 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: javier garcia m
Date: 2004-04-13 20:42
Attachment: clarinete.jpg (207k)
About two months ago there was a discussion about the position of the C#/G# hole.
Here is a photo of my A-Rossi (Rosewood) with this hole in the front, with the normal mechanism.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2004-04-13 22:34
What a fine pic of a beautiful, certainly great, clarinet, J G ! Being a "single-body" inst. allows for proper tonehole placement, not far on the side [near the water-run!] as with 2 joint [non-enhanced!] horns. I have a single-body Pruefer with its front-located C#/G# articulated, sure gives clean notes! [without having to be sure to match up the tenon hole with the lower joint!!]. For a semi-antique its still good! TKS, Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2004-04-14 11:29
In the last discussion to which you refer, there was probably some confusing ambiguity.
From memory, I think you were describing a G# tone hole 'in the front' in the context where the G# (in the front) of an articulated G# was discussed.
In the context of an articulated G# being discussed, 'in the front' meant to me that the key cup was on the same side of the hinging as the 'touch piece'. I said that this was impossible without the articulation, and still assert this.
Clearly there was confusion over the meaning of 'in the front'.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: javier garcia m
Date: 2004-04-14 13:00
Maybe there is a confusion, the hole is in the front side of the clarinet, but no in the middle.
But now, Rossi has changed the design of his models, and the hole for the C#/G# is on the other side, but it is raised comparing with the standard design
http://www.rossiclarinet.cl/llave6.htm
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2004-04-14 13:40
J G -These two pics are of different [models] are they not?, the first being YOURS, and the second being a pic by Rossi? The second appears to be of the "traditional" SIDE location, but perhaps better located Vertically so as to be of more-correct size. I still prefer the articulation for this tonehole to be "in-line" with the upper/lower stacks. Comments? Gordon, Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-04-14 14:54
The C#/G# key design Rossi originally used, with the hole nearly on top of the instrument, had a very short touch lever and an equally short key lever. This meant that your left little finger had to travel a fairly long distance to open the key, and move in an arc rather than straight. Also, the pad opened at an angle.
When I have tried Rossis, I haven't noticed a particular problem, but obviously Rossi did, since he's now moved the hole around to the side and lengthened the touch lever. It shows that he's constantly thinking about and improving his design.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: javier garcia m
Date: 2004-04-14 17:09
Don, the first pic is my A-Rossi. I bought it new in 1996 (or 97? I don't remember exactly) its serial number is 110. The other pic, from Rossi website is the current model. So there is design changes as Ken says. Regardless of the short lever I don't feel problems to touch the key, nor for pitch, projection for the C#/G#.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2004-04-15 00:10
I have not played any clarinet with these short levers, but I certainly find the combination of movement through a small-radius arc, and short key travel (which means more force needed by finger) to be less than desirable on the pre-Boehm instruments, particularly for a little finger, which is considerably weaker than the rest.
With a one-piece body, it is possible to get the tone hole in the ideal north-south location, which means it can be of larger diameter, which lessens the venting requirement, and reduces the likelihood of water collecting.
This is all good stuff, and means that the length of the key cup arm (which affects venting) can be made a little shorter, lifting the tone hole further from the river of condensation, but it sure seems that Rossi overdid it in one of those pics. I doubt that he is proud of having done that before returning to a better compromise.
Don, you wrote, "I still prefer the articulation for this tonehole to be "in-line" with the upper/lower stacks. Comments? Gordon"
I'm not too sure what you referred to 'articulation' here. Other than aesthetics, I can see little point in having the tone hole in line with the others of the stack keys, unless it is for the purpose of articulating the key, in which the mechanics of the situation dictates its location. Or did you mean that you want the hinges in line?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2004-04-15 14:11
Hi Gordon - Rereading my post, since I much prefer the articulated structure over the "usual" touch-hinge-pad structures, I believe I was attempting to point out one of the advantages of it, the similar C#/G# sound character as the adjacent notes. As I frequently do, I prob. used too many words [ala Mozart's notes??]. Playing more bass cl than sop. any more, I do not have the disadvantage of the artic. in the altissimo, and believe my Selmer 33's structure is the best I've played. {Its all on the U J, except for the "closing finger" from the L J}. TKS for explaining the 2 pics, J G. Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
