 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 2003-06-15 00:32
A flute maker has issued a flute made of carbon fibre and magnets for key works. http://www.matitflutes.com/03acoustics.html
How about clarinet? African blackwood can be saved.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2003-06-15 01:53
Hi, Hiroshi !
Have you had the opportunity to try one of these ![[whoa]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie10.gif) ???
Looks like a spinoff from the old saxophone gasket pads - similar to 'O' rings. The O-ring pad seats in a groove around the tone hole and the pad "flap" [Not a cup] is flat bare metal. I've seen only two of them and I believe they were in production only a couple of years. I imagine they worked all right but just never caught on and the market was short lived. The primary drawback to them nowadays, besides being "outdated", is a severe scarcity of replacement parts.
Who knows? maybe Matit-flutes will make a go of the concept this time around. Looks like a good idea trying to make a comeback with some fresh technology. Thanks for sharing.
Can you elaborate on the magnet aspect? I'm sure you have a far better understanding of the magnet technology than most of us. They've done a good job trying to explain it in simple terms but I got lost trying to imagine how they apply magnets to the instrument's keyworks.
- r![[cool]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/cool.gif) n b -
Post Edited (2003-06-15 01:55)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jim lande
Date: 2003-06-15 02:20
It seems to me that there has been more innovations with flute design than with clarinet design. I wonder why.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Douglas
Date: 2003-06-15 14:05
Jim, there have probably been more flute innovations because flutists don't have to spend so much time with reeds as clarinetists do.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2003-06-15 14:20
"I wonder why"
Just a guess, perhaps the accoustical properties of the flute are a lot less complicated than that of the (closed pipe) clarinet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2003-06-15 14:39
Will explore the reference but one comment is that barium ferrite magnetic powder could be incorporated in O-rings.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 2003-06-15 14:57
Several years ago a German manufacturer(B&S maybe?) started to sell an innovative(they say so) saxophone as Ron pointed out. There now seems no shop selling them in Japan either.
There are two shops who sell Mattit flutes in Tokyo area. You will be surprised at their prices. 1,000,000 yen (around 8500$)．Japan is an infamous place where musical instruments' prices are set too high, but this is almost astronomical for instruments made of carbon. (They may heat treat the carbon in furnace, which may be the reason for this high price. Carbon is available as powder and it is necessary to mix it with phenol resin to shape a form.
As to magnets, they provably use ferite magnets, which can be formed from powder to any shapes. But I am not a material engineer/scientist to elaborate on this matter.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2003-06-16 01:42
In my opinion, the instrument that needs the most innovation as far as keywork goes is the bassoon; their fingerings are outragous, and I admire ANY bassoonist who can play at least reasonably well!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2003-06-16 02:57
Just a few thoughts:
I have a problem with the concept of using magnets instead of springs.
When a spring is used on a key, there is more force opposing the finger at the end of the travel than there is at the beginning of the travel. This difference is kept to a minimum with well-designed springs. With poorly designed springs, a good example being those of the side keys of a Buescher student clarinet, the effect of this phenomenon is a poor 'feel', a feeling of sluggishness, - of the key resisting what the player wants to do.
This phenomenon is a result of the spring's force being proportional to the the deflection of the spring - a 'linear' relationship.
For a magnet, the relationship between the separation (of the magnet and the object pulled, and the force exerted, is not a linear one. The force is inversely proportional to the SQUARE of the separation.
This would make the sluggish feel far more pronounced. I wonder if Mattit has found a way to minimise this phenomenon.
Regarding the O-ring type of concept for tone holes, because there is not a felt material that can bed in to accommodate irregularities, there needs to be a high degree of flatness of the tone hole edge, and very secure, accurate mounting and alignment of the key cups with the tone holes. This would mean a much higher standard of production than we are used to with clarinets, and presumably a corresponding higher price. It is probably non-viable for saxophones, simply because the instrument is inherently flimsy in order to keep the weight down.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2003-06-16 04:29
Hi, Gordon -
It seems to me, from just a cursory encounter with the one I was close enough to to touch, that it was indeed on the heavy side (as least... it Looked heavy - possibly because the 'tone hole covers', or flaps, if you will, were much sturdier (thicker) than ordinary key cups. By design they need to be a Very Flat surface. That may well be another reason they didn't become popular. As you say, too, because of the inherent flimsiness, it is probably a constant struggle to keep the thing adjusted. There is a weight limit most players are willing to endure.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2003-06-16 12:07
Gordon
In my mind, magnets would feel much better to play on, because:
-You could alter the strenghts of each of the magnets, thus making some keys 'easier' than others, to each player's own tastes,
-The keys would generally be easier to play, adding much finger dexterity,
-Magnets 'don't wear out' or require maintenance like springs do
-Maybe, when a key is on it's way up after being pressed, it would be much quicker than a spring, as well as much quicker to press down.
Of course this is simply speculation, I've never played on one of these flutes. Judging by this innovation, I personally believe it would be worth pursuing. Not necessarily the O-ring tone holes, but the magnetic keywork for sure. If this were incorporated into clarinets, I would consider it, and it would be worth the extra weight!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2003-06-16 14:03
Gordon -
The problem with magnets also occurred to me when I looked at the Matit Flutes site. You can't fight the inverse square law. If the magnets were kept, say, 1/8" away from the steel, the initial "stickiness" would be eased, but there would still be the decrease in attraction when the key was closed. The action of professional quality flutes is so good that I can't imagine magnets would make any perceptible difference.
I'd much rather see a metal-body clarinet with all the keys mounted on a single long axle, like a flute, so they would all have the same short, light action. Then makers could use gold springs and get the speed and precision of, say, a Haynes flute.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Benni
Date: 2003-06-16 15:10
But don't clarinets have much more air resistance than flutes? I would think the improved action would only help up to a point . . .
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rene
Date: 2003-06-16 16:40
Maybe they use two magnets with same polarity in a repelling action, working on the other side of the hinge. Or even two pairs of magnets, one repelling and the other attracting for a tight closing.
?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2003-06-16 18:23
It seems to me that any magnet would have to be fairly strong to compete with a spring--even on a flute. And certainly the expense is steep. Besides, don't magnets have some limits on their life and strength?
As to the O-ring thing on saxophones, it's probably fine under laboratory conditions, but out in the world things get bent--and the bigger the instrument the more prevalent the problem is. I can't imagine being able to quickly adjust an o-ring key to get through a gig. With kids, it would be a nightmare.
As for the clarinet, it's hard to make a universally accepted adjustment when the fingerings keep changing with the register. It's also hard to get things to be in reach but not underfoot. I recently had the chance to play a pair of Festivals with LH E-flat keys--a feature that I had always wanted. But in reality, it was way too easy to hit them by accident on the way to LH C#. I also relish the thought of an articulated G#, but most players don't want to give up that stable high F fingering which would have to be sacrificed.
I also like the Mazzeo system, but those stacks of rods really stick out from the horn and would be hard not to get bent--particularly in the hands of kids.
Of course, there are a number of players in Berlin, Vienna & Prague who don't seem to think that the Boehm system itself is that much of an improvement.
As for materials, it seems like the Greenlines are doing very well. I know several people who have them and love them, and it seems like they make much more effiencient use of the wood than conventional instruments.
Does anybody have an complaints about the Greenlines?
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2003-06-17 02:08
Rene, no matter whether are single or double magnets, that still does not address what Ken put simply as the inverse square law.
Morrigan:
"-You could alter the strengths of each of the magnets, thus making some keys 'easier' than others, to each player's own tastes".
It is difficult to alter the strength of a magnet, but very easy to alter the strength of a spring.
"-The keys would generally be easier to play, adding much finger dexterity"
The issue that Ken & I agree on would make it more DIFFICULT to play. Sure, there is less friction, but well designed springs have negligible friction anyway, especially compared with the effects of the inverse square law, which would give a feel not unlike that of huge friction.
"-Magnets 'don't wear out' or require maintenance like springs do"
Springs, unless they are made from steel, need zero maintenance. I am confident that if they are properly designed, springs of quality stainless steel can perform as well as ANY other spring material. A lot has to do with appropriate spring cradle design, distance of the cradle from the hinge axis, and especially the diameter-to-length ratio.
"-Maybe, when a key is on it's way up after being pressed, it would be much quicker than a spring, as well as much quicker to press down."
If it is quicker to come up, then it is because the force is stronger, which means the player has to fight more force to press it down. The feel that players really don't like is when the force CHANGES dramatically during the travel, and this would be made to be a serious problem by using magnets, because of the inverse square property discussed above.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cyso_clarinetist
Date: 2003-06-17 02:13
How can african blackwood be saved? By using greenline clarinets! Greenline greenline greenline!!! They are awesome horns!!
- James
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bradley
Date: 2003-06-17 02:53
James- just because you found one good Greenline horn doesn't mean they're awesome by any stretch. Also, aren't greenline horns made from the same wood either way? If you run out of spare wood to process then you're gonna have to start using perfect Grenadilla eventually.
Bradley
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2003-06-17 04:07
I suspect there are several plastics and many composite plastics that would be as good as Greenline (and timber) providing the design is in the professional echelons, without using any grenadilla.
I believe that Buffet just wants us to get used to the idea gradually, with less negative judgement, by providing some grenadilla warm fuzzies in the composite. They are chipping away at the grenadilla-rules-supreme syndrome, so we can actually face the reality that other materials are now better for clarinet construction, without detracting from tone.
*ducks for cover!*
Post Edited (2003-06-17 04:08)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rene
Date: 2003-06-17 09:37
Gordon, with repelling magnets the physics would work the other way. They repell the strongest, when they are in touch, but that would never happen. With two pairs of magnets that never touch one can even make an almost linear action. I am not as silly as I look :-) (don't take that remark too serious - don't even comment on it :-).
However, I think magnets are either too weak or too large to work properly.
I would love to learn more about that carbon material. One needs a light, but stabile material for clarinets. It should also not conduct heat well, so it can warm up in the interior unlike that plastic. That Greeline stuff seems to be good, but it is rather heavy.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2003-06-17 13:00
"....with repelling magnets the physics would work the other way...."
But the inverse square law still applies to that repulsion.
To get a repulsion that is anywhere near as linear as a spring there would need to be quite a large separation between two magnets. This means the magnets would have to be very strong. As you say "I think magnets are.....too large to work properly. This would also potentially create all manner of problems such as wrecking of credit cards that pass near the flute.
What intrigues me is that you wrote "With two pairs of magnets that never touch one can even make an almost linear action." Did you mean 2 pairs, i.e. 4 magnets for each key? What configuration are you thinking of for these magnets to achieve linear effects? I'm keen to learn!
Regarding the material for the body, there are other options perhaps worth considering.
1. Consider the SOLID carbon of the last mouthpiece listed in this web site:
http://www.gis.net/~schwartz/gisup/suguid2.htm
From the description, lack of detail, and price I suspect that this is made from some form of linked 'buckyballs' ('fullerines'). What say you?
2. How about 'liquidmetal' (trade mark) that probably has unique acoustic properties, and is extremely strong and rigid for its weight, and can be cast almost as easily as plastic but with extreme accuracy. (Scalpel blades can be used straight from the mould without sharpening.)
http://www.liquidmetal.com/
Post Edited (2003-06-20 14:02)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2003-06-17 14:34
Great stuff, Gordon.
Looking through the Weiner and WW&BW catalogs, I see a number sax mouthpiece makers who charge around $1,000, so I'm not surprised to see Sugal's prices. Sax players seem to be even more nuts about old mouthpiece styles than clarinetists, and there are many more styles of sax sound than clarinet sound. Sugal's clarinet mouthpieces at http://www.gis.net/~schwartz/gisup/suguid6.htm are around $500 and are apparently designed solely for jazz.
Who knows what they mean by "pure carbon"? Built-up layers of carbon black? Diamond? Or is there a third, metallic form?
The Liquidmetal material is also interesting. Molded scalpels!!!! If it's harder than titanium, how would you adjust a liquidmetal reed? Suppose it had a sharp corner. You'd cut yourself to shreds.
I'll stick with my wood. (Knock liquidmetal.)
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2003-06-17 15:08
A third carbon state is graphite. I suppose carbon fibre is a fourth. I guess a fifth includes the nanotube and fullerine technology, and that either of these two can be made into a light, solid, very rigid mass, something like a honey comb, cork, or closed-cell foam structure at a molecular level.
I see a future in liquidmetal for not only cast clarinet bodies, but also very cheap, cast keys, at half the present metal mass (hence lighter), yet stronger, and highly resistant to corrosion.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jim lande
Date: 2003-06-18 04:24
Liquid metal sounds like good stuff. Can it be machined once it is cast?
One thought for new materials for the body. There seems to be agreement on this list that the air in the clarinet vibrates and that vibrations in the body do not contribute to sound. Would this still be the case if the body was very light and perhaps more rigid than wood or plastic. Might be good, might be bad. Might not make any difference.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2003-06-18 14:33
Jim -
This has been discussed *many* times on the Klarinet board, and the result is that vibration of the instrument has no effect, or, at most, only a tiny one. The material (silver, gold) and thickness of metal in a flute has perhaps a small effect on the sound, but, as with a clarinet, vibration of the tube is quite small compared with vibration of the air column.
This is not the same with all instruments.
Some instruments are struck and vibrate -- bells, cymbals, etc. The sound quality depends on the material and the manner of striking (clashing, hard beater, soft beater), and the volume depends on the striking impact and the size of the vibrating area.
Some instruments are struck, vibrate and have the vibration amplified by a resonant air space -- xylophone, vibraphone, tubular bells. The sound quality depends on the material and manner of striking, and the volume depends on the striking impact, and the size of the resonating area and, to some extent, the size of the vibrating area. The material surrounding the resonating area has very little effect. A xylophone would produce mostly clicking without resonators, and a vibraphone, which is usually played with soft mallets, would be nearly inaudible. Tubular bells are half-and-half.
Some instruments have a small area that excited, vibrates and has the vibrating area directly connected to a sounding surface -- violin, guitar. In these, the sounding surface -- the body of a violin or guitar -- is quite large compared to the excited area (the string). The vibration of the string is transmitted directly to the top of the instrument through the bridge. The vibration of the top is reinforced by the air inside the instrument, which causes vibration of the belly, which is also directly connected to the top through the sound post and the sides.
With the piano, the strings are connected directly to the sound board, which is excited directly, and also, I think, by vibration of the air beneath it as well as sympathetically with the string.
Instruments that produce volume through vibration of the body have as large a body surface as possible. A tubular violin would be very soft. The vibrating surface is comparatively small. Also, the body is made of thin, resonant material, and the acoustics of the interior are designed to make that material vibrate. The sound board of a piano is also as large as possible.
The clarinet has the smallest body surface area possible -- a tube. The excited surface -- the reed -- is also small. What's large is, once again, the stuff that vibrates -- the air inside the instrument -- which is driven by the reed connected directly to it.
Again, with the violin, the string is connected (through the bridge) to the top and drives the vibration of the top. With the clarinet, the reed is in direct contact with the air inside the tube and drives its vibration. Any vibration of the clarinet body is purely sympathetic and thus much smaller than that's driven directly -- the air.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Pinner
Date: 2003-06-19 23:48
Sounds like it is right up there with other useful 21st century innovations like the internet refrigerator. The mind boggles.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2003-06-20 12:28
Many years ago I worked with a scientist who was experimenting with barium ferrite. His theory was that if he could find a way to feed it to some type of very tiny animacule they would eliminate it in tiny rod shapes which could then be easily aligned. Years later I worked with magnetic material experts and I never did fully understand what they were doing. But I do know that discussions about magnetic principles by non-experts are fun reading.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2003-06-20 16:04
What a very interesting discussion, partic. re: "magnetic" key action. I made a quickie patent search on USPTO, using clarinet AND magnet, 11 pats came up, only US 4,957,029 , Kahonen [FI] seems related, and worthwhile reading for his thots and development. Research it! Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2003-06-21 01:55
Gordon, if you mean for patent retrieval/copying/searching, use www.uspto.gov Or make a Google search for USPTO, click on the "Databases", then "issued patents", then "quick search" [for a two-word search] , or "advanced search" for more Boolean-logic-searching, or Patent Number search with the #. I used an inst. name AND magnetic, the flute search turned up a lot of electronic pats! Try other word combinations, luck, Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: deepriver27
Date: 2003-06-22 02:03
How would magnetic keys be effected if you faced North, South, East or West? And I guess playing at the North or South Pole would once and for all be out of the question.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2003-06-22 06:29
The effect would be barely measurable forces, which would not have a hope of interfering.
Thanks Don.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2003-06-23 07:39
I have a Greenline question. One thing that I can't find in the Klarinet archives is the effect of sunlight on the epoxy. Is this affected more or less than grenadilla would tend to be?
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2003-06-23 13:36
Allen: can't say specifically but "UV Stabilizers" are added to all plastics that are expected to be used in outdoor molded part applications. Whether the greenline process incorporates these in the epoxy resins they use I just don't know.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2003-06-23 23:57
One such stabiliser is 'lamp black' (or soot). It could easily be added and contribute to the blackness. However the surface of most polymers does indeed suffer from UV, even when stabilised.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
