Klarinet Archive - Posting 000245.txt from 2001/12

From: "barnes mike" <pappychillmo@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Material....was Gigliotti Inventions
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:10:57 -0500

Janet,

I apologize if incorrect, but I believe Dan's is a basset horn and not a
basset clarinet.

The below was copied from Stephen Fox's site =
http://www.sfoxclarinets.com/Reproduction_Historical_Clarinets.html

Classical basset horn
A replica of a specimen by Raymund Griesbacher (Boston Museum of Art), this
is one example of a basset horn suitable for the music of Mozart and (with
additional keys) early 19th century composers. It has a flat "box", brass
bell and angled middle joint. The bottom range was originally diatonic
(with only D and C natural), but chromatic keys can be provided.

Price:
8 keys (diatonic bottom range), boxwood
Can. $2,900.00
As above, chromatic bottom range $3,100.00

Mike

>From: Janet McNaught <mcnaught@-----.com>
>Reply-To: klarinet@-----.org
>To: klarinet@-----.org
>Subject: Re: [kl] Material....was Gigliotti Inventions
>Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:01:44 -0500
>
>Mike - you are confusing the basset horn, and the basset clarinet. And for
>each
>of these instruments, there are replicas of the purported original
>instruments,
>and there are modern versions. I believe that Dan's new basset horn is not
>a
>replica of an "original" instrument - it is a modern basset horn, with many
>many
>shiny gold keys. The price for these instruments is well over $3,100.00
>CDN.
>Steve Fox has not (to my knowledge) made a boxwood basset hron, but he has
>made
>many many replicas of various early clarinets out of boxwood.
>
>I will leave to Dan the question about why he wants to play the Gran
>Partitta on
>a modern instrument.
>
>Janet
>barnes mike wrote:
>
> > A while back, Dan Leeson posted the news of his gold plated cocobolo
>basset
> > horn by Stephen Fox. He said he wanted it so he could perfectly
>reproduce a
> > Mozart piece using the exact instrument used at the time Mozart created
>the
> > piece. I also recall him stating he paid about $8500 for it
> >
> > Dan is really strong in his arguement that material makes no difference
>and
> > picks away at anyone who disagrees. He claims their is no substance in
>their
> > argument and apparently don't realize there is none to his arguments
>either.
> >
> > Anyone besides me think he's worried he is wrong since the original
>basset
> > horn was made of boxwood and not cocobolo?
> >
> > Also, the Stephen Fox boxwood basset horn with all options is only
>Canadian
> > $3,100 which works out to about US $2,000. Did he pay an extra $6,500
>for
> > cocobolo and boxwood?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > >From: "Tim Roberts" <timr@-----.com>
> > >Reply-To: klarinet@-----.org
> > >To: "klarinet@-----.org>
> > >Subject: Re: [kl] Material....was Gigliotti Inventions
> > >Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:30:58 -0800
> > >
> > >On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:53:30 -0800, Daniel Leeson ranted:
> > > >
> > > >Walt, not only do you speculate questionable conclusions based on no
>or
> > > >anecdotal evidence, you even assume the ability to know what Moennig
> > > >thought without him telling you. Assumptions are piled on
>assumptions
> > > >which are piled on to personal prejudices, and out of this you expect
> > > >some technical truth to suddenly appear???
> > >
> > >In my opinion, Dan, you are being entirely unfair in this diatribe. I
>know
> > >I
> > >am arguing with a man who is a master of debate, but I believe your
> > >conclusion is not, in fact, supported by the facts.
> > >
> > >For reference, I restate the original quote from Alvin Swiney:
> > >
> > > Mr. Moennig insisted that the hard rubber of the sleeve was
> > > made of quality material identical to the mouthpiece.
> > > Mr. Moennig never used plastic for the barrel sleeve as he
> > > felt that it made the tone too bright.
> > >
> > >Now let's look at Walter's followup:
> > >
> > > I think we know where Mr. Moennig's vote would be on whether or
> > > not material made a difference.
> > >
> > >Walter did not announce the formulation of a technical truth here, nor
>did
> > >he
> > >even assert that Moennig knew the technical truth. Walter did not say
> > >"This
> > >quote establishes as fact that material makes a difference, quod erat
> > >demostratum." Rather he expressed an interpretation of Swiney's quote.
> > >
> > >Indeed, from a purely semantic point of view, Walter's opionion follows
> > >directly from Mr. Swiney's second sentence, regardless of whether
>Moennig
> > >is
> > >here to verify it. We are looking at indirect hearsay here, of course,
>but
> > >if you accept the premise that "Mr. Moenning never used plastic for the
> > >barrel sleeve as he felt that it made the tone too bright", then I do
>not
> > >see
> > >how you can argue with the conclusion that "Mr. Moenning felt that
>material
> > >makes a difference." That's what Swiney's quote says. P implies Q.
> > >Neither
> > >P nor Q in this case establishes any fact about clarinet bodies, but
>that's
> > >not what Walter asserted, and you are incorrect to berate him for doing
>so.
> > >
> > >--
> > >- Tim Roberts, timr@-----.com
> > > Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> >
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

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