 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: ariel3
Date: 2004-10-18 16:02
Hi Ken, Thanks for sharing this information about Mazzeo's website. I should have mentioned it when I asked if anyone else out there played the Mazzeo system. I have played my Mazzeo horns for 30 years now and love them. From the lack of response to my question (about 5 pages earlier on this Board) I have located nobody else who plays them. The only two persons I can recall from my personal experience were Cloyd Williams of the Minnesota Orchestra and Roland Anfinson, University of Wisconsin who was my teacher and who introduced me to the system.
Needless to say, I take very good care of these horns and cherish them.
Gene Hall
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phat Cat
Date: 2004-10-18 16:15
His 1970 Buffet looks like a clarinet by S. Dali, but the "melted" key look may have a rational basis. Many of the touch pieces of traditional clarinet keys are convex and nearly symmetric even though this may be sub-optimal for the actual contact area with the finger (or thumb). It looks like Mazzeo was attempting to make some keys more ergonomic, partuclarly those for the index fingers and l. h. thumb, which control more than one key, each with a different contact area.
This baby must weigh a ton, even without a metal bell ring. A fascinating glimpse of someone thinking outside the box.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-10-18 17:12
Gene -
I'm not sure whether this was mentioned on the earlier Mazzeo thread, but Sherman Friedland was a Mazzeo student and plays his instruments. He has lots of Mazzeo material on his site, http://clarinet.cc/. There are also numerous threads in the archives.
Best regards.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2004-10-18 17:32
Hi Ken,
I had the pleasure of chatting with Mazzeo at the Mid-west Band Clinic in the late 1970s. He was a real trip and quite the marketier.
I have a Mazzeo Bundy for outdoor moist gigs but do not play it often. IMHO, the cover thimb hole should be on all beginner clarinets.
HRL
PS For those that have not been at the Shrine of Music at USD, it is worth a 100 mile out of the way trip. So if you are ever on I-80 close to OMA, take a Northerly turn (and also try to visit LaMars, IA, the home of Blue Bunny and the Ice Cream Capital of the World).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Terry Stibal
Date: 2004-10-18 19:59
I am speaking from half remembered facts read many years ago, but didn't Rosario Mazzeo have some repetitive motion ailments that affected his ability to play clarinet? Some sort of joint problems with the LH thumb might account for the rather bizarre touchpiece for the LH thumb.
I know that he had stopped playing completely as far as his lessons went (and he wrote about having done so in the late 1980's or so). But, I don't clearly remember the reason for doing so, at least not at this remove.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-10-18 20:37
I am not quite sure why the clarinet world never embraced some of the wonderful improvements made by M on the clarinet...however, the mechanisim on his instruments did improve intonation and rightly increase the warmth and tuning..
Thanks for the wonderful link!!!!
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2004-10-18 22:41
TKS, Hank, YES, from the BUSY KC area, take I 29 N , it goes close to Ver. , we stayed in Sioux City, ?more interesting? VERY WELL WORTH WHILE. Fine collections and exhibiting, Say Hello to Debbi for me, they now have my old Conn Alto cl , and will prob. have more of my old goodies. Yes, M was very creative, I can post the #'s of his pats if asked. Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2004-10-18 23:39
David poses a very good question. I have often wondered why some of these ideas never caught on. I think it is possible that many players were reluctant to try some of the new mechanisms, even though Mazzeo's were not radical by any means. I also speculate whether the fact that Selmer marketed his mechanism and designs had anything to do with it, since they were not the dominant clarinet maker through this period.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2004-10-19 01:21
Hi,
I have mentioned it before on this BB but the Mazzeo does not work for me for one simple reason. That reason is I use the technique of keeping my RH down when descending below the break but no lower than G and then returning. Anytime I'd press an A, I would get a Bb.
I just did not want to give up this technique which I believe outweighs the sonic advantages of the alternate Bb fingering.
HRL
PS But I still contend that the covered thumb hole is really a great idea. Then there is the MacInntyre (sp.?).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2004-10-19 01:46
I dont play my Bundy M much at all, have been working-up my Stubbins Noblet [which I prefer for the "cleanest" /easiest Bb], in spare time between cl repairs for kids, keeping the BW happy playing Dupl. Bridge [locally, vs some L M's and pro s]. My McIntyre is just too d--- complex for me ! Now am "ordered" into cardiac rehab, kick/scream to no avail.! Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2004-10-19 08:38
Yes, the Vermillion, SD museum is wonderful. It was the subject of a PBS program last night.
My teacher, Ben Kanter, was a student of Mr. Mazzeo but he did not play the Mazzeo system at all as far as I have heard.
A while back I overhauled a full Mazzeo system and found that it had a great sound and was made of very fine wood. It was also a nightmare to adjust and, after that, I would never wish to play one. The less complex Bundy instruments are probably easier to adjust. The simplicity of the regular Boehm system is a great asset and it is a masterpiece of design.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-10-19 14:12
Some may not understand where I am going with my concept, but Mazzeo's ideas could have been used for some key placement and mechanical imrpovement on our supposedly perfect Boehm !
This does not mean changing the Boehm to a Mazzeo, but simply adding a few keys and or even changing the way the register key works somewhat,
The throat Bb is still a problem on most clarinets and I think the Mazzeo solution could be modified and applied to the standard Boehm which North American players use....
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-10-19 14:19
Ed -
Extra keys create extra adjustment problems. For example, adding a seventh ring for the left ring finger gives some very useful extra fingerings, but it also creates an adjustment nightmare, particularly where the instrument also has an articulated C#/G# -- four different mechanisms have to be adjusted so that they're perfectly coordinated. The "full" mazzeo instrument was very heavy, and the key action, particularly for the right little finger, was impossibly stiff.
I don't remember where I read this, but Herbert Wurlitzer did many experiments and said he tried to use as few holes as possible, which was one of the reasons his instruments played so well. The writer counted holes and replied that Wurlitzer's German system design had more than the Boehm design, which made Wurlitzer quite embarrassed.
Benade has material on this, too. I haven't read Horns, Strings and Harmony or Woodwind Acoustics for quite a while, but I remember he said that acoustically, the fewer holes in the body, the better.
At the Clarinet Congress in London many years ago, there was a round-table by Buffet, Selmer and Leblanc designers, and they were asked why they hadn't removed one of the Eb/Bb holes on the upper joint and had both levers open the same hole. The response was that there was no demand for it. The Buffet representative, I think, said they had made a "simplex Boehm" clarinet, leaving off the top three trill keys and the Eb/Bb sliver key for the left ring finger. He said it had sounded and responded much better, but that once again, nobody was interested.
At the same London conference, a well-known player named Jiri Kratochvil had made a quarter-tone clarinet, with double the usual number of holes and an key for every quarter tone. It sounded truly dreadful. Steve Fox has a "horrible example" instrument he admits he ruined by adding a bunch of extra keys and holes.
The clinician Bob Lowrey had a personal model instrument (Conn, I think) that had the Eb/Bb sliver key left off. He said it improved the response.
For the same reason, Steve Fox's instruments have no Eb/Bb sliver key hole. The key is hinged at the other end and opens the right-hand bottom trill key.
There have been many radical clarinet designs. Baines discusses them in detail, and there are lots of other books. For some truly bizarre items, see http://jerselmer.free.fr/clarib/claribole.html, particularly the square basset horn, http://jerselmer.free.fr/clarib/hbsqu/page.html and the serpentine bass, http://jerselmer.free.fr/clarib/iclbas06/page.html, both of which have been discussed at length on the Early Clarinet board.
Historically, many prominent players have made and attempted to market their own improvements, but most of them have failed to catch on because they require changes in fingering, or complex mechanisms, or both.
A fascinating experiment by Meyerhofer was on the cover of The Clarinet a couple of years ago, with a detailed description of its mechanism and restoration.
The late 19th/early 20th century virtuoso Manuel Gomez invented a completely "rationalized" system and played on a custom-made instrument. He made several recordings available on the historical Clarinet Classics compilations. I can't say he sounded much different from other players. Baines describes his instrument in detail.
I think the reason new designs haven't caught on is that there are the top players do very well on the standard design. Even changes that don't require alteration of fingerings, or that make additional fingerings available, have something to be said against them as well as for them.
For example, the alternate Ab/Eb lever for the left little finger adds a bit of weight and, for some players, can at least in theory get in the way. The older design, in which the lever was mounted between the E/B and F#/C# levers, drove many players nuts because it created a gap between those two keys. Buffet had tremendous resistance to the Prestige until it redesigned the key and made it removable. The good players play quite well without it, and learn to slide from one key to another to avoid impossible sequences.
It's not sufficient to note that there are passages that require sliding or other clumsy movements on an existing instrument. Bassoonists slide constantly. Violinists play all their notes with just four fingers and have to shift every few notes. It's just something you learn to do, and people like Karl Leister and Ricardo Morales do it effortlessly.
"Rational" hole positions produce big changes in tone quality. Boehm applied his key system first to a reverse-conical wood body, with the same interior profile as the "randomly" developed older system. It sounded much stronger and less complex than the older models, even those with very large holes. The cylindrical silver flute sounds completely different again.
Also, baroque composers wrote for the flute with a particular sonority in mind, and, just as important, for an instrument that had a sound that varied from note to note. I play baroque (one-key) flute, and the cross-fingered half steps are noticeably less resonant than the non-cross-fingered notes. Even the best baroque flutists don't have a perfectly matched scale. The recorder/baroque flute virtuoso Danny Waitzman has had a baroque flute made with full Boehm keywork, on which every note matches the sonority of the others, and, at least for me, it doesn't work on baroque music.
The Boehm system keywork has been tried on bassoons, but the results have been uniformly disastrous. The "standard" bassoon sound apparently requires long, thin, diagonal holes.
I think that if a clarinet were made like a Boehm flute, with each hole very nearly the diameter of the bore, and all lined up neatly down the front, it wouldn't sound even close to the current instrument.
Combine that with the inherent conservatism of clarinetits and conductors, and it's hard to make changes. Pamela Weston and Abe Galper, who ought to know, both say that Gaston Hamelin had his contract as principal in Boston terminated because he played a silver clarinet.
Finally, remember that Robert Marcellus and Harold Wright could play anything on a "plain vanilla" R-13.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2004-10-19 15:06
I never met Mr. Mazzeo but he seems to have been a very good person (as well as a superb bass clarinetist). When I was a starry-eyed high school kid I wondered what bass clarinets the pros played on, and my private teacher suggested I write to Mr. Mazzeo and to Leon Lester (retired Philadelphia Orchestra b.c. prior to Ron Reuben). Mr. Mazzeo wrote me back a very nice letter with some good suggestions, and included a bunch of Selmer promotional literature (as if I could afford any of their instruments!).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2004-10-19 15:19
I realize that for any additional keys there are trade offs and that there are certainly mechanical problems associated with additional keywork. I also find the clarinet in its current state to work generally well. Nonetheless, I do find it interesting that there is little interest in any type of alternate mechanisms or design. Mazzeo provided a number of improvements and design changes besides his Bb mechanism. I am surprised that although they were numerous, none of these designs have found it into the mainstream. Some of his designs to his own personal instruments were ergonomic changes to keywork. With the increasing concern over repetetive motion problems, tendonitis, etc, it is a wonder that the clarinet remains unchanged. When talking about complexity of keywork, I am always amazed at the relative simplicity of the clarinet compared to the other woodwinds. Of course, if you want to talk about adjustment problems, spend some time with a low C bass clarinet!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
