 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: BarrelOfMonkeys
Date: 2023-03-27 20:25
Hi,
I'm wondering if anyone has tips for sticking with thin reeds and avoiding "outgrowing" them. Classical players tend to "graduate" through increasing thicknesses, and thinner ones are too "buzzy" for them. I don't want to do that, as I want the more flexible playing that jazz, Roma, Turkish folk, and Klezmer people enjoy.
Background: I double lip, and I've heard that favors thinner reeds anyway. But I also plan on doing a lot of single lip, too, now. I also like to play a variety of dark styles, like modern orchestral, Eastern European folk, etc. My mouthpiece is a Vocalise H (big dark sound) with a Rovner Dark ligature. Dark is my thing. No bright Kenny G. crap.
Tom
The Cosmic Pipeazoidist
And people say I monkey around...
Post Edited (2023-04-23 17:50)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-03-27 22:10
I appreciate the fact that you were able to express more ambiguity at toward the end of your last post and then continue with a more detailed issue.
My perspective is that this is a bit trickier.
I had for many years been a dyed in the wool biter. As such it was always (and that may be the case overall for most) much easier moving UP in resistance whether it be with a more open mouthpiece or a harder reed. If you think about it, we adjust up in energy to make the pitch of a note higher but that direction is more work (for classical players) and the adjustments are finer. So I think we like the finer tuning aspect better than the looser, more precarious and flabbier sounding alternative.
More recently I have gone down in the energy spectrum via German mouthpieces (which can be adapted to fit into Boehm barrels). The traditional German approach uses a different kind of lay that is technically longer and more close than anything Boehm ever thought of doing and pair that with 2 1/2 strength German reed. I spent about two years with that........and went back to Boehm much better off. I have now returned to the German mouthpieces and have found that I need to release more energy. I am not sure if I got balled up in the "energy" spiral again or just needed further conditioning.
The best thing I can say about a truly nuanced and relaxed embouchure, is that the pitch across the horn is much more even. There is NO forcing of the top altissimo (of course I'm happy with the high triple C......I can't speak for what comes above that). The low chalumeau B, A and G no longer (for me) need to be lipped down at lower dynamics......another great benefit.
I would think that being cognizant of a truly even timbre and pitch in all registers at all dynamics is the key to remaining happy with a light approach. I stick with single lip but also remain quite light in approach. And probably won't go back to Boehm mouthpieces ever again (on Boehm!!!!).
..................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2023-03-27 22:48
I'm not sure the answer to this question has anything to do with the following facts that I am about to first discuss, but I want to throw them in just as a preamble.
When you refer Tom to thickness and thinness of reeds I am going to interpret these words as your, and other people qualitative response to the resistance they *feel* when playing them, and *not* about the reed's physical measurements.
I say these because within a make and model of reeds, and adjusting for tolerances that at least Vandoren claims to be a thickness of less than a human hair (and industrial diamond reed cutters in need of sharpening, etc.) all reeds of that make and model are cut identically.
Reed strength is something that mother nature, not thicker machining, puts into them.
Now of course different manufacturers use different profiles, even with different models of reeds in their product suite e.g. https://vandoren.fr/en/reeds-technical-elements/ .
It's not uncommon for finished reeds to be subjected to a known force/puff of air (not unlike a tonometer, a.k.a. glaucoma testing machine) to see how much they bend for purposes of determining their strength.
https://youtu.be/XvmfrTsC7GU?t=133
===========
None of this of course answers your question about how to not outgrow a reed's resistance, however that resistance is made. To which I might comment that while a player certainly develops muscle strength and tone over time to be able to clamp down harder and for longer periods, in the same way that a bodybuilder can still pick up light weights, said player can still play light reeds, they just need to control the muscles that enable a mouth to pucker, and deflect some of that strength (IMHO) to the muscles around the mouth that side grip the mouthpiece.
The best embouchures will exert pressure on a mouthpiece more like a rubber band around it than a vice grip (whose levers are closest to the sky and ground. )
As a double lip player I'd guess that to some extent you have a nature mechanism in place that will control how much bite pressure you apply: better known as inner lip pain. But even that can be overcome with calluses and protection devices around the front top and or lower teeth.
Still more, reed strength means little (to me) without also known the attributes of the mouthpiece played on. While that mouthpiece's tip opening is likely the single most determining factor or the range of acceptable strength reeds on which to best play it, the curvature and thickness of the rails, and 15 other attributes, measurable or not will affect ideal reed strength for a player.
I often wonder if the assumption of stronger reeds in players (I've played a closed tip M15 mouthpiece with 3 strength reeds for decades) wasn't so much about their earlier strength reeds failing them, as it was the hope that stronger reeds, and wider tip openings provided some other desired attribute like control, or projection, or I don't know what.
I sometimes consider Stephen Wiliamson of Chicago and Mark Nuccio of Houston, both wonderful players, in different camps regarding resistance. Mr. Nuccio has been quoted as saying to play the lightest reeds that don't compromise your artistry, which is my school of thought. Clarinet play is exhausting enough.
Encouraging students to not bite is IMHO like restricting them in the gym to the lighter dumbbells', where muscle tone, more than size/strength improvements is apt to finding them not wanting to up reed strength as much.
And while I haven't hear Mr. Williamson's thoughts on same, his play seems to, how shall I say, require more energy: energy he clearly has and perhaps benefits him, but more nonetheless.
Certainly, as a player's embouchure properly forms, 2.5 strength reeds on an M13 mouthpiece are unlikely to suit them (your "buzz" reference, to which I'll add color, pitch, projection, and shape of sound.) But once a player's embouchure properly forms and can take on more resistance, it may need not to.
This is one of those questions I'd love to hear what others like Paul Aviles or Karl have to say about the subject. I clearly don't have all the answers and I'm pretty sure that one size doesn't fit all.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2023-03-27 23:38
Reed strength is just a number. You play the reeds that work for you. It doesn't matter what the number says. Why would you purposely stifle your development in order to keep some number from changing? That doesn't make any sense to me.
Also, as Sunny said, all reeds of a given brand/model are the same thickness and are all cut to exactly the same dimensions on the same machine(s). The number is a measure of stiffness. There is no reason to go out of your way to avoid playing stiffer reeds if that's what gives you the best tone for the amount of effort you're capable of putting in.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2023-03-27 23:48
SecondTry wrote:
> Encouraging students to not bite is IMHO like restricting them
> in the gym to the lighter dumbbells', where muscle tone, more
> than size/strength improvements is apt to finding them not
> wanting to up reed strength as much.
>
I'm having trouble following this paragraph.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BarrelOfMonkeys
Date: 2023-03-27 23:52
Paul and SecondTry: Are you both implying that a relaxed embouchure is the key to sticking with lower strength reeds? I plan on going relaxed with both single and double lip.
Tom
The Cosmic Pipeazoidist
And people say I monkey around...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2023-03-28 00:01
lydian wrote:
> Also, as Sunny said, all reeds of a given brand/model are the
> same thickness and are all cut to exactly the same dimensions
> on the same machine(s).
Oh, if this were true...! It *is* the intent, but for whatever reason I rarely find two reeds in a box that have exactly the same dimensions (to the extent I can measure them).
> The number is a measure of stiffness.
So, open a 2 boxes of reeds, one a half strength higher than the other (e.g. #3 and #3.5) of the same brand and model. The likelihood is some in the box of 3.5s will feel easier to blow - softer - than some in the box of 3s and vice-versa. My assumption has always been that even current state-of-the-art reed cutting equipment is just not precise enough and cane is not stable enough to provide much more consistency that they do.
That said, there has been improvement. The consistency of today's reeds within same brand and model is far greater than it was when I was a student 50 or 60 years ago.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2023-03-28 00:53
Hi Karl:
When I wrote
"Encouraging students to not bite is IMHO like restricting them in the gym to the lighter dumbbells', where muscle tone, more than size/strength improvements is apt to finding them not wanting to up reed strength as much"
I meant this: Resistance training with weights in a gym works the muscles of our body no differently than our forming an embouchure over hours of practice will strengthen the muscles of our mouth and face to have the endurance to maintain that position for longer periods. Restricting the athlete to lower weights and more repetition/form, like discouraging biting in the clarinet player, finds both subjects less likely, I think, to need/desire greater levels of resistance for the same number of repetitions in the gym, or by analogy, hours behind the music stand.
Hi Lydian
IMHO the strength numbers on (cane) reeds are not binary. They're not IMHO to be taken as gospel (although more so for synthetics like Legere where mother nature's variety can in large part be overcome through manufacturing and quality control) anymore than they are to be ignored. There is wide variation with a strength labeling, as the factory resistance methods are perhaps only slightly better than no test at all, flexing a reed under dry conditions that very well may not reflect their strength once wet. Then of course there's the even wider difference between brands.
With rare exception, cane reeds to me are something one buys slightly more resistant than comfortable (yes, using a somewhat unreliable strength number,) and then sands down slightly to strength and bilateral symmetry in how a reed plays, not in its physical measurements.
I completely get your thoughts on not being bogged down by a number like my mom was on her dress size, which, by analogy, varied not only among manufacturers (Vandoren, Brad Behn, etc.) but even among the same designer's fashion lines (V12, Rue Lepic, etc.) But once we find that "size 14 pants" tend to fit us with the least alternations from designer "X," we tend not to spend our precious time looking at their "size 17" line, right?
The "number" is more efficient IMHO than a wild guess as a starting point to spending the least amount of time making acceptable reeds, and the most amount getting more proficient while playing them.
Hi Tom
"Are you...implying that a relaxed embouchure is the key to sticking with lower strength reeds? I plan on going relaxed with both single and double lip."
I think you're getting "warm" but where your interpretation of my intentions may be lacking is a gap that may be worthy of attention.
Clearly, the following is nuance. But I would retort that an embouchure where there is no biting, and pressure on the mouthpiece from all directions, where pitch, color, and shape of sound can be maintained with a decent reed for some duration is the goal, and that clamping or relaxation may represent extremes that result in suboptimal playing. Take in mouthpiece until you squeak. Then back off a micron: that's your sweet spot IMHO.
This stuff is so nuanced and one of the reasons having a teacher visualize play so important IMHO. My wife's firm handshake is looser I suspect than Arnold Schwarzenegger's notion of a relaxed grip. 
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2023-03-28 06:31
@Second Try
I'm well aware. In my 40+ years on various woodwinds, I've been through thousands of reeds, occasionally finding a good one. I would gladly pay more for more precise strength measurement. Some reeds simply can't be saved by my pocket knife.
@kdk
No natural product will ever be perfect. My intent was to correct the OP's false assumption that reeds are cut to different thicknesses for different strengths. The machine cuts them all identically.
In any case, I've never let the reed take charge. I'm always in charge. The moment a reed thinks it's in charge, it goes under the knife or in the garbage. I certainly wouldn't change the way I play because of a number on a box.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: hans
Date: 2023-03-28 10:42
Tom,
Reur: "No bright Kenny G. crap" - FYI, Kenny G is not a clarinet player.
Many sax players don't consider him to be much of a sax player either and some of us wish he would stick to playing golf or flying his airplane instead, so that we could ride in elevators without pain.
Regards,
Hans
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2023-03-28 18:59
lydian wrote:
> @Second Try
>
> I'm well aware.
OK, but your prior thoughts might have suggested otherwise. You wrote that reed strength is just a number. It's IMHO not. Most I think would agree.
Now, there are different ways of taking your thought---one of which is to not get bogged down by the strength numbers--which I agree with.
But another is to imply that the strength number is arbitrary and worthy of being ignored. That's an extreme I disagree with. It may not be terribly accurate but I do believe it better than nothing. I think most players will find the most strength appropriate reeds, even if those reeds require adjustment, by sticking with a manufacturer's strength that they've found the most historically amenable to their play, than accepting a desired manufacturer's arbitrary strength box.
I completely respect that this may not be your finding. In fact only once (so this is an anecdote and proof of nothing) I started with a box of Vandoren 5's (much stronger than my "3") figuring "I sand down reeds anyway so what matter is it how much stronger a reed is out of the box than my taste."
I found myself sanding the reeds to such thinness to get them to my strength likeability that they were fragilely thin.
If I may, I'd like to recommend that you try Tom Ridenour's ATG system of reed adjustment. Maybe you have. For me, YMMV, no system of reed adjustment has given me as many good playable reeds.
I do completely agree with you though that if a player requires stronger reeds over time, there's nothing wrong about that provided that a softer setup would compromise their artistry.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fuzzy
Date: 2023-03-29 00:53
BarrelOfMonkeys,
There seems to be a recurring theme to your recent posts, and I believe Brycon covered the solutions in the double-lip/single-lip post.
1. You're returning to clarinet after a 30-year break (welcome back!)...and you're looking for a quick way to excel.
2. You want a discussion about double lip vs single lip pros/cons...but not one that applies to you, as you're rock solid on double-lip...but you realized you still want to play single lip too.
3. You want basic info about reed strength so that you can play all styles without outgrowing the reed's strength.
To me, all these questions answer themselves in the practice room. At least answer themselves better than any info you'll receive from other people who aren't you.
A few points of clarification:
Double lip is not greater than single lip.
Hard reeds are not better than soft reeds.
Reed strength has little effect on style.
Welcome back to the world of clarinet. Have fun in that practice room! As an adult returning to the clarinet, the more you (re)discover for yourself, the more you'll get out of it, and the deeper your understanding will probably be.
Fuzzy
;^)>>>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-03-29 14:30
I think though this did bring up an interesting point.
We DO tend to more open, and/or stronger reeds when we adapt to something new. That direction is "easier."
When was the last time you went to a more closed mouthpiece (and same reed strength)?
The jaw muscles are large and strong. It is easy to confuse them with better embouchure practice.
What's the problem with "moving up" in resistance? It can be a downward spiral that leads to less control of timbre as well as pitch.
Some years ago Brad Behn observed me as I tried out a few of his mouthpieces. He said that I was squeezing down on the reed and actually making the mouthpiece a smaller opening than its design. He suggested that I start off with a smaller tip opening and a softer reed. This seemed radical to me at the time, but he was right. It took me quite a bit of work to get DOWN to a more subtle set up.
Ask yourself if you have to "bite more" for high altissimo notes. Ask yourself if your low A (second ledger line below the staff) has to lipped DOWN a lot at a soft dynamic. Those are indicators that you are using too much force in your embouchure.
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2023-03-29 14:56
@SecondTry
I didn’t intend to imply the number is arbitrary. Only that it should not dictate how you play. If you were to take several reeds of various strengths and mix them up. You should pick whichever on plays the best, not whichever one has a specific number stamped on it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2023-03-29 21:34
Paul Aviles wrote:
>
> The jaw muscles are large and strong. It is easy to confuse
> them with better embouchure practice.
I agree. And the reason I agree--which may or may not vary from your take Paul--is that an embouchure is more like a rubber band, not a vice grip. Restated, pressure on the mouthpiece needs to come from all sides, and in fact when it does, I feel there's less propensity for the player to go into "vice grip" mode where jaw strength is mostly at play. (My $0.02)
>
>
> Some years ago Brad Behn observed me as I tried out a few of
> his mouthpieces. He said that I was squeezing down on the reed
> and actually making the mouthpiece a smaller opening than its
> design. He suggested that I start off with a smaller tip
> opening and a softer reed. This seemed radical to me at the
> time, but he was right. It took me quite a bit of work to get
> DOWN to a more subtle set up.
Don't feel bad Paul. Some of the best players have also come to this realization as well
https://youtu.be/10LxbdRJ-UQ?t=37
lydian wrote:
> @SecondTry
>
> I didn’t intend to imply the number is arbitrary. Only that
> it should not dictate how you play. If you were to take several
> reeds of various strengths and mix them up. You should pick
> whichever on plays the best, not whichever one has a specific
> number stamped on it.
I agree with the following caveat. I think it was Russianoff who said that "time is your most precious asset," which I agree with. And that by corollary the faster you find playable reeds the more time can be spent on meaningful practice...
(...although finding playable reeds is in part IMHO about refining them with wood removal techniques that are themselves worthy of practice and proficiency)
..and that since the reed's strength number is better than arbitrary, if I "were to take several reeds of various strengths and mix them up" you'd find me looking at the strength number and trying those reeds first most consistent with strengths that have historically worked for me on that make and model reed, simply because I believe the laws of large sample sizes would find the most suitable reeds for me faster this way than trying those reeds without such intelligence on the manufacturer's strength number.
That said, I couldn't agree more than once played, that strength number could read "-22/7" for all I care. It's just a starting point whose bottom line is finding cane "that's comfortable to walk in and not about shoe size."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2023-03-30 02:07
@SecondTry
I hear you. At the moment I regularly play at least 5 different reed instruments in 5 different bands, 4 of which have 2 hour rehearsals every week. This, on top of a full time job and practice at home doesn't leave much time to mess with reeds. I can usually find a nice playing reed within about 30 seconds, auditioning about 4 at a time. Once chosen, that reed lasts me about 6 weeks. Obviously I use the strength on the box as a starting point, knowing that Vandoren runs harder than Rigotti which runs softer than Rico, etc, etc.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BarrelOfMonkeys
Date: 2023-04-23 17:09
I did just "graduate" from a Legere 2.5 to a 2.75. Intonation problems with low d and d sharp disappeared, and the upper registers are much smoother. Throat tones a and b flat sound so much richer. A welcome upgrade, especially since 2.5's don't seem to have great lifespans for the price.
Tom
The Cosmic Pipeazoidist
And people say I monkey around...
Post Edited (2023-04-23 17:15)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
