Klarinet Archive - Posting 000399.txt from 1994/02

From: Cary Karp <nrm-karp@-----.SE>
Subj: Re: Mozart
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 1994 13:51:17 -0500

On Sat, 26 Feb 1994, Roger J. Shilcock wrote:

> Does anyone actually know
> that Mozart wanted flutes in the orchestra? He is known to have had a
> considerable antipathy towards them, possibly because in his day there were
> many bad players around of what were frequently bad instruments. To point out
> just one problem, Rockstro (I think) claimed that boxwood was a better
> material for making a hygrometer out of than a musical instrument; I
> suspect that flutes (and anything else made of this wood) intended for
> the "gentleman amateur" of the day were not good things to listen to.

Yes you are quoting Rockstro, but he was out to lunch when he made the
comment. In general, Rockstro has to be read very carefully if you want to
avoid confusing his often grossly overstated opinions with historical fact.

Boxwood (Buxus sempervirens) was the woodturner's material of choice for
centuries. As such, its acoustic properties were one of the prime
determinant factors in the design of the first generation clarinets and
over a century's worth of their successors. The same went for the flutes
and all other woodwinds through, at the earliest, to the end of the 18th
century. The body of surviving instruments provides immutable evidence
of this, as does every period document of the woodwind maker's craft.

The notion that boxwood instruments were "not good things to listen to"
means that the vast majority of pre-19th century woodwind players sounded
poorly. There were other materials available and, indeed, occasionally
used. Why did boxwood remain the mainstream material until supplies
started dwindling as the 18th century progressed? Where are the boxwood
hygrometers?