 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2016-02-18 19:45
Do board members have stories..anecdotal or more scientific..that listeners think they SOUND better playing double lip?
* I play single lip.
* I can play double lip--for a while at least, and some things play easier for me when I do, like fast movement between somewhat distant notes.
e.g.
https://youtu.be/JK91_jjDp1I?t=6m6s
* I have nothing against double lip, except that having only so much time in the day for clarinet, I'm not sure I want to spend time acclimating to double lip versus tackling other obstacles with my time.
* I realize that many advantages may accrue from switching apart from sounding better.
* I realize that playing double lip occasionally may accrue benefits that can transfer to single lip play--I think this a Ricardo Morales-ism.
Please appreciate that what justification I consider off the table---at least for this thread--are notions that the PLAYER thinks they sound better. Not that such sentiments aren't important---but that I seek evidence of acoustical improvement from double lip play as heard by listeners.
Thanks.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-02-18 21:28
WhitePlainsDave wrote:
> Do board members have stories..anecdotal or more
> scientific..that listeners think they SOUND better playing
> double lip?
>
> * I realize that playing double lip occasionally may accrue
> benefits that can transfer to single lip play--I think this a
> Ricardo Morales-ism.
It goes back farther than that - Gigliotti's attitude was the same (he's the one who started me on double lip but claimed he couldn't play that way himself because of his lip structure). AFAIK, Bonade said similar things, which probably reflects an ongoing discussion in Europe in the early part of the 20th century.
>
>... I seek evidence of acoustical improvement
> from double lip play as heard by listeners.
>
Maybe someone has actually sat down with measuring equipment and compared some players' sounds single vs. double, but I haven't heard of it.
As for anecdotal evidence, I suppose you could point to the fact that two of the most revered sound qualities of the mid-20th century era around Philadelphia and Curtis Institute came from Ralph McLane and Harold Wright, both double-lip players. But, of course, no one ever got to hear them playing single-lip for comparison. I don't really know which contemporary players use which embouchure, but I know lots of players have beautiful sounds who don't play double lip, so cherry-picking individual players isn't necessarily convincing.
I don't think, for myself, that most players who adopt double lip ultimately do it because they sound better either in their own or their audience's judgement - precisely because with some conscious effort, it is possible to reverse-engineer the physical changes that contribute to the change of sound and then apply them to single lip. Some teachers (mine among them) recommend it as a temporary way to unlearn and replace bad habits that seem more easily to form in a single lip embouchure. It was my choice to remain with double lip, not Gigliotti's intent, though he certainly didn't object. I think the reason I stay with double lip has more to do with comfort and the greater feeling of security and flexibility in my tone production. That's not something that a listener can necessarily hear, but it makes playing more enjoyable for me and allows me to do more from my imagination without worrying as much about how I'm doing it.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2016-02-18 22:39
Karl mentioned flexibility, and I think Dave also refers to that in referring to movement between distant notes. My subjective impression is that using double lip allows the mouthpiece to vibrate more, or at least better. And that in turn leads to smoother transitions.
Another even more subjective impression is that I can articulate better (and faster) using double lip. Why would that be? - maybe just slightly different positions of jaw, tongue, mouthpiece and reed. Which I probably could do with single lip if I ever thought to try.
After playing single lip exclusively for years, I tried double lip a couple times out of curiosity. It hurt my upper lip before anything beneficial became noticeable, so the tries were brief. However, after a couple tries I noticed that when starting to play I was tending to use double lip automatically, without thinking about it, instead of my long accustomed single lip method. Double felt that much more natural.
Question - I've heard that some double-lip players support the bell somehow. Do any not support the bell at all, and not use a strap either, i.e., just go "au natural" with hand support alone?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-02-19 00:03
You'd have to know first who is playing double lip. You really can't tell without the player's telling you. Since I've seen a number of players now who I don't think play double lip using straps (Morales, for example) and resting the bell on their knees, it's doubly hard to tell.
McLane made a point of standing (when he played solo performances) and not supporting the clarinet.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2016-02-19 07:08
I think Richard stoltzman is a double lipper that does not support the bell all the time.
Myself, if I double lip, I have to support the bell. Usually on the end of my knee. But for me, doing most of my playing marching around, I don't feel it's worth to really work up double lip to only use it on maybe 10-20% of my performances. I'll use it every now and then to see if I'm unknowingly squeezing or biting a bit.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2016-02-19 17:06
I don't know of any scientific studies of double vs single lip.
I would suggest that a player try it and see how it affects his/her playing. It is not that difficult to learn. One might consider alternating 5 minutes double and 5 single, gradually increasing the time until you have endurance to use it for longer periods.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
