 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Mike Hancock
Date: 2001-08-05 19:50
Previous threads have mentioned the concept of "resistance" in comparing the playing attributes of one clarinet in comparison to another. I gather that: 1) there is a difference in "resistance" in going from student level to professional level instruments, 2) mouthpiece design and/or barrel design can result in differences in "resistance" with the same instrument. With this in mind, I would like to know how to detect "resistance" (for instance, is this the same as the difficulty I can feel due to a leaky pad)? Also, is "resistance" generally desireable or undesireable as a characteristice for a particular clarinet?
Thanks,
Mike Hancock
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Daniel
Date: 2001-08-06 01:20
There is a bit of controversy over this quality. Just as there is about tone ("dark", "bright", etc.).
Resistance, or as some people call it, "stuffiness", is a sense of back-pressure when you're blowing into the horn. I find that many profession orchestral players like resistance. While many soloists commercial players prefer more "free-blowing" instruments.
Resistance can be changed by different mouthpieces as well as different barrels.
As to what causes the feeling of resistance and why some people like more or less, i can't help you there.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 2001-08-06 01:40
By my actual experiences of owning RC,RC-Prestige, 10G, and 10SII,
10SII is the most registant, others are freer blowing. This may come from the fact 10SII's bore is less than those of others(=o.574"). I never played R-13s but somewhere I read Harold Wright's R-13(modified by Hans Moennig) was very free blowing. I also noticed Selmer C85-115 makes Buffet RC, RC Prestige, and 10G much more registant than with Vandorens, whereas it does not 10SII. Sherman's corner is informative on this matter: he uses Selmer Recital, which has smaller bore even than 10SII, only matches with a Selmer mouthpiece suitable for smaller bores. This registance by mouthpieces may come from the gap between mouthpiece and barrel at the connection. But if they are reamed, this does not seem to give resistance. As informed in J&D Hite site, Moennig barrels bore at the top end is bigger than the bottom.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2001-08-06 01:57
I wish someone else had tackled this first. I hate sticking my neck out in an area that is talked around often but seldom addressed. And by the way, I hope you like worms, because I fear this could open up a whole can of them.
I believe you are right about the horn, the barrel, and the mp all working together to define the resistance of the unit. For many of us, some degree of resistance is useful because it serves to moderate the extremes of tone and intonation that might otherwise exist. Think of pushing against an object that offers resistance to movement. You increase your effort until you can move the object, and its fairly easy to control the rate and direction of movement. Now make the object a bowling ball and the surface a bowling alley. With little resistance, the slightest movement sends the ball down the lane and its gone before you know it . . . and not always where you wanted it to go.
I know the analogy has some holes (that's why it's an analogy and not a homology.) But very free-blowing rigs like a Leblanc Pete Fountain (huge bore) with a Vandoren 5JB mouthpiece (wide open) can sound amazing in the hands of an artist that can control the rig and still achieve the extremes of tone that the rig allows. In my hands, it sounds inconsistent and usually out of tune because I don't have the expertise to adequately control it. I need some resistance to moderate the outcome. But I dislike too much resistance, because I don't do classical very often . . . most of the arrangements I play have a swing/big band sound and I want to have a little fun with them.
Resistance is not related to student vs pro horn, though most modern beginner horns shy away from big bores because the students can't control them.
OK, that's my read on this. Let the pot shots begin . . . but one at a time, taking a number and waiting patiently in single file. I'll go get a snack . . .
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2001-08-06 01:59
Wordiness has its benefits . . . I wasn't first after all !
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2001-08-06 02:24
Well said both Hiroshi and Fred. I has a [lengthy] post nearly made up, when !@#$% AOL knocked me off ! So I'll just say here that YES I agree that bore size and "mismatch" via mp and barrel being slightly diff. [generating air-flow turbulence??] might cause the resistance variations we notice. Hiroshi [and now I] suggest consulting expert analysis, such as Benade's articles/books and Gibson's booklet. I'll look in my copies of "Horns, Strings and Harmony" and "Musical Acoustics" and hope to improve my understanding. Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: willie
Date: 2001-08-06 04:52
I don't really understand why a symphony player would desire a stuffy horn. I myself like a horn that blows fairly easy. Some of the best sounding clarinets I've ever tried were very easy, but unfortunately, not mine.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-08-06 05:41
Willie,
If a few notes are "stuffy" it's one thing, but if the clarinet exhibits an even resistance it can be easier to play. You use less air for equivalent volume and there can be easier control and flexibility.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2001-08-06 13:54
I like the above explanations.
There is a difference between 'resistance', where some effort is required to get the awesome best out of the instrument, and 'stuffiness' where the insturment has severe and disappointing limits... i.e. there is NO awesome best available, no matter how much effort the player makes.
Note that stuffiness in individual notes can often be corrected by improvements to venting for those notes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2001-08-06 14:47
Thanx, Gordon, Willie, Mark for your comments. I've been thinking about this ?, and yes, I try to cure individual notes, the B nat./F#, pinch Bb, Mid-staff D and the C#/G# which seem to be the worst, usually by venting and/or pads, but a completely-stuffy cl is something else. This whole thing reminds me of the story of the 3 blind men describing an elephant, if you dont know it, I'll add it to the thread, its clean, Mark!! Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Allen Cole
Date: 2001-08-08 05:39
When you really think about it, we synthesize resistance even in free-blowing horns via breath support. Instead of pushing against the instrument itself, we simply push against the diaphragm.
By adding that extra resistance from breath support, we smooth out the differences in resistance between different notes on the clarinet, and make it more responsive.
Does this make sense?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2001-08-08 11:42
No.
No matter what the situation, the pressure on the diaghragm = the pressure on the mouth lining, the tongue surface, the soft palate, the oesophagus, the lung lining, and the 'resistance' offered by the reed/lay/embouchure/etc combination.
The concept of a clarinet having more 'resistance' probably means none other than that all the above mentioned pressures can be increased , hence the reed/lay/embouchure/etc cobo can be modified, to result in a different set of overtones effective in the sound which slightly alters the tone.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
