 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: thecuriousclarinet
Date: 2015-09-03 09:09
I have always been a biter on the clarinet. It's made me stop playing for long periods at times because I get frustrated that my lip hurts and I can't practice or play as much as I'd like to. I already use a very thick tooth cover so I'm set on that.
I play on a Backun Philadelphia mouthpiece (1.15mm tip opening) with #4 Vandoren V12 reeds and I LOVE the sound I get. But, I have to bite.
This makes me think that really I just need a smaller tip opening (because if I'm biting to get the reed closer to the mouthpiece, then the space is too large). But, whenever I try a more closed-tipped mouthpiece, it sounds terrible in my opinion. Super bright and buzzy sounding. I hate it. I have tried all different reed strengths and various mouthpiece combinations. Right now I am trialing some Fobes mouthpieces with closed tips.
Any advice? I'm not really sure what to do. I love playing the clarinet, I have a degree in clarinet performance, play gigs and teach lessons, but I don't love having to bite to play.
Edit: Also, when not-biting, I am now flat on my G, A, B, and C above the staff.
New Edit: I had a lesson with with a really great clarinetist and he told me that my embouchure looks good and that from his point of view I am not biting. He suggests that my problem is that I don't use enough air. While I do believe that I don't use enough air, my lip hurts after 15 minutes of playing (while using a guard over my teeth, and by hurts I mean it hurts/I can't play without pain for 24 hours or so until it heals), and even my top teeth hurt. I will work on my air more but pretty much feel like giving up at this point.
Post Edited (2015-09-27 01:52)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2015-09-03 14:41
Hi There,
Try a couple of things before you decide to change mouthpieces etc.
First off play between 10 and 30 minutes a day or when ever you practice with double lip, this will help to eliminate the biting. After a week or so of doing this regularly you should not feel the need to bite down but rather use the corners and the muscles in that area more efficiently while maintaining tone quality.
Secondly, while doing the first bit mentioned above experiment with taking in more mouthpiece. The Philly mouthpiece if memory serves is a fairly long lay so taking in more would again resist the urge to bite.
Hope that helps
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-09-03 15:17
Your description of bringing the opening down is on point. This is exactly what Brad Behn said to me, though my distance covered is smaller (I already tend toward a tip that is just over 1mm). So I don't think biting can be solved moving to a smaller opening.
I find describing sound to students helpful here. We have two extremes of sound that we can make at any given time which are, pinched/wheezy/buzzy or flabby/uncentered/diffuse. It is all a matter of the amount of "control" we impose with the embouchure (really try to think of muscles around the mouthpiece rather than your jaw) vs. the amount of air we use at the time (given note in a given register at a given dynamic). Ideally what we do to generate a good solid sound is to remain at the very center of those extremes.......at all times.
The trick is to become comfortable with a reed strength that is compatible with this scenario on your given mouthpiece. You need to "learn" to be more comfortable with a softer reed. Unless you have a massive reserve of #4 reeds, I'd say it would be much cheaper to start using 3 1/2s or even even 3s.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2015-09-03 15:36
A #4 V12 does seem rather hard for a 1.15 tip opening (though of course length and shape of curve is also important), but I agree with Paul that you should try going down in strength and learn to develop your tone with a lighter setup.
An overly hard reed on any setup will tend to give a warmer sound simply because it is almost impossible to create many of the higher partials in the tone but that is not the right way or substainable way to get a warm sound.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: thecuriousclarinet
Date: 2015-09-03 18:30
I have practiced playing doubled lipped, as well as just focusing on not biting. I can play long tones and anything not altissimo very slowly without biting. Once I do anything faster or high, or with lots of tonguing (any music I need to play for rehearsals) I bite again.
I thought perhaps it would just take time but I've been doing this for the past month and it doesn't seem to be working. I will keep at it but I was hoping there was more I could do.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: thecuriousclarinet
Date: 2015-09-03 18:35
I have gone down in reed strength recently but anything less than a 4 seems thin(?) in the higher register. I decided to just deal with the bad tone and practice on a 2 1/2 reed just to get the feeling of not biting. I've been doing that for weeks, spending a lot of time practicing on a 2 1/2 reed, and then switching to a 3 and 3 1/2 to see if I can transfer over my somewhat improved non-biting. I just immediately start biting again.
I'm not sure what else to do. Maybe I've just not given it enough time?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: faltpihl ★2017
Date: 2015-09-03 19:04
Could it be that what you think is a "thin sound in the higher register" is actually an ok sound?
Regards
Peter
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2015-09-03 19:08
I hate getting into detailed embouchure discussions over the web, because everyone has different physical characteristics and so everyone's approach to controlling the reed is different, and I normally completely avoid the subject. But, since you're already an active clarinetist who is conscious of what you are and aren't doing when you play, I will ask: what are your lips doing while you're doing all this biting with your jaw? Are they active or is your jaw doing all the work? If they feel active, in what direction or what way?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: thecuriousclarinet
Date: 2015-09-03 19:12
faltpihl wrote:
> Could it be that what you think is a "thin sound in the higher
> register" is actually an ok sound?
>
It could be. To me it sounds bad, but, it could be because I'm just not used to it. It's definitely a very different sound than I usually play with, and one that I generally consider outside my ideal tone quality.
The sound is like, if I play forte then the tone sounds like the reed isn't strong enough.
I'm having a lesson today (for this very issue) with a well-respected clarinetist in town so I will also get his take on what's going on.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony F
Date: 2015-09-04 06:02
Are you basing what you describe as a "thin" sound on what you are hearing, or is this the sound that a listener would hear? What we as players hear is quite different to what a listener hears. If you have not already done so, try recording some of your playing and then you'll have an idea of what you actually sound like, as opposed to what you think you sound like.
The fact that you are an experienced player suggests that you've already tried the common methods of dealing with biting, so the problem and solution must lie elsewhere.
It's possible that your problem in the altissimo register has become a conditioned reflex. Because you expect there to be a problem, there is a problem. If this is the case, I'm not sure how you could best deal with it. Perhaps someone can suggest a course of action.
Tony F.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2015-09-06 22:43
I think you are biting on both mouthpieces. It doesn't matter which you choose. I would suggest a diminuendo exercise with a tuner.
Start with a forte dynamic and practice getting softer and watching the tuner. Keep the chin flat and pointed down. Try to feel like you're opening the mouth while getting softer. In conjunction with this slow the air slightly and focus on support.
Do this a few times at the begining of your practice sessions.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2015-09-06 23:25
Arnoldstang wrote:
> ...slow the air slightly and focus on
> support.
Could you elaborate on this? I have no idea what it means or how you *directly* control the speed of the air.
Karl
Post Edited (2015-09-06 23:25)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2015-09-06 23:44
Blow with less effort. Instead of blowing out 10 candles blow out one.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2015-09-07 00:53
Further to this as I see where you are going , there is a device for flutists that is available with propellors. It is to instruct students how the air is directed when playing the flute. When you blow slowly one or two of the propellors spin. The faster the air speed the faster the propellors spin. This is how we control dynamics on woodwind instruments. One doesn't change the aperture as a main technique for altering dynamics. The volume of air flow is a byproduct of airspeed. No one goes from PPP to fff by just opening up and trying to maximize aperture and air volume. We simply blow faster air.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rmk54
Date: 2015-09-07 17:14
No one goes from PPP to fff by just opening up and trying to maximize aperture and air volume.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Well, some of us do..
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2015-09-07 18:04
Arnoldstang wrote:
> The volume of air flow is a byproduct of airspeed.
This is what I find confusing - it seems to me that it's the other way around. Air speed, to the extent that it changes, is the byproduct, or even a direct result, of volume of air flow through a given aperture (the tip opening of the mouthpiece). I would make the distinction only because it isn't the air speed that we control directly but the volume of air we send toward the mouthpiece. As a teaching image, it seems to me if you tell a student to "slow the air slightly" you'll sooner or later have to explain "blow less air." If the student is slow, as I seem to be, about such things, the first instruction necessarily leads to the second, while if you make the suggestion about air volume first you probably won't ever need to mention "air speed."
> No one goes from PPP to fff by just opening up and trying to
> maximize aperture and air volume. We simply blow faster air.
>
Obviously, you can't do anything about the aperture if the reed isn't being squeezed shut. It's limited by the facing (tip opening) of the mouthpiece. So, the more air you push through the basically fixed opening, the more force it will produce at the reed tip (volume and force vary directly with resistance held constant). The force no doubt translates to speed. But, again, it *is* fundamentally the case that we go from ppp to fff by increasing and (for fff) maximizing air volume. I don't see any other way to get louder.
Mostly, this is a teaching issue - what we say to a student to change an unwanted result. But to the original point about biting, I suspect you're right that the OP bites (assuming he really is biting at all) on both mouthpieces. Without hearing him, I would first suspect a problem with reeds - knowing the difference between responsive and unresponsive ones - and too little active involvement of his lip muscles. But by this time he's had the lesson he set up and will have hopefully gotten some good advice from the teacher, who will have heard and watched him live and in person. I hope he comes back and shares what he and the teacher discussed.
Karl
Post Edited (2015-09-08 00:17)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2015-09-08 03:51
Karl, I'm sure the way you describe this process to students is fine but I have heard some teachers confuse the issue by separating the speed and volume of air as though they were independent. It wasn't too long ago that I heard the following suggestion from a teacher in a masterclass. "When you play this pp note I want you play it with fast air like you are playing Forte". The instructor was trying to employ the garden hose analogy but was confused as to how it applied here. (It doesn't apply). When clarinetists play PPP they all use slow air speed or less volume of air. What is different among clarinetists is how they achieve this slow air/low volume of air.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-09-08 07:10
Boy, this could not be a more contemporary and relevant dialogue for me!
Yes, this has been confused by our greatest teachers. No less than Robert Marcellus had spoken of "fast air" to achieve a good sound. I am coming to my own peace with this in that that he (we) meant by this is that you want the most focused airstream for the given moment to achieve the best sound. Naturally (as I finally have conceded of late) there IS less air for quite passages and more air for really loud material.
Then comes HOW you get there. I prefer to control everything from the "abdominal muscles/diaphragm" combo. My rationale for this is how quick flute players and oboe players can operate this system to achieve vibrato. The other method is to vary the size of the oral cavity through the manipulation of the tongue. Placing the the tongue down and back causes the same volume of air to be slower at the mouthpiece/reed opening. Using that same volume of air with the tongue close to the roof of the mouth causes the air stream to be much quicker at the tip of the mouthpiece. I choose to stick with the later at all times. I think it makes constancy of timbre much easier and makes for more vibrant sound.
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JHowell
Date: 2015-09-08 07:32
We must accept the fact that we do not blow air through the instrument, we sustain a vibrating column of air, like a violin bow sustains the vibrating string. Just as the bow doesn't last forever, neither does our breath.
Biting usually occurs because the player does not focus the airstream with the back of the tongue or voice the sound with the oral cavity, instead depending on reed strength and embouchure pressure to focus the sound. It can work, but it hurts. And it gives only one point of control over pitch and tone color. Controlling airstream focus, oral cavity, AND embouchure pressure yields much better results.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Luuk ★2017
Date: 2015-09-08 19:27
Dear JHowell, do you really believe we don't blow air through the instrument? Where else does our breath go?
To the original poster: I had the same problem, and managed to bite less by forcing myself to pull down my jaw while playing and let my lip muscles do the work. This was a conscious effort in the beginning but became natural after a while.
Also, do use lighter reeds and play around with your lip muscles in order to get better control over the sound, that is to get a nice sound in spite of playing a reed of which you thought it would be too light. You will learn that lighter reeds offer much more possibilities for control.
Another clarinetist once told me his teachers had two remedies for problems like yours: placing a pencil horizontally between lower lip and chin and then pulling it down while the student had to maintain control, and secondly by demanding the student to use reeds nr. 2 but still requiring a nice, rounded tone. If you could manage that (for which you gave to build good lip muscles and air control), you were allowed to step up a half strenght.
Regards,
Luuk
Philips Symphonic Band
The Netherlands
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JHowell
Date: 2015-09-09 07:20
Luuk, many players mistake "blowing more air" for "creating greater amplitude." This is a distinction that has a direct bearing on the problem of biting. Your air is used up in sustaining the vibrating column just as a violin bow is used up in vibrating the string. The less efficient/more wasteful one is tone production, the less time the air lasts, perhaps contributing to the feeling that air is being "blown through" the instrument. You can lose efficiency by failing to focus your airstream, by using a reed that is too hard, by leaking air around the embouchure, or by unduly restricting the vibration of the reed with too much pressure.
Here's an old illustration. Remove your mouthpiece (reed attached) and barrel, or just the mouthpiece if you like, from your instrument, and play it as loudly as you can. Nice loud crow. Then light a candle. Blow out the flame with all the air coming from the end of the barrel (or mouthpiece, if you have no facial hair that could be set on fire) that you produce playing as loudly as you can. Go on, try again, louder. It really takes a tiny amount of "air" to make the sound, and the instruction "Blow harder! Use more air!" tends to produce, in many students, excessive biting as they instinctively resist the greater pressure. As the martial arts maxim goes, "force meets force blindly." A better instruction, I have found, is "Let the reed vibrate more freely. Focus the air, let the sound grow."
You are correct in the sense that as our air does its job energizing the wooden spring/valve that sets the air column in motion, its energy is lost and it dissipates through the instrument and out the tone holes. But the amount of air is so small compared to acoustic energy that the phrase "blow air through the instrument" does more harm than good for all but the most elementary players. The beginner wants to blow, and blow he will. (Actually, I think Brymer said that.) But a more advanced player who is fighting the bite would do well to think in terms of the vibrating air column, and the means by which it can be most easily set in motion and most effectively grown.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Luuk ★2017
Date: 2015-09-09 14:48
Thank you for your explanation. I totally agree, and especially like the blow-out-the-candle illustration. The amount of air flowing through the instrument is very small indeed, but it is there.
However, this low air flow makes it difficult for me to understand the 'fast vs slow air' discussions. Do we really apply different air velocities while playing? And if so, are the differences large enough to call one 'slow' and the other 'fast'? In the same vein, I also heard people speaking about cold and warm air, but obviously the temperature of the exhaled air is not what this is about. This is clearly an analogy.
I suspect these pictures are invented to illustrate another aspect of playing, maybe the shape of the mouth cavity, which can be changed by using the tongue.
I do know (from experience) that tongue position has (some) influence on sound, and this might be explainable by the existence of a (weak) acoustic coupling between the cavity before (= mouth) and the one after the reed (= the clarinet bore). But I don't think that slow or fast air should be taken literal.
The same goes for the 'focused' air stream, since there is almost no air stream. What are people who use this analogy trying to tell?
To sum up, I think this is what influences sound (and intonation, by the way):
- muscles/forces around the reed (counterforce for the reed-spring, frequency dependent damping)
- air pressure (amplitude of the vibrating reed)
- shape of mouth cavity ('2nd order' influence on some higher partials and)
All talking about fast, slow, focused, warm or cold air are analogies invented to push you in the right direction. Nothing wrong with that, but they should be understood as what they are: analogies.
Regards,
Luuk
Philips Symphonic Band
The Netherlands
Post Edited (2015-09-09 15:42)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2015-09-09 18:30
Does fast/slow air exist? Yes, from your mouth to the reed where it activates the reed. From there on there is minimal air flow. Just like the human voice where if you sing there is not much air flow past your mouth the vocalist pushes air at various speeds and amounts through the vocal chords. It is not a metaphor. We move air at various rates.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TomS
Date: 2015-09-09 20:41
Try the Legere classic cut reeds for a warmer sound with less fuss. They work well on VD 5RV-lyre, M30-lyre and M13 and many others in my shoe box, like the Reserve X5 and Ridenours.
I use a M30-lyre for some band playing with classic Legere and use Signature for more volume, ping and projection.
The Legere classic cuts will work on most MPs, but the Signature seems to prefer facings that are "flatter" with less resistance, like the M30 and M30-lyre ...
With the right reed, ligature, voicing and embrochure, you can get a warm, round and powerful sound out of MPs with tip openings in the 1mm range, like the M13. I will admit that the M30-lyre/Signature combo does cut thru the fog a little better, but not needed in most situations.
Tom
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2015-09-09 21:57
I understand the idea that since there is a small aperture (1mm) for the air to go through that this slows the air to a grinding halt. I don't think this is occurring. Checking in with Arnold Jacobs , I note my air capacity should be around 3 litres given my age and height. Further to this he suggests most musicians only use 50% of this. That puts me at 1500 ml . Playing low c on the clarinet I lasted 28 seconds at a forte level. It was 52 seconds at piano level. So we have 54 ml/sec for forte and 29 ml/sec at pp. there is a different flow rate obviously. To put into context when I blow air as I would at a candle it is 45ml/sec. It isn't way different than the flow rate of when I'm playing the clarinet.
Whether one considers this air speed fast or slow doesn't matter so much as we are still moving air to the reed at a discernable rate. As clarinetists I believe there is air speed very similar to what we imagine we are doing when expelling all our air in 30 seconds. Why we would avoid labelling air flow as faster or slower is beyond me. There might be a pedagogical advantage.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-09-10 06:39
The "warm" vs "cold" air is metaphor......and it's not. I think that those who speak of this effect refer to what you'd get if you took the clarinet out of your mouth and blow properly, in a focused manner. The air coming out of your mouth with all the proper internal configurations (tongue close to roof of mouth) would be "cool." As Marcellus used to say, you blow as if you were cooling off a hot cup of cocoa. This is opposed to how you'd blow on your hands to warm them up after coming in from frigid Winter temperatures (you place you tongue low and back as if saying "hah").
But when you have the clarinet in your mouth, this becomes metaphor.
Also, yes, air flow is different from pp to ff passages; that is obvious. What IS constant is the feeling of "pushing from the gut." In fact we feel MORE exertion an soft volumes because we are (or should be) putting forth quite the abdominal effort in opposition to the diaphragm with only that barely audible subito piano to show for it.
.....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2015-09-10 07:43
Paul Aviles wrote:
> As Marcellus used to say,
> you blow as if you were cooling off a hot cup of cocoa. This
> is opposed to how you'd blow on your hands to warm them up
> after coming in from frigid Winter temperatures (you place you
> tongue low and back as if saying "hah").
>
The whole warm/cool air idea seems to me nonsensical. I wonder if Marcellus or anyone else ever measured the temperature of air as someone blew on a hot cup of cocoa or cold hands. I don't see a reason why the air temp coming from a person's lungs would change whether you blow a lot of air or a little. The practical effect of blowing on hot cocoa or cold hands is that the air you blow is necessarily cooler than the one and warmer than the other.
I hate to think of the lesson time that has been wasted over the decades (maybe centuries) trying to teach use of air with this image to students who have no idea what it means - until the further explanation is added that it really means blow more/blow less air. What is wrong with just saying blow more air for forte, less for piano but keep the abdominal muscles engaged at all times? Why use opaque and possibly inaccurate descriptions when the accurate one is so easily at hand?
I also have a little more opinion to express about "air speed." What John seems to be describing is the rate of flow over time - not the same thing as speed - distance covered over time. But I think air speed (as distinct from rate of flow) may be something we *can* control and which may affect tone quality. But it's very late and I need to stop here. I'll write more tomorrow if the topic hasn't been used up by then.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JHowell
Date: 2015-09-10 09:27
You keep trying analogies until you find what produces the feel that corresponds to the musical result you desire. Not every analogy works for everyone, and we soon run up against the fundamental unsharability of human experience. We can agree that the flower is yellow, but we cannot know that we both experience "yellow" the same. What works for me doesn't always work for students. Marcellus had many common sayings but he didn't say the same thing to every student. So we can't argue too much about what this teacher or that player meant when he said this or that, we don't always know to whom he/she was saying it. And especially when all we have is words. If I sit down with you and we both have our horns, I can say, this tongue position, feels like so, sounds like THIS. You can say, yeah, but when I do what it sounds like you're saying to do, it sounds like THIS. And I say, OK, that doesn't sound like what I mean, it sounds like you're focusing too far back . . . or maybe, that sounds GREAT.
Fast air? Slow air? Physics tells us that very little air is moving, but when you form an aperture with the back of your tongue, it can FEEL like the air is speeding up, like a venturi. Is airstream an inaccurate term? Probably. But when you're in the trenches, trying to find the image that will do the job for the student in front of you, you'll say ANYTHING. In the end, it boils down to results -- how does it SOUND?
Then we can argue about what sound is best, it will never end.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-09-10 15:16
Not an analogy as I describe it folks........it's physics.
Again I must go back to Marcellus who was also quite the airplane enthusiast. He spoke of an air valve on aircraft that allowed a small stream of air to pass through it. This valve would invariably always become encrusted with ice. The only thing making this possible was the speed at which the air passed through the valve.
But as we speak of air passing into the clarinet it is not the same scenario and we can get tripped up talking about measurements again. NOT THE POINT. The point is using air in a way allows the reed to vibrate as efficiently as possible. If you can do that without thinking about it..........more power to you.
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2015-09-10 21:15
Playing the clarinet is easy compared to fully understanding other people's thoughts on playing the clarinet. I'm going to practice now and then more reading of other people's ideas. Bye
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: nellsonic
Date: 2015-09-10 23:29
Hot air versus cold air isn't metaphorical, and it's easy to ascertain. Blow hot (warming up your hands) air directly at the palm of your hand and then blow cold (cooling the soup) air directly at the palm of your hand. Do it in reverse order if you prefer. There is a definite temperature difference that's easily discernible.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2015-09-11 19:31
Well, I suppose I've rather unwillingly been drawn in by this exchange.
It turns out, on consulting a fluid dynamics professional, that the explanation of the cold/warm air effect of blowing on your hand is most likely dominated by a phenomenon known as 'entrainment'.
Entrainment occurs when a focussed, fast warm airstream is projected through a medium of colder air. The stream picks up the colder air and incorporates it into the jet.
A slower, less narrow warm airstream, by contrast, keeps its integrity.
You can check this by blowing 'fast' warm air very close to your hand, when entrainment has only a short distance to operate. There is little experience of cold; but as you move your hand away, you feel increasingly colder air hitting it.
(There may be also a 'wind-chill' factor operating, as the warm layer of air in contact with your hand is more efficiently removed by the fast airstream than by the slower airstream; but my consultant thinks that the entrainment effect is the dominant one.)
None of this alters the possible value of the metaphor for a student; but it shouldn't have the status of 'truth'.
None of this occurs inside the mouth.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-09-11 22:09
I would like to formally apologize to you Tony about the whole "air" thing. I was wrong about maximum pressure being present all the time. I was confused by the "FEELING" of pressure being present all the time which is clearly (now) a result of utilizing enough abdominal muscular control to oppose the diaphragmatic muscular control [what is necessary to produce and control a steady air stream when only a small amount of air is being pushed for very soft dynamics].
This is kinda off topic but I needed to say it, even if Mr. Pay is no longer listening.
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kilo
Date: 2015-09-12 00:53
I recently bought a barely used Vytas Krass K05 mouthpiece, mainly because the price was awfully good. I'd actually been wondering whether I wanted to try my hand at playing jazz clarinet and was thinking about getting a Morgan with a big tip opening — I surprised myself by springing for this closed piece but I had to try it. I put a Legere Quebec 3¼ on it and I've got to say, it was the prettiest ringing tone I've ever coaxed out of my GreenLine. The 3¼ felt a little soft though, so I ordered a 3¾ Quebec — even better! I'm not kidding — it's the clarinet tone I've only dreamed of, dark, compact, and focused over the whole range of the instrument. I think I'll forget about playing jazz clarinet for now. It's funny; I played for umpteen years on an HS** with 2½'s. Bought a Grabner K13 and moved to the 3¼ Quebecs. Closed up even more on the Krass 05 and I'm now on 3¾'s. It's not the progression I had pictured.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Luuk ★2017
Date: 2015-09-14 12:37
Dear all, this discussion clears up some concepts for me. Thank you all for that. It also makes clear I'm not the only one confused.
I just did a little experiment. I measured the temperature of my breath at 10 cm from my mouth while blowing at a fast-reacting thermocouple, laying on the table. First like 'warming my hands', then like 'blowing out a candle'. I also put the thermocouple inside my mouth and repeated the test.
The temperature of the 'slow' air was measured as 26.6 tot 27.0 degr.C, 'fast' air 24.6 to 25.0 degr.C. The maximum temperature of the air inside my mouth was in both cases 33 degr.C. (lowering quickly while inhaling, and coming back while blowing).
I suppose that mixing with surrounding air (20 degr.C) by turbulence or entrainment accounts for the biggest difference between inside and outside, and maybe adiabatic cooling adds another degree. However, in this experiment 'fast' or 'focused' air from my mouth, measured at 10cm from the lips, is indeed two degrees C cooler than 'slow' air. I would not say this is a big difference, but it may be significant. Whether it comes from the way the air is blown or is a side effect of the set up, I don't know.
Please note that this test does not say anything about the temperature of skin while blowing against it. That temperature will be influenced by evaporation of water from the skin, which is dependent (amongst others) from the replacement tempo of the air just above it, and the relative humidity of the same. Exactly as Tony Pay points out.
Inside my mouth I did not measure any difference between both ways of blowing. This is important, because that is what the clarinet and its reed encounters.
In the case of an airplane valve all pressures and airspeeds are much higher than inside our mouth. In that case any expanding airflow will surely be cooled because of large adiabatic effects. To compare the physical phenomena of a flying aircraft to the human body is a large exaggeration to put it mildly.
Regards,
Luuk
Philips Symphonic Band
The Netherlands
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: thecuriousclarinet
Date: 2015-09-27 01:48
kdk wrote:
> I hate getting into detailed embouchure discussions over the web, because >everyone has different physical characteristics and so everyone's approach to >controlling the reed is different, and I normally completely avoid the subject. >But, since you're already an active clarinetist who is conscious of what you are >and aren't doing when you play, I will ask: what are your lips doing while you're >doing all this biting with your jaw? Are they active or is your jaw doing all the >work? If they feel active, in what direction or what way?
>
>Karl
My lip muscles are active. The corners of my lips are in and tight/active, my chin is being pulled down, and my lower lip is firm.
I had a lesson with a great clarinetist recently and he told me he thinks my embouchure looks good. He said that to him he doesn't think I bite at all, that my reed sounded too light (it was too light to me as well, but I was using a lighter reed to help alleviate my biting a bit), and he thinks that my problem is that I don't use enough air.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tylerleecutts
Date: 2015-09-27 09:36
Well, what does Morrie have on the website for the PRT and MET models? "Requires a strong embourchre. . Mature use of air. . ." That remains the same, with any medium-open to open mouthpiece with a good facing on it. You have to put enough air in to make it work, just like with a close mouthpiece and hard 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}
