The fingering logic and performing of woodwind instruments. A psychological study and model.
Since there is no empirical research about woodwind-playing, this work shows a way, for example, to calculate "Fear Parts", and how you can circumvent them, or how you can find the best aesthetic fingering sequences.
The analysis of explorative tests showed a correlation between subjective difficulty and the number of fingers in use or the change and the resulting number of finger movements. In order to explain this situation, I use a fingering table, where “0” represents open or keys not pressed, and in “1” closed or pressed keys (Conjunctors). With this table, it was possible for me to handle images as vectors and represent them together with their transformations to make a comparison. With the vector sum, I had the opportunity to compare the subjective results with the calculated values. The relationship between subjective perception and calculated level of difficulty was given. These results make it possible to create a forecast model of optimal fingering sequences for musicians, teachers and composers, without knowing about the playing of a clarinet. These calculations also enable the Aesthetic Analysis of pieces, if the fingering table is expanded with aural criteria. Passages of pieces could be transcribed to other instruments, and be reviewed on their playability, when a sound situation requires this.
This is a crude tool and should be extended to acoustically-physical and aesthetic parameters, to make further developments of the clarinets (Vienna clarinet and French clarinet). The aim of further development of wind instruments should be: Optimizing and expanding sound and fingering techniques appearances. Advantages of the fingering of each clarinet system should be usable on other instruments and, apart from the bore of the systems, universal.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction and definitions
1.1 Basics of the woodwind playing
1.2 Body and instrument as a harmonious unity
1.3 Physical conditions and level of difficulty of the fingerings
1.4 Posture
1.5 Strengthening stamina
1.6 Physiology of mouth and jaw (embouchure) vs. controlled finger coordination
1.7 Instruments for children, instruments for women
1.8 Training of correct practising
1.9 Finger size, key or hole size
1.10 Level of training, age, maturity, playing at sight
1.11 Development of the body and the development of the muscles of the fingers and the hands
1.12 Relation of body height and instrument size
2. The issues of the dissertation and its relevance
2.1 Is the degree of the difficulty of fingerings and fingering combinations predictable?
2.2 The proof of the subjective difficulty rating of fingering sets
2.3 Is it possible to make a prediction of the degree of difficulty of a piece and as a result a calculation of the optimal fingering sequence?
2.4 Is it possible to generate an aesthetic prediction of the playing the clarinet?
2.5 A modelled clarinet can be a tool for composers or for instrument manufacturers
3. Preliminary studies
3.1 Preliminary study 1: Exploratory
3.1.1 Question 1: Methods of practising in the “head”. Which methods are available and which are best?
3.1.2 Question 2: How will the grade of difficulty of a piece be determined?
3.2 Preliminary study 2: Quantitative, qualitative
3.3 Hypothesis 1: Correlation between grade of difficulty and the number of used fingers
3.4 Preliminary study 3: Qualitative
3.5 Hypothesis 2: Correlation between grade of difficulty and finger position
3.6 Hypothesis 3: Correlation between the "difficulty-acceptance" and an aesthetic decision
3.7 Preliminary study 4
3.8 Preliminary study with saxophonists
3.9 Preliminary study with clarinettists
3.9.1 Test persons of the clarinettists study
3.9.2 Key index 0
3.9.3 Key index 1
3.9.4 Key index 2
3.9.5 Key index 3
3.9.6 Key index 4
3.9.7 The calculations
3.10 The saxophone-survival
3.10.1 Test persons in the saxophone survival
3.10.2 The survival of the saxophonists
3.10.3 The values of the saxophone survival
3.11 Main analysis: Quantitative study of clarinettists and saxophonists. Analysis of the obtained data.
4. General investigations
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Method
4.2.1 Participants (selection, features)
4.2.2 Experimental design
4.2.3 Technical resources
4.2.4 Procedure
4.2.5 Evaluation
4.3 Results of both surveys
4.3.1 Results: Clarinet
4.3.2 Results: Saxophone
4.4 Discussion
5. Description of the model
5.1 Theory
5.2 Mathematical description
5.3 Comparison between results and predictions of the model
5.4. Discussion
5.5 Error causes
6. Conclusion
6.1 Experimental design
6.2 Methods of Evaluation (Particularly Explanation of Applied Qualitative Methods)
6.3 Methodological Results
6.4. Generalizability
6.5. Qualitative analysis of quotations, categories ...
7. Summary of main results
7.1 Extension of the model
7.2 Further research: case study, analysis of pieces
7.3 Which conditions make playing a woodwind instrument difficult?
7.4 Which groups of persons have problems?
7.5 Why there are problems and why is this relevant?
8. Implications
8.1 Implication for practising
8.2 Implication for composition and publishing
8.3 Implication for music education systems
Objectives and Topics
This work aims to establish a systematic musicological approach to playing woodwind instruments, specifically the clarinet and saxophone. It addresses the lack of empirical research regarding fingering logic and tone generation by developing a psychological model that correlates finger actions with subjective perceptions of playing difficulty, thereby providing a basis for optimizing performance, composition, and pedagogical strategies.
- Development of a mathematical model using vector analysis to represent and evaluate fingering sets.
- Investigation into the correlation between the number of finger movements and subjective difficulty.
- Analysis of pedagogical implications for woodwind practice, composition, and music education.
- Comparative analysis of different clarinet and saxophone fingering techniques.
- Examination of ergonomic factors and their impact on instrumental playability.
Excerpt from the book
1. Introduction and definitions
"You just have to close with the next finger the next hole, then the next lower tone will come." This is a sentence, which is often said to clarinet students. Behind this seemingly simple exercise is a hidden process that requires a lot of interdisciplinary thought. This logic is actually applicable to very few notes. The idea behind this development and the resulting linking of fingerings is, for a growing woodwind-instrumentalists, the decisive issue in the selection of practice strategies. The possibility of free choice of fingering combinations is not always guaranteed, because of sound or ideological reasons, or the ignorance of further combinations.
Fingering and tone generation can be well illustrated with physical models (Wolte 2006). The resulting fingering charts can be schematically illustrated with the aid of the methods of the logic, and with mathematics they will be converted. The resulting vectors enable one to rate the fingering images and make them comparable. The control of the fingering can be explained anatomically using medical methods, and its movements can be described with the help of sport science. The remaining questions about woodwind playing can be explained and clarified by using the techniques of brain research, and the fingering-combinations can be psychologically modelled.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction and definitions: Defines the scope of the work and introduces the concept that woodwind playing involves complex, interdisciplinary processes beyond simple physical movements.
2. The issues of the dissertation and its relevance: Explores the predictability of fingering difficulties and the potential for modeling these as a tool for composers and manufacturers.
3. Preliminary studies: Details exploratory and qualitative research, including surveys with clarinet and saxophone students to establish a baseline for the later model.
4. General investigations: Describes the methodology, experimental design, and quantitative results of the main study involving clarinetists and saxophonists.
5. Description of the model: Provides the theoretical and mathematical framework, converting fingering charts into logical, vector-based models.
6. Conclusion: Summarizes the study’s findings, notes the transferability of the model, and reflects on the limitations and potential for future research.
7. Summary of main results: Recaps the core findings, emphasizing the correlation between finger action and difficulty, and discusses the extension of the model.
8. Implications: Discusses the practical application of the research for music practice, composition, publishing, and education systems.
Keywords
Clarinet, Saxophone, Fingering Logic, Woodwind Instruments, Music Psychology, Performance Model, Finger Action, Fingering Difficulty, Musicology, Ergonomics, Instrumental Practice, Acoustic-Physical Parameters, Pedagogical Methodology, Vector Analysis, Musical Performance
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The work focuses on a systematic musicological study of woodwind instrument playing, specifically analyzing the logic behind fingerings and their impact on performance difficulty.
What are the primary themes addressed in the text?
Key themes include the correlation between physical finger movements (fingering sets) and subjective difficulty, the ergonomics of instrument handling, and the potential for mathematical modeling in music performance.
What is the main objective of this study?
The goal is to develop a predictive model that can calculate the difficulty of fingering sequences, providing a tool for musicians, composers, and instrument designers to optimize playing techniques.
What scientific methods were employed?
The author uses a combination of empirical music psychological methods, logical-mathematical modeling (vector analysis), and qualitative interviews with music students and professionals.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body covers preliminary exploratory studies, the development of a logical model based on binary switch logic, and a quantitative analysis of data collected from clarinetists and saxophonists.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Essential keywords include Woodwind Instruments, Fingering Logic, Music Psychology, Performance Model, and Ergonomics.
How does the model handle the clarinet's complexity?
The model simplifies the clarinet's fingering system into a logical "0" (open) and "1" (closed) binary state, allowing for the mathematical conversion of fingering charts into vectors that can be compared and rated for difficulty.
What is the significance of "sliding" in the context of this study?
Sliding is identified as an "inaudible cheat" used by trained clarinetists to handle difficult note combinations that are otherwise considered unplayable, highlighting technical dead ends that the proposed model aims to address.
How is the clarinet’s register change viewed in the study?
The register change is identified as a significant mechanical and psychological hurdle for beginners, perceived often as a separate instrument, which requires systematic practice strategies to master.
- Quote paper
- Mag. phil. Bakk. art. Peter Ninaus (Author), 2011, The fingering logic and performing of woodwind instruments, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/167487
