Klarinet Archive - Posting 000417.txt from 2000/10

From: rgarrett@-----.edu
Subj: Re: [kl] Changes to Elite and other Buffets
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 12:02:18 -0400

At 06:00 AM 10/9/2000 -0700, you wrote:
> <><> It is the same issue mouthpiece makers run into - a tradeoff
>on "free blowing" vs. "edgy or non-edgy" sound.
>
> I assume you are saying that these two aspects of a mouthpiece are
>mutually exclusive? That is, you can't have the "most free blowing" and
>the "least edgy" sound simultaneously. Is there a clear-cut explanation
>for why? Or is this just an observable fact of life?
>
>
>Thank you,
> Bill

Bill,

It's very difficult to describe without showing in person. But let me try
- I'll probably make it even more confusing in the process.

Let's take a for-instance - two virtually identical blanks (which is
impossible). Let's say we make one with a tip opening of 1.12 and the
other with a tip opening of 1.14 (not much difference, but enough). Let's
take it a step further and make the curve on the second one ever so
slightly longer. The result, theoretically, is that the second will feel
more resistant (stuffy) but have greater power (volume). Here is where the
problem in description is. What one player feels as slightly more
resistant, another describes as stuffy. Depending on reed, embouchure,
amount of mouthpiece taken, air use, etc., finding two players even to
describe the SAME mouthpiece (let alone two different mouthpieces) is a
long shot. Therefore, to answer your question:

In a perfect world, when one creates a larger tip opening and a longer
curve, the resistance of the mouthpiece can become greater in feel. When
one deepens the baffle - more scooped, the feel can become even more
resistant. Let's say that greater resistance can equal less responsive.
What most players want is the comfort of the less resistant/more responsive
mouthpiece with the tone quality of the more resistant/powerful mouthpiece.
The trick is to get both for a player. This is precisely why there are so
many different blanks out there - Zinner has a deep scoop in the baffle,
and the many different kinds of Babbitts have different kinds of baffles,
different sized interior chambers, etc. etc.......... These different
blanks exist to try to satisfy the many different kinds of players and
approaches out there. No wonder we have so many opinions on mouthpieces.
Richard Hawkins can describe where he believes the "response" factor is in
the curve of the mouthpiece - as well as the baffle. He mentioned that the
curve has to be particular in relationship to the scoop of the baffle.
With the variety of mouthpiece blanks out there, and even with the
variation between supposedly identical blanks, it becomes very difficult to
match mouthpieces.

Frankly, I prefer a more open mouthpiece - 1.19-1.20. For years in fact, I
played on David Shifrin's old Pyne that was a 1.26 tip opening! I still
play on a 1.20 tip. I don't like the edge I get when I play on a 1.15,
1.12, etc. as it drops in numbers (towards a more closed facing). I also
don't like the pitch of the more closed mouthpieces, although some would
argue that is not so much the scoop in the baffle (I prefer a deeper scoop)
as the bore taper. The latter would have a greater overall effect, but the
former would most certainly drop pitch as it is deeper. This is why the
Zinners work so nicely with a more closed facing - very scooped baffle!
AND - the smaller the mouthpiece (Eb vs. Bass), the better that scoop is
for the mouthpiece. This is precisely why the Zinner Eb blanks are the
best thing I've found in a long time. (BTW Walter G., in response to a
post a few days ago, I told you LAST YEAR when you visited that the Zinner
Eb blank was the only one to use.......!!!!!).

The 1.02 of a Greg Smith's terrific mouthpieces and the same facing in a
Hawkins equally terrific mouthpiece are virtually unplayable for me - but
that is just my approach to the instrument. They sound great, but down low
I can't push the envelope in the volume (especially down low) as I would
like. Why? The more closed tip with the dip in the table that simulates a
more open tip (approximately 1.10 according to Richard) creates an
instability in the reeds as I prepare them for a flat table mouthpiece.

Therefore, my description of the Trade-off: in whatever form we create
resistance in blowing to create a particular quality tone, we affect in
terms of response.

Now that I have thoroughly confused you.......let's see Walter take a stab
at the explanation - he struggles with the issue as well!

Great question by the way Bill.

Sincerely,
Roger Garrett

Roger Garrett
Professor of Clarinet
Director, Symphonic Winds
Head, Recording Studio
Illinois Wesleyan University
School of Music
Bloomington, IL 61702-2900
(309) 556-3268

"A man never discloses his own character so clearly as when he describes
another's."
Jean Paul Richter (1763-1825)

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