Klarinet Archive - Posting 000281.txt from 2005/05
From: X-MailScanner-tom.henson@-----.com
Subj: [kl] Mouthpieces - Chedeville
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 18:33:02 -0400
I know this has been a much discussed topic on this list, and I have
found much valuable information in the archives, but I wanted to comment
on this again now that I have some first hand experience.
I purchased a vintage Charles Chedeville mouthpiece last week because I
wanted to find out for myself if these mouthpieces were really up to
their legendary status. Granted, buying a used one is really taking a
chance, but in this case I trusted the source. I have a
Buffet/Chedeville mouthpiece that came with a 1971 R-13 that I had
bought a few years back and found that it had some very special sound
qualities which I liked. Unfortunately, the condition was such that it
would have had to be refaced before I would be able to use it so I just
set it aside. I have seen others comment on the list about buying up
these old Buffets on the Chedeville blanks and having them refaced, but
from what I read in the archives, folks like Clark Fobes and Walter
Grabner seem to feel it could be a waste of your money and the end
result may not be what you had hoped for. Never-the-less, my
Buffet/Chedeville did have this wonderful sound, a resonance and depth
of sound which I had never heard before in any of the mouthpieces that I
had owned. So this stuck in the back on my mind as being one of the
qualities for which they were known to have.
When I first played on the vintage Chedeville I had bought, it
immediately brought back the same sound. The best way I can describe it,
is that it has a certain depth and resonance to the sound. It rings. The
sound produced is extremely centered and very clear. One of the things I
did not expect is that the clarion register is very easy to play,
especially anything above a top space G. The sound is so easy to produce
and it is so clear it is like ringing a bell.
This mouthpiece displays another trait of the Chedeville's and that is
very narrow side rails, tip, and thin side walls. It is my understanding
that this is part of the reason that they have the particular resonance
that they have. The rubber has a dull grey black color. I have seen many
older mouthpieces that start to turn brown, but this one is more toward
a grey black, so this must have something to do with the rubber
formulation that was used. The bottom of the mouthpiece has the white
chain pattern around it, so this may be an indication of a more recent
production from the 70's before they went out of business and were
bought by Glotin in 1976.
Going back to the playing characteristics, I found the best result when
using a V12 # 4 reed. I was told the tip measures about 1.06. I don't
know how many different tip openings that Chedeville made, or if this
one has been refaced to a more modern tip opening or not. The balance
however, with the V12 # 4 reed is just about perfect and all I could ask
for. Very quick and crisp articulation. It does exhibit more resistance
than I have seen in many modern mouthpieces, but when mated to the right
reed this is a plus and adds to it's sound.
I know that much has been said about how they used hard rod rubber and
that this is not available any more. I also know that Chris Hill and Guy
Chadash have made a mouthpiece blank that uses rod rubber and is an
attempt to finally produce an exact duplicate of the originals. Glotin
also markets the "reborn" Charles Chedeville copy. Yet, I have not seen
anyone on this list claim that these mouthpieces play as good or better
than the originals. I have not had the chance to try either of these two
brands, so I can not comment for myself.
I would think with the technology that we have today that we should be
able to get very close to the quality and sound production that these
mouthpieces are famous for, but alas I do not see that. I think Zinner
has come the closest as far as blanks are concerned. Am I missing
something here? Is it possible that producing a great mouthpiece goes
beyond just figuring out the exact rubber formulation and method of
manufacture? Beyond just using exact measurements and numbers? I would
be very interested to know just how much hand work really went into the
originals when they were produced. Perhaps, like any other brand, most
of them were just ordinary mouthpieces, and then every now and then
there was a gem. Is the myth real or not. From where I am standing,
having played one that I feel is absolutely outstanding, I would say
that it is real. What is it that those that made these mouthpieces knew
or did that we don't know or do today?
Tom Henson
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org
