On 29 Jan 2013, at 16:06 , Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
For example, as I recall, Selmer bass clarinets used to have the
right-hand little finger low Eb on the _upper_ rank of keys, with a
low C#/Db on the lower rank. Buffet have traditionally had it the
opposite way round.
FYI, they changed that with the Privilege model, it matches the Buffet
now.
Then there's the left-hand little finger low note key which is often
added to bass clarinets -- it can be a D or a Db.
Mentioned in the .scm and the list of keys produced by Lilypond, but
when you select it nothing shows up.
Bear in mind that this is not limited to bass clarinet -- there are
basset clarinets, basset horns and contra-alto/contrabass clarinets
to take into account as well. And in all these cases, players may
well modify the fingering setup of their instruments to suit their
personal preferences and needs.
Yes, I know of two instruments modified by placing an extra right
thumb key.
5. The left-hand low-d key (with the left thumb), is available
according to the
list, but nothing shows up. Bug!
I think you mean the left little finger, not thumb? In any case,
note that it may be a D or a Db, or possibly even a C.
You're right, that's the typo.
6. Lot's of models have a right-hand low-ees key (with the thumb),
There is no
such key. Wishlist.
Not recent French models, in my experience, but I agree it's often
found. The trouble is its placement is not uniform.
The Selmer privilege has one.
I think that what would be most helpful is to be able to provide a
clear spec for how things should work, and then in principle anyone
-- you, I (although I'm not much of a Schemer), another developer --
can implement that spec.
I dived into Scheme today and it very, very much reminds me of Lisp in
which I did some small things 25 years ago. I started with the re-
positioning of the thumb keys and was able to move these around
already. Now I'm looking at the first experimental layout of the
missing low-ees thumb, which I named 'thumb-ees'. It is not very
difficult, but you have to be very carefull in what you do under the
hood.
My personal opinion as a clarinettist is that fingering diagrams
that represent the physical key layout in practice make sense only
for the regular clarinet (and maybe also its full-Boehm brother with
the right-hand little finger low Eb, which you find also on many
alto clarinets and non-extended bass and contra-alto/contrabass
clarinets).
When you come to extended clarinets, such as the basset clarinet,
basset horn, or the low-C bass, contra-alto and contrabass
clarinets, there is simply too much variety for a physical diagram
to be useful. In this case the only _reliable_ notation is to
indicate keys via name.
Agreed, but as the key positions are sometimes used for different
note(-combinations), naming will also be confusing.
So, the short-term goal in my opinion should be to fix the non-
graphical fingering diagrams for clarinets. Where extended-range
clarinets are concerned, the simplest way to do that is to consider
all the extended-range notes (Eb, D, Db, C) as right-hand thumb
keys. So, your notation would be something like:
o o
o
o
-------| -
Eb D | o
Db C | o
o
i.e. to have a side-box for the "thumb keys". Actually, the box
would only contain one key name at a time, e.g.:
o o
o
o
---| -
D | o
o
o
(Excuse the bad ASCII-art, but I think you get the idea:-)
Yes, the idea is very straightforward and matches the images shown in
the books of both Harry Sparnaay and Henri Bok. The nice thing about a
diagram (and especially the nice ones from Mike) is that is shows a
graphical display in one view. And for my old Selmer (the "new model"
in Henri's book) you could for example play the low-C with the right
thumb, but also when playing a low-D and using the left f-key with it.
Now should I named that key 'f' or 'C' or 'fC' or..... Naming has own
problems. Very annoying when trying to play on an istrument you don't
know that well, as naming will be then be very confusing.
By the way, as you're Dutch, perhaps you can confirm for me: does
the actual key layout of reform-Boehm differ in any meaningful way
from regular Boehm layout? Or is it just the linking and the way in
which keys affect which holes open/close?
You mean the system made by Fritz Wurlitzer? Wurlitzer is not Dutch,
but German ("Deutsch" as we name it). The main difference is the
cylinder inside, it has different dimensions, different mouthpieces,
different reeds and a different sound result. The keys are not
different as far as I know, only in the very high registers. Tomorrow
night I'll ask someone in the orchestra who plays on such an
instrument and I'll try to come back to you with a validated answer.
B.t.w. years ago I made a small findering help-application on my Palm
organizer. I'm thinking of putting this fingering stuff in a web-
database (for fun). There are already plenty people who do something
like that, but not with the beautiful Lilypond diagrams. Just an idea
to play with.
Regards,
Wim.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
