 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Bnewbs
Date: 2005-11-17 02:35
I am looking into getting a new mouthpiece, probably Kaspar stye. I have tryed a Grabner K11 and a K13, I really liked both, but I am wondering what other good Kaspar style pieces are out there. Preferably something with really dark ring to it. I have heard some good stuff about the Bay, Lomax and Fobes models. I would love to hear any suggestions people might have. thanks,
Ben Newby
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarinetgirl06
Date: 2005-11-17 03:07
I have tried the Grabner K11 and the Fobes OM*. Both very good. Why not try anything and everything you can get your hands on that is Kaspar style?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2005-11-17 03:11
For a new guy on the block that I was very imnpressed with (currently using his Kaspar style mouthpiece as my primary and people who have heard me have said I sound very good, as is the control), you might want to try a Ted Lane mouthpiece. You can simply google the name followed by "clarinet" or "mouthpiece" to find his homepage and more information.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sherman
Date: 2005-11-17 03:32
Richard Hawkins is a lovely mouthpiece for me. I think I have the old facing, naturally on a Zinner blank and playing through all of them and like you, there are more than one, I find that this is simply the most friendly mouthpiece I have played, and I will not say........today.
There are simply no brittle sounds from this mouthpiece, nowhere, and while it is not dark and dreary, it certainly doesn't peel paint. So for me, it is ideal.
there are others secondary if you will and all of them play, but this plays best, and I am glad to have it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2005-11-17 04:29
From the ones you mentioned I have tried Grabner, Bay, and Fobes. I've tried all three on bass clarinet, but only the Grabner and Bay on Bb clarinet. I liked the Fobes the most on bass, the Grabners were ok, and I really didn't like the Bays. All Bays felt a little too aggressive.
On Bb the Grabners were pretty good, but no better than the Vandoren I was playing at the time. The Bays again felt a little too aggressive.
So my vote goes to the Fobes, but since I have no idea what Kaspar style means, Id say Vandorens are also worth checking with such a big selection.
If you are in the USA nothing is stopping you from trying any mouthpiece and returning the ones you don't like, and that would be a much better way to make the decision than listening to people on a forum 
Good luck.
P.S. I remember on the Yahoo bass clarinet group someone saying he liked the Fobes a lot but preferred the Grabner so....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2005-11-17 12:34
What exactly do you mean when you say Kaspar style?
I think we all know that the bore dimensions are of a certain style, but what about the chamber and walls and baffle. Define it based upon the very best specimens that you have tried.
(You might be very surprised by the wide variation in response to this question)
Former creator of CUSTOM CLARINET TUNING BARRELS by DR. ALLAN SEGAL
-Where the Sound Matters Most(tm)-
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2005-11-17 14:09
I highly recommend both the Grabner and Greg Smith Kaspars. I had the Grabner CXZ_K14 and found it very nice. He'll send a couple.
But, the best Kaspar like is my Greg Smith Grenadilla Wood Kaspar Cicero 13. Or, if you don't want wood, he has lots of others. Go to his website and check it out. I think Greg is an amazing artisan with mouthpieces. You'll spend about $200.00 for a good one.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2005-11-17 14:25
I have been wondering this for a while. There seems to be some common agreement that kaspars and chedevilles of the old days are the most covetedd mouhtpieces and most contemporary mouthpiece makers emulate and/or improve upon their design. I am abit confused with Kaspars vs. Cheds. According to the Brad Behns and Chadash-Hills, the material is what made the cheds so special, I also heard that Kaspar took some of the cheds as the baseline for his design. Can somebody tell me what are the main characteristics of a ched vs a kaspar.
I am not asking for detailed measurement, but some insight on what makes them special:
How are tey different in:
Material
Facing (long vs short, open vs close, symmetric vs asymmetric, flat table vs dipped)
Chamber and Bore
Finally, what are their typical tonal and playing characteristics:
Bright vs Dark
Liquid vs Velvety
Loud vs Covered
Resistant vs. Easy Blowing
I understand that no mouthpieces are the same but each of these 2 style must have typical characteristcs that makes them so special.
Thank you,
-Sylvain
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2005-11-17 14:40
I also recommend Greg Smith's mouthpiece products. I tried several and selected a Chedeville & Kaspar style, each of which I occassionally use. But as with anyones mouthpieces, they all have their own individual playing characteristics that must accomodate your performance needs. And, like the great Danial Bonade always said, "(you must) go home and learn to play it". One size does not fit all. And, for what it's worth, I have never played anyones "Kaspar" style reproduction mouthpiece that plays better--or even as well as--my old vintage Chicago Kaspar #14 (one of two that I puchased from Frank in the early 1960s). I also have a vintage Bay mouthpiece on which Charlie copied the Kaspar #14 facing that plays almost as well and serves as my backup.
So, I guess I recommend vintage Kaspars & Bays if you have "deep" pockets and can find them. But a great, available today and moderatly priced alternative would definatley be one of Greg Smiths Kaspar style mouthpiece. He will let you try several to insure that you find the "one" that is best for you.
I also recommend--and play one of--Walter Grabners bass clarinet mouthpiecies. It is "aggressive", but in a good way. In some of those fortissimo, tutti orchestral situations, you need "all the help you can get" and Walters mouthpiece provides the power and the sound--expecially in the upper register. However, I have not had the opportunity to play any of his soprano mouthpiece products, although--judging from his bass mouthpiece, they are probably "top notch" as well.
But "bottom line"--like GBK said above, "there is no best". In the end, you must learn to play the mouthpiece you have selected and (alla Bonade) "throw the rest overboard".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2005-11-17 15:53
Aha.....see!
No one has yet chimed in with what makes a Kaspar a Kaspar! (aside from the bore outlet dimensions).
Some of the very best Cheds were NOT as deeply scooped in the baffle as you might think.
Some of the very best Kaspers were not really shallower nor narrower in the chamber as some hold as theological truth.
So look closely at the side walls....No, not whether they were A-frame or straight. Look at how the sidewalls were concave or tapered, and how they joined the throat....then report back to CSI/Grissom
Former creator of CUSTOM CLARINET TUNING BARRELS by DR. ALLAN SEGAL
-Where the Sound Matters Most(tm)-
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2005-11-17 16:14
Great message, Alseg! Good advice about the sidewalls. And interesting discussion! I especially enjoyed reading Sherman's remarks about his Hawkins.
My understanding is that "old" Chedevilles (pre-1950s) are what is being emulated, and that *certain* Bettoney's, Martin Freres, old Buffets, Malernes, and other older stock mouthpieces are indeed the real thing (in various guises).
As it happens, my favorite mouthpiece is a circa 1970s Chedeville (with the Qual Sup marking) refaced by Brad Behn. Brad agreed it was not a particularly "sought-after" Chedeville, but I think his efforts turned it into something spectacular. I love it.
Bill.
Bill Fogle
Ellsworth, Maine
(formerly Washington, DC)
Post Edited (2005-11-17 16:17)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LarryBocaner ★2017
Date: 2005-11-17 17:18
For what it's worth: I played a concert last Saturday night where both the other clarinetists were playing Lomax "Chicago" mouthpieces. Nice full colorful sounds--not too "bright"!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bnewbs
Date: 2005-11-17 17:49
Thanks for all the advice, I had not heard about Ted Lane before this, so I will definately check that out. For the record I do live in the U.S. and Have tried a couple of Grabners (I did like them), but with the large number just posted here you can see that just where I should go next is a little unclear. Right now I am thinking either Greg Smith or Lomax. The Chadash-Hill chedeville style seem interesting to, but really expensive from what I have seen. I also lke the few Kaspar style pieces more than the Chedevilles.
Concerning the playing charecteristics of Kaspars they are known for having a really dark and "ringing" tone quality and blow fairly easily with harder reeds (on the closer facings, I have know experience with any more open tipped pieces) and project very well. I do not know a whole lot about the technical chericteristics so I can't answer that.
As dark an resonant as possible is my personal preference, also If anyone has found one of these to have particularly good altissimo perfomance (thats my weak spot) it would be greatly apreciated. thanks,
Ben Newby
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2005-11-17 18:02
OK
So we have comments about the sound...thus far no info given about size of window, rails, tip, baffle or wall characteristics.
One commentator relates a facing length, but as yet nothing quatitiative about the chamber. Interesting.
Still waiting!
Former creator of CUSTOM CLARINET TUNING BARRELS by DR. ALLAN SEGAL
-Where the Sound Matters Most(tm)-
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bnewbs
Date: 2005-11-17 18:20
I guess I am just a little ignorant on on the typical mesurements of the chamber on a Kaspar. Byond typical facing lengths, tip openings I don't know a whole lot. I just know that I love the way some of the remakes play,
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2005-11-17 19:01
I agree that I have never purchased a Kaspar-style mouthpiece that was as good as my authentic originals, William. There's something about them that people seem to have a hard time copying. I guess that's what makes them so valuable. Greg did a very close job for me on the wooden one he made. I told him to make it just like my Kaspar Cicero 13, and he did.
I also hear Brad Behn's mouthpieces (although as pricey as a genuine Kaspar) are wonderful.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2005-11-17 19:04
I should add that I am not looking for any trade secrets, I am just curious about what makes these mouthpieces so popular and what distinguish them from each other. Somebody on this board must know plenty about it!
-S
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Stewie Griffin
Date: 2005-11-17 21:24
You might want to try a Behn Vintage Kaspar. I have never tried one, but I know they cost about $650. He even copied the Chedeville rubber that the best Kaspars were made of.
Greg Smith and Clark Fobes make really nice Kaspar and Chedeville style mouthpieces. Rick Sayre was a student of Kaspar, but I have never tried anthing made by him
Keep in mind that there is a Chicago Kaspar (Frank L. Kaspar) and Cicero Kaspar (Frank Kaspar, Frank L's relative). The Chicagos that I have tried are "darker", but don't have as good projection as Cicero. Both give me a vibrant, "ringing" tone. Then there is the Ann Arbor Kaspar, also Frank L., which is made from a Babbitt blank, and not as good IMHO.
Currently using a Livengood Kaspar model. It is IMHO the best mouthpiece I have tried that was made from a Zinner blank, and better than some of the Kaspars I have tried.
I like the Chadash-Hill mouthpiece as well.
Stewie
ps I have no financial relations to anybody I mentioned.
Post Edited (2005-11-17 21:26)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bnewbs
Date: 2005-11-17 21:59
If I spend $650 on a mouthpiece it won't be for a long time. I could certainly get a chadash-hill, or maybe a real Kaspar, and have someone like walter Grabner reface it for less $650. It must be really amazing if the cost that much. I really don't want to spend more than about $200. darker is exactly what I am looking for, projection matters some to me, but playing out has never been a big issue. If the Chicago model is giving a darker sound with a great ring to it, then I might have to try a Lomax chicago next, as that appears to be what Mike Lomax based his chacago series on.
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2005-11-17 23:09
Aside from the Fobes article, no one really answered my question.
OK....Some of the better Kaspars really did not have such a narrow chamber nor shallow baffle.
Some of the better Cheds did not have as deep a baffle nor wide chamber as is commonly thought.
What was common to both models is a somewhat steep narrowing* as the throat joins the bore, with the Kaspar inclined so that the overall internal volume matches those of the cheds. This gives the impression of a narrower chamber.
Actually, when comparing the best of the best....the difference is LESS than one would expect from the common descriptions that are ascribed to both.
There is a subtle difference in overtones and resistance, but much of the latter is cancelled by the facing that the individual chooses.
*I note a distinct concavity on the sidewalls as they approach the throat on a particular model
Former creator of CUSTOM CLARINET TUNING BARRELS by DR. ALLAN SEGAL
-Where the Sound Matters Most(tm)-
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2005-11-18 20:57
Oh Brenda, I'd love to know how the T. Guidetti Kaspar 11 works for you. But I don't mean to be Mr. Nosey-Nosey Seriously -
Greg Smith - according to what I have read - designs his Kaspars after the "11." I asked Terry's wife about the "11" recently on auction, and she said the reputation was "dull and stuffy" but that this one had been opened up wonderfully.
Best,
Bill.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2005-11-19 00:47
Terry Guidetti has worked on many pieces for me. He has a knack for maximizing resonance and color and ease of articulation.
He is modest to a fault.
A Kaspar from him on a ched blank was very lively. He has worked wonders with stock Bettoneys (Qual. Sup. and Ched blanks or no-names).
He has also worked wonders with old Lelandais.
Currently he is doing an Eb for me.
He recently retired from West Chester PA Univ. His wife, Lyn Thomas, provides instruments for kids who would not otherwise have access to them. One of my recent surgical patients donated a Conn clar. to her program.
Class act!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
