Klarinet Archive - Posting 000427.txt from 2003/05

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: Re: [kl] More reeds...
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 21:58:09 -0400

On Mon, 19 May 2003 18:57:07 +0000, resurgereweb@-----.com said:

> Y'know, Tony, 2 points could be made here --
>
> -- just my luck to run into a Brit who doesn't know a line from Monty
> Python.

Probably MP was aired a long time ago over here, compared with over
there. I've found that many Americans know MP better than the English.
In any case, you're right that I don't remember that bit.

> -- my original comment was not addressed to you. It was addressed to
> someone who was asking for advice. I gave it to them.

As I recall, they were asking how they could tell when it was time to
change their reed. Clearly this is a deeper problem than the problem of
whether or not to rotate reeds, because it relates to the whole question
of how you tell whether or not a reed is satisfactory. Your post
indicated that you appreciate that this is a deeper question, but, in my
view at least, confused that with the notion of rotating reeds.

The burden of my post was: however the reed you're using gets on the
mouthpiece -- whether it's as a result of rotation, as a result of
pulling it out of a reedcase, or even if it comes direct from the box --
you have to be capable of judging it to be satisfactory.

I have gone into some of what determines that here before, but was on
this occasion confining myself to the fact that rotating or not rotating
reeds is an essentially trivial point by comparison, being merely a
matter of personal preference.

> I replied to you in a spirit of levity, but you seem to be in "bugger
> off" mode, so have it your way.

You misinterpreted what I wrote. When you said, "We don't morally
censure," it may be true that *you* don't morally censure, but some
people think that there is a 'right' way of doing things like choosing a
reed -- as opposed to there being a 'right' sort of reed to choose --
and communicate on the list that they think there is a right way of
doing those things.

So I wanted to say that your 'we' may be less general than you think,
and for all you knew might even have been confined here, before other
people started posting, to 'you and the mouse in your pocket', which is
an expression I learnt from an American. (Another, more English way of
saying it would have been, "I'll assume that you are using 'the Royal
we' here.")

> I could care less what you do with, about, to or for your reeds.

Nor I yours. That was my point.

Good luck with them.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE http://classicalplus.gmn.com/artists
tel/fax 01865 553339

... If the #2 pencil is the most popular, why is it still #2?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/

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