Advertising and Web Hosting on Woodwind.Org!

Klarinet Archive - Posting 000194.txt from 2003/10

From: LeonardoFuks <>
Subj: Re: [kl] Macho Reed Selection, or Why I use a Number 37
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 09:23:51 -0400

I agree with Roger.
During my MsC Thesis on cl reed quality, I did carefull dimensional and
strength measurements on several reeds. At that time (1990), at least for
Vandoren reeds, the design of reeds ranging from 2.5 up to 4 was almost
exactly the same. The industrial classification of strength was probably
done after the reed was shaped and then submited to a mechanical bending test.
According to the stiffness of the reed, probably dry during the test, the
final product was classified and grouped for packing. Interestingly, some
reeds from the same box (3.5) presented similar stiffness while dry but
quite different values when soaked, corresponding to contrasting playing
qualities as expected.

At 08:54 2003-10-08 +0100, you wrote:
>Reeds which start off as nominally "hard" tend to have closer fibres
>than those which start of as "soft". This makes a difference, even
>when the "hard" reed is thinned down. I think quite a few players
>find this particularly important on the bass clarinet, on which coarse-fibred
>reeds are notably liable to squeak.
>Roger S,
>n message <000601c38d37$e16583b0$
> > I don't understand this pseudo-macho complex for hard reeds. It seems
> > (to me at least) as if players through the world almost boast of using a
> > number 37 reed, but then taking so much off it and adapting it that (a)
> > it's probably down to a number 2 and (b) the careful design of the reed
> > maker is lost. What is wrong with buying the strength you want to end up
> > with?
> >
> >

Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc.

     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact