Klarinet Archive - Posting 000206.txt from 2004/01

From: Dan Leeson <leeson0@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] American move to the Boehm system
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:47:14 -0500

Rick Campbell wrote:
> <<Can you visualized the Boehm system clarinet being relaced in America
> over a period of the next 25-50 years? I find it hard to believe that
> such a thing could happen, but it certainly did happen to the Albert
> system clarinet and I have no idea why.
>
> I'm curious about how how, when, why, and where this happened. What did
> we gain? What did we lose? -- Dan Leeson>>
>
> First, it important to inderstand that the Boehm system is a French
> development first manufactured by Buffet.
>
> The Germans tried to perfect the Simple System (Albert) 13 key clarinet
> by keeping the same fingering in the later Wurlitzer and Oehler systems.
> The Oehler has more tone holes, and some complex linkages, but is very
> rational with only 4 roller pinky keys. So today's German or Viennese
> clarinetist playing the Oehler could easily play an Albert, whereas we
> Boehm players have an awful time adapting.
>
> Some guesses about the cause for the change to Boehm:
>
> 1. American clarinet instruction was probably more strongly influenced
> by the French academies.
>
> 2. Albert system Bb clarinets require a real right hand stretch to cover
> the non-ringed tone holes, which makes them even more difficult for
> young beginners. Tough even for my adult hands. Students were often
> started on an Eb or C clarinet years ago.
>
> 3. Perhaps, too, there was an element of planned obsolescence? Everyone
> had to buy a new clarinet, which must have been great for sales. Imagine
> Prof. Harold Hill hawking the new instrument across the heartland.
>
> 4. Another claimed advantage was that Boehm clarinets were truly
> chromatic, and could play comfortably in sharp keys, thus, eliminating
> the need for the A clarinet (with a full Boehm model).
>
> A great question. I wonder if someone has written a doctoral thesis on
> this?
>

Interesting answers but lots of holes. Is there any evidence that one
system or the other has superior intonation? Is either significantly
more or less expensive to manufacture? Were mouthpiece consideratons
involved in the technological change? Were there any other
manufacturing considerations? Is it cheaper/better/easier to add keys to
one clarinet system as contrasted with another.

In other words: what on earth caused this extraordinary shift?

In what way are Albert systems not truly chromatic? That is a statement
begging to be better explained. Also I would argue that the need for A
clarinets is well fixed and unrelated to a need for chromatic playing.

C'mon people! We need some heavy thinking and serious contributions
here, or are we going to spend the rest of our lives asking about which
mouthpiece or which reed gives us the darker sound?

Dan

--
Dan Leeson
leeson0@-----.net

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