Klarinet Archive - Posting 000931.txt from 2000/02

From: Bill Hausmann <bhausman@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] Re: stuck swab
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 07:17:01 -0500

At 12:07 AM 2/25/2000 -0500, Gene Nibbelin wrote:
>Dear "Stuck Swab" and the Ellems:
>
>I have seen posted on Klarinet by clarinetists much smarter than myself that
>silk is less absorbent than cotton. This seems to make sense to me since
>cotton is a much coarser fiber than silk, which should allow more absorption
>and silk fabric is usually more tightly woven than cotton and thus would be
>less likely to readily absorb moisture. This would seem to me to make
>cotton swabs more absorbent than silk.
>
>Also, circumstances that would cause a cotton swab to get stuck could also
>get a silk swab stuck. Granted that a silk swab is "slicker" and might not
>get stuck quite as easily, this "slickness", may confirm my thought that
>silk is less absorbent than cotton.
>
There does seem to be a difference of opinion on silk's absorbancy. But I
can assure you, the silk swab is much more compressable, making it far less
likely to jam.

I saw a silk oboe swab (Hodge) the other day that had an additional string
on the back end for pulling it back out if it stuck. Clever idea!

Bill Hausmann bhausman@-----.com
451 Old Orchard Drive http://www.concentric.net/~bhausman
Essexville, MI 48732 http://homepages.go.com/~zoot14/zoot14.html
ICQ UIN 4862265

If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the band is too loud.

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

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