Klarinet Archive - Posting 000198.txt from 2001/12

From: GrabnerWG@-----.com
Subj: Re: [kl] scientists on the list
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 21:03:14 -0500

Bill Edinger says:

<< but your assertion that "none of us [is a]
scientist" is quite in error. There are several of us who are scientists.>>

HaHa. No offense taken Bill! I KNEW I'd get in trouble on that one.

Bill continues to say :

<< I'd buy another mouthpiece from you in a heartbeat, but I'll have to side with the scientists on the issue of materials' effects on sound. As Dan Leeson wrote, I still haven't seen your data, and the only scientifically-done work I've heard about contradicts what you claim to experience. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.">>

Bill, I don't have any data. Not a darn thing. I don't plan on having any either. I don't have access to a laboratory to make such experiments, and I sure can't afford the equipment on what I make selling clarinet mouthpieces!

I work totally pragmatically. If it works, great; if not, move on.

Let me say this, then we can debate it. I have made quite a few barrels out of cocobolo, delrin, and grenadilla.

Multiple people, including several professional clarinetists, several professional musicians who are not clarinetists, TWO very notable University teachers, and one doctoral student, have all noticed and exclaimed over the tonal qualities of the cocobolo barrels. Several have offered to buy one right off my clarinet!

Now, I use exactly the same tooling (including the same reamer), as close as possible to the same measurements, and exactly the same methods in each, yet the cocobolo barrels are the ones that get the attention.

Why?

My deduction is that the material makes the difference.

What deduction would you make?

Walter
www.clarinetxpress.com

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