 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: lagatitalila
Date: 2016-04-20 23:28
So I've been digging around these forums, reading various topics on barrels, but I've yet to find a thread that compiles opinions on the many types of aftermarket barrels out there.
As a student musician, poverty and firm satisfaction with my kit kept me from exploring barrels. I only did the mouthpiece thing long enough to find my perfect mouthpiece, which is an original model Richard Hawkins.
But these days, I'm very curious about barrels. Basically, I'd like to know what you play and why you play it. What have you tried, how long did you stick with it, and why did you move on? I'm also curious about any passing impressions on barrels you've trialled but not purchased, how large a sample you trialled, and how big a difference you felt between different barrels of the same model. Do you find certain brands to be more consistent than others?
How many of you rate intonation over tone production? Tone production over ease of playing? Would you rather play a barrel that feels slightly off as long as it played perfectly in tune, or would you rather play a barrel that feels comfortable but has a few discrepancies intonation-wise?
And finally, sweet spots: Do you find that all barrels you've played have an obvious sweet spot? Have you ever played on something that sounded/felt unsatisfactory only to find the sweet spot and change how you felt about the barrel completely?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2016-04-20 23:47
If you are happy with your kit why screw it all up by changing just for the sake of it (especially if you are hard up)
You will get as many different opinions on this as there are contributors to the board.
GAS (Gear Aquisition Syndrome) is a deadly, time consuming and VERY expensive disease.
Just concentrate on practice and improving on what you have got.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ClarinettyBetty
Date: 2016-04-21 00:27
I've tried different barrels on my R13. The ICON in every type of metal, the Chadash, and a friend's Backun. The don't come close to my Moennig. Every horn plays better if I switch to my Moennig barrel. It's the "feel," although I can't describe it. It feels less resistant but does not create a honky, open sound. The high register sings and the low register feels warm.
ICON: they felt like my stock barrel. I tried really hard to notice a difference, but couldn't find one. I did not have the time to spend an hour with the tuner on them, so maybe it's more a tuning difference than a feel?
Chadash: I liked it more than the ICONs but less than the Moennig.
Backun: I felt like I was playing mezzo piano no matter how much air I put through the horn. It's just not "me." Tuning was fine, but it's not the sound I am looking for.
As far as your question about tuning tendencies, I'd rather have a set-up that's in tune AND feels comfortable. I have that with my Gigliotti mouthpiece, Moennig barrel, and R13. Before that, my M13 mouthpiece worked fine, but I wanted something a bit more freeblowing. I'll try any new thing out there once, but unless it makes my setup better, I pass.
-----------------------
Eb: 1972 Buffet BC20
Bb: Selmer Paris Presence
A: Selmer Paris Presence
Bass: 1977 LeBlanc
https://gentrywoodwinds.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2016-04-21 01:44
Rule 1 of clarinet playing (paraphrased from Keith Stein): Equipment that plays out of tune is worthless, no matter how good it may be otherwise.
I have tried many kinds of barrels. In general, on my R13 a reverse taper (Moennig or Chadash) tunes and sounds better than the stock cylindrical barrel. In my opinion, odd shapes (square bore, bulging outside) make no difference. The only things that count are the volume and taper of the bore.
By far the best way to get a good barrel is to go to a maker and have it adjusted to play best with your mouthpiece, clarinet and way of blowing. No one design is best for everybody. Next best is to get a matched mouthpiece and barrel from the several suppliers who offer them.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lagatitalila
Date: 2016-04-21 09:10
To clarify, I am not looking for advice on picking a barrel. I'm looking for people's impressions, experiences, and opinions on aftermarket barrels. Like what ClarinettyBetty posted.
"You will get as many different opinions on this as there are contributors to the board."
I hope so, since that is what I am asking for.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ClaV
Date: 2016-04-21 15:17
Silversorcerer wrote:
> "If you are happy with your kit why screw it all up by changing
> The best you might hope to do with an after market barrel is
> substitute a material that might alter your tone slightly. It's
> more likely to negatively affect your intonation than improve
> your tone.
>
It is amazing to offer an opinion without trying different barrels, especially with new(er) polycylindrical bores.
I guess, the longer the post - the more substantiated....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-04-21 18:24
lagatitalila wrote:
> I'm looking for people's impressions, experiences, and opinions
> on aftermarket barrels. Like what ClarinettyBetty posted.
>
> "You will get as many different opinions on this as there are
> contributors to the board."
>
> I hope so, since that is what I am asking for.
Fobes, Moennig, Chadash - all very focused
Backun - rounder, more mellow than the above
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ClaV
Date: 2016-04-21 22:37
Precise barrel parameters are well-known for good craftsmen in the field.
The problem with the alleged exact quantification is that it must be made for an exact specific mouthpiece (chamber volume, bore etc), a specific reed and the same way that reed is handled by a clarinetist; and it may be hardly feasible, given that the clarinet design itself is intrinsically a series of acoustic compromises.
Now for important facts - as far as understand, Moening inverse barrels had their success in adjusting twelfths for newer clarinets with older revered mouthpieces. That is the main barrel purpose - to match your frequency generator and your acoustic pipe
So the idea of using/trying different barrels is to improve tuning, to adjust resistance, and last (least or not) to modify the tone - intensity of overtones and the shape/width of the main harmonic and possibly other harmonics.
While sound perception is quite subjective, to me what Karl wrote has quite well-defined meaning (I spent some time with frequency analyzers to get the basis for this meaning) and then those simple words are nice and descriptive.
Going back to the main point of this topic - barrels: the best barrel is for you, for a specific reed for your mouthpiece and lastly your clarinet.
The best advice then is to try as much as you can and see what works the best. Is the difference perceptible and worth the effort/money?
Post Edited (2016-04-21 22:40)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-04-22 00:10
Silversorcerer wrote:
> Here's what I mean: "All very focused". Focused has a meaning
> with optics. It's in focus or not. In sound I think the meaning
> of focused is subjective. Descriptions that have no objective
> definition don't communicate much.
No, but that's what was asked for.
>
> "Rounder, more mellow ..." All the barrels that are machined
> correctly are round, so if one is rounder is that just a higher
> precision? No, it's a subjective impression using a word that
> best describes a physical object rather than a sound. A round
> sound versus what? A focused sound? I've never heard a round
> sound or a focused one.
They are meaningless words without agreed on points of reference. But if someone asks - and asks again - for impressions, that's what will come out.
The bottom line is, the only way to evaluate equipment is to try it. As soon as you ask other people to express comparisons, you immediately invite a deluge of responses that are objectively meaningless.
To get back to the original request, with all respect:
The basic function of the barrel is to provide a way to attach the mouthpiece to the instrument while reducing overall length in the case and at the same time, provide some (limited) degree of tuning flexibility. If it weren't for the desire for a shorter case profile, the top of the clarinet could just as well be made in one piece with a socket for the mouthpiece (probably with better results). Players shopping for replacement barrels need to make their own judgments based on how various barrels interact with the rest of their clarinet systems and their individual tastes in sound. The only words available to describe acoustic qualities are the ones we borrow from the visual vocabulary - "dark", "bright", "round","focused", "liquid", "opaque", "transparent" - and there is little to no agreement among musicians about what those words really mean. We use them somewhat carelessly in casual conversation, but if we're trying to communicate formal, really meaningful evaluations or descriptions of the acoustic qualities of equipment, we most of the time find ourselves on a dead end street with no useful way out.
If the words I used meant anything to you (as they certainly do to me, or I wouldn't have used them), then I may have told you something useful about those particular barrels (or not, if our understandings aren't the same). If the words mean nothing to you, as they apparently don't to Silversorcerer, then the conversation has simply gone the way most conversations comparing equipment tend to go.
Order a couple of the more popular barrels from someplace with a return policy and try them yourself. But keep in mind that barrels make only subtle differences in the playability of a clarinet. You won't get all that much bang for your buck no matter what barrel you choose. If you want a dramatic difference, think more about mouthpieces or even reeds.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-04-23 12:28
I was never a big believer in moving from the manufactured barrel (or bell). I assume the clarinet is created as a unified whole, so why add foreign elements to it?
Over the years I have had opportunity to change up the barrel and have found that ringless (all wood) barrels do tend to have a more "character" to the sound. I wouldn't even say more projection, just more character.
The worst examples screw up the intonation, so, like Ken Shaw (and Keith Stein), I'd say that needs to be the priority.
But for situations where I have just wanted a change or needed a specific fix, I have had wonderful barrels made by Dr. Allan Segal who posts to this board.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ClaV
Date: 2016-04-23 18:07
Paul Aviles wrote:
> I was never a big believer in moving from the manufactured
> barrel (or bell). I assume the clarinet is created as a
> unified whole, so why add foreign elements to it?
>
Two main reasons to consider:
1) Manufacturers rarely include a perfect mouthpiece (and reeds), and the right barrel would connect your perfect mouthpiece to (their) clarinet.
2) Barrels are most affected by moisture etc, so their dimensions are most prone to change.
I very much agree both about ringless barrels (cleaner less muffled sound, I would say) and getting your barrel crafted for you by an expert.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2016-04-23 18:17
Always ask yourself "What is it that I am trying to fix ?"
Sound? Intonation? etc.
Then go from there.
Disclaimer: yeah, I make em.
Former creator of CUSTOM CLARINET TUNING BARRELS by DR. ALLAN SEGAL
-Where the Sound Matters Most(tm)-
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-04-23 20:29
Alseg wrote:
> Always ask yourself "What is it that I am trying to fix ?"
> Sound? Intonation? etc.
> Then go from there.
> Disclaimer: yeah, I make em.
>
And he makes em vary well.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roxann
Date: 2016-04-23 22:07
I'm 99% convinced that it was an aftermarket Bakun barrel that caused my Bliss to crack. From the very first time I put the barrel on, it fit quite snugly. As my instrument warmed up and saliva started making the joint swell ever-so-slightly, it would become impossible to remove the barrel. I would have to wait for an hour or more until I had a hope of removing it. This frequently happened. The music store I purchased both items from suggested I apply bee's wax to the wood of the top joint to keep it from swelling, which I did religiously. However, my clarinet still cracked. I'm VERY leery now about using a barrel that wasn't made specifically for the brand and model of clarinet I own. I still own the Backun barrel, and now a Buffet, and there's no way I'm going to use the two together. I must admit, however, that the Backun made a huge improvement on the depth of sound of my Bliss.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-04-23 23:06
Roxann, barrel sockets can easily be enlarged (within reason) to fit a top tenon or a mouthpiece tenon that initially is too tight a fit. Beeswax? Might as well just goop it up with extra cork grease. If the fit is too tight, especially where there's wood to wood contact, it's going to get stuck. But even if it's only the cork that is too tight, you can either sand down the cork, if there's enough thickness to do it, or enlarge the barrel socket if the cork is already pretty flat. Any competent tech can make the needed adjustments.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roxann
Date: 2016-04-23 23:45
Thank you, Karl. This was never mentioned to me by the company I purchased the barrel and clarinet from. It's good to know.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2016-04-24 13:33
>> I'm VERY leery now about using a barrel that wasn't made specifically for the brand and model of clarinet I own. <<
The size of the barrel socket is just the diameter it was machined to, plus any changes from temperature/humidity/material. I just had to remove a stuck barrel that the owner wasn't able to remove after a few hours and it was the stock barrel. No other barrel is more specific to that clarinet!
Re the tight barrel, if anyone feels it is tight beyond a snug cork then it's a good idea to let a good repairer check it. If it feels stuck after playing then it needs to be adjusted. With stock barrels it is usually the upper section tenon that needs to be adjusted, but with tight after market barrels it is more often the barrel (if the stock barrel fits fine).
Although a tight barrel can get stuck, etc. it is often the better alternative to a loose barrel, which takes much longer to fit. I just got a loose barrel to fit a clarinet. It is a wood barrel made by one of the custom barrel makers and it is VERY loose, unfortunately (and pretty surprising) it's a machining mistake, since more than a few other barrels (from several different makers) fit fine.
Post Edited (2016-04-24 16:41)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2016-04-24 16:38
Wood-to-wood contact between the end of the tenon and the bottom of the barrel socket is the surest way to create an upper joint crack. Gt it fixed as soon as possible.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roxann
Date: 2016-04-25 04:45
I did have it repaired immediately, and it's as good as new. However, I only use the original barrel. I would imagine the reason I was told to use beeswax was so that there was NO "wood-to-wood contact between the end of the tenon and the bottom of the barrel socket." Wish I had had Ken's advice a year ago!!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
