The other day I was listening to some lovely flute playing and noticed how much I relished the subtle but constant presence of the flow of breath driving the music, keeping the tune aloft, its long black tail dancing and floating and flickering in the wind.
I recalled the endless debates on the board and chiff and its opposite, the pure tone that some are seeking.
It struck me that that edge to the sound was as fundamental to my enjoyment of the playing as the player’s marvellous skill. Taking it away would result in something “like a kiss without a squeeze” (to quote my father’s dictum about “apple pie without cheese”).
That sound of the breath - It’s the breath that gives life that excites and energizes us. It’s the wild and woolly fringe of the music.
It’s also texture, like the nap of woven cloth - a warm cape of tweed as opposed to a rubberized raincoat. It’s the warmth of brick or limestone as opposed to the cold sheen of polished marble.
Give me that airy edge in a whistle. I want squeezes with my kisses. I want breath in my life. I want to play a wind instrument.
a while ago, and came to the conclusion that for all round versatility, the fiddle comes out tops. The options for greater dynamic contrast, playing and playing with any note in an analogue way, suggested to me that the fiddle gave the best options for Irish music.
BUT, with a flute or whistle, it’s the very breath of life that gives life to the music. The fiddle makes its sound from the resonance of the strings as they are bowed, the pipes from a reservoir of air not even blown from the player’s mouth. This is why the flute (or whistle) still captivates.
I guess that’s why I prefer accoustic guitar to electric, piano to electric organ. Every step in the chain between the player and the sound takes away a little of the life.
And yes, I like more chiff in my whistles, most of the time.
While I have just the opposite preference (I much prefer a “pure” sounding whistle), I wonder if it doesn’t come from being a singer. The human voice is another instrument that is powered and sustained by breath…but a breathy-sounding voice is highly undesireable, for various reasons. Consequently, when I hear a breathy whistle, my first impressions are “something’s wrong…either the technique is bad or there’s something wrong with the instrument.” Illogical as that may be, experience does inform taste, to a great degree, and my experience has been mainly vocal All I know is, the first time I played a Clarke original my first thought was “Yikes! That tone isn’t properly supported!”
Geeze Steve, I didnt know you were also a good poet… Yeah, playing the flute and be able to create a similar feeling as the one you described would be a lifetime achievement for me.
How profound we are this morning Steve! Beautifully said and so, so true. I don’t want my music and instrument sanitized for my protection. I want to know there’s a human in there somewhere creating that sound.
On 2002-11-11 12:47, JessieK wrote:
Steve, that’s some excellent writing, and you didn’t even use a pseudonym!!!
Still, one can hear the life-breath in a pure tone, too. It comes out in phrasing and in tone color.
Jessie
Very true. That’s one thing I’ve noticed when I play songs that I also know how to sing…I tend to use my breath differently, to give emphasis to certain notes, and the result is a more expressive, lyrical sound. If you listen to recordings of professional whistlers, even those who play very pure-sounding instruments, you can hear the same thing, especially on airs. The breath is very much there…it’s just busy producing and enhancing tone, rather than leaking out around the edges.
There’s more to chiff than just breathiness (I don’t want this to degenerate into yet another discussion of the definition of chiff, though). There’s breathy like a Clarke or Shaw, and the sort of growl that’s epitomized in Overtons, but also present in Thin Weasels and others.
There are also a few ways of being pure. Not all pure sounding whistles are recordery like Susatos. Burke aluminum whistles are very pure but they have a tinny sound that I associate with whistles.
And, of course, it’s not a black and white question – there’s a world of difference between the breathiness of Clarkes and Clares, as there is between the growl of an Overton and the buzz of an Oak.
On 2002-11-11 11:33, Redwolf wrote:
a breathy-sounding voice is highly undesirable, for various reasons.
You’re right - in artsy-fartsy music it is. But not in jazz and many popular forms. Imagine Astrid Gilberto without the breath in her voice - all the sultry, languid sensuality would disappear with it.
A local musician whom I greatly admire was told recently by a vocal ensemble she wanted to join that her voice was too breathy. Maybe so, for their purposes - but she’s a really fabulous singer with a tremendous range and she can support her notes just fine.
Points taken, Jessie and Chas.
Martin I enjoyed your reflections and concur. The fiddle is hard to beat, flutes and whistles have the breath. But the pipes have their own special magic.
What about the banjo? I long ago concluded that it ought on the face of it to be a totally unsuitable instrument for Irish music. You can’t sustain or bend a note. All you can do is hit it once (bonk!) twice (bonk! bonk!), three times (bonkety-bonk!) etc. And anything less breathy would be hard to imagine. If you make someone cry with your banjo playing, it’s probably for the wrong reasons. Yet, having said this, and though I can’t ever see myself playing one, I enjoy a nice sensitive banjo player in a session.
On 2002-11-11 11:33, Redwolf wrote:
a breathy-sounding voice is highly undesirable, for various reasons.
You’re right - in artsy-fartsy music > > it is. But not in jazz and many popular forms. Imagine Astrid Gilberto without the breath in her voice - all the sultry, languid sensuality would disappear with it.
I like the later recordings of Stan Getz. You can really hear the attack of air when he plays ballads. (eg. First Song - For Ruth, It Never Entered My Mind, etc) I’ve never heard a more sultry and cool tone coming from a saxaphone before. Chet Baker’s singing voice also has the airiness that adds to his sound.
I also believe that there is a distinction between focused airiness and leaky airiness. Leaky airiness is a weak sound you hear from a flute player with a poorly formed embouchure, or from a clarke with a loose cork. Focused airiness is something different for me. A good example of focused airy would be Jean Michel Veillon’s flute playing. To me, its different from sounding reedy or dry - just very airy in a good way.
[ This Message was edited by: Eldarion on 2002-11-11 21:10 ]
On 2002-11-11 21:08, Eldarion wrote:
I like the later recordings of Stan Getz. You can really hear the attack of air when he plays ballads. (eg. First Song - For Ruth, It Never Entered My Mind, etc) I’ve never heard a more sultry and cool tone coming from a saxaphone before.
Agreed, but… what about Gerry Mulligan’s ?
Chet Baker’s singing voice also has the airiness that adds to his sound.
Funny, it’s his late trumpet I like (for the chiff, too), while I skip most his vocal tracks.
BflatMW
[ This Message was edited by: Zubivka on 2002-11-12 02:48 ]
Steve, thanks for you airy thoughts. I am with you on this one. I especially like players who keep a pulse of breath going to mark the beat, while their fingers fly.
All I know is, the first time I played a Clarke original my first thought was “Yikes! That tone isn’t properly supported!”