 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-06 19:31
Hi,
I am playing around with recording myself so I can do a remote performance exam for the ABRSM. When I play back my performance it sounds terrible. I sound like a duck or a kazoo. I just wondered - do you think I need to work on my tone or is it being in a bigger room or something that helps?
I attached the file so you can hear. It was recorded with a zoom H1n, directly onto the zoom's memory card. The settings on the screen say 96k 24bit, off, off, off.
I showed my son, and showed him also the recording of Emma Johnson below, and explained that I would like to sound like that, and he said "Okay, but you know that is not going to happen, right?". I would like to think that I could get maybe half way in that direction though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMZiuQNBspw
Thanks!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-06 19:42
I just wondered if anyone might know what I am meant to do to sound nicer?
The clarinet is a new Yamaha Custom CX, with a J&D Hite D mouthpiece and a 2.5 Vandoren V12 reed. The ligature is a Rovner dark one. My lungs are probably a bit rubbish.
Thanks!
Adult learner, Grade 3
Equipment: Yamaha Custom CX Bb, Fobes 10K CF mp,
Legere Soprano Sax American Cut #2, Vandoren Optimum German Lig.
Post Edited (2021-02-06 19:45)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BethGraham
Date: 2021-02-06 20:14
For what it's worth as another newbie, I think you're doing just fine. Remind us how long you've been playing clarinet, Jen?
I hear you on the kazoo thing, though. I hear the same in my practicing sometimes. (Mostly, though, I find myself sounding "flute-y," if that means anything to you.) I've recently started practicing in a different space (my kitchen, which is more "alive," acoustically), and that has made some difference in how I perceive my sound.
What does your teacher have to say? Does he/she perceive the same qualities in your sound? Would you be able to take one or two "master classes" with another teacher to get another perspective? (I remember that Peter C. kindly offered his services in your register key thread.)
Being an adult learner is hard. It's hard to be kind and patient with ourselves.
Power to the adult students! (Fist upraised in solidarity)
Beth
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-06 21:30
The recording process is its own discipline.
You may not sound like Emma Johnson, but I am sure you don't sound like the provided recording either (somewhere in between I'm guessing).
First off your are WAY too close to the mic. It even sounds like there may be some distortion involved. I seem to recall earlier attempts where you were determining which equipment to use and all of those (ALL OF THOSE) sounded better. So first off you need to be at least 10 feet from the mic with a clarinet (maybe more like 15 feet). Then there are automatic settings on the Zoom (default if I remember correctly) that you need to SHUT OFF so that you get a better differential between SOFT sounds and LOUD sounds. The default is good for recorded spoken voice when you want to hear all the sounds of every spoken WORD. But for music, you need nice transients (sharper, louder starts to notes) and nice tapers and softer endings.
To that end though you need to play your loudest sounds and set the recorder so that it is "peaking" (not in the red, or max input for the machine) in the safe zone (yellow blinky lights on most mixers........I'm not looking at the H1n manual........poor internet connection right now). Then the sounds that are less loud will actually record softer.
Also it is the room interactions that make Emma Johnson's sound appear the way it does.....lots of gushy, hall like reverb (whether natural or imposed).
Of course the clarinety way to improve the sound is to work much more from the belly. If you've ever tried blowing up a beach toy just with your breath.........that's the way it needs to feel ALL THE TIME when you play clarinet. The key is a really steady stream of air (whether it is a small stream of air for soft passages or a larger stream of air for loud passages), and that takes some work.
...................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-06 21:43
Hi Paul,
Thank you very much. That is great.
I had forgotten that you said to put the microphone further away. I will do that.
I did wonder whether the big room was needed. We're not allowed out right now, so maybe the kitchen is my best bet, with the mic at the other end of the room. I suppose ideally a church would be the thing.
I get what you mean about the beach ball. I don't think I've ever actually managed to blow up a beach ball, and I always blow up balloons with a bicycle pump as I don't have the puff to do it the usual way. Maybe that is a clue to what I need to do to get better at the clarinet though.
Beth - Thanks for the encouragement. I think I started in April 2018, so it must be nearly three years now. That's nice to realise that I'm still going, and still improving after so long. This is the longest I've gone on an instrument without hitting some barrier to progress before.
Thanks!
Jen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-06 22:11
Attachment: My Movie3_0.mp3 (193k)
Hi,
I just tried recording from a distance in a bigger room with the Zoom H1n, and it didn't really seem that different tbh. I must be doing something weird with the settings or something.
But I remember that when I posted recordings before Paul said the best sound was from my little powershot camera, so I got that out again and recorded myself from 10 feet away, and I actually think that it sounds nicer.
I'm now wondering if it might make sense just to use the Powershot as it's easy and does seem to do a good enough recording. It's also really easy to set up and to get the colour and lighting really good for watching myself play. I'm finding that seeing recordings of myself is really helpful for understanding what I'm doing wrong and what I could improve.
I attached a sound file from the camera in case you would like to see. I think it sounds quite a lot better and much less ducky. Not Emma Johnson, you know, but good enough for what I'm doing.
Thanks!
Jen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2021-02-06 22:18
Emma Johnson's recordings are mostly with her playing a large bore Peter Eaton handmade clarinet, I believe. The Elite has a bore somewhere around 15 mm unlike the smaller bore Yamaha CX that you play. You are trying to match the sound of a traditional English clarinet (derived ultimately from the Boosey and Hawkes 1010 clarinet) on an instrument patterned after a French model. One traditional English conception is for a dense, thick, syrupy sound, and one traditional French conception is for a vibrant, slightly nasal one. Eaton is retired from making clarinets (though I believe he helps players find used models of his instruments that might be for sale) but he still makes mouthpieces. And his mouthpiece design is quite different from that of the Hite D you play. Eaton likes large A-chambers and other features not found in the Hite. So you are sort of trying to paddle a raft with a pair of broom sweeps as if it were a racing scull with oars.
Would it be worth your while to pay dearly for a used Eaton Elite clarinet and ask Eaton to make you a mouthpiece like the one Emma plays (which would probably be around $400 US money). I don't know. You might still prefer the more French qualities of the Yamaha. Many players do. If I were trying to sound like Emma, I'd probably get a Yamaha SEV clarinet or a used Yamaha SE (almost the same instrument), which has a more abrupt bore taper than the CX and can be nudged a bit more to sound like an English big bore clarinet. I'd also dump the Hite D mouthpiece. Emma doesn't have much edge in her sound, so I would play a mouthpiece that tended towards roundness such as the Hawkins Vocalise or the Vandoren 30D. Developing your embouchure to play reeds of at least 3 or 3.5 strength might also add to the density of the sound.
Your son is probably right that you will not sound like Emma even on an Eaton Elite or a Yamaha SEV with a different mouthpiece. But you might no longer hear as much of what you perceive as a kazoo quality. And of course the advice given above about playing further from the mike is correct. Most players are surprised how they sound the first time they hear a playback. Remember Emma didn't do her recordings on your sound equipment. She had the benefit of pro sound engineers and top quality studio equipment. And Emma probably had many thousands of hours of practice under her belt before she ever made commercial recordings. How long have you been playing?
Thousands of American clarinetists have tried to sound like Harold Wright or Robert Marcellus; younger Americans have tried to sound like Jon Manasse or Ricardo Morales, but few if any any achieve either any of these goals. Still, many manage to sound very good nevertheless. Perhaps it is best to try to play as well as Emma Johnson but sound like yourself.
Post Edited (2021-02-06 22:45)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2021-02-06 22:37
I think you are being very hard on yourself to say that you sound like you're playing a Kazoo. It's just not the case. : - )
And okay, you don't sound like Emma Johnson but she's been (at the risk of pointing out the obvious) doing this a LONG time on equipment (including recording equipment) likely better than yours. And while we can certainly agree that Squidward Tentacles is not a good player, the definition of ideal sound is quite open to opinion. (I do think Ms. Johnson sounds lovely in your link; I don't mean to imply otherwise.)
Energy I think is better spent on what we can do to improve your sound. If you were my student I would have you play long tones with the following advice/mindset:
The embouchure is not a vice but rather a rubber band. Pressure doesn't simply come from grabbing the mouthpiece and pushing the top and bottom lips towards a center point. Focus on applying pressure in all directions, especially from the sides that you're likely to less be focusing on right now.
And sure, this is likely to cause fatigue at first. It's a process, not a quick fix.
One more thing. Take in as much mouthpiece as you can before you squeak and then back off a tad (cognizant of this sideways embouchure pressure).
THAT's where you want to be on your mouthpiece.
As a child I was told to simply take in more mouthpiece. I personally think this advice was flawed without the concomitant advice on embouchure pressure from all sides that I offer above.
My $0.02. Good luck!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-06 23:11
Thank you Seabreeze and SecondTry,
That is really interesting to understand all that. I had no idea about the larger bore making such a big difference, and I will work harder at my embouchure.
One thing I notice in the videos of my playing is that my jaw moves a lot when I play, which I think can't be right at all. I will ask my teacher about that.
That was partly why I wanted to start videoing myself as I think my lessons will be more effective if I can show my teacher video footage during our skype calls. I definitely want to work on the rubber band idea and I will try putting my mouthpiece further in.
My husband just came past and I showed him the two recordings and he says I definitely don't sound like the kazoo recording. He says something's gone really wrong in the recording there. He says I do sound like the powershot camera file and he thinks I sound fine, which is a relief. Phew!
Thanks so much for your advice. :-) I will try not to covet wide bore clarinets too much.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2021-02-07 02:32
"My jaw moves a lot when I play."
First off, pat yourself on the back, not get harsh on your capabilities with the mere fact that you had the sense to take a gander at how you look playing--not for egocentric reasons, but to notice aspects of and improve your play, on top of the equally astute occasional recording and listening to of your play.
And while this visual attribute of your play is one not afforded to me, I will theorize that this jaw movement is in part your natural accommodations towards having greater success voicing certain notes, over maintain a preferred and more consistent (but by no means static) grab of the mouthpiece.
As a young player tackling the large note spans of this piece at this point https://youtu.be/7e8v750q9Uo?t=317 I too acted similarly until an astute teacher politely made note of this. He explained to me that I should be trying my best to approach the instrument with the idea that energy conservation is a necessary part of clarinet player's art, and that I should strive towards a mouthpiece grip that works best for as many notes as possible.
I think the concepts of the mouth as a rubber band will help you achieve better sound and voicing on all notes and may over time reduce your tendency towards such oral accommodation you describe.
Another thing: if you can, if only for a few notes, see if you can have your top lip, like your lower, cover your teeth and play this way in what's known as double lip embouchure fashion.
I'm not suggesting we have you play this way going forward, but notice how this bite anatomically causes the top of your inner mouth expand, making for nicer voicing. Try mimicking this when returning to single lip embouchure.
Let's review..it's a lot all at the same time. Rubber band mouth, full mouthpiece grip, stable mouth, expanded palate. : - )
Best!
Post Edited (2021-02-07 02:34)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-07 03:02
Some time ago someone posted a link of a computer playing a clarinet. The mechanism to achieve getting the air into the horn was plexiglass box with a rubber gasket in place of lips/jaw. I assume from what I saw that the pressure of the gasket around the mouthpiece/reed was constant. The machine played beautifully from the very bottom of the clarinet range all the way to at least the "G" four ledger lines above the staff. Now was it the very best sound.........no, but it was really good. So my opinion is that you only need to provide a nice platform to hold the reed/mouthpiece. I spent WAY too much time obsessing about embouchure in my formative years that I am convinced was mostly if not all wasted time and effort.
AIR IS KING
As for the specific equipment, yes if you listen down into the core of the recorded timbre you can pick out differences from one international school over another (used to be easier forty years ago). HOWEVER, if you listen to Emma Johnson vs. Ricardo Morales vs. Andreas Ottensamer (etc.), you'll hear a LOT more similarities of projection, vibrancy, resonance than differences.
One thing I'd throw out there, if you are using air correctly, you'll feel the clarinet vibrate under your fingers (in every register, at every dynamic).
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2021-02-07 04:24
SunnyDaze,
Perhaps listen to others like Andrew Marriner, Tony Pay, Robert Plane, Richard Hosford, Michael Collins, Jack Brymer, Gervase De Peyer, and many many more.
Peter Cigleris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2021-02-07 06:43
Nice list of English clarinetists, to which one might add Fredrick Thurston and Julian Bliss. To vary the gender a bit with a few (non-English) women (who happen to play small bore Buffet clarinets), one could add Sharon Kam and Seunghee Lee, and the English player Joy Farrall.
Post Edited (2021-02-09 23:52)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-07 12:15
Hi,
Thank you for all these thoughts. It's really so helpful to have these different viewpoints to consider.
SecondTry - Thanks so much for explaining all that. I tried just now having the mouth piece further in, and I then didn't seem to need to move my jaw to reach the mouthpiece any more, which was a really interesting change. I've been doing a lot of experimentation with single/double lip embouchure, and have reached a half way house, where I do single lip, but keep my rubber band tight right round the mouthpiece, so it is almost like double lip. I am keeping trying to develop the muscles to get more and more in that direction.
Paul - I completely get what you mean about the air, and trying to develop that. It is the area where I think I am struggling most, as I literally cannot blow up a balloon the old fashioned way. My hope in learning to play the clarinet is that my air strength will keep improving and improving. I used to always breath with my chest, but now I always naturally diaphragm breathe, which is a huge change, and I'm really chuffed about that. I will keep thinking about that, and look for the sensation of the clarinet vibrating as a sign of improvement.
Cigleris and Seabreeze, thanks for the ideas of who else to listen to. I will enjoy that very much.
I just did another test in a big room, with proper distance, and the zoom setting changed after reading the manual. The Powershot camera is still clearly better and gives me really useful visual feedback on my teachnique (and posture and dress sense - oh dear) so I will stick with that. I think it will do me a lot of good to see what my teacher sees, and to be able to act on it. :-)
On of things I notice most in the video is that I really need to relax and enjoy the music and just sometimes just make the mistakes. I hadn't realised that. No point playing note-perfect music if it sounds tense and rubbish. LOL!
Thanks!
Jennifer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cigleris
Date: 2021-02-07 13:31
Indeed Seabreeze.
Thurston, Kell, Sid Fell, and not forgetting Bernard Walton or Thea King. I don’t think there are any recordings of Pauline Julier. Georgina Dobree, and more recently Angela Malsbury and Katherine Lacy. Maybe even throw me into the mix.
Peter Cigleris
Post Edited (2021-02-07 13:39)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-07 14:04
I found you on youtube! Exciting. :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZIdsj_R5OY
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-07 14:04
I really like this clip too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya4y4xJ6OxA
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Nelson
Date: 2021-02-07 14:19
Good to see Bernard Walton mentioned Peter. Such a fine musician and wonderful to see him on DVD in the Classic Archive Collector's Edition "Conductors" on EuroArts 3075004 as part of a great collection of performances from many countries. 14 hours of video on one BluRay. It's a collection of complete works with the likes of Karajan, Mravinsky, Munch, Stokowski, Klemperer, Giulini et al and Walton has the Schubert Unfinished Symphony solos under Stokowski.
Also a Pauline Juler can be heard in Ferguson's Octet available on CD Dutton CDAX 8014 (British Gramophone Premieres). Thurston is on this CD too with the Bax Nonet
dj
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Lagace
Date: 2021-02-07 18:09
Back to your recording.
If you don't sound exactly on a recording as what you hear playing, it is the equipment and/or the setup. The recording can sound better than what you hear with proper post processing. I have your MP3 and will see if post processing can help enough. Then send a better recording according to the above information and I will fix it so you sound better than Thea King!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Lagace
Date: 2021-02-07 18:56
Attachment: My Movie_0 V1.mp3 (326k)
This is just a few minutes of work post-processing.
I limited the high frequencies that a good clarinet sound doesn’t need and boosted the lows as much as was recorded (Mike limitation or recording software?). A better recording as suggested above will enable a better post process.
I don’ have the written music, but it sounds like the 1st note is an up-beat (sort of) so I changed the note length to sound like an up-beat.
Also, the main melody comes in too early, again I don’t have the music to verify, so I added time to fit the 1st note of the melody on a 1st beat of a measure.
Then there was a note mistake near the end that I fixed.
Most auditions wouldn’t allow the changes above, but this is more for helping you understand the whole recording process. Many of the perfect recordings you hear are generated in a mixing studio.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TomS
Date: 2021-02-07 19:09
Hat's off to you for recording yourself. Nowadays, with such great portable recording devices, we should all listen to ourselves from time to time. It's a wonderful tool!
It does sound like you are a little close to the microphone and maybe a room with a little more ambience will improve things. Because my household is so busy, I have to often practice in one of the bathrooms, will all the hard surfaces to color the sound ... not a pretty recording.
Keep on going! You WILL achieve the paradigm of sound you seek.
If you aren't studying with a good teacher, do so, if possible. Initially, I had just 4 lessons in the summer of 1964, by a real taskmaster! He established the basics of my sound by intimidation and torture (would qualify as child abuse, in today's world). But it worked, and set me on a good path. The next lessons I had were in 1982 (!!), but I had my sound well established from almost 20 years back.
Tom
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-08 21:19
Hi Ken,
Thanks for taking a look at that. I hadn't realised that music was airbrushed like photos of models. That's a really useful bit of perspective.
Tom - That's really kind of you. I do think it does me good to see and hear myself and realise what I look and sound like. The clothes and haircut definitely need some work too. :-)
Paul - I wondered if I could ask a bit more about the airstream part that you mentioned?
I always feel as though my tone is limited by posture. My lungs are squashed by the way I stand, when I am facing down to get my embouchure onto the mouthpiece.
I tried just now adjusting my stance so that I stand they way I used to as a soprano singer. That means standing straight up, with my chin a little bit up and my chest out like a bird.
It radically changes the sound, for the better I think, especially on open notes. I just wondered if you think that is a good idea? If it is, I can change my sling so it would hold the clarinet in that position, and I think it would work.
It's basically changing from the kind of stance in the photos on this page:
https://www.mcauslandmusic.com/post/how-can-your-posture-help-you-play-clarinet-more-easily
to holding the instrument at this kind of angle:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya4y4xJ6OxA
I've been through phases of doing this before, and always end up going back to the more usual angle, as the clarinet is very heavy, and plenty of professionals seem to hold the clarinet much lower down and do just fine.
I'm really sorry - because I think I've asked this before, but I'm still a bit confused about it. I wondered if you have any view on that?
Thanks!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-08 23:12
I just tried again and it turns out that I can stand up like a singer and hold the clarinet close-ish in front of me.
The key seems to be supporting the weight of the clarinet well with my hands and the rubber band embouchure. Then it doesn't squash my lower lip, and I can get the whole instrument to vibrate at all registers. Then the sound is really resonant.
It's even better if I hold the instrument out in front, but that is quite hard work, as it is very heavy.
For bonus points, standing straight up makes me look less zonked. :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-09 04:31
I would say posture can be really important. It is a key to the Alexander technique of playing in the most efficient and relaxed way. I also recall a master class given by Hermann Baumann (not a clarinet player......but man what a great musician) where he advocated standing for solo work and even broke it down to where he stood one foot further out in front of the other. Then made the point that for more power he stands leaning forward, over the tips of his forward foot, but leans back (center of mass behind forward foot) for more subtle passages.
All I'd say is that whatever gives you the easiest breathing and subsequent pressing of the air out (actively and with some force) will be the best stance for you.
So you seem to be saying though that until just now you found it easier to "look downward" while playing. I'm glad you found a comfortable way around that. Many really fine players played with the clarinet held closer in and yet held the heads up quite straight. I would think that bending downward would occlude the wind pipe..........not good. That also brings up the old "open throat" vs. "closed throat" (not that this is an issue for you but now I'm on a roll). John Yeh of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra pointed out that "open throat" (traditionally thought of as saying "AHHHHH") is actually closed throat, because "AHHHHH" lowers the the back of the tongue into the the throat causing MORE BLOCKAGE. Not hideously so, but one should be aware of this.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-09 09:53
Hi Paul,
Thanks for that. That really makes a lot of sense to me.
I think I will keep thinking about it with my singing instincts engaged and see where it takes me.
Jen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-09 21:37
Adult learner, Grade 3
Equipment: Yamaha Custom CX Bb, Fobes 10K CF mp,
Legere Soprano Sax American Cut #2, Vandoren Optimum German Lig.
Post Edited (2021-02-10 11:16)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BethGraham
Date: 2021-02-10 18:24
Curious: Do you always play standing up? Is that what your teacher has recommended? I ask because I almost always play sitting down, which seems to take less effort. (I think I remember you writing somewhere that you use a strap, which I imagine is a big help regardless.)
Also, I was struck by what you wrote: " My lungs are squashed by the way I stand, when I am facing down to get my embouchure onto the mouthpiece." I've been taught to insert the clarinet into the face hole (i.e., embouchure), rather than to bring the face down to the clarinet. What did you mean here?
Beth
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: leolollo
Date: 2021-02-10 18:47
Attachment: digital - analog references.png (113k)
Hello SunnyDaze.
When recording the clarinet, keep the microphone 20/40 cm from the instrument, towards the middle of its body.
Be careful to adjust the input volume on your ZOOM. Many people don't understand that there is a very big difference between recording on analog and recording on digital. If you record at 24 bits the input limit (which you see on the meter) must be close to -18. If you register at 16 bits, take -12 as a reference
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-11 05:53
Dear "leolollo,"
I have to admit that I am confused (VERY VERY CONFUSED) by the input dB chart you provided. Can you provide the source for this material?
I have been educated at Full Sail University (a prominent entertainment industry school) on recording techniques and frequently switch from 16bit to 24bit within ProTools and have never used any such referenced difference for the dB meter I use in the program. In fact the bit rate only changes (very slightly) the perceived audio quality. Actually, if you record for CD playback you MUST use 16bit. If you do not do your own mastering, then you need to leave the max peaks around -6dB (leaving room for the mastering engineer to add the final touches). If you do some form of final product on your own, you want to peak at 0dB........period.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mmichel
Date: 2021-02-11 06:29
Paul Aviles wrote:
> Dear "leolollo,"
>
> I have been educated at Full Sail University (a prominent
> entertainment industry school) on recording techniques and
> frequently switch from 16bit to 24bit within ProTools and have
> never used any such referenced difference for the dB meter I
> use in the program. In fact the bit rate only changes (very
> slightly) the perceived audio quality. Actually, if you record
> for CD playback you MUST use 16bit. If you do not do your own
> mastering, then you need to leave the max peaks around -6dB
> (leaving room for the mastering engineer to add the final
> touches). If you do some form of final product on your own,
> you want to peak at 0dB........period.
I'm not leolollo, but he's talking about headroom for recording, not for mastering. There's an article that makes a similar point here: https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-how-much-headroom-should-leave-24-bit-recording
And another that makes the same point within the broader context of gain staging here:
https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/gain-staging-your-daw-software
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-11 06:42
I am now fully back on the interweb! And I have looked at the H1n owner's manual. I would say try these things:
o Use low cut 120 (lowest note of clarinet is 147 cycles roughly). This will take out unwanted noise (errant HVAC; bumping of the mic or stand it's on; wind if any).
o LIMITER - OFF Limiter protects from clipping but also compresses sound (makes difference between loud and soft SMALLER).
o AUTO LEVEL - OFF Same as above. You want true picture of sound, not the machine's
o 44.1 kHZ/16bit WAV: The higher settings are overkill. Just know ANY CD you listen to is 16bit/44.1kHZ. Recording engineers can record and manipulate at higher rates but must convert down for the final product.........it really is good enough for most applications.
o Finally I'd say get used to looking at the "Clipping Indicator" (two little rectangular boxes in the middle of the far right of the display screen. Just make sure that when you set your recording levels those are not blinking or ON. I'd play with finding a level that is just UNDER what makes those boxes active when playing your loudest........that would be a full volume, final recording level. Then of course all the rest (softer than super loud) will be well within good recording standards.
I guess I'm saying to ignore the manual's recommendation to set your level at -12. I don't even know the relevance of that statement.........use the clip indicator.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-11 06:49
Ahhhhh "mmichel"
But you are talking about two DIFFERENT measuring systems! Recording engineering will use just the analog meter (dBU).
Maybe the practical application would be for engineers who want to compress the crap out of a recording for maximum "volume" in broadcast land. You CAN squish a digital signal much more than an analog one..............just another tool for "the sausage factory" (a derisive term for no dynamic range whatsoever). Google the "Sound Wars" for further information.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TomS
Date: 2021-02-11 07:34
I used to practice standing up, but found that my playing was much improved and more relaxed by being seated.
In addition, the floor reflection when seated reinforces the chalumeau register for a bigger sound, IMHO.
For you double-lip players, standing is especially more of a challenge. I think Richard Stoltzman commented that playing while standing could be painful at times. I think that Harrold Wright used to play his orchestral solos seated.
Tom
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: leolollo
Date: 2021-02-11 10:52
Good morning Paul.
As mmichel wrote my advice refers to the registration phase. The nominal peak level should not go beyond -4 at this stage. If you record at 24 bits you can keep the nominal peak even a little lower (-8 / -10). Recording digitally getting too close to 0 can be very dangerous.
Recording at 24 bits increases the dynamic range. This allows you to record with a lower reference level without this leading to an increase in background noise (compared to when recording in 16 bit). It is simply a "safety" advantage to not create distortions during the peaks .... Then when you do the mastering you will proceed to raise the levels close to 0.
I'm a professional audio engineer, so I know what I'm talking about.
https://www.dreamvideo.it/articoli/326/i-livelli-audio-nella-registrazione-digitale
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: leolollo
Date: 2021-02-11 11:25
...
The unit of measurement in digital recorders is dBFS, not dBU ...
This is why -12 is marked as a reference in all manuals for similar devices. But this is not to say that you shouldn't go above -12 when recording
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fuzzy
Date: 2021-02-11 11:38
leolollo, mmichel, Paul, and Ken:
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I'm whatever you'd call the step right before "beginner" at the audio engineering thing. ;^)>>>
I had bought an H4n years back. I love the silly thing, but I was scratching my head at some of the things I had chalked up to mic placement, or other inconsistencies on my part.
After reading the links mmichel provided, and looking at the chart/website leolollo provided, I think I understand some of the results I was seeing. I had definitely been applying old analog rules to digital.
I never want to be an audio engineer at any level, but I do appreciate the talent it takes. I only hope that I can apply what I learned from this thread and start getting somewhat consistent results with my own H4n recordings/mixing (something that COVID has made more necessary for me.)
Paul mentioned a low cut off of around 120. Ken mentioned filtering out some of the unnecessary high...is there an approximate "high cut" which is useful on solo clarinet?
Thanks again!
Fuzzy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: leolollo
Date: 2021-02-11 12:11
Fuzzy, I'm glad you found the information useful.
The low-cut can be useful in certain situations. In general, I prefer to do without it when record clarinet. I would also do without a High-Cut.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-11 17:37
Well in my experience, the low cut (really referred to mostly as a "High Pass Filter") is essential in many multi track scenarios. Every track ADDS another instance of LOW content and the energy just builds and builds and builds. This is not so true for high material since there is a practical range above which most cannot hear. Also, there is the idea that higher upper partials influence the audible range and should be left present particularly for classical music applications. According to the chart I referenced last night, low concert "D" (our lowest Bb clarinet note) is 146.84 cycles per second. There should be no NEED to have lower material present on an acapella clarinet recording. A 120 cycle low cut filter is more than appropriate. If you add a piano though......sub contra notes can be as low as 16 cycles.
"leolollo,"
Ok, for practical scenarios where you, the end user are providing a recording of unaccompanied clarinet for adjudication, would you not want the final (and really only) recording to be peaking close to zero dB? I personally would not want the receiver of the file to have to turn up their volume to hear the submission. Again, my reference is the very peaks of the material and 0dB. Also, realistically speaking there will be less dynamic range on a solo clarinet recording than a recording of a full ensemble with percussion section (and it is the percussion is what challenges the peak metering!).
................Paul Aviles
Post Edited (2021-02-11 17:47)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: leolollo
Date: 2021-02-11 19:28
A digital distortion of the sound signal during recording it is no longer possible to correct. I were to unfortunately touch or exceed 0 on my digital meter while recording I will have to throw it all away.
If I record the clarinet playing "mezzoforte" at -12dBFS I might perhaps have an "fff" at -4. It will be ok.
Getting a "mezzoforte" at -18 and "fff" at -10 will also be fine.
If the file needs to be sent to someone (or if you need to make a cd ...) we will proceed to raise the peak signal to 0dBFS with the DAW: "Normalization" will serve the purpose.
Always staying away from the 0 dBFS threshold while recording is essential.
Post Edited (2021-02-11 21:42)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-11 22:38
Clipping (distortion) is rather obvious to hear. Instead of a musical sound, one gets something that sounds like a 2"x4" being slapped flat against a wall. I'd rather shoot for avoiding that than going strictly by the numbers.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-12 07:32
Gosh! That is a lot of information about sound engineering. I had no idea that there was so much new vocabulary to learn. I will need to reread these comments a of times to get to grips with them, but thank you for taking the time to explain.
About the question of playing standing up - I generally practise sitting down until I get close to an exam, and then I switch to standing up. There are two reasons, which I think are probably specific to me.
The first is that I took up the clarinet to strengthen my diphragm breathing. It was rubbish before, to the point where it caused health problems. After three years of playing I have now switched from default chest breathing to default diphragm breathing, which is great. However, when I do an exam and really want to play well, I find that my diphragm breathing is better standing up, as there is more space down there.
The second reason is that I have a dodgy wrist, so I use a really good sling, which supports the weight of the clarinet entirely. I can actually play no-hands, if I want to. That makes a very big difference when playing standing up as it means I don't need to rest the bell on my knee. I also have a Kooiman thumb rest which helps me to keep complete control of the rotation of the instrument while standing.
The one place when I find standing up most helpful is when I play Georgie by Emma Johnson. I have epic trouble doing the legato break crosses to be completely smooth with no break in sound. Standing up and getting really good abdominal support helps very much with that.
Thanks so much for all this discussion and especially for the detail of sound recording. I have given up using the zoom and am just using my camera, but I will try to understand it all and give it another go.
Thanks!
Jen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-12 12:37
Hi,
I just did some totally unscientific tests on my Zoom recorder. I wondered if I could write them down in case they mean anything to anyone?
I updated the zoom driver in the PC and the firmware on the zoom H1n, and then recorded straight into Adobe soundbooth. I changed the volume from 100 down to 50 and the sound dial thing from high-ish down to 5. I also tried turning the three other button controls on and off, and none of it seemed to make very much difference.
The powershot camera recording still seems as good, or better. I'm not sure how much that is to do with my mind being tricked by being able to see the video footage of the music as well as hearing it.
Sorry - this is not very scientific at all. I don't really get what was said above about setting it all up but thought I'd fiddle a bit. I wrote to the zoom helpline but haven't heard back.
I'm completely happy to just use my camera tbh. Thanks!
Jen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-12 14:05
The volume buttons on the side (0-100) only determines the playback volume, which is not relevant to the recording process.........just to what is comfortable listening during playback.
The dial on the front is VERY important (0-10). This will determine how much sound is being fed to the recorder during the recording. When I record an ensemble for example, to prepare for the actual session I ask the conductor to play a section of music that contains the loudest material the group will play during the session. I set the input level (analogous to your dial on the top) so that the loudest moments do not exceed -6dB (those flashing horizontal bars across the screen.........your -6dB is the seventh bold hashmark). However, in your case, I feel that a more satisfactory end result would be to shoot for closer to zero dB or rather between the last two bold hashmarks (WITHOUT MAKING THOSE LITTLE BOXES ALL THE WAY TO THE RIGHT GO ON AT ALL!!!). So, the number on the dial you use is irrelevant. It is the amount of sound (how much of the horizontal bar is produced) you are getting into the machine that determines where the dial ultimately lands. Maybe the best way to determine this is to do a test recording while the Zoom is positioned that you can observe where those bars are from roughly the distance the device will be when you do your actual recording (and then the mics should be pointed at you).
If you have a camera tripod, I'd also suggest mounting the H1n on the tripod (screw into bottom of Zoom) and point the front directly at yourself (looking for all the world like a stun gun). The 90 degree angle between the front of the mics represents the left and right of your stereo image. Another thing that I find can help in typical rooms in a home, is to try having the mic high up close to the ceiling (so if 9ft ceiling, have it at 8ft and the base of the stand 10feet from your feet). You can angle the mics to point toward you (experiment with that vs. perpendicular to floor......off axis might actually give a more pleasing effect).
It's most unfortunate that the manual does not cover placement and positioning of the device. In the world of professional recording, microphone placement is JUST AS important as the choice of mic you are using.
..................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-12 14:53
Hi Paul,
Thanks for translating. :-) I'll stick it on top of the tall bookcase 8 ft away, and post my son up there as well to report on what the black bars are doing. :-)
Jen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-12 15:19
Hope that does help.
No matter the "numbers" or anything anyone says, it is the final results that matter.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-12 15:44
Attachment: IMG_9559.JPG (887k)
Attachment: Powershot_0.mp3 (623k)
Attachment: zoom_0.mp3 (763k)
Hi Paul,
I did that test, with my very obliging son standing on the piano stool adjusting the dial. The recorder was 8 feet away and 2 feet from the ceiling on top of a wooden bookcase.
I have attached three files.
One is a photo of the zoom recorder screen showing the final setup.
zoom_0.mp3 is the sound file that it recorded.
Powershot_0.mp3 is the sound file from my powershot camera taking video footage in the same position.
Both sound files were loaded into windows movie maker to have the ends clipped off, and then exported as mp3. The sound quality was the same before and after.
It seems to me that I made a good choice buying that powershot camera ten years ago, whatever else may be going on. :-)
I'm really happy to just stick with the camera if it saves everyone time.
Thanks!
Jen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-12 15:51
The camera is a Canon Powershot SX210 IS in case anyone else is trying to do remote exams and would like to know. LOL!
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/4120195354/canonpowershotsx210
It's very cheap secondhand.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-12 19:58
I just went on Amazon customer service chat and they are going to take the zoom recorder back and give me a refund. I think that will will solve the problem nicely and then I can just use my camera.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2021-02-12 21:01
The audio of the camera seems perfectly fine. The difference in the volume can be attributed to what I referred to about the recording level (getting close to 0 without actually hitting the clipping indicators).
Certainly having video as well makes it an easy decision for you.
Sorry the Zoom did not work out for you.
..................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SunnyDaze
Date: 2021-02-12 22:07
Hi Paul,
Thanks for all your help. That was really kind of you to take the time.
I think you're right about the video being helpful. Should save trouble and it's the right 720p format, which is a bonus.
Jen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
