 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-04-29 23:44
In the YouTube clip recently cited in a couple of other threads, Eugene Mondie says that clarinetists are divided into two "camps," those who think the clarinet is a "high flow" instrument and those who think it is "low flow." I have my own knee-jerk understanding of what I *think* he means, but I'm not sure I've ever heard those particular terms. Later, he mentions "cushion," which I have heard before and which I think is probably related to these descriptions of flow rate.
Does anyone have enough familiarity with the principle he's talking about to explain it? (Hopefully without guessing - I can do that for myself).
Thanks,
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-04-30 01:13
Thanks for bringing this up. I have been around the block and have NEVER heard this two camp idea. I guess it would have prevented some dust-ups on this board when some of us in one camp get into it with the other. I guess it is referring to those who 'PUSH' against the reed, 'PUSH' against the sound; vs those who are in the lighter reed, easier set-up configuration. [and that's a guess folks]
I have been for my career a "PUSHER," only reverting to the other camp as I have been just recently introduced to the proper method to approach German playing on German mouthpieces. Of course this can be done on any style of mouthpiece but it took a big shift to get me to "wake up" to a totally different approach.
Again it's a guess. This is not common terminology amongst the professors I have had the privilege to hear in person: Marcellus, Combs, Brody, Leister, Russianoff, Longmire, Mitchell.
And here again, is said video (of a clarinetist with unquestionably high skill level and accomplishment)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yK4aXpjSxA&feature=youtu.be
...............Paul Aviles
Post Edited (2016-04-30 01:20)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2016-04-30 02:40
Tom Puwalski on 2006-03-01 at 12:46 sent a message on this board that may be similar to the distinction Mondie is making between high flow and low flow. The subject was the Backun mouthpiece, specifically the close "C" model MoBa.
"There are 2 styles of playing on single reed mouthpieces, those that put a lot of air into the clarinet . . . and those that put a little amount but use a lot of air pressure. People that use a large volume of air tend to like larger tip openings and those who use more air pressure tend to like closer facings."
I've heard this kind of distinction made more than once, and it makes good sense to me. I am certainly of the "little amount of air but high pressure" breed; all of my current mouthpieces have facings of 1.005 or less at the tip and I have played down to 0.95 mm, which I believe is the facing on my Behn Epic. Oddly, for about 30 years, I didn't play that way. I had a more open facing on a Lurie M3 and I used to blow high volume like crazy with a Vandoren #5 traditional reed. When I switched to double lip, that way of playing seemed bizarre and I luckily found a very French sounding Vandoren 3UD that was refaced to be very close and accomodated the small volume, more air pressure style of playing. I've never looked back! Also switched to #3 and 3.5 reeds and probably extended my life by a several years. Maybe this is comparable in some small way to what Paul is doing with the German mouthpieces and the lighter reeds.
Anyway, here's a link to what Puwalski said:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=210011&t=209993.
By "cushion," I believe Mondie is referring to a certain roundness and liquid quality to both tonal entrances and the smooth bridging of intervals. Many clarinetists have a full resonant sound but still sound jarring and edgy because their tone lacks such cushion and speaks too abruptly. Finger movement has a lot to do with how cushiony the tone sounds. If the fingers move too violently, the tone shatters; when they move like weightless light rays dancing on the keys and tone holes, the tone is sweet and well cushioned.
Post Edited (2016-05-09 21:48)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-04-30 03:10
Well I don't know of those particular distinctions are true.
For many years I have tended to small tip openings but use a LOT of air. I know very recently (but before the German thing) I realized that what I thought was constant abdominal pushing was merely the feeling of the diaphragm taking over most of the issue at lower dynamics.
I think this distinction HIGH FLOW - LOW FLOW are relative to the mouthpiece mostly though.........biting vs not biting ?????!!?????? After all, Mr. Mondie is using an M13 Lyre with nr 5 Vandoren V12s
Then again, this is a mysterious topic to me and would really welcome a long sit down with Mr. Mondie.
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bassclarinet101 ★2017
Date: 2016-04-30 18:14
High flow and low flow mouthpieces is probably referring to the way Arthur Benade discusses the clarinet mouthpiece in his book on Musical Acoustics. A high flow mouthpiece-reed combination will allow a lot of air through the instrument at one time, while a low-flow mouthpiece-reed combination will only allow a little air through the instrument at a given time.
-Daniel
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-04-30 19:52
bassclarinet101 wrote:
> High flow and low flow mouthpieces is probably referring to the
> way Arthur Benade discusses the clarinet mouthpiece in his book
> on Musical Acoustics. A high flow mouthpiece-reed combination
> will allow a lot of air through the instrument at one time,
> while a low-flow mouthpiece-reed combination will only allow a
> little air through the instrument at a given time.
>
OK. Does the flow rate directly affect the acoustical result or only the player's physical reactions needed to produce the result he/she wants? Can a musically educated listener hear the difference or is it another of those things that players feel but audiences don't notice? Were (or are, to the extent they still exist) specific "schools" of clarinet playing dependent on one or the other type of mouthpiece for their characteristic styles?
Although Mondie in the video is discussing (Vandoren) mouthpieces and reeds, he refers not to "high" or "low" flow mouthpieces or mouthpiece/reed combinations, but to the clarinet system as a whole. So how does the explanation you've suggested extend to the rest of the system?
And one other question occurs to me, as I think about it. We often discuss (argue about?) fast air/slow air. To the extent that we're actually talking about the forward velocity of the air we blow through the mouthpiece and into the instrument, how does that interact with the flow rate? Greater flow = less pressure = less velocity? I would expect a more restricted airway (closer tip opening, higher tongue position, smaller instrument bore) to result in higher pressure, greater velocity and lower flow rate throughout the system. Presumably, the converse would also be true.
I find this engaging mostly because it deals (I think or at least hope) in a physical property of fluids (e.g. air) and not a folkloric psychological concept or a set of terms relying on visual parallels (you know the words I mean). I will go back and look at Benade again.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2016-04-30 23:43
Very little air flows down the clarinet. What vibrates is the air that's already in there. After all, even the most open tip is pretty thin, and x-ray videos show that the reed seals completely against the mouthpiece in all but the softest playing.
Everything is personal and depends on anatomy. I go crazy playing close-tip mouthpieces even with the hardest reeds. The air backs up and I turn purple without being able to get anything louder than single-forte. I've always felt best with a more open tip and medium-strength reeds. But that's just me.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-05-01 00:01
Ken Shaw wrote:
> Very little air flows down the clarinet. What vibrates is the
> air that's already in there.
Well, assuming that's what these terms are referring to, the amount of flow is relative. After all, the air you blow goes somewhere, so I would suspect the amount of air that flows down the clarinet (at least to the first tone hole opening) is the amount you blow out. If it isn't leaking out out of the embouchure around the mouthpiece, it's going into the instrument.
This is a question (again, assuming this is what the reference is in the first place) of larger or smaller quantities of air. A lot more air goes into a tuba, I would think, than goes into any clarinet and oboes feature a very low rate of air flow rate into the instrument. And for a really large flow rate, one in fact that most of us can't maintain for very long, blow into an open 5/8 in or 3/4 in hose.
So, is this what Eugene Mondie was talking about? I'm not interested in taking sides in this at all. I just have never heard the terms.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NetG
Date: 2016-05-01 03:32
Mr. Mondie has a beautiful tone for sure! He looks very relaxed and in complete control of his instrument - thanks for posting the video!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2016-05-01 05:19
I know this is a clarinet discussion, but I recently read something similar in a book about the saxophone, The Devil's Horn. The author, Michael Segell, refers to comments made by saxophonist John Purcell about low-velocity and high-velocity players and the "vibratory action of an instrument's metal." According to Purcell, low-velocity players (like Lee Konitz, Joe Henderson, and Johnny Hodges) sound best on "instruments that vibrate quickly." High-velocity players (like John Coltrane, Sonny Rollins, and Mike Breker) need "something that vibrates more slowly." (p. 272)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-05-01 05:49
Not knowing the level of authority to ascribe to either Segell or Purcell, I'm not sure what to think of this. But it has the ring of someone's having taken a germ of a defensible theory (high vs. low velocity would probably be inversely related to high vs. low flow rates) and applying it to a peripherally (maybe) related area that has little or no data to back it up. I don't know how Purcell knows who are the "high velocity" players and who aren't. Nor am I sure what it means for an instrument to vibrate quickly or slowly, how the composition of the metal affects it or how Purcell knows enough about the metal each player's instruments were made of. At best, I'd want to see more of what Purcell had to say.
The connection might be there, but it sounds like a leap away from science to witchcraft.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
