 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: maxnorman
Date: 2012-03-17 22:49
Hello All,
I've got a reed that I've adjusted to perfection. It's a Vandoren V12, 4.5 strength, that seems to be just about perfect. Is there any way I can duplicated this reed?
Best,
Max
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2012-03-17 23:01
You can copy the dimensions but that won't guarantee a similar result since the grain pattern will be different on each and every piece of cane. Basically to copy the reed you need to take thickness measurements at many points on the reed and then work on a new reed until the measurements match up. There are several (rather expensive) measuring tools sold to help facilitate this.
Post Edited (2012-03-17 23:02)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2012-03-17 23:35
As the owner of more than one of the measuring tools Steve referred to, I can tell you that duplicating dimensions will not duplicate a reed. As a matter of fact, nearly every reed I measure of a given brand and model measures exactly the same as its box-mates, yet the variation among reeds from the same box are legend. When you adjust a reed, you're really compensating for grain and density irregularities by making harder, more dense areas thinner. Since it is *irregularities* you're adjusting for, there really isn't a one-cut-fits-all set of dimensions that will ensure a perfect reed.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2012-03-18 16:00
When I first began making my own reeds, which I no longer do by the way, I measured all my best reeds and kept a log table of those measurment. Then I used the average, something like 9 at the tip, than at certian points going toward the bark, 15, 23 35, 45 etc. Those are not the actual measurements just an example. Then I proceeded to make my reeds to those measurements and rarely was succesful in making a really good reed. I would have to make several adjustment on each of my home made reeds to make them play well, but at least it was a place to start. I was very succseful over time but just got tired of making them and after Rico came out with their "professional" brands and sent me several boxes to try over a few years. It was a lot quicker and less frustrating to open a box of "good" reeds, break them in, make small adjustments in my break in process which I had to do with my hand made reeds too. You can "reed" my break in process on my reed pages on my website if you're interested, works for me. ESP eddiesclarinet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rtmyth
Date: 2012-03-18 16:05
At one time Ridenour offered this service as an adjunct to his reed manufacturing business, but problems with his equipment forced him to quit.
richard smith
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2012-03-18 16:22
The only way to accurately duplicate a reed......is to take a picture.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2012-03-19 16:00
Check out www.reedual.com This is a neat little machine which can copy the profile of a reed very accurately and is easy to use. I'm getting good results from my machine and Terry Dolan is very helpful.
Jerry
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2012-03-20 07:27
I've made hundreds of handmade reeds. Cane quality was the major factor. It's hard to make all of the reeds play well, even with a reed dual tool, although this machine does speed up the process.
Whenever my local store gets in an order I go down and test this group of boxes. I'll buy 2 boxes and if they sound really good I will buy a dozen boxes, because the cane probably came from the same location. I've had really good results having the person call you when new Vandoren reeds come in.
It's still my opinion that all of the tools ever made, even at places like my old stomping grounds, Rico, Prestini, Vandoren, all of these companies with good cutting tools, the cane quality is your only hope. Reed duals, splitters, and sanding, whatever, won't make a 2 year old piece of cane into a Grand Concert level reed. Actually how long do GC reeds play. Hopefully 2 or 3 reeds will get you 3 weeks out of a box. The old Moree reeds went for 2 months for me. That was really wonderful stuff. Once my suit against Rico is over I can get dirty here and spill my guts! I had an offer and turned it down. Lets see what happens sometime in the next 2 weeks. Maybe more offers or the lawyer will set up a court date. The back log of cases is around 8 weeks.
Out here in southern California I found a place that has cane growing for 4 or 5 years. The normal growing time is about 2 years. Well I'm having a blast right now cutting 5 year old cane and I am resting it for another year. The cane show strong fibers and under a microscope inside the bark has very thick dense walls.
This is the kind of cane you really need to make good, long lasting, thick fibers, and stiff plants that don't bend. More on that later; after the lawsuit.
Designer of - Vintage 1940 Cicero Mouthpieces and the La Vecchia mouthpieces
Yamaha Artist 2015
Post Edited (2012-03-23 10:09)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Simon Aldrich
Date: 2012-03-21 01:33
Max - I've made reeds on four different machines; a Reedual, a modified Reedual (with an adjustable model reading-head), a Greg James machine and the recent Uhl Technik RPM 68 (http://www.uhl-technik.de/en/pi3/pi7/pd1.html).
The single lesson learned from making reeds on these different machines is that there is no ideal nor perfect set of measurements for a reed, only an ideal density of cane to suit your mouthpiece.
You mentioned that you feel you have adjusted a reed to perfection and that you would like to copy it. My experience suggests that a copy will come close to the original in playing characteristics only if the copy is made on a blank whose density is identical to that of your perfect model. Other reed-makers' experiences I know suggest the same thing.
Reeds often come off the Reedual with measurements nothing close to the model. I have made reeds on the Reedual with ludicrously out-of-whack measurements, yet sometimes they would play wonderfully, sometimes much better than a copy of a reed with "ideal" measurements.
If the cane density is optimal for vibrating on your mouthpiece, the reed will play, more or less. If the cane density is not optimal, neither ideal measurements nor a perfect copy of a good reed will make it play.
Simon
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2012-03-21 06:08
Simon Aldrich wrote:
> If the cane density is optimal for vibrating on your
> mouthpiece, the reed will play, more or less. If the cane
> density is not optimal, neither ideal measurements nor a
> perfect copy of a good reed will make it play.
Simon, at the risk of hijacking Max's original thread, which wasn't about making reeds from scratch, I'm curious. I've never read anything in the articles I've seen about making reeds from cane tubes or even from pre-cut blanks, about cane density. Do the companies that supply cane for reed making grade the cane in any way? Can you buy cane according to its density? I've always bought, adjusted and used commercial reeds, but I wonder (and your post brought the thought into the foreground for me) whether players who make their own reeds have any choice in the density of the cane they start with, or if it's just a matter of scraping until the reed either vibrates or lands in the trash can.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Simon Aldrich
Date: 2012-03-21 15:29
Karl wrote:
"I've never read anything in the articles I've seen about making reeds from cane tubes or even from pre-cut blanks, about cane density."
It is true that when discussing reed-making, cane density is often left out of the equation. When I was at Northwestern University, one of the classes I took was reed-making. The accent was on how to accurately copy a model reed. Cane density was not mentioned. However time and time again, an accurate copy with theoretically good measurements would barely produce a sound, while copies with theoretically absurd measurements would play well.
The propensity for the Reedual to produce a copy with whacky measurements lead me to realize that its all about cane density, not ideal measurement duplication.
One summer at National Repertory Orchestra in Colorado I was making my own reeds. This was before I had cottoned on to the importance and consequence of cane density.
One night I produced a reed that was, in theory hopelessly lopsided (8 on the left, 2 on the right). It shouldn't have worked, but it played great. Because the measurements were not kosher (and at that stage in life I was more absorbed by the process than the result) I clipped the tip off to remake the reed, hopefully with "good" measurements this time. The result was a reed with lopsided, "bad" measurements again. The reed's measurements were askew, this time in reverse. The reed was overly thin on the left. I clipped the tip and remade the reed about 5 more times, each time getting cockeyed measurements that should not have worked, all the while ignoring the fact that the reed played and responded well. The reed ended up quite short but I could ignore for only so long the fact that it played well. I played it for all the concerts for the rest of the summer (1st in Galanta, Scheherazade, Beethoven 6, Peter and the Wolf, etc).
"Do the companies that supply cane for reed making grade the cane in any way? Can you buy cane according to its density?"
Perhaps you can now but when I made reeds you could not but cane according to its density, which is why I stopped making my own reeds; the variation in cane density made the whole process hopelessly hit-and-miss. You could do almost anything to a blank of good density and it would play. Conversely, you could make a perfect copy of an ideal model and you would have an aneurysm and give yourself a double hernia trying to produce a sound.
"I wonder whether players who make their own reeds have any choice in the density of the cane they start with"
In the past, less so. Perhaps things have changed. The notion of cane density is starting to appear on the radar of reed-making machine manufacturers. Witness the cane-density gauge that Uhl makes:
http://www.uhl-technik.de/en/pi6/pd25.html
For me there has always been a schism between what the commercial reed-makers know about cane density and clarinetists' awareness of the importance of cane density. Not that companies keep it a secret however.
About 15 years ago, one of the Van Dorens was in Montreal and gave a reed presentation. He explained that there is no difference in *thickness* between a 2 1/2 strength reed and a 5 strength reed (a fact one can confirm by measuring the reed on a micrometer like a Perfectareed). He explained that the phenomenon that determines a reed's strength is the cane's density. He described the density gauge Vandoren uses. If you look at the butt of a Vandoren or Rico reed you will see a horizontal band of "teeth marks". These are marks left by a spring gauge that presses into the butt of the reed, measuring the cane's density. The resulting density measurement determines the number strength the reed is assigned.
One of the implications of the cane's density being the most important determining factor in its playability is the questionableness of scraping down hard reeds to a point of playability. One can thin a reed but one can't change that cane's intrinsic density.
Back to your question of "I wonder whether players who make their own reeds have any choice in the density of the cane they start with".
One technique that was less unsuccessful than making reeds from blanks of wildly varying density was to buy commercial reeds of a particular strength (and therefore of a particular cane density), clip off the tip and to remake the reed with one's own measurements.
As an afterthought, in his reed presentation Mr. Van Doren mentioned that when clarinetists did tours of Vandoren's reed-making building, they would often dust off the old joke, "I'd like to meet the person who puts the one good reed in every box of VanDorens". Mr. Van Doren explained that this phenomenon (only one good reed in a box) was not imagined. He explained that of the 10 reeds in a box, Vandoren puts 8 reeds of average density (for the reed's corresponding strength number), one reed of lesser density and one reed of greater density, "to try and please everyone". The "one good reed", in his opinion (and now my opinion) was the reed of lesser density, the reed that one might describe as the live one.
Simon
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2012-03-21 16:49
Simon Aldrich wrote:
> About 15 years ago, one of the Van Dorens was in Montreal and
> gave a reed presentation. He explained that there is no
> difference in *thickness* between a 2 1/2 strength reed and a 5
> strength reed (a fact one can confirm by measuring the reed on
> a micrometer like a Perfectareed). He explained that the
> phenomenon that determines a reed's strength is the cane's
> density.
Yes, this has by now been written about enough to be, I imagine, pretty well-known. I've confirmed it myself any number of times with a PerfectaReed gauge. It was part of what prompted my question.
> He described the density gauge Vandoren uses. If you
> look at the butt of a Vandoren or Rico reed you will see a
> horizontal band of "teeth marks". These are marks left by a
> spring gauge that presses into the butt of the reed, measuring
> the cane's density. The resulting density measurement
> determines the number strength the reed is assigned.
>
So, I wonder, then, why the companies that sell tube cane and pre-cut blanks don't use similar equipment and sort their products just as the commercial reed makers do. If there's any profitability in selling the cane itself to individual players I'd think that density grading would make the cane or blanks much more attractive, since at least some of the hit-and-miss you mention would be eliminated. And the market must be infinitely stronger among double reed players. None (I don't think) of the oboists or bassoonists I know use commercially made reeds - they either make their own or buy them from a local player who makes them by hand and sells them.
> One of the implications of the cane's density being the most
> important determining factor in its playability is the
> questionableness of scraping down hard reeds to a point of
> playability. One can thin a reed but one can't change that
> cane's intrinsic density.
>
I've been belatedly coming to the same conclusion recently.
>
> ...of the 10 reeds in a box, Vandoren puts 8 reeds
> of average density (for the reed's corresponding strength
> number), one reed of lesser density and one reed of greater
> density, "to try and please everyone". The "one good reed", in
> his opinion (and now my opinion) was the reed of lesser
> density, the reed that one might describe as the live one.
>
I'm a little surprised that the density gauges are that precise. I always chalked this up to the presence of normal (bell-curved) variation among reeds determined to be a particular density. So, if you're playing on equipment that's well attuned to the manufacturer's "average density" reeds at a given strength, you should be getting closer to 8 good reeds in the box?
Thanks.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Simon Aldrich
Date: 2012-03-21 18:35
"So, I wonder, then, why the companies that sell tube cane and pre-cut blanks don't use similar equipment and sort their products just as the commercial reed makers do."
I don't know about the state of things at the moment, but in the last few decades there were not ready-for-business companies, per se, that sold cane and blanks. When I made reeds, obtaining blanks and tube cane was a hazy, abstruse, almost underground affair. Nielsen Woodwinds outside Chicago would sometimes have blanks, the source of which was never clear. Then one would get a tip that Weiner in NY had tube cane so you would order that until it ran out. Again, the source of the cane was uncertain.
I remember contacting people (not companies) in France for their cane. I recall one long, obsequious call where the only way to convince a Madame Ghys (sp?) on the other end of the line to sell me her tube cane was to essentially massage it out of her tube by tube.
Obtaining cane seemed as much a part of the voodoo of making reeds as making the reeds themselves. The quality or density of the cane was not a consideration compared with the challenge of getting your hands on the stuff!
"If there's any profitability in selling the cane itself to individual players I'd think that density grading would make the cane or blanks much more attractive"
I suspect there is no profitability is selling cane to individuals. Hence there is no motivation to grade the density of the cane on the part of the growers. With the reported increase in demand for cane, coupled with the reported scrambling of reed-making companies to obtain cane from whatever sources they can, it must be a lot easier and more profitable for the grower to sell all his cane to a company, rather than deal with piecemeal and unsystematic sales to individuals.
"None (I don't think) of the oboists or bassoonists I know use commercially made reeds"
On a somewhat related topic, Guy Legere launched his line of synthetic bassoon reeds this past March 17th, in Montreal. During recent rehearsals for Mahler 10 with my orchestra, the principal bassoon was playing in a break. He sounded like himself. I noticed visually (not aurally) that he was trying a Legere bassoon reed. You could not immediately tell he was playing a synthetic reed.
That gives one pause. In his blog about the recent bassoon audition for the Cleveland Orchestra, the Assistant Principal Bassoonist of that orchestra, Barrick Stees, wrote about the auditioners, "a lot of them sounded like great players just having a bad day. Lots of reed trouble, missed attacks, etc."
All those untold thousands of hours of practicing and thousands of dollars in everyone's expenses, to have your reed run interference on what you are trying to do.
"So, if you're playing on equipment that's well attuned to the manufacturer's "average density" reeds at a given strength, you should be getting closer to 8 good reeds in the box?"
Up until now we have been discussing one aspect of cane, albeit the most important aspect; its density. We have not touched on other factors which adversely affect a reed (intrusive xylem and phloem near the tip and on the sides of the reed that inhibit vibration, immature cane rushed to market, cane improperly cured, personal reed storage that encourages warping and loss of contact with the mpc rails, rushed reed break-in procedures that result in, among other things, warpage, etc. etc). Those are all factors as well.
But speaking of getting 8 good reeds in a box, I have colleagues that get a high ratio of functional reeds with Rico Reserve. Anecdotally, Rico appears to be producing more "good reeds" per box than VanDoren these days.
Simon
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dileep Gangolli
Date: 2012-03-22 00:21
I agree with these tenets that have been mentioned on this thread:
> cane and xylem density is the most important criteria (even more important than the look of the cane.
> breaking in the new reed is very important. Saliva will have a very different effect on the cane than just water due to the digestive properties of human saliva.
> It is very hard to create exact duplicates of a model reed on machinery available to the home reed maker. That does not mean you can't make a great reed at home - just that it would be hard to make 10 in a row that measure the same with a dial indicator.
> I think the synthetic guys are onto something and these reeds will eventually be accepted by the entire clarinet community.
> Competition is great for the consumer. The big strides in quality made by Rico will push Vandoren and others to raise the bar. This should make reeds cheaper in the long run since there will be more good reeds in a box than in the past. Thank you Rico for creating this horse race.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Garth Libre
Date: 2012-03-22 10:37
I have experienced this when building bows made from bamboo for my Indian fighter kites. In order for these manoeverable kites to fly straight without a tail, one must get the bow to be near perfect left side compared to right. I stumbled upon using a kitchen scale to measure how many grams of force it takes to bend one half of the bow. This caused almost all my bows to fly straight in a dive several hundred feet without coming out of the dive. Previous attempts to get a bow balanced involved putting it on graph paper while flexed and mapping the shape of the bow and also visually estimating thickness of the wood taper left to right. I now eyeball the taper, test it on graph paper but rely on the kitchen scale force test. I suspect the force test is what is needed in reed making. In the end those people who build their bows from fiberglass or carbon fiber are on the right track to consistency just as Legere is in making consistent reeds.
Garth, 305-981-4705. garthlibre@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Simon Aldrich
Date: 2012-03-22 15:15
Attachment: pic_5.JPG (43k)
"I stumbled upon using a kitchen scale to measure how many grams of force it takes to bend one half of the bow."
Interesting that you intuitively discovered how to measure the density of cane. Similar to your method, Uhl's cane-density meter (or reed-strength gauge) bends the reed and measures the force expended.
http://www.uhl-technik.de/rsg20/index.html
I attached a jpg of the gauge in action.
Simon
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
