Author: Jarmo Hyvakko
Date: 2022-12-28 10:47
As some in this conversation have pointed out, the origin of vibrato is singing and instrumentalists' attempts to get a singing quality into their playing. In "classical" singing, where you have to produce sound loud enough without any microphones, i presume, the vibrato comes by using abdominal support (not diapraghm!). The variation in air speed and pressure causes changes in intonation, so it's a very physical and emotional thing (?). And some wind and brass instruments act very similar. Added air pressure raises the intonation, thus more or less similar use of abdominal support as in singing causes vibrato.
In woodwind the flute and oboe react more to that than the clarinet. And in the clarinet quick added pressure flattens the intonation if anything. A good vibrato goes up and down around the pitch and trying to do the vibrato the singing way with the clarinet easilly causes a vibrato that oscillates between pitch and flat like laundry hanging in clothesline. Or a funny ha-ha-ha kind on an effect. That leaves us only the lip vibrato, which is quite easy to produce, like in string instruments moving your finger up and down.
I believe that a large amount of clarinetists, including me, have felt that using (lip) vibrato is a quite concious and deliberate way of imitating the real thing. And feels "cheap". One professor once blamed me of using too much rubato in my interpretation, asked me to try to express the things i wanted to express by dynamics and phrasing instead, because "rubato is the cheapest way of expession". Does vibrato fall to same category?
Jarmo Hyvakko, Principal Clarinet, Tampere Philharmonic, Finland
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
