Klarinet Archive - Posting 000839.txt from 2002/10

From: "WILLIAM SEMPLE" <wsemple@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] What makes the biggest difference, the horn or the player?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 19:32:53 -0500

This has turned into quite the exchange.

I thought I might have been setting up a straw man here, but the responses
so far tend to confirm my own intuition: sonic outcomes are clearly the
result of a conversation that goes on between a musician and his or her
instrument. Some players can match their technique and style to almost any
instrument; others seek to match an instrument to their particular technique
and style.

The more subtle the change, the more proliferate the apparent choices, the
less apparent (ironically) the change to the average ear, but the more
important and dramatic to the ear that counts, if in some cases for
psychological reasons (e.g., change for change sake).

I fall in the middle. I am not convinced that a Prestige Buffet necessarily
is any better than an R-13 found in the back of a store selling band
instruments. Yet, there are discernible differences between a student Yamaha
and an R-13. It flies in the face of reason that clarinets a priori are all
alike. They are most definitely not. And set-up is important.
Yet, I bought a $20 silver-plated band clarinet (a Pitt-American),
overhauled it myself, and can get quite the sound out of this thing.

I have a matched pair of Buffets built in 1949 (Ser # 36,589 and #36,868),
the Paul Schaller R-13(Ser #59,580), built in 1959, which he played in the
DSO for twenty years, and two "modern" Buffet R-13s, an A purchased in 1996
(Ser # 388,688) and a Bb purchased this past May (Ser #468,249) while the
Schaller horn was undergoing an overhaul. No matter what I do, these do NOT
sound the same. Yet I play them all, and love it.

I have also owned other instruments, mostly inherited and all hand-selected
by Schaller, since my father was pres of the DSO board and was good enough
to take Schaller's seat at a Meadowbrook Festival concert during the early
1970's (I guess he also exerted some, ah, influence, but believe me, Paul
would never have let my father perform if he didn't think he could do it).
These included a matched set of Prestige. Unfortunately, they all went up in
a house fire. Even then, I remember I did not like the Prestige pair!!

Make no bones about it, the 1950's Schaller instrument, freshly overhauled,
is the best instrument of my present group and may be the best instrument I
have ever owned. But the new Bb is also something special. I purchased it at
a local BAND MUSIC STORE (they had only two) after trying out twenty or more
student-grade models and the other R-13.. I absolutely LOVE this instrument
(especially the lower register).. No Clarinetfest for me. Yet as easily as I
got this Bb, I now struggle to find an A that matches the Schaller, a search
that I think will be especially difficult. What am I, cuckoo? And what
compels me to find a sister to the Bb, when I have TWO other As that play,
and can play quite well.

To William Wright: my fascination with the psychology of sound comes from my
several years as an audio reviewer for The Absolute Sound. To this day,
audio reviewers declare that they can detect the most subtle differences
based on such exotica as the thickness and construction of audio cables. But
I remember an instance where all of our esteemed reviewers were assembled
listening to a pair of new Acoustats. I was the only one who detected that
one of the tweeters had blown, creating a hole in the sound stage. Everyone
else was oohing and aahing.

---- Original Message -----
From: "William Wright" <b5w@-----.net>
Subject: Re: [kl] What makes the biggest difference, the horn or the player?

> <><> William Semple wrote:
> I have an R-13 Buffet A that initially seemed highly resistant. In time,
> I got used to this instrument, making adjustments that now allow me to
> move between my A and Bb quite easily. But it wasn't this way at the
> beginning.
>
>
>
> The above quote omits a critical datum. In the same message you said:
>
> =========
> Some of this must be purely psychological, rather than any specific
> sonic result that can be detected
> =========
>
> My question is: Do you think that the "sonic result" of your technique
> changed as you "adjusted" (to use your word) to the R13?
>

> This is where the factor of interaction enters the discussion, and I
> think it is incorrect to ignore the interaction. I suspect that the
> R13 required changes to your technique, and this interaction **did**
> produce a 'sonic result' that was different from (1) what you played
> before you bought the R13, and (2) what you would play now if you
> returned to your previous instrument.
>
> Thus you can say that *you* changed when your instrument changed, and
> the two factors interacted to produce 'your music' as it exists at this
> moment. There would be more changes to "sonic result" if either you or
> your instrument changed again, and I suspect that changing either one
> would cause a change to the other (again) as well.
>
> To say that your music is unaffected by your equipment is unrealistic.
> It is also unrealistic to say that making a certain change will produce
> the same result for every musician. Probably if you and I were both to
> switch to <Brand C> or to <Tip Opening D>, the result would be different
> for each of us.
>
> For that matter, why do you have two instruments (your A and Bb)? Is
> it **only** to avoid transposition? Are all other of your
> introspections about sound character purely psychological --- by which I
> think you mean not perceivable to the outside world?
>
> Cheers,
> Bill
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>

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