 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: bryris
Date: 2005-09-03 19:03
I saw an R-13 today at Sam Ash, s/n 106275 that they say has been on the shelf for months not selling. I decided to take a gander at it, and even took it in the back room for a test drive. It played ok....keys were clacky though, but a good tweaking would be all it would need.
Anyway, the first thing I noticed about it was that the wood was very widely grained and it was lighter in color. I grabed another buffet 3000 something or other (salesman said that that series is made exclusively for Sam Ash...btw, it was stamped made in germany) and it was much darker in color and had very close fine grain. You'd have to look hard to tell it is wood.
Why the drastic difference in wood hue and grain appearance? After playing both, frankly, the 3000 whatever germany horn sounded better than the R-13...granted the R-13 was not in prime condition whereas the 3000 was brand new.
Post Edited (2005-09-03 19:06)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2005-09-03 20:03
Chances are the German made one is stained, and made from better selected wood, and as the R13 is older the stain has probably faded.
This 1010 I've got has excellent grain on both top and bottom joints, but the bell and barrel have more vessels showing on the surface.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bryris
Date: 2005-09-03 21:25
Well the R-13 is a superior horn to the other one. The other one was new and was selling for $999. So it likely ranked somewhere around an E-12 or equivalent. It would seem to me that the stain on the other one would allow blemishes on the wood to be hidden. Whereas, the R-13, with less stain, would have to be of higher quality.
Just speculation.
BTW, can a clarinet tech take an older R-13 like this one and restain it back to its original look?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2005-09-03 21:34
It can be restained, but personally I think grenadilla is better when the natural grain shows, even if the joints are all different shades - it's part of the character.
I'd never stain an old instrument to look uniform, but oiling or buffing will darken the wood, but still show off the grain.
The worst examples of staining are probably the Schreiber-built E11s as they're painted black, whereas the Buffet E13s are stained with a dark purple-black dye (similar to permanent marker pen ink), and comes off with alcohol.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2005-09-03 21:34)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2005-09-03 23:24
Quote:
Well the R-13 is a superior horn to the other one. However earlier, you told us that . . . Quote:
After playing both, frankly, the 3000 whatever germany horn sounded better than the R-13 To me, these statements contradict each other.
Keep in mind that you can't judge a clarinet by it's pricetag, but since it's a MUSICAL instrument, I would judge it by it's sound.
There are (IMO) quite a few duds that are R13s. I have yet to play one that I think is better than my 10G. As a matter of fact, I haven't found one that has been better than my Evette and Schaeffur (equivalent of E13). Granted I've only played about 6 or so, but this is just proof positive that just because it's stamped with a certain model number, doesn't mean it will automatically outperform another "lesser" clarinet.
Not to mention, you said that it had been on the shelves and never bought. That to me right THERE would be a sign that other people that have tried it didn't like it and so it might be a dud.
For a professional level instrument, I would think that the playing should be better than "ok". I say keep on looking. 2000 dollars is not chump change to most people, and if you are ready to drop that much in a clarinet, I'd make sure you pick a damned good one!
If you check out Tom Ridenour's website, you'll find THIS LINK to a good article on how to select a new clarinet. It's got some good tips. Check it out and then hit some stores that have a good selection of clarinets to choose from.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bryris
Date: 2005-09-03 23:55
Well, when I said it was superior, I was referring to the model/pricetag in general. Like comparing a BMW to a Ford. This one just needed some TLC.
But, I was never considering buying it. Just made a pass at the music store and figured I'd ask some questions and give it a hoot.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2005-09-04 09:32
I overhauled a Buffet E11 and R13 in succession, repadding them in exactly the same manner and using the same venting.
Even though the E11 bore, tonehole layout and most aspects are directly copied from the R13, the sounds couldn't have been more different - the E11 had no depth or warmth of sound and characterless in comparison to the R13. I'm not saying the E11 has a poor sound though, just the direct comparison shows what's lacking.
The R13 had a very full, weighty, warm and also a nice bright sound - a world apart from the E11, which begs the question - how can something so similar in several respects be so different?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-09-04 12:04
You were trying out a very old and possibly "blown out" buffet r-13 and comparing it to a clarinet which is only 1/2 step above the E-11.
I wouldn't touch either horn.
And no, the E-11 is NOT a copy of the R-13 much at all. Different in many ways - research it.
student horn vs professional horn
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2005-09-04 12:57
The R13 was #439xxx ('97), and the E11 was #753xxx with the polycylindrical bore, but inset plastic chimneys leaving huge voids where they entered the bore (the holes being drilled through to the bore the same diameter as the outer diameter of the chimneys), a sort of crude undercutting without even being undercut.
But the paint job on the E11 was definitely one to be marvelled at - not unlike a blackboard!
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2005-09-04 13:01)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2005-09-04 16:53
It was August 2003 when I worked on that R13, it must have been played constantly from the day it was bought as all the (skin) pads were stained, compressed and mostly split - plus the fact synthetic cork was used nearly everywhere and the tenon corks were all loose. But again I used mainly cork pads on this one - leather pads in the 2nd finger ring cup, lower rings and the bottom four cups.
I use the better, hard-wearing rubberised cork a lot, called 'Rubco' or 'Gummi-Kork', and it's excellent for use under adjusting screws and linkages instead of real cork or leather as the screws or sharpish edges won't chew through it, but definitely not that 'Sy-co' foam type fake cork stuff that's pretty useless, not to mention it gets sticky, and that Buffet/Schreiber once used it, only realising too late how bad it is - dare I mention those Valentino... no, better not.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2005-09-05 01:02
Every single clarinet is unique. About four years ago I simultaneously overhauled three R-13s (of various vintages) that were brought to me by three friends who played in the same concert band. I gave the instruments identical overhauls, and when I was done, I played them side-by-side, in various orders, using a few reed/mouthpiece combinations on all of them. They were three very-different sounding clarinets! One of them, I thought, was superb --- one was merely 'pretty good' --- and one had a horrible, nasty harsh sound that to me was totally unacceptable.
Same brand, some model, three very different clarinets.
I didn't really notice much difference in the grain of the wood.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
