Klarinet Archive - Posting 000256.txt from 2001/07

From: rgarrett@-----.edu
Subj: RE: [kl] Re:Mouthpieces recommendations - worth??
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 04:57:42 -0400

At 03:28 PM 07/10/2001 -0600, you wrote:
> My purpose in asking whether you would publish the results of your
> measurements of various mouthpieces is really just to know more about the
> wide variations you discovered (e.g. in the Vandoren B45) in an earlier
> message, and to what extent different mouthpiece makers are successful in
> eliminating those variations.

Yes - I think I understood this David. No problem with asking...........

As with all things, intent and motive have quite a bit to do with why
something is made available. First - I can tell you what I found in terms
of facings, window sizes, baffle shapes, etc......but that's not really
going to help you a whole lot. Also - by providing this information, I
don't think Vandoren, Woodwind, or any of the other commercial/bulk
manufacturers are going to change anything. I would open myself up for
nothing!

> (I'm not asking for mouthpiece recommendations, though my request might
> have been read that way.)

Oh.....I added that tag after your email came in asking. I had already
written my long message! : )

>Perhaps I'm confused here, but suppose I am playing a B45, or 5RVL, or
>Pyne, or Smith, or whatever. If I drop it and nick the rails, and need a
>new mouthpiece, I think it's reasonable that I ought to be able to buy
>another mouthpiece of the same designation and have the response be
>identical. Yet that will not be the case if the variations are as large as
>mentioned for the B45.

You can order several Smiths, Pynes, Vandorens, or whatever - but they will
all vary to a certain degree. You know, you can measure the facing of a
Smith - in fact 10 of them - and within a model number, come out very close
if not exactly close to the same face measurements. Greg is very skilled
at what he does. Why then do they all have a unique characteristic in the
way that they blow? Because not even Greg can control all of the variances
of the blanks as they arrive from the Zinner. Same with Babbitt,
etc. Hawkins and Smith use Zinner blanks because they are of very high
quality - and there are bound to be more of them that are similar. That
does not necessarily eliminate the variances that make each one
unique. It's as frustrating for the mouthpiece makers as for the players.

Clark Fobes has invested thousands in reamers to achieve a specific
taper. So would, I assume, have Jim Pyne and Greg Smith. So what have we
got? Very close tolerances in bore taper and openings, very close
tolerances in window sizes, tip and side rails, and facing. But the inside
baffle, sidewalls, and throat are all very difficult to adjust in a way
that achieves perfect tolerances. So there you have it. They're doing the
best that they can - probably much better than the commercial producers.

>If we have information that says "brand X mouthpieces are within +/- 5% on
>tip opening, facing length, flatness, material density, blah, blah, blah"
>whereas "brand Y mouthpieces are within + 25%/ - 5% on these factors"
>then, I suppose, we at least know that while I may only like one
>particular brand X mouthpiece, I can play 100 of them and like them all,
>whereas with any brand Y mouthpiece, if I find one I like, it may simply
>be an aberration. Conversely, if I dislike a particular brand X
>mouthpiece, there's no point in trying another of the same designation;
>whereas playing 5 other brand Y mouthpieces might lead me to a solution I like.

I understand what you are saying here. Alas, such information can't come
from me. Not only would some of it be guesswork, the rest would conclude
based on the end product - not the design information itself. For example
- Ford and Chevrolet provide specific information regarding their
automobiles - wheelbase, horse power, torque, thrust, compression, liter
size, valves, etc. etc. etc. These things are measurable, and the
specifics are there. Anyone can take the design provided and check it for
accuracy. What if they didn't make this information available? The person
checking the design would first have to guess at what the design was
supposed to be, and then maintain an accuracy chart against that. What
does that give us? Now let's look at mouthpiece design and actual
manufacturing. For obvious reasons Clark Fobes, Charles Bay, David Hite,
etc. need to make a living - and perhaps they are doing so with their
mouthpieces. Why would they disclose the taper, interior measurements, and
data regarding such to us? It's the same way in many
businesses............altruism only goes so far!!!

>Maybe the current processes used to manufacture and finish mouthpieces
>don't allow for achieving such close tolerances. But, part of the quality
>engineering work is in seeking out and eliminating those sources of
>variation. And, if someone producing mouthpieces by hand is achieving
>substantially less variation than the factory with tens of thousands (or
>more) invested in NC machinery, and that information is widely known, it
>sounds like a possible business advantage.

It would be a wonderful advantage wouldn't it?

10 Pyne mouthpieces of the same model and facing play differently. Same
with 10 Hawkins, 10 Smiths, 10 Bays, 10 Vandoren B45s, etc. The trick is
to keep the variance as small as possible. Some people do better than
others at this - but in a way, without the variance, we couldn't provide
for exactly everyone's needs - at least not with the models you order from
the WW/BW, and IMS. Custom work is always possible. While that doesn't
make it easy to match your mouthpiece if you drop it, you can at least find
another one that you can adapt to. This is what happened to me. I went to
the Arizona Clarinet Fest looking for a match to my 25 year old Pyne that
Shifrin gave me (and he used in the Cleveland Orchestra). I loved that
mouthpiece! I asked Jim Pyne if he had anything close. He looked at it
and made a few comments - then told me no. But, he told me, more often
than not, people who go to him looking for a match often find something
they like better. That wasn't the case with me - but I at least realized
that in order to have two mouthpieces that played similarly, I was going to
have to choose two at the same time. That's what I did, and, after
adapting to the new one(s), the one I loved for so long is no longer my
preferred. Kind of like shoes you know?

Best wishes,
Roger Garrett

Roger Garrett
Clarinet Professor
Director, Symphonic Winds
Illinois Wesleyan University
School of Music
Bloomington, IL 61702-2900
Phone: (309) 556-3268
Fax: (309) 556-3121

"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