 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2016-01-05 23:59
Many clarinetists advocate the use of "fast, cold air" for blowing the clarinet. Now that we've established that it's impossible to change the temperature of air that comes out of our bodies (thanks to Tony Pay), I'd also like to call into question the use of fast air. I certainly don't play with "fast air" and I know many other European players and teachers who believe in slow, well-supported air. I wonder whether this idea of fast air comes from a misunderstanding of something that Tabuteau taught. On this link at around 16:05, you can hear Tabuteau (in a very strong and charming French accent) describe his candle exercise:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ep6akP_4qY&feature=youtu.be&t=16m38s
"Control of the wind is the important element. Wind control is the equivalent of the bowing distribution on a string instrument. To practice control of the wind I waste time by blowing on the flame of a lighted candle to gradually bring the flame almost to extinction, then bring it back to its full flame."
Please try this exercise. If you blow "fast air" the candle will go out immediately. It takes very slow and controlled air to achieve what Tabuteau is describing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-01-06 01:02
I want to admit quite openly that I was wrong on some of my earlier assertions about air. I would add though that this "imagery" was highly touted by some of the best player/teachers in this country. It is inaccurate but was an attempt to get at the essence of one needing to actively control the stream of air. It IS accurate to want to focus the airstream to the tip of the reed/mouthpiece as much as possible however.
So it finally did occur to me during a lesson as I was trying to demonstrate how you stop a long note with your core, that at a soft volume the amount of air out of necessity is smaller and consequently slower. What IS happening then, as Tabuteau is demonstrating, is that the stream of air needs to be controlled by the opposition of the diaphragm and abdominal muscles working as an isometric pair. A decent analogy (maybe) would be what happens if you move your arms in front of you as if you were under water (or as in Tai Chi). You wouldn't just slowly move the muscles necessary for the movement itself, you would feel tension of opposing muscle pairs as you made the movements more and more controlled.
I apologize to all .............and Mr. Pay, for having this so wrong. What I "felt" at my core was a great effort of the opposing muscles, NOT the pushing of any particularly fast stream of air.
This imagery has, however, helped a good number of clarinetists achieve a better approach despite the inaccuracy of the description.
.....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2016-01-06 02:13
Paul: why the opposition of the muscles? I have my own thoughts on why, but I'd like to hear yours. Some explanation might clarify, since air is only being pushed out against the resistance of the instrument, not pulled in.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2016-01-06 04:45
It may not even be "opposing" muscles, but in everything I've worked out (and I lift weights and work out a LOT), it goes without saying that the slower and more controlled you try to make a movement, the harder it feels.
For example, do one push-up. Fast it's easy. Now take ten seconds to slowly lower yourself and another ten seconds to slowly raise yourself at a controlled and smooth rate. Much tougher.
Maybe what you felt was not an opposition of muscles, but the tension of your muscles having to be more slow and controlled.
Alexi
Ps- with regard to air, I find that most of my problems at the time can be solved by concentrating on a good, quality airstream. As for fast or slow air, I haven't analyzed it much. But smooth, uninterrupted air is what I concentrate on. Most of my problems with pitch stability, tonguing, tuning, control over volume, and other things were symptoms of, or exacerbated by my air coming out in spurts or the air pressure changing as I tongue, or something like that. When I started to work drills to keep consistent airstream regardless of what my fingers or tongue or what intervals I was jumping, or at least smoothly increase or decrease air based on crescendos and decrescendos, my playing became much easier and much more comfortable (after internalizing the not so comfortable drills at first....but now the air is second nature to me).
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-01-06 07:05
SO.......
When you play your loudest possible volume you are just pushing with your abdominal muscles unopposed. Now, anything less than that you still are pressing close to that with your abdominals.......BUT you must also be PULLING with the diaphragm (as if to expand the thoracic cavity, to expand the lungs, to draw in air).
Why do you do this? You do this to have absolute control over the the stream of air so that it isn't erratic. It is the waving, noncommittal stream of air that produces a poor clarinet sound (for obvious reasons).
You also use the opposition of forces so that you can execute VERY quick transitions of air speed for louder vs. softer; for higher vs. lower; on vs. off.
Of course I may find myself apologizing five years from now for getting this wrong again, but for now I think this is correct.
..................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-01-06 21:01
Dear Donald,
Thank you SOOOOOOOOO much for bringing this video to our attention!!!
I sat rapt in attention not even realizing the time had gone by. There is a wealth of information within this. Starting from the very beginning Mr. Guy addresses very musical concepts.
This was also very interesting as an interview. It was a very gentlemanly style of questioning with a few moments where Ed Joffe had a different idea but they both said what they wanted and arrived at an agreeable place. It was wonderful to watch.
This video should be on everyone's MUST SEE list for the New Year.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MichaelW
Date: 2016-01-06 23:33
I began playing the clarinet only some years ago so beg the experts pardon if I should talk commonplaces. But as an old doctor, for me what Paul describes is the well- known balance of agonists vs. antagonists in every controlled muscular activity. I've always wondered that the point of diaphragmal control was so much less stressed by clarinetists than by oboe and flute teachers, not to speak of singers. Here, the training of "Atemstütze" or "Zwerchfellstütze" (diaphragmal support) is a central aspect. When practicing this controlled exspiration (e.g. without instument) I'd, however prefer to imagine a slow but variable (fp, vibrato!) relaxation (not a downward pull) of the diaphragm from its contracted state.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2016-01-07 03:04
Especially like what Guy said about the air stream flicking the tongue off the reed, rather than the metaphor that the tongue somehow makes an "attack" (read percussive assault) on the reed. My observation is that players who have mastered the art of light and rapid articulation throughout the clarinet range, have in the process, learned how to breathe. For a complex string of articulated musical tones to emerge from the instrument (as in Midsummer Night's Dream) the airstream must be gradual and steadily supported with that "squeezing toothpaste slowly out of the tube" feeling that Ralph McLane used to teach. Any other kind of air flow will result in a jagged, broken, uneven sound in the staccato.
Post Edited (2016-01-07 03:24)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2016-01-07 06:54
What I found more interesting than the Larry Guy video (though it was nice to hear someone say the tip of the tongue to the tip of the reed isn't mandatory--contradictory to the pedagogical platitudes often posted here) was the recommended video on the Youtube sidebar with Keith Underwood.
For those who don't know Keith's name, he's a well known flute teacher that's worked with many successful students--flute as well as other instruments. And here in NYC, he's regarded as something of a breathing expert. Much of what he says in the video contradicts the common American clarinet pedagogy on breathing/blowing (as outlined by Paul above). Perhaps it's due to Keith's background in Alexander technique; my own Alexander teacher, Lori Schiff, scoffed at a lot of what we clarinet players do with our air.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-01-07 09:19
I do find the excuse about the tongue size to be an odd one. Mr. Guy made a large gesture along his jaw to illustrate that the tongue can be so much larger compared to your oral cavity. Granted. I have no problems with that. What I have trouble understanding is that for all intents and purposes that is the excuse for allowing the tip of your tongue to be placed three to five millimeters lower.
Really?
I look forward to watching the Keith Underwood offering.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-01-07 11:15
Ok, had to check out Keith's video. Around 43:00 of part I, he refers to opposition of muscles when referring to embouchure ("ah to ooo"). So this is not a foreign concept to him.
As for the breathing that he gets into during part II, I don't find contradiction in the least. He is emphasizing imagery to achieve successful end results and that's a good thing no question. John Yeh used to say, "analysis is paralysis." So, yes delving into the weeds on stuff can actually get counterproductive. But the great thing about different approaches to the same issue is that one will method will speak to you while another won't.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2016-01-07 20:35
Paul,
Keith specifically said that reed players, in his experience, focus too much on the abdominals and diaphragm, which causes tension elsewhere in the blowing system. How is that not a contradiction of the popular clarinetism: "It's all about the abdominals!"?
My Alexander teacher advocated a simpler way of breathing and blowing--as though you were sipping rather than sucking the air in, and then letting the air back into the mouthpiece rather than pushing it from the stomach. This approach seems to be what Keith is after, by the way. When she'd work with me, I'd notice my sound open up tremendously and I could easily get away from that stuck way of blowing that Americans are known for.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2016-01-07 22:24
Oops, just realized there are two videos. Paul, watch the one that has "exercises" in the title. Toward the end, he does some breathing with the breath-bag.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-01-08 01:14
Yes, saw the breathe bag.
A good example is when you just said "sipping" air. I see the benefit of approaching from a point of what you experience (or feel) as opposed to physiology. You want to be a performer not a thoracic surgeon.
But, for example the only way to get air into the body is to contract your diaphragm. This massive, bell shaped muscle has only ONE job, and that is to expand the thoracic cavity. In doing so, the lungs expand along with it (simple physics.....you may have even done a similar experiment as a kid with a bell jar and two balloons).
Now if you want air to leave the body (besides relying on the expanded lungs and chest to just seek their comfort zone) you need to press it out actively, and that is (as Larry Guy pointed out) with the use of the abdominals (and back and side muscles to a much smaller degree).
How you use these groups of muscles, or rather how you train yourself to use these muscle pairs most efficiently is really up to the player. But we all need to get to the same spot in terms of final product, which is a vibrant, projecting sound.
....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2016-01-08 02:04
My understanding has been that as the diaphragm relaxes it returns to it's uncontracted position, which reduces the size of the air cavity and expels air. Further, this is the primary force in normal exhalation; the auxiliary breathing muscles are used more extensively during physical exertion.
The rate of diaphragm relaxation can be controlled independently of the auxiliary breathing muscles.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-01-08 03:02
But the diaphragm doesn't return to its uncontracted position with any force (muscle tissue can ONLY contract......or relax as you stated).
And you are absolutely correct in the description of norman breathing.....we DO NOT force! But playing a wind instrument is an active event. Like blowing out a candle or blowing up a balloon. Those things don't "just happen."
Your last statement gets to the heart of the matter. If you are controlling the lessening of the contracted diaphragm then something other than the diaphragm's muscle tissues must work in concert to do that.
..................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2016-01-08 10:58
Philip: Paul is correct. What you describe only applies to normal, quiet breathing. For active, forceful exhalation (eg. playing the clarinet) some contraction of the abdominal wall muscles is necessary. The diaphragm can put opposing pressure against this force to allow us a controlled release of the air. But the relaxation of the diaphragm on its own certainly doesn't supply enough force on the air to play a clarinet.
Post Edited (2016-01-08 11:02)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rdc
Date: 2016-01-08 18:03
Licorice said,
"For active, forceful exhalation (eg. playing the clarinet) some contraction of the abdominal wall muscles is necessary. The diaphragm can put opposing pressure against this force to allow us a controlled release of the air. But the relaxation of the diaphragm on its own certainly doesn't supply enough force on the air to play a clarinet."
I think this is succinctly and distinctly well put. Although I have never seen it in any discussion of musical instrument pedagogy, there is a term for the "opposing pressure" of the diaphragm: eccentric muscle contraction.
Muscles contract in the normal way, where the muscle fibers shorten. This is known as concentric contraction. Eccentric contraction takes place when a muscle resists its opposing muscle group while lengthening. For example, when you bend your elbow and raise your forearm, the biceps muscle concentrically contracts. When you extend the arm slowly to, say, set your clarinet down gently on a table, the biceps is contracting eccentrically to control the concentric contraction of the triceps. In the same way, the diaphragm eccentrically contracts to control the push of the abdominal muscles while blowing.
These terms can readily be found on the web in discussions of exercise science, sports medicine, and yoga. The terms have evidently been around a long time. I found a reference to "eccentric contraction of the diaphragm" in a 1910 book on training the speaking voice. (Google "eccentric contraction of the diaphragm." On about the third page, you will see a link to "Mind and Voice: Principles and Methods in Vocal Training" that will take you right to the reference.)
Since the diaphragm cannot be felt, I use other body cues to know that I am using it correctly. Singers I know say, "The muscles of inspiration resist the muscles of expiration." I take that to mean that the expansion I feel in the lower ribs, abdomen, sides, and back when the diaphragm (concentrically) contracts to take in air are not allowed to collapse when the abdominal muscles apply their blowing pressure.
This has gone long, but in closing I would say that this thread has indicated to me that the concept of "fast air" may only be an analogy for the air pressure needed to produce a vibrant tone, but I still think it is a useful one.
R. Chest
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MichaelW
Date: 2016-01-08 19:56
One factor- and I think an important one- wasn't mentioned here (or I have missed something): the inherent elasticity of lung tissue. Passive, not forced exspiration is mainly effectuated by elastic contraction of the lungs. In a resting state, a slight tension of diaphragm serves in controlling the process so you don't exspire in one puff. The power of this passive elastic force you can see at a lung taken out into open air: It contracts to about double fist size. When the elastic fibres are destroyed, the lung can't contract properly, a state called Emphysema.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2016-01-09 21:39
Short visit:
Robert Chest wrote, in part:
>> Since the diaphragm cannot be felt, I use other body cues to know that I am using it correctly. Singers I know say, "The muscles of inspiration resist the muscles of expiration." I take that to mean that the expansion I feel in the lower ribs, abdomen, sides, and back when the diaphragm (concentrically) contracts to take in air are not allowed to collapse when the abdominal muscles apply their blowing pressure.>>
For clarinet players, I think that the crucial 'cue to know that [they] are using it correctly' lies in their perception of the sound modulation or nuance that they intend and are achieving – or not – with no perceptible concomitant body sensation. It's what's 'magic' about the 'magic diminuendo', after all.
That the working of the diaphragm cannot be directly 'felt' as the working of the biceps CAN be directly felt, is the crucial point that is almost never underlined in the literature.
>> This has gone long, but in closing I would say that this thread has indicated to me that the concept of "fast air" may only be an analogy for the air pressure needed to produce a vibrant tone, but I still think it is a useful one.>>
The pressure has to be there, sure. But it seems to me that the important part of the 'fast air' idea can be captured by the idea of delivery at the reed by a narrow passageway. Then:
FAST AIR = NARROW PASSAGE = HIGH TONGUE POSITION WHEN REQUIRED = UNRESONANT CHAMBER BEHIND REED WHEN REQUIRED
That's not to say that resonance behind the reed isn't very often required – say, for throat Bb. In expert playing, unconscious tongue movement plays a very large part:
http://test.woodwind.org/Databases/lookup.php/Klarinet/2003/10/000046.txt
...but it seems that in most cases a player is improved by using 'fast air MORE OF THE TIME' = 'higher tongue position MORE OF THE TIME'.
The actual speed of the air passing through the mouth isn't an essential variable. Compare, if you will:
https://www.uu.edu/dept/physics/scienceguys/2001Nov.cfm
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2016-01-10 03:24
Nice to see a post from you Tony. When I venture to write here, I sometimes bear in mind that you and frightening others may be reading (a bit self-important, I know.)
I don't think auxiliary breathing muscles are invariably needed to produce a clarinet sound. This is said after experimenting with simply exhaling into the instrument (on single notes.) Given a decent embouchure, it produces a decent sound; faster exhalation, louder sound; slower, softer. So the combination of lung elasticity plus the diaphragm returning via eccentric contraction to its rest state can overcome the resistance of the instrument etc., at least in limited cases.
Having said that, I agree that use of the auxiliary breathing muscles is essential, but not with the idea that there needs to be a huge effort all the time between opposing muscular forces. Coordination and control, yes. Changes in effort with dynamics, yes. Strain or rigidity, no. Most of the time the physical effort seems very modest.
I have come to think that another reason for opposition is to support vibration of as much of the air cavity as can vibrate. It seems logical to assume that though the air is flowing outward, it still vibrates within the player just as it does within the instrument. Slight tension throughout the musculature involved - lips, jaw, tongue, etc, as well as breathing muscles, seem to enhance this, so that basically everything that can vibrate at all, does. Is this not important for the quality of sound produced? But rigidity or great effort would make it impossible.
It may take a lot of effort to learn control, but once learned it takes very little (physical) effort to do it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-01-10 05:45
Hey, since we have come to resonance, did anyone else listening to the Larry Guy video find the talk about resonance fascinating? It was Ed Joffe's personal interaction with Phil Woods that I am referring to. In response to Ed's query about how Phil got his massive sound without making any effort, Phil said, "I feel the sound behind my eyes." And there was conversation about how the sinus cavities and upper body factor into the resonance of your sound...... as long as you relax.
Is this weird or what?
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2016-01-10 05:46
Philip Caron wrote, in part:
>> I don't think auxiliary breathing muscles are invariably needed to produce a clarinet sound. This is said after experimenting with simply exhaling into the instrument (on single notes.) Given a decent embouchure, it produces a decent sound; faster exhalation, louder sound; slower, softer. So the combination of lung elasticity plus the diaphragm returning via eccentric contraction to its rest state can overcome the resistance of the instrument etc., at least in limited cases.>>
Thank you for your post, Philip, and I agree with your statement above.
In previous posts, I've tried myself to draw the distinction between:
(1) Blowing the clarinet 'well'
...and...
(2) Blowing the clarinet 'with support'
(See the posts in 'Keepers' about support and blowing terminology.)
I'd say that (1) involves a number of things that almost everyone agrees with – like, not pulling in below the ribcage, and not raising the chest.
Whereas, (2) is a technique that can be applied 'more or less'. You can choose how much support is appropriate for a given situation.
The distinction between (1) and (2) is not widely appreciated. Nor is the idea that 'degree of support' constitutes a choice, to be determined by 'what works' in a particular passage.
>> Having said that, I agree that use of the auxiliary breathing muscles is essential, but not with the idea that there needs to be a huge effort all the time between opposing muscular forces. Coordination and control, yes. Changes in effort with dynamics, yes. Strain or rigidity, no. Most of the time the physical effort seems very modest.>>
So I agree with you: SOMETIMES, strong support is appropriate. Sometimes very little is appropriate.
It's often said here that tension in one place is bad because it inevitably results in tension in other places, and that those other tensions are necessarily counterproductive.
But I say that we – like ballet dancers who very often use exquisitely balanced strong tensions and relaxations below the waist, yet very often exquisitely balanced gentle tensions and relaxations above the waist – can rise above that sort of dogma.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
