 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Frank
Date: 2003-01-28 22:48
Would anyone out there know if Buffet has plans to make a bass out of their Greenline material?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jez
Date: 2003-01-29 13:09
I don't know if they are, but it would seem sensible due to the difficulty finding pieces of blackwood long enough for bass joints.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: James
Date: 2003-01-29 14:45
I'm confused. I thought greenline material was made by the company out of wood dust and resin or whatever else they use. So couldn't they just make larger blocks thus making bass clarinet joints? Personally I think it would be easier to make.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Sloss
Date: 2003-01-29 15:20
95% wood powder, 5% carbon fibre. I'm no material sciences expert, but I think the tenon problems they had with the early horns might be indicative of why they haven't rushed to market. Can they manufacture pieces that big that aren't vulnerable to breakage?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob
Date: 2003-01-29 15:41
The larger cross section necessary for a Bass would be my main concern. Lets face it, the Greenline process is still not without problems
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Frank
Date: 2003-01-29 17:07
Is it the joint in the middle that breaks? From normal use or hard knocks? Maybe a one piece body is the answer....for soprano as well as bass. Seems to me the middle joint serves no purpose really, other than it's tough to work with a long tube of wood...if you're "molding" the body....why put a joint in there???
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Robert Small
Date: 2003-01-29 19:37
I think this Greenline thing is a little gimmicky. Why doesn't Buffet (and the other makers) start producing clarinets made from hard rubber? They would be sturdy, durable, and sound as good as wooden horns.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2003-01-29 20:47
Frank wrote:
>
> if you're "molding" the body....why put a joint in
> there???
The Greenlines aren't "molded"; they're solid billets that are worked yet again on a lathe. Or so I'm told - I haven't actually seen a Greenline billet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Sloss
Date: 2003-01-29 21:02
Not gimmicky at all. They found a formulation that provides the resonant quality of the African hardwood without the instability. A pretty remarkable achievement given the macro grain structure is obliterated.
Hard rubber is just a different material and will give you a different sound. I'm sure there are materials experts on the board who can comment on the fragility and machinability of rubber. Sound as good as a wooden horn? Depends on your definition of "good".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal
Date: 2003-01-29 21:16
I've renovated a number of hard rubber Eb, Bb and A soprano clarinets, and alto and bass clarinets, some of which are still in my possession, which I'd put up against any wood clarinet you might choose. I believe in a proper double-blind test you'd find the sounds to be indistinguishable, on average. Hard rubber is an axcellent material from which to make entire clarinets, as well as mouthpieces. But not being a full-time professional player, perhaps my ear is simply not good enough to distinguish a difference, if indeed there is any.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2003-01-29 21:51
Frank wrote: "Seems to me the middle joint serves no purpose really, other than it's tough to work with a long tube of wood...if you're "molding" the body....why put a joint in there???"
The middle joint is very necessary for tuning purposes. If you only tune down by pulling out at the barrel, then you flatten the "short" notes a lot more than the "long" ones. You need to also be able to pull out at the middle joint to be able to lay in tune properly.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Peter
Date: 2003-01-29 23:47
Frank wrote: if you're "molding" the body....why put a joint in
there???
Back in the '60s you'd have gotten some very interesting answers to that question from almost anyone who heard you ask it!
Gee, is that the intro to "Memories" I hear...?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2003-01-30 10:25
Portability is one reason for a middle joint on a bass.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob
Date: 2003-01-30 14:37
<A pretty remarkable achievement given the macro grain structure is obliterated.>
What's a macro grain structure?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Sloss
Date: 2003-01-30 14:59
The wood, even ground into powder, still has a fibrous structure; you just have to get out the microscope to see it. No doubt has something to do with how the composite retains its resonant characteristics. I'm sure the Buffet wizards figured out just how fine they could grind it before it lost that special something. By "macro", I meant the grain you can see with the naked eye in a regular ole' chunk of wood. At first blush, one might think that you would lose that "woody" quality by grinding it up.
Come to think of it, I wonder if a bass clarinetist might try to smoke grenadilla powder...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw
Date: 2003-01-30 15:17
I'd say having a reasonable-length case is the main reason for making bass clarinet bodies in two pieces. I've never been able to play my bass with the center joint pulled out even a little, since it makes the automatic register mechanism unreliable.
I'm not sure whether the Carre bore refinements are used on Buffet bases, but if they are, there is a small narrowing in the ring-finger area of the upper joint bore, which is very difficult to do on a one-piece body.
Francoic Kloc has said that the Greenline material requires new tools for shaping the bore and making the tone-holes. The cost of retooling can be amortized over many thousands of Bb and A clarinets, but would be unprofitable on the bass, given the small number of instruments made.
Many (maybe even the majority) of Loree and other professional oboes made these days have an ABS (plastic) upper joint, including the one played by the principal in Philadelphia, and Heckel bassoons have had a plastic lining for the wing joint and the descending half of the boot joint for nearly a century.
If I made my living playing bass, I'd switch a one-piece artist-quality plastic or hard rubber instrument in a heartbeat, to get rid of the constant adjustment problems.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2003-01-30 15:28
Sorry Ken, just to clarify- Frank wrote "Maybe a one piece body is the answer....for soprano as well as bass", and questioned why we need a middle joint at all.
I was refering to soprano instruments when I spoke about needing to pull out in the middle for tuning.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2003-01-30 16:35
Doesn't pulling the middle joint out on either bass or clarinet not greatly increase risk of stress cracking of tenon? The leverages are higher than for barrel/crook etc. Some clarinets might fall out completely if bottom joint pushed only half way in. Sounds risky to me.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2003-01-30 16:42
I've had my present instruments for 12 years, and haven't had any problems pulling out in the middle joint. All my colleagues do it too. You don't pull it out so far that it's "only half way in", just like you don't do that at the barrel. If it falls out because you pull it out a few millimtres, then you need new cork!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
