 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2001-02-22 20:20
Are Vandoren mouthpieces hard rubber or plastic?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dave Spiegelthal
Date: 2001-02-23 14:33
I rarely disagree with Gordon, but I must take issue with him here. The sound of a mouthpiece (IMHO) is entirely defined by its facing curve and interior dimensions, NOT by the material of which it is made. I have a cheapo white plastic clarinet mouthpiece which I refaced and modified internally to demonstrate my argument --- it is a beautiful-sounding mouthpiece (the second-best I have) --- it certainly doesn't sound dead! And on bass clarinet, my highly-modified Yamaha 4C plastic mouthpiece is also my #2 mouthpiece. It's like with the clarinet body materials --- manufacturers simply don't take the time and effort to make good mouthpieces out of plastic, just like they don't try to make top-notch clarinets out of plastic or hard rubber. But they certainly could if the market would justify it!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-02-23 17:38
Dave Spiegelthal wrote:
> It's like with
> the clarinet body materials --- manufacturers simply don't take
> the time and effort to make good mouthpieces out of plastic,
> just like they don't try to make top-notch clarinets out of
> plastic or hard rubber.
Hite, Pyne, Hawkins, and Fobes make excellent plastic mouthpieces. They scratch and show tooth wear much faster than hard rubber, but considering they're half price or less compared to the hard rubber models a great investment. I've been told (but have not verified) that the plastic mouthpieces have less variance out of the mold than hard rubber, and need less cleanup/facing work than their hard rubber brethren, thus contributing to their lower cost.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Anji
Date: 2001-02-24 18:42
There are several good reasons to choose injection molded plastic for any high volume production; speed of setup, lifespan of the mold, finish directly out of the mold and ease of changes.
This material is maligned because it is cheap, and doesn't weigh very much.
Glass has similar casting properties with far more handling problems during the colling step. It also has a very smooth inner surface...I wonder if the fiddle factor is what makes the hard rod rubber stuff so prized?
As Dave's stuff readily demonstrates; when you spend time adjusting and play testing, you have a higher incidence of really good results.
When you pull 2-3 thousand blanks a day, the TQM manual may allow for very few dimensional checks.
As to the materials contributing to the sound, "It ain't the meat, it's the motion", or to paraphrase Pops, "If it ain't inya, ya can't blow it out."
Maybe the plastic stuff would gain cachet if we called it "Advanced composite" and put a weighted ring around the bottom.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Pinner
Date: 2001-02-25 06:53
The Selmer c85 series mouthpieces are plastic as opposed to the normal selmers which are rubber and they are brighter and louder if anything.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-02-25 22:51
My C85 120 is hard rubber, not plastic. Perhaps they changed material at some time in the past? Of course, their web page says "The C85 Series (hard rubber)" right there.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2001-02-26 01:51
I think the material probably has some relevance.
Flick a standard flute head (without the body attached). It rings. Flick a sterling silver head. It makes a dull "thuck" sound, like lead. So some acoustic property is very different indeed. Flute players all acknowledge that a well made silver head plays more resoponsively than a (well made) cupro-nickel one.
Flick a crystal wine glass. It rings. Flick a platic wine glass. "Thuck!" They are certainly different.
Perhaps the ringing acoustic property is better for clarinet mouthpieces. I think hard rubber is somewhere between ABS and crystal.
I wonder if anybody has experimented with modern hard plastics, such as that used for snap-shut buckles, and "Corelle" or "Duraware" used for plastic plates. Some modern plastics ring like metal.
ABS seems nore cheesy than hard rubber. That is not a very scientific term but means lack of dimensional stability when subject to forces. Now the precise cut of a mouthpiece seems to be very important. What happens then to an ABS mouthpiecs when subject to the slapping forces of the reed.
Cost of manufacturer. Couldn't a modern CNC machine shape a mouthpiece to perfection in a matter of say a minute?
Note that the above are merely ponderings, not pronouncements of any great wisdom!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-02-26 02:01
Gordon (NZ) wrote:
> I think the material probably has some relevance.
I'd really like to see some proof someday. What we think may have absolutely nothing to do with reality.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Anji
Date: 2001-02-27 17:41
As I begin reading through Benade's text, some more clear distinctions about instruments come to light.
We obviously carry some preformed opinions about what this instrument should and shouldn't have when laying down payment.
What we DON'T have is a measurable standard for evaluation.
As an amatuer woodworker, I'm enamored by the finish, grain and heft of nice Mpingo/Ebony/Cocobolo and Rosewood clarinets.
As a player, I can say that a well set up rubber or plastic horn can sound really good (expecially when the player knows what to do with it). Even synthetic reeds (the heart and soul of the instrument) are gaining acceptance.
The same applies to mouthpieces. No matter how you slice it, it is still a piece of rubber/plastic/glass/advanced aerospace composite with a hole down the middle.
It's all about the final adjustments.
Speaking this morning with my buddy Earl of Littleton, he chimed in on the same subject this morning.
***********
*Jimmy Dorsey came through Denver to play a few shows and stopped off in the shop for some mouthpiece mods. It happened to be the same day as a baseball game. Earl had bet heavily on the game and didn't pay too much attention to who the customer was.
"I need some bevelling of the sides, take a little out of the baffle and give me a crooked facing. I need it by five o-clock." JD
"No problem, put it on the shelf and I'll have it for you this afternoon." Earl
Earl became embroiled in the game and neglected the task.
At five, Jimmy strides in (Earl finally recognized him in his band leader Zoot), picks the mouthpiece up off the shelf and fixes to play.
"It's everything I ever dreamed of... perfect!" JD
Earl charged him $80, after all Jimmy could afford it.
***********************
If we don't have a critical ear on this stuff, we will forever fall prey to hype. Play testing is the only real arbitration to quality. When you must spend an additional $300-$1000 to get a brand new professional instrument dialed in, what do you suppose you have paid for?
I'm all for making the instrument relatively easy to play. Its just that huge dollars can be spent on changes without audible results.
Get a disciplined assistant to listen to your playing with any new gizmo.
If they can't hear it, neither will your audience.
anji
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
