Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning spacing of clarinet holes

there's an excellent history of the clarinet here:

http://www.geocities.com/ajanicz/clarinet.html

in which it is written:

>> Muller presented his instrument of thirteen keys
>> and gut pads to the Paris Conservatory in 1815. They
>> rejected it without debate. It was not that Muller
>> had invented something radical with too many keys;
>> the problem that the elders had was that it would
>> eliminate the need for clarinets in various keys.
>> Muller's clarinet boasted a fine tone, was in a
>> convenient size pitched in B-flat and could comfortably
>> play chromatically in all keys. The elders preferred
>> the difference in tone colors of the clarinets in
>> various keys and claimed that it would be almost
>> blasphemous to eliminate them.

i found this most interesting. so then the clarinets
with few keys, which existed before Muller's instrument,
had to have had the holes bored at postions which
gave a well-temperament or a meantone -- and i would
strongly suspect that it was meantone.

does anyone know of a resource giving the measurement
of holes on the clarinet?

i was already thinking about posting this request before
i read that webpage, except that i was wondering about
the spacing on the later Boehm and Albert clarinet systems.

i was comparing the key mechanisms on my two clarinets,
and noticed that the spacing for semitones varied quite
a lot.

i've been assuming all along that the modern woodwinds,
which all followed the lead of Boehm's flute in 1832,
have their holes bored at positions which produce
12edo or something close to it. but now it looks to
me like even on the modern instruments the holes may
be spaced according to meantone.

if nothing comes up in my search, then i suppose i can
do the measurements myself ... or perhaps another
clarinetist out there can do it.

-monz

🔗Werner Mohrlok <wmohrlok@hermode.com>

i suppose i can
do the measurements myself ...

Sure, if you want to play only in the basic octave (or duodecime).
But all compromises that have to be done so that the instrument
will have a good temperament throughout all octaves requires more
than a simple calculation. I don't know how this is achieved by
good woodwind instruments but as to my opinion it requires a lot
of experience...

spaced according to meantone...

I don't believe so. As to my opinion (and experience) the ideal of a good
woodwind instrument is a temperament near to e.t. and besides of
this a good flexibility of all tones so that the instrumentalist
can easily tune the tones higher or deeper according the
requirements of their harmonic function.

- Werner
-----Ursprï¿½ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: monz [mailto:monz@attglobal.net]
Gesendet: Freitag, 28. November 2003 08:25
An: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: [tuning] spacing of clarinet holes

there's an excellent history of the clarinet here:

http://www.geocities.com/ajanicz/clarinet.html

in which it is written:

does anyone know of a resource giving the measurement
of holes on the clarinet?

i was already thinking about posting this request before
i read that webpage, except that i was wondering about
the spacing on the later Boehm and Albert clarinet systems.

i was comparing the key mechanisms on my two clarinets,
and noticed that the spacing for semitones varied quite
a lot.

if nothing comes up in my search, then i suppose i can
do the measurements myself ... or perhaps another
clarinetist out there can do it.

-monz

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
tuning-subscribe@yahoogroups.com - join the tuning group.
tuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com - unsubscribe from the tuning group.
tuning-nomail@yahoogroups.com - put your email message delivery on hold
for the tuning group.
tuning-digest@yahoogroups.com - change your subscription to daily digest
mode.
tuning-normal@yahoogroups.com - change your subscription to individual
emails.
tuning-help@yahoogroups.com - receive general help information.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

🔗monz <monz@attglobal.net>

hi Werner,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Werner Mohrlok" <wmohrlok@h...> wrote:

>
> i suppose i can
> do the measurements myself ...
>
> Sure, if you want to play only in the basic octave (or duodecime).
> But all compromises that have to be done so that the instrument
> will have a good temperament throughout all octaves requires more
> than a simple calculation. I don't know how this is achieved by
> good woodwind instruments but as to my opinion it requires a lot
> of experience...
>
> spaced according to meantone...
>
> I don't believe so. As to my opinion (and experience) the
> ideal of a good woodwind instrument is a temperament near
> to e.t. and besides of this a good flexibility of all tones
> so that the instrumentalist can easily tune the tones higher
> or deeper according the requirements of their harmonic function.
>
> - Werner

every orchestral instrument which plays specific pitches
(i.e., not including many percussion) is capable of a
wide variety of intonation.

in woodwinds specifically, this intonational flexibility
is a result of changes in embouchure (the position of the
lips and other parts of the mouth and face). and changes
in embouchure do indeed allow a tremendous variety of
pitch for any given fingering.

so all i can hope for is some kind of mathematical or
theoretical "ideal intonation" which is a result of the
placement of the holes along the air-tube of the instrument.

but another way of achieving microtonal notes on woodwinds
is by using "non-standard" fingerings. so -- besides
learning the basis of the standard fingerings -- this is
another reason why i'm interested in the exact measurements
of the holes.

using unusual fingerings closes all kinds of different
combinations of holes, most of which affect the sound in
many ways: not only pitch, but also volume and especially
timbre.

there should be mathematical ways to model what happens
to the pitch as different combinations of holes are closed.
in fact, most likely it's already been done. i saw many
papers on subjects like this for brass and string instruments
and flutes (but interestingly, not for reed instruments)
presented at the ISMA conference in which i participated
in Italy in 2001.

if it hasn't been done ... then i'm trying to instigate
someone out there into picking it up as a research project.
;-)

-monz

🔗monz <monz@attglobal.net>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Erlich" <paul@s...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
>
> > i was comparing the key mechanisms on my two clarinets,
> > and noticed that the spacing for semitones varied quite
> > a lot.
> >
> > i've been assuming all along that the modern woodwinds,
> > which all followed the lead of Boehm's flute in 1832,
> > have their holes bored at positions which produce
> > 12edo or something close to it. but now it looks to
> > me like even on the modern instruments the holes may
> > be spaced according to meantone.
>
> On what basis do you make that claim? There's no simple
> formula for determining the pitches just from the spacing
> of the holes.

thanks paul ... and as you've probably seen by now from
my subsequent posts, i realize that it's hard to find
research on this.

but there must be *some* mathematical formula ... i'm
sure that factories which make clarinets do not space
the holes by ear individually for each instrument they
make. they have to bore the holes by measuring. so
what tuning do those measurements produce? that's what
i want to know.

note also in my later posts that i recognize the extreme
variability of pitch for a given fingering because of
embouchure.

-monz

🔗Werner Mohrlok <wmohrlok@hermode.com>

Hi,

Some years ago, when Yamaha and others presented their ideas
in "physical modelling" I thaught that the algorithms of these programs
could help the wind instrument producers to find new model
for such demands.

But now my way did lead me away from my bassoon. It's a shame...

Good luck for this interesting project.

Werner
-----Ursprï¿½ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: monz [mailto:monz@attglobal.net]
Gesendet: Samstag, 29. November 2003 10:35
An: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: [tuning] Re: spacing of clarinet holes

hi Werner,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Werner Mohrlok" <wmohrlok@h...> wrote:

every orchestral instrument which plays specific pitches
(i.e., not including many percussion) is capable of a
wide variety of intonation.

so all i can hope for is some kind of mathematical or
theoretical "ideal intonation" which is a result of the
placement of the holes along the air-tube of the instrument.

using unusual fingerings closes all kinds of different
combinations of holes, most of which affect the sound in
many ways: not only pitch, but also volume and especially
timbre.

if it hasn't been done ... then i'm trying to instigate
someone out there into picking it up as a research project.
;-)

-monz

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

🔗monz <monz@attglobal.net>

here's my start on it: i've measured all the holes
on my Boehm-system clarinet. this is how it looks when
nothing is being played:

(this will become a webpage, and eventually will have
a detailed analysis of every possible fingering on the
clarinet ... i hope)

====================

fingering as in this webpage
http://www.wfg.woodwind.org/clarinet/cl_fing.html#a

measurements in millimeters from the top of the barrell down.
mouthpiece not included. lh = left hand and rh = right hand.

in .1.2.3.4 periods signify the four little right hand keys
at the bottom of the top joint.

minus signs around the measurement means that the hole is open.
parentheses around the measurement means that the hole is closed.

the bottom joint extends another 19 mm beyond the "E" hole,
for a total length from the barrell of 489 mm.

the bell extends another 107 mm beyond that, for a total
from the barrell of 596 mm.

Boehm clarinet
--------------

top at left, bottom at right, in order by fingering

left hand:
R T A lhG# lh1 lh2 Eb lh3 C# F F# E

right hand:
.1.2.3.4 rh1 rh2 B rh3 F# rhG# E F

(the F#, F, and E keys for both hands close exactly
the same holes)

here are the measurements and the open/closed situation
when no fingers are used:

mm
R (81)
T -157- & -166-
A (130) & (139)
lhG# (139)
lh1 -157- & -178-
lh2 -197- & -211-
Eb (213)
lh3 -235-
C# (246)
F
F#
E
---
.1 (93)
.2 (119)
.3 (168)
.4 (216)
rh1 -197- & -276- & -291-
rh2 -197- & -276- & -318-
B (297)
rh3 -197- & -276- & -340-
F# -401- & (432)
rhG# (373)
E -401- & -470-
F -401-

-monz

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> hi Werner,
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Werner Mohrlok" <wmohrlok@h...>
wrote:
>
> >
> > i suppose i can
> > do the measurements myself ...
> >
> > Sure, if you want to play only in the basic octave (or duodecime).
> > But all compromises that have to be done so that the instrument
> > will have a good temperament throughout all octaves requires more
> > than a simple calculation. I don't know how this is achieved by
> > good woodwind instruments but as to my opinion it requires a lot
> > of experience...
> >
> > spaced according to meantone...
> >
> > I don't believe so. As to my opinion (and experience) the
> > ideal of a good woodwind instrument is a temperament near
> > to e.t. and besides of this a good flexibility of all tones
> > so that the instrumentalist can easily tune the tones higher
> > or deeper according the requirements of their harmonic function.
> >
> > - Werner
>
>
>
> every orchestral instrument which plays specific pitches
> (i.e., not including many percussion) is capable of a
> wide variety of intonation.
>
> in woodwinds specifically, this intonational flexibility
> is a result of changes in embouchure (the position of the
> lips and other parts of the mouth and face). and changes
> in embouchure do indeed allow a tremendous variety of
> pitch for any given fingering.
>
> so all i can hope for is some kind of mathematical or
> theoretical "ideal intonation" which is a result of the
> placement of the holes along the air-tube of the instrument.
>
> but another way of achieving microtonal notes on woodwinds
> is by using "non-standard" fingerings. so -- besides
> learning the basis of the standard fingerings -- this is
> another reason why i'm interested in the exact measurements
> of the holes.
>
> using unusual fingerings closes all kinds of different
> combinations of holes, most of which affect the sound in
> many ways: not only pitch, but also volume and especially
> timbre.
>
> there should be mathematical ways to model what happens
> to the pitch as different combinations of holes are closed.
> in fact, most likely it's already been done. i saw many
> papers on subjects like this for brass and string instruments
> and flutes (but interestingly, not for reed instruments)
> presented at the ISMA conference in which i participated
> in Italy in 2001.
>
> if it hasn't been done ... then i'm trying to instigate
> someone out there into picking it up as a research project.
> ;-)
>
>
>
> -monz

🔗rumsong <rumsong@telus.net>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> here's my start on it: i've measured all the holes
> on my Boehm-system clarinet. this is how it looks when
> nothing is being played:

Greetings,

Bravo!

As usual, excellent work from Mr. Monz.

It is only a guess, and perhaps long since covered, but old
instruments must have been built with some well temperament
in mind. As EQ 'took over' the old instruments were considered
'out of tune.' Perhaps some limit was reached for making
microtonal adjustments to temperament. Perhaps it became a
matter of ease.

Then the question might be what temperament was used. I
expect local variations in Europe and a degree of standardization
in America tending close to EQ.

All best wishes,

Gordon Rumson

🔗monz <monz@attglobal.net>

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@lumma.org>

🔗monz <monz@attglobal.net>

hi Carl (and paul),

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:

> > Right -- there was a single set of hole sizes and
> > positions that was determined originally by extensive
> > experimentation, and this is applied to every instrument.
>
> What's your source on that?
>
> -Carl

i can't provide any specific source yet, so maybe paul
can. the best i can do is point to James A. MacGillivray's
article "The Woodwind", which is chapter 10 of _Musical
Instruments Through The Ages_ edited by Anthony Baines.

MacGillivray clearly (albeit very briefly) cites Boehm's
intentions and procedures in his redesign of the flute,
which was followed within just a few years by the
Buffet/Klose version of the clarinet whose key system
is so similar to that on Boehm's flute that it's been
called the "Boehm clarinet" since it first appeared.

the oboe had quite a different evolution, devoloping
more slowly from the old-style oboes, chiefly at the
hands of Triebert in the mid and late 1800s.

the bassoon evolved slowly in France in a way similar
to the oboe (and the so-called "Buffet model" is still
played today), then was redesigned in Germany in 1824
by Almenraeder, whose version was perfected later by
Heckel and is by far the preferred bassoon design today.

paul is absolutely correct about the experimentation
on the flute and the clarinet.

i'm now eagerly awaiting the arrival of my copy of Baine's
more comprehensive _History of the Woodwind Instruments_,
since i'm "getting back to my roots" as a woodwind player.
i'll be able to post more when i read that.

-monz