 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: muppie
Date: 2014-03-02 04:38
Hi,
The Bb has two fingerings on my fingering chart. One is with index finger + thumb. This one on the Ridenour Lyrique seems to produce a not so nice sound, more resistance when compared to using index finger + the second trill key with the right index finger (second key from the top).
I tried it on my E12F, the result is the same, although the E12F gives me a slightly less resistance with the index+thumb than on the Ridenour.
What can I do to make the left index + thumb to sound just as nice, or is this just what it is?
Thanks
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2014-03-02 10:03
The resistance of the register (left thumb) key is always a compromise between clarion note security and the quality of the throat Bb. Tom seems to prefer a higher resistance, though it can be adjusted several ways- usually the amount the key opens (by cork under the lever).
However, throat tones A and Bb are always problematic. On my Arioso they are nicer than my previous Leblanc Dynamic, but I learned some of Tom's so-called "resonance fingerings" which greatly improved them on the Leblanc and somewhat improve them on the Arioso (not as much because they start off better).
For throat Bb, try adding right hand fingers 3-4 or 2-3-4. It's like magic! Tom describes this in a YouTube video called "Clearing your Throat" or something like that. For the A try RH 3-4. I also learned that which fingers is not all that critical, so I've gotten lazy in a lot of passages and just leave some RH fingers down while playing the A or Bb.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qehEEj1GIGg
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2014-03-02 17:51)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2014-03-02 16:00
Throat Bb using the trill key will always sound better due to it employing larger diameter toneholes that are correctly placed as opposed to merely sharpening the throat A by opening the speaker key.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2014-03-02 15:08
As Sidney Forrest said, focus the sound and blow harder.
It helps to use the resonance fingering, adding the two ring fingers plus the low F key with the right little finger.
Depending on how your hand is shaped, you can often use the third side key rather than the register key. And there are numerous mechanisms for using alternate holes and creating additional venting.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2014-03-02 20:26
Using "resonance" fingerings and learning to voice the Bb with A + R-key are the ways to make that fingering sound better. But the other half of the answer is that you can use the side trill key fingering anytime it's convenient.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2014-03-02 15:27
Welcome back, Ken! Good to see you posting again.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-03-02 20:36
I would HIGHLY recommend getting used to the 'standard' Bb fingering of register and "A" key since this is much faster in MOST situations (particularly arpeggiated figures and leaping in and out of the clarion register).
The actual resonance fingers you use vary somewhat from brand to brand. I am pretty successful using fingers 3 and 4 of both hands for the Bb (without the RH Eb/Ab key). The other useful one is just finger three of both hands WITH the RH Eb/Ab key. As for the other throat notes, this varies a lot more. On Buffet the "A" is most resonant with just finger 1 of the right hand (but it's better on my Yamaha with both fingers 1and 2). "G" on Buffet seems better with 3 and 4 of the right hand but the Yamaha favors fingers 1 and 2. The bottom line is you need to experiment with this for yourself. Keep in mind that ANY resonance fingering lowers the pitch slightly (varied by which fingering you use) and you need to compensate for this.
..........Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-03-02 18:04
now..sigh... if someone had a resonance fingering for ![[C#4]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/db4.gif)
I understand that this note lacks the clarity of, say, an ![[F5]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/f5.gif) because its tone hole positioning/size (in some ways not unlike the throat Bb) represented a compromise that might better be addressed if clarinets were not segmented into upper and lower joints--such that the tone hole could be put close enough to where the joints on our clarinets meet, that the hole's integrity might not be compromised by its proximity to the end of a joint.
Which brings me to a question: why segment a clarinet into upper and lower joints? Now, I believe that in the case of grenadilla instruments, coming by a piece of the stuff machined, of that length and needed quality, might prove problematic to the point of markedly raising the cost of clarinets, but how's about in the case of clarinets like Tom Ridenour's rubber ones?
Would making the upper and lower joints of a clarinet as one, assuming doable, present problems (a more soprano saxophone looking case notwithstanding)?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2014-03-03 00:12
The reason clarinets are mostly made with separate joints is if the top joint cracks (which is likely on wooden clarinets), it's easier and far less expensive to replace the top joint only than to replace an entire body joint.
There are some clarinets being made with a single body joint - Rossi clarinets are made like this and Eb clarinets are mainly made with a single body joint.
When it comes to clarinets with the articulated C#/G# mechanism, the C#/G# tonehole goes right through the middle tenon and socket, so they have the same length top joint with the tenon cut back further to make it longer, the lower joint is a few millimetres longer at the socket end and the C#/G# key and pad cup is mounted on the lower joint instead of being on the top joint.
But putting any RH fingers down while the C#/G# key is open will close the C#/G# pad cup as the RH rings are linked to the C#/G# pad cup in order to make a B/F#-C/G# trill easy (as it is on saxes) and also intervals and tremolos involving C#/G# easier.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2014-03-03 00:16
One piece clarinets have been produced for over 100 years, currently I believe Rossi is the only maker regularly offering them.
As to why segment, there are priobably several reasons but primarily the ready availability of billets of good quality long enough is a main one. The task of manufacture is also more difficult e.g. much longer reamers needed, difficulty of undercutting tone holes, harder to make small adjustments for tuning etc etc.
Problem of replacing a cracked joint also comes into it.
It can all be done - but at a price that the general market is unlikely to accept.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-03-03 01:11
I get that all thanks. But what's the case for two pieces with rubber clarinets like Tom Ridenour's?
I'm sure Mr. Ridenour thought this out.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2014-03-02 20:22
The case is the case - if you have a pair of clarinets you'll have to carry two cases as the single body joint Bb won't fit into a regular double case.
Also you'll either have two point screws with the slotted ends opposing each other in very close proximity (for the LH and RH ring keys) which makes it a pain to use a screwdriver on them unless a single pillar is fitted with a double ended point fitted into it, or an extra long rod screw for the LH rings (going in from the top end) and a point at the end for the RH rings. The C#/G# rod screw will require clearance as well so it can be removed/fitted easily.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThatPerfectReed
Date: 2014-03-03 01:54
Chris--maybe it's me, but I think we got a little lost in translation.
When I said what's the case for having 2 joints like in the case of Tim Ridenour's rubber clarinets, the word case was not being used then to suggest the "box with a handle" you put the instrument into to transport it, but rather the word "case" as appears in this fragment...
"what's the case for leaving synthetic reeds on the mouthpiece between practice sessions?"
(that's just an example--it's been covered, no need to reply)
It's probably my bad. I'm sorry. I should have been clearer. ![[grin]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie5.gif)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2014-03-03 03:17
Still, most of the non-wood clarinet production is aimed at students from grade school to college, and a case for a full length one-piece clarinet wouldn't fit in a bookbag or briefcase, which is how many, especially younger students carry their instruments. It may be that upper end hard rubber clarinets are simply imitating what has by now become a two-piece clarinet tradition.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-03-03 03:29
Well, it may not be one of THE reasons, but I find it substantially easier to repair (diagnose problems) when you have only half the number of pads to check at one time. This IS my only reluctance to being MORE serious about switching to Rossi even though the majority of live performances that I have heard that really stuck out (French system that is) were done on these instruments.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
