some way can be found to have the lip join with the jaw in providing a gentler, more appropriate source of pressure than the jaw alone would provide in pushing against the lips.
Smashing the jaw and teeth against the reeds as if one were breaking a walnut into smaller pieces is not a subtle enough process for good music making. The lips, by removing some of the jaw's burden, can teach the player exactly how much pressure the reed needs on it to properly voice any given note (especially in the altissimo).
A good clarinet embouchure, then, is not one that dispenses altogether with jaw-driven pressure from the teeth; it is one that coordinates or modulates the combined pressure of the teeth and the lips working together. I am personally certain that the lips play a substantial role in the clarinet embouchure because I stopped playing for over 20 years and then seriously took up the clarinet again. I am a regular long distance runner with pretty strong lungs, but the lungs alone did not produce a decent tone or correct pitch on the altissimo notes when I returned to the instrument. The lungs did still allow me to make big crescendos and play long tones, however. I could do that the first time I returned to playing the instrument.
Like most other people I like to eat (though I am a vegan) and my jaw was in good shape from chewing nuts, greens, etc. But pressure from my jaw did not suffice to produce the high tones I once took for granted. So, by the process of elimination I concluded that my lips needed strengthening. As I practiced daily scales and interval studies, I could indeed feel that my lips began to assume a progressively greater role in producing the upper tones, until, after several months, they were firm enough to sense just how to push to make the altissimo sound like well-voiced clarinet tones instead of owl screeches once again.
If my lips, in fact, had nothing to do with my "recovery," then exactly what did? Did my tone production shape up only by alteration in jaw pressure and air pressure with no assistance from the lips? Do the lips play an entirely passive role in voicing and tuning altissimo notes? I would be quite willing to hear documented physiological proof that this is the case. Perhaps I am wrong.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-05-12 12:27
Norman: As a person who has played single-lip and double-lip: exclusively double-lip for the last 10 years, I fully agree with you that double-lip requires more regular training. Its being more demanding may put some people off, but then again, excellence is never easy to come by in this life.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-05-12 12:33
Wes: I too have heard players with a fine tone that leaked air out of the corners of their mouths. Ironically, we clarinetists seem to tolerate this more than audiences do. I heard a Richard Stoltzman recital in which he made a steady deflating tyre sound and I overheard members of the audience wondering aloud what was wrong. Was there something wrong with his instrument, they asked. This parasitic noise is very distracting for members of the audience and as the ultimate goal is to play in public, it should be avoided.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2014-05-12 18:55
Why would Mr. Stoltzman tolerate this leaking air? Would this be due to weak muscles?
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-05-12 19:41
Quote: "I would like to ask: what do the people who say this – and the people who listen appreciatively, and then chime in to agree – think is the purpose of this muscular development?
What, precisely, does it achieve?"
In a word; endurance.
bruno>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-05-12 19:48
In fact, many excellent clarinetists have leaked air without any noticeable detriment to their career. One was Anthony Gigliotti, in the Philadelphia Orchestra and another was Mitchell Lurie. I heard Lurie play recitals on several occasions, and the air leakage was distinctly noticeable. Overall, though, his sound was large, vibrant, and compelling.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-05-12 20:03
The air leaking is an odd beast. I firmly believe that this phenomenon is NOT a consistent artifice even in the players that have been observed doing this. I heard Stoltzman in a small hall with Toshi years ago with none of that sound. One friend of mine dismissed Leister's playing because in a similar small hall setting he said Leister sounded like a "water fall." There is truth to the fact that orchestral playing hides a lot of extraneous noise, so you don't have to police up that sort of thing. But I believe that there may be more specific issues going on when we hear these moments: chapped lips, being tired, muscle tonus issues, etc.
...........Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-05-12 20:14
Paul: I think air leakage is just one of those bad habits that creeps up on even the best of players. There are others. A fine oboist I have been playing with for twenty years, snorts noisily. I have enough respect for his fine playing that it doesn't bother me, but audiences are wont to be less charitable and I've heard remarks from them. They've said they wish he wouldn't snore through his performances. It is true that these noises are probably not heard when playing Strauss' Alpine Symphony.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-05-12 20:21
Mr. Pay: In application of the Greenberg principle, which I am the proud creator of: if you want to ask the right question, know the answer to your question. You have certainly asked the right question and I eagerly await your answer to it. I am also curious to know whether you use single or double lip when you play period instruments, though admittedly, this is a bit off the subject.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2014-05-12 20:41
seabreeze wrote:
> In fact, many excellent clarinetists have leaked air without
> any noticeable detriment to their career. One was Anthony
> Gigliotti, in the Philadelphia Orchestra
Another who by reputation played with a noticeable air leak - I never heard him live - was Stanley Hasty. I can't respond to Gigliotti's having leaked air when playing in the orchestra (I presume at louder dynamics) except to say that I only very occasionally *noticed* a leak when he played in the orchestra from my seats in the Academy of Music. I can say for certain that in several years of studying with him I never heard an air leak during lessons, when we were together in a small studio and he felt no need to force. There are two or three American clarinetists of the 1960s and '70s whom I heard from those same seats (or equivalent seats in other venues) leak noticeably. But these were all players who I would say had no problems with endurance or "strength" - the leaks could have come from any number of other causes.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: wanabe
Date: 2014-05-12 21:31
I am not a physiologist and know very little about musculature and such, and I have a question. My wife had the Lasik surgery procedure done on her eyes. It produced wonderful results and we are thrilled at the improvement in her eyesight. A friend of hers advised her to "exercise" her eyes after her operation to strengthen her eye muscles. My wife asked her Opthalmologist about this and he said that this would do no good because the eye muscles that are used to focus our eyes are of a different type of muscle tissue and could not be "built up" like bicepts, etc., something about long fiber Vs. short fiber muscle tissue. My question is what kind of muscle fiber makes up our lips? I have never heard of anyone making their lips bigger by exercising them. Is it even possible to make our lips bigger and/or stronger by exercising them? Is this whole discussion moot?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-05-12 23:34
QUOTE: "I am not a physiologist and know very little about musculature and such, and I have a question. My wife had the Lasik surgery procedure done on her eyes. It produced wonderful results and we are thrilled at the improvement in her eyesight. A friend of hers advised her to "exercise" her eyes after her operation to strengthen her eye muscles. My wife asked her Opthalmologist about this and he said that this would do no good because the eye muscles that are used to focus our eyes are of a different type of muscle tissue and could not be "built up" like bicepts, etc., something about long fiber Vs. short fiber muscle tissue. My question is what kind of muscle fiber makes up our lips? I have never heard of anyone making their lips bigger by exercising them. Is it even possible to make our lips bigger and/or stronger by exercising them? Is this whole discussion moot?"
I can state with some authority that your ophthalmologist is correct. In addition to being a different kind of muscle our focussing muscles are inside the eyeball and cannot be accessed by moving the globe.
Regarding the "lips" question, our peri-oral muscles are voluntary, striated muscle and indeed, can be strengthened like any other voluntary muscle in the body.
Muscles don't have to increase in size to be strengthened (as is seen in weight lifting), but can be strengthened greatly all the same. Even if they did increase in size, it would be such a small amount that you are not likely to notice it in your physiognomy.
We see lots of otherwise pretty young things today with collagen-enlarged lips. They believe that to be beautiful and that is their privilege. Thank Providence it is temporary.
All of which goes to show that just as there are reeds and there are reeds, there are muscles and there are muscles.
bruno>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2014-05-13 01:45
There seems to be many good performers who leak air at the embouchure. Is it due to the embouchure style they have chosen, rather than weak embouchure muscles? I can't imagine that a 'drawstring' embouchure approach would result in leakage, as providing closure from all directions is the basis for this embouchure. Is it not more likely that leakage would be consistent with the "hard cushion" or "bottom lip shelf" approach to embouchure.
I do know from my oboe playing that excessive air leakage can happen after lots of extended long note passages. At this point it could happen while trying to finish a very soft extended ending to a work. It doesn't have to be a loud passage. The more I am in shape, the more endurance I have.
The oboe reed is only 7mm wide so perhaps closure at the sides is more difficult than the clarinet where the mouthpiece is much wider. ie applying corner pressure to one finger in your mouth is more difficult than with two or more fingers. Please remove the fingers from your mouth.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2014-05-13 06:24
One important aspect of strength is that it's useless unless developed in the service of something.
I developed a small rotator cuff tear a few years and it became painful enough to bring me to an orthopedist's office. When I mentioned that I worked out regularly and (at his request) described some of the lifts I was doing, he asked me if I ever needed to move similar levels of resistance in my normal activities. I had to admit I never did. His reaction was that all the resistance training I was doing was fine if I spent my time at the beach posing (though it had probably caused the tear), but I needed to do some different training (more reps in different directions with much less weight - rubber "Thera-bands" instead of metal discs on machines) to strengthen my shoulder muscles for *my* normal, everyday activities. I might not be a poster boy for a muscle beach ad (not much chance of that, anyway), but I could get through my normal day, and then some, effectively.
"Developing" or "strengthening" one's embouchure, similarly, will almost certainly mean different things to different players, which will make every player's approach an individual process determined by his/her individual needs as a player.
Karl
Post Edited (2014-05-13 16:37)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-05-13 09:13
Arnold: I'd never heard the term "drawstring embouchure" as opposed to the"shelf
one". -very interesting! It really puts it well. Maybe you're right about the width of the tip of clarinet mouthpiece being conducive to leakage. I think it's also just a bad habit that we get lazy about corrrecting, like so many of our bad habits in everyday life.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2014-05-13 20:00
I'm sloppy about what I mean by "embouchure." I often use "tired embouchure" to refer to poor conditioning: If I fail to practice soprano clarinet for a couple of weeks, my lower lip and cheeks get sore quickly the first time I practice again.
That's probably a substandard use of the word "embouchure," if the word more properly refers to the positioning of lips and tongue to create . . . uh-oh, "that nice dark tone." (And then we can discuss the definition of a nice dark tone. On second thought, let's not.) Or maybe the purpose of embouchure is to close up gaps where air can leak with a hiss, unless we're playing some punk composer who marks passages, "Hiss" and "Extreme Hiss" and "Hiss Like A Cobra." (She's imaginary. I think.)
Or maybe the next time someone mentions "embouchure" we could beg him to fermez la bouche. (Is the French word for "shut" etymologically related to "firm" . . . ?)
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Johan H Nilsson
Date: 2014-05-14 00:59
Is the ability to play on harder reeds and with higher air pressure a motive?
To me, this increases stability and gives a margin of safety.
For instance, if you have taken a quick breath and jump to a tone, intonation is safer with a harder reed.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-05-14 01:31
"The shaping of the lips, tongue, etc to produce a musical tone" is how the grand old Webster's 2nd Unabridged American dictionary (circa 1944) defines "embouchure." I'll buy that, especially the "et cetera" part.
For the clarinet, that etc. certainly includes the jaw muscles pushing the teeth up under the lips, and we're all just kidding ourselves if we don't admit the role of teeth pressure in combination with the lips in forming the embouchure.
The Socratic question Mr. Pay has set seems to be what exactly does the development of the muscles in the mouth have to do with the embouchure. Some would say that the orbicular action of the muscles that pucker the lips to whistle also places the right amount of pressure on the reed to produce that goal of a "musical tone." Others would say, nonsense; the roundness or "drawstring" circularity of contraction has little or nothing to do with giving the teeth that assist they need to voice and tune the musical tones. They would say, just bunch the lips up under the reed any way you can, and you will find the right amount of tension to get the job done. So you have the orbicular, circular drawstring school of embouchure vs. the lower lip pad or bunching school. Then others would say that the muscles that draw the corners of the lip upward in a smile accomplish the trick most readily.
Do we really know? Certainly, some muscular action must be necessary to get the lower lip to push up just right, along with the upward pushing of the teeth under it, to make a pleasing and well-tuned note. But which action is best?
At the forthcoming clarinet festival this summer in Baton Rouge, LA, I see that a presenter, Erica Low, is set to speak on matters that may shed light on this very subject. Her theme is "Examination of Embouchure Force During Clarinet Performance." I for one plan to attend carefully to what she has to say. Can she measure the relative share of teeth versus lip pressure on any given note at any given moment?
Post Edited (2014-05-14 05:46)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-05-14 04:16
It's such a small point, but.......
The jaw muscles can only move the lower jaw up and down, side to side, and front to back. They cannot position the teeth under the lips. It's the job of the lips to position themselves over the teeth.
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-05-14 06:39
I have on occasion felt leaking air on my fingers (or cheek?, or neck? memory fails me)- and been mystified its exact source. Like a fellow trying to find a leak in a tire. I once read about putting your tire in a bathtub of water so you can look for a stream of bubbles. Sounds like a recipe for getting in trouble with the wife- tires are mighty dirty. And I don't think that would work for clarinet.
Paul's recent advice to tighten my embouchure (he endured one of my videos) has helped- at least now I know what to do when I feel one of those leaks. It amounts to tightening the drawstring. I agree that some tension is needed there (I think I was near zero), but I'm working on keeping it at a minimum.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2014-05-14 07:54)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-05-14 09:42
Dear Sea; Mr. Webster has it right. Did he play the clarinet? I see that the grand old man also mentions tongue as part of embouchure, though "per se" it isn't. Tongue and especially palate play a major part in tone production. I find that with double-lip embouchure, I have more control of my palate and can do subtle things with it by minute adjustments of the upper lip. Question to our scientifically- minded participants: are the lips muscles? Aren't they just fatty tissue. The muscles, it would seem to me, are around the lips, but the lips themselves aren't muscles. Maybe I have it wrong. If I had gone to medical school, I would have probably flunked out.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-05-14 20:12
Some say (I among them) that the air column in the clarinet should be thought to extend all the way back through the throat into the trachea, and indeed into the lungs themselves, at the bottom of which is the diaphragm. That air column, manipulated, reshaped, and huge in size, has an enormous influence on our "sound", our vibrato (or lack thereof), and articulation.
The orbicularis oris, a complex of muscles surrounding the lips, includes fascicles that extend into the lips as well as encircling them and extending into the chin and across the cheeks to a lesser degree. They are very important in the formation of our embouchure.
There is no way to imagine that a clarinet player can develop a beautiful sound, the necessary endurance, and all the variables in musical articulation without developing this set of muscles.
B>
Post Edited (2014-05-14 20:17)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2014-05-14 21:13
The lips themselves have no muscles, but the surrounding cheek, chin (the obicularis orbis) does.
I equate it to pushing on a wall - your hand has a somewhat soft, then firmer feel on the wall, and the wall does not move.
Your stretched lip is the hand, and the muscles around the lips are the wall.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-05-14 23:06
Quote: "The lips themselves have no muscles, but the surrounding cheek, chin (the obicularis orbis) does."
Not true. Fascicles of the orbicularis oris extend into the lips, as I said above.
B>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2014-05-14 23:59
"Musicians, particularly trumpet players and the like, use the orbicularis oris extensively when practicing and performing. Constant use of this muscle makes it prone to injury. Rupture of this muscle is a common problem in these musicians and can have devastating effects.
When the orbicularis oris ruptures, overwhelming muscle weakness can occur. The musician then has trouble controlling tone and suffers a debilitating loss of endurance. This condition, often referred to as Satchmo’s Syndrome, has the potential to ruin the career of the musician. "
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-05-15 01:30
Didn't know there was a Satchmo Syndrome. Is that why he mostly sang in later years?
............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2014-05-15 04:17
'''develop the muscles in your embouchure'.''
Should this quote rather read as: ''develop the muscles to aid your embouchure''?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2014-05-15 11:20
''...and the people who listen appreciatively, and then chime in to agree...''
I detect a note of disrespect here for us, the great unwashed (i.e.) ''chime in''. Gosh, maybe I'm just TOO sensitive?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-05-15 21:11
Ned said: "'''develop the muscles in your embouchure'.''
Should this quote rather read as: ''develop the muscles to aid your embouchure''?"
No.
bruno>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2014-05-16 20:12
Ruben Greenberg wrote:
>> You have certainly asked the right question and I eagerly await your answer to it. >>
Well, in a way I think the notion of 'developing the muscles of your embouchure' is the wrong starting point for an investigation into what an excellently working embouchure IS.
To my mind, it would be a little like saying that it’s important for a conductor to develop the muscles in his arms and face.
If you do a fairish bit of conducting, then I’m sure those muscles DO develop; but that’s a side effect of your main concerns.
When people talk about muscle development — and when they talk about 'not biting' -- I’m inclined to point them towards:
http://test.woodwind.org/Databases/lookup.php/Klarinet/2002/04/000770.txt
and perhaps towards:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=326083&t=326083
The point of the original post was to have some people (perhaps) say the sort of thing I think counterproductive, and then to see to what extent other people would agree or disagree.
Some of that happened.
Of course, I suppose that there are certain extended passages, as well as certain pieces, that might make a clarinet player tired. (I remember finding Bolero a bit exhausting to play in a Schools Concert at 9am one time.)
But we have nothing to compare to the stamina problems of brass players. In their case, the primary vibrator is the stretched lip itself, and it's not surprising that when THAT gets tired, they're in trouble. We merely use our lips to CONTROL our primary vibrator, which is the reed.
Talking too much about 'muscle development’ in our case is, I submit, to promote the development of stamina to an inappropriate level of importance. There are more significant things to say, and to understand.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-05-16 20:28
Mr.Pay: What comes to mind in your eagerly awaited answer is what Jascha Heifetz retorted when asked what the best way of developing the ring finger was. His answer: the best way of developing it is to use it. Maybe the appropriate word for working on embouchure is "placement"; placing everything correctly and then just letting it develop naturally. At any rate, you have opened up Pandora's box, as a great variety of points of view on the subject have been expressed here.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-05-16 21:08
This whole plastic reed fiasco I am going through is putting me in the mind set to try and completely re-assess what is going on with my embouchure.
I am quite interested in the the statement from the first link:
"The amount of pressure required to put the reed in its
optimum equilibrium position depends a great deal on the sort
of reed-mouthpiece setup the player is using."
And contrast that with (I paraphrase), "the almost complete lack of pressure Germans exert with their long, closed facings."
The Legere reeds seem to require an "optimum equilibrium" closer to the German idea. I spoke recently with Mr. John Moses who helped design the Legere Signature and he unequivocally stated that the Legere plays full dynamic, full range with little if any pressure. So is there an approach than can be practiced to get me down to this ideal to match the requirements of this reed? And does this also involve (ideally) seeking out the longest, most closed French style lay?
.......................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-05-16 23:08
Yes, the entire point of having an embouchure on the clarinet is to exert exactly the right amount of pressure on the reed to voice and tune the tone. Therefore the embouchure serves the reed, and the reed determines to a large extent exactly the amount and placement of force required from the lips. The reed is a lever on the mouthpiece facing.
If the facing and reed require little force from the lips to make the sound, then so much the better for the embouchure. The German lay and reed may indeed work more efficiently and therefore require less pressure. Mr. Moses' reed may also add efficiency and require less work from the embouchure.
However, I doubt that even the most efficient lay and reed, German style or otherwise, requires no muscular force from the muscles surrounding the lip or the jaw muscles pressing upward to produce clear tones of characteristic timber and pitch throughout the clarinet range. If anyone can devise a mouthpiece/ reed combination that truly requires no lip or jaw pressure, then let me be among the first to try it!
Post Edited (2014-05-17 05:59)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2014-05-17 09:17
>> If the facing and reed require little force from the lips to make the sound, then so much the better for the embouchure. The German lay and reed may indeed work more efficiently and therefore require less pressure. Mr. Moses' reed may also add efficiency and require less work from the embouchure.>>
The equation I started with:
developed=stronger=better
...as applied to the embouchure, is a misconception essentially because an inappropriate 'hard science' concept is being applied to a control system. Discussion of control systems requires a different language.
The same misconception could be said to be in operation in what you write above. 'Efficiency' is another such hard science concept, and so its application yields little insight. The German mouthpiece/reed/embouchure system has different strengths and weaknesses when compared to the French system; but the decision of which one to use in a given context is not to be made on the grounds of mechanical efficiency.
Gregory Bateson wrote in part, apropos control and communication systems:
Quote:
The whole energy relation is different. In the world of mind, nothing—that which is not—can be a cause. In the hard sciences, we ask for causes and we expect them to exist and be "real." But remember that zero is different from one, and because zero is different from one, zero can be a cause in the psychological world, the world of communication. The letter which you do not write can get an angry reply; and the income tax form which you do not fill in can trigger the Internal Revenue boys into energetic action, because they, too, have their breakfast, lunch, tea, and dinner and can react with energy which they derive from their metabolism. The letter which never existed is no source of energy.
It follows, of course, that we must change our whole way of thinking about mental and communicational processes. The ordinary analogies of energy theory which people borrow from the hard sciences to provide a conceptual frame upon which they try to build theories about psychology and behaviour—that entire Procrustean structure—is non-sense. It is in error. To see that 'clarinet embouchure' forms a (very simple) part of 'the world of communication', notice that it needs to respond flexibly to context. That context consists of our perceptions of our own sound, as well as our perceptions of how our own sound relates to other sounds. In fact, it forms an extension of our musical brain.
You can read the whole article, 'Form, Substance and Difference', and an equally revealing article, 'Style, Grace and Information in Primitive Art' – as well as other things – in the link I posted here last year:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=391018&t=391018
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-05-17 22:03
With all the discussion about not having to strengthen our peri-oral musculature in order to blow our clarinets and restrain ourselves from getting physical about it, let me offer that just because a weight-lifter can bench-press 350 pounds does not mean that he can't also crack 2 eggs into a pan without breaking the yolks. Or thread a needle. Or play softly on his clarinet.
Accordingly, damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead, or something to that effect, I continue to blow steady and crescendo-decrescendo long tones across the range of my clarinet as part of my warm up. I don't think I'm going to become 'muscle-bound', or destroy my embouchure.
Hey! It might even give me better endurance. And who knows - perhaps a better tone, more control over the pitch, and an easier altissimo. But maybe that's just wishful thinking. :-)
bruno>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2014-05-17 22:10
Well, good for you, just so long as the strengthening is a secondary consideration. I have no problem with your warmup.
See, stuff about the value of strong musculature in the embouchure might give some people here the wrong idea.
I know there's nobody here worth considering, in that regard -- for some of you.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-05-17 22:57
I'll tell you a secret, Tony. Strengthening my face is not only NOT a secondary consideration, it's not a consideration at all. I'm only interested in one thing; bel-canto playing and whatever it takes to produce it.
bruno>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-05-18 07:20
Dear Mr. Pay,
Having a wonderful brain for the creation of music, listening to one's sound, blending with other musicians, and providing social communication of great vigor and and creativity through music in no way guarantees the possession of a good embouchure. Louis Armstrong had an abundance of musical creativity and originality, was sometimes enraptured by the sounds he made (and justly so), not only blended well with other musicians but inspired them to play at their best, and communicated the essence of his art with live audiences perhaps better than any other musician I can think of.
But it is a simple fact that Louis Armstrong, despite his genius, did not have
a good (i.e. efficient ) embouchure for producing the effects he wanted. Pressing the trumpet mouthpiece too hard against his lips to produce the high notes of great brilliance essential to his phrasing and style physically wrecked his lips, leaving them gashed, swollen, and sometimes in need of a doctor's care. This is a commonplace today among trumpeters who, though lacking Armstrong's originality and musical genius, have learned to play notes an octave or more higher than Armstrong with much less pressure than he used and to continue playing them at an age when his lips were shot.
By not developing the most efficient embouchure, Armstrong cut his trumpet playing career short by 10 or 15 years. He became primarily a singer and entertainer during the last years of his life precisely because he lacked the knowledge (as indeed most other players also lacked) of how to play high and brilliantly without abusing his lips.
So the scientific study of embouchure formation is not rubbish; it can save a player's career if applied correctly. Arthur Koestler's "Ghost in the Machine" need not be destructive; it can be life-enhancing. According to Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas et al., that ghost or soul seeks knowledge. Intuition and bedtime stories are not enough. Armstrong had better intuition than most and heard his share of bedtime stories, but Brer Rabbit never told him enough about embouchure formation to save his lip.
Post Edited (2014-05-18 09:50)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2014-05-18 11:46
That's the trumpet. And, do you think that I am untechnical in what I write about the embouchure?
http://test.woodwind.org/Databases/lookup.php/Klarinet/2002/04/000770.txt
???
Obviously, the quality of ANYTHING can be judged according to different criteria. The clarinet embouchure and the trumpet embouchure are completely different, but it would obviously be possible to judge a specimen of either of them (a) according to musical criteria, and (b) according to medical criteria.
All I'm going on about is that you need to be much more subtle about judgements according to musical criteria than words like 'developed', or 'efficient', suggest. And people here further say things like, "Your embouchure should never change," which as a general statement is totally untrue.
You seem to imply by your scare-story that minimal effort is medically desirable, and then deduce from that that it's MUSICALLY desirable. But both minimal effort and maximum strength of muscle (as in the original post) are crude concepts to invoke in the context of discussion of the subtleties of embouchure.
The French style reed/mouthpiece/embouchure system involves larger forces than the German style. That doesn't make it WRONG. It all depends on what you want, musically.
Tony
Post Edited (2014-05-18 18:48)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2014-05-18 15:56
>> I'll tell you a secret, Tony. Strengthening my face is not only NOT a secondary consideration, it's not a consideration at all. I'm only interested in one thing; bel-canto playing and whatever it takes to produce it.>>
I'll tell you ANOTHER secret: bel canto is not the only sort of playing that it's necessary to master on the clarinet:-)
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2014-05-18 23:09
The original post actually said "develop the muscles of your embouchure" which is not the same as "maximum strength of muscle" noted in post above.
Clarinet playing embouchure is not the same as body building with an objective of maximum strength.
The optimum strength to provide necessary control, flexibilty and stamina is surely the objective.
And stamina is vitally important, at least if one has to play through 2 or more hours of orchestral transcription for military band on a solo clarinet stand.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2014-05-19 02:32
Quite right, Norman.
At any rate the issue has been examined from the various sides I'd wanted it viewed from, so I suppose it can end there.
There are various solutions to the 2 hours problem, I imagine; would suicide be an option?-)
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2014-05-19 03:00
If Henry Wood Sea Songs with that horrendous cadenza ever comes up again then suicide is definitely on the cards.
Norman
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2014-05-19 08:14
>> There are various solutions to the 2 hours problem, I imagine <<
There's a reason long concerts are usually on ground floor...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2014-05-19 11:19
Louis Armstrong also suffered from a heart condition, propbably brought on from a lifetime of smoking. That makes you short of breath. He also smoked marijuana daily. If he hadn't, he would have never sung "What a Wonderful World".
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-05-19 13:46
Doesn't this bring us back to the sound a man makes falling from the roof of a one story building vs a 10 story building?
..............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}
