 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: crvsp
Date: 2020-12-01 23:18
I've been thinking about some clarinet products that some people might consider a sham or make false claims...
I won't name any specific brands, but some general examples are companies that claim barrels/bells make a huge difference in sound or ligatures that claim to create a "dark, rich, and warm" sound.
Any thoughts on this? I feel like to an extent such products can make some degree of difference, but I think it's mostly on a personal level; a placebo of sorts.
From personal experience, when I was trying out different barrels made of different woods, the way the manufacturer described the sound qualities of the woods impacted how I heard it, but when recorded there was no difference in sound (not a bad thing; meant I didn't have to spend money!). Which is why I came to the conclusion that these types of products make minimal differences, but it's different for everyone! Again, please let me know your thoughts.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2020-12-01 23:48
If we wanted to harshly apply strict logic and courtroom level proof, then virtually every advertiser's claims for their clarinet-related product would have to be thrown out of court as a sham. Ads don't describe so much as lure or attract attention. Everybody promises better intonation, smoother intervals, wider dynamic control, better blend, support of a more personal sound, or whatever will drawn attention to the product. It's then left up to the player to decide the attributes of the product for themselves.
There are reasons beyond advertising hype that many professionals have chosen certain equipment, for example clarinet barrels made by Moening, or Chadash, or Marc Jacobi, or Backun, or the Icon Buffet models. Few players would find the sound or response of a typical Backun "fat-boy" barrel to be exactly the same as that of a Chadash or an Icon gold. The differences are hard to put into words, which at best are only metaphors for sound, but most players would find that Backun to be less vibrant and less narrowly focused than the Chadash or Icon. The Backun would mirror the overall tendencies of Backun clarinets and the Chadash and Icon would mirror the the tendencies of the classic Buffet R13. Some players would prefer what the Backun offers, some would go for the Chadash or Icon and others would like neither. I believe these differences would show up on an oscilloscope but they would still be quite subtle and more apparent to the player than to listeners. Of course there are innumerable barrels on the market and many of them probably don't add anything of value to performance.
Recently Brad Behn released two different adjustable swivel-type barrels. He experimented with an all rubber one and a rubber one with a metal turning plate. He decided to offer both to give players a choice. The all rubber one seems to have a warmer more intimate sound and the partly metallic one is more powerful and assertive. Is this difference purely imaginary? A player could try both and come to their own conclusions. But I doubt either barrel could be described as a "sham."
Post Edited (2020-12-02 04:37)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2020-12-02 00:09
The other way to say that is.......MARKETING
or
BRANDING
There have been some products that have come and gone mostly because (I assume) they don't work and clarinetists just don't buy them. I was looking for a product recently that someone identified on the Board that was supposed to be a plaque you place between reed and mouthpiece to change the response and strength characteristics. Also there was a series of buttons (different product) that I wound up with that you place at various points along the inside surface of the reed to aid resonance (did not work for me). Neither I would guess worked as described; neither are currently available.
Ooooo, there was also an Accubore clarinet barrel that had a square shaped bore (literally square). I don't think Accubore (though they had aluminum barrels of decent repute) exists anymore.
Might be fun to list products like that others remember.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2020-12-02 01:04
It was Rovner who marketed the square barrel, and in fact revived production of this product in recent years. I've never tried one, but I think there's one in stock at the local music store.
DEG (Accubore) made very good barrels, and it's a real pity that they no longer exist - I imagine that the influx of after market barrels at the end of the 1990s had something to do with this. I know a couple of people who STILL use them after all these years... and I regret selling the "Eddie Daniels" model I had.
I don't recall DEG making any ridiculous claims in their advertising, but see ridiculous claims all the time (as does the OP).
At any rate, my take on this is - there are "aftermarket" accessories that work, some that MAY improve your result, and those that HINDER your result. It's a matter of separating one from the other, initially the difference may be obvious- but the more separating you do, the less obvious the differences become. You have to make a decision when to stop looking for improvement.
I haven't paid attention to bullshit marketing (even from companies I support) in a long time.
Post Edited (2020-12-02 01:11)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2020-12-02 03:04
Thanks for the correction on the square barrel (turns out the bore is rectangular). The Proteus Barrel......that improves intonation.........for beginners and intermediate students. ???
Maybe I should say though that I am not so cynical regarding claims by various mouthpiece makers since there are plenty of proven architectural characteristics that tend to accentuate more upper partials (brighter sound....one that projects more) or less upper partials (a "darker" sound......one that does not project as much). And honestly every mouthpiece provider should have a chance to sell their wares.
Hey, how about those metal bars that attached across the breaks between joints that increased the power of your sound. Are those things stil around? Anyone want to endorse those?
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tom H
Date: 2020-12-02 08:49
My simple response is mouthpieces obviously make a difference, as much as reeds do. Barrels, I don't think so. Ligatures-- if any difference at all it's so minimal as to be ignored.
The Most Advanced Clarinet Book--
tomheimer.ampbk.com/ Sheet Music Plus item A0.1001315, Musicnotes product no. MB0000649.
Boreal Ballad for unaccompanied clarinet-Sheet Music Plus item A0.1001314.
Musicnotes product no. MNO287475
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: crvsp
Date: 2020-12-02 12:07
Tom H wrote:
> My simple response is mouthpieces obviously make a difference,
> as much as reeds do.
Absolutely! I mostly meant barrels and ligatures.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bennett ★2017
Date: 2020-12-02 22:49
I really like my music peg - the kind with three feet. I doubt the audience hears the difference.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2020-12-03 13:42
AaaaaAAAHHHHH!
FREAK OUT!
LefreQue, c'est chic!
FREAK OUT!
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2020-12-03 13:44)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2020-12-04 04:50
The thing about the le freak whatsit is that I know TWO quite good (playing at what I'd describe as an "International professional" level) who tried them out and were convinced it was worth all the effort. Of course, I know a zillion players who don't, so TWO is a small proportion...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AndyW
Date: 2020-12-04 21:49
Any strap-on doo-dah that improves your sound on clarinet, flute AND euphonium gets my vote. lol.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2020-12-04 22:30
AndyW wrote:
> Any strap-on doo-dah that improves your sound on clarinet,
> flute AND euphonium gets my vote. lol.
Kinky ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2020-12-06 21:46
>> What did you think, Donald?>>
In the absence so far of a reply, I'll say what _I_ thought:
I was very surprised by the magnitude of the effect. You can very quickly judge that magnitude by putting an acoustic damper – a piece of rubber, say – under one end of the installed device, and then removing it, which takes a couple of seconds.
I used it in important concerts several times. I replaced the twin rubber bands by a single, larger rubber band wound twice round the top of the top joint of the instrument, holding the plates in place but allowing you to pull out at the barrel (or even take barrel and mouthpiece off) without disturbing the setup overly.
I even tried it on period instruments, reasoning that the existence of integral barrels on some boxwood instruments might have a similar effect – though of course that can't be tested.
In the end, it all felt a bit silly. I suppose I had a particularly good reed, and was concentrating on other more interactive musical considerations, so left it off. Then it seemed a bit of a bother to go back.
I imagine many professional players had the same reaction, which is why I wanted to know Donald's thoughts.
I definitely think it's worth a proper scientific investigation. (The 'explanation' given on the YouTube video is of course worthless.)
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
