 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: atl4413
Date: 2004-02-10 16:08
I have seen a few threads regarding Tom Ridenour's TR-147, but I wanted to ask some specific questions about it.
I know that there are clarinetists at many different levels posting on this site, so I have to say that I hope to get a reply from a professional; as I am certainly not.
I would classify myself as an "intermediate" player. I do not ever expect to play professionally, but would like a clarinet that has great sound. Until now, since the 6th grade and I am now in my 30's, I have always played a typical plastic "student" clarinet. I would love a real, honest to goodness, clarinet - a wood one - at least I thought I did.
I spoke with Mr. Ridenour, who I must say is fabulously nice and generous with his time, about which clarinet would be a good choice for someone at my level. He strongly suggested against a wood clarinet, especially one with silver keys, because of the upkeep associate with it. Cracking too is a consideration. Inasmuch as I do not play professionally, he said that it wouldn't be worth it.
He recommended instead the TR-147; which he claims has sound that is equal to, or better, than an Opus or a Sonata (which is what I secretly wanted). He also said that the nickel plated keys have better tactile sense than the silver plated, which are more difficult to play with. He said that the Rhapsodie is too new for him to give an opinion on.
Can anyone give me an opinion on this clarinet? I don't mind spending the $800.00 for it, if it is indeed all that Mr. Ridenour says it is. I have a great amount of respect for him, but really, who is going to say that something they designed isn't good?
Is a hard rubber clarinet the same as a plastic ABS clarinet?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Robert Small
Date: 2004-02-10 16:48
I haven't tried this instrument but I disagree with TR about nickel having a better tactile quality than silver. It's just the opposite in my opinion. Nickel has a harder and more slippery feel than silver making it more difficult to keep the fingers on the keys. When playing fast passages it's easy for the fingers to slide off of nickel keys. Silver is more secure. Also I think silver plate is more durable than nickel. And though silver does tarnish the tarnish is easily removed with silver polish. Frankly what TR told you sounds like a sales pitch to me.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2004-02-10 17:08
I am very definitely not a professional.
I am wondering how guilty Mr Ridenour feels about designing the wooden clarinet with silver-plated keys that I was recently foolish enough to buy.
I am also wondering why most models of clarinet sold in England, including my plastic Yamaha, have silver-plated keys when these are such a burden on the player. Now I know why I play so many wrong notes. Obviously I should have bought nickel-plated. Or perhaps the problem is that I never clean the silver. Since it hasn't visibly tarnished in three years, I didn't know I had to.
I have no experience with the TR-147. I have some sympathy with the fear of wood cracking, but the TR is not the only non-wood option if that is really an issue.
I think Ridenour is just trying a little too hard to sell what may well be an excellent product.
Hard rubber is rubber. ABS is acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene. They are different materials; whether one is intrinsically better than the other is open to debate.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: msroboto
Date: 2004-02-10 17:11
I too needed to buy a horn when I got back into playing. I decided that I needed to buy something that would make me stop shopping. The only way for me to do that was to buy THE clarinet I always wanted. I figured if I bought anything else I would always wonder and be shopping for the clarinet instead of practicing. Also, it took a lot of excuses away for me. I knew it wasn't the horn getting in my way.
If you think the TR-147 will do that for you go for.
I bet you will still always want the LeBlanc though no matter how well this one plays.
Also, just an enthusiast never to be a professional.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ChrisC
Date: 2004-02-10 18:17
I'm likewise not a professional, but my experience with a TR-147 is that it plays *much* better than my Sonata, in terms of feel and ease of response, and certainly does not suffer in the tone department for being made of hard rubber. However, I have only played one Sonata and one TR-147, so I'm not sure if I can make a valid conclusion based on such a limited sample. I don't think that the TR-147 can be described as a professional instrument by any stretch of the imagination, but my own extremely limited experience suggests that it is a fundamentally better instrument than others in its price range.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2004-02-10 18:42
kia ora
if you've read the past threads on this clarinet you will have seen my comments already, but i sumarise....
- great tone
-great intonation
- awful mouthpiece (buy new one or use your "old favourite")
- was not happy with keys (apparently this has been fixed on newer models)
however- the Nickel vrs silver key thing is something i'd like to comment on. i remember "not liking" nickel keys on Leblanc and Buffet clarinets i have played over the years. In particular trying an R13 in Cincinnati and thinking that it was the best sounding horn i'd ever played, but the keys felt slippery.
the odd thing is that i never get this feeling when playing "nickel plated student clarinets" (the slippery feeling, not the "this is the best horn i've ever played" feeling). And, despite not being happy with the keywork on the Ridenours i've seen (including one still for sale here in Auckland) any feeling of "slipperyness" was not part of the problem.
hmmmm
hope that was helpful
donald
disclaimer- i earn only about half of my income playing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2004-02-10 20:48
Brook Mays sells the Bb TR-147 for $795 - OK, a high end beginner/intermediate clarinet.
They sell the TR-147 in A for $1695 - certainly no longer anything other than a professional price.
The TR-147 in C is even higher at $1995.
If equal care/quality goes into each model, the difference would have to be in the cost/unit savings of greater production volume. It would be more confusing to have different quality standards for instruments of the same model designation but differing only in the key of the instrument.
So how are we to evaluate this offering - as a student instrument or as a pro instrument?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2004-02-10 22:47
Some people exhibit skin allergies after contact with nickel. I don't, so it's not a big deal with me. Also, I believe Ridenour to be very knowledgeable about Clarinets.
However, I wonder what "a better tactile sense" really means? Based on whose preferences?.
Regards,
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Synonymous Botch
Date: 2004-02-11 12:17
Unless the instruments are hand tuned, and have better fit on the key/rod mechanism, these prices are prohibitive.
The instrument is a relative bargain, second hand.
Mine cost (including overhaul) less than $200 USD and needed little help.
Prices approaching Two thousand US Dollars are too much for a clarinet - any large production clarinet, given the precipitous fall in residual value the instrument exhibits.
I would consider spending this kind of money if and only if the instrument were in fact hand made, to my requirements.
Stephen Fox
Guy Chadash
Senor Rossi
Hammeschmidt
Eaton of the UK
All come in around this price point... TR has a long way to go to reach this level of fit and finish.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: atl4413
Date: 2004-02-11 13:22
Well, here's the scoop....
I appreciate so much everyone posting on this thread. The input helped me to make a decision.
After much deliberation, I decided to purchase the TR-147 directly from Mr. Ridenour, who has promised that he will hand-tune it himself.
I also purchased an alternate mouthpiece (model RZ), a couple of his books and the ATG reed finishing system.
I've learned, after speaking with several professionals who were kind enough to take a few minutes on the telephone, that for the most part everyone has their preference. Some swear by Buffet clarinets and will play no other, some feel they are garbage. Some like Rossi, some didn't, and no one liked Bundy (hee hee). For the most part, everyone agreed that the LeBlanc Sonata, which is priced not too much higher than the TR-147, was a good clarinet.
I chose the latter over the LeBlanc because if one is pretty much just as good as the other, I didn't want to deal with possible cracks and splits. Plus, as I said before, I am not a professional and most likely wouldn't pick up on the differences between the two. Also, there is a 5 year warranty on the TR-147 and Mr. Ridenour is most amenable to tuning it up whenever it needs it.
He appears to be a super-nice, down to earth professional who is really passionate about his profession and loves the clarinet.
I will be happily playing come this Friday.....
Thanks again...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rev. Avery
Date: 2004-02-11 14:44
Just saw this post, otherwise I would have chimed in sooner 
There are two versions of the 147. The newer version (which you’ll be getting) has the in-line trill keys. I purchased mine used (the new version) in pristine condition. I love it.
Tom is a great guy. He's passionate about his belief in his products, as anyone of us would be if it were us. His pedagogy (IMHO) is both impressive and trustworthy.
If you’d like to talk to me more about the 147, email me. I’d really like to hear from you. I have some observations that you might appreciate.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-02-11 14:51
John -
I definitely prefer silver over nickel. For me, nickel is slippery. My fingers keep sliding, particularly on the left little finger key for F/C. Also, I have a slight allergy to nickel. Finally, the thin nickel plating tends to flake off, and there have been many complaints that Buffet's silver plating wears through quickly, exposing the copper under-plating.
My main instruments are R-13s from the early 1970s with unplated German silver keys, which I like best of all.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-02-11 16:12
I am in accord with Ken in a number of ways...I feel that the wood instrument is far more flexible and in spite of crack worrying It affords a response and flexibility of tone that no plastic or rubber instrument can give. On top of this, rubber is also prone to shrinking and atmospheric change as much as wood is, so I am not quite sure if this is such a tremendous advantage over a period of say 30 years.
As to silver keys, they offer a bit more flexiility on sliding from lower pinky keys and give a cleaner feel to playing. , I once burrowed a nickel plated clarinet when once in a jam, and could not stand the lack of smoothness to the keys, and this did not enhance sliding in any way...
As to the set up I use Glotin leather pads(synthetically impregnated) and Selmer clarinets which I had done by Brannen in terms of tuning>
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: L. Omar Henderson
Date: 2004-02-12 02:31
I have tried several of Tom's TR-147's and like them very much. My own preference for "tactile feel" is for silver keys, which for me at least have a less slippery feel than nickel plated keys.
We have had long discussions about the materials that horns are made from but most will agree (if that is possible on this BB?) that the workmanship and attention to detail, as well as undercutting, and voicing and tuning by an expert, go a long way to make a superior horn. I am not a particular fan of hard rubber because it too is subject to environmental disruptions as noted by others. Buffet has certainly done an admirable job, IMHO, with the Greenline, which is a non-wood (other than the sawdust bound together by carbon fiber and resin) instrument with attention to manufacturing detail.
In some of my own recent escapades at reworking resin horns I have found that alterations to the size, placement, and undercutting of tone holes will make dramatic differences in the tone and intonation of a resin horn. There are of course tradeoffs when moving and resizing tone holes because it may affect other notes in the same or different registers. Many student level resin horns from the "Big 4" which I have experimented with would IMO benefit from some slight modifications and tuning tweaks. Tom has a vast amount of experience both in the design and acoustics of clarinets, but also in tuning and voicing a clarinet for final improvement. The two TR147 clarinets that I played had superb intonation and good tone.
Tone of course is a subjective criteria to non-professionals like myself but I do have a tonal ear which can be both a blessing and a curse at times. In my opinion, the tone is just different than a Buffet (if that is what you want to hear) but the same could be said for other brands of intermediate and professional level clarinets and that is why many players choose a particular brand. Tone may also be blended within a clarinet section by a good player and avoid getting "wacked" by the Buffet mafia. Tonal signatures for various brands of clarinets can be identified by acoustic spectrograph analysis and subsequent deconvolution of the frequency patterns. My own experiments with resin horns indicate to me that a resin horn can be modified to produce a tonal signature very similar to any instrument brand that one desires - if one so desires?
The Doctor
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rev. Avery
Date: 2004-02-12 07:58
I appreciate the post Doc – because of it’s unbiased nature. My input might be a little biased I’ve filed your post for future reference.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-02-12 14:17
Doc -
I'm perfectly willing to believe that different brands have different tonal signatures, though I think they're more obvious to the player than the listener. In particular, I think my (extensively tweaked) Buffet R-13s feel and sound different from other maker, and even other Buffet models.
So -- to your ears, does the TR-147 approach any other model? Perhaps the Leblanc Opus or the Selmer Signature?
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rev. Avery
Date: 2004-02-12 14:30
Here's what an individual from this BB wrote me who has both an Opus and a TR-147:
"I paid under $100 for my first [TR-147], and had it overhauled. Plays great, and there's no worry about cracking during a ... winter. (It's almost as good as my Opus - dangit.)"
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ray
Date: 2004-02-12 14:47
David Dow feels that the wooden clarinet offers far more flexibility in tone than clarinets made of other materials. I'm not sure what that means - can someone elaborate?
Also, what do you suppose is inherent in wood that provides this flexibility? Or is it something inherent in the bore design of wooden clarinets but not in rubber or plastic?
Plastic is prone to atmospheric change big time, though maybe not in the way that David is thinking. Twice I have played my outdoor clarinet, a V40, in temperatures in the low 40's. Both times the lower joint shrunk enough to bind the LH F/C lever (the long one) between its posts so it wouldn't return after it was pressed. I verified this by putting the joint in the refrigerator the next day.
People who brought out wooden clarinets those evenings didn't have the problem.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: atl4413
Date: 2004-02-12 14:55
Ray - what is the answer? To have one of each (wood & non-wood) so that if one exhibits a problem, you can play the other?
Fred wrote earlier, speaking about the TR-147, "So how are we to evaluate this offering - as a student instrument or as a pro instrument?"
Does anyone have an answer to that question?
Is there any non-wood clarinet that someone would consider a "professional" model?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Morton
Date: 2004-02-12 17:00
Regarding plated keys: contrary to what one poster suggested, nickel is a great deal harder than silver, which could offer an explanation of the slippery sensation some have mentioned. Nickel therefore wears much better.
I suppose an inert material like nickel or silver is indicated for corrosion resistance, but I think Ken's preference for unplated nickel silver makes perfect sense. Nickel silver is less common than it was in the first half of the 20th century, but was widely preferred then partly because although similar to brass, it did not show yellow when the nickel plating had worn through.
John Morton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: atl4413
Date: 2004-02-12 17:20
Here's a question - what is the material under the nickel plating?
I still have my very first student clarinet, an Artley Prelude, and most of the keys have yellow "dots" where the nickel has worn off.
It looks hideous.....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rev. Avery
Date: 2004-02-12 19:11
Hi,
The TR-147 is pure rubber. It doesn't have the things added to it's constitution like the earlier rubber clarinets which caused them to green and smell.
Now, I'm not a scientist/biologist and therefore I'm talking off the top of my head here but -- though the TR-147 isn't "wood" it is pure rubber from the rubber tree (which I think is wood?). Therefore I don't think the TR-147 is in the same category as plastic/resin clarinets.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: L. Omar Henderson
Date: 2004-02-12 19:20
Ken,
The TR-147 sounded to me more like an Opus (and LeBlancs in general) but I hear a difference between the Buffet Greenline R-13 and the regular R-13 (a non-scientific study). Different clarinets within the same brand and model have slightly different tones but with a little mathematical wizardry there are characteristic sound signatures within a brand and especially within a model - This latter observation is like the observation that traffic accidents increase with traffic density - duh!!!
The Doctor
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-02-12 20:17
Doc -
Thanks for the information. I'm not surprised that the TR-147 sounds like an Opus, given that Tom designed them both.
I haven't played one of them yet, but I'm anxious to try.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rev. Avery
Date: 2004-02-13 12:00
att14413 referred to this in a note above:
"Fred wrote earlier, speaking about the TR-147, "So how are we to evaluate this offering - as a student instrument or as a pro instrument?" Does anyone have an answer to that question?"
I've been giving this some thought (though, as all of you know I'm no expert).
What does make one clarinet "professional" and another "intermediate" or "student?"
I know there are some basics: quality of craftsmanship; quality of keys; quality of material; price ....
But, Tom plays his TR-147 exclusively. He's a professional, playing a student model? Kenny Davern plays a Conn 16 plastic clarinet! He's a professional, playing a student model?
When I first listened to Kenny's playing I loved his sound. Then I read the liner notes and found out what he was playing! Boy, did I feel stupid He wasn't playing a professional clarinet! How could I be enjoying his sound?
I'm listening to Kenny now and I don't know if I should be enjoying this or not because he's playing a plastic clarinet.
Doc said that resin clarinets can be modified to produce a tonal signature very similar to any instrument brand that one desires. Now, if he's correct (and I have no reason to doubt him) what does that mean? A resin clarinet can be modified to produce a tonal signature almost as good as a wood clarinet? Seems to be working for Kenny Davern.
Someone else mentioned extensively tweaking Buffet R-13's. A professional model benefiting from extensive tweaking? I thought only cheap, non-professional models would need the benefit from tweaking?
All this is presented tongue-in-cheekly
But seriously, I'm wondering if the concept of "professional" "intermediate" "student" isn't maybe over-hyped?
Maybe, in the end, what sounds good is what sounds good?
I'll go back to listening to Kenny now ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Avie
Date: 2004-02-13 13:55
A rubber or plastic clarinet should be less expensive than a wooden one because once the mold is made plastic and rubber clarinets can be produced inexpensively. A wooden clarinet has to be turned and shaped individually. The material of the upper and lower joints plays less of a part in the tone quality than the reed, mouthpiece, key action and of course the person behind the instrument. The key plating is a matter of preferance. Long hours of practice with one instrument is probabaly the most important thing in the long run.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-02-13 18:46
Rev. Avery -
I have played a number of non-wood artist-quality clarinets, and I can tell you that they play just as well as wood. It all depends on how carefully they are made.
I'm the one who said my R-13s have been extensively tweaked -- in my case by Kalmen Opperman. For me, they play dramatically better than un-tweaked instruments. The toneholes have additional undercutting, often at an angle. The bore has small adjustments, as does the bell. The barrel is custom-made to fit the particular instrument, mouthpiece and player. The result is big improvements in intonation, response and evenness of scale.
All of these things can be done on a plastic instrument, and, from the descriptions on his website, that's what Tom Ridenour does with his various levels of service. I'm not sure how much hand work he does on the TR-147.
For much more, see:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=7569&t=7550
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=36683&t=36456
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=13141&t=13032
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=101693&t=101582
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=96108&t=95957
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: atl4413
Date: 2004-02-13 19:21
Ken, I always find your posts informative....
I chose option V (total package) with the TR-147 that I ordered. It's supposed to be here today and I must say, I keep checking every 20 minutes for the Fed Ex truck to pull up.
I'll post on Monday to let you know what my opinion, not that it really matters that much, is - I'm sure I'll love it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rev. Avery
Date: 2004-02-13 20:47
Thanks for your reply Ken. I'm finding this whole topic very interesting and informative. I love stuff that makes me think.
Margaret, I can't wait to read your post Monday. I hope you'll be a pleased as I was.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2004-02-13 21:28
What prices does Tom list for his TR-147 at different option levels? Perhaps option levels explain the wide discrepancy of pricing between Bb instruments (perhaps no tweeking) and TR-147's in A and C (possibly tweeked?) I wish Tom was in this thread.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2004-02-14 03:46
The great difference in pricing between the Bb, A and C clarinets is most likely due to the need to recover the cost of tooling. Precision plastic mold tooling is very costly- clearly the usage of A and C (and Eb) horns is far below that of the standard Bb, and the die cost must be spread over far fewer units. Hence, the price difference.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rev. Avery
Date: 2004-02-14 09:38
Are the Ridenour A and C clarinets plastic? I guess I was assuming they are hard rubber too.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: wyatt
Date: 2004-02-14 14:36
i still believe it is mostly the player and not the horn.
I play one of the best horns on the market and I am far (very far) from being one of the best player in the world.
Blame the player or enjoy the player and not the horn.
peacee
bob gardner}ÜJ
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2004-02-14 14:37
Sorry-should not have used the term "plastic" in place of "hard rubber". But, the concept of spreading tooling costs is the thing......
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: atl4413
Date: 2004-02-15 03:57
Well, I wish that I could say the reason for my not posting late yesterday or earlier today is that I have been practicing, practicing, practicing.
But, no - sadly.
The "Brown" carrier (can we say names here - U_P_S?) has "lost" the package. It left Texas on Wednesday and somewhere on a plane from there to Atlanta, it is not to be found. Could they have accidentally flushed a 1 foot by 1 foot by 2 foot package?
Had to wait until this morning to request the sender (Mr. Ridenour used a local postal store - something like Postal Mart) request a trace with UPS. It's totally not Mr. Ridenour's fault, but I'm sick to my stomach.
UPS says, "don't worry, it's insured, we'll pay for it to be replaced". But, if they've definitely lost it and he has to pick another out to send, it's not going to be the same. This particular one was unique because of the extra work that he put into it, and he said that he hand picked it. Although he's definitely not like most people I have ever met, most people would be reluctant to put that kind of work into a 2nd one.
And, he's leaving the country sometime soon, so there's not time for it. I'm just going to have to wait and be patient. Either they find it, or in a month or so I'll get another.
Of all the packages in the world, did it have to be this one? I just cannot believe it....
Don't these people know that sometimes things just aren't "replaceable"?
So frustrated, staring at my music stand and deciding that I'll NEVER use "brown" - ever!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rev. Avery
Date: 2004-02-15 09:31
I just feel sick for you! ![[frown]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie2.gif) I'm so sorry. But, there is hope it will be found. I know that doesn't ease the pain right now though.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: atl4413
Date: 2004-02-15 22:03
Thanks for the remark Rev. By the way, I sent you an e-mail and await your reply whenever you have a minute.
Still hoping that Monday morning they'll miraculously find it.
Mr. Ridenour couldn't be nicer about it; when he found out he said that he had no problem doing it all over again. I just have to wait a few months.
Well, if that's what it takes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rev. Avery
Date: 2004-02-15 23:44
I can't wait to get your email. As of right now: Sunday 7:45 pm Eastern Standard I haven't received it. Sometimes my server is goofy. So, if you don't hear back from me by later tomorrow, please try again.
It's nice to have someone to talk to about this great instrument
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
