Grex Classical Conference

Item 26: Favorite instrument(s)

Entered by keesan on Tue Feb 24 04:17:01 1998:

Do you have a favorite musical instrument or instruments for 
listening to?  What pieces feature it?
64 responses total.

#1 of 64 by keesan on Tue Feb 24 04:19:50 1998:

I like both the French horn (as in Mozart's horn concerto) and the cello
(Dvorak).  All I can think of that they have in common is the range, which
is such that I can hum along.  I would appreciate suggestions of other
composers and pieces that feature either or both.  (By the way, what range
do cello and horn usually play?)  What makes the French horn sound so
different from the other brass instruments?


#2 of 64 by mary on Tue Feb 24 15:22:18 1998:

The cello has a four octave range (not counting a high funky
harmonic).  The lowest note is played on an open C string
which is two octaves below middle C.  A cellist reads three
clefs - base, tenor and treble.

If I were attempting to seduce someone into loving the cello
I'd suggest one work above all others, Bach's Six Suites
for Unaccompainied Cello.


#3 of 64 by orinoco on Tue Feb 24 21:50:42 1998:

Probably violin, although I confess I've been falling in love with Bach's
organ music of late.

The different sound of the french horn comes from the fact that its bore -
the way the walls of the brass tube angle - is different, and it has a
differently shaped mouthpiece.


#4 of 64 by faile on Tue Feb 24 23:08:18 1998:

Obviously, I have to put a good word in for the bass here, but I have to admit
that I'm not really all that fond of bass solo music.  I suppose if I was
trying to convince someone to love the bass, I'd sit them down and make them
listen to some Mahler (Although not too much.... Mahler tends to get a trife
long, but definately teh opening of hte third movement of teh first symphony),
some jazz, perhaps one of the Bach unaccompanied cello suites played at pitch
on the bass (we read bass clef, and sound an octave below where it is
written), though only by a good bass player (not Gary Karr!), and some of
Edgar Meyer's recordings.  
        Other than that, I'd have to say that I'm very fond of the English
Horn... if it is played well... poorly played, it sounds like a sick goose.


#5 of 64 by keesan on Wed Feb 25 00:49:43 1998:

#2.  My range is also centered on middle C, though it is much narrower than
that of the cello.  What range is English horn?  And are there any nice pieces
that feature it?  (I also like the Bach cello suites.)


#6 of 64 by orinoco on Wed Feb 25 03:28:32 1998:

Mozart's written some good horn concerti, I belive.


#7 of 64 by faile on Thu Feb 26 21:32:43 1998:

Well, mu stupid music theory book doesnt' list the range of the English horn,
but from expreince, the range is somewhat lower than that of an obew, though
nt nearly so low as a basson.... (Just to make sure it's clear, the instrument
I'm talking about is the English horn, which is a double reed instrument which
looks like a big oboe with an  onion stuck in the bell.  The French horn is
that bras instrument with all the nifty curvy tubing)... a good peice for
English Horn would be Dvorak's New World Symphony or the middle section of
the William Tell Overture by Rossini.
        The Range of the French Horn is From roughly a C two octaves below
middle C (though it isn't areally pretty note), to the F on the top line of
teh treble clef staff.


#8 of 64 by keesan on Thu Feb 26 22:15:33 1998:

Again, it sounds like my range is centered in the middle of the range of the
French horn, maybe English horn is the same?


#9 of 64 by orinoco on Fri Feb 27 03:24:49 1998:

According to Walter Piston's _Orchestration_, the English Horn's lowest note
is the F below middle C.  It doesn't list a high note, but since the English
Horn is more or less an Oboe pitched a fifth lower, I'd guess it to be around
the C above the staff.


#10 of 64 by faile on Fri Feb 27 09:29:35 1998:

Thank you.


#11 of 64 by keesan on Fri Feb 27 18:58:09 1998:

Which instrument normally plays in the range closest to:
E below middle C through E above high C (or a bit lower, I sound
rather squeaky by the time I attempt high C)?


#12 of 64 by orinoco on Fri Feb 27 22:48:38 1998:

Would that be a clarinet?


#13 of 64 by keesan on Sat Feb 28 03:13:44 1998:

I have one around somewhere that I played a long time ago, should check.


#14 of 64 by albaugh on Mon Mar 2 18:17:53 1998:

The Bb Clarinet (which sounds a whole step lower than the notes it plays)
ranges from the [concert] D below middle C to (practically speaking) the G
above the treble clef.  So orinoco is right on.  As was as his/her (? :-)
comments about the English Horn:  Though capable of fingering/playing notes
to above its written C above the treble clef, it would sound much like a goose
being strangled at that upper limit.


#15 of 64 by keesan on Mon Mar 2 20:16:24 1998:

If by the G above the treble clef you mean G above high C, then the clarinet
range (B flat) is identical with the range they expected of the second altos
in a choir I once sang in.  I doubt anyone managed the whole range.
        Of the three tapes I pulled out to listen to while insulating on
Sunday, one was Gluck for flute, one was the Mozart Horn Concerto and one was
Bach's cellos suites (totally random selection, I did not look first).  I
tried singing along, and found that both cello and french horn top notes are
well within my upper range on both tapes, but both go a couple of notes lower,
however I could sing the horn part an octave up and it sounded fine.  Does
the french horn have a lot of volume on the higher harmonics?  How does the
frequency distribution compare for french horn and other brass, and for brass
and strings or woodwinds?
        Which instrument has a frequency distribution closest to human?


#16 of 64 by orinoco on Tue Mar 3 03:14:14 1998:

Well, both instruments get compared to the human voice quite often, as does
the baritone sax, which also operates in a similar range.  Beyond that, I
don't really know...


#17 of 64 by albaugh on Wed Mar 4 17:01:51 1998:

Re: Bb Clarinet top range:  4th ledger line high [concert] G.


#18 of 64 by orinoco on Thu Mar 5 18:58:52 1998:

Wow...that a much broader range than I'd expected


#19 of 64 by keesan on Thu Mar 5 21:47:36 1998:

Yes, but I don't think the clarinet often plays that high.


#20 of 64 by albaugh on Thu Mar 5 22:16:07 1998:

Depends on what kind of music.  Jazz clarinetist routinely roam around above
the staff lots.  Orchestral works, probably not routinely or a whole lot. 
Band music, where clarinets are surrogate violins, the first section will play
many passages in the written range of C to F, sometimes G or even A; this is
very common in marches.


#21 of 64 by keesan on Fri Mar 6 20:21:49 1998:

I find that the higher ranges of most instruments, including voice, are
painful to listen to.  Maybe that's why I like cello and horn.  Why have
sopranoes been so popular, is it that people like the sound or admire their
ability to sing near-impossible notes?


#22 of 64 by orinoco on Fri Mar 6 21:23:34 1998:

I actually don't like the tone of the traditional operatic soprano voice -
it's too shrill and almost sickly-sounding for me.  I think the shrillness
of the high ranges of even low instruments comes from the fact that their
bodies are made to resonate well to much lower notes.


#23 of 64 by rcurl on Sat Mar 7 06:47:34 1998:

Sopranos are so popular because they sing beautifully. Those terms "painful"
and "shrillness" are entirely in the listener (obviously), and I don't
share those opinions. 


#24 of 64 by mary on Sat Mar 7 13:55:26 1998:

High notes, done well, sound precarious and thrilling, especially when
they are sustained and solo.  It's a little like watching a high-wire act,
you know it's dangerous and failure won't be pretty.  It's a high-brow
adrenaline rush. ;-) 



#25 of 64 by keesan on Sat Mar 7 16:20:10 1998:

Thanks, Mary, finally a logical explanation.  People also like horror movies
and lots of TV violence, all of which they know won't hurt them.  Are live
sopranos more popular than recorded ones, since there is a chance of failure?
It is always nice to hear from people with different opinions, and good
reasons for them, it gives me new ways to think about the world.  But I still
prefer cellos and tenors.  Maybe I dislike high notes because as a second alto
they made us sing the G above high C, and it hurt as well as sounding awful.
My throat seems to tense up when I hear them.  Same when I hear high
instrumental sounds, except piano, nothing like the human voice.


#26 of 64 by orinoco on Sun Mar 8 00:06:48 1998:

It's not so much the high pitch that bothers me about operatic soprano voices
as it is the tone.  I don't really know how to describe it.


#27 of 64 by albaugh on Sun Mar 8 04:39:02 1998:

Like a sheep bleating?  ;-)


#28 of 64 by rcurl on Sun Mar 8 05:57:52 1998:

I don't share Mary's "high-wire act" explanation. On the contrary, a
soprano sings so naturally and unforced that it is an exquisite vocal
exploration of the upper registers. I get that "high brow adrenaline rush"
as readily from a basso as from a soprano (and everything in between).
It is, in fact, somewhat disparaging to consider the soprano voice as
somehow less natural than any other. 


#29 of 64 by mary on Sun Mar 8 11:56:02 1998:

My sense of the high notes being more fragile extend not just
to voice but also to the highest register of individual
instruments.  Like when James Galloway goes for that
octave leap in during the final bars of Londonderry Air when 
his already way up there.  It's like, "Whew, he made it."



#30 of 64 by mary on Sun Mar 8 11:57:29 1998:

Too many typos.  Need sleep. ;-)


#31 of 64 by keesan on Sun Mar 8 17:38:41 1998:

Why don't any radio stations play high soprano before 10 am?


#32 of 64 by rcurl on Sun Mar 8 21:34:45 1998:

Does Gallway think "Whew, I made it"? I doubt it. But I acknowledge that
there are limits to what an instrument or voice can do, and when
performers play near those limits - and not all performers can - the
audience is often impressed. But for the best performers, performing at
those limits still strikes me as effortless.

Which reminds me to ask, since you are a string performer (I used to know
this when I played the violin as a child, but I forget): what is it called
when you play a note an octave higher (I think) by just barely touching
the string? It came up recently as a physics question. One plays the
fundamental of the string normally, but another harmonic when just
touching the string, and I can't recall which harmonic - and its name,
musically. Our daughter now does this on the flute by blowing differently.



#33 of 64 by davel on Sun Mar 8 21:48:59 1998:

This response has been erased.



#34 of 64 by mary on Mon Mar 9 00:01:17 1998:

Boy, don't know, Rane.  On the cello each string as a true harmonic
which sounds the note two octaves above the sound of the open string
and one octave above the fretted point directly below the harmonic
position.  But I don't know of any special name other than true
harmonic.  False harmonics are played elsewhere (not the center of
the length of the string), are difficult to pull-off, and well
beyond anything I'd attempt without a net. ;-)



#35 of 64 by faile on Mon Mar 9 06:19:19 1998:

The only instrument with reliable harmonics other than the middle harmonic
is the bass.  (And I'm really not just asing this to stroke my own ego... I
promise)  That's only because the string is so darn long-- there's the octave
harmonic, in the middle, then above that, there's a fifth, then the double
octave.... depending on the instrument, it is possible to get up to the
seventh of a given fundemental.  Then, because the octave harmonic rings so
true, even when the string isn't touched (poor bowing can cause teh fifth or
the octave to sound, rather than the true pitch), there is a harmonic half
way between the nut and the octave.... and there are some fals harmonics that
I wouldn't attepmt without at least a disclaimer in teh program warning
pregnant women and small children that there are health risks involved.


#36 of 64 by rcurl on Mon Mar 9 08:37:40 1998:

My daughter demonstrated the four octaves she can reach on the flute by
the way she blows. Three are octaves, but the highest has to be keyed
to be an octave. She does not know what note it is unkeyed (I shall
attempt to measure it....). 


#37 of 64 by keesan on Mon Mar 9 18:53:44 1998:

re #35, are you saying that the strings will vibrate even when you are bowing
some other string?  (Do you two ever get any sleep?  3:37 a. m.?!)  How much
progress has been made in synthesizing sounds of real instruments?  IN theory
you should be able to add in all the harmonics, but it sounds rather
complicated if unbowed strings are also involved.


#38 of 64 by rcurl on Mon Mar 9 19:33:31 1998:

The best electronic "pianos" simulate other instruments quite well by
including all the harmonics. The effect of other string going into
sympathetic vibration occurs on all undamped string instruments, but
is most noticeable on the piano when pedalled. The effect is used
intentionally by composers. I cannot say for sure if this is included
in the pedal mode of electronic pianos. The coupling is hard to design
so is very different for different instruments (and is probably part of
the difference between violins that make them "better" or "worse").


#39 of 64 by faile on Mon Mar 9 20:27:12 1998:

There are a couple places on the instrument with really strong sympathetic
vibrations, and the lowest string has a nasty tendancy to sound somewhere else
in the overtone series, just to be nasty, particularly if one isn't careful.
But often, a note will cause another string to vibrate if it is in the
overtone series of that note.  (an example is that the D string will
occasionally vibrate when an A above it is played....)  
(Sure I sleep.... and to me, its an hour earlier...)


#40 of 64 by keesan on Mon Mar 9 22:41:36 1998:

How do other parts of an instrument affect the overtones, such as the sounding
boards of pianos, the cases of violins (stringed instruments)?
Is that what you mean by 'a couple places on the instrument?'


#41 of 64 by orinoco on Tue Mar 10 03:41:23 1998:

That, keesan, is the $16,000 question.  
First off, both the air inside an instrument and the material that the body
is made out of will resonate.  The larger the hollow cavityu inside the
instrument, the better the air inside is at resonating to low pitches; the
smaller the cavity, the better it is at resonating to high pitches.  
The solid material will resonate better to different pitches depending on its
dimensions, and also on the material it's made out of.  (This is why the metal
body of a banjo gives a much higher tone than that of a guitar - it's smaller,
and metal tends to reinforce high pitches better)
It gets more complicated, though, because the shape also matters.  This is
why so much effort is put into bending wood to make violins and guitars the
proper shape - yes, it would be possible to make a wooden box of the same
volume, but there would be slight differences.  And as if that weren't bad
enough, different materials conduct vibrations at different speeds, and
sometimes even the same piece of wood cut with or against the grain will ahve
entirely different properties.

In other words, it's damn complicated, and nobody really knows.


#42 of 64 by rcurl on Tue Mar 10 07:10:47 1998:

That's actually the $16,000,000 question - for some violins, for example.
It all developed by trial and error, reinforced by a lot of people with
the skills and understanding - and "ear" - to hear what most people would
find most pleasing.


#43 of 64 by albaugh on Tue Mar 10 17:42:51 1998:

If a composer wants the string player to play harmonics, the notes are to be
written with little o's over them (this is from recollection, I haven't
consulted my book on this in ages since I've never had the need! :-).

Re: flute's 4th octave:  From middle C to 3rd space C the flute is breathy,
has a unique sound, can't be played particularly loud.  From 3rd space C to
2nd ledger line C is nominal flute range for most players.  High C to double
high C is for experienced players, with the upper range already shrill.  A
4th ocatave above that is of no practical use.  Being able to play notes in
that range (through harmonics or whatever) is a novelty/skill, but not likely
to be often employed!  :-)


#44 of 64 by keesan on Wed Mar 11 01:02:03 1998:

Larger speakers also play the low notes louder, and it helps if the speaker
is dense enough not to resonate at certain frequencies, or if it does not have
any dimensions which are multiples of others (which also reinforces certain
notes).  And if you are trying to block sounds, a larger wall cavity helps,
along with thicker wallboard.  Metal blocks lower sounds well, perhaps this
is related to its vibrating at higher pitch?  [I meant block low sounds.]


#45 of 64 by mary on Sun Apr 5 14:43:13 1998:

A friend is getting married next Friday.  She is a Buddhist and
not much into "things" for their home.  She is also an accomplished
musician and her fiance is just beginning an affair with the piano.
So what to get them?

On the advice of another Buddhist I visited Jewel Heart's store on Ashley
and was totally captivated by something called Tibetan Singing Bowls. What
an incredible instrument.  You simply hold these old and tarnished brass
(I think) bowls on one hand while dragging a wooden dowel around the rim
with the other.  There is a bit of technique involved but I found that
after a few minutes of getting to know each bowl I was able to get each to
vibrate and produce the most unusual sound - a clear and deep tone which
seems to fill the room, coming from everywhere.  Amazing stuff.  I
understand that in Tibet and Nepal the monks play these as a form of
meditation, often in chorus, and the experience is quite profound.

Has anyone else ever heard or played a singing bowl?


#46 of 64 by keesan on Sun Apr 5 16:12:03 1998:

We used to use the same technique on goblets filled with water to different
depths, to produce different pitches.  You rub the rims with a wet finger.
There is also a 'glass harmonica' on a similar principal.


#47 of 64 by orinoco on Mon Apr 6 02:50:16 1998:

I've heard a tape of those singing bowls, courtesy of raven, but I've never
actually played one.


#48 of 64 by srw on Mon Apr 6 17:31:00 1998:

I have never been to the Jewel Heart store, but I did visit their 
website http://jewelheart.org/, when I linked it to the HVCN Religion 
Infocenter. They have a page for their store, too. It looks like an 
interesting place. I love the sound of a glass harmonica, but wonder if 
the sound of Tibetan Singing Bowls, though made on the same design 
principle, might be  different in some way.

I think I may have heard a recording of them once, but the memory is 
vague.


#49 of 64 by keesan on Wed Apr 8 02:00:36 1998:

It sounds like the bowls are not filled with water.  Perhaps they are heavy
enough to resonate without having to add water.  Are they lower pitched than
the glass harmonica or wine glasses?


#50 of 64 by mary on Wed Apr 8 14:24:55 1998:

The bowl I bought sounds the C# just above middle C.  They
had smaller bowls which produced higher tones and a couple
of larger bowls which had incredibly deep resonant voices.

What amazes me about the sound is how it seems to come from
everywhere, or nowhere in particular.  It's like one of those
painting where the portrait's subject seems to be looking right
at you no matter where you stand.  This music surrounds you
everywhere in the room.

I want a big one for my birthday.  I should drop some hints.


#51 of 64 by keesan on Wed Apr 8 23:23:42 1998:

The sound from everywhere may have something to do with reflection off the
insides of the bowl. A parabolic bowl might just send sound in one direction.


#52 of 64 by rcurl on Thu Apr 9 04:06:02 1998:

The outside vibrates too. Even the inside has to vibrate in the correct
mode and phase relations to focus the sound. It doesn't. A plane sound
wave *entering* a parabolic reflector is focused - to the focal point.
There is no sound being *generated* at the focal point, so that mode of
directionality is invalid too. 


#53 of 64 by remmers on Thu Apr 9 17:15:53 1998:

Re #50, last sentence: You just dropped a big one.  :)


#54 of 64 by orinoco on Thu Apr 9 21:39:33 1998:

As a matter of fact, the "sound from everywhere" might have something to do
with the fact that the whole instrument's vibrating, not just a single
resonator.  Hmm....


#55 of 64 by rcurl on Fri Apr 10 04:34:58 1998:

It is a single "resonator". However physical objects have very complex *modes*
of vibration, depending on where and how they are struck/bowed.


#56 of 64 by orinoco on Fri Apr 10 19:59:08 1998:

(sorry, I meant "the whole instrument's vibrating, not jsut part of it")


#57 of 64 by mary on Fri Apr 10 23:34:58 1998:

Well, the singing bowl now has a proper Buddhist home.
I shall miss it.


#58 of 64 by omni on Sun Jul 25 07:43:49 1999:

  My favorite instrument is the Trumpet. 
  
   It really depends on who is playing it and whose music is being played on
it. My favorite jazz piece is "Flamingo" played by Carl H. (Doc) Severinson.
The piece starts out slow, almost feeble, then builds into a full blossoming
melody that floats on the air. The finale of the piece features Doc doing some
really heavy crescendos and a killer solo in the bridge. No matter how many
times I hear it, my spirit always soars to Heaven.
   I have a few classical pieces that stand out. The first is "Fanfare for
the Common Man" by Aaron Copland and performed by the Cincinnati Pops.
Copland's use of the entire horn section was a stroke of pure genius. The mid
section, where the french horns speak regally is something worthy of gods.
The second piece is "Rondeau" by Jean-Joseph Mouret played by Wynton Marsalis.
He is absolutly flawless in his performance and it is definitly another soul
stirrer. Not quite as stirring as Fanfare for the Common Man, but indeed
beautiful. Marsalis also does a piece called "Prince of Denmark March" which
is also great. Incidentally, Rondeau is the Masterpiece Theatre theme.

   I have many other Trumpet records and peformers to list; Herb Alpert,
Wynton Marsalis, Maynard Ferguson, Chuck Mangione, among others are simply
awesome to hear. There is something about a Trumpet's sound cutting through
the air.


#59 of 64 by coyote on Tue Aug 3 22:31:54 1999:

My favorite instrument is the piano... it is incredibly versatile, can express
such a wide range of emotions, can play many different genres of music so
effectively, has the rare ability of being able to fill out chords with
itself,
and has some wonderful music written for it.  The only instrument that I love
more than the piano is the full orchestra as a unit.  There are so many
pieces that
feature the piano that I wouldn't know where to begin describing them.

I, too, enjoy the French Horn.  The horn has a full, rich sound (when
played correctly) which is very enjoyable to listen to.  The French Horn
is often described as having a
"singing" quality to it, and is often likened to a human voice.  The range
of the French Horn is, for practical purposes, from the C two ledger lines
below the bass clef staff to the C two ledger lines above the treble clef
staff.  The range can be overreached, but I don't think that that's done
very often.  There's a good quantity of works for horn and piano, which
remind me a bit of art songs (probably because of the horn's singing
quality).  Although my collection of horn music is not at all extensive,
I recommend the CD "A Horn Museum: The Valved Horn" by Willard Zirk (the
Horn professor at EMU) as a good collection of some of these pieces.

Besides these two instruments, which I'm probably biased towards because I
play both of them, I also like the sound of the double-reeded instrument
family, though I'm not really familiar with any of the literature written
for them.  Of the string family, I'm probably most fond of the cello, but
I enjoy the others, too.


#60 of 64 by dbratman on Thu Aug 5 22:27:36 1999:

For sheer sound of individual instruments, I enjoy the viola, oboe, and 
trombone - dark-hued (well, two of them are) middle instruments without 
the glamour of their orchestral neighbors the cello, clarinet, and 
trumpet.

Preferences for groups of instruments playing together is another 
matter.


#61 of 64 by mary on Mon Aug 9 11:41:52 1999:

Jeff, I'm not surprised you would favor the cello among stringed
instruments, as the octal range is almost identical.  I too enjoy the
lustier sound of a base voice but I prefer the cello to brass because it
doesn't involve spit.  For the most part. ;-) 



#62 of 64 by coyote on Mon Aug 9 18:12:21 1999:

That is a downside... but whenever I empty my horn, I comfort myself by saying
"it's mostly condensation."  :P


#63 of 64 by mary on Mon Aug 9 21:02:42 1999:

Ack, s/bass voice/base voice.  Comes closer to what I meant. ;-)


#64 of 64 by davel on Fri Aug 13 12:00:26 1999:

Also s/octal/octave/  ??
<dave tries to imagine a base-8 (or bass-8?) voice>


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: