Klarinet Archive - Posting 000323.txt from 2001/07
Subj: RE: [kl] Jumping on the Bandwagon - or jumping
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 02:22:28 -0400
At 12:09 PM 7/12/01 -0600, you wrote:
>Or perhaps, to whom is this addressed, Roger? The natural response, of
>course, is "if the shoe fits, wear it." That seems pretty evasive - if you
>have a problem with me, be direct about it.
As you can see, it was not addressed to anyone. It was musings on my
part. It came into my head and I typed it down. I didn't send it until I
was sure it was not directed at anyone in particular.
I don't have a problem with you at all. Why would I? You haven't said
anything that has upset me, and I don't know you except by way of the list.
>For clarification of my own interest in this topic, I am not here to
>either a) benefit from the work you and others have done by starting a
>mouthpiece manufacturing operation, or b) publishing a paper that
>"speculates" about the nature of issues regarding mouthpieces, or gives
>measurements, et al.
My post didn't say that you are.
>I'm here to satisfy my own intellectual curiousity about the clarinet. I
>want to learn more about what is really going on with the instrument and
>my interface to it. I want to know how things can be made better. To that
>end, I will make inquiries, raise speculation about certain issues, etc.
>speculations are unfounded, fine; someone can correct me. That's part of
>the learning process. (I'm assuming that this is what the forum is for; if
>it's not, then I need to know that. But where else can one sit and have a
>chat with several respected individuals in the field, unfortunately without the
>added dimension of face-to-face interaction?)
I would guess that most people are on the list for this reason also. There
are some who are on it for other reasons though............. ; )
>In my opinion, an accomplished player could take ten mouthpieces, reeds,
>ligatures, and instruments (all of identical make/model in the same case)
>into an anechoic chamber and get very repeatable results on a spectrum
I would assert that this is a completely different issue that what we have
>...........in my view, such control and repeatability would at least
>eliminate part of the problems that people encounter with the instrument.
>Then, the variation between different models and makers of instruments,
>mouthpieces, ligatures, and reeds would allow individuals to choose a
>setup that did work best for them...without wondering as to whether they
>just got a lousy example of some particular component. (And, perhaps,
>publishing test results from such analysis would encourage manufacturers
>to evolve their design and manufacturing processes.)
Well, I think I agree with you in principal. I just don't plan to be the
person to publish that information.
>As an aside, I do know a couple of plastics engineers. If one of the
>mouthpiece makers on the list would be interested in having a dialogue
>with them regarding materials, I am willing to see if they are interested.
>Again, I'm not interested in being a mouthpiece manufacturer.
I'll bet Walter takes you up on this offer! : )
>Well, that's my stand on the subject...independent of whether the original
>message was directed at me. (If it wasn't, I look defensive, huh? Darned
>if I do, darned if I don't...)
Not at all...............
But you may have jumped on the bandwagon a bit too soon.
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org