 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2015-08-07 08:29
I'd like to know if anybody notices a difference in how I sound between these two recordings I made about a month ago, and if so, which one do you like better? I made a couple of equipment and technique changes and I want to see if the change is actually perceptible. (It was perceptible to the people who were coaching me at the time, but they were aware of exactly what changes I made.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImPugf4dBAo
https://youtu.be/PpD4Pb92Cic?t=18s (I've set it to skip ahead to 0:18 - the audio is oddly shrill before that and I have no idea why.)
I'd also appreciate any comments on the actual performances themselves. Last time I asked for comments on a performance here, the responses were all extremely critical, but led me to reevaluate some aspects of my playing.
Edit: Since the above recordings are of different pieces, I've made some recordings of the same excerpt played twice so it's easier to hear the difference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLVfqrD4b30
Post Edited (2015-08-08 09:00)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-08-07 20:45
I'm listening on a really crappy computer right now so the timbre is all whack (can't assess this properly). But, I'd say on the larger scale that the intonation of the Brahms was more problematic. Perhaps you didn't compensate down enough when presenting your middle "B" for tuning (if you gave the pitch). At any rate, I'd say that once you're "in the mix," your best bet would be to adjust your pitch to what is happening in the moment. The Schumann was much better in that regard.
As for the evenness of the timbre (such as what I can hear at the moment), it seems that the Brahms was more consistent. However the material is different enough to make a direct comparison a little difficult. Could be that it was just a different day, different problems. Maybe just stick with the white pants.
..................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2015-08-08 00:10
Maybe I should upload recordings of the same piece... I agree that two different pieces recorded on two different cameras isn't the best way to compare my sound, they're just all I had available for comparison. I'll upload some new recordings later.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-08-08 03:17
I've listened on a better system and it brought out a little more of what I heard earlier. I like the constancy of the timbre better in the Brahms, but it comes at the cost of intonation (?). My guess is that you are more comfortable doing what you did in the Schumann and that resulted in better intonation at the cost of steady sound (too much "openness" in the chalemeau and a bit "wild" sounding in the altissimo).
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2015-08-08 08:58
Okay, I've recorded two short clips of the beginning of the 2nd Brahms sonata (not exactly perfect performances, it's mainly so you can hear the difference in sound). My iPhone tends to distort the upper clarion just a tiny bit, but the recordings are good enough that you'll be able to hear the difference.
I've added this to the original post as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLVfqrD4b30
Post Edited (2015-08-08 09:07)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-08-08 18:11
Within the limits of the technology (which is VERY limiting - Sergei Celibidache refused to release commercial recordings of his performances for that very reason) I am not picking up a significant difference. But I would add that if there is no noticeable difference to a live auditor, you should stick with the version that makes it easier or more enjoyable for you.
I was in a conversation (with wind players) just yesterday concerning how great violinists choose their equipment and style based on how it sound to a "spotter" in the hall. The prevailing feeling amongst them is that if it sounds good "to you" it won't sound good to the audience. Actually this is a truism for us as well. There should be more grit and overtones in our sound to carry out into the hall. And it may not sound all that great to someone seated right next to you.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AAAClarinet
Date: 2015-08-08 18:27
As I listened to this at 2am I started thinking that you were using double lip the first time and single lip the second, but I could have been dreaming, in fact, maybe I still am.
AAAClarinet
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rdc
Date: 2015-08-08 19:01
For what it is worth, I didn't hear a lot of difference between the Brahms Quintet and Schumann examples.
I do hear a significant difference between the two Brahms Sonata excerpts. I like the resonance or ring in your sound in Option 1. Option 2 is a mellower sound with perhaps better control.
The ring I hear in Option 1 comes closer to my preferred concept of sound than Option 2, although I hear that quality of sound in the Schumann example, so I know that you can produce it on that equipment if you want it or need it.
So the question becomes which sound do you like better, and how hard or easy is it to produce that sound on the two different mouthpieces?
You haven't told us what changes in technique you are using. I hear something that I would like to mention that could be related to either technique or equipment or to both. In the Brahms Sonata excerpts, the F in measure 3 and the first G in measure 4 are being pushed very noticeably flat. I hear it much more in Option 1 than in Option 2, but it is present in both. I feel it is something you are doing in your technique: pushing the sound too much and momentarily losing the core of the tone on those notes. But it could be related to the equipment as well.
I hope these comments help you decide which direction to go. Lovely playing either way!
R. Chest
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2015-08-08 20:09
Thanks for the responses everyone!
Between the Brahms and Schumann recordings, I changed both the mouthpiece, mouthpiece angle, and method of air delivery (breathing more from the "diaphragm" than from the chest).
Between the two Brahms sonata excerpts I just changed the mouthpiece.
The first excerpt was recorded on a Clark Fobes CWF, which does provide a really nice ring to the sound (has more of the "grit and overtones" Paul Aviles mentioned), but on which I have gotten a number of criticisms of my sound "spreading" or going out of control, especially in loud, high passages. It's extremely free-blowing and a little harder to control, but I like the "ring."
The second was recorded on a Vandoren M15, which was suggested to me by the professor of the Tanglewood clarinet institute because he heard my tone tending to spread; it's a little more resistant and makes it much easier to center and control the sound, but at the expense of slightly less upper overtones. The professor and assistant at Tanglewood both agreed they liked the sound of the M15 better, and it is easier to control, but I do sometimes find myself missing the ring of the CWF. The M15 isn't so "covered" sounding that it has no ring, though, I can still project fairly well with it.
rdc, your observations about me pushing the sound too much and losing focus are absolutely true, it's something I'm working on fixing. Not related to the equipment, just bad habits on my part.
Post Edited (2015-08-08 20:15)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Exiawolf
Date: 2015-08-08 22:50
That makes sense. I personally liked 1 better as well (The Fobes). On that note, it might be worth trying one of the reserve mouthpieces (X0, or X5). They have a lot of overtones in the sound, but also have a built in resistance to add control to the sound. Maybe that's a direction you should consider going?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ClaV
Date: 2015-08-09 00:34
Nice playing!
M15 is one of the most hard-reed favouring (and hard-reed friendly) mouthpieces that I've encountered.
It may be worth to experiment with harder reeds. You are most surely should be able to gain the overtones/ring - the issue may be how hard you should work for it, there M15 can be demanding.
Ultimately, the choice to make is between open and close mouthpieces, based on your sound preferences and ease of playing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2015-08-09 03:24
Silversorcerer - it could be different between sitting and standing... Hadn't thought of that. I'll try practicing while standing today and see if it feels much different.
ClaV - Thanks! Vandoren suggests using a 3.5+ to a 5 reed with the M15, but so far I've actually been comfortable with V12 3.5s - I tried it with some harder reeds when I first got it, and it became too stuffy sounding (coaches at Tanglewood agreed the 3.5s sounded better.) I might consider moving up to a 3.5+ at some point when I'm more used to this setup, though.
I typically played 4s on the Fobes, though I was playing a 3.5 in both recordings here.
I believe both mouthpieces have fairly close tip openings and long facings, but the resistances are pretty different - CWF is very free-blowing, M15 slightly less so (but not overly resistant either)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ClaV
Date: 2015-08-09 05:13
Maxopf, I was not familiar with the CWF mouthpiece. I assumed by the sound it is more open. Wow! You have a great choice. I've seen M15 worked well with 4-4.5 reeds (Vandoren blue box and Old Rico Reserve and Grand Concert reeds).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
