Klarinet Archive - Posting 000817.txt from 2003/05

From: GrabnerWG@-----.com
Subj: Re: [kl] Facing vs. reed strength
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 09:07:55 -0400

In a message dated 5/29/2003 6:43:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, trishm@-----.com writes:

> but I tried a dozen different B-45s and couldn't find a single one that even came close. In fact, they weren't even close to consistent with each other. Either their manufacturing QA has gone downhill extensively or I simply got very lucky when I got the first one.>>

Thanks, Trish.

I think that this point is so important that it needs to be mentioned over and over again.

Poeople ask me how my mouthpieces compare to a particular brand/model of "stock" mouthpiece. My answer is always the same - which particular mouthpiece? The variability is so great that there sometimes seem to be no baseline for comparison. And there's the problem.

Now SOME variability is a GOOD thing. It allows us some choice. A mouthpiece is like a pair of shoes, it has to FIT the person "wearing" it. So if every mouthpiece in a "model" like a B-45 were exactly alike, we couldn't choose the one that fits us best!

But, huge variances just confuse everybody.

QC is very expensive, for any company that manufactures a product. Even more so when you realize that a finished mouthpiece with a ruined facing is junk and nees to be THROWN OUT - before it gets sold to some unsuspecting person. It's sad to think, but a lot of these "ruined" mouthpieces get passed down the distribution chain to some unsuspecting student that struggles mightily to get the damn thing working.

Enough...coming down off my soapbox......

Can you tell this is a subject that I really vare about?

Walter
www.clarinetxpress.com
mouthpieces "in spec" or they don't go out

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