 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: fuzzystradjazz
Date: 2009-03-15 00:22
Hello again - I have a second "stupid" question for the day... (sorry, but both of these questions have been bothering me a lot lately).
With the dawn of spring-like afternoons/evenings beginning, and the temperatures boarding on hitting the 50 degree mark - a question of wood clarinets and temperatures/humidity has once again crept into my mind. I'd love to go outside to play, but I know the temp isn't quite there yet.
The humidity today is a whopping 7% and the temperature reached all the way up into the upper 40s!! I'd say this is going to be pretty standard until some time in June.
While I know this topic has been discussed to the point of being nauseating - I'm not sure if there has ever been evidence offered as to the following factors:
Temperature/humidty combination tolerances.
Old instruments vs new instruments (and how temp/hum effect them).
Direct sunlight - does it create a 10-20 degree difference between the sunny side of the clarinet, and the shady side - like it would on something like fabric or paint; or does the hollow body/wood material make a difference?
Please understand that I'm not opening this can of worms to instigate the standard theories or physics debates - I'm asking instead to find out whether or not any manufacturer or repairshop, etc., has ever taken (say) 100 old clarinets with 100 clarinetists and played in various temperature/humidity ranges, and mapped out failure/cracking rates. How about for new clarinets?
I've never found any such research, and thought maybe it is just in some obscure location. You'd think this type of thinking would be a great investment for manufacturer's - once one stipulated its tolerances, then other companies would do so in order to stay competitive - it could be quite a selling point. I was thinking that perhaps even Buffett might have done a study such as this before introducing its newer outdoor wood options?
I would think the market could drive this, and I would think the musician's unions would want this too - as it could mean a substantially elongated performance season for some groups; or allow some venues to hold concerts they might not have held otherwise.
Thanks!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kilo
Date: 2009-03-15 02:18
I think one problem with this approach (if I understand you correctly) would be that every tree, log, and billet is unique. The stresses and tensions within each piece of wood and how they are resolved over time with exposure to heat, humidity, and other factors would make it difficult to make generalizations. It probably makes more sense (and higher profits) for Buffet to promote their Green Lines.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2009-03-15 03:57
This, I think, is a different kind of question from the one you asked about reed break-in. The only consequence of breaking in reeds with unneeded procedures is that time is wasted. The consequence of not breaking in reeds, if the players who tout its importance are correct, will be shorter life for your reeds, which in any case aren't very long-lasting or expensive in the grand scheme of things.
The consequence of playing a clarinet in cold conditions, if it cracks, is that an otherwise excellent and expensive instrument may be damaged permanently, depending on where the crack is. For that reason, most players prefer to err on the side of caution rather than push the limits and risk that no relationship exists between an instrument's temperature and its potential for cracking. I've never heard of any such experiment as you describe, and a sampling of even 100 instruments that don't crack might do little to comfort many players about the risk. Most players just take it as axiomatic that cracking comes from a bad combination of structural flaws in the wood from which the instrument is made, quick changes of temperature and dryness. It's just easier to be safe when an instrument worth thousands of dollars is involved. There's no real upside to daring fate and playing outdoors in 50-degree weather. Oboe and bassoon players, of course, have even greater investments in their instruments, which are vulnerable to cracking as much as clarinets are.
As to the musicians' union's possible interest in such research, I think their concern is more for the players' comfort than it is for the safety of their instruments.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fuzzystradjazz
Date: 2009-03-15 06:55
Thank you for your response.
You are correct in your statement, but my thoughts were this:
Pretend that company A and company B divided a load of lumber - same load from the same stock and everything - you could even cut the stock in half and hand company A the left half and company B the right half.
Wouldn't it be interesting to know whether one company's consistency had fewer failures (cracks) than the other? The way wood is aged, along with how it is handled, etc., has a lot to do with its long term quality. I know some master woodworkers who chop their own live wood, then age/dry it over the years in a controlled manner (usually taking between five and ten years to dry it). This treatment varies somewhat from one woodworker to the next, and the results can vary greatly. To the point that a different result is produced from similar stock. I would love to know if company A consistently had a wider range of temperatures (on average), etc.
Right now, we have only a theory that it doesn't matter where you get the clarinet from - it has the same properties as it would from any other company; or there are too many variables to consider.
Even something like automobiles or computers are very inconsistent - yet we demand these companies test their products into the ground to ensure our safety/return on investment. I just think it would be really cool to have this "average" idea of testing to empower us to choose more wisely based on the characteristics we desire - right now we're sorta buying the "car" without knowing an estimated gas mileage.
Personally, I would be much more likely to buy a clarinet which consistently averaged lower pre-breakage temperatures since I live in a cold climate, but often play outdoors. So it would be really neat to see a "gas mileage" chart on each brand/make of clarinet to help me decide which brand/style will be most likely to meet my needs. Sorta like the operating specs available for all electronics - a little chart showing the acceptable operating temperatures.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fuzzystradjazz
Date: 2009-03-15 07:14
kdk,
Thanks for your thoughtful response...
The first sentence of your second paragraph, "The consequences of playing a clarinet in cold conditions, if it cracks ...expensive instrument may be damaged permanently" - is precisely why it would be nice for the manufactures or someone to perform this testing for us. Wouldn't it be nice to have a company even go so far as to develop new processes in wood selection/growth/aging/handling/production to the point they offered a warranty "Guaranteed not to break if played in >15% humidity at >55 degrees F, or we will repair/replace the clarinet at our option!" Then company B would offer something similar, or suffer the consequences in potentially lost business.
The point isn't necessarily to get all the way to a warranty/guarantee of performance as much as it is to simply give us a tool to use in comparing various brands/models for the traits we want/need - WITHOUT having to rely 100% on "Well, I think 65 degrees is the limit" "Well, I think 60 degrees is the limit" etc. With no way to actually determine the real number. Afterall, who of us will offer our good instruments to push this test? None.
I figure if we consumers have demanded that car manufactures randomly crash perfectly good cars right off the assembly line, then it shouldn't be so shocking to ask a woodwind manufacturer to do some testing on the body (sans keys) of a clarinet in production, should it? I don't blame the manufacturers for this, because if I were a manufacture and the customers weren't making this demand of me, I sure wouldn't do it. It just seems to me that we (as consumers) don't hold wood instrument manufacturers to the same standards that we hold other high-end manufacturers to.
A few years ago I tried six new clarinets - three from company B and three from company L - I had to send them all back. I tried again, and had the same problem. As a result, I've ended up stocking up on lots of old clarinets - I just haven't been able to find the same quality/tone/feel that I was used to. Even the other professionals that were helping me try to pick one were disgusted with the quality of these new instruments. We had three independent players try each instrument; and the results were equally horrifying. Perhaps this was just happenstance and bad luck, but it added fuel to this type of soft-critical-thinking about what we demand from our manufacturers as woodwind customers; compared to the standards we demand from other (in many cases not-so-important) consumables.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2009-03-15 15:03
"A few years ago I tried six new clarinets - three from company B and three from company L - I had to send them all back. I tried again, and had the same problem. As a result, I've ended up stocking up on lots of old clarinets - I just haven't been able to find the same quality/tone/feel that I was used to. Even the other professionals that were helping me try to pick one were disgusted with the quality of these new instruments. We had three independent players try each instrument; and the results were equally horrifying. Perhaps this was just happenstance and bad luck, but it added fuel to this type of soft-critical-thinking about what we demand from our manufacturers as woodwind customers; compared to the standards we demand from other (in many cases not-so-important) consumables."
You obviously don't believe in "blow-out." (Different topic, lots of previous discussion...) :-)
I think lots of clarinetists share your feelings about modern clarinets, even top models from top makers. I wonder if oboists and bassoonists (or for that matter flutists, even though they're dealing today with mostly metal instruments) feel the same way. Those instruments are made on order, one at a time with lots more hand work and adjustment than clarinets, which are largely produced on assembly lines and only adjusted, to the extent they are at all, at (or near) the end of the process. The custom approach that applies to the other woodwinds results in much higher instrument prices and long wait times, which I suspect most clarinetists wouldn't tolerate simply because they're used to being able to order six at a time to try and either accept or reject. It used to be you could even walk into a music store and find them in stock. I don't know how many music stores have ever stocked Heckel bassoons or Loree oboes.
Most clarinet players accept that once you buy an instrument, you're going to need to have more hand work done to it to make it play really well. And while they complain about it a great deal, they accept that the alternative is probably a market more like the ones for Loree and Heckel - put in an order, wait 16 months and spend northward of $5 or $6 thousand (for an oboe).
And even after all of that, one irony is that most of my oboe friends are more worried about cracking their instruments (and have actually had it happen to them) than I do.
I'm not sure if I'm disputing or supporting you with all this, and it's in some ways only tangential to the issue of cracking and testing for crack resistance. We can demand what we like, but we need to be prepared to pay for it in one way or another.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2009-03-15 18:40
NOT a stupid question when you have to have a cracked clarinet repaired. The results of my crack (! sorry !) experience and some research into wood stress is summarized in the companion thread:
Drastic humidity changes, ...
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
