 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 1999-02-13 18:35
In old days,some makers,like Conn,tried to develop metal
clarinets.I wonder why present manufacturers do not try to
develop new ones.Does anyone have any considerations?
I play also play flute.Exerytime I play clarinet I wonder why clarinet playing is so difficult.Even among clarinet systems,some systems such as German or Austrian,seem awkward in playing than French one.Many players now play platinum or 18K,14K gold flutes.They change thickness by the materials'stiffness sometimes enhancing mixing cupper with gold.African blackwood is in short.Some Environmentalists blame clarinettists to be a environment destroyers.Buffets boasts of R13 greenline that it is enviromentally gentle.But fact is they make garanular grenadilla compoundes with other compound and still includes 95% grenadilla!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia
Date: 1999-02-14 00:08
Hiroshi wrote:
-------------------------------
In old days,some makers,like Conn,tried to develop metal
clarinets.I wonder why present manufacturers do not try to
develop new ones
I think a high-quality metal clarinet would be a great idea, even though I love fine wood and hope that efforts to farm wood for clarinets can succeed, before the wild sources get logged into oblivion. Most of the old metal clarinets were built as student instruments of low quality. I see many of the cheapest metal clarinets at flea markets. Most of them are junk. I think these gave metal clarinets such a bad name that today there's not much of a demand for them. But the few fine, professional-quality metal clarinets proved these can be made well, the same as fine-quality saxophones and flutes. I think that metal is more aesthetically pleasing than plastic, but I also agree with people who want manufacturers to work on producing top-quality plastic clarinets. Besides the environmental concern, IMHO there's a real need for clarinets that aren't as sensitive to damage from outdoor weather as wood, but that play well enough to meet the demands of advanced students and professionals.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 1999-02-14 17:21
I appreciate Leria's detailed response.
Compared to flute,the key work of clarinet is the main
reason for the difficulty of playing this instrument.
Flute fingering makes lefthand work only on lefthand keys.But we can use right and left hand fingers for the same notes and there are so many different key shapes.
Clarinet key systems are so imperfect compared with those od flute and oboe(maybe).
In developing metal clarinets I hope these inconveniences be solved together.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ray Swing
Date: 1999-02-14 18:44
Since we all know that the material has no bearing on the tonal or timbre quality of the instrument,why do the flute manufacturers use such expensive exotic metals as Gold , Platinum and Silver?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jim lande (lande @ erols.com)
Date: 1999-02-14 19:40
Like Lelia, I too love vintage metal clarinets. Yes, I can tell the difference between my Buffet metal and my R13, but the metal is a large measure better than any plastic clarinet I have ever played. However, there has been a lot of comment on Klarinet that: 1) some pro quality oboes are made out of plastic; and 2) a good tech with the right tools can make a good plastic clarinet sound mighty fine. There is no consensus on whether the material of the body makes much difference to sound.
Unless body material makes a difference, I believe that it would be easier to produce a near pro quality plastic clarinet than to produce a near pro quality metal clarinet. I believe this for three reasons: 1) many makers are already tooled to make plastic clarinets and 2) it may be difficult to produce a poly-cylindrical bore in a metal body; and 3) it would be easier for a tech to make fine adjustments in the tone holes of plastic bodies.
So, before we pool our money and go into production, I think we have to ask: why hasn't anyone made a top quality plastic clarinet? I don't know, but I would guess that makers believe that most purchasers would pay a hundred dollars more for a plastic clarinet. [Perhaps someone can tell us how much of the cost of a new, top quality wood clarinet is the wood.] [[And perhaps someone knows how much the silver or gold adds to the cost of a flute. Obviously people are willing to pay the difference and buyers believe that even if the silver doesn't make the flute, the best makers use silver.]]
Maybe buyers would be more likely to buy a top quality metal clarinet than to buy a top quality plastic clarinet. At the moment, metal clarinets seem to have a much worse reputation. Indeed, I have restored a couple that I did not like as much as my Bundy. (And it really hurts me to say that.)
Still, perceptions change. When I was a child, the phrase "Made in Japan" meant dross, cheap imitations, the lowest quality. No longer. Perhaps, Hiroshi, you will be successful in getting a Japanese company to take the risk. I don't think that American companies will be bold enough. My one suggestion is to follow the Conn approach of shorter chimneys - not because I believe the tone is better, but because you will end up with a more compact look.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rick2
Date: 1999-02-14 20:40
There are a number of comments to make here. First and foremost, there have been physicists investigating whether the body material affects tone, and the accepted answer is no, it is the geometry that makes the difference. There are those who aregue, like myself, that the body material might add some tonal "seasoning" with low order effects, but I haven't read the papers nor have I plotted the acoustic spectra on a spectrum analyzer, so my opinion is largely intuitive.
Secondly, the Boehm clarinet (French system) is based on the flute, however, since each instrument is a different beast, you need to make modifications. BEcause the clarinet has six open holes, you must use both hands for long tube notes if you want alternate keys. Nature of the beast.
I personally would prefer that clarinet manufacturers stay with wood for the better horns. I don't know what the status of rosewood is, but that material makes fine instruments. There are other hardwoods, such as oak and ash that might be usable for instruments, but I don't know how prone to cracking they are. However, that becomes a non-issue if a greenline approach is used.
The main problem I see with metal is that in order to get the bore to the correct thickness, you must make the outer diameter much smaller or have a 50 pound clarinet. That smaller OD feels funny in your hands.
Regarding expensive metals in flutes: It's like the difference between driving a 1964 station wagon with wood side panals, or driving a 1999 Lexus. Both are functional but which one is more fun to drive, and what statement do you want to make?
Regarding Japanese companies changing their reputations, look into the work of a man named W. Edwards Deming, and you'll see why they have a solid quality reputation now.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 1999-02-14 21:21
jim lande (lande @ erols.com) wrote:
-------------------------------
<snip>
So, before we pool our money and go into production, I think we have to ask: why hasn't anyone made a top quality plastic clarinet?
---
Buffet makes the Greenline (wood dust & resin) and Howarth makes a clarinet from PVC (the same stuff drain pipes are made out of). Both cost exactly the same amount as their wood counterparts.
------
<snip>
[Perhaps someone can tell us how much of the cost of a new, top quality wood clarinet is the wood.]
-----
I have been told between 5 and 10 US dollars, including the transportation, storing, aging, and selection.
----
[[And perhaps someone knows how much the silver or gold adds to the cost of a flute. Obviously people are willing to pay the difference and buyers believe that even if the silver doesn't make the flute, the best makers use silver.]]
----
There is something to be said for the _workability_ of silver and gold alloys - one of the reasons jewelry is made from these materials other than their intrinsic value is that they are easily workable.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 1999-02-14 23:08
Rick2 wrote:
-------------------------------
.... Regarding Japanese companies changing their reputations, look into the work of a man named W. Edwards Deming, and you'll see why they have a solid quality reputation now.
-------------------------------
The irony is that Deming was an American who had some great ideas on how to put quality into cost effective parts and he could not get any interest in this country. These days one of the highest industrial awards in Japan is the Deming award.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 1999-02-14 23:10
In addition, gold and platinum are fairly inert metals and do not react to environmental effects. Silver is also fairly good that way although it does tarnish. Silver can be kept in fairly good condition.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 1999-02-14 23:58
Plutinum or gold are not insisted to have different tonality.In fact there are even stainless or brass flutes played by famous players like Marcel Moyse.Marcel Moyse disliked Gold flutes that their intonations are not so good compared with silver ones.This phenomena is experienced instantly if we play gold plated saxsphone necks or all gold plated saxohones.They sound simply bigger.
Many flutists select gold or platinum flutes,they say, simply because they sound bigger,which is present days' orchestra requirement to flute players.But still there are flutists who can play big by ordinary silver flutes like William Bennet,who saids the material does not matter.
As to Japanese manufacturers' quality.I think Mr.Demming have nothing to do with their works.Their work are totally hand-crafts.Mr.Demming introduced statistic quality control of mass products.
But it can be safely said that Japanse companies like Muramtatsu adopted Cooper Scale invented by Mr.Albert Cooper, who is now the vice president of Brannen Cooper.
This is why James Galway uses Muramatsu,who started to use an Albert Cooper flute.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ray Swing
Date: 1999-02-15 01:57
I'm certainly pleased that this discussion on materials affecting / not affecting the tonal qualities of an instrument is once again being pursued. I see that Rick 2 is modifing his stance concerning this concept from a few months back. I still believe that materials and their thickness do have an effect on the quality of the tone. I continue to pursue this issue.
R.S.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brian F.
Date: 1999-02-15 03:05
One difference I've always noticed in metal instruments (saxes, lower clarinets), they play more differently cold than warmed up, as compared to wood or plastic instruments.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jim lande (lande @ erols.com)
Date: 1999-02-15 04:18
Rick2 wrote:
-------------------------------
The main problem I see with metal is that in order to get the bore to the correct thickness, you must make the outer diameter much smaller or have a 50 pound clarinet. That smaller OD feels funny in your hands.
_______________________________________
Different metal clarinets had different hight chimneys, so some felt just as big as a wooden clarinet. I will have to
do some measuring in the morning. I will report back if there is anything interesting.
--- Mark C>>>>>
Buffet makes the Greenline (wood dust & resin) and Howarth makes a clarinet from PVC (the same stuff drain pipes are made out of). Both cost exactly the same amount as their wood counterparts.
------
Masonite is wood dust and resin and I guess it doesn't look like plastic. I have not seen a greenline. I suspect that the reason they don't skip the wood dust (or use any old wood dust) is marketing considerations -- a point I was trying to make. I was not aware of the Howarth. I would like to learn more. Will check the resources page.
-------- Brian F>>>>
One difference I've always noticed in metal instruments (saxes, lower clarinets), they play more differently cold than warmed up, as compared to wood or plastic instruments.
-----------
I had forgotten about that. I don't play outside in cold weather. I have read that cold air condensing inside the metal clarinets made them positively drool. (Some metal clarinets are pretty crudded up inside. I poured boiling water through the last one I restored. I don't think that cleaned it very much. I have thought about boiling the
next one I work on, but I worry that my wife will catch me using the stock pot and put an end to me buying more metal clarinets.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rick2
Date: 1999-02-15 05:35
Dee: I didn't want to go into a whole dissertation on Deming, but it would make me very happy if reed manufacturers would use his methods.
Ray: I haven't changed my views, I have only articulated them better this time.
Hiroshi: As far as I know, the material studies were only done on clarinets. I do not know if similar studies have been done on flutes. I wouldn't be surprised if flutes are more sensitive to materials because the physics of the instrument is different.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnold the basset hornist
Date: 1999-02-15 10:21
Why did Theobald Böhm made his flutes out of metal?
Effectively I don't know. His first experimental samples were made of wood. Remember, he was a goldsmith, this would have made him to try metal, too.
Why is the key handling of a clarinet so much more complex than that of a flute, oboe or saxophone?
Remember, the clarinet speeks to the twelfth, most other woodwinds to the octave. The fingering system concept of the clarinet could be as simple as that one of the flute if you could use six more fingers. Nevertheless, I viewed less key function problems at the clarinets than at the oboe.
Water condenstion problems with metal instruments?
I used to wind a cloth on the neck of my basset horn to reduce the water (while playing in a church). Alp horns (german "Alphörner") need some thermal insulations, why not metal clarinets, too - even it's more difficult due to the posts an tone hole sockets - or do you think of electically heated metal woodwinds (electically heated keyboards for church organs are allredy available).
Sound effected by the material?
There should be some (important or not, meassurably or not) effects caused by the sonic speed ("Schallgeschwindigkeit") inside the wall material thus effecting the 'angle of total reflection'. Even wall thickness will change some of the reflection of the high frequent waves. Moreover, wood has different sonic speeds - with grain and parallel to grain. Fibre filled plastics (e.g. "PC CF 30", "PC C 30") should have a anisotopic effect, too, if the fibres are oriented in some way. If made with a fibre core (before molding material injected) you should have still more anisotropic differences.
Another effect is done by the micro structure of the surface. Some find the polished bore of a PMMA ("Plexiglas", acryl glas) mouthpiece to bo too smooth - and prefer to make an 'irregular micro fine structure' on it with some fine sand paper.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Poulsen
Date: 1999-02-15 14:39
I would assume that the length and thus, intonation changes of metal instruments are more dramatic with changes in temperature. Of course, if it is significant, why are flutes made of metal?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rick2
Date: 1999-02-15 15:00
I don't think the length of the instrument will change all that much (in the order of several hundred microns probably. Remember that if the metal instrument expands in length, it also expands in bore, so the insrtrument is probably always in tune with itself. I do know that my wood clarinet plays significantly flat when it is cold and takes about ten minutes to come in tune with an electronic keyboard.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 1999-02-16 00:24
The amount of expansion is very low. Even for aluminum (which has a fairly high expansion rate in the world of metal) the coefficient of thermal expansion is only 0.000009 inches per inch per degree Fahrenheit. So let's say it is built to be in tune at room temperature. Pick 70 degrees to keep the math easy. Now play outdoors on a hot day. Let's say 100 degrees. The change in temperature is 30 degrees. A flute is close to 24 inches long.
So over the length we get a growth of:
24*0.000009*30 = 0.00648 inches
This is only 0.027% growth. The effect on the pitch due to growth wouldn't even be measureable.
I used aluminum in this example as I happen to know its coefficient since I use this regularly. For others, I would have to go look it up in my engineering reference tables.
Now the instrument wall temperature can significantly affect the temperature of the air as it moves through the instrument but that is a different type of problem.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 1999-02-16 00:33
Rick2 wrote:
-------------------------------
Dee: I didn't want to go into a whole dissertation on Deming, but it would make me very happy if reed manufacturers would use his methods.
-------------------------------
As of this point in time, neither one of us knows whether or not they are using Demings methods to approach quality control or not. Even if they are it would probably not guarantee consistent reeds as the raw material is extremely inconsistent to begin with. It is quite unlike metals where the raw material can be made consistent by refining.
I have written some extended thoughts on this matter but left my disk at work. I'll try to remember to bring this home tomorrow and post as a new thread. I'm not up to re-typing it!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David
Date: 1999-02-16 01:47
What a great thread.
We need 3-5 good ears, blinded to the instrument material and see if wood, metal and plastic are distinguishable. The acoustics of concert halls seem material sensitive, I have a hard time believing that the sound production isn't material sensitive... but then, why do the experiment if we already knew the answer.
Deming was a genius. His approach shouldn't depend on the natural variation in the materials, any "standard" could accomodate to the usual range of this material, excluding batches on the basis of being "out of control". On the other hand, each reed probably needs to be "individually tuned" for it to be perfect. If there is a technology to permit this... I don't know. I have tried a synthetic reed and wasn't thrilled.
David
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 1999-02-16 02:11
David wrote:
-------------------------------
What a great thread.
We need 3-5 good ears, blinded to the instrument material and see if wood, metal and plastic are distinguishable. The acoustics of concert halls seem material sensitive, I have a hard time believing that the sound production isn't material sensitive... but then, why do the experiment if we already knew the answer.
---
Benade did just that, many times. His reasoning (from the paper "Why Use 'Playing Experiments' Rather Than (Objective??) Laboratory Devices To Measure the f2/f1 Mode Alignment>"
<blockquote>
1) Because of the history of the subject in Cleveland
2) To take care of certain phenomena that are inaccessible in the lab
3) To check and/or disclose new scientific subtleties
4) To provide dependable methods useful to craftsmen
5) Because nothing is conclusively studied outside its natural habitat - to play well is the ultimate purpose of a musical instrument
<font size=-1>(abstract: J.Acoust.Soc.Am. 76(52):S21(A) 1984</font></blockquote>
There's an awful lot that has been done, but very few <i>clarinetists</i> have read any of it. The math isn't all that bad - a 1st year calc student can understand just about any of it (not the derivations, but the resultant formulae).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rick2
Date: 1999-02-16 03:53
Dee: Actually, I have exchanged emails with the president of Rico Reeds, who posted his email address in a message here a few months ago. They are not using any kind of SPC or DOE methods. Quality there consists of a professional musician sampling the reeds and play-testing the samples. As far as the TQM management style goes, if they aren't doing SPC and DOE, they aren't doing TQM either. I have strongly suggested to him that he hire a quality engineer that plays a woodwind, but I don't know if that happened.
Using SPC and DOE methods doesn't guarantee perfection, but it almost certainly will guarantee improvement and a lower cost of poor quality.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rick2
Date: 1999-02-16 03:57
David: The natural variation of the cane will show up as what is known as common cause variation. On a control chart, that is what causes the dots to occur in a random manner. The quality methods would help to reduce what is known as special cause variation, like dull blades, uncalibrated manufacturing and measuring equipment, buying cane from different vendors grown in different locations, perhaps different chemicals in the environment. If any reed manufacturers are reading this please please please implement these methods! They can do nothing but help your product!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rick2
Date: 1999-02-16 03:59
Mark: Even if the math were that bad, there are enough engineers and scientists on this board that do understand it and could walk the musician through the derivations.
I need to start answering more than one person per message.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnold the basset hornist
Date: 1999-02-16 07:08
Dee wrote:
-------------------------------
The amount of expansion is very low. Even for aluminum (which has a fairly high expansion rate in the world of metal) the coefficient of thermal expansion is only 0.000009 inches per inch per degree Fahrenheit. So let's say it is built to be in tune at room temperature. Pick 70 degrees to keep the math easy. Now play outdoors on a hot day. Let's say 100 degrees. The change in temperature is 30 degrees. A flute is close to 24 inches long.
So over the length we get a growth of:
24*0.000009*30 = 0.00648 inches
This is only 0.027% growth. The effect on the pitch due to growth wouldn't even be measureable.
Now the instrument wall temperature can significantly affect the temperature of the air as it moves through the instrument but that is a different type of problem.
=====================================================
The notifyable tone difference is 0.3 % of the frequence (approx. 5 cent - one cent is 1 % of a semitone). An instument is fine in tune when it is less than +/- 10 cent.
The sonic speed in the air is proportional to the square root of the absolute temperaturs (in Kelvin) - as I remember. Thus you may have 'air temparature problems' (and the resulting intonation problems) when playing a while throat tones only and then the long tones - if the material cools the air a lot - more on a clarinet whith it's larger difference between throat an long tones than on a flute. By the way, the bore of a flute (19 mm) is still more than the one of a clarinet (15 mm) - less surface per volume, less temperature loss.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: paul
Date: 1999-02-16 18:50
I know that all of the metal based clarinet design and manufacturing questions were asked and answered way back in the 1920s (perhaps earlier than that) with the advent of the metal clarinet. Excellent quality saxophones and flutes are being made of metal today. The sax or flute manufacturer could modify the design and manufacturing plans for one of those horns and apply today's technologies to improve the product for a modern day metal clarinet. The technology is not rocket science, but we still don't see any modern-day metal clarinets on the market. There must be reasons for this.
Who could afford to spend the money to pay for the research, development, manufacturing, and marketing of a metal clarinet? Would an instrument manufacturer be able to make enough money to make it worth her/his while if the metal clarinet was a hot novelty? What would stock holders think if the metal clarinet turned out to be a dud? With plastic clarinets costing so little and selling pretty well, why bother with making a metal clarinet that is bound to cost more to make and not have as good a return on the investment? How much would you be willing to pay for the privilege of owning a contemporary metal clarinet? Would you be taken seriously by your peers and your audience if you showed up to a concert or a gig with a metal clarinet? Would your metal clarinet sound good enough for the type of music you want to play (contemporary, jazz, classical, etc.)?
In summary, you will see metal clarinets on the mass market as soon as there is a steady and profitable demand for them. Until then, unless you have a lot of money to spend on a very unique instrument, don't hold your breath.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rick2
Date: 1999-02-17 04:04
Perhaps we are making this too complicated. Maybe metal clarinets are a flop simply because people want their clarinets to be black.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: paul
Date: 1999-02-17 18:40
You want a black metal clarinet? You want tiger's stripes? Leopard's spots? Can do! Look at LA Sax's product line. Ditto for other contemporary sax manufacturers. Black laquer or patterned laquer is an available option for saxes, so why not for a metal clarinet?
Now, if we could just talk someone like LA Sax into making metal clarinets...
If you would like to know my source, I have a couple of recent WW/BW paper catalogs. I get one once every couple of months now.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Fowler
Date: 1999-02-17 19:08
I for one, am fortunate enough to own a professional model metal clarinet. It's an early 5 piece, solid silver, double walled, articulated G# key, Selmer that plays very, very well. Frankly, I don't use it much on the gig because I have so many other horns, I don't even think about pulling it out. Maybe tonight's blues gig will be a good excuse to play it again in public!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia
Date: 1999-02-17 23:47
Bob Fowler wrote:
-------------------------------
I for one, am fortunate enough to own a professional model metal clarinet. It's an early 5 piece, solid silver, double walled, articulated G# key, Selmer that plays very, very well. Frankly, I don't use it much on the gig because I have so many other horns, I don't even think about pulling it out. Maybe tonight's blues gig will be a good excuse to play it again in public!
Drool.... Now that's my idea of a fine metal clarinet: something with dignity that looks like exactly what it is. Anybody who wants L. A. Sax's leopard spots and zebra stripes is more than welcome to them. They'd probably look cool in a rock band, but somehow I don't picture the first clarinetist of the New York Philharmonic making a grand entrance with a flaming magenta clarinet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: paul
Date: 1999-02-18 15:19
Hey, if Liberace could create a stir with fancy costumes and brightly colored pianos, play the piano extremely well, and then "cry all the way to the bank", why couldn't a good pro make a splash on stage and fire up some excitement with a fancy pro grade metal clarinet?
True, the bread-and-butter classical types may not take it too well, but that shouldn't exclude the possibility from other folks trying to make a living at it. LeBlanc makes the brightly colored plastic clarinets for marching band mainly for flash and show, so why not make a contemporary very high quality splashy metal clarinet for professional use?
Who knows? Maybe that can rekindle the fire of popularity for the clarinet again.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Plácido
Date: 1999-02-21 17:33
I disagree with Ray Swing, I think the material makes difference in the sound. If it wouldn't, why would organ builders spend enormous money on tiger-metal and good quality organ-metal??
Pláci
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 1999-02-22 01:23
Plácido wrote:
-------------------------------
I disagree with Ray Swing, I think the material makes difference in the sound. If it wouldn't, why would organ builders spend enormous money on tiger-metal and good quality organ-metal??
-------
For stability reasons. Churches (where organs tend to reside) have some absolutely horrendous temperature swings.
An experiment was performed (the description was in Windplayer magazine) where the organ tubes were set up to be double-walled. The organ was played with and without water being in the inner space. No discernable difference in sound was noted!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarence Wilkinson
Date: 1999-03-24 05:29
I don't follow the Clarinet Pages every day, so I missed out on the discussion of metal clarinets last month--sorry. Several years ago I was told by one of my flutist friends that at one time the Haynes Flute Company made a set of experimental solid silver clarinets for the Long Beach (California) Municipal Band. They were made with double walls in an attempt to reduce the effect of temperature changes. Incidentally, this would make the feel correspond to that of a wooden instrument. Apparently they were not successful, as there was no follow up by Bill Haynes. I have not been able to find any further information about these clarinets.
When I was taking clarinet lessons in the 1930s from Harry Lewis, who was also a dealer for the H. N. White Company, he told me of some tests that the company had done to compare metal and wood clarinets. They had Hruby, then clarinetist with the Cleveland Symphony, play his wood clarinet and one of the King metal clarinets for a group of professional musicians. He played behind a screen so that the listeners could not see which instrument he was using. They were not able to tell which was which. However, Harry told me, Hruby continued to use his wood clarinet in the symphony!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
