Klarinet Archive - Posting 000200.txt from 2004/01

From: "David Glenn" <maestrodavidglenn@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Boehm and Albert Systems
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:14:05 -0500

--

--------- Original Message ---------

DATE: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:29:02
From: "Mike Kubit" <m.kubit@-----.net>
To: <klarinet@-----.org>
Cc:

>Dear Folks,
>
>I play a Boehm-system clarinet, and am a huge fan of Dixieland jazz. I am
>intrigued by the fact that many of my favorite clarinetists played "Albert"
>system clarinets. I read a quote by Barney Bigard saying how he preferred
>the Albert system clarinet over the Boehm, because to him it seemed to have
>a "better tone". Whereas I can't really envision how that could be (tonal
>differences between clarinets is not the subject of my inquiry in this
>post), I mention it for anecdotal reasons, as that comment sparked my
>interest in learning more about the technical differences between the
>systems.
>
>For kicks, I have been "researching" the Albert system online (...), but all
>I have been able to determine is that the Albert system has fewer keys than
>the Boehm system, and that the Albert seems to be less prevalent, at least
>in the US -- maybe even a dying breed (?)
>
>I was just wondering if anybody might be able to shed some light on the
>actual playing differences between the two systems, how long it takes a
>players to learn one over the other, how one system might facilitate or
>impede certain styles of playing over the other, differences in (alternate)
>fingering -- how they might differ in the practical application of clarinet
>playing in general, and in playing jazz in particular.
>
>My interest is sheerly academic, and I am eager to learn more. (Which is
>not to say I wouldn't mind picking up a used Albert system clarinet for
>kicks just to blow it and noodle around a bit ;-)
>
>Thank you in advance for sharing any information (and Happy New Year!)
>
>Mike
>
>Mike Kubit
>m.kubit@-----.net
>
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Leaving the mouthpiece-reed question entirely out of this because it is a very big factor of itself, the Boehm clarinet tends to have a longer section than the Oehler at the bottom of the instrument which is conical. I'm not aware of the "Albert" system being any different in the bore than the Oehler or German. Please correct me if this is not so. The tone difference in the width of the bore, as I understand it, would be only secondary to the shape of the bore (meaning cylindrical/conical and here leaving out the swellings like for example Buffet do at the barrel and upper section). The number of toneholes would be poor third place.

Someone mentioned trying to imitate the "Albert" sound by using a Boosey & Hawkes model 1010. This would probably be counterproductive as the 1010 has not only a wide bore but also much flaring at the bottom. I wonder if anybody has seriously tried this? (I mean substiting a 1010 for an Albert system.)My suggestion would be to try a so-called "Reform-Boehm". This has a similar bore to the Oehler/Berman system but with the Boehm keys. Aside from all this, I think the bigger difference can be made with the mouthpiece reed combination (which I wasn't going to start on) and of course working on one's own embouchure and imagination.
David

Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail!
http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org