Klarinet Archive - Posting 000168.txt from 1995/10

From: Mitch Bassman <mbassman@-----.COM>
Subj: Re: Re Roger's comments on players not liking the sound of a C
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 21:07:41 -0400

This should be quite interesting.

On Fri, 6 Oct 1995, Dan Leeson wrote:

> Roger suggested that the C clarinet might have gone away because
> players did not like the sound of it. [snip]
> [snip] but I like the sound of the C clarinet very
> much and I know others who think this way too.

I, too, like the sound and hope to own one someday.

> [snip]
> While it is the basis of good discussion amongst ourselves, were that
> argument ever put forward in an encyclpedia article, or book on musical
> instrument history, and were it put forward as nothing more than
> speculation, I would personally put a pencil in the eye of the writer!

Since I remembered reading something about C clarinets losing popularity
because of their tone qualities, I decided to look through some of the
clarinet books on my own bookshelf. Two authors would soon have eye
trouble except that I believe they are both already dead.

1. "As you know, the commonest kinds of clarinets are the Bb and the A.
... [brief explanation of transposition deleted] ... Now this may seem to
be going a long way round to get back to where you started. 'Why,' you
may ask, 'can clarinets not be built in C?' The answer becomes clear when
you hear the C clarinet -- a squeaky little instrument, not without its
special uses, but having none of the soft, mellow beauty which the larger
bore gives the Bb or A clarinets. The first clarinets were, in fact, in C,
but it was found that Bb or A were the two keys in which the instruments
could be built most successfully. Beauty of tone is (rightly) preserved
at the expense of a certain amount of bother.... [O]ften you will come
across parts written for C clarinet, and there is no hope for it then but
to play on your Bb or A instrument, transposing the part up a tone or a
minor third as you go."

Thurston, Frederick, _Clarinet Technique_ (second edition), London: Oxford
University Press, 1964, pp. 38-39. [Note: the first edition was published
in 1956.]

2. "The C clarinet, the only non-transposing clarinet, is, like the D, a
very old and popular member of the family.... In dictionaries and
textbooks it is commonly stated to be obsolete. This is very far from the
truth, again east of the Rhine. Here parts are not infrequently written
for it, and are as a rule played upon the instrument for which they are
intended. It is unknown in the orchestras of England and of France, and
in countries not subject to German tradition, where the parts are played
upon the B flat and are of course transposed up a tone. The C suffers by
its proximity in pitch to the B flat and A. We are inclined to expect
from it a tone not dissimilar in quality to these last, and are perhaps
surprised to find it matter-of-fact, crisp, and frank, but lacking in
mellowness and romance, invaluable for certain effects, but lacking
in charm. Nor has it the individuality of the D. These slight defects,
lack of charm and mellowness, with a tendency to hardness, no doubt
account for it never having been adopted as the standard orchestral and
solo clarinet. It is just devoid of the pleasing timbre of the
lower-pitched instruments. When it is brilliant it is apt to be hard and
incisive. In common with other clarinets of higher pitch it is difficult
to make; for it demands small tone-holes and a smaller bore than that of
the B flat and A. Pierced with large holes and fitted with a reed too
wide for the bore, it can be hard and wild in tone, and frankly
objectionable."

A footnote at this point (possibly added by the editor of the revised
edition) acknowledges the following: "Here again we see a recent tendency
in West Eupopean and American orchestras to restore the smaller clarinets
to the position allotted to them by symphonic composers. The best makers
now devote as much care to proper scaling and relative proportions in the
C as in any other clarinet, adn serious players give equal attention to
appropriate mouthpieces and reeds."

Rendall, F. Geoffrey, _The Clarinet: Some Notes on Its History and
Construction_ (third edition revised by Philip Bate), London: Ernest Benn
Limited, 1971, p. 123. [Note: the first edition was published in 1954.]

Was Rendall merely speculating, Dan, when he wrote, "These slight defects,
lack of charm and mellowness, with a tendency to hardness, *no doubt*
account for it never having been adopted as the standard orchestral and
solo clarinet"?

--Mitch Bassman
mbassman@-----.com