Klarinet Archive - Posting 000095.txt from 2008/07

From: "Daniel Leeson" <dnleeson@-----.net>
Subj: RE: [kl] Once again, a C clarinet issue
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:17:23 -0400

I am of the opinion that the character of any particular clarinet is very
much a function of its length. As such, the ca. 1800 clarinet pitches would
be as different from each other as they are in today's clarinet pitches.

After all, the science of acoustics has not changed in the last 200+ years.

Dan Leeson
dnleeson@-----.net
SKYPE: dnleeson.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Rasmussen [mailto:Michael@-----.us]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 6:05 PM
To: klarinet@-----.org
Subject: Re: [kl] Once again, a C clarinet issue

On Wednesday 09 July 2008 14:54:35 Sean Osborn wrote:
> 4) Though I still think it is important to respect the composer's
> wishes with regards to instrumentation, composers from 1750-1850
> (approx.) are more likely to have requested an instrument for the key
> the music is in than for the sound of said instrument, I feel.

Isn't the difference between a circa 1800 clarinet of any type and
contemporary instruments great enough to make the distinction a moot point?

--
Michael Rasmussen, Portland Oregon
Be appropriate && Follow your curiosity
http://www.patch.com/words/
The fortune cookie says:
All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the
parts
you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get
them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a
hammer.
-- IBM maintenance manual, 1925

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

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