 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Chalumeau Joe
Date: 2005-11-05 02:10
Does anybody have any experience playing a pocket clarinet/chalumeax? "Lark in the Morning" sells one for $86.95:
http://larkinthemorning.com/product.asp_Q_pn_E_WIN161_A_Ebony+Pocket+Clarinet_E_
Opinions, please.
Regards,
JC
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-11-05 02:29
Do a bulletin board search on "lark in the morning" (no quotes needed)
Their instruments have not gotten rave reviews ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2005-11-05 10:05
No, but Sidney Bechet used to carry his clarinet in his pockets.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-11-05 11:52
I do employ a chalumeau in our ensemble´s concerts from time to time. Mine is recorder-sized, with a common sopranocl (Bb)-mouthpiece. There´s a version with an octave-key, but as far as chalumeaus go, I´d always stick to those keyless (because, besides you´re a renaissance/Old Music - specialist, it´s a rather pointless enterprise then, something like a cl with let´s say 6 keys), for the "antique" feel whilst performing it. Such a chalumeau is an excellent instrument to enter the single reed - family, children find it usually easier to finger, it´s naturally close to the recorder´s fingering, and, in New Music contexts, the upper octave (the ambitus is around 2 full octaves, and not all chromatic intervalls respond well - but that´s what makes it interesting to play, in certain circumstances) has a distinct shrill and cutting quality, as like a mini nasal chainsaw (not that loud,though). A great attribuition as far as adding an individual voice to the single reeds, but not very deep.
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chalumeau Joe
Date: 2005-11-05 14:52
A quick Google groups search came up with some pretty disappointing reviews (i.e., hard to play, poorly tuned).
I had wanted to get the pocket clarinet; however, after a bit of Googling, I expect it will play a lot like the Xaphoon, so I think I'll pass.
JC
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2005-11-05 15:15
I wonder if there has someone come up with 2 ft of stiff pvc tube, drill some holes and shove the mouthpiece into one end...
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2005-11-05 15:23
Given all the things that have been done (and are still being done) to make the clarinet play in tune, it seems only logical that a natural chalameau would have some quirks. It might be fun to have one--particularly if you have students--to demonstrate how lucky we are to have our modern instrument.
Ditto for wood flutes and modern flutes IMO.
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DougR
Date: 2005-11-06 03:35
Attachment: hfp.jpg (64k)
well, here's the answer to your prayers, maybe---but we're, oh, maybe 70 or 80 years too late. I have an old recording by Red Nichols that includes Adrian Rollini playing one of these, but with the primitive recording (plus the fact that I've pretty well worn out the record) I can't pick out its distinctive (I assume) voice. If I had to guess, Î'd imagine it sounds something like a really expensive duck call.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Kalakos
Date: 2005-11-06 04:22
My first clarinet consisted of a regular mouthpiece someone gave me. I was about 14 or 15. I then took the hand hold end of a broken soft ball bat, drilled it out, put in some finger holes, and there it was!
It played; even in tune; but it sounded like a saxophone. I abondoned it and finally got my first Albert, C clarinet, a Conn, and I was on my way.
Someone gave me a Xaphoon, but I didn't like the mouthpiece; it sort of sounded like a .... saxophone ... kind of like the first "clarinet" I made from a bat! I sold the Xaphoon!
Kalakos
Kalakos Music
http://www.TAdelphia.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-11-06 09:39
Jolly, you guys with "playing in tune" - yes we´re lucky to have the modern cl and its advanced making technique: But the great advantage of the reed instruments in the eyes/ears of modern composers and performers alike is the heterogneous intonation (well,not the only thing which makes woodwinds so attractive for composing, but a fundamental one) of the different registers. Not one single heap of voices all tuned well-tempered, but to have a shifting multitude at one´s disposal, clashing, cutting tones, - exactly as Schönberg said in his great "Harmonielehre", it´s nothing but lazy habit what we call just intonation and dissonance. And this modern chalumeau definitely has its own voice,limited yes, but fetching.
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2005-11-06 16:13
Marcus, could you say that in German?
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2005-11-06 17:45
> Marcus, could you say that in German?
Why not simply post an .mp3? (I find it extremely difficult to explain music or paintings...)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-11-06 18:53
![[yeah]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smiley17.gif) ...certainly, I could. I think so. ...But I´m afraif in German I´ll indulge in even more rhizomatic vocabulary and even longer sentences; today I read another brilliant word coined by Heidegger, quite lucid, though: "Unzuhause", as the negative substantive form of an adverb. It´s the titel of a composition for cl solo which I ordered today.
And Ben is certainly right in saying that it is highly questionable, though unavoidable, to explain one art through/by another code. I wonder why that is so. Any conception about an prae- or out of-area, a metaphysical realm where the musical objectives dwell, is nowadays clearly overthrown and has no rational basis whatsoever. But it´s on the other hand equally unsatisfactory if "everyone just stick to one´s own grounds" and finis. We all know that more than well how a difficult phrase is at least as difficult to explain, speaking from teacher´s perspective, as to play it, but as soon as one can sing it,however screechingly,it soon becomes quite clear how to perform the phrase. The philosphies of Heidegger, Josef König and Plessner suggest it quite with authority that the only way to critisize, talk about, value art with words is to produce a work of art itself, repeat creation. Which would efface its hermeneutical status as critique/evaluation/explanation. And so on...
markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
![[tongue]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie6.gif)
