Klarinet Archive - Posting 000148.txt from 1994/12

From: Lorne G Buick - Music TA <lgbuick@-----.CA>
Subj: Re: Dave Kaminsky v. Dan Leeson
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 1994 10:43:26 -0500

Dan's most recent message (the short one) came in while I was writing what
follows, so this is only semi- relevant. However since Dan posted his
original message in haste I'm going to go ahead and post this too.

* * * * * * *
Dan, give the guy a break! The tone of your response is hostile and
subjective, and not at all up to your usual level of thoughtfulness. You
seem to have a knee-jerk reaction against anything that smacks of
"marketing".

On Sat, 10 Dec 1994, Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu wrote:

> David, are you seriously asserting that, in some past survey, the majority
> of the responses suggested that what they really wanted was a "polycylindrical
> bore"? Some kid in Montana suggested that his or her dream was to come
> down on Xmas morning and find "my polycylindrical-bored clarinet under the
> tree"?

I think we can give Leblanc the benefit of the doubt, and say that they
have people on staff (especially Tom R.) who can look at the playing
characteristics demanded by players in a survey and come up with the
analysis that those characteristics can best be achieved by using a
polycylindrical (I'll call it pc [not to be confused with PC] to save
typing) bore. If that wasn't explicitly spelled out by David K., you don't
have to jump all over him for it.

I don't think "some kid in Montana" is the issue here either. Student
clarinets, to my knowledge, have never used pc bores, only the Buffet pro
models.

I think David also pointed out quite rightly that one can infer from the
dominant position of Buffet in the pro clarinet market, and the fact
that the pc bore is one of the chief distinguishing features of Buffet
clarinets, that there is
something about pc bores that produces the effect desired by pro clarinetists.

> I think that clarinet players are the smartest people in the world but
> even with that compliment, suggest that few would ask for a polycylindrical
> bore! Now maybe a lot said, "I want a LeBlanc to play like a Buffet" (and
> I am not suggesting that this is a good or bad thing), and someone in the
> factory decided that the only way to get this was to create an instrument
> with a polycylindrical bore. That's OK by me. But I don't think that
> the Kenosha offices were besieged by crazed men and women with double cases
> screaming "GIVE US POLYCYLINDRICALITY OR WE'LL BURN DOWN YOUR DAMN
> BUILDING!!!!!!!!!!!" and you guys interpreted this hostile riot as a
> market survey and decided to give us polycylindrical bores, whatever the
> hell they are.

Polycylindrical is not a difficult word to figure out. "poly"= more than
one; "cylindrical"@-----. Hence pc bore= a
bore with more than one cylindrical section (of different diameters). See
Lee Gibson's columns for polyobjective details.

As far as that last paragraph of yours goes,
Dan, when clarinet manufacturers resort to hype and subjective claims to
sell us their products, you jump all over them. Hello?

> I sense a bit of disingenuousness here. Let me tell you what I think
> happened.

Bit presumptuous, don't you think? I mean, here we have a company rep
trying to have an honest discussion with us- we don't necessarily have to
accept everything he says at face value but neither let us assume that
he's simply "planted" in the group to feed us the "party line".

You sent out a survey and LeBlanc users said "We think you
> guys make a great clarinet. Leave me alone. Leave it alone. I'll
> buy another one when this one wears out."
>
> But another bunch of people, namely non-LeBlanc users said, "We aren't
> interested in your clarinet because it doesn't play like I want it
> to play. It doesn't play like a Buffet (or a Selmer or whatever)."
>
[etc]

> to customer wishes and requests. It is simply nothing more or less
> than a technical direction determined by what is going to sell best.
>
> Nothing wrong with that. It's good business, but don't pat me on
> the back for getting you to do that. Pat whoever is/was your
> marketing director for getting the company to do what will sell best.
> A smart company will NEVER do what the marketplace says. Instead,
> they get ahead of the markeplace, dress like a drum major and lead
> the parade.
>
I really don't follow you through this part. You seem to be saying that if
LeBlanc sends out a survey to 2600 clarinetists (the smartest people in
the world), their responses will indicate what they will _buy_, not what
they _want_. Where's the logic? What possible better way could there be to
build a better clarinet than to get input from many clarinetists, build a
prototype, have it tested by pros, take it back to the workbench for
improvements... ??

>
> On the complimentary side, thus far no one can hold a candle to
> LeBlanc's marketing skills. The other guys are amateurs in this
> business next to LeBlanc.

>From the tone of this and previous messages, it is obvious that you don't
consider this a compliment. You have indicated in the past that it's very
important to you that we don't flame each other on this list, and I think
your sarcasm is treading close to your own line here.

But there are some who think that
> important skill is not really very substantive when it comes to
> figuring out how to play the Ginastera variations.
>
Once again, "Give the guy a break!" What is the constructive point you're
maknig here? I quite agree, marketing skills don't help you play
Ginastera. But maybe having the best clarinet the company can build, based
on the input of professional clarinetists and technicians, would.

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org