 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Luc
Date: 2026-01-12 17:37
I have been reading some older posts on lig tightness and would like to re-animate this discussion. The wisdom of the day is to tighten the reed "snug but not tight". That is very subjective and not really helpful. "Snug" to me is maybe not the same as snug to you. But my question is does't the clamping performed by the embouchure cancel out what is behind it? Or are you saying that the portion of the reed under the ligature vibrates enough to contribute to the sound? Think of a harmonica. It has many reeds welded to a base plate . The part of the reed that is welded does not contribute to the sound... i would think.
Luc
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Erez Katz
Date: 2026-01-12 17:56
The reed is like a spring, it stores and releases energy as it vibrates.
Some ligature, like rovner dark can absorb some of the energy and a result dampen some frequencies. Some ligatures act as springs of on their own right.
The shape of the mouthpiece and material also plays a part in the vibrations bouncing around.
There is no right or wrong.
Most of the differences between ligatures or in the way the ligature are used are barely audible, if at all, to a listener 15 feet away, while for the player the differences are not subtle.
It really boils down to personal preferences and finding a response that works well with the particular reed and mouthpiece. Cane reeds behave a differently than synthetic because the fiber structure can get crushed by an over tightened metal ligature, which will change the overall elasticity of the reed, at least in theory.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2026-01-12 19:13
So I've found some disparate results......with synthetic. The results seem to imply that some of the more important characteristics include where the ligature makes contact with the reed as well as the the height of the contact along the mouthpiece as well as the amount of tautness of the ligature.
But without getting too far afield I think I can shed some light on how to determine how tight tight is. You can "measure" that by how easily you can shift the reed (left and right at the tip). If the reed moves easily, that is loose. Play some notes to get an idea what loose responds like. Firmer will make moving the reed more resistant......and there is an associated response to that. Tight is where the reed no longer will move to reasonable attempts to move the reed. Now the response also changes to the above as you move place the ligature either very high (top contact point of ligature at the bottom of the mouthpiece window and beyond) or low (lowest ligature contact point at the bottom "line of ligature" and beyond). SOOOOO many combinations and results that one may not even want to exhaust them all. But it's worth trying variations of the extremes to see what works better for your mouthpiece/reed combination.
That's JUST about synthetic, since I no longer use cane. But cane should have similar configurations and associated responses.
The bottom line then is that the vibration (or lack thereof) of the entire reed seems to be important.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2026-01-12 19:15
The advice to not overtighten comes from the fact that too much force can deform or damage the reed or even damage the mouthpiece or ligature. That's what you want to avoid. So tight enough so that it seals and doesn't move, but not so tight that you deform or damage the reed, breaking the seal. It's not about allowing a certain level of vibration on the stock end. You never want any vibration there unless you actually like the dulling effect, which a few players actually do, for reasons I'll never comprehend.
Unless you're the Hulk, the embouchure alone cannot fully compensate for a loose ligature. So just use common sense and get as finger tight as you can so the reed seals and doesn't move. Don't get the vice grips out and break the screws.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2026-01-12 19:55
I recently took some advise Paul Aviles offered about loosing the ligature a tad and, as he advised, expecting to find the reed playing with slightly less resistance (thanks Paul.)
(I consider this another tool in my arsenal, along with moving the reed up or down on the mouthpiece a micron to stiffen or loosen its response respectively, along with micron level left/right movements to quickly compensate for longitudinal perceived imbalances where the removal of reed material may not be practical.)
But this said, in my scientific mind I would expect, contrary to this, that tightening a ligature (within reason) would make a reed play easier. To my physics way of thinking, which is not perfectly analogous, I'd imagine a diving board having the most spring when its retaining bolts at its base are firmly torqued, allowing the maximum energy imposed on it by the diver at the other end to be applied to its tip rather than in part absorbed by its base.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: marcia
Date: 2026-01-12 21:57
If you are an orchestral player, you will need to be switching between A and Bb, sometimes with very little time. If you are changing only the mouthpiece (some change barrel as well so this does not apply in that situation) the ligature needs to be tight enough that it will not slip out of place, or worse come off entirely.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2026-01-12 21:57
My version of science is to allow for the odd deformations that we see in high speed video of "standing waves." Unlike the regular up and down movement of a simple system, the reed must move quickly from the vibrational form of one note to another as well as different octaves. Any decent diving board would lose its mind trying to keep up with that.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2026-01-12 22:05
Paul Aviles wrote:
> My version of science is to allow for the odd deformations that
> we see in high speed video of "standing waves." Unlike the
> regular up and down movement of a simple system, the reed must
> move quickly from the vibrational form of one note to another
> as well as different octaves. Any decent diving board would
> lose its mind trying to keep up with that.
>
>
>
>
>
> ..............Paul Aviles
>
Indeed the diving board analogy has limitations.... 
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kilo
Date: 2026-01-12 22:22
SecondTry, I agree with your point (the diving board analogy) and especially with cane reeds, which have continuous longitudinal fibers running the length of the reed. I want any reed vibration to be concentrated over the facing, not under the ligature along the stock and the heel.
I don't see how two-screw and leather ligatures could be tightened enough to deform a reed on a flat table, as both the table and the stock are rigid and superhuman pressure applied to those small screws would be more likely to damage the threads of the mechanism before the reed, or the mouthpiece, would be damaged. Has anyone run across a mouthpiece where an overly tightened ligature had any more than a cosmetic effect.
But one question arises in my mind – could overtightening have an effect when the table is slightly concave? My Fobes pieces have a very slight concavity and on an old Geo. F. Bundy the concavity is more pronounced. A ligature which pressed solely on the central part of the reed, as opposed to the ends – I'm thinking of a mechanism like the Otto Link STM sax ligatures only without the four bumps on the plate, a mechanical thumb – might exert a bit of leverage on the active end of the reed, the forward part of the table acting as a fulcrum. But maybe overthinking is even worse than overtightening.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2026-01-12 23:32
kilo wrote:
> I don't see how two-screw and leather ligatures could be
> tightened enough to deform a reed on a flat table, as both the
> table and the stock are rigid and superhuman pressure applied
> to those small screws would be more likely to damage the
> threads of the mechanism before the reed, or the mouthpiece,
> would be damaged. Has anyone run across a mouthpiece where an
> overly tightened ligature had any more than a cosmetic effect.
>
> But one question arises in my mind – could overtightening
> have an effect when the table is slightly concave? My Fobes
> pieces have a very slight concavity and on an old Geo. F. Bundy
> the concavity is more pronounced. A ligature which pressed
> solely on the central part of the reed, as opposed to the ends
> – I'm thinking of a mechanism like the Otto Link STM sax
> ligatures only without the four bumps on the plate, a
> mechanical thumb – might exert a bit of leverage on the
> active end of the reed, the forward part of the table acting as
> a fulcrum. But maybe overthinking is even worse than
> overtightening.
I've definitely overtightened enough to deform, break the seal against the table, strip screws, and break ligatures. So all those are absolutely possible.
Imagine the case where the reed is slightly convex along its length. A ligature placed too far back and too tight would effectively move the point where the reed contacts the table. Or a case where it's concave or convex along its width. Too much clamping force could indeed raise the outer edges, whereas just the right amount of force could flatten for a perfect seal.
Most of these scenarios happen with imperfect reeds or tables to begin with. I'm usually able to compensate and get a perfect seal with optimum clamping force, not too little, not too much.
Just the other day on my bass sax, the reed was warped one way or another, and backing off my normal torque just a little took it from unplayable to playable. That sort of thing rarely happens on a tiny soprano clarinet reed. But the bigger the reed, the more potential for warping and the more need for optimum ligature force and placement.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2026-01-15 15:57
One thing that most don't realize or consider is that the way the reed is tightened, the position of the tightener and the amount of force affect the tip opening. Very often people attribute mythical reasons to changes that happen because of this.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Luc
Date: 2026-01-15 18:37
I have experimented with some of these elements. And although I am a novice clarinetist, I sensed that a loose reed (where I can easily move it around) was less responsive that a very tight one. I think of the diving board comparison again: if the base of the board has a lot of play, then some of the energy produced by the springing action of the diver must be diverted to the sloppy base and wasted, resulting in less energy at the tip end of the board. Applying this argument to the reed/lig setup would suggest less energy available for the reed to vibrate and hence more wind/embouchure required.
On the other hand, I found a very tight set up was easier to play, albeit only somewhat. With the base of the reed firmly clamped down, the tip would enjoy all the energy produced by my air - no wasted energy under the ligature. But I found that tightening it that much seemed weird. I am using a Daddario X5 mp with Legere classic 3.0 reed and a Rovner dark leather ligature. I'm pretty sure the table is flat as well as the reed, so overtightening would not pose a deformation problem but it just seems unnatural to tighten it that much. So back to the middle ground of "snug but not tight" and the challenge of replicating that precisely every time.
As for lowering or raising the ligature itself, I am finding that the lower it is, the harder it is to play. I imagine energy is wasted again by having a portion of the reed trying to vibrate below the window. I surmise the line on my mp is there for a reason and as it happens, coincides with the bottom edge of the window. So I put it a tad lower than this.
Luc
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lydian
Date: 2026-01-15 21:20
If you're too far back you won't get a good seal where the reed breaks from the facing curve, and you'll have to do it with embouchure. Too far forward, and you'll effectively shorten the facing curve, also bad. A lot of mouthpieces have a line where the optimum ligature placement is. But you might have to deviate from that if you have a warped reed or really open facing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2026-01-15 22:51
A typical medium-long facing is about 17mm (real millimeters). This is WAY up beyond any point that would be affected by ligatures. I think there is some room to talk about the manufacturers tendency to produce mouthpieces with a concavity along the table. The longer (and deeper) that is, the greater the chance of there being some of what you folks talk about up there. Let's say for example that you play considerably closer to the tip than what is actually possible given the length of the lay of your mouthpiece. Then, if you don't tighten as much over the concavity, what happens is that the TIP of the reed will wind up even closer to the end of the mouthpiece (a smaller tip opening). In that scenario, you'd experience more "resistance" if you tighten the reed down which would help to bend the tip of the reed up somewhat.
Personally, I believe that if you want to think of a mechanical system it might make more sense to think of the reed as a "seesaw." You sit on the mouthpiece opening side and the reed's extra resonance exists on the other side. What you want ideally is to BALANCE out the system. If you sit as close to the point where it teeters, you have the best chance of both sides operating as efficiently (and equally) as they should. It is keeping close to the point where the reed comes in contact with the mouthpiece that allows you to have better luck with the looser ligature.
But then I recommend doing what works best for you.
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JTJC
Date: 2026-01-16 12:53
I'm not convinced ligatures have the strenght to bend the butt end of a reed into a concave mouthpiece table. Perhaps a metal ligature tightened to the point it distorts itself might do that, but I doubt many players go that far. If you try bending the butt of a reed between your fingers it takes considerable force.
That's not to say tightening a ligature over a concavity doesn't have an effect. It's probably more about the reed being held more securely than actually being bent. But, if it were possible to bend the reed in this way, the effect would be as Paul describes (increased tip opening etc)
If anyone has done any experiments, measurements or scientific work on this issue, I'd be interestedto hear about it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
