Talk:Bass clarinet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

The article states that the bass clarinet is used in "Valkyrian and Tristan, by Wagner" - I suspect this means that it is used in Die Walküre and is also used in Tristan und Isolde, but I don't know Wagner as well as I should, so I'm not sure - can anyone confirm? (There's no single piece called "Valkyrian and Tristan", of course.) --Camembert

---

I've removed the Mozart Requiem from the list of works that employ the instrument - I'm almost certain that it's the basset horn in that piece, which is sort of an ancestor of the bass clarinet (and I think it was sometimes called the "bass clarinet" in Mozart's day, though I'd have to look it up to be sure), but isn't the same instrument. I'm prepared to be proved wrong about this, of course. --Camembert

Each time I've seen a live performance of the Requiem (maybe twice) the clarinet parts have always been taken by an instrument that looks as described: clarinets with crooked mouthpieces and bells, resembling a baritone sax. Whether these would be found on an authentic-instruments performance is something I wouldn't know myself.

"Valkyrian and Tristan" seem to be inherited from the Swedish page. I am reasonably certain that these are the two Wagner works meant. -- Smerdis of Tlön

Oh this is funny, you wouldn't believe it, but I clicked on Recent changes and this was the first article that popped up and I play bass clarinet...I just had to say that because what are the chances of that happening on Wikipedia?--naryathegreat 00:55, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)

I've just checked the score of the Mozart Requiem, and it is basset-horns, not bass clarinets, that are written for. Basset horns are not all that common, so I suppose basses might be substituted nowadays as a cheat. Thanks for fixing the Wagner. --Camembert

---

Why is "The Light Fantastic" linked to the article about the Terry Pratchett book of the same name? Is there any connection other than the name? -- Rsholmes 20:48, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

---

Perhaps it would be worth mentioning "When I'm 64" by the Beatles? The bass clarinet is prominent in that piece, and for many may be the only place they have recognizably heard it.Tuc 07:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I concur. A section should be added for Bass Clarinet in contemporary music. Shploo 01:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images?

The image(of a Buffet bass clarinet) at the top of the article and the Dolphy image have been added and removed a few times, so I'm wondering what's up. The Dolphy picture looks familiar (album cover?) and I suspect it's under copyright, but I don't know. Maybe the editors who originated the images and/or made changes can sort it out. It is helpful to indicate why an edit is being made, BTW. Special-T 15:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Checking the image pages for both those photos, both claim the images are available for unrestricted use and both give links to the sources of those images. However, checking both those web sites, I see nothing that indicates these images are not copyrighted and their use restricted. I suspect this use is in violation. I don't know the proper procedure at this point, though. (Note that the glicibarifono image is one I took myself, and so far as I know there are no copyright issues with it.) -- Rsholmes 23:55, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

So, now that they've been deleted, anyone have a good image on one? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 16:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Range

The range is inaccurate: I'm guessing it's in concert pitch, so the Bb is correct, but the A and C are both confusing and wrong, the bass clarinet has the same range as the Bb soprano clarinet in the "high" (altissimo?) register. (written c)LM

Well no. For any wind and string instrument, the upper range is vague. It mostly depends on the skill of the player. Also, ranges are often written that way, as a sort of "realistic high vs theoretical high". ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 03:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

If you're looking at the "Description" section, the range looks accurate to me. Then again, maybe I wrote that part... Special-T 15:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh no the description is fine, its the graphic I'm talking about. Even if it is written as "realistic high vs theoretical high", it should be written as a concert F 8va (written G) as the realistic, and a concert Bb 8va (written C) as the theoretical. LM

So be bold and change it :) ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 17:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Ugh, why do you think I don't have a username :) LM --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.81.102.240 (talk • contribs).

The clarinet article shows a range from E₃ to C₇. This seems not unreasonable for the written range, and the caption in the "Range" section does specify "written", though the same graphic appears without "written" in the infobox. If it were true that the bass clarinet had the same range as a soprano clarinet, plus a semitone on the bottom (for a low E♭ instrument) or four semitones on the bottom (for a low C instrument), then it would be E♭₃ or C₃ to C₇ written, or D♭₂ or B♭₁ to B♭₅ sounding. The graphic shows B♭₁ to A₅ or C₆, which matches pretty well the latter of these possibilities: sounding range for a low C instrument. It is confusing to show the written range in one infobox and the sounding range in another, especially with no explanation, but certainly the claim that the range should go about an octave higher doesn't seem reasonable. Though I'm told it's easier to hit higher harmonics on a larger instrument, so that in fact the bass clarinet's upper written range limit is higher than a soprano's. -- Rsholmes 23:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I just looked closely at the infobox range graphic and it is (to put it mildly) hard to justify that range. Kennan lists (written) low C, Eb, or E to high E with the possibilty of a high G. Adler shows the same low with a high of the written C (two ledger lines above the staff), possibly to the E above. The range shown in the infobox would go to the written B above that (raising at least my eyebrows at the thought), to the written D above that, which would qualify as 'extended technique' in anybody's book. I'll try to get another, more accurate graphic to insert there. Special-T 04:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but if I understand what you're saying correctly, this is just wrong. I've played bass clarinet; not well enough to be able to say with confidence what the high limit is, but it's not written C two ledger lines above the staff (C₆). That note and the next few higher ones are well within the capabilities of any high school bass clarinetist. I would expect a professional could get to at least the G above that (G₆) and almost certainly a good deal higher. I don't know who Kennan and Adler are but either -- as I said -- I've misunderstood you, or you've misread them, or they are no authorities. I'll look around... -- Rsholmes 10:57, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

What you're forgetting is that the graphic is the /sounding/ range, so it's written a 9th higher. Yes, the high limit is very high, but I wasn't going to say anything on that as I've never been even close to a professional and it's been a while since I've read an orchestration book on the matter, or even played my normal clarinet, much less a bass. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 11:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Nope, I am forgetting no such thing. The higher note shown is a C₆, sounding B♭₆, and while that's well above anything I ever played on the bass in high school band (well, intentionally anyway!), it's well within the capabilities of a modern day professional soloist. My reference to written C two ledge lines above the staff as being too low was in response to Special-T's statement that Adler gives that as the upper limit. It isn't. -- Rsholmes 14:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe that C₆ would sound B flat₄.

The concert pitches (as Melodia points out) shown in the infobox are well above anyone's version of the instrument's range. I think Adler's (Samuel Adler, Eastman School of Music, The Study Of Orchestration) conservative approach to the upper range reflects his concern that the tone thins out appreciably when the pitch gets that high. I'd go with Kennan's (Kent Kennan, University Of Texas The Technique of Orchestration) range to third-ledger-line G. If I were writing a bass clarinet part that went that high (I know, original research alert!), I'd question whether I was using the right instrument. Kennan and Adler are two of the foremost authorities on the matter, each having written books on orchestration that are in very wide use and have been for generations (Kennan's first edition has a 1952 copyright, Adler's 1982). Special-T 12:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

"Third ledger line G"? Do you mean fourth, above the treble clef (G₆)?

Aber and Lerstad write:

Although the compass is in theory virtually unlimited, it can safely be said that the bass clarinet can reach chromatically to a written C two octaves above the C played with the thumb and the register key. Enrique Raxach has included an A#4 in his Chimaera and Terje Lerstad has written up to a C5 in his Solo. The notes from the highest A to C are sensitive and difficult to obtain, but the notes up to G#4 are quite stable and, with practice, can be employed fluently. Notes in this range, particularly those as high as E4, occur quite frequently in the new solo literature, often in technically difficult passages.

Their notation is confusing: the "C played with the thumb and the register key" is written C₆, concert B♭₄, in scientific pitch notation. But if you look at their fingering chart and their description of it, "the most useful fingerings for the notes from C#3 to C5", clearly they mean written C♯₆ to C₈. Given the last sentence in the quote above, I think (written) "E4", i.e. E₇, an octave above the E three ledger lines above the staff, is not an outrageous choice for the upper end. I know Lerstad is a proficient bass clarinetist and composer, and I'd take his recommendation over a 1950s orchestration book any day. Especially since Kennan and Adler seem to be talking about their personally preferred recommendations for what's most useful (in an orchestral setting?), while Aber and Lerstad are talking about what is actually being played in the present day (esp. in a solo setting). -- Rsholmes 14:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the "highest A to C are ... difficult to obtain", but certainly acceptable as a nominal top-end for the purposes of this article. I'd vote for a "most useful" top note as G, four (yes, you are right!) ledger lines above the staff, with a smaller-note-realistically-obtainable C above that - kind of like the soprano clarinet limits. And yes, Kennan and Adler are addressing ensemble, specifically orchestral writing, not modern-day virtuosic limits. Special-T 14:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I think there may still be some misunderstanding. The A to C they refer to are not the ones written with four to five ledger lines above the staff, but the ones written an octave above that (!!!). See the fingering chart. The note they cite as being the highest commonly found in modern solo literature is the written E below that, i.e. the second E above the staff. That sounds as the first D above the staff, a whole tone higher than the second of the two notes shown in the graphic. -- Rsholmes 15:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. That is certainly extremely high. I'm not that concerned about the exact notes shown in the infobox as the top of the range, but I'm always a little wary (in any article) of extreme examples being given the same weight/emphasis as the "99.999% of what's out there" info. That's why I'd vote for the same range as the soprano Bb clarinet being shown (high G as the most-often-seen top end, with the C above as a realistic possibility), with perhaps a sentence indicating what you've stated above - that literature exists for this instrument that demands a much higher range. Special-T 18:53, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

It is confusing that the new range diagram disagrees with the text. Of course there is no well defined upper limit, but to have the text say one thing and the diagram another isn't good. The article by Aber and Lerstad is the best authority I can find, which is why the text says what it does. I believe either the diagram should follow the text, showing written E₇ for the upper limit (highest frequently occurring note in the modern solo literature according to Aber and Lerstad) or the text should be adjusted to fit the diagram -- but in that case, there needs to be an equally authoritative citation. For the bass clarinet -- you can not simply assume the same written limit as the soprano clarinet. -- Rsholmes 15:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I am aware of the distinction; I am a professional clarinetist and arranger. As stated above, I think it is misleading in an encyclopedia article, when showing the upper limit of an instrument with a theoretically unlimited top note, to include notes which appear very infrequently in the literature. And since you have dismissed the more conservative sources I have cited, there's nothing else I have to contribute here. Feel free to revert my changes. Special-T 15:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)