 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: ClariBone
Date: 2005-05-05 00:15
HI
I was wondering if anyone here could explain to me the difference in tone, intonation, and/or dynamic contrast from using either the vertical or angled clarinet playing position. I'm picturing Bonade or Morales as the vertical and Benny Goodman as the angled. Is there any difference besides just the appearance (for example, was the angled clarinet position more "showy" for Goodman??) Thanks in Advance!!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2005-05-05 01:09
I say just play with what's comfortable. I feel more comfortable playing the clarinet when it's less vertical. So my position sticks out a little more. I CAN play it more vertical, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm playing it wrong . . .
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: wvu_cnet21
Date: 2005-05-05 02:55
ClariBone,
The angle at which you hold your clarinet can make a big difference. For the most part, if you are holding the clarinet at too big of an outward angle, it can make your tone a little more spread and harder to control....especially in the higher regiter.
What the peson said before me is true...you SHOULD do what is comfortable for you. However, I do have a suggestion. You should try the "Wall Test."
When doing this, you:
1) stand, with your best posture, with your back against the wall...head comfortable and perpendicular to the ground.
2.) Play an F scale (clarinet F) in 3 octaves...whatever rhythm you want, and pay close attention to your tone throughout the scale.
3.) From there try moving the clarinet clarinet outward and inward bit by bit (very small incriments)...and decide which angle sounds best for you :-)
Hopefully this Helps you in some way...
David
Post Edited (2005-05-05 03:01)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarinetgirl06
Date: 2005-05-05 03:15
I hold my clarinet vertically-it sounds better for me. I think this has to do with the fact that my upper teeth go over my lower teeth a little. My teacher got me to hold it out a little bit because I used to touch the ligature (screw in front) to my chin.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2005-05-05 14:07
I believe that the degree of "overbite" of upper teeth [over the lowers, like mine!] is the important factor in playing angle, with the seeking of desired tonalities in the several registers also being variable/experimentable. Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brent
Date: 2005-05-05 15:56
I agree with the overbite comment. I have a bit of an underbite (my uppers and lowers meet dead-on; typically the uppers are slightly ahead of the lower teeth) and so am more comfortable with the clarinet sticking out slightly more than many people play.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: nickma
Date: 2005-05-05 18:29
I hold the clarinet in a position whereby the angle of attack of the tongue on the tip of the reed is optimal, so that the staccato is as potentially explosive and as controllable as possible. This is my starting point. I got this from Brymer's excellent book 'Clarinet' in the Menuhin series.
Nick
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2005-05-06 01:56
I too have an underbite (my bottom teeth are CLEARLY in front of my top teeth, and my bottom jaw outgrew my top jaw a lot). I believe that could be a MAJOR reason as to my playing position. Picture above . . .
EDIT: Rather, below, since I accidentally submitted too quickly . . .
US Army Japan Band
Post Edited (2005-05-06 01:59)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2005-05-06 02:00
Attachment: 111_1200_r1.jpg (27k)
The clarinet is vertical, but my head isn't. Try to imagine it as though I was facing forward where the clarinet would be pointed.
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Morton
Date: 2005-05-06 14:53
> Is there any difference besides just the appearance (for example, was the
> angled clarinet position more "showy" for Goodman??
Appearance is definitely a factor if it is not a formal classical setting. Artie Shaw was certainly a serious and exacting player, but probably overcame the obstacles (to good tone and relaxed style) presented by the "show" posture, just because he was a bandleader/entertainer.
What is it that makes us clarinetists look a bit dorky? Whatever it is, it's a lot worse for oboists, imho, who look like they're about to blow a gasket.
John Morton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tyler
Date: 2005-05-06 22:44
Try standing up and holding your clarinet only with your left hand. Then, letting your right hand be very relaxed, lift it up to playing position without changing the tension in your fingers. The resulting angle SHOULD be close according to some people.
good luck!
-Tyler
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 2005-05-07 12:21
Once you find your optimum angle, you can use slight variations in angle to your advantage. More vertical tends to raise the pitch and further out from the body lowers it. This is due the resulting variation on the interaction between your embouchure and reed. Thus if you are in a warm room and can't pull out anymore, you can still lower the pitch a bit by increasing the angle between you and the instrument. And vice versa in a cold room. I wouldn't go to an extreme though.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarinetgirl06
Date: 2005-05-29 19:33
I was just reading "Perfecta Reed and Beyond" by Ben Armato and he said that clarinet angle has to do with the length of your tongue. He says that the longer your tongue is, the more vertical you will hold your clarinet. The shorter your tongue, the more angled the clarinet.
I just made up this illustration to go along with what Mr. Armato said, so I hope it works. Imagine your bottom lip being the fulcrum and the mouthpiece on one side and the rest of the clarinet on the other side of a teeder-todder. The longer your tongue is, the more vertical the clarinet needs to be in order for the mouthpiece to be farther away from the tongue.
I don't know if I agree with it, but it's just some food for thought.
Oddly enough, I have a short tongue and hold my clarinet vertically. Hmm...?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2005-05-29 20:17
As suggested by others above one's mouth/teeth orientation has a lot to do with what works best. The BG style you mentioned probably has to do with showmanship and perhaps volume projection.....or at least imagined projection.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevensfo
Date: 2005-05-29 22:01
I always worked hard on my emouchure without really thinking too much about the angle of the instrument. Having seen too many films, I was holding it at what I considered to be the 'normal' angle, ie sticking out too high up.
A few months ago I read an article on the net:
http://raider.muc.edu/~peroneje/tipsforbeginners.htm
and followed the advice on hand position and the angle. ie MP 'behind' teeth, not 'under' teeth.
I'm still very much a novice, but the difference was dramatic! My only problem is now, as I get more relaxed, I notice the clarinet starting to creep up again!
Steve
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Celeborn
Date: 2005-05-30 02:21
Well, gee. . . I pretty much use a "horizontal" position. It works so much better-- darker, easier to control, and more projecting-- and it does look somewhat less dorky, to use a technical term. There is a bit of professional discrimination about that type of thing, though.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavieCane01
Date: 2005-05-30 03:10
There are 2 thing here to consider:
1) The air will follow the contour of the roof of the mouth as it travels from the back to the front of the oral cavity. Having the clarinet in a more vertical position exposes the opening of the mouthpiece more directly to the air stream, thus preserving the focus and pressure of the air column. Having the clarinet in a more horizontal position will cause the air to hit the top of the mouthpiece first, and this can greatly affect the efficience of your air.
2) If you hold the tips of the fingers and thumb of one hand together (pretend they're your front teeth, you get the picture) and place your mouthpiece between them in a horizontal position. You'll notice the the top teeth force the mouthpiece down into your bottom teeth in a wedge-like fashion. That can increase biting and overall pain in your lower lip. Not good. Now rotate the mouthpiece into a near vertical position, say 45 degrees. You'll see that the reed is now closer to parallel to your front teeth, thereby putting the pressure on the flat fronts of the teeth rather than the sharp top edge. Good thing. Also, you'll see that more of the reed surface is exposed inside your mouth, allowing for freer vibration. Also a very good thing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2005-05-30 06:38
1. I tend to disagree with point 1 made by DavieCane01, because the airspeed within the actual mouth cavity is sufficiently slow for this probably not to be a factor.
2. The ideal angel for any player, as others have said, depends on the geometric configuration of the jaw and teeth, and also the tilt of the head.
3. Try this experiment...
Take just the mouthpiece with reed. Place it straight on the lower teeth, WITHOUT the lower lip covering the teeth.
Now tilt the mouthpiece so it points well UPWARDS. Note that the lower teeth contact the SIDES of the reed only.
Now tilt the mouthpiece well down. Note now that the teeth contact only the centre of the reed.
Assuming that the lip gets at least SOME support form the teeth, and that this is transferred to some degree through the lip to the reed, this experiment demonstrates that altering the angle of the clarinet with respect to the lower teeth alters the amount of pressure on the centre of the reed, compared with the sides. IMHO this alters the way in which the reed vibrates, leading to a difference in tone.
When I play test an instrument which happens to have a note such as side Eb/Bb sounding slightly on the fuzzy side (especially if my reed is on the hard side), and increasing the venting under the pad does not correct this, I find that if I lower the clarinet slightly, the fuzziness reduces a lot. IMHO this is because I alter the way the reed and hence the air column vibrates, as described above.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2005-05-30 12:41
....but then there was that player(and others) who played with the reed on top! Obviously Davie has given the subject a lot of thought and analysis....more than I have. I wonder how one knows, however, just how the air moves inside everyone's mouth. What effect does my upper denturre have? What is the purpose of the bottom lip....certainly it must dampen reed vibration to some degree. And finally!.....I believe there's always some degree of placebo effect involved in our perceptions.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2005-05-30 12:50
I agree with DavieCane01 - the reed will vibrate more freely if the wind is coming AT it, not into it. Remember that the sound is produced by the reed vibrating against the mouthpiece and this is best achieved by aiming at the surface of the reed, not into the opening between the reed and mouthpiece. So a vertical position is best - but you don't need to have the instrument pointing directly down to do this!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavieCane01
Date: 2005-05-30 17:29
Actually, Bernoulli's principal is in effect whenever there is movement of air. This is why gliders with long and effecient wings can glide so slowly, acheiving maximum lift at minimal airspeeds. I agree that we're not talking about flight level airflow when you playing, but physics is physics.
Gordon, I submit that you're getting better results from your harder reed by playing closer to the tip of the mouthpiece because you're exerting pressure on a thinner part of the reed, and are thereby more able to bring the reed into vibrating distance of the mouthpiece. Your experiment regarding angle is also subjective, and in conflict with your remark of immediately before regarding geometric configuration, which I heartily agree with. My teeth tend to remain flat throughout the rotation of the reed. I think that the lower lip actually serves to equalize and distribute the pressure (which should be minimal at best...I know, another whole topic of discussion there...) across the surface of the reed that our uneven teeth would otherwise place only in isolated points of contact.
So, what does it all mean? Nothing. You and I (and everyone else) play the way we do and describe it in terminology that we relate to. We could be doing very similar things and describing it very differently. My only intention was to bring some factual information into the discussion. There are more than one way to skin a cat, and somehow we all manage to get the silly thing to honk when we need it to. That, I think, is ultimately all that matters.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ken
Date: 2005-05-30 17:41
This subject was touched on recently and Ken Shaw cited Bonade and Morales as examples of players who purposefully heighten the angles on their clarinets.
I see the practice of elevating horn angle as fundamental technique and as an "amplification aid" however, musically situational and have a rational purpose and result. "Bells up" (like any musical thought or action) should make music i.e., to project and manipulate sound to create/meet a "specific" musical requirement. Just as a skilled vocalist works a mic to effect and accentuate their voice an instrumentalist uses physics as a tool technique. When applied correctly, the varying angle, bell and tone holes work together complementing air stream, oral cavity (reed vibration) and mouthpiece angle to produce a variety of tonal shades and volume level; an on-demand "up or down" knob on the radio dial.
A traditionalist view; bells up should be applied as a "special affect" not as the norm. The beginner should not try it, the intermediate use caution, and advanced player pick their moments --- if abused, it can and will screw up chops and set back weeks/months of hard work. Instrument fundamentals (like habits good or bad) always REPEAT and are progressive. My rule of thumb; in any playing position, if the shoulders and arms are moving at the top of a deep breath the horn is being held at too severe an angle. The correct "resting" playing position and posture is approximately 7 to 8:30 o'clock; that is a large enough area to accommodate any sized or angled mouth cavity; it is NOT what comes natural or about comfort ability. This position also best complements instrument design, and the soprano family of clarinets was not designed for playing extended periods straight out and/or parallel to the floor.
Another observation; one of the reasons early swing-era, big band clarinet leaders such as Shaw and Goodman played bells-up was due to the compulsory environment and primitive sound reinforcement. In the 30-40s, there weren't any SD Systems LCM 82s, with wireless 2-mic condenser bell mounted/lyre-ringed set-ups, belt clip power pack and volume tone with a stand-by switch. These guys played acoustically into one stage mic having to fill 600 to 1,000-plus capacity ballrooms. They somehow projected (or competed) over an 18-22-piece wall of sound with banging marching-sized snares and 22-inch bass drums better suited as coffee tables. God rest their souls. v/r Ken
Post Edited (2005-05-31 00:15)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2005-05-31 01:55
DAvie, I think we lost communication somehow.
First, I mentioned nothing about getting better results with a harder reed.
Second, my experiment did not intend making any alteration to the position of the teeth (whether covered by lip or not) along the length of the reed.
It alluded to altering the pressure on the centre line of the reed, with respect to the edges. This occurs because of the curvature of the biting surfaces of the row of lower teeth. My experiment will demonstrate that this alteration occurs as the angle of the mouthpiece changes, unless the player happens to have the lower front teeth in a straight line. I suppose this is possible, but certainly not common.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: contragirl
Date: 2005-05-31 08:37
While playing a Wurlitzer, I was told to bring the horn to a more horizontal position. Not completely parallel to the ground, but further up than I would normally do. And my sound and articulation improved greatly when I did this on these clarinets. I'm not sure if it was the technique in qhich to play a German type clarinet, or just the tip from Steve Bates, but it helped. As for my Buffets, I try to play with my horn a little ruther up than I used to, and I sound fine.
--CG
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster Brown
Date: 2005-05-31 12:03
Many, many years ago I took lessons from a Chicago Symphony clarinetist whose name I can't even remember. Shows how important it was to a high school player. But, I distinctly remember him saying the German method was angled and the French was vertical. He spent alot of time trying to get me to a more vertical position. I never quite made it all the way. I guess I'm now a French/German hybrid. Reason fo an angled Wurlitzer?
This whole discussion is interesting, but I guess it's what works for you. Changing a clarinet position is as difficult as trying to change a golf swing you've had "wrong" for many years. It can't really be done "easily".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2005-05-31 12:05
Morrigan wrote
<<I agree with DavieCane01 - the reed will vibrate more freely if the wind is coming AT it, not into it. Remember that the sound is produced by the reed vibrating against the mouthpiece and this is best achieved by aiming at the surface of the reed, not into the opening between the reed and mouthpiece. So a vertical position is best - but you don't need to have the instrument pointing directly down to do this!>>
Blowing air at the FACE of the reed is not what makes it vibrate. That would have to be a real tornado to press the reed to the mouthpiece. Such a tornado does not exist, because the flow of the air in the mouth itself is quite slow.
It is blowing down betweeen the reed and the mouthpiece that initiates the sound. We blow through a narrow gap, so the air is travelling fast in the gap, which (as per Bernoulli) reduces the air pressure between the reed and mouthpiece. This in turn allows the air pressure in the mouth (although only very slightly above atmospheric) to press the reed towards the mouthpiece. When the reed to close against the mouthpiece, no more air passes, so the initiator of the relative 'vacuum' collapses, so the reed is released again. This cycle alternates to get the reed vibrating.
IMHO resulting from my formal study of fluid flow and pneumatics. Somebody correct me if this is wrong in any way.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2005-05-31 13:12
A good analysis, Gordon, I agree, also having studied fluid flow. At least one of our "good books", Benade [in particular], Brymer, Lawson, Rendall, Stein-Pino etc, must discuss this. I have just "lurked" here after suggesting that teeth/jaw configurations [over/under bite] have much influence re: angle. Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kenb
Date: 2005-05-31 13:31
contragirl/buster-
I too find Wurlitzer reforms work better when angled a little more toward the horizontal - pitch control in the upper clarion and altissimo is enhanced.
But then maybe that's as much to do with the longer facings on German mouthpieces as with instrument design...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2005-05-31 17:23
In Larry Guy's handout at the Clarinet Symposium, he reproduced embouchure pictures of both Daniel Bonade and Robert Marcellus, both of whom held their heads well up and had the clarinet absolutely vertical.
However, as Larry noted, both men had a receding chin. Few players hold the instrument completely vertical. David Hattner, a Marcellus student who was at the Symposium, has a long jaw and holds the instrument well away from his body.
After the Symposium, I tried holding the instrument vertical. It didn't fit my jaw length, though. I found that I had to blow much harder, and that the instrument played much louder. I had trouble playing soft.
Perhaps Bonade and Marcellus adopted the vertical position both to accommodate individual bone structure and, if my experience is a guide, to be heard through a large orchestra.
Also, I agree with Don and Gordon that the flow of air in the mouth is nowhere near fast enough to create turbulence or Bernoulli effects. Tongue, palate and jaw position certainly affect tone, but the reason is changes in resonance, not airflow.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Poulsen
Date: 2005-05-31 18:09
Gordon is correct, but Ken S. had one small error. The effect Gordon is describing *is* the Bernoulli effect, the same one that allows airplanes to fly and causes spinning ping pong balls to curve.
I might add that one does not want turbulence, but a smooth (laminar) flow of the air between reed and mouthpiece so as to get a controlled, predictable vibration of the reed.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2005-05-31 18:25
Don -
Thanks.
I know that the Bernoulli effect is what makes the reed vibrate. What I meant to say was that given the slowness of the airstream, curving your tongue from back to front into a "ski jump" shape may make a difference in resonance (and be a good mental image), but the effect on airstream speed is negligible.
Or is that wrong too?
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rc_clarinetlady
Date: 2005-05-31 19:29
Bites are classified in dentistry as Class I (normal), Class II (overbite), or Class III (underbite). Class I's and II's are both top teeth over the bottom. Class III is usually bottom teeth out beyond the top teeth like sfalexi describes he has. A normal bite has the top teeth over the lowers and that's what most of us have, especially if you had orthodontic work. If a dentist tells you you have an overbite then it has to do with the way the molars align with one another, top to bottom. That then will determine how the rest of the teeth line up. A severe overbite is sometimes called "buck teeth".
I think the bite has a tremendous effect on the way we play the clarinet. The relationship of the top teeth to the bottom teeth clearly dictates what is comfortable in playing position for each individual. I worked in dentistry for 12 years after getting my music degree. I teach privately, though, and always look at a students teeth/mouth structure before I can determine how they should be holding their clarinet. Granted, there are only slight changes in angle that I believe are acceptable because I completely agree with Davie's theories on air flow and reed vibration. I've had students on either side of the extreme's. "Buck teeth" and "Underbites" are very difficult to work with but not impossible. I had one student with such a severe "underbite" or class III that she eventually went to playing bass clarinet to get a better angle on the mouthpiece. It worked out very well for her. A switch to sax is also a reasonable solution for people with extreme "underbites". As we all know, oboeists seem to do well with "overbites". That's a no brainer. Bassoonists too.
Soprano clarinets should, IMO be played the way the oral cavity dictates. Trying to play against that is asking for discomfort and a strained way of playing.
Best regards,
Rebecca
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Poulsen
Date: 2005-05-31 19:31
Ken--
I cannot speak authoritatively on how curving your tongue as you describe affects resonance and expect that you would be much more authoritative on that. Obviously, it's something that those of us who haven't done so already can all experiment with.
And, as you say, I would expect the effect on airstream speed to be negligible as the primary resistance to airflow continues to be the small gap between reed and mouthpiece, which hasn't changed, and the force behind the airflow is provided by the lungs, a force that one presumably isn't also changing in the process.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
