 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2007-09-15 16:19
With the term 'blown out' in mind, how do you reckon a 'blown out' instrument would compare to one that hasn't been played in?
When playing an older instrument, is it easy to tell being 'blown out' from being in a state of disrepair (ie. leaking like a sieve, but only just playable), and will it play any better having had the full works done to it to bring it into top notch form?
And what specific things define an instrument as being 'blown out'? Is it in the condition of the instrument as a whole, or just the condition of bore? Or a botched DIY repair job to make it half playable, or years of poor maintainance and accumulation of grease and dirt in toneholes? Or is it something else - if so, what?
I've got two Bb Series 9 full Boehms - the newer of the two is my regular clarinet which I stripped down and fully rebuilt (it's now airtight and plays great), and I bought an older one which I've done nothing to yet (and plan to turn this one around to be my main clarinet) - it's out of adjustment and the pads are in very poor shape (as well as duff venting and it leaks like a sieve), but it plays well enough over the entire range for me to hear it has the superior tone than the newer one, and therefore a lot of potential. I can only assume having the full works done to it will make this one hard to beat. And with the term 'blown out' in mind again, this one is certainly far from it.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2007-09-15 16:21)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: redwine
Date: 2007-09-15 16:49
Hello,
I think "blown out" is mostly a crazy notion. I could see where the bore of the barrel could get damaged by someone's acidic saliva, but for that to reach the bore of an instrument seems improbable. There are always exceptions, I suppose, but it would seem that simply getting a different barrel would improve any old or often played instrument that doesn't play like it used to. Also, perhaps the wood drying out could contribute to this, so a good oiling (the Dr's new oil sounds interesting) might revitalize an instrument.
Ben Redwine, DMA
owner, RJ Music Group
Assistant Professor, The Catholic University of America
Selmer Paris artist
www.rjmusicgroup.com
www.redwinejazz.com
www.reedwizard.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2007-09-15 17:11
It has been said that some top tier pros change(d) their instruments every 6 years, because they no longer found the instrument to play as when it was younger.
As Ben said, I also think that experimenting with a different (newer) barrel can dramatically change the focus and/or resonance of the instrument.
Case in point - I own a 96xxx R13 which I felt was losing the ring ("ping") which I remembered it once had. Replacing the original R13 barrel with another from an instrument slightly newer had a big effect on the focus and response. The instrument just felt better.
It took many weeks of playing and I really tried to be honest and judge if there was a distinct difference in the quality and response with the newer barrel, or if I was just trying to hear something that wasn't there.
IMO there was a big enough sound difference to conclude that a different barrel, in this case, brought the instrument back to where I felt it originally was...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LarryBocaner ★2017
Date: 2007-09-15 17:28
I've always thought "blown out" had more to do with erosion of the bore diameter from years of swabbing than it had anything to do with "blowing."
Prudent care with using a non-abrasive swab -- preferably silk, never chamois -- and swabbing deliberately will add years to the useful life of your clarinet. Swabbing from the top down also tends to chamfer the top edge bore of your barrel, so I recommend swabbing bell-first.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-09-15 17:29
I have been told that my clarinets have an oblong bore- taller than wide- and that this is from the 'water trail' that runs down the horn.
the widening causes wide 12ths, just as a wider bore causes wide 12ths... as I was told by a few people.
Trying a brand new version of the same model clarinets I have I found... the exact same problems of pitch- clearly the water trail was not the problem.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2007-09-15 18:37
"I have been told that my clarinets have an oblong bore- taller than wide- and that this is from the 'water trail' that runs down the horn.
the widening causes wide 12ths, just as a wider bore causes wide 12ths... as I was told by a few people.
Trying a brand new version of the same model clarinets I have I found... the exact same problems of pitch- clearly the water trail was not the problem."
The talk of water trails to me is like old wives' tales in that I don't think there's much truth in it (in that it doesn't hold much water!)
True, water (in the form of condensation) will run down the lowest point of the bore once the droplets become unstable, though it won't erode the bore as it isn't an abrasive or corrosive action (and your clarinet's bore should be sufficiently oiled so that condensation forms droplets on the surface).
Condensation will accumulate the entire diameter of the bore, mostly in the mouthpiece, barrel and top joint - though depending on the temperature it will extend to cover the lower joint in cold weather and only the upper part of the top joint in warmer weather.
And using the pullthrough is the best way of distributing the moisture more evenly in the bore with several passings through of it (and not pulled through mega quickly either as this will not only remove less condensation, but runs the risk of the pullthrough getting snagged on the speaker tube) and the majority will be absorbed by the pullthrough provided it's of an absorbant material to begin with (such as soft cotton), and is kept clean and not used for wiping sockets with.
As for the bore being oval, well this is pretty normal and is to be expected with the way timber used in woodwind manufacturing naturally shrinks and expands through the effects of humidity.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2007-09-15 20:06
> The talk of water trails to me is like old wives' tales in that I don't think
> there's much truth in it (in that it doesn't hold much water!)
There are quite a number of wooden houses here that are well over 500 years old. Withstood the elements, generations, everything. And that is comparably soft wood (mostly pine). So really, come on, water trail...yech.
I agree that there may be a sensation of "blown out". We change, and the instrument probably changes a bit too. After some time the two paths of development have diverged too much and it's time for a re-orientation. Doesn't mean that the instrument is objectively at the end of its life - it has just become too incompatible. Just as we step up from a 2.5 reed to a 4ish. It'd be more honest to say "I don't like it any more as much as I did six years ago" than to blame it on "it's blown out".
Do artists retire, or are they replaced because they're "blown out"? ![[tongue]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie6.gif)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Synonymous Botch
Date: 2007-09-15 20:15
I believe that some players are VERY sensitive to the resistance pattern of their instruments. They can detect, with some credible repetition, that a given instrument has a resistance pattern outside their acceptable range...
That being said, if a clarinet plays within +/- 5 cents throughout the range of absolute pitch AND adjacent notes are no more than 10 cents "spread" - you likely have a playable instrument.
Most of the clarinets I have resurrected suffered from toneholes that were either occluded or overly fraised (in an attempt to make pitch adjustments).
I suspect that if an instrument is presented in brightly shining keywork, half of the consideration has been made prior to playing a single note.
But what do I know?
Me, I'll just keeping buying Ridenour products that unsuspecting snobs in training have decide against; for "artistic" considerations.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: pelo_ensortijado
Date: 2007-09-15 21:58
wow. the stuff that mr naylor wrote really putted a lot of things together for me!
GREAT Kilo!!!! tnx for the link!!! superb!!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-09-16 13:37
One thing I wonder about the 'blown out' thing is, would it make any difference if the instrument had not been played?
I examined a 160 year old Buffet (either maple or boxwood) and the bore was wavey as the wood shrank more is one spot than the next- I doubt the waves were even possible to make on the machines of the day.
Now looking at a modern clarinet, it is made of wood and wood changes shape over time. If we took 200 clarinets that were made this month and played only 100, would we find that all 200 feel 'blown out' after 10 years? Or would the 100 unused ones feel 'new'?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: C2thew
Date: 2007-09-16 16:02
could it be that the mouthpieces that were once good have slightly warped, causing the player to think it's the instrument and not the mouthpiece?
interesting read.
Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. they are but improved means to an unimproved end, an end which was already but too easy to arrive as railroads lead to Boston to New York
-Walden; Henry Thoreau
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2007-09-16 16:32
C2thew wrote:
> could it be that the mouthpieces that were once good have
> slightly warped, causing the player to think it's the
> instrument and not the mouthpiece?
No, generally the players who have or claim to have instruments "blow out" are working professionals - not clueless newbies.
The phenomena is real to the people involved; the cause is not certain - it could be physical changes to the instrument, or psychological or physiological changes to the player. It doesn't mean the instrument is worthless, just that it no longer suits the performer. "Blown out" might not be the best descriptive set of words to use ... but it doesn't mean that all claims are to be dismissed out of hand. That would be just as scientific as accepting all claims.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris Hill
Date: 2007-09-19 00:13
I've had instruments I've owned measured, and over time, the bore in the upper joint has gotten larger, and the playing characteristics changed. (The resistance is less and the pitch rises, particularly in the 12ths from F-C, E-B and D-A.) I carefully dry the instrument after I play, but for whatever reason (I've heard several theories) the bore has changed. Recently, two friends of mine have had bore replacements done in the upper half of the upper joint. Both of these instruments played quite well after this; the washed-out sound and bad pitch disappeared.
Chris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2007-09-19 03:15
My clarinets, ranging in age from thirty to ninety years old, are all fine -- however, I'm blown out at age forty-nine...........
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-09-19 03:45
"Recently, two friends of mine have had bore replacements done in the upper half of the upper joint."
The "upper half" only?? Wouln't this cause a bump where the new wood meets the old wood?? Even if they are flush in the begining they would likely continue to change (and in different ways) over time.
I had a barrel once that had a 2 part bore. Over only a few months the wood on the top and bottom had changed in very different ways even though they started out the same and were made of the same kind of wood- I didn't even know it was a 2 part bore until the wood started to warp.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2007-09-19 05:16
With five Buffet clarinets ranging from 1912 to 2005, none seem to be "blown out". Both the 1912 and the 1921 one piece instruments are still great as are the 1971, 1998, and 2005 models, each with a slightly different character. The plating on the 2005 clarinet is allready showing wear but it plays fine while the older instruments show no plating wear.
A 1984 Loree oboe I have is a little bit eroded on the lower bore but still sounds sweeter than my 2006 Loree, which is slowly getting better. The old one has a lot of plating wear but the 2006 one is mechanically slightly better.
After many years of playing and looking down clarinet bores, I've never seen one that seemed to be "blown out".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2007-09-19 16:37
How in the world do you replace a bore? To increase a bore size, maybe, but to reduce the upper half bore of a joint...my head is spinning.
Clarinet Redux
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2007-09-19 17:57
The bore is reamed out oversize and a lining with an undersized bore is fitted. Once the glue has gone off, the toneholes are drilled through and the bore is reamed up to size, then the toneholes are undercut.
This can be hidden with metal tenon caps so you don't see the join when looking at the end of the tenon.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2007-09-19 22:17
I guess wood wind instruments have to be among the most vulnerable to deterioration in the orchestra. I don't have a clue, but if a Pro says his horn is blown out I'd think he had a point.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2007-09-19 22:19
If someone else convinces him his clarinet is blown out, they get commission when he buys a new one from them!
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: A Brady
Date: 2007-10-06 17:07
I would like to put in a word on this subject.
My 1967 vintage R-13 was consistently playing quite sharp, and the resistance level was getting lower, resulting in an increasingly unfocused, "tubby" sound.
I took the instrument to Guy Chadash, who replaced the bore in the upper joint with a hard rubber bore, restoring the dimensions to their original Buffet specifications; this was after Guy had measured the interior dimensions at the top of my upper joint, and found them to be very expanded.
There was an immediate and dramatic improvement in the tone and resistance of the instrument. Steve Barta of the Baltimore Symphony was there also on that day having his Chadash clarinets regulated, and, on trying my instrument after the procedure, exclaimed "amazing!" and stated that he would have bought the instrument on the spot if he had been looking for a vintage Buffet.
I also recently had Guy finish the overhaul on this same instrument, and I can truly say it is the best it has ever played.
Not all clarinets are the same, but in my case, there was a dramatic improvement from the bore replacement.
Alan Brady
AB
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2007-10-07 18:41
Maybe this has to do with oil content. I swear that when I oil mine it comes back sounding slightly brighter. I guess eventually the natural oil content of the wood could get out-of-whack...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2007-10-07 23:24
"I took the instrument to Guy Chadash, who replaced the bore in the upper joint with a hard rubber bore, restoring the dimensions to their original Buffet specifications; this was after Guy had measured the interior dimensions at the top of my upper joint, and found them to be very expanded.
There was an immediate and dramatic improvement in the tone and resistance of the instrument. "
My question is, was the improvement doe to one or the other or both of these, and I suppose we will never know:
1. The change to the bore.
2. The re-undercutting of the tone holes.
I suspect that at least some of 'blowout' is because mineral deposits and lint have built up over the surface of the undercutting of the tone holes (as alluded to in the original post). The mineral deposits can be very hard, not unlike stalactite material, and not touched by normal cleaning procedures.
Without special equipment, this is build-up is pretty well impossible to see, and very few technicians would have the fraising tools and the confidence/know-how to include re-fraising in an overhaul.
I do my best with scraping &/or brushing, even wire brushing with gun brushes at times, but not re-fraising as such. To do this also runs some risk of altering an instrument from what a player has become used to, and being castigated for it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-10-08 01:53
what about the fact that he replaced it with rubber?? we've had this argument before about the material.
and I will ask my question again- What if the instrument is not played? Wood still changes over time. Would a 10yr old played and unplayed instrument both sound 'blown out'?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2007-10-08 02:14
"I believe that some players are VERY sensitive to the resistance pattern of their instruments. They can detect, with some credible repetition, that a given instrument has a resistance pattern outside their acceptable range..."
------------------------------------
I'd assume that most professional players are that sensitive - comes with the territory.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: A Brady
Date: 2007-10-08 02:53
It's true that the tone holes were recut of necessity in the upper joint, so this could certainly be a factor along with the new bore.
As to the rubber material, Tom Ridenour goes into great detail on his website about his view that rubber is actually superior to wood, both acoustically and in terms of stability. When I asked Guy about maintenance of the new bore, he told me that it was now the most stable part of my instrument, and would likely outlast the rest of the horn. I have great respect for Mr Ridenour and Mr Chadash, with their comprehensive acoustic and technical knowledge of the instrument, and have been very pleased with their contributions to the art of the clarinet over the years.
At any rate, whether purely scientific or a bit more abstract, the improvement in this instrument continues to make me very happy.
AB
AB
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-10-08 03:02
So I am asking if at least part of your satisfaction is related to the material and not just the shape of the bore.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: A Brady
Date: 2007-10-08 03:19
That is certainly possible.
I really believe that it is a holistic phenomena, in other words, a combination of several factors, all optimized to a very high degree, but I have to believe that the bore restoration is a major factor in the improvement.
I hope to try some of Tom Ridenour's rubber instruments at some point, to experience the feel of an all-rubber clarinet first-hand. I played on a Ridenour mouthpiece for many years and was very pleased with it.
AB
AB
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: pelo_ensortijado
Date: 2007-10-08 11:56
for those who hasn't read the papers that mr naylor wrote.
DO IT!
its A LOT of very good info on this subject, and is worth reading, even if its very long and very detailed!!
for all swedes on the bb. im in the process of translating it to swedish, got about 4 pages left. so if you hasn't read it you can allways mail me and i will send you the swedish copy when i'm finished!! :D
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2007-10-08 12:19
"I hope to try some of Tom Ridenour's rubber instruments at some point, to experience the feel of an all-rubber clarinet first-hand."
You could always try a vintage Chinese "Lark" brand. Hard rubber. :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2007-10-08 21:47
HAHAHA! Then again, there are now loads of ebonite bodied CSOs as well as the notoriously dire Lark and Hsinghai ones of old.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Firebird
Date: 2008-07-23 15:06
Just to reopen this thread, it seems that this so called 'blown out' phenomena applies not just to wooden instruments. Today a trumpeter came to our workshop sked for a change of bell, because his tutor, a local symphony associate principal trumpeter, claims that his instrument is 'dead'. The player in question chose to change the bell of the instrument instead of buying a new one, as his tutor recommended.
Any thoughts on this?
Chan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2008-07-23 15:13
Firebird wrote:
> Any thoughts on this?
Utter nonsense, if you ask me.
Sometimes I wonder whether those teachers are testing the waters on what hoops their students are willing to jump through. A bell! I could understand if he suggested to re-do the valves and all that, but the bell? The mind boggles.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Firebird
Date: 2008-07-23 15:16
The curious thing is brass instruments get blown out too?! Our brass tech recommended instead a chemical wash and a lead pipe change, and we shall see the result as soon as it it done.
Chan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2008-07-23 16:18
Certainly the bell of a trumpet is vibrating when the instrument is played. I remember visiting the Callichio factory years back and they made some bells that were dead..... there were people that liked it. If this wasn't blown out I don't what would be. Re clarinets I take it that there are large and smaller bore clarinets. If a smaller bore clarinet is blown out and the bore is too big just hand it over to someone who likes a bigger bore instrument. If bore size is the determining factor then 'blown out' is a misnomer.
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2008-07-23 23:58
"The curious thing is brass instruments get blown out too?!"
Strange, I have heard that metal instruments IMPROVE with age.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: IanH
Date: 2008-07-24 07:02
This is an interesting one. I've just been talking about my R13s. They were made in 1967, the owner pottered around on the Bb for a while, then she put them on a shelf until I found out about them seven years ago. The 'A' particularly, after cleaning the greyness off the keys was an 'as new' instrument. The term 'mint' certainly applies here. I repadded, oiled them, and they play more 'blown in' than any new instrument I've tried before or since. The 'A' particularly, considering it was never played, had an instant resonsive tone and feel similar to my 1977 S1 A. Better actually! So, did the wood mature with age, or was the wood of a better quality then, or what is the reason? Certainly nothing to do with being 'blown in' in this situation. Slightly off topic; The case cover was an original canvas one. It was stiff as a board and the case hadn't been opened in all those years. I had to cut it off the case!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
