 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2025-01-18 12:08
I found the article below while looking for information on embouchure formation.
This is the best comprehensive guide I have yet to find.
I would appreciate it if you would read it through and comment on its correctness or on anything that doesn't seem quite right to you.
Thanks. (Hopefully it'll wind up in the favorites.)
https://woodwindintonation.weebly.com/clarinet.html
Post Edited (2025-01-18 13:13)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2025-01-18 14:48
Straightaway note that first line E isn’t sharp on my instruments but tends to flatness. The twelfth is wide, so a sharp B in the upper register arises where the E below is in tune. You wouldn’t tune both sharp. No point.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2025-01-18 17:08
Hi graham. Actually, the guide first lists 1st-line E (E4) under "Slightly Sharp", and later says it "tends to be flat."
It's a good guide but may not apply in every particular to any specific clarinet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: symphony1010
Date: 2025-01-18 17:50
No quite sure where to start with this but just to say it's very generalised and a lot is missing. I'm not sure the person writing it is an expert as they suggest that top F MIGHT need the Eb key whereas all the instruments I know, except wide-bore 1010s or Peter Eaton Elites most certainly need it. No mention of long top F.
Adding all RH fingers to middle G could be 'interesting' and as for the embouchure advice!
There is no substitute for a decent teacher to guide on all this as there's no size fits all solution. A lot of people would love to wrap things up with this sort of guidance but even the best guidance would be a mere starting point. I wouldn't be recommending this page to my own students.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mojo
Date: 2025-01-18 18:55
Missing the wide twelves for low E-F to B-C is a big omission. Not much help suggested if you are flat. Get a shorter barrel in case you need it. Use some tuning rings at the joints you always need to pull out.
MojoMP.com
Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
MojoMouthpieceWork@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2025-01-18 19:21
Dan Shusta wrote:
> I would appreciate it if you would read it through and comment
> on its correctness or on anything that doesn't seem quite right
> to you.
>
symphony1010 wrote:
> There is no substitute for a decent teacher to guide on all
> this as there's no size fits all solution. A lot of people
> would love to wrap things up with this sort of guidance but
> even the best guidance would be a mere starting point.
There is also no substitute for listening and reacting to what's actually coming from your instrument when *you* play it.
I've never been a fan of pulling out at the middle joint. If the tenon isn't in good condition - if it has even a slight bit of movement because of rounded edges or a loose fitting cork, it can become unstable. Besides, moving the bridge keys apart can change the leverage there and leave your 1+1 and 1+2 fingerings unreliable.
If you pull the bell out to bring down a sharp C5, B4, which in orchestral playing is the general tuning note (concert A4) given by the oboe, will be affected as well. But the B may need tuning at the bell that's slightly different from the C.
FWIW, there's no mention of the tendency on most Boehm clarinets to be slightly flat on low E(3) and F(3).
Among the alternate fingerings, adding right hand fingers to "high B" (B5) on any clarinet I've played will indeed flatten it - to a Bb.
Likewise, I've never had success using all three RH fingers to flatten high C(6). A fingering that does work on my clarinets is T/RK OXX G#/Ab | OOO. But this is instrument-specific - ymmv. It depends on how sharp the standard fingering is. For example, I need to use it more often on my A clarinet, which has sharper B5 and C6 than does my Bb clarinet.
Altissimo fingerings tend to vary with the mouthpiece and reed, never mind the instrument. Also, the intonation is context-dependent. There are any number of ways to shade those notes for a specific situation. Using the RH sliver key (as shown) is one but not the only way.
One other observation I'd make is about the throat notes. My understanding has always been that, rather than their being "naturally sharp" as the chart suggests, they are traditionally (deliberately) tuned slightly sharp to allow for resonance fingerings, which tend to flatten them. The tendency for them to sound thin is a function of their very short tube length. Being able to add fingers to increase resonating space for those notes without driving them uselessly flat has, in my understanding, been considered a benefit of those notes' slightly sharp tuning.
You *can* bring those notes down by adding something in the top of their tone holes (tape, shellac, etc.) to make the hole smaller and slightly lower in the bore (especially G, G# and A, which don't have standard 12th fingerings to deal with). You may improve their tuning in this way, but not their tone quality, which will still be what the manufacturer has managed to give them.
Karl
Post Edited (2025-01-18 22:25)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2025-01-18 22:07
I agree that there will be some specific issues from horn to horn but I do like the idea that there are some generalities that are good to know.
The biggest generality is one that really only just occurred to me. The use of "vent" or "resonance" fingerings is two fold. In the chalumeau the main reason for using "extra" fingers is to gain more resonance.....at the expense of intonation (that is, one must be conscious of the pitch difference and compensate for it, OR abandon the resonance due to untenable tuning problems). In the clarion and above, the reason for "extra" or alternate fingerings is mostly for intonation with the resonance being a secondary issue.
There is a video of Montanaro at a clinic playing an excerpt where he mentions that it would not be nearly as effective without alternate fingerings. Though he was not clear as to whether the concern for him was pitch, resonance or both.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2025-01-18 23:45
My thanks to all of you who have commented.
There are so many things to write about...how about I take one item at a time?
The Embouchure Formation Yes, symphony1010, I cringed when I read about forming a "Q" with the upper lip. I believe it was Paul Aviles who mentioned about pulling the outer lips downward. Also, I have seen a picture of Lee Livengood while playing and his outer lips, imo, were really pulled downward. (I have tried to imitate this with little luck.) It appears to me that the only portion of embouchure formations that is exactly the same in all of the explanations is to keep the lower lip firmly flat.
symphony1010 also wrote: "There is no substitute for a decent teacher to guide on all this as there's no size fits all solution." Now, with all due respect, how do you know that you have "a decent teacher"? Let's say you've found 5 decent teachers, are they all going to teach the exact same thing for the same student? For example: the same embouchure formation technique? My gut tells me there are going to be instructional differences for the same student. So...again...who is right? And, how is a student to know that they are being taught the correct embouchure formation?
Here's a short YouTube video by John Kurokawa concerning this topic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYR0qsQkj64
I have counted over 100 videos on clarinet embouchure formation. So...who is right? Are they all basically saying the same thing? I don't think so.
p.s. Something tells me this is going to be a long and interesting thread.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RBlack
Date: 2025-01-19 02:02
Definitely read Clark Fobes writings on intonation, on his website. Well worth the time if you want to understand how the clarinet works, though they are pretty dense.
https://www.clarkwfobes.com/pages/intonation
https://www.clarkwfobes.com/pages/tuning-and-voicing-the-clarinet
Post Edited (2025-01-19 04:13)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2025-01-19 02:39
BBlack, Thank you for your informative reply.
Looks like my imagined long thread is quickly coming to a end.
One last question: Has Tom Ridenour basically ended the intonation problems inherent in all other clarinets? I've seen the video of him, blind folded and blowing notes from the bottom to the top on his Libertas(?) clarinet while I looked at the tuner on the screen. Very, very seldom was a slight variation in pitch noted. I found that to be quite impressive.
However, because Tom Ridenour graduated from Yale with a Masters in Clarinet Performance with honors, I wouldn't be surprised if he has a perfect pitch hearing capability and may have unconsciously adjusted his embouchure to bring it into pitch. I don't know. I honestly don't know.
What do you think? Has Tom resolved the inherent tuning problems found in other clarinets?
p.s. This short thread has influenced me in having a closer look at Ridenour clarinets.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2025-01-19 04:17
Quote:
I would appreciate it if you would read it through and comment on its correctness or on anything that doesn't seem quite right to you.
I just skimmed the article. But I noticed the portion "How to Adjust Pitch While Playing Clarinet" has some stuff that is now out of the mainstream. I don't think anyone now would suggest, for instance, to "increase embouchure tension" and change the vowel sound to raise the pitch.
You can do a little bit to lower the pitch with the embouchure. Altering the embouchure and the voicing, however, affects the tone color. So although you can do a little manipulation in terms of lowering the pitch, the primary tools are alternate fingerings, including shading tone holes; blowing differently into the clarinet, such as doing a dim. for that low F near the beginning of Mozart; and pushing in/pulling out in a particular way for a particular bit of music.
Quote:
What do you think? Has Tom resolved the inherent tuning problems found in other clarinets?
I've never played one of those instruments. Telling people you've created a perfectly in-tune clarinet as a sales pitch, though, is laughable.
But even if there were a clarinet that played perfectly in tune for every player, at every dynamic, with every mouthpiece/reed, etc. like a well-tuned piano, you'd then get into an ensemble and need to play sharp or flat to match your colleagues.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2025-01-19 05:21
brycon,
Thank you for your detailed response. Much appreciated.
"Telling people you've created a perfectly in-tune clarinet as a sales pitch, though, is laughable." I'm not sure how to respond. Are you saying that Tom is lying?
Have you ever tried playing one of his Libertas? How can you be so sure?
"But even if there were a clarinet that played perfectly in tune for every player, at every dynamic, with every mouthpiece/reed, etc. like a well-tuned piano, you'd then get into an ensemble and need to play sharp or flat to match your colleagues." Isn't that why they make adjustable barrels?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: symphony1010
Date: 2025-01-19 13:20
The language of embouchure and tuning is very difficult. Conceptualising what is required is why we look to teachers. I can hear poor embouchure and incorrect articulation and gently help the student adjust. It's often necessary to look at the reed/mouthpiece setup at the same time so that everything is working together. I don't think I could easily write this down as has been attempted here.
Every case is different.
I do see some playing philosophies which I find it very difficult to align with. There are still many national differences in approach. For example, many of us in the UK are a world away from the short lay, hard reed, locked embouchure that still seems to be current amongst some players in the US. Just can't go there! It's not the kind of noise I want to make!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2025-01-19 21:19
Quote:
I'm not sure how to respond. Are you saying that Tom is lying?
Have you ever tried playing one of his Libertas? How can you be so sure?
I don't know: lying is a matter of intent. Tom Ridenour might really believe his clarinet is perfectly in tune. But a clarinet can't be perfectly in tune; they aren't pianos (which I guess can't be perfectly in tune either!).
I looked up the video you referenced. It's Tom playing mezzo forte on some isolated pitches on his clarinet. As soon as you, who has a different oral cavity, tongue position, way of blowing, embouchure set up, preferred mouthpiece and reed, etc. play his instrument, it's going to tune differently. Again, clarinets aren't like pianos: the player does a lot of the tuning.
(And even if you and Tom had the exact same bodies, played clarinet the exact same way, used all the same equipment, etc., as soon as you perform a crescendo, the pitch goes flat and you have to compensate somehow.)
Kind of an illustrative example that came to mind: One of my colleagues was playing a well-known boutique brand of clarinet in his orchestra. This brand claimed to have "fixed" the sharpness of the throat tones and left hand. My friend ended up changing clarinet brands, however, because he needed the option of being sharp. Although those notes of the clarinet were "in tune," in his orchestra (a very good, full time ensemble), he often felt below the pitch.
Quote:
Isn't that why they make adjustable barrels?
Playing in ensembles is much more dynamic than just pulling out/pushing in and/or setting your adjustable barrel. You're rapidly making minute changes based on chord member, balance, blend with other instruments (and their tuning tendencies), range and so on.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lmliberson
Date: 2025-01-19 22:10
I was just about to respond to Dan’s post but brycon basically laid down a pretty complete laundry list why the “perfectly” in-tune instrument doesn’t really exist. I wholeheartedly endorse the concept that it’s not instruments that play in tune but rather the players that learn to play instruments in tune (or not, which is most often the case!).
Regarding adjustable barrels - if you like them and they work for you, go ahead and use them. However, in all my years (and they are many!), I have yet to work with a player who uses them. My reference is using (or not, as the case is) an adjustable barrel in a setting with experienced professionals, fyi.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2025-01-19 23:16
To symphony1010 and brycon:
Many thanks for the valuable information both of you have revealed. Hopefully, I'm not the only one who is learning a lot.
To both of you and others: I try very hard not to put anyone on the spot. I've had that done to me and I must admit it didn't make me feel good. I believe that all of us are here to simply have discussions and reveal our personal opinions.
smyphony1010, when you wrote: "The language of embouchure and tuning is very difficult. Conceptualizing what is required is why we look to teachers", the first thing (again) that came to my mind was: how in the world does a student know they have a good, highly qualified, thoroughly experienced teacher? In my early 30's (around 45 years ago), I purposely went to a "clarinet teacher" simply to have him check my embouchure. I was using the same, wide grin embouchure I was taught by a music store teacher when I was 14, and he pronounced it "good". So, I continued to play with that embouchure style. Interesting...two highly unqualified teachers in a row! Unfortunately, I believe that that style of embouchure eventually lead me to develop embouchure dystonia. So, may I change your initial sentence from "The language of embouchure and tuning is very difficult. Conceptualizing what is required is why we look to teachers" to "The language of embouchure and tuning is very difficult. Conceptualizing what is required is why we look to very competent, highly trained, and thoroughly experienced teachers who also happen to play in symphonies or teach at the university level". To me, this type of teacher doesn't teach music store, multiple instruments, i.e., clarinet, sax, trumpet, trombone, etc.
To brycon: I read what you wrote with a more than my usual high level of interest. What I interpreted is something like...a certain clarinet in its entirety may play very well "in tune" for one person and play quite "out of tune" for another when they use their favorite mouthpiece and reed setup because it's not just the change in their mpc/reed setup, but also a change in the oral cavity involved. So, it appears that the complete clarinet needs to match the oral cavity of the player to obtain the highest level of "in tune" capability. All of this makes me feel that the complexities involved are far more than quite extensive.
So, (and this is not any kind of put down) Tom's Libertas may play perfectly in tune "for him" but may not (or rarely) for anyone else. That is something that has never occurred to me before.
Now, revisiting the teacher subject, to me, all of this boils down to economics. A parent may, indeed, find an extremely qualified teacher for their child, but, (I may be wrong here) the higher the expertise, the higher the fees involved, imho. So, the financially well-off can certainly hire university professors or symphony players and supply their child with the finest of equipment, however, there are probably more in the other financial direction that simply cannot afford to do this. From my personal point of view, this certainly is a very sad, but true reality.
Just my opinions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2025-01-20 03:36
Before putting this to bed (I skimmed some of the above), I just wanted to throw out some resonant finger ideas. The open G is the first note from the bottom that can benefit from some fingers down. I found on one clarinet that adding 1 and 2 of the right hand made a great difference adding more "gusto" to the sound. On another clarinet it actually made the open G a bit muddier. From there though those two extra fingers (not all three mind you) can also help G# and A. You can also use 2 and 3 of the left AND 1, 2, and 3 of the right for the Bb (rather than the 3 and 3 plus C key......which is probably best).
Keep in mind ANY venting or tuning extra fingers are best if they only involve the tone holes because then they can be used virtually in any situation going to, or coming from any other note. And again, you must balance the flattening and your ability to compensate for that with the need for more "punch" to the sound.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2025-01-20 05:58
Quote:
What I interpreted is something like...a certain clarinet in its entirety may play very well "in tune" for one person and play quite "out of tune" for another when they use their favorite mouthpiece and reed setup because it's not just the change in their mpc/reed setup, but also a change in the oral cavity involved. So, it appears that the complete clarinet needs to match the oral cavity of the player to obtain the highest level of "in tune" capability. All of this makes me feel that the complexities involved are far more than quite extensive.
More like: A clarinet can play very well in tune for a particular person playing only isolated pitches and mezzo forte. Once you're out of the laboratory environment, playing real music with dynamics, expression, and other players, things aren't going to be so "in tune."
Having said that, I've sat down with my repair tech, played with a tuner, and had him adjust key heights--and do whatever other proprietary magic he does--so that my clarinet plays very well in tune with itself when I'm playing. Then, it just took ten years of daily practice with drones on a tuner so that when I crescendo or decrescendo, play piano or forte, start a phrase or end a phrase, etc., I maintain the pitch. Haha!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2025-01-20 11:57
brycon,
Thank you for your comments above. They certainly opened my eyes as to how careful a professional player has to be to play "in tune" during actual performances.
At first, I couldn't understand what you were saying about a "few isolated notes" being played by Tom Ridenour. I searched through YouTube and finally found the video that you were referring to. Yes, there were isolated notes played without resonance fingering which may have been selected ahead of time for this particular video because they were "in tune". The video I was referring to showed Tom, blind folded and playing all the notes from the bottom to the top. Next to him was a tuner. For some unknown reason, after what I would call an extensive search, I couldn't find that video. It appears that that particular video has been removed and replaced by the one with the few isolated notes. In the blind folded video, Tom's fingers were not shown. This makes me now think that he may have been using resonance fingering all along. This, of course, leads me to believe that Tom has certainly not created a perfectly "in tune" clarinet, i.e., one not needing resonance fingering. I feel a lot worse than just a "little bit let down". I now believe that the Ridenour Libertas clarinet, tuning wise, is exactly the same as all other professional clarinets and by that I mean a player needs to use resonance fingerings in order to play "in tune".
I don't now...maybe I simply mislead myself or completely misunderstood what was actually going on. However, due to the fact that we were actually writing about two completely different videos, I feel the need to apologize to you for some of the things that I wrote. You were right and I was wrong. There is no such thing as a clarinet that needs no resonance fingerings.
Mea culpa.
All of the above are simply my opinions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2025-01-20 16:05
I had a clarinet once that had been tuned/customised by a very well known US craftsman, and owned (and played) by a very famous player. I had to make a few changes for my own peculiarities, but it pretty much..... played in tune.
Great.
I was playing a clarinet concerto by John Ritchie as part of the Clarinetfest 2006 in Atlanta. At the end of the 1st mvt I thought I'd got a bit sharp so I pulled out 1mm... maybe pulled a little far... Then spent most of the 2nd movement looking for places to push back in again (never had more that a beat rest for half a page).
Listening to the recording- I'm consistently flat across the range.
SKILL is compromised by a poor instrument.
But at the end of the day, SKILL is what enables you to play in tune (I'm including "good decision making" under the category of "SKILL" here!!!!!!)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2025-01-20 18:03
kdk wrote:
> Among the alternate fingerings, adding right hand fingers to
> "high B" (B5) on any clarinet I've played will indeed flatten
> it - to a Bb.
>
In the interest of transparency, after writing this I went back and tried putting all three RH fingers down with high B. To my amazement, it actually didn't produce the flat Bb that I expected, but it didn't lower B, either. On my clarinet it actually raised the pitch of the B a few cents. I assume it's because with all three RH fingers covering, it becomes a member of a different harmonic series - instead of the twelfth (3rd partial?) of the series on E4, it must become the 16ve+3rd (5th partial?) of the series on G3.
But the three RH fingers definitely didn't lower the pitch of B5.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2025-01-20 21:19
Hi everyone,
I decided to do another search on YouTube for that "lost" video. I again couldn't find it so it must have been removed for whatever reason.
However, I did find the following 2 intonation videos and 1 "alternate fingerings" video made by Tom Ridenour:
Tuning test for Libertas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHcO3z_x_hY
Libertas 4 clarinet tuning test
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAbLW76k16M
In this video Tom tests 4 different Libertas clarinets for intonation
clarivid 77 alternate fingerings on the clarinet pt. 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHaOCBwLVkw
Now, had I seen the last video about 77 alternate fingerings, my mind certainly would not have been confused.
Yes, imho, the Libertas does play "in tune" very well, however, like all other professional clarinets, alternate resonate fingerings are just a necessary and normal fact of life.
Just my opinions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lmliberson
Date: 2025-01-20 21:36
Perhaps it’s simply semantics but I hardly regard any fingerings as ‘alternate’ as they all, depending on the situation, have some sort of use.
And resonance fingerings are hardly what I would refer to as ‘alternate’ - in most cases, the so-called resonance fingering should be regarded as the first choice in practically any and every passage where the note in question is sustained (and often when a note is not sustained!).
But that’s just me…
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2025-01-21 17:23
As an aside- I share Mr Liberson's regard for resonance fingerings and was lucky to be introduced to them quite comprehensively aged 13. This is the ONLY reason that I don't play a pair of Mazzeo system clarinets.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: symphony1010
Date: 2025-01-21 18:03
donald wrote:
> As an aside- I share Mr Liberson's regard for resonance
> fingerings and was lucky to be introduced to them quite
> comprehensively aged 13. This is the ONLY reason that I don't
> play a pair of Mazzeo system clarinets.
And nor does anyone else for precisely that reason + the weight.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
