Klarinet Archive - Posting 000153.txt from 2004/08

From: CBA <clarinet10001@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] Material influence on sound...one more time
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 22:37:54 -0400

OK...I am coming in late on this (re)discussion of materials and
its relationship to acoustics of clarinet playing, because I
have been moving 1100 miles to go back to school...WHEW!
BTW...It was great meeting Rebecca, Sue, Nancy, Mark, and
everyone else from the list that I am forgetting at the moment.
ClarinetFest was great, for as little of it as I got to see.

So, it's time for me to stick my head out and get it cut off and
thrown to the tigers...here goes!

As far as rubber clarinets go, I tried the Ridenour C Clarinet
and was REALLY impressed with the quality and intonation. I
still love my Patricola C, but this would be an AMAZING addition
to my clarinets, as a lot of my C clarinet jobs are in churces
where the temperature of the church changes by 20-30 degrees
between the time I open the case and the time the services are
over. I would wholeheartedly recommend them to anyone needing a
C clarinet! Also, at $1100, you can replace it once it goes
green <GRIN>.

My assertion previously about Bb mouthpieces on C clarinets is
less relative to this instrument than most I have played. I am
playing on a Clark Fobes San Francisco mouthpiece on my C and
love it, although I did have the end tenon on the mouthpiece cut
down (professionally) by 1/16 inch to even up all the oddities
about the long notes (low E, F, and F# and long B, C, and C#)
and the throat tones. Previous discussions about using the same
mouthpiece with your A, Bb, and C instruments I still think are
irrelevant, since the difference between Bb and C or Bb and A
are small, but the difference between C and A clarinets is more
pronounced. I think leaving a Bb/A mouthpiece and then having a
separate C mouthpiece is a good idea, as you can be more
tailored to the idiosyncrasies of the individual instruments.

As far as the comment goes about the material not having an
affect on the sound vibrations on a clarinet would be very
different in the mater of metal, but for a different reason than
the vibrations of the body. Everyone who is a brass player or a
sax or flute player knows that silver, gold, platinum, brass and
bronze all have very different playing response due to the
affect of the airstream against the metal. The surface of the
interior of the horn does affect the airstream, so why wouldn't
the different woods have an affect on at least the airstream? I
imagine that a solid gold clarinet or basset hound <grin> would
have a very live and vibrant sound with more of the upper
partials present than on wood instruments (probably too much
so.)

Kelly Abraham
Woodwinds - Computer Geek
Hattiesburg, MS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--- dnleeson <dnleeson@-----.net> wrote:

> Concerning the issues that Matthew Lloyd brings up about
> rubber
> clarinets being of poor quality, there is something very
> important to be said on that issue.
>
> There is little or nothing inherently inadequate with rubber
> that
> would cause it to be responsible for the problems you
> describe.
> Given proper manufacturing and care in design and assembly, a
> rubber clarinet will perform as well as one of wood. It will
> be
> in tune, play well, and last a long time. (I am not familiar
> with
> physical issues in working with hard rubber as contrasted with
> some other medium so I may be at a disadvantage here. Someone
> with more knowledge could probably cite things such as
> difficult
> in cutting and drilling hard rubber.)
>
> However, the manufacturers who made rubber clarinets in the
> past,
> chose the medium because it was inexpensive. Then, in a
> natural
> desire to reduce selling prices even further, they either did
> not
> properly manufacture the instrument or else took little care
> in
> its design and assembly. Poor workmanship added another
> dimension
> that resulted in difficulty. Had the same casual effort been
> made on a wooden clarinet, the poor results would be similar
> if
> not identical.
>
> Bottom line: if a rubber clarinet does not play well, don't
> blame
> the material of manufacture. Look at the pads, the springs,
> the
> keywork, the physical placement of the tone holes, the bore,
> the
> everything that needs to be carefully done (and is carefully
> done) on a fine instrument. That is what you are paying for
> when
> you buy a clarinet. You will pay more for a wooden clarinet
> not
> because it is an inherently better material from which one can
> make a clarinet, but because the resource is becoming more and
> more scarce (which is why Buffet wisely went to Greenline). I
> love and use only wood as a medium for my clarinets but that
> is
> because it is beautiful to my eyes, and my playing is always
> affected by working with things that are beautiful, not
> because I
> will sound differently on such instruments. When Fox built my
> basset horn, I had a choice of blackwood or cocobolo. I chose
> the latter because I find it aesthetically more pleasing.
> Don't
> ask me why. It is as if I had said "I don't like asparagus."
> If
> Fox had said, "I only make them out of hard rubber," I would
> have
> been disappointed because the aesthetics would have changed,
> not
> the sound character.
>
> If price were no object, one could have a fantastic clarinet
> made
> out of 18K solid gold. It would weigh a ton, but one could
> not
> assert that the glorious (or ugly) character of the sound
> derived
> from the gold body.
>
> Dan Leeson
> DNLeeson@-----.net

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

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