Klarinet Archive - Posting 000152.txt from 1997/09

From: pharmacy <pharmacy@-----.com>
Subj: [Fwd: Re: Greenlines cracking and making the things]
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 21:32:36 -0400

Bill Hausmann wrote:
>
> At 08:57 AM 9/3/97 +0100, you wrote:
> >But you've got to have the discarded wood to do this. If there is no
> >process which produces this, then there's nothing to make greenlines from,
> >so the saving in trees can only occur if Buffet don't increase production.
> >The situation may be even worse than this. Does anyone out there know how
> >many loads of non-greenline chips it takes to make a greenline?
> >The non-cracking "reason" looks much more convincing.
> >Roger Shilcock
> >
> Consider the very name of the clarinet: "GREENline." Whether the original
> purpose was to save trees or not, the MARKETING is clearly environmental.
> I suspect they got tired of wasting all that wood and wanted to see if they
> could figure out a way to use it for clarinet production. It is the
> equivalent of chipboard or particle board, at a higher level perhaps, but
> the principle is the same: recycling. Their guarantee against cracking is
> in all likelyhood (pure speculation on my part) part incentive to buy a
> Greenline vs. a regular R13 and part a belief, logical I think, that the
> composition body will be less prone to cracking. Time will tell.
> Pan-American thought their composition clarinets would be impervious to
> cracking. Very few remain today. Guess why.

Uh, because Andy made them all into lamps? My living room is also
proudly displaying a P.O.S. Clarinet Lamp!
Carol