 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Contra
Date: 2005-07-30 05:46
I have the feeling the first thing that would happen if I picked it up would end in a lot of broken hearts.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2005-07-30 11:34
Thanks for posting the photo. What does the ceramic clarinet weigh, compared to a typical wooden or plastic clarinet? Is it made of high-fired ceramic that's not very fragile? That might be a good material for mouthpieces.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-07-30 17:22
Lelia Loban wrote:
> What does the ceramic clarinet
> weigh, compared to a typical wooden or plastic clarinet? Is it
> made of high-fired ceramic that's not very fragile?
I can't find my little cheat sheet, but from memory:
It's still heavier, significantly (factor of 1.5?) but thinner, so only about 1.3x total
The ceramic is machinable (similar to grenadilla) and somewhat resilient, but still not practical (too brittle) for everyday use.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2005-07-30 18:07
Mark:
If your memory serves you, is this a preview of something "in the works" toward becoming an innovative and practical development?
Are 'they' moving toward a production piece that will be (similar to/or better than Greenline?) practical, durable, repairable? There are so many new materials developing so fast now, it seems to me conceivable that a ceramic material would/could soon replace what's on the market now in the very near future.
If machinable, then it would seem that it's not all *that* brittle in its present state (of development).
- r![[cool]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/cool.gif) n b -
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-07-30 18:14
ron b wrote:
> Mark:
>
> If your memory serves you, is this a preview of something "in
> the works" toward becoming an innovative and practical
> development?
Yes; there's a consortium of ceramic manufacturers that have been working on ceramic instruments for almost 20 years. The first demonstration of ceramic woodwinds was in 1989 (I think). There's a line of ceramic string instruments, too (violin, viola, cello, bass).
> Are 'they' moving toward a production piece that will be
> (similar to/or better than Greenline?) practical, durable,
> repairable? There are so many new materials developing so fast
> now, it seems to me conceivable that a ceramic material
> would/could soon replace what's on the market now in the very
> near future.
They're working on it; the consortium (which displays their wares at the Aichi Expo annually and I believe has a competition yearly) wants to create commercially viable instruments. They are purchasable on special order; if you have to ask the price, you can't afford it at the moment.
> If machinable, then it would seem that it's not all *that*
> brittle in its present state (of development).
Still too brittle and unforgiving in the "school of hard knocks" department.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-07-30 21:20
marcia wrote:
> Is it actually playable, or just a novelty item??
Perfectly playable.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2005-07-30 21:34
Interesting link:
http://www.idrs.org/Publications/Journal/JNL18/JNL18.Kanesaka.html
Flute player wrote, "...The tone has a warmness because of the 'fired material'..."
Hmm... now I've heard it all!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-07-31 23:32
When Tiger Woods endorses the new Buffet TW-13 carbon fiber clarinet, call me ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-08-01 01:39
Remember that Rico put out a mouthpiece (still??) that was basically unbreakable.
You could drop it on cement and it wouldn't break. Buffet for about 1 year was putting those in with their E-11 (and other student models) Clarinets. I complained big time to Francois Kloc, and he brought it up in the next board meeting and it ended.
They weren't very good mouthpieces at all, but sure were strong.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-08-01 02:04
DavidBlumberg wrote:
> Remember that Rico put out a mouthpiece (still??) that was
> basically unbreakable.
> They weren't very good mouthpieces at all, but sure were
> strong.
If you are thinking of the Rico Royal mouthpieces -
The Rico Royal mouthpieces have to be the ABSOLUTE WORST mouthpieces ever offered for sale, anytime, anywhere, any century.
When first marketed in the 1970's (or 1980's?) they were given out by the thousands - free to band directors, most of whom immediately threw them in the trash.
They were "-- Made from Graftonite™--- "
They should have left the graphite in the pencils.
Thick rails, thick tip, very resistant blowing, raised reed table, thin sound - nothing good whatsoever about them, except that they were (sadly) indestructable.
Toss it in the landfill where it belongs.
I think that the the half-life of lead is 22 years...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
