 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Cosmicjello
Date: 2007-02-19 02:49
I received the instrument from one of my local music stores, as a previous employee I stressed that they seriously take at look during NAMM this year. They were only able to get 1 instrument and I've had the opportunity to give it a blow in both an orchestral and band setting, in addition to my own practice.
Overall I found the instrument to be a joy to play. It was quite even in timbre throughout the range of the instrument and spoke easily and clearly in all registers and dynamic levels (with 1 exception noted below). The tone was focused and with a good amount of ring. I didn't feel any significant amount of tonal distortion when playing at a strong ff or in the upper octaves. And going over the break was the most fluid I've felt on any instruments I've played.
I personally liked the feel and shape of the keys, especially the curvature of the LH c#/g# key.
The only minor issues I had with the instrument were:
Pitch was consistently 15 cents sharp across the board.
-I was only able to use the 65 mm barrel as the 66mm cocobolo barrel was cracked when it arrived at the music store. Even when I switch setups from my normal Livengood mouthpiece to my Smith 1+ mouthpiece.
The low G was noticeably stuffy compared to the rest of the instrument, although it was probably due to the adjustment screw not being properly adjusted for the venting (it can happen in shipping).
There is a lot of wasted space INSIDE the backpack case. It allows room for only the additional barrel. All reeds, backup mouthpieces, tuners and accessories have to be stored in exterior pockets. Which isn't a big deal for some musicians but I like the ability to store my back up mouthpiece and reeds in a relatively safe interior space.
I agree with everyone else that the tacky plastic thumb rest screw has got to go.
So the questions I have to ask myself are, "Is it worth $1800 smackers?", "Would I recommend it to others?" and "How does it stack up to it's competitors?"
At a few hundred to several thousands less that some others on the market, I would definitely recommend it to others. It's worth every penny imo.
How does it stack up? I also took out on loan a Yamaha SEV, CSV and an R13 (my norm is an older Yamaha YCL-81 Custom that I got back in college for dirt cheap!)
All the instruments played well however, I felt the CSV while it had great intonation, was on the bright side of the tonal spectrum, the Buffet had a lovely tone and response but lost some of it's "umph" and focus in the upper registers and high dynamics, I liked the SEV only the I liked the tone of the Cadenza a smidge better.
(btw they all sounded and responded better with the Backun barrel, triple blind tested against my oboist wife)
So comparing the costs and attributes, if I were in the market for a new instrument, I would have picked the Cadenza. It's my guesstimate that if the 66mm barrel hadn't been cracked, the pitch would have been much improved, as so it was when I pulled out a long ways.
Even if you're not in the market, or if you've been a brand loyal person, I suggest you give it a shot. With the more that $700 you'd save just if you got an R-13 with nickel keys, you could get a dandy Backun bell! But since I'm not in the market, they'll all go back and I have no doubt that the Cadenza will not last long on the shelf.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2007-02-19 14:37
I agree that it's really worth the price. Of the instruments I've play-tested and owned lately the Cadenza really had the best overall tone and feel.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
