 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Carmen Izzo
Date: 2001-12-20 04:54
OKAY,
I think that i have finally formulated my thoughts on different brands of instruments. Tell me if you agree or not. Thesis: The ability to make a distinct charater of sound from a clarinet player should be of that player himself, not from just his(or her) instrument. A player really should look for how an instrument feels when they play it, and how welcome they feel on the instrument. An instrument is not going to last forever, and some changes may be made in their choices in the future. A player must learn to create their sound not within the clarinet, but within themselves, and the way HOW they play their clarinet. A clarinet is only the tool which brings out our abilities, and we must learn to perfect the abilities before we can determine what instrument actually helps our playing process.
Thanks for listenin'!
carmen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2001-12-20 06:12
Carmen...I would also add that each player either acquires or develops in their mind (and ear) a basic sound or tonal conception. This, I believe is the basis for the formulation of one's sound.
A good role model, either through private instruction or selective discriminating listening is most important in the early stages of tone development.
Equipment can refine or make the production of the sound more effortless, but a conception of the quality of tone strived for must be realized first.
A fine clarinetist, with an understanding of the type of sound they want to produce, will eventually sound like themselves on practically any type of clarinet...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Stephane
Date: 2001-12-20 08:00
Carmen,
I 2nd GBK's opinion. I'll tell you my own experience, I started with a plastic Yamaha, and after some time I was quite happy with the sound, then I evolved to a Buffet E11 (my first ebony), then to a Selmer Odyssee (the brand new pro entry level from Selmer Paris, I don't know if it is available in the US), with even more happiness with the sound produced, convinced that the instrument quality had done a lot in the sound quality, and finding the Yamaha sound awfull when comparing it with my new ebony toy.
I recently took my plastic Yamaha back in mouth, and I discovered that I could produce still a beautiful tone, and a much nicer one than the one I could produce in my early clarinet days: I had obviously made a lot of progress.
So indeed, your ability as a musician to decide and produce what is a nice tone to you is as important as the quality of the instrument itself.
Stephane (France)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal
Date: 2001-12-20 14:34
GBK and Stephane are absolutely right --- having a firm concept of the desired sound in one's head is the prerequisite and fundamental requirement for obtaining a good sound (and is almost independent of equipment). When I was in high school, I was a hotshot bass clarinetist (technique-wise) with a mediocre sound at best, because I had no concept of what a good bass clarinet sound was, and what sound I wanted to achieve. I had very little exposure to the playing of top-notch bass clarinetists, and no real role models to emulate. Since then I've done a lot of listening (mainly to recordings) and have gradually developed in my mind a definite concept of my personal 'ideal' bass clarinet sound. Having now that firm concept, I can come close to achieving that sound (or at least something satisfactory) on just about any instrument with just about any mouthpiece and/or reed. Clearly, there are instruments and mouthpieces that make it very much easier to approach my ideal sound, but as was pointed out above, once a player establishes that personal 'sound', he/she can produce it thereafter on almost any setup (with varying degrees of difficulty).
There have been numerous anecdotes here on Sneezy and elsewhere about professional clarinetists who can at any time pick up someone else's clarinet and/or mouthpiece and still sound about the same as on their own setup.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2001-12-20 15:55
The basic skills can be learned on almost any clarinet--provided it is in good working condition. Many great clarinetists had poor parents (like Benny Goodman) and didn't have access to quality instruments until they were able to purchase one on their own later in life. By that time they had become good enough to really soar on the good equipment.
There are lots of variables in instruments, but the most important part of the instrument is the person making it play music. The mind, motor skills, emotions and self-discipline required to make an excellent musician do not have a price tag or brand.
I started on a plastic Bundy rental instrument that was in good condition (the best my parents could afford at the time) and didn't even know there was such a thing as better brands of clarinets. I just worked every day and developed my abilities until I became a first chair player. Now, after 40 years, I can afford any brand I want and have played just about every type of instrument on the planet. It still remains true that it is the player more than the instrument--although a wonderful clarinet is a true treasure.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: C@p
Date: 2001-12-21 14:05
Maybe I missed something but I get the idea that these posts indicate that the value of the skill of the musician is so far more important than the nature of the instrument that it renders the quality of the horn to almost of no real significance.
While I understand that the clarinet sound begins with the clarinetist even before the reed starts to vibrate and that the horn has to feel good in the musician's hands, it would seem that there has to be some more value and distinction to be had and made between different clarinets in addition to the skill and attributes of the musician.
In other words, if the sound is just about all in the musician, why would anyone want to buy an expensive clarinet if any plastic student model would do just fine? If the clarinet quality contributes significantly to the sound, should not the clarinet get near equal billing with the musician?
C@p
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Stephane
Date: 2001-12-21 15:19
Your point is valid c@p, but I guess that we all want to buy the best horn we can afford because even if the musician is the first involved in the quality of sound, the easiness of producing that desired sound will depend upon the quality of the horn. I can almost produce an equally beautiful sound from my plastic Yamaha and my Selmer pro, but I need much more concentration and efforts on the Yamaha than on the Selmer for that almost similar result. And I guess when you reach a certain level in your repertoire, you don't want to spend your energy fighting with your instrument for getting a nice sound.
For instance my key system is much more "fluent" (I am not too sure this is the appropriate word) on the Selmer, and producing a pp altissimo register tone is piece of cake compared to the Yamaha, this is why you want to pay the price for a more expensive horn, to make sure you will place your energy in better ways when playing a quality horn. And this why I put the money in the Selmer, otherwise I would have stuck to the plastic Yamaha!
Stephane (France)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2001-12-21 17:14
Stephane...very well explained.
For the reasons you just elaborated on, that is exactly why I had stated in my original answer that:
"Equipment can refine or make the production of the sound more effortless, but a conception of the quality of tone strived for must be realized first.".
The mind and the ear ( as well as one's physical make up: embouchure, diaphragm, etc...) have more to do with a desired sound than the model of instrument...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jeff Forman
Date: 2001-12-22 09:52
My take is similar to Stephane's. I've played bluegrass banjo for 30 years, and now clarinet for about a year and a half. But I can tell you that with the banjo, whether I play on my Gibson Mastertone (The Mastertone being to the banjo what the the R-13 is to the clarinet) or on a cheap Sears Silvertone, the playing is decidely "me" and my style of playing comes out. I have been to jam sessions where a guy has a very expensive banjo and either can't hold timing, produces no discernable tone quality, etc. and other guys are producing beautiful, flowing lines on cheap pieces of junk.
So while I play the same notes, with the same syncopation and lines on any brand and quality level, the difference is that on the good instrument, you don't worry about 1:1 ratios of the tuning pegs so that if you play long or hard, the instrument goes out of tune. And because the better instruments have decent tone rings (some of the cheaper ones don't even have tone rings, much less quality tone rings) you get richer tone quality with much less effort. So, as Stephane says, you don't fight the instrument, you can focus more on nuances and subtleties and just flow.
We used to say, give a beginner Earl Scrugg's banjo and he'll sound like a beginner, but give Earl Scruggs a Harmony or a Kay student model banjo and he'll sound like Earl Scruggs. I suspect it is the same with clarinets. Give me Richard Stoltzman's clarinet and I'll blow notes. Give Richard Stoltzman a Vito platic clarinet and he'll still sound like Stoltzman.
Just my two cents.
Jeff
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2001-12-25 22:52
There are some clarinets which seem to be incapable of producing a reasonably good sound for me. Fortunately, these also seem to be difficult to play. I call them "bad."
I can produce a sound I like with many different instruments. Some of these make it much easier. These are the instruments I call "good." Right now, I'm still looking for one I like "best." When I find it, I'll bet it will be sort of like getting married.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
