Klarinet Archive - Posting 000196.txt from 1999/04

From: jim & joyce <lande@-----.com>
Subj: [kl] Wood/plastic, etc...
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 06:04:30 -0400

Mark wrote:

>>In my world the instrument is a tool, a means to an end...

Lets take another field: writing. Some writers say that they produce
better work on word processors, some on typewriters, some
by pen and paper. These implements are simply tools. The tools
do not create the words. You cannot find a difference in the
quality of the words if you have a machine write the same sentence
in three different media and then judge solely on the content
of the writing. Yet some writers say they cannot write a lick
with/without their trusty whatever.

I didn't say this is rational. I prefer playing my old
metal clarinets to my R-13. I was stunned when the electronic tuner
showed how inconsistent I was. I figured it was just me until I
got out the R-13. Oh well, play fast and nobody much notices. I still
prefer using the old metal clarinets. The scary part is that I have
convinced some other people that I sound better on them.

I would like to hear from some of the other mouthpiece guys on this
subject. People are paying huge prices for some vintage
mouthpieces. I have heard some people say "you cannot get quality
blanks like you used to" and "old rubber is better." Is this true?
Does material make a difference for a mouthpiece? Why is that
different than for the body of the clarinet? If materials don't make a
difference, what was the magic that nobody can reproduce today.
Scientific (and psychotic) explanations welcome.

jim lande

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org