Klarinet Archive - Posting 000476.txt from 2002/04

From: "Sirius T. Bontea" <clarinetist@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Octave repeaters vs. Twelfth repeaters
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 03:02:22 -0400

I agree that dealing with a 12th interval (and not an octave) makes the
clarinet more challenging, but it's what gives the instrument its
beautiful low register (considering its length is comparable to a flute
or oboe). I hardly would call this a "damnable deficiency." :-) There
is a compromise because of the acoustic properties of the instrument.
The clarinet functions much like a "stopped pipe resonator," in which
case the clarinet will sound an octave lower than one would expect. A
stopped pipe produces these odd partials, so the clarinetist has to deal
with a 12th interval between the first two registers rather than with
the octave as on most other woodwinds. Because of this, the key
mechanisms are much more complicated. Personally, I believe that there
could be some improvement to the Boehm system. My clarinet teacher once
told me that he used to play on a "full Boehm" clarinet back in the
early 60's. He said he could do much more on that instrument than he
could on the one he's using now (which is a "regular" Boehm clarinet).
The drawback is that the full Boehm is heavier. Besides the weight,
I'm not sure why it's not more common, though... Anyone?

Speaking of different "systems," I've seen Oehler clarinets, but never a
"full Oehler." Does anyone know of anyplace (on the web) that has some
close-up pictures of the key mechanisms? I'm curious to see what it
looks like and how it compares to the full Boehm. Oehlers are supposed
to have better intonation than the Boehm, but the fingering is harder,
which begs more curiosity on the nature of a "full Oehler." :-)

~Sirius

Rick Campbell wrote:

>As a good saxophonist, weak clarinetist, and sometime bassoonist, the
>unique feature that divides us on the issue of "woodwinds" must be that
>only, ONLY, the clarinet fails to repeat on the octave, a damnable
>deficiency in my mind. To my knowledge, all other woodwinds (even the
>ocarina and taragoto) do. That places terrible demands on the
>clarinetist, but not enough to justify such a rejection of all other
>instruments "woodwind". Someday there will be an improved clarinet which
>is easier to play, and more popular, but only after the "I learned the
>Boehm system and so must you" academy are gone. Have you ever asked
>yourself why there has not been a hugely popular clarinetist since Benny
>Goodman and Artie Shaw? Just think what a standard L4 Eb key would do
>for ease of playing. Or roller keys on R4 Eb/C. Or an improved throat Bb
>with some of the more complex linkage of the saxophone's two vents. Or
>even more closed hole clarinets (I hear the flute guys do that). These
>things are not insurmountable, and would be relatively cheap in mass
>production. Yes, in 1800, hand manufacturing cost was a major concern,
>but in the days of $3000 clarinets, shouldn't we have advances? Why must
>we insist that the instrument remain difficult to play. After all, by
>that logic, we should all be playing the 13 key instrument, or perhaps
>the 6 key. Much more demanding! Are we masochists?
>Rick Campbell
>

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

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