 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-09-13 17:46
Would there be a demand for a large bore French style clarinet like the Centered Tone in today's market that's dominated by small bore clarinets?
Although there are large bore clarinets such as the Peter Eaton Elite and large bore Rossi on the market (both which are based on the B&H 1010 which have a large bore but relatively small toneholes), there isn't as far as I'm aware the equivalent of a large bore Selmer (with large toneholes) or even a Leblanc Dynamic H being made by any of the big makers or any small firms.
The nearest new clarinets to a CT were the .590 bore Bundys, but I don't think they're still being made and they were never destined as pro level instruments.
But if such an instrument was available, would it be well received or would it be considered resurrecting a long deceased corpse?
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Peacock
Date: 2011-09-13 18:03
Chris: I guess the Howarth S1 or S2 isn't large bore enough for you? They have a nominal dimension of 14.75 mm, as opposed to the more standard 14.65mm of their S3 model. They also have a big taper: I measured an S1 recently as 15.2mm at the top of the top joint (0.598"). But if you're looking for a CT clone, presumably you want something more nearly cylindrical? (but do you want it in tune as well?)
Howarths tell me they don't make their clarinets any more as they just couldn't compete with Buffet on price. I think it's a great pity, as they have a distinct character. The S1/S2 make a big sound - a bit 1010-like but with a normal mouthpiece. And they were beautifully made. It would be nice if they started being produced again.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-09-13 18:11
Chris P wrote:
> Would there be a demand for a large bore French style clarinet
> like the Centered Tone in today's market that's dominated by
> small bore clarinets?
>
> But if such an instrument was available, would it be well
> received or would it be considered resurrecting a long deceased
> corpse?
>
The CT still has a very large following and it's getting harder to find ones in decent condition at reasonable prices. I suspect that if Selmer were to reissue the CT it would likely sell pretty well. Unfortunately I'm not sure if the same would be true if another company released a perfect copy under a different name. Brand name recognition still counts for far more than it should.
FWIW I prefer my own CT over pretty much every new clarinet I've played.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-09-13 18:43
Seeing as Selmer launched their Reference series saxes a while ago to offer players something different to the SA80II and SIII, it would be nice if they did a similar thing with their clarinets and offered Reference 54 Bb and A clarinets based on the large bore/tonehole configuration as the CT. I realise they already have a sizeable lineup of clarinet models, but they're all narrow bore instruments.
The keywork would most likely be a maximum of 18 keys 6 rings (as that's what seems to the the standard nowadays - no more options of articulated G#, forked Bb or low Eb) with a detachable LH Ab/Eb lever like the Signature.
I don't think Leblanc would ever return to making an equivalent of the Dynamic H the way things have gone with them, but I could be wrong.
As much as I like Howarth clarinets, I do still prefer the old large bore Selmers as that's what I've got used to - especially the CT.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-09-13 18:58
Chris P wrote:
> I don't think Leblanc would ever return to making an equivalent
> of the Dynamic H the way things have gone with them, but I
> could be wrong.
>
I had thought that the Dynamic H / Pete Fountain / Big Easy clarinet was a pretty good seller for Leblanc. There always seemed to be a decent amount of discussion about them on the various jazz forums at any rate. I have an older Leblanc Dynamique that is a pretty goot player. It is a little easier to play in tune than the CT but it can't shout like the CT can. Still a pretty nice clarinet though.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2011-09-13 22:10
I'm curious - having started my serious clarinet playing at, I think, the very end of the Series 9 and 9* eras (mid to late '60s). How did the CT models play differently? How does a bore that large affect the instrument's characteristics? Never having played on an instrument outside the R13/Selmer 10G sphere, and not being really sure when I listen to older recordings who is playing on what, I've never really been sure about this (I apologize in advance if this ends up diverting your original intent, but it seems appropriate).
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2011-09-13 22:10
David Krakauer plays a Selmer Privilege, which has a 14.60 mm bore. Believe me, nobody plays louder than he does.
I believe the Series 9 (not 9*) had the CT bore.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-09-14 11:50
I'll answer in a different way.
The Wurlitzers have varied their bore dimensions over the years and the mid '80s had featured a larger bore than had been the case before. Michelle Zukovski said it best when in her analysis stated that these instruments did not have the focus of their predecessors. Wurlitzer did bring the bore back down some (hybridized it a bit actually) when the general response was not too favorable across the board.
I personally believe (having played 1010s and Oehler system Wurlitzers circa '84) that larger bore instruments are like severely undercut tone hole clarinets. Granted, they give you a flexibility of timbre production, but you lose buckets of focus which in turn translates to projection and solidity of sound.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2011-09-14 14:51
The contemporary Wurlitzer R-Bs are quite large bore. Each instrument is slightly different, so giving dimensions is not helpful. But I will say that the ones I've measured have been comperable to my early Fritz's, which are comparable in size to the 1010s, CTs, Pete Fountain model, et al.
As for a "loss of focus"....no way. All of the instruments I've played from Neustadt over the past year have been focused, though also with a potentially huge, flexible sound. [Disclaimer: I sell Wurlitzers].
As to Chris's OP---a brilliant idea to expland the Reference series to clarinets. I have a Reference 54 tenor which is beautiful. What would you say, Chris, to not only a Ref 54 clarinet (CT), but ALSO a Ref 36 (K series)? I've never played a K series, but what I miss more than anything is that old Benny and Artie sound from the late 30s--before the CT. Is there a significant difference between the K Series bore and the CT?
Someone mentioned the Pete Fountain/Big Easy on this thread too--I've done some web digging for that one, and it seems it's been discontinued. Is that true?
Eric
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-09-14 15:28
MarlboroughMan wrote:
> Someone mentioned the Pete Fountain/Big Easy on this thread
> too--I've done some web digging for that one, and it seems it's
> been discontinued. Is that true?
>
>
> Eric
>
Sadly the answer is yes. They were discontinued in 2010 and Leblanc isn't currently producing any professional level clarinets. Too bad considering that this was one of the only mass produced clarinets you could still buy off the shelf with the articulated C# and 7th ring.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevesklar
Date: 2011-09-14 16:25
"but what I miss more than anything is that old Benny and Artie sound from the late 30s--before the CT. Is there a significant difference between the K Series bore and the CT?"
I'll check my 30's model versus the CT for a comparison.
==========
Stephen Sklar
My YouTube Channel of Clarinet Information
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: CocoboloKid
Date: 2011-09-14 16:26
Sadly, Leblanc is producing NOTHING but the Bliss clarinets these days. I hope they manage to pull something together soon...
Perhaps resurrecting the Big Easy would be a good first step! :P
(I'd personally love to see them bring back the 90s Ridenour-designed lineup...the Opus/Concerto/Infinite/Eternite/Ambiance/Esprit/Sonata/LX2000, but that's just me. OT, I know. Sorry!)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JJAlbrecht
Date: 2011-09-14 18:52
From a message I got from Leblanc earlier this year, they have some more instruments in the pipeline, which ought to be out inb the coming year. I have a feeling they will be pro-level instruments.
Jeff
“Everyone discovers their own way of destroying themselves, and some people choose the clarinet.” Kalman Opperman, 1919-2010
"A drummer is a musician's best friend."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-09-14 18:59
JJAlbrecht wrote:
> From a message I got from Leblanc earlier this year, they have
> some more instruments in the pipeline, which ought to be out
> inb the coming year. I have a feeling they will be pro-level
> instruments.
>
> Jeff
>
That would be good news. In a thread a few weeks ago there was some mention about a possible new version of the Concerto.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2011-09-17 01:57
Would a revived "Centered Tone" sell? Probably yes . . . but not in numbers that the business folks would want to see. There's a nostalgic aspect to a CT. It may be no different than an unnamed N-Series Selmer, but the CT is still more highly sought after.
Some people love antique furniture and eagerly buy it . . . but that's not what you see today's companies cranking out.
P.S. - I love my R13. I also love my Centered Tone. Vive la différence!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-09-17 06:30
Fred wrote:
> Would a revived "Centered Tone" sell? Probably yes . . . but
> not in numbers that the business folks would want to see.
Very true. The real issue would be how much would people be willing to pay for a brand new CT. I think that Selmer could probably market a re-issued CT as being "The Jazz Clarinet" as that is what the majority of people associate the vintage CT's fair or not (I consider mine to be a general purpose instrument). This is essentially the way Leblanc marketed the Dynamic/Pete Fountain/Big Easy. If we use the prices of Selmer Paris's current offerings as a guideline then it is probably reasonable to estimate that the approximate selling price of a re-issued CT would be around $4000. IIRC the Big Easy was listed for around $3500 and apparently wasn't selling very well since Leblanc discontinued it.
I guess the question might be whether people who weren't eager to buy a Leblanc Big Easy for $3500 would be more willing to buy a new Selmer CT for ~$4000?
Thoughts?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2011-09-17 11:06
I've often wondered why models such as the Centered Tone aren't revived on a limited-edition basis--a small batch made every now and then. Brass instruments, including some from Conn-Selmer marques, have been marketed this way for some time; why not clarinets?
I think the easy availability of vintage large-cylindrical-bore instruments may have a lot to do with the lack of interest by manufacturers in producing new ones. While a vintage Centered Tone is not hard to come by, large-bore vintage alternatives from the likes of Conn and Boosey & Hawkes are plentiful and extremely inexpensive. Until the current oversupply of large-bore vintage instruments is depleted, there's little incentive for many players to pony up for a brand new instrument.
P. S. I love my Ridenour Lyrique 576BC. I also love my Boosey & Hawkes 8-10. Vive la différence!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-09-17 11:38
There is a lot of danger in marketing or branding any instrument as being 'Jazz' or 'Classical' specific as that may influence or alienate potential buyers. Considering large bore Selmers were played by both symphonic as well a Jazz players shows they weren't confined to one specific playing style.
As Selmer only made the one model of clarinet at a particular point in time back then (with overlaps as new models were introduced and the previous model was being discontinued) it wouldn't have been wise to make instruments designed and marketed for a specific style and they had endorsees in both Classical and Jazz for universal appeal. It was only in the '60s when they offered more than one model at the same time (Series 9 and 9*) so players had more choice as to which models they prefer from the one company.
MkVI saxes (and others before and after) were never marketed as a Jazz specific instrument, only they were the choice of many Jazz players even though players outside Jazz also played them. Again it was a single model they were making at a certain point in time and very recently they offered more than one model than only the SA80II for differing tastes to suit all players.
As the word 'Jazz' is viewed with suspicion and contempt by certain quarters, it's best not to market any clarinet as such if you want universal appeal. Find a happy medium so as not to alienate anyone.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BartHx
Date: 2011-09-17 15:51
Metal instruments would not be too difficult to revive given that the entire process from alloy to finished product can be precisely duplicated. However given the discussions that have been on this board relative to the quality of currently available wood, I wonder if it would even be possible to duplicate an older model, pro level clarinet. I have a large bore Selmer 55 and a CT. I love both of them. But, given the density and tight grain of the wood, I would be surprised to see a modern version that could match them. There is even a detectable difference in the wood between my CT and my 9. That's not to say that you can't make a good quality instrument with currently available wood (my 10 is my primary instrument), but a "duplicate" of an older model would not likely be the same as the original. On the other hand, I have a friend who is a hard-core R13 person who would love to get his hands on my Selmer 55. However, having only one, I don't know if it's the model or the particular instrument.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jeroen
Date: 2011-12-12 13:38
MarlboroughMan wrote:
> What would you say, Chris, to not only a Ref 54 clarinet (CT), but ALSO a
> Ref 36 (K series)? I've never played a K series, but what I miss more than
> anything is that old Benny and Artie sound from the late 30s--before the CT. > Is there a significant difference between the K Series bore and the CT?
Yes, there is a lot of difference, at least between the instruments I own: a K Series RI (Radio Improved) and a CT. Compared to the CT the RI has clearly a bigger bore. Soundwise the RI is superior over the CT: bigger tone, more volume, more dynamics, more ability to colour the sound, more of everything. The pro's of the CT are the more centered tone and easier intonation.
Sadly the RI's keywork is not plated, resulting in dull looking keys and the keywork operates not that smooth as on the CT.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-12-12 13:45
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2011-12-12 13:54)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lizholt
Date: 2012-10-14 23:09
I've got an R Centred Tone, 1959. It's serial number is R8510, and there is a star engraved after the Centred Tone inscription on the upper joint.
I haven't seen a CT* before, and wondered if anyone knows what the * depicts. I saw an old advert for a Series 9 and 9* on the clarinetperfection website, and this said that the 9 was aimed at the Jazz player, while the 9* was aimed at the orchestral player. Do you think this could be a similar distinction with the CT and CT*?
[ edited - GBK ]
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SchlockRod
Date: 2012-10-15 10:01
I read that the * in the serial no. is not like the model no. "9*" but denotes a joint body that was replaced by the factory, either after sale, or during the build for some reason. I also read that some people feel that some of these horns actually play better.
Can anyone verify this?
My Q-series CT also has a * with the S/N on the top joint.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-10-15 10:44
I've seen them with the * or ** above the serial number (denoting official top joint transplants), but never on the logo.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lizholt
Date: 2012-10-16 20:26
The * on this CT isn't actually on the serial number, it's on the end of the 'Centred Tone' model inscription, on the top front of the upper joint. It's in the same approximate area that the * is on the 9*.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-10-16 23:27
I've got a set of Series 9*s that aren't even stamped as such. The star is usually below the Series 9 logo on them and on the barrel, but these have 'A' and 'Bb' on their barrels, top joints and bells and also have consecutive serial numbers stamped on every section (A - V2**1 and Bb - V2**2). Both beautiful instruments which were once owned by Gino Cioffi in 1967.
Selmer didn't stamp all Series 9 or 9*s with the model logo - some just carried the Selmer logo (with 'Depose' and 'France' on the top joint). You can tell what they are by the hexagonal speaker bush and bell shape. The Series 9* has undercut toneholes and a smaller bore than the regular Series 9.
Maybe this CT had a top joint transplant and someone stamped the * by the CT logo instead of above the serial number. But it's unique, so that will set it apart from others.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lizholt
Date: 2012-10-17 14:04
Thanks Chris. I've tried to upload a photo, but somehow this site / my computer won't let me. I've tried the 'add attachments' button, and found the right photo and 'uploaded' it, but it just doesn't appear.
I've searched all the images I can find for a similarly marked CT, but I think you're right, it's unique! Probably, as you've said, someone just put the * stamp by the 'Centred Tone' inscription rather than by the serial number on the back. I have another CT, 1958, which I planned to keep for myself, just as it's closer to my age!. But now I'm wondering whether I'm keeping / selling the right ones!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2012-10-18 15:12
Buffet's been doing it (copying their older self).
Bill Fogle
Ellsworth, Maine
(formerly Washington, DC)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
