--=====================_81089014==_.ALT
At 2/6/02 09:03 PM, coree coppinger wrote:
>Therefore I can conclude that the less dense the material is, the more
>likely it will vibrate, and the more likely this material will add to the
>color of the sound( air flow), again reminding myself that sound is vibration.
>The big question here is not what causes sound, but what sound we feel is
>best. And I feel that is a combination of vibrations(again vibration is
>sound) and player who gives life, breath, energy, vibration, to a now
>vibrating instrument ..... bingo...... we get a beautiful sound. I feel
>all parts of the equation vibrate, all parts effect the whole. The
>question is do we like the whole, and how refined are we when it comes
>down to judging so many different beautiful sounds. At this point we add
>taste to the equation. And there is no accounting for taste. coree
In all of this discussion of sound and quality, your point of what the
PLAYER adds is something that hasn't been explored fully.
Since it has been noted several times that we are playing and vibration
"AIR" and not the wood, how -does- the player themselves affect the sound?
Eg, How does the shape of the mouth cavity and throat, or way we use our
tongue to change the shape of the "hole" in the mouth cavity, affect the
sound? Do the shape and volume of the lungs enter into it? Does the air
vibrate inside of us as well as inside the flute?
Up to this point people have mentioned their lips but nothing else. The
shape of our lips, tongue, mouth, etc are so variable and affect the sound
so much, maybe we should some time discussing the shape of our mouths and
tongues and lips and how the "air" or "breath" inside our bodies merges
with the air column of the flute to make that vibrating sound. Is there an
"ideal" shape we should be striving for? Ok, I know that "ideal" is a
stupid thing to say. There are as many opinions of "ideal" as there are
players. But humor me. Are there "better" shapes? More "efficient" shapes?
"Less" efficient shapes? Any shapes that have a higher likelihood of
success over others?
Any comments?
Herb
--=====================_81089014==_.ALT
<html>
<font size=3>At 2/6/02 09:03 PM, coree coppinger wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>Therefore I can conclude that the less
dense the material is, the more likely it will vibrate, and the more
likely this material will add to the color of the sound( air flow), again
reminding myself that sound is vibration. </font></blockquote><br>
<blockquote type=cite cite><font size=3>The big question here is not what
causes sound, but what sound we feel is best. And I feel that is a
combination of vibrations(again vibration is sound) and <i>player who
gives life, breath, energy, vibration, to a now vibrating instrument
</i>..... bingo...... we get a beautiful sound. I feel all parts of
the equation vibrate, all parts effect the whole. The question is do we
like the whole, and how refined are we when it comes down to judging so
many different beautiful sounds. At this point we add taste to the
equation. And there is no accounting for taste.
coree</blockquote><br>
In all of this discussion of sound and quality, your point of what the
PLAYER adds is something that hasn't been explored fully.<br>
<br>
Since it has been noted several times that we are playing and vibration
"AIR" and not the wood, how -does- the player themselves affect
the sound? Eg, How does the shape of the mouth cavity and throat, or way
we use our tongue to change the shape of the "hole" in the
mouth cavity, affect the sound? Do the shape and volume of the lungs
enter into it? Does the air vibrate inside of us as well as inside
the flute?<br>
<br>
Up to this point people have mentioned their lips but nothing else. The
shape of our lips, tongue, mouth, etc are so variable and affect the
sound so much, maybe we should some time discussing the shape of our
mouths and tongues and lips and how the "air" or
"breath" inside our bodies merges with the air column of the
flute to make that vibrating sound. Is there an "ideal" shape
we should be striving for? Ok, I know that "ideal" is a stupid
thing to say. There are as many opinions of "ideal" as there
are players. But humor me. Are there "better" shapes? More
"efficient" shapes? "Less" efficient shapes? Any
shapes that have a higher likelihood of success over others?<br>
<br>
Any comments?<br>
<br>
Herb</font></html>
--=====================_81089014==_.ALT--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 03 2003 - 09:09:50 PST