 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2010-11-04 21:05
I received my November issue of The Instrumentalist the other day, and was amused to read Trey Reely's article, "Weighty Matters." I never gave this subject much thought, but Reely gives approximate figures for the number of calories one can burn practicing a musical instrument. According to him, 30 minutes of practice on a woodwind instrument burns 47 calories, 71 on a violin or trumpet, 118 on a trombone, and 142 for drummers.
I give Reely credit for writing a great article and bringing up the subject, but I'm not sure if his figures are correct. According to this source from ChaCha, playing a woodwind instrument burns 132 calories per hour for someone weighing 145 pounds.
http://www.chacha.com/question/how-many-calories-are-burned-playing-clarinet
Here's another link, although clarinet playing isn't listed:
http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm
I'm surprised nobody yet has written a book called "The Play Music Weight Loss Plan."
Post Edited (2010-11-04 21:24)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dori
Date: 2010-11-04 21:10
If nothing else, this is an incentive to practice. Something tells me I still need to go to the gym <g>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2010-11-05 01:59
David- in fact, digesting your reed will use more calories than you get from the reed, so eating ALL your old reeds will be a great weight loss method!
dn
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2010-11-05 03:03
My close facing\soft reeds probably makes me burn a lot less calories than many who use very open facings with very hard reeds.
That's probably the first upside to making my playing life much harder =)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: karlbonner82
Date: 2010-11-05 03:45
Well I often find myself feeling warm and a bit sweaty after a hard practice session, so I believe the article. Am surprised to learn that trombone consumes a lot more energy than trumpet, though. I guess it has to do with the greater quality of air and the amount of slide motion the right arm must use, since it can't possibly be embouchure. (I wonder if a soprano or alto trombone would burn more calories than the tenor?)
Another interesting metabolism comparison would be clarinet vs saxophone. The sax requires more air (unless it's soprano) but the embouchure doesn't seem quite as strenuous. And of course I bet the oboe burns more calories than any other soprano woodwind! Recorders probably burn the least, which is unfortunate since that's another instrument I play...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2010-11-05 05:44
47 for 30 minutes isn't necessarily much more than the amount a regular person might burn normally unless they are a couch potato TV junky. Plus, who was tested anyway? I think some people can burn over 40 calories in 30 minutes naturally by doing nothing. One person weighing 145 pounds can burn a lot more or less calroies than someone else also weighing 145 pounds. BTW some excellent drummers (i.e. who probably play and practice a lot) are very fat. Playing any musical instrument won't help if you eat too much after.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2010-11-05 08:15
I think the average is 80 calories an hour the body uses for pretty obvious things like breathing, keeping the heart pumping, digestion, etc.
At 47 calories for 30 minutes practice, if you're looking to lose weight, you're not gonna lose weight by practicing. 47 calories would take about 5 minutes to burn on a cross-trainer. Depends on a lot of things though; if you were very overweight and very unfit, practicing the clarinet would be quite good for you as the breathing alone would get oxygen pumping through your veins.
I should know about this stuff; I've lost 17kg this year (that's 37 pound in the US)...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Plonk
Date: 2010-11-05 08:25
According to this one, it's 140 cal/h
http://caloriecount.about.com/calories-burned-woodwind-a209
and some serious research done by a university
http://prevention.sph.sc.edu/tools/docs/documents_compendium.pdf
(search for "woodwind").
1MET is what you burn while doing nothing. So I guess playing the clarinet is like doing nothing twice ;o)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Beppe
Date: 2010-11-05 11:01
But with a reed in stomach I think that pancreas and liver will works too much.
Liver will produces bile excessively and a part of reed will be expelled, WHILE BILE WILL INCREASE YOUR TENDENCY TO DEPOSIT MORE GREASE.
So nothing to do.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fishamble
Date: 2010-11-05 14:14
In this regard it matters whether you're standing or sitting when you practice. I'd assume that the original poster's surveys covered both scenarios - 47 calories sitting, 132 standing. The latter accounts for the person's weight being specified - you burn calories holding up your own weight when you're standing, but not so much if your chair is providing taking your weight.
If memory serves, about 3,500 calories burns 1 pound of weight. So a sitter would be looking to play for 37 hours to lose a pound. Or my preferred way of looking at it: 37 hours practice buys you two guilt-free restaurant nosh-ups!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Claire Annette
Date: 2010-11-13 22:19
Do these statistics include the calories burned picking up the case, opening it, assembling and disassembling the instrument, swabbing the horn, and greasing the corks? How about the calories burned while tapping the foot, then stomping the foot and slapping the leg because no matter how many times a certain passage is practiced you still can't seem to get it right?
Oh, and trills. Are we including trills?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2010-11-13 23:24
Claire, please, see your refrigerator soon, as you are in clear and present danger of getting a serious hypoglycaemia or something that's equally interesting, especially as it involves the greasing of corks.
"I'm a coroner - I love to work with people." --unknown
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2010-11-15 13:15
Ben knows of what he speaks. He once sent me a container of Swiss cork grease that was orange-scented and smelled so delicious, it took every bit of my self-restraint not to eat the stuff. I have no idea how many calories that would have been, but no doubt it would have been detrimental to my weight-loss program.
One area that surprisingly has not been addressed thus far, is the metabolic benefit of working on reeds (by hand, not using one of those fancy automatic devices like an ATG or whatever). I'd be willing to bet I've expended many thousands of calories over the past couple centuries or so, just in scraping and sanding and filing and wetting/drying all those reeds....
Off-topic, but this reminds me of something my perceptive older brother once said while watching me dry some reeds between thumb and forefinger per one of the reed-adjustment books: he said that my playing problems were the result of "rubbing my reeds the wrong way".....
Post Edited (2010-11-15 13:16)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
