 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2008-03-02 21:44
I am writing about the needle spring that is mounted on the key itself.
I wonder if Buffet will ever attend to their poor design of this spring.
It has an inherent 'sluggish' action. And this is in an area which already has enough sluggishness on account of the friction from the rubbing motion along the crowsfoot when F#/C# presses down F/C.
IMO there are several causes of the sluggishness.
1. The spring is so short for its diameter, which means that the force that needs to be applied increases unnecessarily much during the travel of the key.
2. The tip of the spring is displaced significantly from the hinge axis of the key. Most spring cradles are not that far from the axis.
3. The spring is not parallel to the key's hinge axis.
4. The tip of the spring is rubbing against timber, which has higher friction than necessary.
5. The tip can easily wear a groove in the timber, such that when the pad closes, the tip runs into a tiny wall at the end of this groove. This wear is greatly increased by using a tapered spring, with smaller contact area.
6. Unless a tiny curve is judiciously bent near the very tip of the spring, either the tip can easily dig into the timber, or the point of contact with the timber is such that the spring's effective length is even shorter.
Buffet, why? Why for so long?
I believe there was once a time when this spring was longer, and also operated against a groove in the small metal part screwed into the timber to stabilise the post. This was far better.
And why persist with unnecessarily mounting the spring on the key. Almost every other manufacturer successfully mounts the spring on the post, with a smoother and more reliable function.
Does anybody have a Buffet contact who could provide plausible answers?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2008-03-02 21:57
It makes you wonder why other makers that have taken on Buffet's design (and that's pretty much EVERY maker that makes Boehm system clarinets) have opted to go for the F#/C# spring mounted in the pillar (and there's room in the pillar for a pillar hole, and beneath the key barrel for the spring to run even if it means milling a slot for clearance), yet Buffet have stuck with this design even though it makes the F#/C# key action feel slow and spongy in comparison to the other keys which are snappy. I know they may be the oldest manufacture of the Klose-Buffet system, but there's no need to either make innovations that aren't well received or sticking firmly in the past with other designs. Find the middle ground and people will be much happier.
On Howarth clarinets the F#/C# is sprung this way (as on Buffets), though the large flanged base of the pillar has a slot in it for the spring tip to locate in, so it's not bearing against wood as on Buffets.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2008-03-02 22:13
"It makes you wonder why other makers that have taken on Buffet's design (and that's pretty much EVERY maker that makes Boehm system clarinets) have opted to go for the F#/C# spring mounted in the pillar "
I can think of only two fair answers. At some time in the last few decades:
1. They have sufficient common sense to do it sensibly.
2. They actually had a mechanical engineer associated with their production plant.
I can't really put it down to Buffet lethargy, because they were "innovative" enough to use (and now give up?) those ridiculous, sloppy pivot screws with plastic under the head, and "innovative" enough to use useless, weak, cosmetic, nickel-plated plastic reinforcing (not!!!!) rings on tenon sockets.
It certainly does not say much for Buffet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2008-03-03 00:22
Though it has to be mentioned the Schreiber-built Buffets (B10 to E11) have the F#/C# spring mounted in the pillar and have a flat on the underside of the key barrel for clearance. Since it works well on these, why not use the same idea on the French ones?
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2008-03-03 01:10
I personally hate this spring with all my heart. Every time I push the key I hate it. Conversion to a normal spring design is on my "to do" list. As it is, some quick improvements are- putting the curve in the tip of the spring and wrapping the tip in teflon tape. In this case the spring rests in the large cutout, not the tiny slot. Shorter spring length is not good, but I find this to be the lesser of 2 evils.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
