Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-02-09 18:56
Paul Aviles wrote:
> Anyway, this makes the system most efficient. If you get
> great results in less efficient ways that only means you don't
> mind working harder.
>
Paul, *I* probably do things the same way you do (to the extent I can accurately understand what you do). The point of the thread seemed to be the OP's final sentence, "How do you *teach* clarinet tongue position?" (my emphasis).
This wasn't, as I read it, about how any of us position our own tongues; it asked what we say about it to our students. I questioned the idea of "fast" air because I don't know that it conveys the same image to everyone who uses or hears it, and I'm not aware of a way to measure it objectively. In the process I questioned whether the actual speed of the air (could pressure be an explanation? Direction? Focus - your word? Are those all synonymous with speed?) was the physically verifiable explanation. I also gave my own answer to the actual question, saying only that I don't "teach" tongue position, the player in essence finds it for himself, perhaps with some specific individualized cues from me, using his ears as the arbiter of the result. Whatever descriptions a teacher uses (including warm/cool and slow/fast air) fall into the category of imagery and not, at least currently, verifiable science.
Teachers can say anything that seems useful to a student or nothing, if nothing need be said. I get antsy when we get all wrapped up in science and physics when what's really involved are conjecture and imagery.
Can anyone tell me how to make my tone darker?
Karl
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
