Klarinet Archive - Posting 000010.txt from 2007/08

From: X-BakerBotts-MailScanner-tom.henson@-----.com
Subj: RE: [kl] Re: Clarinet Manufacture - Differences between French and German - Wood is a "Living" Material
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:13:50 -0400

Tim,

I agree with you that the patent is not related to our clarinet
discussion, except that I referenced this to show that using a "tap"
test is an accepted form of testing materials for use on a musical
instrument, thus showing that this is a valid form of testing that some
makers use. It's not just something I made up. I am not arguing the
results of this testing method, only that it is used.

Regarding the fact that a wooden clarinet body has a lot of mass, I am
not saying that tapping a clarinet will produce a musical tone, but it
will produce an audible sound.

Obviously, hard wood is capable of making a sound when hit or we would
not have marimbas, castanets, or claves as part of our musical
instruments which all use hard wood as the main sounding board.

Have you ever accidentally hit two bells of a clarinet together? The
resultant ticking or clicking sound is similar in character to hitting
two claves sticks together and this is all I am saying that a tap test
is. How the maker then infers the result of this sound to how well a
clarinet will resonate in a finished state I do not know. It may be the
lack of this audible sound that would be of more importance than the
sound itself. Catherine may hit of something when she said it may be
possible to detect defects in the wood and grain structure by tap
testing.

Tom Henson

<< Tim Roberts said: I actually tapped my clarinet in many places with
several different types of tools at last weeks rehearsal as an
experiment. Besides the "tick" of the impact, there was no "resonance",
and I still think it is folly to claim that a seasoned professional
could detect any. There's just too much mass. >>

------------------------------------------------------------------