 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Sandra F. H.
Date: 2003-02-11 16:14
Hi Everyone! For all of us evaluating clarinets, especially used instruments of older years, what is the BEST way to determine whether or not tone holes are "Undercut". Best to all of you. Sandra
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2003-02-11 17:26
Hi, Sandra. All the best to you too
I don't know whether this will assist in evaluating an older clarinet or not but, for your consideration, here's what I've found from personal experience:
Undercut (fraized) toneholes are pretty easy to see with a leak light. The light coming from inside the bore will make the angled cut obvious, especially on the lower joint large holes. You'll get a much better look at these if you can take the padded key off; that way, you Can't miss it. A little less obvious are the smaller open tone holes but, if you've seen a few, they too will show up pretty well. If you don't have a leak light handy, the next best way is to examine the instrument in very bright sunlight. Bright indoor lighting is okay but you might have to do some 'manipulating' to get the best angle for the light to catch the angled cut.
I've found that a lot of older horns, even those by lesser known makers, commonly had undercut tone holes. Seems that everyone was doing it then just because they could 8]
I could be way off the beam about this because, of course, I haven't examined all the old clarinets. However, the ones I have checked out (mostly Alberts) had undercut tone holes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Leonard A
Date: 2003-02-11 20:00
I see so much about undercut tone holes. Why are they "better." And if you don't have them, what kind do you have?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2003-02-11 20:24
Leonard,
That is a fascinating question. I often think about the playing differences between fraised (undercut) and unfraised clarinets. I have a B&H 1010 with (almost) no fraising, a pre-BT Selmer with (almost) no fraising, and a Buffet (pre-R-13) with so much fraising that the interior appears like a series of gouges.
For me, the difference is one of manipulation and flexibility, with the fraised instruments being significantly more flexible. Also, the tones are (sorry!!!) darker on the fraised clarinets. I like the response of unfraised clarinets also. And B&H built a symphonic clarinet that has beautiful tones, without any obvious fraising. In these instruments, the feeling from note to note is firmer (more secure) and "movement" around the scale is freer.
I believe the makers of both fraised and unfraised clarinets compensated in such a way that differences SHOULD be felt to be <b>minimal.</b> As Stubbins said about mouthpiece design, you're always going to wind up in the middle, even if you don't consciously realize it. There's a strong limit to extremes in design, and the maker (or player!) will build in the compensations required to bring the clarinet more toward center, both in tone and in other factors.
Bill.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2003-02-12 02:10
Not so subtle sometimes; it's often the difference between being in-tune and out-of-tune.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2003-02-14 03:38
I guess that it is very quick and easy with CNC machinery, working with a small dovetail cutter lowered through each tone hole and then moved, planetary style, around the bottom of the tone hole, but this will not give variation between instruments that the very slow, hence expensive traditional hand techniques did.
But what is better, hand made with variation, or a perfect copy of the best hand made example available?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
