Quick tutorial: Telemann Canonic Sonata on EWI, à la Jeff Kashiwa

Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, at no cost to you.

I recently posted a video of Jeff Kashiwa demonstrating the Akai EWI4000s wind controller. As part of his demonstration, he plays a movement from one of the Telemann Canonic Sonatas (well, sort of an arrangement of one).

The Canonic Sonatas are duo sonatas, with both musicians playing from the same part. (You can download free sheet music of the Canonic Sonatas from the IMSLP.) The first player begins, and the second player echoes, one measure behind. If you have ever sung “Row, Row, Row Your Boat” as a round, then you already understand how this works.

Jeff Kashiwa plays the Allegro movement from the first Canonic Sonata all by himself, playing the first part on the EWI and using a delay effect to create the second (echo) part.  Here’s the video again—it should start playing about a minute and a half in, and the Telemann goes until about 2:40.

After the 2:40 mark, Mr. Kashiwa uses more sophisticated looping techniques, using some kind of external device. But you can perform the Telemann duet without any extra hardware, using only the EWI4000s’s onboard synthesizer.

To set this up, you’ll need to be able to hook your EWI up to a computer through a MIDI interface, and successfully connect to the EWI through the free and downloadable Vyzex EWI4000s patch editor. (That stuff is beyond the scope of this tutorial, but the Vyzex download includes pretty good documentation, and there is additional help available at the Vyzor support forum.)
We are going to edit an existing patch to have a built-in echo, so make sure you’ve got your favorite sounds safely backed up. I’m using the “Matt EVI4000s” patch from the Patchman sound bank.

The settings we are going to adjust are in the “Delay” section. I want my second part to be an exact echo of my first part, and I’ll be setting the delay accordingly, but you can experiment to get the results you want.

Time: This sets the amount of time between a note and its echo, so this will also determine the tempo of the piece. We need to set the delay time to the length in seconds of a single measure—it can be between 0 seconds and 1.27 seconds. We can use this formula to figure it out:
(beats per measure)/(tempo) × 60 = delay time
I want a tempo of about quarter note = 132, and this movement is in 2/4, so my calcuation is:
2/132 × 60 = .91 seconds
The slowest possible tempo for this movement, with a delay time of 1.27 seconds, would be about 94 beats per minute. (Stay in school, kids.) For more flexibility with the tempo, you will need an external device.

Feedback: We want only a single echo here, so set this to 0%. Setting it higher creates more echoes.

Damp: This affects the sound of the echo. To make the two parts sound the same, we set it to 100%.

Level: This affects the volume of the echo. To match the volume of the first part, we set it to 100%.

That’s it—we’re ready to save this edited sound and transfer it to the EWI’s memory (consult the Vyzex manual).

And here is the result, recorded direct from the EWI:

Similar Posts

  • Flute pressure against lip: survey of published opinions

    Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, at no cost to you.

    My own past flute teachers gave me conflicting advice about how much the flute headjoint should press into the lower lip. One would pull on the crown of my flute while I played to make sure it came away from my lip with no resistance. Another would push the headjoint more firmly into my face as I played. (I improved under both teachers’ approaches.)

    I got curious about it recently and looked up what some flute pedagogues have had to say. I’m presenting my findings here without taking a personal stance (yet).

    It’s a little tricky to parse some of these, since many speak in terms of avoiding too much pressure, but don’t clarify whether that means to use as little pressure as possible or some moderate amount of pressure.

    In the avoid-too-much-pressure camp:

    A very important point to remember is never to force the mouth plate against the lower teeth as such forcing will limit the amount of flexibility after the embouchure has been developed.

    James Pellerite: “Improving Tone Production in Flute Performance,” in Woodwind Anthology, volume I, 1999 edition. Northfield, Illinois: The Instrumentalist, 1999, p. 11. Article originally printed in The Instrumentalist in 1953.

    Do not press the head joint hard against the lips. Control of the tone must come from the lips themselves, not from pressure.

    George Waln, “First Flute Lesson,” in Woodwind Anthology, volume I, 1999 edition. Northfield, Illinois: The Instrumentalist, 1999, p. 25. Article originally printed in The Instrumentalist in 1957.

    “The chin is, of course, an aid in support, but it must not be depended on for support, since pressure against the jaw will seriously disturb the embouchure.”

    Edwin Putnik: The Art of Flute Playing, revised edition. Miami, Florida: Summy-Birchard Inc., 1970, p. 7.

    In order to correct this problem [sharpness/pinching], the student should be certain that he is not pressing the flute against his lower lip, but rather thinking of the flute as resting lightly against the lip…

    Mary Jean Simpson: “Flute Intonation Trouble: Spare Not The Rod,” in Woodwind Anthology, volume I, 1999 edition. Northfield, Illinois: The Instrumentalist, 1999, p. 117. Article originally printed in The Instrumentalist in 1972.

    Do not press the flute too tightly against the chin because too much pressure will alter the tone and pitch.

    Kathleen Goll-Wilson, “Erratic Intonation in Flute Sections,” in Woodwind Anthology, volume I, 1999 edition. Northfield, Illinois: The Instrumentalist, 1999, p. 661. Article originally printed in The Instrumentalist in 1992.

    Excessive pressure against the chin should be avoided.

    William Dietz, Jerry Kirkbride, Hal Ott, Mark Weiger, Craig Whittaker: Teaching Woodwinds: A Method and Resource Handbook for Music Educators. Belmont, California: Schirmer, 1998, p. 174. Note: Hal Ott is the flutist among the authors, so this presumably reflects his opinion.

    …the flute should rest lightly against the chin in order to leave the lips free and flexible.

    Nancy Toff: The Flute Book: A Complete Guide for Students and Performers, third edition. Oxford University Press, 2012, p. 94.

    [Common problems:] Too much pressure into the lip. The teacher should be able to tap the flute off of the lip with very little effort. … [for piccolo:] Too much pressure into the face, especially upper register. Excessive pressure makes high notes much more difficult if not impossible.

    Charles West: Woodwind Methods: An Essential Resource for Educators, Conductors, and Students. Delray Beach, Florida: Meredith Music Publications, 2015, p. 17.

    These are the ones I could find that seemed to advocate for at least some pressure, although neither is explicit about how much:

    Students should keep in mind the three points of pressure… [including] the lips pushing out against the flute…

    John Knight, “Flute Intonation,” in Woodwind Anthology, volume I, 1999 edition. Northfield, Illinois: The Instrumentalist, 1999, p. 529. Article originally printed in The Instrumentalist in 1989.

    “Keep a relaxed embouchure, but place the flute firmly on the chin.”

    Michel Debost: “Basics of Flute Playing,” in Woodwind Anthology, volume I, 1999 edition. Northfield, Illinois: The Instrumentalist, 1999, p. 632. Article originally printed in The Instrumentalist in 1991.

    John Knight is the only author to speak in terms of the lips putting pressure on the flute, rather than the reverse.

    In any case, among the sources I consulted, there seems to be some consensus that pressure of flute against lip should be light, or at least not “excessive.”

  • |

    Not good

    I like to use a Socratic-ish method in my private lessons, and ask my students questions. It means that I have this conversation several times per day:

    [Student plays.]

    Me: How did that sound to you?

    Student: Not good.

    Me: What didn’t you like about it?

    Student: It didn’t sound good.

    Me: What aspect of it didn’t sound good to you? The tone? the pitch? the phrasing? the articulation?

    Student: Um, I guess the articulation?

    Me: What didn’t you like about the articulation?

    Student: It wasn’t good?

    It’s an ongoing battle to get my students to listen more deeply than that. Was the articulation “not good” because it started with air noise instead of tone? Because it was accompanied by an unwanted percussive sound? Was the articulation technique perfect but you failed to follow the composer’s markings? Or was it something else?

    Photo, David Bailey
    Photo, David Bailey

    Often the “not good” is a combination of factors, but if my students can identify even one of them, then they can immediately start working in a focused way to improve it. If it’s just “not good,” then they tend to just play it again from the beginning without any clear approach to making it sound better, and repeat until frustrated.

    Part of my job is to help them identify and verbalize the desirable and undesirable phenomena in their playing, and to teach them the techniques for manipulating the variables involved (breath support, voicing, embouchure, finger technique, and tongue technique, to name the most obvious ones). But it’s up to them to take that information and run with it. For my students to become independently-functional musicians, they need to learn to listen critically to themselves and troubleshoot.

    For yourself and for your students, don’t be satisfied with bland value judgments (it sounded “good” or “bad”). Be factual and descriptive about what you hear, and tackle problems in a methodical way. Practice smart!

  • Which is your favorite?

    Another question that I am frequently asked as a woodwind doubler is, “Which instrument is your favorite?”

    My answer to this is simple.

    If it’s a good day, then my favorite is the one I’m playing.

    If it’s a bad day, then my favorite is any one but the one I’m playing.

  • Playing modern vs. “vintage”

    Most of the time, an average car shopper should consider buying a recent model. Newer cars (ostensibly) have better safety features, better fuel efficiency, and the latest conveniences. Service and parts are likely available and inexpensive.

    Someone in the market for a “classic” car should know what they are getting into. Some older models might be cheaper than newer ones, but a good appraisal requires expertise. Or, some might have prices inflated by cachet, rarity, or “cool” factor. (Those are better suited for collectors or hobbyists than everyday drivers.) Older cars often lack desirable modern features, or need expensive parts.

    6079549609_cf01007244_z_mini
    photo, DonJinTX

    Musicians face similar choices when buying instruments. For most players, there are significant advantages to modern instruments. They have (again: ostensibly) improved ergonomics, intonation, and evenness of tone.

    There are “vintage” instruments with outstanding qualities. But often there are tradeoffs with features, condition, and “collector” pricing. That’s not to say that a vintage instrument is necessarily a bad choice, but (like a classic car buyer) you shouldn’t make that choice uninformed. “Cool factor” wears off quickly when you have to stop every few miles to add oil—or when you are wearing yourself out trying to match pitch in the saxophone section.

    If you aren’t sure what you’re doing, a recent-model instrument is usually a smarter bet.

  • Recorder notation vs. band/orchestral woodwind notation

    At the request of a reader, I’m going to try to clarify some things about notation for recorders. (I touched on it previously in an article about woodwind key nomenclature systems.)

    Those of us who play modern band/orchestral woodwinds are familiar with a system in which, within a family of instruments, a notated pitch always corresponds to a certain fingering. No matter how large or small the instrument, the same fingering always corresponds to that same written pitch, even though the smaller instruments produce higher sounding pitches and the larger instruments produce lower sounding pitches. For example:

    E-flat clarinet B-flat clarinet A clarinet Bass clarinet
    Notated pitch
    Fingering
    Sounding pitch

    This is convenient for clarinetists because, essentially, they only need to learn one set of fingerings to be (in that respect) prepared to play any instrument in the clarinet family. Note also that even the bass clarinet is notated in treble clef, as are its even lower cousins. All the major modern woodwind families (flutes, oboes, clarinets, bassoons, and saxophones) use this approach: consistent clefs, and consistent correspondence of notated pitch to fingering. The transposition is a function of the instrument’s size.

    Because of the prevalence of this system in the Western woodwind tradition, it’s an understandable error to assume that the recorder family is notated in the same way. But recorders typically use a different system, in which each instrument is notated in concert pitch, and the fingerings change depending upon the instrument. Or, to be more precise, each instrument is notated in a sort of “concert pitch class,” since some of the recorders are notated as transposing by one or more octaves, but a notated C always produces a sounding C. Bass recorder and lower are notated in bass clef. Here are the most common ones:

    Descant (“soprano”) recorder Treble (“alto”) recorder Tenor recorder Bass recorder
    Notated pitch
    Fingering
    Sounding pitch

    Recorder players must learn two sets of fingerings, one with the instrument’s lowest note being C (for descant and tenor recorders), and one with the instrument’s lowest note being F (for treble and bass recorders), and must be prepared to read in two clefs. Read More “Recorder notation vs. band/orchestral woodwind notation”

  • Practice technique: anchoring

    This is a technique I recommend often to students who are struggling with notey passages. I can’t remember where I picked it up, or whether “anchoring” is my own name for it or someone else’s. No doubt credit for this belongs to somebody smarter than I.

    The problem that I sometimes see with my students (and, okay, occasionally with myself) is that fast passages are uneven and panicky. The student sees a long string of notes and frantically dives in, to the detriment of meter and tempo, and with notes accidentally omitted or added.

    Let’s consider this excerpt:

    from Debussy Première rhapsodie
    from Debussy Première rhapsodie (clarinet)

    It’s a challenging passage—shifting harmony, intervallic motion, awkward fingerings. This is a recipe for frustration using the old standby method of playing slowly with the metronome and gradually increasing the tempo. Instead, let’s set the metronome aside for a few minutes, and play the passage in an intentionally uneven way:

    with added tenuto-accent-fermata
    with added tenuto-accent-fermatas

    Put lots of weight on the metric pulses (the “anchor” notes): play them long, loud, and with emphasis. Hold each fermata long enough to scope out the next four notes, then move through them as quickly as you accurately can, coming to rest again on the next fermata. Repeat the passage in this way as many times as you can stand.

    Here’s what this accomplishes:

    • It makes you think about logical groups of notes, rather than trying either to process each note individually or to deal with the whole phrase as an overwhelming sea of notes. It’s the sweet spot between too much mental chatter and too little focus.
    • It encourages effective phrasing by treating the notes as leading toward downbeats.
    • It trains your ears to hear the notes in fours (at least in this 2/4 passage—try threes instead if the situation calls for it). Now as you return to playing the passage evenly, you are more likely to notice if you are omitting or adding notes.

    To transition from this technique into a more performable approach, gradually decrease the duration of the fermatas and the weight of the accents, while continuing to mentally emphasize the anchor notes and place them carefully in tempo (time to get the metronome back out). Also try spacing the anchors farther apart as an intermediate step—one at the beginning of each measure, for example, or every few measures as appropriate.

    Practice smart!

3 Comments

  1. Imporessive. Fell in love with Jeffs rendition on utube and having always wnated to learn the sax saw it as an ideal opertunity to learn the Sax.
    I sourced and purchased an EWI which has provided hours of
    Fun.
    Finally someones identified the piece of music and I get
    download the score and learn it.
    Tbank you and well played

  2. Wonderful!! I loe these canonic sonates and played them often on Baroque recorders with Danny Bond, solo Bassoonistof the Orchestra of the 18th Century when we were students at the Royal Conservatory in the Hague.The Patchman sound is as always very good and such virtuosity on what sounds like Modern French Horns makes it all the more interesting.

    Thanks Bret, this has inspired me to one day try again to get the Vyzex software going again, senior moments get in the way with such complicated software.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments that take a negative or confrontational tone are subject to email and name verification before being approved. In other words: no anonymous trolls allowed—take responsibility for your words.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.