 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2017-04-26 23:39
Of late I have looking at where the reed is secured by the ligature. My ligature is about 36mm from the tip of the reed. The facing length is approximately 17mm. That distance of 19mm is interesting. It could well be that this extra distance gives the reed more room to flap and gives a depth to the tone. For me I see the negative side to this distance. The reed doesn't lie flat against the mouthpiece and it requires biting to allow the reed to vibrate well. This might even be the majority of reeds. What do you think?
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2017-04-27 01:16
I need us to be on the same page. Here's a diagram"
http://tinyurl.com/lf7rr5p
It seems to me that of the 36mm length you describe--maybe I'm wrong--17mm comprises a PART of what you describe as the facing (perhaps the "window"-which is 1 part of the facing), and that the remaining 19mm comprises, say, the "table" (the other part of the facing), further away from the mouthpiece's tip.
I'm at a loss as to which part of the facing, the window or the table, has the larger portion of the 36mm distance you describe.
So let me try to answer this generically. Your mouthpiece's table should be as close to flat as possible. If its not, consider having it made flat or acquiring a new mouthpiece whose table is flat.
That said, your reed should lie on the table flat with no virtually gaps, with no ligature pressure. If it doesn't, the reed, provided it isn't warped beyond all repair with respect to its long axis, needs to be flatten either via sandpaper of a reed knife.
Mind you, I'm not talking about the warping of the tip that can happen before it's sufficiently hydrated. I'm talking about the bottom, particularly closer to the reed's butt end.
Be careful to work mostly on the section of the reed that lies over the table only.
Consider the ligature far more in the business of keeping the reed in place than flattening it against the mouthpiece table.
At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the reed should not lie flat on the window portion of the facing, veering away from it as one approaches the tip.
When the reed first deviates from the window, provided it is ostensibly flat, and how fast it veers away is a product of the window's side rail's curvatures--which should be as close to symmetrical as possible. The thickness of these rails also plays a role in the mouthpiece's characteristics, among many other factors.
If you are biting to produce sound, to any point beyond a snug grip, at first glance it would appear to me that your playing too strong reeds for the mouthpiece you use. The curvature I described plays into the tip opening, measured in 1/100mm, whose size is inversely proportional to the strength reeds you should be using.
Adjust the reeds to the mouthpiece rather than switching mouthpieces to accommodate a particular strength reed. Play the softest reeds you can that don't compromise your artistry (Mark Nuccio--NY Phil/Houston).
It might be a good idea to indicate more on reed strength, mouthpiece make and model of stock, and which portion of the facing is which. Excessive clamping of embouchure or ligature to make sound is indicative of one or more problems.
Store your reeds in a manner that keeps them flat.
Good luck.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2017-04-27 02:53
You experiment with ligature position to find the best place. I find that with the ligature placed high (closer to the beginning of the vamp), response is muted and inflexible. With it placed lower (closer to the butt), the sound is louder but tends toward coarseness.
For my way of playing, in the middle works best.
However, Stanley Drucker puts his ligature as low as possible, and Elsa Ludewig-Verdehr puts hers as high as possible. As always, you do what works best for you.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2017-04-27 03:59
WhitePlainsDave wrote:
> It seems to me that of the 36mm length you describe--maybe I'm
> wrong--17mm comprises a PART of what you describe as the facing
> (perhaps the "window"-which is 1 part of the facing),
17 mm is probably the curve length - the distance from the tip to the point where the reed and the side rails meet. The window is typically a little longer. The one I'm looking at right now is 33 mm from tip to end of window.
> the remaining 19mm comprises, say, the "table" (the other part
> of the facing), further away from the mouthpiece's tip.
> I'm at a loss as to which part of the facing, the window or the
> table, has the larger portion of the 36mm distance you
> describe.
So, my table begins about 33 mm from the mouthpiece tip. If I put my ligature where John puts his (I assume he means the ligature's top edge), it's about 3 mm below the end of the window opening. That's enough length to provide a good anchor for the reed to vibrate from.
> So let me try to answer this generically. Your mouthpiece's
> table should be as close to flat as possible. If its not,
> consider having it made flat or acquiring a new mouthpiece
> whose table is flat.
Or, you shouldn't. Many mouthpieces made by very knowledgeable craftsmen past and present put a slightly concave curve into the table. It does two things, in theory. It perhaps allows the ligature to press the reed into the concavity, which springs the vibrating part of the reed outward and theoretically gives it a little more vibrating distance. It also avoids most of the problems of a flat table that isn't flat, because the only places where the reed actually sits on the table are at the top (under the window) and near the end, which are enough to stabilize the reed and keep air from escaping under the reed. Any irregularities in between, unless they're extremely high, are cancelled out because the reed doesn't sit on them.
> That said, your reed should lie on the table flat with no
> virtually gaps, with no ligature pressure.
Only, again, if the mouthpiece is designed to have a flat table.
> At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the reed should not
> lie flat on the window portion of the facing, veering away from
> it as one approaches the tip.
Well, not to put too fine a point on it, the mouthpiece rails curve away from the reed - the reed should still be flat. But I know what you meant.
> When the reed first deviates from the window, provided it is
> ostensibly flat, and how fast it veers away is a product of the
> window's side rail's curvatures--which should be as close to
> symmetrical as possible.
Unless the facing is designed to be asymmetrical. As is the case with Pyne mouthpieces, for example.
Players have their individual idiosyncratic ways of doing things. They settle on this sort of witchcraft by trial and error and then just stay with what seems to work best. Part of the problem is that "what works best" depends on what you want to accomplish. If you need to be loud, and a little coarseness isn't going to carry into the hall, then you may do it one way. If you want refinement and don't need so much volume, maybe something else - some other ligature placement, some other way of adjusting reeds, etc. - will produce that result.
You can make an empirical case for anything if it works for your needs. There are really no rules about tables, reeds, ligature placement, or anything else.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2017-04-27 04:33
Karl--I take no issue with the facts associated with exceptions you point out. I seek here to only justify my less detailed coverage than yours.
As stated, my answer was generic and basic to a poster having a hard time explaining themselves and who seems to be wrongly solving issues with vice grip embouchure and ligature pressure.
The laws of large numbers here suggest from context a basic player, with a basic mouthpiece consisting of a flat table and symmetrical rails and I followed the adage of "when you hear hoofs, think horses, not zebras."
Perhaps the O.P. will embellish so we can determine which sub-classification of the Genus of Equus (to expand on the animal classification metaphor) best applies here.
"Players have their individual idiosyncratic ways of doing things....You can make an empirical case for anything if it works for your needs. There are really no rules about tables, reeds, ligature placement, or anything else."
I generally agree, as I do with the Russianoff school thought of not teaching one way to all...but unless a student already comes to me with virtuosic talent that breaks conventional wisdom, I'm not going to tolerate things that make advancement harder that buck the classic paths of least resistance to play.
Post Edited (2017-04-27 05:28)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2017-04-27 05:36
John (Arnoldstang) can speak for himself, of course, but he is a longtime member of this BB - maybe even predating my joining, and I don't think he is asking for solutions to a biting problem. He was, as I read his post, more interested in what others here thought about the effects of placing the ligature in different positions on the mouthpiece. He did suggest that putting the ligature very low leads in his view to biting because the reed has more "room to flap" - more freedom to move, maybe requiring more work (biting) to control the extra vibration.
I've experimented a little tonight and, moving the ligature down does, indeed, seem to make it play louder. I didn't feel myself adding jaw pressure, but I may have been gripping a little more with my lips to keep the sound focused and, for some notes, in tune. But it was only one reed on two slightly different facings and not an exhaustive test by any means.
WhitePlainsDave wrote:
> If its not,
> consider having it made flat or acquiring a new mouthpiece
> whose table is flat.
>
> That said, your reed should lie on the table flat with no
> virtually gaps, with no ligature pressure. If it doesn't, the
> reed ... needs to be flatten either via sandpaper of a
> reed knife.
>
> ...how fast it veers away is a product of the
> window's side rail's curvatures--which should be as close to
> symmetrical as possible.
Dave, I only objected because these comments, read by a less experienced player than John, might lead him or her to actually change (or have someone try to "fix") equipment that is perfectly serviceable because he has read here that it "should" be other than what it is. Concave tables and asymmetrical curves are not simply esoteric refinements limited to equipment used by expert players. That many inexperienced players don't know they're playing on mouthpieces with deliberately concave tables or that they're playing on facings designed intentionally to skew resistance to one side of the reed doesn't mean many of them aren't playing on those mouthpieces or that those "problems" need "correction" to allow them to play their best.
In any case, all of this is peripheral, I think, to what Arnoldstang was getting at. Unless I misread his original post.
Karl
Post Edited (2017-04-27 06:52)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2017-04-27 17:45
"these comments, read by a less experienced player"
The very (i.e. inexperienced) players you fear swayed by my expressly stated generic advice, I strongly suspect aren't
* playing nearly as many mouthpieces deliberately possessive of non flat tables and asymmetrical rails as you report, anymore than if they are, are
* apt to be lured into "fixing" mouthpieces I suggested they (generically) "consider" (get more info) addressing, not categorically fixing, let alone
* apt to be trying to fix themselves: a process they might have not known even existed (re-sufacing) prior.
For those few I've missed, I suggest you take your mouthpiece to a reputable mouthpiece re-sufacer, who by definition I'll classify as someone with not only great experience at the craft, but possessive of enough knowledge of the mouthpiece brand space that they don't go removing deliberate rail asymmetries and table non-flatness.
As to my possible misread of the O.P.'s experience..someone who considers biting a negative side to play, rather than an unacceptable side to play, will, yes, throw me off. FWIW I did consider my assessment of the O.P.'s skill set as possibly greater than what I assumed from context, given his postscript title, and that ambiguity in his description, not his abilities might be at play.
I admit to finding it hard to provide the brevity of answer, to get people to read, that leaves out details---and the detailed answer provided in vain: too long to capture attention--so I opt for the middle space.
Post Edited (2017-04-27 18:25)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2017-04-27 19:59
Attachment: IMG_1308.JPG (698k)
Attachment: IMG_1307.JPG (671k)
Attachment: IMG_1310.JPG (562k)
Sorry about this Dave. You certainly know lots about this subject. I just wasn't clear about my intent. I tend to try reinventing the wheel. Here are two photos . One from about 25 years ago and the other yesterday.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2017-04-28 00:18
John, I'm not sure what wheel you're trying to reinvent. Your ligature looks like it's in a pretty standard spot - maybe a tad lower but not much. The tape looks like it climbs up to nearly where the curve of the rails ends. Are you looking for the effect of having the reed secured that high? Maybe you could re-shoot the picture and mark the reed vamp where 17 mm is.
I thought I understood that you wondering about the effect of moving the ligature down farther than normal. Maybe I conflated your post with Ken's about how low Drucker put his ligature. I've spent a little time this afternoon checking reeds for a piece I'm playing on Eb, putting the ligature all the way down to the end of the bark. It definitely frees the reed and makes it louder. I don't find any more pressure is needed and certainly no bite.
Is the top edge of the tape in IMG_1310 past the bottom of the window? It looks like it must be really close. Are you finding there's an effect on vibration by securing the reed that high? What happens if you use something firmer, like ligature string?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2017-04-28 18:09
Yes I am binding the reed very high in addition to a normal ligature. I think placing the ligature very low will effectively lengthen the facing length and open things up a bit. This might have short term positive results but will require more embouchure control. If the reed changes a bit due to the elements then you will have to "muscle it" to rein it in. It might be that securing the reed at 20 mm from the tip of the mouthpiece sounds smaller and restricted but this can be modified. There is a gain in ease of playing. i have been using yellow silicone tape so it doesn't interfere with the embouchure. The yellow is thicker. I pull it quite tight.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RKing
Date: 2017-04-30 00:13
Way back when, my junior high school music teacher told us that the little lines around our mouthpieces were called "ligature lines" and we should put the ligature somewhere between those lines. I don't know if every mouthpiece has those lines, but my Vandoren 5RV did (so does my Fobes Cicero) and that is the advice I have followed the past 40 years.
I experimented with setting the ligature lower on the mouthpiece and it seemed to make my reeds play "softer". My ligature is now back near the top line.
I think this also works better in case the table is slightly concave as Karl mentioned.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2017-04-30 00:52
Interesting. How far below the end of the curve (17 mm from the tip) is the top edge of the tape?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2017-04-30 03:11
I wasn't trying for any particular distance. It is 18mm from the tip of the reed. I have been leaving the reed on the mouthpiece after each use. This means a bit of warmup when you first play again as the reed has dried out. I might rebind it once a week or until I feel it necessary. If you try it let me know your results. I use thick teflon tape( yellow) but I assume the white would also work if you applied a bit more. I pull and stretch it quite tightly. The white is more apt to snap off.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2017-04-30 03:54
Might be easier with my Legere - no issue of a reed reed.
Karl
Post Edited (2017-04-30 03:55)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2017-04-30 19:20
You could be right. Legere is much more impervious to weather changes and the wetting and drying process. Beyond this my question is whether there is a good reason for the standard ligature position other than convenience. ie Is the 15-20 mm distance between the start of the facing and the highest point where the ligature is positioned necessary for appropriate reed vibration on the clarinet.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
