Pitch and brightness

[David Renaud]

Grin---this came out longer then I planned, but its good
Perhaps you were jesting but, its actually a good question,
why not just put everything up a semitone

That would really change everything technically.

Imagine relearning a major piano concerto a pianist has played their whole
life in c major, in C# major. It may never quite settle right.

Aside from this, raising the pitch makes things brighter, but changing the
key technically changes everything for the performer. An A for clarinet
solo changed to a Bb is much stuffier, does not speak as well, requires
resonant fingering tricks, and would not naturally sound as bright even though
it is up a semitone.(without extra effort). We work harder to make a Bb sound
the same as an A that speaks better, or a C that really resonates well.
When a passage sounds smooth, it is only because of years of training
learning to compensate for the horns tendencies.

Orchestrally......for example:

The Mozart Clarinet Concerto is written in C for A Clarinet.
The opening alone G----E--F-A-G-F-E-E just would
not be the same in C# major. Certain notes resonate better
then others on the clarinet and he wrote for the Clarinet
to fall in just the right place. Part of the beauty of this concerto
is how perfectly, simply, and beautifully it is sensibly written
around the best good resonant notes that speak and
fall naturally for the performer. He knew some notes are stuffier
then others, some more focused then others technicially. We
learn to compensate for this, and have tricks, like resonant fingerings,
embrasure, and tongue adjustments to even it out. But when
a composer writes for a horns natural tendencies, some of
the best material is written.

Yes we can compensate for alternate keys,
But when a smart composer takes advantage and writes for
the most advantageous, resonant placement for ease of voicing
tone it can be so beautiful.

The Beethoven 6 clarinet solos executed on Bb clarinet
in Ab major instead of G would not fall under the fingers right, and the
flow of it be very difficult. The beautiful slow movement solo is in
C for Bb clarinet with nice open resonant C's D's, E's, and
open G's as good pivotal resonant melodic notes. Change this to C#,
D#, E#, and the G# that tends to be stuffy, and it would not feel
or sound the same at any adjusted tuning of A435-448 by virtue
of technical qualities of those notes on the horn. Perhaps someone
could make it sound convincing but at considerable effort.
In orchestral writing composers often(not always) consider the keys
they are writing for.

We spend a lifetime learning to execute that repertoire.
Much of it is difficult enough without having to relearn it all in awkward keys.

                                                         Cheers
                                                          Dave Renaud
                                                          RPT
                                                          (Have clarinets will
travel)


Joe & Penny Goss wrote:

> Hi David,
> A thought, if we need the brightness due to the hall why not just transpose
> everything up a half step. <G>
> Joe Goss
> imatunr@primenet.com
> http://www.primenet.com/~imatunr/
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Renaud" <studiorenaud@qc.aibn.com>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2001 11:02 PM
> Subject: Re: Pitch and brightness
>
> > Perhaps I may offer some experience with this creepy pitch problem.
> > I am a woodwind player, Clarinets as major, saxes and flutes as minor.
> > I have played pops concerts with a national orchestra,
> > and much freelance pit work, the odd pick up orchestra.
> >
> > I can not explain the science, but I can offer my personal experience
> > that higher pitch is brighter. I have recordings of the Berlin orchestra
> > at A448, and some others at A435. This is a big spread.
> >
> > The Bb clarinet is noticably brighter then the A clarinet in tone.
> > The spread of A435 to A448 is a good part of that semitone.
> > In fact, a German clarinettist must buy an instrument with holes
> > bored out differently. Making such a change by exchanging for just a
> > short barrel would throw all the scales intonation way off.
> >
> > Also when I use a 65 mm barrel(1mm short) and voice the clarinet
> > tone up to A442(Montreal symphony is always 442; on their
> > auditions they advertise its requirement for the audition) I end
> > up brighter.
> >
> > My hypothesis as to why orchestras push the pitch is simple.
> >
> > We have built larger and larger halls,
> > with less and less wood, and more cushy seats and rug
> > that suck up sound. It requires a very bright sound to project
> > into a room of 3000 without amplification.  In fact some of the
> > older bass player I know often complain about how bright
> > the are asked to play compared with 30 years ago.
> >
> > Timbre has evolved. Pitch is only one of the techniques
> > to achieve a strong core to the sound that is bright enough to carry.
> > Once the sound gets out a couple hundred feet it sounds much more mellow.
> >
> > We don't get our best recording orchestras performing in
> > nice church halls and concert halls that hold only 300-500 people
> > with dozens of different reflective surfaces, shapes and contours.
> > Halls are so large, if there is too much reflection, the delay is too
> > great. They are massive, and often fall into two categories.
> > One...they are dead, or two.... they sound like a gymnasium because
> > the delay is so great.
> >
> > So again I say. Rising pitch is only one technique orchestras are using
> > to deal with the problem. Equipment(mouthpieces, instruments)
> > & performance technique also have evolved to the same end.
> >
> > This is not a new problem. I think a wind or string players
> > persuit of the perfect tone is sonewhat obsesive at this level of
> > performance. The in thing/equipment/mouthpiece/bow/technique,
> > goes in cycles. Perhaps one day it will swing the other way,
> > Perhaps one day all the clarinetist will be promoting double
> > embochures again in order to get a "darker" tone. It is so
> > competative for these job positions that everyone tends to follow
> > whoever is at the top of the food chain in order to meet expectations
> > and get a job. So a minority of musicians tend to set the trend.
> >
> >                                            Cheers
> >                                            David Renaud
> >                                            Canada
> >                                            RPT
> >
> >
> >
> > "Robert A. Anderson" wrote:
> >
> > > The story I have read more than once is that the rise in orchestral
> > > pitch in the 19th century was due to brass instruments. In the quest for
> > > a "brighter" sound, instruments were made to give increasingly higher
> > > pitches. This phenomenon was largely responsible for the standardization
> > > of pitch. I may have read this in Helmholtz. I seem to remember that he
> > > (or probably Ellis, in one of the appendices) notes the pitch of various
> > > orchestras and manufactures, and that it rose to about 468, maybe in the
> > > 1860s or '70s. Perhaps someone better informed can tell whether or not
> > > that's accurate. I have never understood why a higher pitched brass
> > > instrument would sound "brighter", though. The explanation about the
> > > violins deadening under stress sounds plausible, at least. Anyway,
> > > Mozart's A was in the 430s, which is a long way from the 460s. So that's
> > > a much larger spread than 440 to 444. But the change happened
> > > gradually.  Maybe the "brightness" was a psychological
> > > (psycho-acoustic?) phenomenon. What do you brass players have to say?
> > >
> > > Bob Anderson
> > > Tucson, AZ
> >
> >