Klarinet Archive - Posting 000128.txt from 1994/05

From: "Jay Heiser, Product Manager, Govt Systems" <jayh@-----.COM>
Subj: Re: Keys and The Stuff (material more critical closer to the
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 16:26:42 -0400

I agree with you, I just can't get anyone to explain why it
is true and I can't prove it myself. :-)

How about if I go out on a limb and say that the closer
you are to the mouth, the more crucial the material? This
is why flute headjoints are sometimes difft than the body,
this is why sax mouthpieces can be made out of metal,
ebonite or plastic (which sounds lousy -- even the new
ones from Rico) and why clarinet mouthpieces vary more in
material than the bodies do. (maybe a glass clarinet
would sound really neat, but it doesn't meet my leg c
requirement for mechanical durability).

Barrel joints and necks seem to get more attention than
the rest of the horn too.

Finally, bigger instruments seem less critical than smaller
ones. This is why a resin bass clarinet or a student
model bari sax sound less objectionable than comparable soprano
cl or alto saxes do.

But I still don't know why!

-->I cannot say for sure that construction of the body makes a difference, but
if
-->it did not, then why are there such a profusion of different MOUTHPIECE
-->materials? There are plastic, hard rubber, even glass and metal. I know
lots
-->of jazz sax players who swear by a metal mouthpiece, and I can tell you that
to
-->my ears, a sax played with a metal "jazz" mouthpiece (which is what a lot of
-->them are) sounds different than a hard-rubber mouthpiece. I've never played
on
-->a glass Clarinet mouthpiece, but I heard one once, and the sound is unreal.
If
-->the construction materials don't make a difference in the body, why would
they
-->make a difference in the mouthpiece? They're all connected.

--> -- Scott McChesney
======================================
Garden Status:
First harvest: spinach, lettuce
Beans sprouting, tomatos still under plastic