
- Photo, ~Bob~West~
There’s an interesting woodwind-related post by blogger “MarkCC” at Good Math, Bad Math, entitled “My Newest Flute, made of… Plastic?!”
MarkCC recently acquired a new flute of the type used in Irish traditional music, the kind that are most often made of wood. But MarkCC’s is made of polymer, and it sounds like MarkCC has wrestled a little with the issue of whether a plastic flute can really measure up to a wooden one.
But… Plastic?
I’ve seen several acoustic studies that claim that the material the instrument is made of isn’t that important. In a wooden flute, the physics show that the head joint is the only part of the flute that really has a significant influence on its sound. But the head joint of a wooden flute is actually lined with metal. So the wood isn’t really having too much influence on the sound.
As it turns out, MarkCC is something of a doubler, and also plays the clarinet.
Most people (including me) play on mouthpieces made of hard rubber or plastic – so the primary sound-producing piece of the instrument is plastic. The barrel of a wooden clarinet is (obviously) wood, so according to the physics/acoustics, that’s the only piece of wood that actually has any measurable acoustic effect. And the physics of this isn’t sloppy stuff put together by an instrument company trying to sell their plastic clarinets: to the limits of my ability to understand it, it’s good, solid stuff.
And yet, I’ve played a whole lot of clarinets, and by god, there’s nothing like a grenadilla wood clarinet. Even the best clarinet makers, even when I put my wooden barrel on a polymer body, it doesn’t sound the same. Of course, that’s subjective, and we humans are notorious for hearing what we want to hear in a subjective situation. And, by god, I’m a math geek. I’ve seen the math, and it’s correct.
One of the most-linked articles on my blog makes the same point about our expectations about materials coloring our playing experience. It’s worth pointing out, too, that a different barrel made from the same material will also affect the instrument’s sound.
I do think it’s a grey area to refer to a mouthpiece or barrel (or flute headjoint) as “sound-producing.” The instrument’s parts don’t produce any audible musical sound (unless you hit them with drumsticks)—it’s the column of air contained within them that vibrates in a musically useful way.
But MarkCC goes on, I believe, to hit the nail on the head: Read More “More on the science/fiction of woodwind materials”
Those were easy – if you can’t spell all those you shouldn’t be teaching. If you don’t teach who cares?
100%, but I teach WW methods, so I should get all of them correct. Makes me realize I should probably give a small spelling test while the semester is still early.
100% Yay me. :)
I reckon a Georgia education does a mind good, bum diggidy.
100%, and I’m Dutch. ;-)
Do you keep stats on the most often misspelled words from your test? [My money is on “tounge” BTW…]
Well done!
No, not keeping any records of people’s misspellings—just counting on them to report their scores honestly. So far everyone who has responded seems to have done well, and I’m not expecting many people with low scores to brag about it.
Another 100% here too. (I’d have to hang my head in shame if I didn’t huh?) ;)
Interesting feature on the blog Bret. Well done. I like it. You’ve added some really interesting plugins, etc to your site.
Take good care. “See you” around here, or on the WF, or on my site…hk
You know…I’ve had many a teacher spell “SaxAphone” on programs. Usually chorus teachers that had me play on their programs! And my students who spell “cHello”. I love that one lol
100%, and I’m sure I was in the guilty party of “mis-spellers” in class. But that just means I did learn something in WW methods. Site looks great doc.
I wanted to take the test, but the file links give me the 500 error. Please fix it some time.