 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2021-05-01 09:48
One of my ensembles is starting to get ready to perform again. Bell covers on all wind instruments are going to be required. I am going to be switching between E-flat and B-flat clarinet and need a solution for a stand that won't require removing bell covers to use.
Is anyone aware of a non-peg type stand that might work for this application? It doesn't have to be a perfect solution--something intended for a soprano sax, perhaps? Just something to get by with until the Covid-19 situation has run its course.
I have unibody cases for both E-flat and B-flat and could just lay the assembled instruments inside them when they're not in use. That, however, would leave the mouthpiece sticking out of the case and vulnerable to damage.
Post Edited (2021-05-01 10:48)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2021-05-01 17:25
Perhaps you can lean the bell covered instrument on a stand like this:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1301535-REG/hercules_stands_ds532bb_1_alto_tenor_saxophone_and.html
That said Ursa, and of course I realize that the bell covers that your group is mandating that you use may appear as absurd to you as to me, may only be as effective at limiting the transmission of oral containments as you are limited to solely playing this note:
![[E3]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/e3.gif)
I say this, as you and many others may appreciate, because air we push into the clarinet to make sound finds its way out of the nearest opening, which is not the bell provided we're not playing E3, or perhaps B4: should an academic discussion about how opening the register key and harmonic partials may also allow germs to leave the open register key, albeit directed towards our chest, be warranted here.
Sigh.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mojo
Date: 2021-05-01 18:12
I think the covers are absurd too. The air exhaust is actually split among all the open downstream holes. It will favor the path of least resistance. Acoustically the standing wave is just to the first open hole. But the air stream that sets up this wave at the tip of the mouthpiece uses more holes than just the first open one.
MojoMP.com
Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
MojoMouthpieceWork@yahoo.com
Post Edited (2021-05-03 16:56)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2021-05-01 22:03
Thanks for the suggestion on the sax/clarinet stand, SecondTry. I sometimes double on alto sax; that stand could come in handy now and into the future.
Bell covers on clarinets and saxophones? Don't get me started. Flautists are still going to be blowing air across their instruments' embouchure holes and spewing a cloud of droplets into the air, just as always. Nobody is asking them to don something like a clear garbage bag over their upper body and flute to mitigate that transmission mechanism. Or, how about a wad of toilet paper clipped to a marching lyre positioned in front of their embouchure plate to catch some of the moisture?
The possible impact of wind instruments spreading airborne diseases such as tuberculosis, measles, mumps, and whooping cough back when they were not under control was something people either didn't care about, or thought was a risk worth taking. A band room in the 1950s was a veritable germ factory. And yet we survived.
Post Edited (2021-05-01 22:27)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2021-05-01 22:06
Bell covers? What's the point of bell covers?
Bell covers are for the gullible and do bugger all except stifle the notes that issue from the bell.
Forget about bell covers and move on.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LFabian
Date: 2021-05-02 04:26
Since I am in a freelance non union band, the places that might require masks. Rather than play than refusing a gig. Got mask for clarinet just in case.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2021-05-02 17:27
Ursa wrote:
> The possible impact of wind instruments spreading airborne
> diseases such as tuberculosis, measles, mumps, and whooping
> cough back when they were not under control was something
> people either didn't care about, or thought was a risk worth
> taking. A band room in the 1950s was a veritable germ factory.
> And yet we survived.
>
This argument is to me something of a red herring. Tuberculosis doesn't in normal circumstances cause epidemics and it has been treatable since the discovery of penicillin. The MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine has been keeping those three under control since 1971 and as individual vaccines since the '60s. Those of us who are older than that (playing in band rooms in the 1950s) all got those viruses (generally as children) - but they are for the most part survivable. Nothing even approaching the death rate for COVID-19. Whooping cough also has been controlled by vaccination since the 1940s in the DPT shots we're supposed to get as infants and then get boosted every ten years. Common cold viruses probably also spread pretty easily even today in an unmasked band room - if you catch a cold you take medicine for symptom relief (or not) and go on with your life.
IMO, COVID-19 is every bit as extraordinary a threat as governments and doctors around the world have been making it, and extraordinary precautions are more necessary until enough of us have been vaccinated or therapeutics have been developed that are reliably effective at keeping victims from dying.
All of that said, I agree 100% with the others who find bell masks ludicrous as a way to prevent COVID spread. If spreading COVID is a concern, the activity is not safe. People have a right to decide on the level of risk they're willing to take, but pretending to minimize the risk with a bell mask on a clarinet is IMHO a delusion. As more of us are vaccinated and effective treatments become more widely available so that the risk of death is marginalized, music performance of all kinds will get back to normal.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2021-05-03 21:00
Karl, thank you for your thoughtful and insightful response.
I had a dear friend die from Covid-19. The disease has been notably more lethal for Native Americans/Canadian First Nations persons versus the general population--and I belong to a First Nation. I'm most assuredly not part of the "It's just the flu" or "It's just a hoax" camps. This is dangerous stuff.
I work in the hospitality field and trying to get guests to wear masks properly, maintain social distancing, and use hand sanitizer appropriately has been a monumental challenge. Despite trying to be a good host and attempting to address situations with tact, diplomacy, and good cheer, I get called every four-letter word and racial slur in the book, and some situations end up going so bad that people end up getting arrested.
This ongoing crisis has brought out the absolute worst in some people.
I am on my absolute last nerve, and have had at least a dozen incidents in the last two months that came perilously close to ending in "Take this job and shove it."
What I said above was an attempt to blow off some steam and, in retrospect, looks a bit flippant considering what's at risk and the gravity of the situation. And I apologize for that.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2021-05-03 21:32
I am truly appalled that you've had those experiences as a hospitality worker trying to get people to take this Pandemic seriously. Appalled, but in the current political and social climate not especially amazed. I hope that the vitriol of the last decade or perhaps 2 eventually tires itself out and that routinely calling anyone a four letter word or racial slur (for any reason) becomes an ugly part of history. Many seem to have taken their "unalienable Rights, [to] Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" to include the right to be cruel.
I'm glad that none of those incidents actually did end up in "Take this job and shove it."
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2021-05-03 21:55
I too am appalled. If someone does not wish to wear a faceguard, then that is their choice, but please stay at home. I believe in them (as a not 100% effective device, but better than nothing) as I believe in the vaccines (again, not 100% effective, but better than almost anything else available).
Do I believe in bell coverings? Well, if that study shows effectiveness (I have not read it) then yes, I'd believe in them. But - whether I believe or not, if a group says they're required to play, then I have a simple decision to make, scientific or not. Either put one on and play with the group, or not put one on and not play with the group. There's really no argument at that level - I may think it's a waste of time and effort to put that bell cover on (as someone in a store thinks a cubreboca is a waste of time) but it's the current mandate. I'd have to argue at a much higher level - and win - to get the bell covering mandate rescinded. I have much better ways to waste my time right now - the ROI is too low.
Not everyone wants a vaccine, and I can understand it. My fiancée is deathly afraid of the vaccine since all her news has come from flawed politicians and WhatsApp. It's hard to convince someone that the vaccine is safe when what they hear is troubling to them. But ... they'll gladly get in the car or walk the crumbling sidewalks here in Cancun where the chance of death is so much higher, from a myriad of different ways.
Heavy sigh. I'll convince her. But she won't be happy.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2021-05-03 22:56
Quote:
I hope that the vitriol of the last decade or perhaps 2 eventually tires itself out and that routinely calling anyone a four letter word or racial slur (for any reason) becomes an ugly part of history. Many seem to have taken their "unalienable Rights, [to] Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" to include the right to be cruel.
Amen to that, Karl.
We're at the point where a substantial portion of the population conducts themselves as if any course of action that won't result in prosecution and conviction must therefore be OK.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fuzzy
Date: 2021-05-03 23:22
I think the idea that we are "guests" and are not entitled to any specific service or product is being lost...whether walking into a store, or wanting to be part of an ensemble. The rules of the host should be strictly followed. The only other option is to abstain. I'm confused by this (somewhat, but-not-totally, new) belief that others should be forced to accommodate "me."
Having said that, I do believe that the conflicting and imprecise data being presented to the populace from the "experts" only exacerbates the issue, and forces folks into one "camp" or another. Where the science is lacking, folks get sucked into a belief system.
My concern with bell covers is: we know that the virus doesn't transfer so much from surfaces as it does via aerosol (at least we think we know this). However, have any studies been performed pertaining to using a cloth to control such aerosols, and then handling that cloth, or storing it and reusing it? Are bell cloths simply changing the transmission method instead of reducing the transmission? The aerosol/bell cover study was very controlled and seems difficult to apply to real-world application due to the incredible number of variables which couldn't be included in the study. Again, to me, it seems this leaves us yet another study into which we might fall into beliefs or camps. Not all things that "make sense" at face value end up panning out when tested or put into practice.
Fuzzy
;^)>>>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2021-05-04 00:38
Quote:
I think the idea that we are "guests" and are not entitled to any specific service or product is being lost...whether walking into a store, or wanting to be part of an ensemble. The rules of the host should be strictly followed. The only other option is to abstain. I'm confused by this (somewhat, but-not-totally, new) belief that others should be forced to accommodate "me."
Anyone in a hosting capacity, if they're a competent, committed professional, will exhaust any and all resources at their disposal to find ways to say "YES!" to their guests as much as possible. It's not just our job--it brings us joy to turn possibilities into realities. We stay up late at night brainstorming on new and better ways to be ideal hosts.
Overnight, our hosting duties now incorporated acting as mask, social distancing, and hand sanitizer compliance officers. In addition to accommodating the needs of guests as we've always done, we're now ceaselessly annoying them in an effort to mitigate a public health crisis.
The host-guest relationship, once a collaborative endeavor, is now adversarial in many cases.
It's a confusing, despicable situation for everyone.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fuzzy
Date: 2021-05-04 01:34
Quote:
Anyone in a hosting capacity, if they're a competent, committed professional, will exhaust any and all resources at their disposal to find ways to say "YES!" to their guests as much as possible. It's not just our job--it brings us joy to turn possibilities into realities. We stay up late at night brainstorming on new and better ways to be ideal hosts.
A good host tries to accomodate the guest any way possible. A good guest tries to avoid burdening the host. ;^)>>>
And...to keep this on-bboard topic - I feel many community bands could be viewed via this same lens of host/guest. I don't have a right to play in any specific band. It is a privilege.
Fuzzy
;^)>>>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2021-05-04 02:17
Fuzzy wrote:
> The aerosol/bell cover study was
> very controlled and seems difficult to apply to real-world
> application due to the incredible number of variables which
> couldn't be included in the study. Again, to me, it seems this
> leaves us yet another study into which we might fall into
> beliefs or camps.
I think we were already in those "camps" about bell covers before this study (which, for anyone who missed it, Philip Caron cited in the other bell-mask-related thread) was published last month. Instead of sending me into a "camp," it simply doesn't convince me that what I already believed is wrong.
In its controlled design, it doesn't test anything that's really relevant to the problem: does playing a clarinet with or without a bell mask broadcast enough aerosols to present a danger to others nearby? A convincing study would have to demonstrate at the least that most of the aerosols produced during clarinet playing come from the bell. The study only shows that bell masks reduce the aerosol flow that does come through the unmasked bell.
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}
