Klarinet Archive - Posting 000226.txt from 1995/09

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.EDU>
Subj: Basset horn bore sizes
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 10:49:28 -0400

Clarke Fobes is correct to point out that some basset horns (indeed, it
turns out to be very few) did have larger bore sizes than others. This
is to be expected. The ones that were measured were musuem samples from
the early 19th century and there were limited standards for bore
drilling and limited tools as well.

BUT, the vast preponderance of those basset horns that have wound up
in museums and that give us an understanding of bore sizes in early
basset horns, are those which have an internal diameter of roughly the
size of a B-flat clarinet.

Let me also suggest that Clarke's reference to Bill McColl at the
Univ. of Washington (a wonderful player who not only makes his own basset
horns, but even plays them in tune to my constant amazement) happens
to prefer the larger bore size precisely because it eliminates those
problems that the narrow bore sizes present to all of us. As such, I
believe that he exaggerates how many larger bored instruments he actually
measured in museums. Bill can't stand Selmer or old Buffet basset horns
so his prejudice extends to all narrow bored models precisely because he
knows that they have yet to be (and probably can't be) made well.

The thing that attracted both players and listeners to the sound
of the basset horns (or I should really say, the character of the
sound) was the belief that it was sad and melancholy. I don't say
this to be true, only report that it was stated over and over.
Add to this the fact that Mozart invariably selected the basset horn
for music of serious character (Masonic Funeral Music, Requiem,
Magic Flute, for example) and one can get the impression that he
also thought this way.

In order to achieve whatever it was that appealed to the ear of the
player and audience, instrument makers of that epoch (who did not
have much beyond empirical analysis) monkeyed around with lots of
things to try and achieve that sound character or even enhance it.
But what they finally settled on was a narrow bore, though as Bill
notes, some few larger bore experiments probably did take place.

It was a bad mistake to have settled on such a narrow bore for such
a long instrument for I suggest that it was that fatal combination
that produced an acoustically defective instrument. And, were it
not for the fact that Mozart wrote so much music for it, the basset
horn would today be exactly where the bombardon, opheclyde, tromba
marina, and sarrousaphone are today; i.e., dead. One man, and one
man alone salvaged the basset horn from the thousands of failed
musical instrument experiments: Mozart.

The whole history of musical instrument development has been to
first invent and then diddle with the inventions until they got to
the point where they worked fairly well. The basset horn was no
exception. The nature of the earliest ones are unknown since no
examples exist, but those of the early 19th century are, with few
exceptions uniformly narrow bored. By that time, instrument
makers had stopped diddling with the bore size. I think they
stopped diddling for two reasons:

1) they weren't getting anywhere

2) composers were not writing very much for the reasons state above;
i.e., technical difficulties in playing them.

Then, and until the early 20th century the basset horn was as dead
as the dodo. While pieces were written for it and while virtuoso
performers existed, the instrument simply did not have a fixed place
in the music world precisely because it was so difficult to play
well. When Strauss began to write for it ca. 1900, the industrial
revolution had reached a point where the instrument could be made
a little better, but not much better. They cannot even be made
well today in narrow bored models. Every single one has difficulties
of one sort or another.

But it is only with narrow bored models that one gets the character of
sound that appears to be what the composers were looking for. I must
admit that I don't know this to be the case. It is based on my
speculation that when I play a LeBlanc basset horn, I am impressed
at two things: (1) how wonderfully they play in tune; (2) how the
character of the sound has changed from melancholy to otherwise. Of
course this could also be personal prejudice too. I am not immune to
it.

Finally this: I try not to favor narrow bored basset horns because I
have two of them, but because they sound they way they do for the music
for which they were employed. But as I say, this is all very subjective.

====================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
(leeson@-----.edu)
====================================