Klarinet Archive - Posting 000273.txt from 1999/08

From: reedman@-----.com
Subj: [kl] Dear Roger,
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 03:54:59 -0400

I am really surprised by the vituperative nature of your many posts on the
recent thread and response to my comments.

I have NEVER denigrated or even commented about your playing. I don't know
why you would throw in such a spurious and unrelated remark. If you open up
a discussion about mouthpiece quality and pricing that puts mouthpiece
makers on the defensive you will of course encounter some argument.You seem
to think that you are the only person on this list with a right to an
opinion and if someone has a counter opinion they are trying to obfuscate
or avoid the issue

I think that your comments that I never offer any material information
about mouthpieces are pretty far off the mark. My contributions to this
list in the area of technical information have been generous and are well
documented in the archives. .

I thank you for your very nice comments about my mouthpieces, but on the
other hand I am dissappointed that you choose to see my arguments as
personal attacks. I have been in the music business for 24 years. I have
had my own business for 14. I think my experience within the business
community of music gives me a small insight into the economics of musical
commerce. Your perspective as a novice and part time, albeit perhaps
excellent, mouthpiece maker is different than mine. If you were to move to
a point where your livelihood depended on making mouthpieces I think that
you may have a broader view on mouthpiece pricing.

I don't quite understand Mark Weinstein's comments regarding pricing
either. I don't think musical instrument merchandising is an anomaly
compared to other industries. Most makers set prices based on a formula
that does allow a reasonable profit for himself and allows a comfortable
retail markup within which a retailer can make a profit on his investment.
If Mr. Weinstein's idea of vertical marketing is that each step up product
is priced as an integral graduate, then he is not taking into consideration
the variables of cost and time required to make the different products.

I did not set $50 as the "magical" price point, Roger did. I think that
mouthpiece prices are in SYNC based on Mr Weinstein's comments. It is also
untrue that artists are "forced" to make plastic mouthpieces. I chose that
path, because i saw that there was a great need in that area. I am
extremely proud of my products and make no apologies. Every mouthpiece that
bears my name has been made with thoughtfulness toward quality.

I still agree that rubber is a better material for making clarinet
mouthpieces. But the point that I keep coming back too is that one cannot
make as consistent a product with rubber AND keep the price point low
enough to be affordable to a broad student market. Thousands of children
start the clarinet and drop it within in one year. Should they be "forced"
to pay for a rubber mouthpiece when an excellent product in plastic is
available at half the price and will suit their needs beautifully? Granted,
there are extremely bad plastic mouthpieces out there - probably millions.
Poor manufacture of plastic mouthpieces in the past and currently is more
the cause for maligning plastic than the material itself.

Plastic (acrylic) works wonderfully for me on an acoustical and economic
level and provides an extremely consistent product. If one prefers his
students to start on more expensive rubber mouthpieces that is his
perogative and there is a huge range from which to choose.

Clark

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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