 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2024-06-05 18:14
As a hobbyist woodworker in additional to clarinetist (the latter limited to furniture not instruments), the following, at least to me, seeming contradiction has always confused me.
If I'm cutting a piece of wood, no surprise, whatever tool I use to achieve the cut is apt to be most effective when the other end of the piece being cut is well secured.
Most of us realize this to be the case because the energy from the saw is less transferred into the piece, and more focused on cutting, the less we allow the loose end to vibrate. Many of us have taken saw to wood, and watched the end being cut vibrate in inverse proportion to the effectiveness of the cut, to then better secure the distal end and achieve better cutting results.
Let's assume--maybe incorrectly--that maximizing the ease with which a reed vibrates at the mouthpiece tip is best. Perhaps this isn't, or isn't always the case. Maybe we have a soft reed or closed tip mouthpiece that benefits from methods that somewhat dampen the vibrational properties of the reed tip. Speaking anecdotally I've found that a leather ligature sometimes helps me deal with a softer reed, having convinced myself (maybe incorrectly) that leather provides an inferior hold on the reed base over metal, and that more of the vibrational energy from our breath is transferred away from the reed tip and down to the reed's base with this ligature.
(I normally move a soft reed up a micron on the mouthpiece, not switch ligatures, but point out the above to make a point about attachment methods.)
This said, many a ligature touts its limited contact points with the reed. Why? Would not clamping down the reed's base with all the pressure and contact points possible, short of damaging it or the mouthpiece, by the woodworking principles I've described, allow its tip the greatest vibration for the breath we exert into it?
Am I wrong about the physics, or perhaps in that greatest vibration of the reed tip for our wind energy is a noble goal?
Do we not, again speaking in metaphors, achieve the greatest spring from the swimming pool diving board, all else equal, from the secured and limited play of the diving board's base to the the structures of the diving board assembly that are themselves rigidly attached to the ground, by otherwise well torque bolts that connect the diving board base to this supporting infrastructure?
Perhaps some minimal vibration of the reed's base is a good thing and my assumptions wrong.
TIA
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2024-06-05 19:01
You are exactly right. Your woodworking experience and the diving board illustrates it perfectly. Leather and springs and few contact points are all detrimental while ironically being touted as improvements, "freeing" the whole reed to vibrate. I'm glad you can recognize through empirical evidence that this is nonsense. But most people will never be convinced of this fact, so the cycle of bad ligatures and snake oil continues. The problem is people rely on preconceived notions about how reeds vibrate rather than the physical reality. We all want the reed to be free to vibrate. But most don't understand that allowing the stock to vibrate actually causes the tip, the important part, to NOT vibrate.
So if stretchy, loose ligatures are worse, how can people possibly like them? Part is psychological, part is preference. When you spend a lot on money on something or your idol uses that something, you'll be much more likely to convince yourself you made the right choice. Or you may actually prefer the duller, weaker tone that results from a loose ligature.
It's refreshing to see posts like yours that show an understanding of the actual physics involved.
Post Edited (2024-06-05 19:02)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2024-06-05 19:20
Perhaps you're not a diver? Diving boards are adjustable https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dRmpa9rjGw
If your premise were true then just a single band at the bottom would do. Probably it does, but considering that the reed is damped by your lips, the different ligatures provide some damping in addition. It's a complex system, and remember, the reed is supposed to be transferring energy to the air - possibly not the most efficiently, but in a way that both makes the reed responsive and transmits partials as we want them.
And - who the heck cares how it works, in reality. _If_ it works, for you, it's the mark of a good system - for you. The physics of the coupling of reed to air are beyond me - and I used to do static non-linear analysis codes for General Motors 35 years ago.
You could probably get a doctorate for a thorough paper describing and predicting the energy transfer from air to reed to air (via vibrations provided by the Bernoulli effect) with the multitude of damping factors applied to the reed, mouthpiece, and ligature system. I don't think a single lumped resistance would work. I could be wrong ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2024-06-05 20:00
There is the further complication of the cone shape of the mouthpiece. With all ligatures (particularly metal ligatures) the manufacturer has to make a "guess" about the degree of the curve of that piece of material (I think we've all spread out some ligature of some material and have seen that it is a curved artifact). So how well that matches YOUR mouthpiece (and this is where Vandoren came up with "The Masters" idea to force the unique ligature/mouthpiece combo on everyone) has more to do with how evenly the reed is having pressure applied to the mouthpiece. The Optimum's plate is "floaty" and soft ligatures kinda "mold" to their applications (but still have to be a dedicated curve).
Two things that aided me when the healthiest vibrations were necessary were:
1. Keeping the top contact points of the ligature JUST under the bottom edge of the mouthpiece's window.
You can definitely determine this a lot easier with Legere reeds because you can see through them.
2. Securing the ligature down rather snugly.
I had the greatest success overall with the Optimum which has a comparatively short contact plate (least possible angle deviation) and...........(wait for it)......
.....the Vientos Bambu Nova - WITHOUT the metal plate. I want to emphasize that that is no longer a recommendation but rather what worked for me under the conditions where I had to bend over backwards to get reeds to work well for me.
.............Paul Aviles
Post Edited (2024-06-05 22:02)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2024-06-05 20:29
Mark Charette wrote:
> Perhaps you're not a diver? Diving boards are adjustable
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dRmpa9rjGw
>
I am aware Mark (but thank your for your input) of the ability for diving boards to elongate and short and adjust their fulcrum, to all other things equal increase or reduce their spring. But this feature IMHO (unless I am missing your point) in no way detracts for my point about the physics of, at its base, of a well fastened board being necessary for whatever degree of elasticity is experienced at each of its lengths.
> If your premise were true then just a single band at the bottom
> would do. Probably it does, but considering that the reed is
> damped by your lips, the different ligatures provide some
> damping in addition. It's a complex system, and remember, the
> reed is supposed to be transferring energy to the air -
> possibly not the most efficiently, but in a way that both makes
> the reed responsive and transmits partials as we want them.
I completely respect the above points detracting from my saw and wood metaphor in that the sawed wood's and reed's dampening points differ.
>
> And - who the heck cares how it works, in reality. _If_ it
> works, for you, it's the mark of a good system - for you. The
> physics of the coupling of reed to air are beyond me - and I
> used to do static non-linear analysis codes for General Motors
> 35 years ago.
On the above I respectfully disagree. Understand cause and effect gives us a better handle on control. That is not to say that I'm not pragmatic: content to go with a setup that works, rather than spend my time (a clarinetist's most precious asset) on physics over etude books, especially given the limited improvements ligatures provide to the mix.
>
> You could probably get a doctorate for a thorough paper
> describing and predicting the energy transfer from air to reed
> to air (via vibrations provided by the Bernoulli effect) with
> the multitude of damping factors applied to the reed,
> mouthpiece, and ligature system. I don't think a single lumped
> resistance would work. I could be wrong ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2024-06-05 20:43
Exactly. The stock past the fulcrum should not move. If it does, it's only robbing energy from the tip. The simple 2 screw metal band design hold the reed down firmly not too far from the fulcrum if installed properly. The embouchure does the rest.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2024-06-05 20:46
Yes Paul, at least two somewhat distal contact points (or maybe one thick one) help to prevent reed sway and with the mouthpiece's conical shape, as you point out, these contact points being of differing circumferences stands to reason.
If I was cutting a piece of wood, damping it closest to the cut site would, all else equal, no surprise, facilitate the cut. I can't help but draw analogy to how you advocate for similar dampening just below the mouthpiece window.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Julian ibiza
Date: 2024-06-06 21:35
Hi Secondtry and all.
The way I see the physics you have raised , there are two principal anchor points in play here . One towards the heel to arrest the force as the reed bends towards the MP, and the other behind the window, to conversely arrest the force of the reed's bend away from the MP. The forces trying to lift the reed stock from the table, are switching between these two points at however many Hz the reed is vibrating at. ( It would be quite something if one could see a spark jumping between these two points to represent the transfer of load from one to the other).I would offer these two extreme anchor points as the "principle" anchor points, because they are the points with the greatest mechanical advantage in the matter of holding down the reed.
And that leads me to speculate, that without additional anchoring between these two extreme points, there may occur some slight arching up of the stock from the table between these two points when the reed bends towards the MP, but not when it bends away, as then the force is pushing the stock down on the table.( or so I see it )
I offer these pretty straightforward physics musings, because I imagine that probably within them lie more of the fundamentals behind what makes for a good ligature, than a lot of the mumbo-jumbo with which ligatures are all to frequently marketed.
Ps. when I say "more", I'm rather assuming that that doesn't have to be a whole hell of a lot ....Lol.
Julian Griffiths
Tel. 34 696 798 853
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2024-06-06 22:23
Thank you for that Julian
I'd never considered a differential between which direction the reed is headed in its cycle of movement.
What I have under my belt for experience is that the most commonly used holding plate has two vertical rails that take hold of the reed from somewhere closer to the mouthpiece window and continue down to some degree toward the butt of the stock. These historically work the best (the Bonade configuration for example). Then there are also fairly effective versions of contact at the extremes (of the ligature that is.....some longer than others). I have had good luck with the Vandoren M/O and currently use the "four raised bumps" version of the Vandoren Optimum plate that in effect grips only toward the top and bottom of the plate (which is relatively short).
I can't say for sure if one configuration is better than another since I've used both depending on "era" and situation (reed type and reed strength). But it may help guide my decision to think of the forces divided in that way.
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2024-06-06 22:35
Julian ibiza wrote:
> And that leads me to speculate, that without additional
> anchoring between these two extreme points, there may occur
> some slight arching up of the stock from the table between
> these two points when the reed bends towards the MP, but not
> when it bends away, as then the force is pushing the stock down
> on the table.( or so I see it )
The important points under the stock are across the table just below the window to provide a fulcrum and prevent air from getting under the reed and at the end of the heel to provide stability. Many mouthpiece makers put a "French curve" - a slightly concave shape - into the middle of their facings, or at least they once did. The goal, as I understand it, was (is) to have the ligature pressure in the middle of the stock area press the butt portion slightly into the concave area, giving the vamp over the window a tendency to spring more away from the rails to give a little more life in the tone.
I'm inspired to have a look at my newer mouthpieces to see if any of them have this curve. I've never thought to check.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Julian ibiza
Date: 2024-06-07 00:18
That's interesting about the " French curve" Karl . So does the center of this dip in the table basically correspond to the center of the stock ?
Julian Griffiths
Tel. 34 696 798 853
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mojo
Date: 2024-06-07 17:48
The real reason for the dip in the table is to compensate for manufacturing variation in table flatness. If makers try to make the table flat, some will be flat, convex, and concave to varying degrees, Convex is bad. Concave is not bad. Flat is best if you keep your reeds flat or use synthetics.
To avoid making convex tables, the manufacturing target for table surface is concave. Then, with manufacturing variation, some are a little concave and some are a lot concave.
I think a lot of our ligature observations depend on what kind of reed and table flatness we are using. This could explain the variety of opinions we have on the importance ligatures. I think with a flat table and reed, ligature choice makes little difference. When they are not flat, your ligature contact points and force play off the irregularities in good and bad ways.
MojoMP.com
Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
MojoMouthpieceWork@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2024-06-07 18:42
Mojo wrote:
> The real reason for the dip in the table is to compensate for
> manufacturing variation in table flatness. If makers try to
> make the table flat, some will be flat, convex, and concave to
> varying degrees, Convex is bad. Concave is not bad. Flat is
> best if you keep your reeds flat or use synthetics.
That makes sense, and explains why all of the mouthpieces from my drawer, both new and old, that I looked at yesterday seemed to be slightly concave, contacting the straight edge I was using only just under the bottom of the window and at the the end of the table.
Thanks for the comment.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2024-06-07 21:47
To bring this discussion full circle, at least for me, it's not that some pricier ligatures don't find their owners reporting superior results to cheaper ones that otherwise "do the job" (i.e. reliably hold a reed in place.)
It's that *if* maximum reed vibration is the goal--and it may not be--touting ligature lightness and minimal contact points are IMHO, and by the laws of physics, attributes for which not only a premium price should not be asked, but that are actually attributes that diminish the device's effectiveness and should come at price reduction.
I get that ligatures shouldn't and can't be as heavy as paper weights. I get that some may prefer, say, a leather ligature that doesn't grip a reed as firmly as a metal one, and that some may prefer this setup: perhaps as a compensation for slightly softer reeds or more closed mouthpieces or their own playing nuances.
An analogy: maybe a poor one. If someone tried to sell me on thinner cables to my vehicle's battery, that touch the battery terminals at fewer points, AND, wanted a premium for that design, I'd think, again, by the laws of physics, their ideas not comporting with common sense.
I fully get that the "ligature doesn't maketh the player." My issue is with vendor's products that do an inferior or equal job at price premium, by virtue of features that don't comport with science, and players gullably being lured in.
Post Edited (2024-06-07 21:49)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Julian ibiza
Date: 2024-06-08 00:22
In the classic fairy tale "The Princes and the Pea", the prince would no doubt have gone on to find himself an even better princess, if only he had got the pea gold plated. By "better", I suppose I'd be referring to the quality of moaning, hemophiliacs who suffer from insomnia, with whom to live happily ever after. After the" living happily ever after " detail didn't quite work out for the prince, he discovered that however poor he was at choosing a partner, he had a special gift for marketing ligatures...... And so he eventually DID come to live happily ever after.
And the moral of this story is.....Ummm!....$150.... but $500 with gold plating.
Julian Griffiths
Tel. 34 696 798 853
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
