 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Julian ibiza
Date: 2023-04-18 18:37
To what extent do composites using Grenadilla dust truly impart the tone qualities of that wood to an instrument.....or is this in fact more of a marketing
Gimmick ?
Julian Griffiths
Tel. 34 696 798 853
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-04-18 18:46
I feel you won’t like my answer but here goes:
I have a collection of the Pereira 3D ligatures made of the different broken down materials. The sound/response does vary perceptively from one to another. If you drop them upon a hard surface, you can hear them ping differently (higher/lower pitches) that seem to correspond with the sound they produce when holding a reed. I believe clarinets produced with various materials would also manifest slight tone/response characteristics.
………….Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Maestro_6
Date: 2023-04-18 19:20
I’ve found a noticeable difference as well. My experience was also with Pereira 3D, and I got to try a number of their custom barrels between the 3D printed wood (which has wood particles in the material) and the fully synthetic version. The synthetics felt quite nice, but the 3D wooden ones definitely had more warmth and ring in the sound and also felt more similar to my barrels made from traditional woods.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2023-04-18 19:36
The density of the binding agent is going to have the largest impact on the properties of the natural material - the grenadilla dust is merely filler when used in this manner and all the properties natural grenadilla once had are now gone.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kilo
Date: 2023-04-18 20:39
I've played a GreenLine R13 since '06 and a grenadilla composite Royal Global bass since last September. Neither one exhibits a characteristic sound that screams "COMPOSITE!", although both are heavier than their wooden counterparts. (The R13 is two ounces heavier than my old Selmer Series 10. Comparing basses, the upper joint of the Model 30 is 15¾" long and weighs 30 oz. The upper joint on the Royal Global Max is also 15¾" long and weighs 39 oz.) I've heard hard rubber clarinets and metal clarinets that acoustically compared to fine wooden instruments, and I've heard ones that really didn't sound as good. The difference was in the quality of the setup and the experience of the player.
Were these experienced players trying to approximate the classic "woody" sound and altering the characteristic sound of their non-wooden instruments? Or is the sound quality of a clarinet due to the air column alone and simply a function of the bore, assuming no leaks and a responsive reed?
I admit to some skepticism about the material the clarinet is made of affecting the sound. I don't doubt that some players sense a difference in tone but there are so many other factors which contribute to the total sound that have nothing to do with material – room ambience, temperature and humidity, reed fatigue, minute variations in the position of the reed, irregularities in the bore and toneholes, and slight changes of embouchure.
It would be possible to design experiments with the sound of vibrating columns of air using pipes made of different materials. But even under ideal circumstances it would be difficult to apply the objective results to the sound of an expressive musical instrument powered by human lungs and inspired by traditional tonal concepts of beauty .
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-04-18 21:08
Subjective is the operative word here. But whatever the player perceived as better makes the performance better. Ever done your best work at a shitty job?
As for materials, just a slight addition of a different material can make a huge difference. Did you know the only difference between a thick clam shell and a brittle stick of chalk is the occasional very thin layer of protein.
………… Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2023-04-19 06:59
I think Chris P's answer makes most scientific sense here.
That said, I think someone needs to say this about Grenadilla or its dust.
"It's about the money, son."
Grenadilla wasn't originally chosen as the material of choice for clarinets based primarily on sound. It was about the wood providing cheaper manufacturing costs.
https://www.rclarinetproducts.com/the-grenadilla-myth
Now, I'm not saying that Grenadilla is a lousy choice for clarinet material, I'm saying money was a large impetus in the original decision to use this wood.
That said, we need to look at the history of Grenadilla composites.
Originally, Buffet heated its factory with the wood shavings from making clarinets.
As this wood became rarer, more expensive, lower in quality, endangered, etc., some marketing genius thought about taking these shavings and gluing them together, as if nothing about the wood's fine acoustical properties would be changed in the process--the costs being the need to find alternate ways of heating the factory.
I'm not saying these epoxy based clarinets are bad. Heck, they may be more dimensionally stable than some wood clarinets.
I'm saying the so called magic of grenadilla's acoustic properties may have been more hype than substance.
Put the craftsmanship into a clarinet made of plastic, excuse me, what am I saying!!....
...a clarinet "crafted from an ideal blend of synthetic material for maximum resonance and durability" https://backunmusical.com/products/alpha
....or hard rubber, and you may just have an equal or superior instrument
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-04-19 13:15
It is my understanding that the historic choice of African Black Wood for clarinet manufacture was a practical one centered on build quality. The dense wood was most favorable for the small drill holes for posts and such. It also had the quality of being most stable after manufacture unlike boxwood (or rosewood) that expands/contracts and warps to a higher degree.
Sound was not the main consideration.
Now I would hope we can all have an open mind moving forward. We already have more stable materials in things like Greenline, carbon fiber or printed clarinets. The emphasis should be on stability and secondarily on what might help create even better sonic outcomes (or just different options that may appeal to some of us).
............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Julian ibiza
Date: 2023-04-19 20:22
Well!.. I'm delighted that this topic has brought out so many great and diverse responses . All very interesting .
I agree that although we can no doubt endlessly debate whether or not Grenadilla dust lends something to the tone of a composite instruments, the fact that composites seem to be finding a good degree of favor with musicians can only be good news .
I tend to agree with Chris P ,that if you take a tone wood and grind it into dust , it's tone qualities are gone ..... However , using the dust with resins to make a composite may well create a favorable density for tone . One could probable equally use a whole range of other ingredients to the same effect , but if you happen to have a heap of scrap Grenadilla off cuts then ...... Great idea !
I suspect that what effects tone in the matter of a body material( in as much as it does ...also debated ) , is probably above all to do with densities and thickness'
' . ( yeah !.... I know ...I'm not going to defend that as an absolute truth ..Ha-ha!... That would definitly not be the case for string instruments.)
Tom Ridenour said something in one of his videos on mouthpieces which I found food for thought . He said something like.
" Making a good mouthpiece is not so much about using this material or that material. It's about knowing the material you have chosen to work with ."
So with this sentiment in mind, I'm all for the mastering of good sound ,be it using wood , hard rubber , hard work on the part of musicians ,or composites .
Surely " The proof is in the pudding " after all .
Julian Griffiths
Tel. 34 696 798 853
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
