 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-26 08:56
I recently borrowed a copy of Larry Guy's book on embouchure building as a checkup for my embouchure.
The one thing that baffles me is the idea that the embouchure should be 100% formed before the mouthpiece is ever inserted. I can flatten my chin, bring my corners in, insert the mouthpiece etc. just fine, but when I go to push air through the clarinet without changing anything, the only sound I get is a "whoosh."
In order to get a full, steady, supported sound, I have to engage my corners and upper lip in a way that I can't do without the mouthpiece in my mouth. (I ever so slightly raise the corners of my mouth and tighten my upper lip, putting a dimple in the corners of my mouth.) Once I do that, the sound is fine, and I can keep my embouchure constant without problems. I observe the same thing trying to play with a double lip embouchure — I have to sort of "engage" the embouchure once the mouthpiece is in my mouth.
This doesn't really feel "wrong" — my chin is still flat, my corners are still pushing in, my top lip is still engaged, and this is how I usually play — but it's contrary to what the book suggests. Any thoughts?
Here is a video. (Sorry for the poor sound quality.)
I first form an embouchure without the clarinet and try to play with that embouchure; then I switch to the embouchure I usually use.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP7M-gk9zPI
I'm not too concerned about this since it doesn't seem to be a detriment to my playing at all, but I'm just curious if the embouchure really must be formed separately from the mouthpiece.
Post Edited (2016-05-26 10:20)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mojo
Date: 2016-05-26 16:31
Some teaching concepts should not be taken literally.
MojoMP.com
Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
MojoMouthpieceWork@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-05-26 17:12
Mojo wrote:
> Some teaching concepts should not be taken literally.
>
And they don't always translate well to print. The value of face-to-face study with a teacher is the possibility of live demonstration by and immediate feedback from the teacher.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-26 17:36
That's what I figured. I wasn't about to let what the book says override what I've learned with my private teacher — I was just curious if forming the embouchure without the clarinet is a common practice, or more of a conceptual thing. (Clearly it's the latter.)
I do find some of the other concepts in the book to be very helpful, though.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2016-05-26 17:49
"The one thing that baffles me is the idea that the embouchure should be 100% formed before the mouthpiece is ever inserted."
..and I respectfully don't agree with this. The embouchure is NEARLY formed before the mouthpiece is inserted in the mouth--not differently than I hand tighten a nut on a bolt before torquing it on tightly with a wrench.
The pressure on the mouthpiece, as applied by the mouth, would close the mouth without the mouthpiece there, and thereafter involve a mouthpiece insertion that would pry open the mouth, even if ever so gently. This might cause the lips to cover the top and bottom teeth, forming more of a double lip type embouchure than, at least, the single lip player might wish to form.
Post Edited (2016-05-26 18:06)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-26 19:00
@WhitePlainsDave: Your description of nearly forming the embouchure and then tightening it is how I form my embouchure now. I will just stick with that.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Slowoldman
Date: 2016-05-27 00:08
I believe that Mr. Guy's point is that you should not further open your mouth to accommodate the mouthpiece insertion (which would be changing the embouchure), but rather place the mouthpiece in the opening you have created.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-05-27 15:51
I just wanted to address "corners."
[Though I don't really SEE a problem per se]
The idea that firming up (or tightening) the embouchure requires pulling up on the corners of your mouth could lead to a nasty battle between sets of muscles and too much tension (that is NOT necessary).
The "corners" of your mouth should be thought of as going down and back (or in), not up.
Again, I don't see this, but don't let that problem develop while getting all microscopic about your embouchure.
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-27 17:19
It's not a drastic, intentional pulling on the corners of the mouth (as in a "smile" embouchure); I still feel like my corners are pushing in. Visually, they appear to just shift ever so slightly up when I firm up my embouchure, but I don't feel opposing muscles at play. I'll be sure to keep an eye out for unnecessary tension caused by that, but so far I haven't had any problems with it.
Post Edited (2016-05-27 17:31)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarence Beale
Date: 2016-05-29 03:24
Max,
For what it’s worth, the idea of completely forming the clarinet embouchure before inserting the clarinet into the mouth that you found in Larry Guy’s Embouchure Development book seems to go back to Robert Marcellus. In Larry Guy’s latest book, “Articulation Development for Clarinetists”, Larry has this quote printed in bold type in two different places:
“Form the embouchure completely before inserting the clarinet.” Robert Marcellus
Now that I have invoked the name of the great Robert Marcellus I would like to make it clear that I do NOT think that just because Mr. Marcellus suggested doing something means that all clarinet players should attempt to do the same thing. There are many different ways to play the clarinet “successfully”. I hasten to add that there also are many different opinions as to what playing the clarinet “successfully” means. It would be a dull world if all clarinet players sounded the same.
That said, I always very seriously consider anything Mr. Marcellus said. Personally, I think he was a genius at figuring out how to play the clarinet efficiently. At his 28 June 1977 Masterclass given at Northwestern University he said:
“I may live to rue my words at these classes, but playing the clarinet really can be quite simple. Perhaps it might be better phrased: It is more simple than a lot of people I have seen come into my studio seem to think it is. ”
I have my own interpretation of what he said:
“Playing the clarinet can be quite easy if you play the clarinet like Robert Marcellus played it.”
Just my opinion.
Mr. Marcellus developed a set of integrated interdependent principles which he used to play the clarinet his way. You have done the same, your way. Now you are trying to graft into your set of principles one principle used by Mr. Marcellus, and you are finding that it doesn’t quite work. That should not be surprising since you probably are not using all of the other principles Mr. Marcellus used.
When Mr. Marcellus played the clarinet he did some things that are contrary to what many, if not most, clarinet teachers dogmatically teach. Let me give one example.
In Larry Guy’s Embouchure book he has a section on The Open Throat. Larry wrote that the “open throat” concept of playing the clarinet involves half a yawn. The half of the yawn not used is the process of dropping the bottom of the mouth and tongue. The half of the yawn that is used is the “lifting of the soft palate.”
When I began studying with my first significant teacher, George Silfies, he told me to open my throat more. I was somewhat surprised when he asked me to do that because I thought that my throat already was open and when I tried to open my throat more it felt unnatural. Nevertheless, since he was the master and I was a lowly fourteen year old clarinet student I tried to do what he suggested. Later, when I was studying with Harold Wright he also talked about opening the throat. In a lecture Mr. Wright gave on the double lip embouchure in 1969 at the University of Denver’s National Clarinet Clinic he said:
“Now let me just touch upon some of the benefits of a double lip embouchure….It opens the oral chamber of the mouth. That means that you are more like this all the time rather than pushed down in the throat. Your throat is more open. Consequently, your tone becomes freer. “
The most extreme argument for the open throat that I’ve read is made by Anthony Gigliotti. In 1970, an interview of Mr. Gigliotti by Arthur Hegvik was published in The Instrumentalist magazine. This is an excerpt:
A.H. How does the throat fit into all this?
A.G. It's very important....I have worked out a series of vowel sounds which go from the tightest to the most open throat position. Many say the throat is most open when you say ah, others say O. I feel it should be a deep open O, not up in the mouth, but low in the throat....The throat position of the O is roughly the same as a yawn. In a yawn the adam's apple drops and the throat distends far beyond its normal position. In other words, the position of my throat when playing is not the same as when I speak--it is more open. This is a matter of muscular control, which must be developed. It makes a great difference in the sound.
Some twenty-five years later, Mr. Gigliotti repeats essentially the same thing in an interview by James Gholson published in 1996.
Note that Larry Guy advocates half a yawn while Mr. Gigliotti seems to advocate a full yawn.
James Gholson also interviewed Robert Marcellus, and the interview is included in the same 1996 publication, “Seasoned Clarinetist”:
J.G.: "What misconceptions do you feel exist in the teaching of the clarinet?"
R.M.: "Mostly horrible sound!"
J.G.: "Yes, you talked about a wide open throat."
R.M.: "Well, that's death to a beautiful sound. Misconceptions taught are open throat, anchor-tonguing, or worse sometimes--chin or lip or hand vibrato as we see it practiced occasionally. It's a misconception that it's easy to play in an orchestra. But it's easier to play in a good orchestra than a bad orchestra. Oh yes, another misconception is that double lip gives a fuller sound. Quite the contrary. It gives a smaller sound."
Wow! “Death to a beautiful sound.”
In the Masterclass lecture at Northwestern University referenced above Mr. Marcellus said: “I believe the throat should be in a very nice rounded position but not unusually open. Quite the contrary."
Who was right? Mr. Marcellus or Mr. Gigliotti? I think both were right.
Within the context of Mr. Marcellus’ set of principles which he used to play the clarinet a wide open throat as advocated by Mr. Gigliotti didn’t work as well as a throat that is “in a very nice rounded position but not unusually open.” For Mr. Gigliotti, using his set of principles, the wide open throat worked better.
What is the point of all this? If you want to pursue Mr. Marcellus’ principle of completely forming the embouchure before inserting the clarinet into the mouth then I would like to suggest that you do some research and learn what other important principles Mr. Marcellus used to play the clarinet his way. For example, how did Mr. Marcellus form his embouchure and how did he use his tongue to control the flow of air. In my opinion, these principles are well documented. You can get the documents and read them for yourself. Don’t trust what other people say including me. There seem to be some opinions floating around that I think contradict verbal quotes of what he actually said. You can read all this yourself and form your own opinion.
Finally, I watched your YouTube video. It seems to me that the “Whoosh” sound you demonstrate is nothing more than air SLOWLY moving behind the reed over the mouthpiece rails into the clarinet without the reed vibrating. Why so slow? You will understand why I think this is an important question when you can answer this question:
Why does air moving rapidly behind the clarinet reed over the mouthpiece rails into the clarinet mouthpiece cause the reed to vibrate?
There may be other problems explaining why the reed isn’t vibrating: Like: Is your reed so strong relative to the kind of facing your mouthpiece has that you have to smash the reed toward the mouthpiece facing using your old embouchure – not the new embouchure described in Larry Guy's book which you seemed to be trying to emulate - before the reed will start vibrating?
Keep asking intelligent questions. It’s a great way to learn.
Clarence Beale
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-05-29 04:21
To an extent, perhaps a large one, the techniques of sound production can depend on the player's needs in his playing context.
My impression from a couple of live performances I heard in Philadelphia (recordings being potentially misleading) and from comments made by people who heard the Cleveland Orchestra of the time more regularly at home, the orchestral approach under Szell was one of control and precision, never bombast and volume for its own sake.
Philadelphia, by contrast, at least under Ormandy, played for a "big" sound with most of the players I knew at the time complaining that they never really played softly - Gigliotti's term for it, if I remember the spelling correctly, was btsooi - blow the s---t out of it. I think he needed, or at least felt he needed, to produce a lot more sheer sound volume than Marcellus did. This may have dictated his opting for ways to provide more air at the reed. Anyone who saw Gigliotti play certainly remembers the way his neck actually bulged as he played at louder dynamics.
Different environments, perhaps different needs.
Karl
Post Edited (2016-05-29 06:22)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-29 06:30
Clarence Beale, thank you for all the information! I don't play with a particularly open throat either — I typically aim for a high, or at least medium-high, tongue position. (Think "ee" or "ue")
As for the whoosh: I am playing with a fairly strong reed (V12 #4, balanced to the best of my ability), but on a close/long facing (Clark Fobes CF), which should be a good reed/mouthpiece match. I don't mash the reed into the facing with my typical embouchure. But when I don't "engage" my embouchure like I did in the video, I can push all the air I want into the clarinet, slow or fast, and no sound will come out.
You've got me curious, though — I'm going to dig out a box of #2.5 reeds I have, and see if I can play them without having to set my embouchure post-mouthpiece-insertion. I have a feeling they will just be too soft for this facing, though, but you never know.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-29 07:20
Well, the #2.5 didn't work so well. Without "setting" my embouchure after inserting the mouthpiece, I still just got a "whoosh" noise. When I set my embouchure (which required less effort than the #4), I could play the reed alright (as far as response, articulation, etc. go), but the sound was very unfocused and brittle and hard to control.
So I am guessing that a too-hard reed is not at fault here.
Post Edited (2016-05-29 07:22)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarence Beale
Date: 2016-05-29 08:34
Max, I recommend that you listen to the first eleven minutes of Tape 1 of Robert Marcellus' 28 June 1977 Masterclass taught at Northwestern University which is available online. He says some interesting things about the speed of the wind and his teacher, Daniel Bonade.
For years I stumbled over stories about using the speed of the wind to blow out a candle. Hold a burning candle in front of your mouth and with you mouth wide open try to blow out the candle. You can't. Next close your lips except for a very small opening at the center. Now blow air through the small opening toward the candle flame. Bingo! You blow out the flame. Why? The small aperture allows you to increase the speed of the air enough to blow out the candle. Nice story but no one explained to me how this specifically applies to playing the clarinet.
One day on my own I discovered how the laws of physics explain why air moving rapidly behind the clarinet reed over the flat mouthpiece rails causes the reed to vibrate. And then the proverbial light bulb went on. The opening behind the reed immediately above the flat mouthpiece facing rails is very small just like the opening in the center of my lips was very small when I was trying to blow out the candle. I can use the small opening behind the reed above the flat mouthpiece rails to almost effortlessly increase the speed of the air moving into the clarinet mouthpiece. Assuming the reed is properly adjusted to match the mouthpiece, the reed will start vibrating when the flow of air is sufficiently fast. On that day my mental image of how to produce the clarinet sound completely changed.
Note: I think it is the speed of the air flow immediately above the mouthpiece rails and behind the part of the reed immediately above the rails that is very important.
Clarence
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-29 09:21
Thank you, I will be sure to listen to that. The mental image about air speed is very helpful as well!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-05-29 15:18
Ah, the air speed thing. I carried that one around for a long time myself. It was Tony Pay, or someone of that ilk on this Board that got me re-thinking this as it was pointed out that there are OTHER dynamics.
Yes, students with poor, unsupported sounds are probably not offering up enough air speed for the given note at the given dynamic. But as a discipline, I have come to the conclusion that it is better to think of the air stream as STEADY and I mean ROCK STEADY, on any given note at any given dynamic. You do this by ensuring that you have an active control of (and actively feel the use of...) your abdominal muscles. The confusion over what is actually going on with the abdominals and diaphragm working together in opposition is that you won't feel the diaphragm because it such a big muscle that works all the time.
The talk about the "throat" (or back of the tongue) has been an issue for me over the years as well, particularly since John Yeh referred to "open throat" as "closed throat" (the oral cavity does get bigger, at the expense of blocking the flow of air at the top of the throat, just above the voice box).
I have softened on that in the last few months vis a vie the use of the closed German mouthpieces and soft reeds. This system (or any that are similar) achieves a warm, projecting sound without any undo effort whatsoever. So all the minutia we argue about the embouchure just seems to go out the window.
As I began using Legere on this "light" concept, I too started to feel a need to get the softest possible Legere and went through the "whoosh" phase. Bas De Jong of Viotto mouthpieces did have to talk me back from the brink on that one. He said that there still is some "support" of the mouthpiece however slight is may be.
I add this because it is important to know that the clarinet can never be equivalent to just placing it against your lips like a flute, there needs to be a "damping" at the "cantilever" point just before the point where the reed and mouthpiece come together.
But if you have a set-up that "plays" just by "blowing" (as much as that is possible on clarinet) then you DO have more flexibility with what else you do as far as tongue position (open vs closed "throat") or how much you actually feel the engagement of your abdominals (pushing at your mid-section), while you still get a really good sound.
....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-30 10:03
"As I began using Legere on this 'light' concept, I too started to feel a need to get the softest possible Legere and went through the 'whoosh' phase. [...] there needs to be a 'damping' at the 'cantilever' point just before the point where the reed and mouthpiece come together."
I guess that best describes what occurred when I tried to form the embouchure separately from the clarinet. I couldn't achieve that damping until I added the extra support, hard reed or soft reed.
I've read about your experiences with the German mouthpiece on a French clarinet, and the idea of achieving a good sound with less effort does seem appealing. There's an interview with Michele Zukovsky somewhere where she describes the same thing — how the German mouthpiece takes less embouchure effort to blow. She couldn't get the German mouthpiece to play in tune on a French clarinet, though, so she ended up switching entirely to German system. I'm going to be studying with Michele Zukovsky starting in the fall; I'll have to ask about her experience with that.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-05-30 14:37
Congratulations!
Michelle Zukovsky is a wonderful musician and has a wide range of experiences with the clarinet.
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-30 20:28
Thank you! She is indeed a brilliant musician and clarinetist. I had a lesson with her about a year ago and went to her final concert with the LA Phil, and was pretty blown away. I'm really looking forward to studying with her and Yehuda Gilad over the next four years.
Remind me: which Viotto mouthpiece were you able to use with a French system clarinet? And did you have to purchase a modified barrel to get it to play in tune? I probably wouldn't switch, but I might be curious just to give it a try sometime.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-05-30 20:52
I use the Viotto N1. This mouthpiece works fine with whatever your standard set-up is. It may be a hair lower, but negotiable.
I think I am learning now (after 40 some years) that the softest reed possible within your set-up is the way to go.
I just (last night in fact) tried the German Legere on one of my favorite Boehm mouthpieces for the first time, and darned if that wasn't pretty wonderful too (a little more resistant than I've come to appreciate in the last six months though). So I am now much more curious about re-trying the Legere Signature (a much softer one than I had before) as well as the new European cut (certainly no more more than a #3 strength and probably less).
Still though I went back to the German mouthpiece du jeur for today's Memorial Day gig (I think the node points of the German cut reed may not be ideal for Boehm mouthpieces.....but it was the only type of reed I own that is that soft).
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2016-05-31 03:12
Paul's experiment, using a German mouthpiece (Viotto N1) with softer German cut reeds to allow decreased use of lip pressure, is worthwhile. But I wouldn't altogether abandon the possibility that a French style mouthpiece can be designed for use with French style (Vandoren trad. or 21) reeds that would accomplish nearly the same end. I recall several years ago trying a James Kanter mouthpiece with a close facing that played with very little pressure from the lips. I remember thinking "I've never played a mouthpiece before that was so easy to blow and required so little lip force." I cannot now recall the model number and at the time was not interested in using less pressure.
Anyhow, Kanter, who is semi-retired, does still make some mouthpieces and I see that he will be giving a mouthpiece clinic and allowing attendees at the 2016 California Clarinet Clinic in Pasadena (June 19-23) to try some of his models. Max, if you could attend, you might spark Kanter's interest in crafting such a piece and discuss just what its physical attributes might be. By the way, Michelle Zukovsky is on the faculty of this clinic.
http://www.californiaclarinetclinic.com Click on "Special Events" for "Jim Kanter Mouthpiece Clinic.
If you cannot attend, you might try to see Kanter at another venue. I believe Julia Heinen can probably put you in touch with him.
Studying with Michelle Zukovsky should be inspiring; as the only principal clarinetist with a major orchestra in the U.S. for the past 30-plus years to play mainly or exclusively on an Oehler instrument, she has certainly had to think for herself. If you find her lessons beneficial and pragmatic, as I'm sure you will, perhaps you can talk her into writing a book on clarinet playing. That's one book I would want in my collection!
Post Edited (2020-02-28 21:35)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2016-05-31 03:58
Is the missing part of the equation here right thumb pressure? One has to "snug up" with a given embouchure setting. ie bring the clarinet " to you " not "you" to the clarinet. Snugging up should get you beyond just air going through the clarinet.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-31 04:40
seabreeze, thank you for letting me know about the mouthpiece clinic! I've always been curious about how mouthpieces are made, especially since I visited Clark Fobes one time and watched him make one. The clinic is before I move into USC, but maybe I could make a trip up there.
(I also noticed there's a repair clinic with Levi Tracy, who repaired my clarinets a few months ago. I'll look into that as well.)
Arnoldstang: Interesting you should mention that. While practicing today, I discovered that I wasn't taking in quite enough mouthpiece, and that adding thumb pressure helped fix that. Sounds like I need to be paying more attention to that. I occasionally practice with a double lip embouchure, which helps me find that right amount of "snugging." I'll experiment more with this.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarence Beale
Date: 2016-05-31 06:00
When I play the clarinet I hold the instrument firmly in my mouth, but that stability is not provided by clamping down on the reed and mouthpiece with my lips and jaws. To the contrary, I simply lay the front of the reed on the flesh in front of my lower teeth with the stability being provided mostly by some upward pressure from my right thumb being countered by my upper teeth resting on the mouthpiece top.
To me it seems like there is very little pressure against the front of the reed. There is some, just enough to focus the sound. I can back off that little bit of pressure but there still is sound although unfocused and not especially pleasant. Because of this it seems to me that Max should be getting at least some kind of sound when the air is moving rapidly across the mouthpiece facing into the mouthpiece.
I think all of this maybe is better explained by Anthony Gigliotti. The following few paragraphs are from Arthur Hegvik's 1977 interview of AG from the Instrumentalist magazine.
A.H. What about the corners of the mouth?
A.G. There are students who come to me and look as if they're smiling when they play, and they say their teacher taught them to pull the corners of the mouth up. Others look like they are frowning, and pull the corners down. I feel they shouldn't be pulled anywhere. They should stay exactly in their normal position, with a slight tightening of the corner muscles to prevent air leakage, but that's all.
A.H. How much pressure should be exerted by the lower lip against the reed?
Very little. You should not get a grip on the reed. The lower lip should touch the reed with just enough firmness to focus the sound. Of course, if you are playing a wide open mouthpiece, you have to use a lot of pressure to bring the reed up to the lay of the mouthpiece to get it to vibrate, but if you use a facing like mine, which is medium-close, that is not necessary. You can play with very little pressure, just enough to control the reed and focus the sound properly, and that's it.
A.H. How would you put this across with a young or beginning student?
A.G. I demonstrate to the student by playing an open G with no pressure at all, so the sound is spread to the point of a squawk, and it's very obvious to the student that it's not a good tone. Then I play the same note with a good quality of sound. (You must first establish these tonal conceptions in the student's mind so he can recognize when the sound is correct and when it is not correct.) Then again I play the open G with the no-pressure, squawky tone, and show them that by increasing the pressure or firmness against the reed very slightly you can focus the sound. Now this requires a very minute change of firmness. Then I have them do the same thing. I spend some time in this so they realize that the difference between the unfocused, spread tone and the well-focused sound in terms of embouchure firmness is very slight. This way they don't get in the habit of biting and gripping the mouthpiece. The important thing is to establish the concept of just enough firmness, and not too much, to avoid the habit of playing with a tight, tense embouchure.
I suspect that some might disagree with some of these ideas but I include what Mr. Gigliotti said simply to note that when he played with no pressure against the reed at least he produced a squawk.
Clarence Beale
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-31 07:14
What you and Gigliotti describe is, more or less, how I think about embouchure already, although it was very helpful to read what Gigliotti said as a review of what a proper embouchure feels like. Really the only difference at all between your post and what I do now is whether or not the described embouchure can be formed prior to mouthpiece insertion.
When I try to form the embouchure separately from the clarinet and then insert the mouthpiece with no changes to the embouchure, I can't achieve any kind of focus whatsoever; the air just rushes past the reed. It's like the lips are too slack and I can't get the reed vibrating. In order to get a tone, I have to tighten the corner muscles slightly once the mouthpiece is in my mouth. While I can come very close to a functional embouchure without the clarinet in my mouth, I have to have a mouthpiece in my mouth for my corners to "snug" against.
Even when I start with a neutral embouchure and slowly introduce the clarinet with more and more right thumb pressure until the sound goes from a "whoosh" to a tone (and do this single- or double-lip), the corners are tightening automatically, reflexively, as I insert the mouthpiece, in a way that they can't seem to do without the mouthpiece there.
I will keep experimenting with this to see if there is any way for my embouchure to be completely formed before I insert the mouthpiece, as Larry Guy describes.
(I did discover today that I was not paying enough attention to the upward thumb pressure. I practiced for a couple of hours and paid closer attention to "snugging up" with thumb pressure, and I had much greater stability and embouchure stamina, and had to "engage" my embouchure less.)
Post Edited (2016-05-31 07:19)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2016-05-31 07:21
Valuable comments from Gigliotti. As counterpoint to Gigliotti's statement that it is necessary only to exert "very little pressure, just enough to control and focus the sound," today Jose Franch Ballester says it is best to use even less lip pressure than would be necessary to focus the sound, and instead use tongue position to bring the sound into focus and up to pitch.
If Ballester is right, then a very loose embouchure can be used, as long as no air is leaking, and the tongue does the rest by narrowing and directing the air.
See his presentation of this idea here in "Tongue Position with Jose Franch Ballester":
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=tongue+position+with+Jose+Franch+Ballester.
Post Edited (2016-05-31 07:23)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-31 07:31
Thanks for the video seabreeze, I hadn't seen that before. I also keep a high tongue position to focus the sound. With my setup, it seems like there needs to be some combination of tongue position and embouchure pressure, but I definitely use an "ee" syllable in place of biting to focus the sound.
Post Edited (2016-05-31 07:31)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: maxopf
Date: 2016-05-31 07:35
On a separate note — looks like I missed the deadline to apply for the California Clarinet Clinic that you mentioned, seabreeze. Maybe I'll go next year.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2016-05-31 07:48
Don't give up so easy. Ask them if you can attend just one day for James Kanter's clinic. They might say yes. (Two or three years ago, I asked them just that, and they said yes, but it turned out that for other reasons I couldn't go).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
