 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2014-12-01 21:09
Ok, maybe it's not a trend per se, as many fine artists use more medium size tip mouthpieces with not as strong reeds, or even more open tips and stronger reads (e.g. Morales).
Still more, tip opening alone doesn't define a mouthpiece's resistance, which is rather a blend of the intertwined effects of rail width and curvature, and where that separation from the reed begins...and chamber design, etc.
And yet still more, even if it was a trend, maybe clarinet players are not necessarily going with "small tip, big stick" for the same reasons.
But with all those caveats covered, what might be the top reasons to play such a setup? Is it the ability to project in an orchestra?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2014-12-01 22:22
Our own Paul Aviles often professes his love of the "small tip, big stick." Perhaps he can enumerate its plenitude of pleasurable qualities...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-12-02 01:50
It may matter what you're calling a "big stick." I play on a mouthpiece with a tip opening of about a millimeter, but I'm not sure you'd call the #3-1/2+ reeds I use these days (Rue lepic, D'Addario Res. Classic) hard.
Interesting thing (perhaps, or maybe not) is that when I was younger I used #5 of the only clarinet reed Vandoren made (the "Traditional" blank - before V12 and way before 56 Rue lepic). I adjusted them so they didn't feel hard or stuffy. Recently I tried a few old #5 VD Traditionals that I had put away when I started to use V12s. Those old reeds were very playable on my current mouthpiece, Modern #5s of any brand are much harder and I can't play on them. So, am I a "small tip, big stick" player or a "small tip, medium stick?"
It has always seemed to me that when people talk about this, they seem to think that the reeds used on close-tipped mouthpieces are stiff to the point of unresponsiveness. No matter what tip opening, curve length, rail width or chamber size your favorite mouthpiece has, the goal is to match a reed to it that is vibrant and resonant.
All of that said, I find that a closer-tipped facing is *in general* less demanding of embouchure pressure to keep the sound focused and clear. My brief encounters with tip openings greater than 1.10 mm have made me feel too much of a need to squeeze with my lips.
But, always, I have to consider that I haven't ever played on an open-tipped setup enough to have really adjusted to it or found the best reeds to go with it, so my experience at that end of the spectrum is worthless or very nearly so.
If we've played long enough, we tend to play on what we've gotten used to. The important thing isn't what you use but what you produce with it.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-12-02 02:52
When I first started clarinet I was "self teaching" and somewhere along the line I bought a Buffet crystal mouthpiece that was 'off the chart' open. My belief at the time was that you needed an open mouthpiece to get a big sound - larger opening; bigger sound. Of course it finally occurred to me that all I was doing those years was working much harder than I had to work (I specialized in hard reeds on an open mouthpiece). It was ALL counterproductive.
More recently I found myself with a custom mouthpiece that was more open than I preferred, and tried desperately to get it to work. What I found this time around is that YOU need to be constantly moderating the amount of air versus embouchure support to achieve constant timbre and pitch. If you are looking for a more popular music sound you may want more variation in these areas (and easier vibrato and glissandi).
But for standard classical clarinet playing it is BETTER to have consistent timbre be what comes out more often than not. Even if you are only doing this as a thought experiment, it should be clear that a narrower band of physical options offers less variation in the sound characteristics. So, a smaller tip opening with a reed that has an appropriate amount of body for that opening will automatically be more consistent in pitch and timbre.
PROJECTION is almost an entirely different subject. My favorite story is of a colleague who wound up with a Behn mouthpiece that made him feel as if he had bees buzzing in his head (his words). But everyone around him thought he had a much more prominent sound (even at lower volume levels). It is more a function of how many upper partials (and which harmonics are emphasized) are present in your fundamental note that gives the sound more projection. To get a little better idea of what I am talking about, read the justification for the Power Barrel by Dr. Omar Henderson.
One cannot simply "blow harder" to be heard distinctly over an ensemble.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2014-12-02 06:33
I asked my teacher, who plays professionally in an orchestra, if any orchestral players use softer reeds. She said most professionals use reeds in the 4 or even 5 range (I assume with a closer mouthpiece) simply because they project better over a large ensemble. (She cited a well-known player who had just received a spot in a major orchestra, and said something along the lines of "he gets a great sound with his current set-up, but he and I both know he'll need to change his set-up in order to project over the orchestra.)
Post Edited (2014-12-02 06:34)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-12-02 19:51
I know quite a few professional orchestral players and I would say (despite my preference for number 4 Vandorens) that many are using 3.5 strength reeds as well with quite a bit of success.
Again, it's not THE REED or THE MOUTHPIECE but the combination of the two (which should allow ALL aspects of playing with ease, not just 'the most prominent sounds').
Also, I'm not convinced that a anyone would even be a "final round candidate" if they did not already exhibit all the attributes necessary for the job. If they are not meeting some aspect of the job, then they are passed over.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2014-12-02 23:49
I dont think she meant that he couldn't project but that it would be easier for him with a different set-up. Obviously he's a great player and well-qualified for the spot.
I actually have no idea what set-up said player uses, I'm just relating my teacher's opinion on the matter.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2014-12-03 21:02
It is all very relative...a larger tip a somewhat thinner reed in tip..not build or width etc. all which also affects timbre. I think alot of orchestral players use more open tips than is previously thought. It is simply irrelevant to think that a more open mouthpiece is a taboo in clarinet playing. Goodman played on all kinds of mouthpieces and never had a classical sound..but what constitutes a classical tone has yet to be defined. I think most people in the audience and many students feel this is a bogus topic. It is really what is comfortable and works for you.
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: katiemules1
Date: 2014-12-04 21:24
There needs to be an opening between the reed and mouthpiece, because the sound will be choked off without it. Find mouthpieces sanded down to make a nicer opening between the two, BUT the reed strength shouldn't correlate with this as much as you think. Keep whatever reed strength controls your air the best and stick with it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2014-12-05 00:31
katiemules1 wrote:
> Find
> mouthpieces sanded down to make a nicer opening between the
> two,
I don't understand what you mean by this. Sanded down? Nicer opening? Please explain these.
> BUT the reed strength shouldn't correlate with this as
> much as you think. Keep whatever reed strength controls your
> air the best and stick with it.
Certainly, as we've all said, there are more mouthpiece parameters than just tip opening that influence the resistance provided by the mouthpiece. The reed needs to be compatible with that resistance, doesn't it, to "control your air the best?"
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2014-12-05 21:35
Quote:
But for standard classical clarinet playing it is BETTER to have consistent timbre be what comes out more often than not. Even if you are only doing this as a thought experiment, it should be clear that a narrower band of physical options offers less variation in the sound characteristics. So, a smaller tip opening with a reed that has an appropriate amount of body for that opening will automatically be more consistent in pitch and timbre.
That's pretty much what I feel with tip openings/curvature. The less tip opening, the less likely pitch can vary. The bigger the tip opening, the more the pitch can vary. Personally, I use Walter Grabner's WIDEST (his jazz/klezmer) mouthpiece with a 3.5 reed. I use a very very relaxed embouchure and make sure not to pinch and so my pitch still doesn't vary since I'm not using my embouchure to change the tip opening (ie: squeezing the reed and changing the tip opening to a closer value). I love it, love the sound, and it works for every style music.
But I like having the flexibility, even if I don't use it all the time. I like knowing that I CAN use it, should I want. Now I can pinch shut a little to tune with those damned trumpets (SHARP!) and then relax back to keep with the saxaphones depending on who I'm playing with at the time.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-12-06 00:27
Oh the trumpets..........don't even get me started.
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-12-09 07:35
I assume a Backun.
Do you have a number on that David?
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tylerleecutts
Date: 2014-12-09 10:12
The Reserve line of mouthpieces were specifically designed to mimic old Chedevilles and vintage mouthpieces, in order to get a sweet sound with excellent projection.
I use an M15 a lot, but the Vandoren lines tend to be a crapshoot. . I have an X0 on the way I'm gonna try. The X5 is good too, but can tend to have too much resistance.
Personally, the range between 1.00-1.05 is my happy spot. Regardless if that's "traditional" or not, that's just where I fit. I certainly believe players can be very successful with different facings- everyone is very different. One of my friends plays on the old M14 and sounds AMAZING on it. . Wonder why Vandoren discontinued it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2014-12-10 00:39
I talked to Morales after his solo performance last week with the Philly Orchestra. He uses an opening about 1.01, I forget the model, maybe he said an M but I'm not really sure what he told me, and he used a Legere # 4 for the Debussy Rhapsody and then a 4 1/4 for the Rossini Into. Theme and Varations. It tip opening is just one small part of a mouthpiece. I use a medium opened, alway have, and I use #4 Rico Thick Blanks as well as some reserves. Mine tip opening is about 1.18, an old Morgan, one of the first ones he ever made, but it plays more like his newer 1.06 and 1.10 because his old ones are so different from the ones he made after as far as the tip length, baffle, rails, bore size etc. etc. There is no one rule for a tip opening vs the reed strength. It also depends on the embouchure stregth and teeth formation of the player. The pressure point and how much pressure they use as well as how much MP they take in their mouth, as well as the tongue position and size and throat opening. Many factors to into it.
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-12-10 07:26
Absolutely Ed, no question.
I was "short-handing" the conversation only to get at what combination Mr. Morales is using in combination with the Legere reeds. This is still a matter of "chasing that demon in the sky" for me. Once I actually get Legeres to work, it will be the end of cane, period.
............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2014-12-10 09:45
I think it's great that Morales has moved on from the rather open facing of the
Philadelphia P MoBa mouthpiece (1.15 mm tip opening according to the Backun website) to the much closer C (Camarata 0.99 mm or L Legacy 1.03 mm) models. Now teachers can tell young clarinetists that if they really want to play well, as Morales does, they should use a facing they can easily control and one that will assist them in developing a supple, sensitive embouchure. They can learn to play on a close facing like a Vandoren M13 or a Reserve X0 instead of feeling that they have to struggle with a Vandoren B45 or a similar facing that is too open for them. And some of them, if they can afford it, might want to try a MoBa C or L themselves, or a Backun Eddie Daniels at 1.03 mm, or another upscale mouthpiece with similar facings.
Post Edited (2014-12-10 23:22)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-12-10 10:37
I'll be the one to ask:
Are we talking what are now the current "CRT" and "LRT" facings? Or is there another line of Backun mouthpieces?
...............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}
