Klarinet Archive - Posting 000316.txt from 1997/11

From: PGAYR@-----.com
Subj: Re: Re: reed strength/ acoustically balanced
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 23:45:04 -0500

I wrote the following and Roger Garrett responded:
The upper claion left hand pitches, however, still tend toward stridence
> and metallic quality in many of these instruments; but over all it is an
> improved instrument. I wonder if that would have ever happened if we had
not
> done what we did at Leblanc earlier this decade? I guess we can never know.

I have not noticed the strident qualities you describe when I try them,
but I do believe that your involvement with Leblanc's newer designs
impacted substantially on changes ALL clarinet makers have made in the
last several years.

Thanks for a helpful and humbling post!

Roger Garrett
Wasn't trying to humble anyone, just to clarify a few things as best as I
could. As for influencing changes ALL clarinet makers have made: I think
that competition among makers does improved the lot of all players.
We're better off today because of what Leblanc has done, and I think the
clarinet world owes Vito a debt of thanks. Because he took such risks of
buying the French factory and investing lots of money things are better for
everyone.
He did not have to do that, and he did it mainly because he loves the
clarinet, which is more than I can say for many other company heads whose
only interest in the clarinet is sucking a living off of it and running it
out of their warehouses as "units". They might as well be selling toilet
fixtures or lamp shades. It wasn't that way with Vito, I know that for a
fact.
What amazed me was how many clarinet players were ready to put us down at
Leblanc when we were actually trying to do something for them. I even saw
players get angry at me when they realized that I was right and the Leblancs
I was showing them did do some things better than their Buffets. They would
get angry like Iwas attacking their best friend, when the truth was they had
not ever seen a Buffet representative coming to them asking what they would
like better or what could be done for them.
Further, Lee Gibson wrote clearly and repeatedly in The Clarinet for almost
two decades about how Buffets could be improved and the Frence did NOTHING.
And yet here were American clarinetists defending them like Buffet
Crampon was run by their brother in law and the Buffet clarinet was divinely
revealed clarinet dogma. It made no sense to me. The ignorance,suspicion
and prejudice, not the fair minded inquiry and criticism, were disheartening
to me in many encounters.
I know as a professional clarinetist and teacher no Buffet rep ever came to
me to see whatthey could do for me. And it was always that way until we
began our work at Leblanc. Only then did Buffet get "interested" in American
clarinet players and begin going around.
What we did at Leblanc, I believe, ought to encourage players to think
carefully about their choices and not just be sheep, to think deeply about
not just making sound on the clarinet but making music in all its'
complexity. Anybody can make a decision on an instrument based on just one
element of music or sound. But it takes real intelligence and both
technical and musical insight to choose with a total vision of music making
in mind.
My personal intent was not to copy Buffet, but to try to improve upon some
faults I found in their design and to give players a choice by fusing the
virtues of two types of instruments:
The Leblanc clarinet, (many of which played remarkably evenly and securely,
butwhich often lacked depth and resonance required by so many professionals)
and
The Buffet clarinets, (which had the depth and resonance, but which had
definite weaknesses in response, blowing resistance and tone color in
specific areas.)
Again, I make these comments on the brand as general ones, acknowledging that
there are always exceptions due to a variety of factors.
Thanks for your comments Roger.
Tom

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