 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-09-14 20:28
I see more and more professional clarinetists using strength 4 reeds; pretty hard. The idea that I put forward is that playing on a harder reed is harder physically, but easier technically. I know for a fact that the fine players of the past used reeds that we would find pretty weak these days. Your thoughts on the matter, please.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bmcgar ★2017
Date: 2019-09-14 20:45
I don't see that happening at all, at least in the last 60 years I've been in the clarinet world.
I agree with "harder physically, but easier technically," though.
B.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fernie121
Date: 2019-09-14 20:46
Doesn’t the resistance depend on the reed and the mouthpiece and how they work together? In Austria, they use very hard reeds but their setup isn’t exactly very resistant. It just fits the mouthpiece they use. Or am I missing something?
I do find players moving towards very resistant setups, regardless of reed strength though.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-09-14 21:43
Clarinetists of yesteryear: Brymer, Alan Hacker, Cahuzac, Lancelot..all used strength 3 at the hardest (the half strengths didn't exist at the time). I would say on average for symphony players the strength is number 4, which is actually a big difference.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2019-09-14 21:43
Yeah I don't agree with the premise at all. If you're a professional clarinetist, you use a reed that PLAYS and TUNES the way you want with the LEAST hassle.
One extreme example:
In Germany the tendency is to use a mouthpiece with a very small opening, a very long facing ........and pair that with a very soft (strength 2 1/2) reed.
I find a percentage of students equating strength number with advancement, such as, "I started on a #2, last year I played a #3, so in a few years I should be playing a #4." This is utterly ridiculous.
DON'T DO IT !!!!!!
Use reeds that give you the sound you want, and tune easily with the least effort.
END OF RANT
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: gwie
Date: 2019-09-14 21:47
My experience has been the opposite--many more people playing in the 3.0-3.5 range versus all 4.0+.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-09-14 21:49
Paul: I certainly agree with you that youngsters shouldn't have the mistaken notion that they are "moving up" to a harder reed.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dorjepismo ★2017
Date: 2019-09-14 22:16
When I was studying at a conservatory in the early '70s, common knowledge was that top pros were playing on 4s and 5s. This isn't a recent phenomenon.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2019-09-14 22:47
I'm not sure you can use your four English and French examples to typify clarinetists of the last generation everywhere, even during their playing lives. Here in the Philadelphia/Curtis Institute circle Vandoren #5s were generally the rule. That changed to some extent when VD first started to make the V.12 line. I have no idea what has happened in Germany, Austria, Japan and other places where standard orchestral clarinet playing is popular.
Those 1950s through 1970s #5 VDs (pre-V.12) were, I'm fairly certain, softer than the ones Vandoren produces now in any of its models. So, bottom line, strengths from 50-60 years ago don't necessarily mean the same thing they do today.
As was already mentioned, you can't really make observations about professional or experienced amateur players' reed choices without considering what was already brought up about choices in mouthpiece facings. If you change one, you often change the other. So, if the clarinetists whose reed preferences you're familiar with are using harder reeds, you also have to find out what mouthpiece changes they've made.
So, I don't know if your premise is true for a specific area or "school" or if the result is truly that the players are working harder physically. I personally have scaled back to lower strength numbers, but I think mostly because the strengths have gotten harder. I'm looking for the same response I've always looked for. The numbers have changed at the factory end.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tom H
Date: 2019-09-15 05:36
I don't know if things have really changed much. I recall during my years playing year round in New York (1970s) that many used reeds harder than mine. Many used harder than a 3 Vandoren. I've always used a 2 1/2 Van D., except when they changed the numbering for a few years and I used what they labeled a "2 1/2--3". Of course, as pointed out, mouthpiece is a big factor, mine being Vandoren 5RV.
It is harder to get the extreme altissimo notes to speak easily with a softer reed, but it can be done.
The Most Advanced Clarinet Book--
tomheimer.ampbk.com/ Sheet Music Plus item A0.1001315, Musicnotes product no. MB0000649.
Boreal Ballad for unaccompanied clarinet-Sheet Music Plus item A0.1001314.
Musicnotes product no. MNO287475
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: hans
Date: 2019-09-15 07:31
Attachment: from Artie Shaw Clarinet Method.jpg (557k)
FWIW - Artie Shaw (see the attached excerpt from his Clarinet Method book) seemed to prescribe a fairly closed mouthpiece with a reed that is not too soft, which is not the same as "play the stiffest reed you can manage".
Hans
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-09-15 11:06
It is easier to get a creamier legato with a hardish reed and a tone that is darker and more full-bodied. This can be done with a softer reed, but as I have already said, is technically more difficult. It also seems to me that you can get more harmonics out of a softer reed. I remember the bassoonists of the Philadelphia Orchestra and its oboists when there was still such a thing as the "Philadelphia school" of playing, also played very soft reeds (Tabuteau, de Lancie, Garfield, etc.). I personally play with a double-lip embouchure and most double-lippers are said to have a smaller sound. This isn't actually because of their embouchure. It's simply because they tend to use softer reeds.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2019-09-15 15:53
Quote:
Those 1950s through 1970s #5 VDs (pre-V.12) were, I'm fairly certain, softer than the ones Vandoren produces now in any of its models. So, bottom line, strengths from 50-60 years ago don't necessarily mean the same thing they do today.
A number of years ago I had a large stash of the old purple box Vandorens in #5 strength. These were from the late 70s and early 80s. I had purchased them from a store that was going out of business. They played very well for me. As I ran out, I purchased some newer Vandoren reeds in the same strength. I found the new ones impossible for me to play as they were much harder.
I don't agree with the generalizations that pros today are playing harder reeds and that double lip players have a smaller sound. There are some players for which this would be true, but I can think of many examples of the opposite as well.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-09-15 16:12
I agree that double-lip layers having a smaller sound is a cliché. But if they do, it's simply because they're playing on softer reeds. It's not the embouchure that produces a smaller sound. That said, double-lip embouchure players don't necessarily play on softer reeds.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2019-09-15 17:05
ruben wrote:
> I remember the bassoonists of
> the Philadelphia Orchestra and its oboists when there was still
> such a thing as the "Philadelphia school" of playing, also
> played very soft reeds (Tabuteau, de Lancie, Garfield, etc.).
Gigliotti, who was certainly of the "Philadelphia school" of sound concept, played on VD #5. When they were for a short time unavailable, he played on Lurie #5.5. When V.12s first appeared, he played #4.5 when I was still in touch, although someone recently told me he later switched to #5 V.12s. The sound he got from them, which was in some ways the antithesis of the round "dark" sound that has become popular, resulted from his approach to embouchure, the mouthpieces he used and the way he adjusted the reeds.
But, once again, reeds have changed and the numbering systems used today by the myriad manufacturers don't necessarily line up. And of course most oboists and bassoonists back in the days you're recalling (I think it's still true today) made their own reeds, so I'm not sure how you'd quantify how "hard" their reeds were. They needed to sound resonant and articulate cleanly.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Lagace
Date: 2019-09-15 17:07
Like one comment above, the mouthpiece/reed are a marriage. I can reface a mouthpiece so a #1 reed is way too hard or a #5 is way too soft. The strength differences now are due to reed changes, not playing changes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BethGraham
Date: 2019-09-15 17:10
My clarinet teacher, who's a professional band/small ensemble musician, plays on a 2.5 strength reed. OP's statement about professionals and their reeds seems rather sweeping.
Always remember, it's not the size of your reed; it's what you do with it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2019-09-15 17:27
Ruben's last couple of posts to this thread made me think about players who made and even today make their own reeds from blanks (or even tubes). I remember reading something on Clark Fobes's blog space several years ago (I can't find it now) in which he suggested, as nearly as I remember it, that no matter what you cut or scrape to make a hand-made reed vibrate more freely, it will always keep its basic feel of resistance - whether mushy or stiff or "just right" - because of the character of the cane itself. Hard cane behaves one way, soft cane behaves differently, and the basic behavior of a piece of cane remains consistent through the whole process. (This can explain in large part why some players start with commercial reeds in hard strengths and scrape them down to the vibrancy they want.)
All of this begs a question for me to those of you who have experience making your own reeds: How do you control the hardness of the cane you start with? Do you just start on a reed and decide at some point later in the process if its characteristics are promising or not? Are there ways to determine a blanks hardness before you get started working on it? Do you even find what I'm remembering of Clark's blog post to be true?
(If Clark reads this, maybe he'll clarify what he said - I may have it quite wrong.)
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-09-15 18:06
Karl: I must admit that I failed to mention Mr. Gigliotti for the simple reason that I never cared for his tone (though respected his fantastic solidity). I did play with students of Schoenbach, Garfield (namely Jim Hough, principal bassoon of of the Utah Orchestra at one point) and de Lancie and found them almost dogmatic about how reeds should offer minimal resistance. Players here in Paris when they tried their reeds didn't understand how they could control anything so weak and "kazoo-like". Schoenbach was fond of saying: "the bassoon is a wind instrument, not a lip instrument!"
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: YT
Date: 2019-09-15 18:43
I as a German clarinetist have to chime in to Paul's statement:
Germans playing very close mouthpieces with pretty soft reeds isn't true anymore. Nowadays the most professional German clarinet players play on French facings (fairly open) with French reeds, those who didn't choose that kind of playing play indeed on pretty close facings but with hard reeds, as you do it typically in Austria with the viennesse way of playing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-09-15 19:42
YT; ...absolutely! The sound of the great Heinrich Geuser in Germany is as gone as that of Jacques Lancelot's in France. Maybe it's a pity. Chalk it up to globalisation.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Lagace
Date: 2019-09-15 19:53
>>All of this begs a question for me to those of you who have experience making your own reeds: How do you control the hardness of the cane you start with? Do you just start on a reed and decide at some point later in the process if its characteristics are promising or not? Are there ways to determine a blanks hardness before you get started working on it? Do you even find what I'm remembering of Clark's blog post to be true?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It doesn't matter.
Making your own reed from tubes results in the best reed you will get from what you ever have, depending on the amount of experience you have.
And it is even more complicated than that.
Depending on which side of the cane got the most sun and most wind, half of the tube may be harder than the other half, and you may have split it in such a way that half the reed is harder than the other half. But a skilled reed maker will get the best from what he/she makes. And the result is usually good enough for practicing, or given to students who do not have reeds as nice.
It is the same idea as when Michelangelo said, "There is a fine sculpture inside every piece of marble." It is up to the sculptor/reed maker to remove everything not needed to make it great.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EbClarinet
Date: 2019-09-15 21:00
I personally agree with all of you that are speaking TRUTH and from professional experience. I, too, think it's a certain mindset to say "all" professionals are going harder. Harder doesn't mean or make you BETTER.
I knew the 2nd chair Bb Clarinet player in college was raving and having others worship her because she played a Vandoren #4. I thought this was silly and it didn't mean she was that good. I played a Vandoren 4 in high school marching band because I wanted to play louder for marching band my sophomore year. I went back 2 a 3.5 for concert season. My junior year, I stayed on a 3.5 because playing louder didn't mean I played BETTER. I've been on a 3.5 every since. College, personally, community band and what ever. I have 3.5s on my C Clarinet that are V12s. I have excellent tone quality, warmth of sound and control using that setup, my Pyne crystal mouthpiece and Rovner big.
Now on my Eb Clarinet I REQUIRE Vandoren Whitemaster 4s. They're for Bb but I just cut off some of the length and they fit perfectly 2 my 5RV mouthpiece. I use them for CONTROL and tuning. I've been complimented by my musicians of how well I play in tune with my setup on Eb Clarinet. The Eb plays in the altissimo register a LOT and I need 2 b in tune with the flutes/piccolos up there. The Eb is known for being out of tune, especially in the clarion and long tones register.
I've NEVER saw the use if a Vandoren 5 for my playing. I don't equate reed strength with skill. A Bari sax player told me he played on a 5 for high school so he could play loud. I hope he was in tune though. I had a hard Lavoz which was the equivalent of a 5 Vandoren and I could actually over blow it. My fellow clarinetist in college said he over blew it too. I know reed strengths aren't the same per brand though.
On my Eb Sopranino Sax, I use Vandoren 4s for control and tuning purposes. I have great tone quality on that sax 2. Those 4s for the sopranino sax aren't that hard or difficult to player either.
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/mbtldsongministry/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2019-09-16 03:12
When I was selling the Steur reeds for the clarinet and saxophones almost all of the clarinet reeds were 3 and 3 1/2 strength reeds. as for the saxophone reeds 2 1/2 out sold all of the other strengths combined.
As for mouthpiece tip openings the most common tip opening players seem to like most is between 1.06 to 1.08mm's. When I send out 5 or 6 samples now ranging from 1.03 to 1.13 I sell very few over 1.08.
So my conclusion is the pros as well as advanced players don't want to work hard and in fact the double lip players still prefer around 1.02 or so with a 3 to 3 1/2 reed.
Julian Bliss and John Bruce Yeh seem to play on heavier reeds with more open tip openings. John sounds very good as we all know. Julian is an amazing jazz player. The Chicago Symphony hall is huge. Maybe players feel the need to use a slightly heavier reed there and a more open mouthpiece. When I played there for one concert I used a 1/2 strength harder reed. But at Severance Hall in Cleveland I didn't have to.
As far as top jazz player we also have Eddie Daniels who only uses a tip opening of 1.03 and we all know he can hit any note on the clarinet as well as bend notes.
Designer of - Vintage 1940 Cicero Mouthpieces and the La Vecchia mouthpieces
Yamaha Artist 2015
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-09-17 09:36
Just one last comment by way of conclusion: as you get older, you won't be able to "push" a hard reed any more because of declining strength in the jaw and less respiratory capacity. I suggest preempting this by whittling down to a softer reed before it becomes necessary; before you have no choice but to do so.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2019-09-17 15:20
If you're using your jaw muscle for anything other than chewing nuts and steak, then you've got the wrong concept of what is going on.
That's called "biting."
Also "capacity" is not correct either. It is an active pushing of the air out, not volume. I think Stanley Drucker is still doing that correctly at 90.
This thread almost feels like we are being 'punked.'
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2019-09-17 20:10
>> If you're using your jaw muscle for anything other than chewing nuts and steak, then you've got the wrong concept of what is going on.
>> That's called "biting.">>
You have two sets of jaw muscles, one set to close your teeth and the other, opposing set to open them.
The balance between these two sets creates the stable gap between the teeth on which the embouchure is founded. See The wrench method.
>> Also "capacity" is not correct either. It is an active pushing of the air out, not volume. I think Stanley Drucker is still doing that correctly at 90.>>
Harder reeds tend to require a larger volume of air at a given dynamic, so you may well need softer reeds to play the longer phrases as you age.
>> This thread almost feels like we are being 'punked.'>>
Especially when you join it.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vrufino
Date: 2019-09-29 02:11
In the late 60’s and early 70’s I was a strident of Joe Allards. While I was a college student, He advised me to save money and play on Rico 5’s, After I graduated I began playing on Morre reeds that I purchased from Joe. They were 2.5 strengths but must stiffer than the Rico 5’s. The mouthpiece I used then was a Cicero Kasparov 114 opening. At that time Marcellus was playing Morris and according to Mr. Marks who imported the reeds, Marcellus was also playing on 2.5. The numbers don’t really matter, because they are not uniform across the brands. These Morris were very stiff reeds.
Dr. Vincent J. Rufino
Professor of clarinet and saxophone
St. Elizabeth University
Morristown, NJ
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-09-29 19:21
Dear Vincent, the company Pilgerstorfer in Austria makes a model of reed-among many others-they call "Morré". If you have tried them, I wonder how you find they compare to the real thing: the original Morré reeds. I lived in Switzerland for a while and tried, unsuccessfully, to get my hands on some old Morré reeds. I find the Pilgerstorfer Morré fantastic: my favorite reeds.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2019-10-01 06:50
Hi Ruben, I have tried the NEW Morre's. I also have a few reeds from the 1970's. They are so different and the old Morre's had 2 different cuts, the German cuts and the French cuts. Most of the players seemed to gravitate towards the German cuts. These reeds came in 2 and 2 1/2 strength reeds and then Bob Marcellus requested Morre' to make a 2 1/4 strength which he did until this man died and then the shop was closed. This reed was indeed very popular, because of this ideal strength. The thickness was about the blank size of a tenor sax and partly why these reeds lasted a long time and players could rework them without screwing them up; knowing there was a lot of wood left to reshape and literally make a new reed. The thickness was around .128 - .138". The thickest Vandoren's might be around .123". give or take .005".
To answer your question, The only thing that is the same as the NEW and OLD Morre' reeds is the name. Owners, cane, and machines, are all different. This doesn't really matter to me. But the actual cut of the reed does. It's not the same. A great Vandoren reed or a great Steuer reed plays like the old Morre's.
This is partly why I liked the Steuer reeds, but the cuts of the reeds are too inconsistent. So we continue to hope for that special cut from reed companies. I have to say it's hard to meet every players needs, but reed companies are getting closer.
Designer of - Vintage 1940 Cicero Mouthpieces and the La Vecchia mouthpieces
Yamaha Artist 2015
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2019-10-01 09:28
Thanks for the information, Bob.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
