Your sound: “setup”, or head?

Just thinking about David Glazer, looked his name up and found that he passed away last week. Brother of Frank, (perhaps a more well-known pianist), David was the clarinetist with the New York Woodwind Quintet at its prime and made many recordings and appearances with them. (Sam Baron, Flute, Ronald Rosenman Oboe, Arthur Weisberg, Bassoon, and John Barrows Horn.) It was at the time, simply the best ensemble of its kind.David Glazer was a player of rare ability in that he was able to blend i with a chamber ensemble with a wonderfully sensitive musicality. David also concertized with many orchestras mostly in Europe. In the early 60’s he was in residence along with the Fine Arts Quartet at the University of Wisonsin, (Milwaukee). I went to see and meet him one afternoon. He played a Chedeville mouthpiece with a metal inlay and we immediately tried each others mouthpiece(and clarinet). At the time, I was playing a Selmer S, a very bright mouthpiece and I thought his sound to be quite thick . Within about 5 minutes, he was sounding like David Glazer on my mouthpiece and I like, my bright self, on his. He had retired in 1985, and is survived by his brothers.

As a clarinetist, like you who reads this, I’ve thought about sound for as long as I have played the instrument. From my first efforts, when I heard my first teacher play, it has remained paramount in my mind and certainly whenever I play, (sometimes to great frustration), perhaps as you have as well. So, when I remember the playing of David Glazer and that afternoon in Milwaukee so many years ago, I realize that most of my sound must lodge somewhere in my head, resting in my conception of what the clarinet ought to sound like. Music and the musical phrase have always been more important to me than the basic making of the sound, however that sound does come first. If David Glazer was able to make his sound on my mouthpiece, (and mine on his), what in the world do the things that many students and professionals talk about all of the time have to do with the sound we make on the instrument? NOT all that much, which is basically the subject of this posting.

I am almost overwhelmed by the amount of words I read and hear about mouthpieces, instruments, “setups” and even ligatures. It is enough to make one overcome with the selling of equipment, for that is what it is.

There are folks who market all of the above at prices which are inconceivable to me. Mouthpieces for five hundred dollars! I am especially bothered by the so-called “stepup” products for that is pure and utterly ridiculous crap! A player of the clarinet can make a beautifuly sound on a Bundy mouthpiece, or one of the myriads of Kaspar mouthpieces, (knockoffs and otherwize) for sale out there for hunreds of dollars. And that doesn’t get close to the clarinet itself.

I am maddened by the price that students must pay for what they thnk or are told is a good clarinet, one that has that special sound or ping. Anything near the ballpark of three thousand dollars (or more) is wrong. Wooden instruments are not necessarily better than plastic or hard rubber. The Buffet Greenline clarinet is essentially a plastic clarinet and it is about three thousand bucks! Is that right?  Hard rubber is as good a material as grenadilla or even more exotic woods. These weird woods are much more prone to cracking than hard rubber and the sound is essentially the same. The Lyrique clarinet, (which I play) costs about a third of the price of a wooden instrument and the essential scale is better in tune. This is not an advertisement for my clarinet, for I have never met the man who designed it, nor spoken with him. But I know we feel the same about the hurt we experience when we know a young student or the father and mother of that student have to go and get a loan to buy the youngster an instrument that will run them almost four thousand dollars.

So think about the late David Glazer and me that afternoon. We played with our basic sound on each others mouthpiece (and clarinet). Take it from there when you look at asetup, a step-up, a horn, mouthpiece, ligature or the rest of it. Use your head and your ears.

Stay well, and keep practicing.

Sherman

he effect of the sound in you oral cavtii y

Professor Friedland, I would like to communicate with you regarding the subject of the effect of the oral cavity in clarinet tone production . Your opinions as a clarinetist would be very much appreciated I communicated with you (only) once when I learned you were a colleague of ALLEN SIGEL, my teacher when I was an undergraduate at the then University of Buffalo, I hope this reaches you and I look forward to your reply.As for me it would be an exceptional pleasure to communicate with you re the subject above. Michel G. Mulawka PS; I trust the following will bring back a memory. I came across a picture of you and others performing (?) the Gyorgy Ligeti Poeme Symphonique for 100 Metronomes @ the Albright Knox Art Gallery in 1965. I attended a second ‘performance’ (?) of same @ Albright – to this day ‘no comment’! save for/

 

Professor Friedland,

I would like to communicate with you regarding the subject of the effect of the oral cavity in clarinet tone production
.
Your opinions as a clarinetist would be very much appreciated

I communicated with you (only) once when I learned you were a colleague of ALLEN SIGEL, my teacher when I was an undergraduate at the then University of Buffalo,

I hope this reaches you and I look forward to your reply.As for me it would be an exceptional pleasure to communicate with you re the subject above.

Michel G. Mulawka

PS; I trust the following will bring back a memory.

I came across a picture of you and others performing (?) the Gyorgy Ligeti Poeme Symphonique for 100 Metronomes @ the Albright Knox Art Gallery in 1965.
I attended a second ‘performance’ (?) of same @ Albright – to this day ‘no comment’! save for/

 

Hello mr mulawka,\

easy answer, the cavity you mention has virturtually no effect.
The response is diRECTLY THROUGH YOUR EARS ONLY. filtered through your perception of sound, directly connected to the functionality 0f your embouchure, you actually control the effect through all of your development.

The sound as we say, is in your head.

cordially, ]
sherman friedland

Strident results in the upper register. What is a Big Full sound.?

Dear Mr Freidland:

I have read some of your comments posted on the Internet and can appreciate how valuable and interesting they are to your readers. I am an advanced, nonprofessional B flat clarinet player, having played off and on since 1948. I own a 7-ring Selmer clarinet S/N N7636 (obviously reconditioned), which indicates it was manufactured in 1951 in France, and it has a very full sound, apparently due in part to a comparatively large bore.

However, this horn produces fairly bright, if not strident, tones in the upper register above high C. I use the Vandoren B45 mouthpiece and was wondering if a change to another type of mouthpiece could improve the upper register tone quality. In addition, attempting to play a gliss, such as Artie Shaw’s at the end of his Begin the Beguine, is a risky endeavor.

I would greatly appreciate your comments on the foregoing.
Jim C.

Dear Jim C:
Thank you for your note about the N series Selmer and attendant possible mouthpiece problems, also glissandi.

I think that the VD B45 is a good ordinary mouthpiece. That it is just about the most popular mouthpiece in their mouthpiece stable is in my opinion, only happenstance.Of course mouthpiece considerations are always rather personal or personal to some degree as are mine. But, as I have tried and played in concert many many of the VD mouthpieces with various degrees of satisfaction, I feel somewhat convinced of my conclusions.
To continue, the B45 is only an average mouthpiece.It plays, but never ever gave me the kind of control that I have experienced on other VD mouthpieces, specifically the M13,my favorite of the Van Doren.It is I’m told, Van Dorens take on the Chedeville mouthiece of days gone by, and that mouthpiece was supposed to be extraordinary. But , I have never played on one, just copies of them,like theM13.Allof the M mouthpieces are quite a bit better that B models, especially with pitch. I found with my M13 more comfort in the altissima and better large intervalic movement, and let’s face it,I liked the sound.
But, if you will take that as a suggestion that you may wish to try another Van Doren, good.
But,there are others which play even better and are less,such as the Fobes Debut, much easier, much better for choosing reeds and excellent in the upper extremes without pinching in either embouchure or resultant sound.
Yes, I like the Richard Hawkins best, the R model, though I have and own the S model as well. He is the most sensitive of the mouthpiece makers and I believe him to be more precise and careful in his handmade mouthpieces.He uses the Zinner blank, highly touted these days, for a very nice quality.
So, there you have some suggestions and I start with saying yes, try a new and better mouthpiece, and there are those plentifully available. One thing to remember,each that you play will respond a bit differently, and that is a guaranty, similar, but different.
The only comment I would have is that a bigger bore clarinet does not necessarily result in a bigger or fuller  sound,which is all totally subjective.
And who,said that a bigger  or fuller sound is a better sound, and how do you define a big  and/or fullsound? One takes it for granted, as a “given”.A big sound is all in the ears of the beholder.

Good luck and just practice.
Artie Shaw didn’t copy anybody.
best regards,
sherman

Director wants a darker sound, suggests tape around the bell.

Hi,
Recently I travelled to Kauai with my clarinet and sat in at rehearsals of a local community band. The band leader during one rehearsal commented that someone’s (clarinet) sound seemed “too bright” and that he wanted a more “German” sound. He said that one could change this by wrapping tape around the clarinet. I forgot to ask him about it; but one of the other players tried it and sent me note about it. Have you heard of this and how does one go about gauging the effect it has, if any?

Bill

Hello:
The idea of putting a piece of electric tape around the bell and barrel of a clarinet in order to dampen the sound is easy to trace,but is deep within the area of fantasy when extended to change a “bright” sound to a “german” sound. Your band director,whatever planet upon which he resides or whatever he is smoking, couldn’t be further from the truth. which in itself, is nonexistent.
It is a case of too little knowledge or a smattering of ignorance.
There is a clarinet with a different bore, a different amount of resistance and a different mouthpiece, which is played on the European continent which produces a slightly different sound than that of the North American clarinetist who usually plays in the French tradition , starting with people, such as Gaston Hamelin and Daniel Bonade,who were French players who came to the US to play in symphony orchestras, mostly imported by European conductors who themselves, were imported to conduct US orchestras, and the list is endless. The basic sounds of these clarinetists and their students was basically what is called “french”, being lighter and brighter than the so-called German, which really was available only with the kind of setup used by these players: different reed and mouthpiece, more resistant clarinet producing a somewhat denser sound.
There were and are exception to this, notable Marcellus, who played principal for Szell in Cleveland and had a noticeably more dense quality. Also presently in the same orchestra, Franklin Cohen who is currently principal has a similar quality.
Now, back to taping the clarinet. Forget about changing the sound in that way, the tape may make a slightly different response to your ear , but none at all to the listener. Taping the barrel helps nothing as well, though one may get the perception of some change, there is none.
The ring around the bell of most clarinets cuts in to the bell by 3-8ths of an inch, making the middle B flat. Take the ring off and it improves slightly, but only on the middle B.
The Mazzeo system clarinet had a bell with no ring and a different shape, rendering the midB sharper, but also brighter and it needed getting used to.
Holding the clarinet on your knee makes the B even flatter, but helps nothing else..
Returning once more to your question, if you desire a more dense sound, try a reed with a thick blank, slightly harder than you are accustomed to and you may achieve a bit of the quality for which you are looking, but please, no tape. Maybe handcuffs.
best wishes,

Sherman

“Darkening my sound”

Dear Mr. Friedland:

I am playing on a Yamaha Allegro instrument with a Yamaha 5c mouthpiece and vandoren v12 reeds. I am looking for ways to darken my tone. My director said that some of it has to do with the instrument and I really really really don’t want to have to buy a different instrument. I love my current clarinet. I didn’t know if there were certain mouthpieces or reeds or different ways of playing that could make my tone more dark. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much!

Dear JA:
several years ago I came upon the Yamaha Allegro Clarinet, designated by the ACL 550. It was interesting to me because of the package in which it came and because it also came with a leatherette case cover over the excellent case. But it was also interesting because of the look of the horn which had gold plated posts and silver plated keys. And it played well, actually quite well. I was not t in love with the barrel which seemed to cut the upper clarion a bit, but was improved with a different barrel, almost anything, I further found. It was in tune and had a pleasant response as do most of the upper end Yamaha clarinets. Further, it had recently been discontinued, making the instrument more affordable. It had a certain appeal, let us say. Some had a bell with a cut-out section, supposedly to brighten the low clarion,some did not.
One thing to remember: a discontinued horn is not necessarily bad in any way; more, it makes more room for newer or other models models, for the competition is always pressing against Yamaha and indeed , all makers. Yamaha has been especially laden with different numberings and other designations.

The instrument is not bright or dark,what ever those terms mean, and they seem to mean different things to different players. One must remember that there are numerous changes in these designations, but not many actual differences. Of course there are those who will argue, however I maintain that these cute looking horns with all their funny names and reputations require one thing that is not part of the package: they don’t come with a tone, either dark or light, or bright. That designation is all ours to bring to the horn, and we are all different.
Mouthpiece can make a small difference, especially if the mouthpiece is generally not well made, however the Yamaha mouthpiece is not e a bad mouthpiece. Yes, I prefer something else, but that is a whole other article.(Hawkins,Fobes, Hite come to mind, in that order).

So, don’t you dare buy another horn to satisfy the whim of a director who may not himself or herself ,a clarinetist, and especially ,if they are. Clarinetists directors are notoriously opinionated folk. (Just ask me).
Darken your sound. Brighten your sound. The verbosity indicated in such an response eclipses all imagination. The sounds we make are in general a product of many things, but it is we who make the sound, it is not the clarinet. The horn has a response, but whether or not that response pleases us is quite superficial and easily argued . Read any description by any maker and it will be filled with meaningless ranting.

Most Van Doren mouthpieces are in general brighter than others, sharper as well, but easily fixable. The Van Doren take on the Chedeville mouthpiece have proved to me to offer the best possibilities and are more in tune to the standard “american pitch of A=440. the 360, B44,B45, B46 tende to have a brighter response. The M13, 15, 30 and 40 a better response. But still, it is the player and his background and even the way he hears the clarinet that determines the never ending search for bright or dark. Thin light reeds usually produce brighter quality, a reed having more heart will help to eleminate some of those higher frequencies and add to the even quality of the sound.

The comment,”darken your sound “is purely an academic statement which I would simply ignore. As a a person who has been playing for about 60 years, I find the comment to be thin, in and of itself.”Some of it has to do with the instrument” is a repulsive comment. Ask the director to define the terms of use. I have found that Van Doren V12 reeds are not my choice, however there are so many different kinds of reeds available. I have used the German White Master Van Doren reeds for many years and recently changed to Zonda which for me, are much more consistent. And don’t buy another instrument, the worst idea of all, especially if you like the one you have.

Best wishes and keep practicing.

sincerely, Sherman

Dear Mr Friedland:

Thank you very much for the reply! What barrel would you suggest as a replacement?
Hi Joshua:

The barrel I would recommend for replacement, especially for darkening the sound is the following: hard rubber :
It should be of some help and also, the price is quite reasonable.
His website is on your browser.
Best wishes, Sherman
Ridenour Ivorlone Clarinet Barrels

Tonal and Responsive Characteristics Compared to Grenadilla

Most players find Ivorolon barrels to be darker, more resonant and more responsive than Grenadilla wood.

The sound of the clarinet really can be traced to L. Cahuzac , 1880-1960

Louis Cahuzac,(1880-1960) lived to be 80 and was an active player for most of that span. Below is a recording he made of his own work in 1930: His clarinet sound is usually called the epitome of the French Clarinet Sound, among its facets, extreme liquidity or fluidity, and agility of all aspects of both tone and technical faciity. While there needed to be much knowledge gained in the realm of recording piano, the clarinet sound is just about perfect in all its expressivity, timbral qualities and intonation. We usually think of his sound , and others as well: Hamelin, Maclane, Bonade, and their students, continuing until Marcellus, whose tone was less bright, perhaps more substantive, usually thought of as the beginning of the amalgation of the so-called German school of clarinet sound with that of the French. Toward this end, Marcellus it is said, used a reed with a different cut, a thicker blank, most probably a more resistant reed, yet some seem to have wished for a more expressive qality of sound, less objective, but for others this is the sound of which they prefer and for which they strive Actually ,upon listenig one hears more of a penetrating sound with Mr. Marcellus, whose technic and staccato was flawless.. Harold Wright really did not deviate much from that of Cahuzac, again more substantive, but with really superb facility and all-over control. He was one of the few contemporary orchestral clarinetists who played the actualy dynamics as they were written. Forte was forte and pianissimo and piano were his stringest points. Truly he believed and advocated never to push the sound, to distort. So while he played until relatively recently he escaped the emergence of the loudness of todays American orchestras, specifically the Chicago Symphony, whose principal Larry Combs, was really a deep admirer of the soud of Wright. His excellent control is demonstrated on this recent performance of the difficult 3rd movement solis of the Tchaikovsky #4.

Antony Pay from the UK is also of the more musical of clarinetists. His recording of the Mozart Quintet featured here is certainly the most imaginative and with superb ideas as to tempi and phrasing and his sound is exemplary. While not basically an orchestral clarinetist, he respresents the best and most thoughtful of the so-called English School. The only question one may have are the execution of his appoggiatured trills in the first movement, beautiful, though not consistent in that he plays the first  trill in the development without an appoggiatura.All others are executed with really excellent appogiaturas from the note above, accented and correct. One wonders why this single trill Ab-Bb is played without the appoddiatura? Still he is certainly representative of the so-called English school and tone quality.

Has the sound of the clarinet changed much since Combs and the others mentioned herein?(and there are excellent players, but these are the choices by this writer) I think not, however the advent of recorded symphonic music being so artificially conceived as having brough much louder clarinet playing to the fore. (for example, purchasing a recording, listening to the orchestra and going to an actually concert are different experiences. “How come I can hardly hear that clarinet solo?” Because it was recorded by a single microphone directly in front of the player and then mixed with great care so as to give it prominence on the recording; completely different from hearing the player in the orchestra at a concert. This has created a competition between a player and his recordings because the recordings are so much clearer than what the listener hears in the hall. Now has this competition made its impression upon younger clarinetists?Yes, it has; witness the playing of Mr.Morales who can, when he wishes, cut through any orchestra. The playing of Karl Leister, whom I remember as the Principal of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra must also be noted for his excellence. The sound he made seems perhaps a bit more present, yet for me, I prefer a more even quality. I think the Barber included here, shows that rather thicker, (for want of a better word) quality, than that of the French. Still however, very imressive playing, perhaps a reflection of the German clarinet and mouthpiece and reed,perhaps not.

Gino Cioffi, another principal player of the Boston Symphony should be mentioned here because he too embodied that basic fluidity of the clarinet. It is interesting to note that all of these players recorded in beautiful acoustic chambers, either Orchestra Hall on Chicago or Symphony Hall in Boston.

But the sound of the clarinet was really conceived by Mr. Cahuzac and those of his ilk, and has not strayed all that far, that is to say, with that wondeful fluidity which is so much a part of the sound of the clarinet.

Of course, one can make the point that this reflect bias ;  that there were and are many players who were a part of the evolution of the sound of the clarinet, and to those, I will agree, however there is not that much deviation from the sound of Cahuzac made in 1930.

Keep practicing.

Sherman

Louis Cahuzac:

Gino Cioffi:

Antony Pay

Harold Wright:

Larry Combs:

Karl Leister

Barber, “Summer Music” for woodwind Quiintet

Your sound: “setup”, or sense?

Just thinking about David Glazer, looked his name up and found that he passed away last week. Brother of Frank, (perhaps a more well-known pianist), David was the clarinetist with the New York Woodwind Quintet at its prime and made many recordings and appearances with them. (Sam Baron, Flute, Ronald Rosenman Oboe, Arthur Weisberg, Bassoon, and John Barrows Horn.) It was at the time, simply the best ensemble of its kind.David Glazer was a player of rare ability in that he was able to blend i with a chamber ensemble with a wonderfully sensitive musicality. David also concertized with many orchestras mostly in Europe. In the early 60’s he was in residence along with the Fine Arts Quartet at the University of Wisonsin, (Milwaukee). I went to see and meet him one afternoon. He played a Goldbeck mouthpiece with a metal inlay and we immediately tried each others mouthpiece(and clarinet). At the time, I was playing a Selmer S, a very bright mouthpiece and I thought his sound to be quite thick . Within about 5 minutes, he was sounding like David Glazer on my mouthpiece and I like, my bright self, on his. He had retired in 1985, and is survived by his brothers. (Now, I learn that David died several years ago. Still, it is a loss regardless of when one learnes of the loss.)

As a clarinetist, like you who reads this, I’ve thought about sound for as long as I have played the instrument. From my first efforts, when I heard my first teacher play, it has remained paramount in my mind and certainly whenever I play, (sometimes to great frustration), perhaps as you have as well. So, when I remember the playing of David Glazer and that afternoon in Milwaukee so many years ago, I realize that most of my sound must lodge somewhere in my head, resting in my conception of what the clarinet ought to sound like. Music and the musical phrase have always been more important to me than the basic making of the sound, however that sound does come first. If David Glazer was able to make his sound on my mouthpiece, (and mine on his), what in the world do the things that many students and professionals talk about all of the time have to do with the sound we make on the instrument? NOT all that much, which is basically the subject of this posting. 

I am almost overwhelmed by the amount of words I read and hear about mouthpieces, instruments, “setups” and even ligatures. It is enough to make one overcome with the selling of equipment, for that is what it is.

There are folks who market all of the above at prices which are inconceivable to me. Mouthpieces for five hundred dollars! I am especially bothered by the so-called “stepup” products for that is pure and utterly ridiculous guano! A player of the clarinet can make a beautifuly sound on a Bundy mouthpiece, or one of the myriads of Kaspar mouthpieces, (knockoffs and otherwize) for sale out there for hunreds of dollars. And that doesn’t get close to the clarinet itself.

I am maddened by the price that students must pay for what they thnk or are told is a good clarinet, one that has that special sound or ping. Anything near the ballpark of three thousand dollars (or more) is wrong. Wooden instruments are not necessarily better than plastic or hard rubber. The Buffet Greenline clarinet is essentially a plastic clarinet and it is about three thousand bucks! Is that right?  Hard rubber is as good a material as grenadilla or even more exotic woods. These weird woods are much more prone to cracking than hard rubber and the sound is essentially the same. The Lyrique clarinet, (which I play) costs about a third of the price of a wooden instrument and the essential scale is better in tune. This is not an advertisement for my clarinet, for I have never met the man who designed it, nor spoken with him. But I know we feel the same about the hurt we experience when we know a young student or the father and mother of that student have to go and get a loan to buy the youngster an instrument that will run them almost four thousand dollars.

So think about the late David Glazer and me that afternoon. We played with our basic sound on each others mouthpiece (and clarinet). Take it from there when you look at a setup, a step-up, a horn, mouthpiece, ligature or the rest of it. Use your head and your ears. Make sure you are not being set up.

Stay well, and keep practicing.

Sherman

5RV is too bright, what to try?

Dear Sherman,
I play on a 5RV Van Doren mouthpiece yet I cannot seem to get a sweet sound on it – the sound seems a little bright. I have tried other mouthpieces of vandoren and I also tried a crystal mouthpiece but I always end up with the 5rv as being the easiest and most successful for me to play on. (The crystal mouthpiece was an extremely classical sound which I didn’t like). What do you recommend. Is there another company that has a mouthpiece similar to the 5RV in facing and length yet different enough to produce a darker sound or is it my playing.
Thanks,A
———————————————————————-
Hi A:
Thank you for your inquiry. Defining words like bright and dark when it comes to mouthpieces is not easy because the words seem to mean different qualities to different people.
For me, bright seems to imply an edgy light sound that may also be thin in quality. Strident also comes close to a single word, or sometimes even shrill seems correct.
Dark seems to be described by words such as full, substantial, penetrating.
Sweet is something else again and may be considerably assisted by a less bright mouthpiece, though the word seems to denote a musical quality, not necessarily that of timbre.
So, I would think that your 5RV is a light sounding mouthpiece that tends to be edgy in quality and perhaps strident in the high register.
The mouthpiece that I now play satisfied a number of problems of brightness, replacing them with a sound that has more substance. It is the Gennusa mouthpiece, made originally by Ignatius Gennusa, former principal clarinetist with the Baltimore Symphony. It is now made by a student of his who purchased the company, Benjamin Redwine. You can find his name in your browser I am sure. He is a fine mouthpiece maker and clarinetist as well.

Good luck,
sincerely, Sherman Friedland

More on Mouthpieces, igatures,clarinets, dark and bright

Dear Mr. Friedland,
Which of Mr. Ridenour’s clarinets is in your opinion the best (I’m quite confused between the Arioso and the Lyrique–are there more than these)?
Would you say that in terms of physical nitty-gritties like keywork and aesthetic qualities like tone colour, even resistance, intonation, Ridenour’s clarinets are superior to professional Buffet clarinets like the Festival and Tosca models? I would like a clarinet that I will be satisfied with for a life-time of learning and performing.
Can a warm, fluid and dark tone colour with depth (like that of Martin Frost and Sabine Meyer) be achieved with Ridenour clarinets? I use Ralph Morgan mouthpiece RM06, Zonda reeds size 3.5 and Eddie Daniels ligature.
May I know your set-up?Thank you very much for answering my questions.
Yours sincerely,
Tim
P.S. To help me clear up my understanding of tone colours, could you please describe what is bright and what is dark? Is Buffet RC or R13 brighter?
——————————————————————–
Tim:
Thank you for your letter.
As far as Mr. Ridenour’s clarinet models, my awareness is that the Arioso is the basic model and that the Lyrique is somewhat similar, however comes with a personal warranty from the designer himself for service, something like a luxury automobile, however I may have that somewhat confused. I have not as yet played the Lyrique clarinet, so I cannot comment further on the model.
The Arioso, which I own. Tone color, resistance and intonation, it is equal to any clarinet made.
As far as sounding like those whom you mention, you will sound like you sound, and there are a number of reasons for this: it is not a matter of just sound per se, but also of attack, release, conception and perception of the player.

No setup can make you sound like an admired player, but of course you must have at least correctly made materials, including clarinet and mouthpiece, etc. My feeling is that ligature is more a fad concept and one more of perception than material, although of course if you tighten the material enough, you can choke your reed ,rendering it impossible to do much in the realm of flexibity. Please do not use a wraparound string ligature. It is expensive and it does not work in a quickchange situation.

People just love to question and to interpret what is bright and what is dark, and as well, they adore making derisive remarks about the meaning of these terms pertaining to clarinet sound.
Right now, these terms are considered equal to good (dark) and bad(bright), but that is sure to change again and again, depending upon the particular player and the following they acquire.These qualities are not just a matter of frequencies, but more I think of actual musical execution and the ability to really espress the music of the particular composer.
If you ask a number of players whom they admire and why, you will get answers that are completely disparate.
A correctly made mouthpiece is more important than the make, and there are differences there as well as to symetrical or asymmetrical facings, rather violent differences at that.
Most of the great players of the past used symetrically faced mouthpieces.
I play on a Gennusa mouthpiece, copied from an old one I had found so that now I have two very close mouthpieces which play many reeds and I am at last, and at least satisfied. They are also very much intune and I like the sound. Gennusa used a different mix for his blanks and they do sound different , which I prefer.
My facing is supposedly similar to that of Harold Wright, I have been told, (by Tom Ridenour, after I sent him my measurements).
I use Gonzalez FOF reeds which I find perfect for my playing. They are similar to Zonda, which I have also tried, however they last longer and remain consistant more than Zonda or any other I have played. Supposedly they are similar to the old Morre cut used by legendary clarinetists, the blank being thicker.
I used that type of ligature(like ED) but without all that gold filagree on it and no different plates to put under it to change your sound. This stuff for me is all pure “sell” and really nothing more.
The optimum ligature made by VD is the most expensive thing you can buy, is heavy and slipped off my clarinet each time I removed the mouthpiece to change clarinets.Worthless, for me.
I am told that all Buffet clarinets are the same instrument, with different labels and prices to match (and my source will remain anonymous). I do not know which is brighter and/or darker.
A lomg time ago I played an R 13 and then changed to an RC, and I didn’t like the change one bit. The RC seemed to me to be tubby, flaccid ,if you will.
Ridenours clarinets are not finished as well as the big three french clarinets, or the Yamaha, at least the top of their lines, however that is not to say that you could not play for a lifetime of playing music on them, with great pleasure.
Hard rubber I believe is a superior material to grenadliia and it cannot crack, so that is that; and I do not subscribe to the popular folklore that you can only make a good clarinet sound on wood, not for one minute.
I don’t know thw Ralph morgan mouthpiece, but I know that Ridenour knows more about mouthpiece manufacture than any other mouthpiece craftsmen as they are prone to call themselves.

Best of all good luck with you clarinet and all else.
sherman

Extruding teeth and embouchure woes, dark and bright

Dear Mr. Friedland
Thank you for your great site! Since the first time I discovered your site, I almost checked it out everyday. This is really a great site.
Now, after playing in the high school band for more than 1 year as 1st clarinet, I had discovered recently that my embouchure is incorrect! As the book stated that the upper and lower teeth must be parallel while playing. But I have very extruding upper teeth, and I have to push out my lower to the maximum in order to make them parallel. However, it is almost impossible for me to do that as it is extreme tiring, and I am playing with a double-lip embouchure. So I tried to push my lower jaw a bit out, and have a low instrument angle, and surprisingly, I can get the highest C out without much pinching, even tough it is a bit flat and I cannot tongue the notes above the highest G. My question is, is this correct? If not, what should I do?
Also, my seniors tried to play the lowes t notes very depth, and make them ¡°sound like bass clarinet¡±, is this concept correct?
Thank you very much for your time.

Hi :
You actually seem to have several problems, and although I cannot see and hear you I can try to help you solve them.
One of the first things I mention to all questions of mouthpiece placement and embouchure placement is that we go with what produces the best quality of sound, the most ease, the most range and the most intune, all of these under the heading of comfort and endurance while playing.
Stretching or contorting your embouchure will only make the problem worse.
Where do your teeth close naturally , you know when the dentist asks you to bite down?
If you are like most of us, you have what is called an overbite, wherein your upper teeth close over your lower.
Make your double lip embouchure. What feels and sounds best? What gives you the best intune, sound and range.
If you can answer these questions, then that is your embouchure.
I happen to play single lip embouchure, but I have played double lip, which I believe is the best way to play the clarinet.
In my embouchure I do move the lower jaw forward somewhst but I would be reluctant to suggest that you do the same.
I think you teachers want you to have a bigger and darker sound, a particular goal these days.
That is more the question of mouthpiece and perhaps reeds.
What you need is to be able to play with comfort and increasing endurance.
The “Art of Clarinet Playing” is a great book, but one should not neccessarily take it literally.Why? Because we each have different setups with our teeth, and they are all different. We take what makes us sound better.
I myself could not play with my teeth parallel but as I said, I do extend my lower jaw a very small amount.
I would remind you once again that comfort, tuning and endurance are important issues for you to consider before you begin following directions literally.
Now, there is a great debate going on at present about “bright” and “dark” sounds and the empahsis seems to be on dark, however that too is a matter of what it is that you most admire.
If you have a favorite player on records that you like to listen to, then perhaps you prefer his or her particular sound and you will almost play for that sound.
This is a general kind of answer, however I hope that it helps in some way (s).
best of good luck .
sincerely, sherman