 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Roger Aldridge
Date: 2006-04-26 21:13
I'm curious about how tone hole size might affect a clarinet's tonal qualities and performance. I recently noticed how much larger the tone holes are on my vintage Couesnon Monopole compared to those on a R13. Couesnon has a larger bore (.580) than a R13 (.574 I think). I'm wondering if there is another reason for the larger tone holes besides a clarinet simply having a larger bore. It would be interesting to compare the tone hole size of a Leblanc Big Easy and an Opus to see if there is a difference....especially, with the Big Easy having a .590 bore.
Any theories or thoughts?
Thanks, Roger
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2006-04-26 22:05
Tone hole diameter/height/location/undercutting all have an effect on tone and tuning, across the range of notes. This package of very complex compromises interrelated all over the instrument, also related to the bore parameters, is unique to each model.
Another related phenomenon is that often, for the same model, the larger "A" clarinet has SMALLER tone holes than the Bb.
Could it be that the compromises for these A clarinet models are engineer to deliberately produce a different tone from that of the Bb?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2006-04-27 10:37
And the differences were all the more obvious when I bushed the toneholes on my set of Centered Tones - considering both are large bore clarinets with large toneholes, the A had slightly smaller diameter toneholes in comparison to the Bb - an example being the top joint side and cross Eb/Bb tonehole is 6mm on the Bb, but 5.9mm on the A.
And with my set of Series 9 the different diameter of the C#/G# toneholes can be seen in the case (as the tonehole goes through the middle tenon) - the A has a tiny C#/G# tonehole in comparison to the Bb.
And a set of Recitals also shows the same thing - the large toneholes on the bottom joint are different diameters (smaller on the A) when compared.
When I added the tonehole chimney to my Yamaha for the forked Eb mech I didn't realise just how much I had to enlarge the LH 3 tonehole - it was 8.5mm originally, now I think it's around 9.5mm with the chimney (not sure exactly as I reamed it out by hand to tune it), and the vent tonehole I added between LH 2 and 3 is a whopping 5mm - and with a 7mm cork pad covering it there's not much room for error!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: L. Omar Henderson
Date: 2006-04-27 13:53
The size and configuration of the bore is the primary consideration for tone hole size. The size and placement of the tone holes is a complex interaction of the amount of energy (probably not the right term but involves the volume, speed, and frequency of the fluctuating air column) at the given point of tone hole placement. Undercutting also affects the energy released at a given tone hole. Open tone holes obviously affect the "energy" and holes further down the bore are affected by the energy lost by an open tone hole further up toward the mouthpiece. The size and shape (both due to undercutting and the length of the chimney - distance from bore to tone hole top) also affect the amount of energy released by a given tone hole - and the frequency of the sound produced. The longitudinal placement around the circumference of the tube cause tone hole size interactions within a band at that point of the tube and there are complex interactions of "energy" considerations within that band. The whole business of tone hole placement and size is absurdly complex because the configuration and placement of tone holes far apart which can influence each other in many subtle ways.
L. Omar Henderson
Post Edited (2006-04-27 18:21)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2006-04-27 15:17
Opening a tone hole in a wind instrument is not the dame as sawing off the horn right through the tone hole.
Think of a single tone hole as a short, squat cylinder of air. Think of the first open hole below all of those that are closed by fingers or pads.
The vibrations in the instrument's bore move that little slug of air out and in. That takes the sort of energy transfer that Omar Henderson mentioned. The bigger the hole, the more air must be shaken around as the tone is produced. Adding a chimney increases the amount of air to be moved, lowering the pitch.
Even if the wall of the instrument at the hole is very thin, some near-by air will be sucked in and out of the horn.
On the other hand, increasing the size of the tone hole (keeping the same hole center) raises its upper edge, shortening the air column in the clarinet and raising the overall pitch.
Enlarging a tone hole has the possibility of either raising or lowering the pitch! Stretching my analogy a bit, undercutting the tone hole might doubly raise the pitch --the conical inside edge reaches up the bore --tending to raise the tone, and shortening the "chimney" from the inside reduces the amount air to move.
Now, consider the next open hole down the tube: its own little air column gets excited by the noise coming down the pipe, and it, too vibrates. The whole, highly interactive effects of all the tone holes change the pitch and timbre of the instrument.
I'm in awe of folks who can take a clarinet-shaped-object and poke around in its tone holes and bring it into tune. I believe that such artistry far exceedes the ability of acoustic engineers to synthesize an array of tone holes to define a "perfect" instrument.
SIGH
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: el gitano
Date: 2020-05-05 22:12
Attachment: 1.jpg (403k)
it´s an older thread, but I´ve seen a Boosey & Co London, from may be 1924, clarinet. It was not pssible to play.
But this small toneholes of the upper tenon is heavy.
Whats happend with the sound?
regards
Claus
Post Edited (2020-05-05 22:16)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2020-05-05 23:53
It appears from the image that the tone holes of the upper joint have linings. These could have been original perhaps or added at a later time to fix or prevent leaking caused by cracks. If it were a repair, the repair may not have taken tuning and timbre into account as much as it should have.
Maybe someone would know for sure if tone hole liners were original to this horn.
-----------------------------------------
Let me amend that..........
Looking at this again, it may just be the angle of the light source creating a false impression. And yes those do seem small, but I would wager it is the best sizing for what the manufacturer intended.
-----------------------------------------
................Paul Aviles
Post Edited (2020-05-06 00:41)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tdufka
Date: 2020-05-06 04:05
How would enlarging a particular tone hole affect the tuning on the rest of the instrument, for example enlarging or undercutting the Low E tone hole on a bass which has an inordinately flat low E relative to the adjacent notes?
The rest of this instrument is very well in tune. I have come to learn that this low E to clarion B interval is one of the more difficult on a bass, and often a compromise between the tuning of the two notes.
Playing this E in tune is manageable using voicing, butI am wondering if this is something that is ever addressed by modifications to the instrument?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Luuk ★2017
Date: 2020-05-06 14:02
For a comprehensive but basic overview see http://www.sfoxclarinets.com/baclac_art.htm, a very good starting point for everybody interested in clarinets design variables and issues.
If you can't follow the technical discussion, at least you could get a feeling of how interdependent everything is.
Regards,
Luuk
Philips Symphonic Band
The Netherlands
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2020-05-06 14:27
Dear Omar, it's good to have you posting: very informative! The company I work for has three models that use an identical bore. But the toneholes are not the same size, are not in the same position and are not undercut the same way. This results in a RADICALLY different tone-color. As for intonation, that's another matter: always a compromise. You lose on the swings what you gain on the round-about.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2020-05-06 18:18
Do be aware on basses built to low Eb with the key on the bell, low E (and upper register B) issues from the bell key tonehole and not the lowest tonehole on the lower joint. Low Eb issues directly from the bell itself or a vent hole on keyless bells (where all the mechanism is on the lower joint).
The bell key tonehole is the one you'll have to address to bring both low E and upper B up to pitch, only that may not be possible due to the thickness of the metal the E/B tonehole is formed from and its location if it's tight against the bell socket.
If it's a bass built to low E, then you'd have to shorten the bell if both low E and upper B are flat as E/B (as on most clarinets) issues directly from the bell.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tdufka
Date: 2020-05-06 23:07
Thanks to everyone for such information!
Chris, how would your analysis apply to basses built with a Low C?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2020-05-07 00:58
If E/B are both flat on a low C bass, then that note again issues from the same relative tonehole - only this time it's on the body and the one covered by the low Eb key. Adjusting the tuning on that will be much easier by removing wood from the north side of the tonehole, but still aiming to keep the tonehole round.
The crown can be widened (fabricate a sanding disc to do this), then the inside edge opened up with a conical or spherical reamer (you'll most likely have to fabricate that too) and then the tonehole itself enlarged, but you'll probably have to replace the pad as it may not seat against the widened tonehole crown given the crown is now lower as well.
You could iron the pad to flatten it and remove the original impression then reseat it, but that might not be enough and it'll be easier to replace it with an identical diameter and thickness pad and using more shellac to compensate for the larger gap between the crown and the pad cup.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tdufka
Date: 2020-05-07 03:01
Thanks Chris! Great description of the process.
By "north side of the tonehole" I am assuming you mean the outermost edge of the tone hole?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2020-05-07 04:38
The north side of the tonehole is the side that's nearest to the top (mouthpiece) end of the instrument.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2020-05-07 23:16
What you're effectively doing is shortening the length of the bore at the point where the notes E and upper B issue from to raise the pitch of those particular notes.
It's still better to have an in tune upper B and a flat low E instead of a sharp B and an in tune E.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
