Klarinet Archive - Posting 000394.txt from 1996/02

From: Fred Jacobowitz <fredj@-----.EDU>
Subj: Re: Selmer Clarinets
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 13:07:46 -0500

Hey all,
The real problem here is that people are being their normal lazy
selves and trying to get away with describing a very subjective, nebulous
concept such as tone, with *ONE* word. How about we all start to adopt
this kind of description: The Selmer clarinet is generally known for
having a lighter-weight, less dense/robust, rather gentler tone quality than
the Buffet, which has been called "ballsy", strong, thick, heavy, dark,
etc. How's that work, folx? While we're at it, let's not leave out the
Leblanc, which in my experience is even more on the light-weight, brighter
side than the Selmer (at least, the older models-- The newer models such as
the Opus are much more like the Buffet).

Fred Jacobowitz

On Wed, 14 Feb 1996, Nick Winkler wrote:

> > I guess it again demonstrates that we don't really have adequate
> > terms to describe what are essentially subjective assessments.
> > Anyone else care to jump into this fray?
>
> Ed, thank you for addressing this subject. I've often wondered
> exactly what a "dark" tone is. Maybe Dan, or some of the other
> eloquent types on this conference can shed some light. (No pun
> intended.)
>
> -Nick-
>