 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Matt Locker
Date: 2000-04-19 16:08
What is everyone's opinions on new vs. used/old clarinet purchases? It would seem that a used horn would be broken in and the wood would be stable, but what are the disadvantages? Are new horns "better" sound producers? Do new horns have technological advantages? .....
Matt
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 2000-04-19 16:58
Matt Locker wrote:
-------------------------------
What is everyone's opinions on new vs. used/old clarinet purchases? It would seem that a used horn would be broken in and the wood would be stable, but what are the disadvantages? Are new horns "better" sound producers? Do new horns have technological advantages? .....
-------------------------------
The answer is, of course, it depends. How old is old/used? What is the overall condition? What kind of price is being asked for the used instruments? There are a number of factors.
An instrument that is a few years old will be past the point of what manufacturer's call "infant mortality." i.e. Those that would be prone to cracking have already done so. Thus one that is several years old and has not cracked is far less likely to ever do so. However if it does crack, then all repair/replacement costs are up to you. If the initial price was reasonable, however, you can still come out ahead. On the other hand, new instruments are covered by warranties. Significant problems that occur during that period will generally be covered.
New instruments do have some advances incorporated due to advances in acoustical science but if the horn is only a few years old they have these already. If the horn is, oh say, over a decade old, there will be some differences. Does this make them better? Maybe and maybe not. It depends on your goals for clarinet playing. Advances often come with a trade-off. As a result, Buffet is now making two versions of the R-13. One of these is the current model with its improvements and one is a duplicate of the 1960s version. Why? Because some players preferred they way that one played.
If you know how to evaluate the instrument as far as age, condition, quality, your personal musical goals and get a reasonable price, used instruments can be a good buy. If you don't know how to do this, then it is safer to buy a new one.
I proudly play a 45 year old Leblanc professional grade instrument. My daughter plays a 60 year old Pruefer of at least high intermediate quality. Both are fine instruments.
On the other hand, if I had the money, I would get a new one for no other reason than the fact that I would like to have a new one.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dave Spiegelthal
Date: 2000-04-19 16:59
Matt,
Clarinet design has been essentially unchanged for about 80 years. One thing that has remained constant: Every single clarinet, regardless of brand or model, plays differently than every other clarinet. I've been restoring (and playing) clarinets dating from every decade from the 1930's on, and I can say that there are good, bad, and indifferent clarinets in every age range and brand. So, to get to the point, a used clarinet, of almost any age, is just as likely to be good, or bad, as any new instrument. There is one clear advantage of an older clarinet: If it hasn't cracked already, it probably never will (unless mistreated or neglected). With a new clarinet, you never know, although the more reputable manufacturer's should cover cracks under warranty. My bias is towards older used instruments, because they're MUCH cheaper to purchase and I can restore them myself, but obviously not everyone is in the same situation.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J. Butler
Date: 2000-04-19 17:56
I have several good clarinets that play nicely in tune and with the sound I prefer. Not one of them is less than 30 years old: Selmer "N" series (1948) Selmer "L" series A (1936) Selmer "P" series (1953) and a Buffet R-13 (1968)! Yes, I do play all of them for different reasons. The "N" has the art. G#/C#, fork Eb/Bb for use when I need the art. keys. I use the "P" series for jazz playing. The "L" series A for obvious reasons (just acquired) and the Buffet to match others in the section for ensemble purposes. I have never bought a NEW clarinet and am very happy!
J. Butler
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Graham Elliott
Date: 2000-04-20 12:18
There is probably quite a difference between a recently manufactured used clarinet and the vintage instruments mentioned on this string. Some recent but used clarinets may well be quite naff, if the owner has decided to cut his losses and get a new one even though the other is in no way worn out, for example. In such a situation it may be worth enquiring into its provenance just as you would a used motor car. Of course, playing on it helps, but the decision process is not always easy. For example if the key work always goes out of kilter, then that can have been covered up by a recent overhaul just prior to sale.
Theoretically the same is true of the vintage instrument, but your reason for buying one is likely to be different, namely to get your hands on an instrument with a different sound and delivery from the modern crop. I have a pair of c.90 year old Martels and they are very different from the modern alternatives, so the playing results are quite distinct from the modern models.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 2000-04-20 14:34
I had no real problem understanding your post but would like a definition for "naff" please. I'm not really up on the British version of English.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gary Van Cott
Date: 2000-04-20 15:22
Dave Spiegelthal wrote:
-------------------------------
Matt,
Clarinet design has been essentially unchanged for about 80 years.
----
I don't believe this is true at all. Only the basic layout of the Boehm system has remained the same while many changes have been made in bore sizes and tapers, tone hole design, keywork etc. Consider the Buffet Elite, it is pretty far out there compared even to clarinets of the 1950s.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 2000-04-20 15:57
Gary Van Cott wrote:
-------------------------------
Dave Spiegelthal wrote:
-------------------------------
Matt,
Clarinet design has been essentially unchanged for about 80 years.
----
I don't believe this is true at all. Only the basic layout of the Boehm system has remained the same while many changes have been made in bore sizes and tapers, tone hole design, keywork etc. Consider the Buffet Elite, it is pretty far out there compared even to clarinets of the 1950s.
-------------------------------
It is not the bore, tapers, tone hole shape, etc that define a Boehm system. All these can be applied to any system clarinet and if a different key system had been selected such work would have been done on them too.
The Boehm system really only applies to the keywork and order of the open/closed holes on the instrument. As such the standard Boehm system as we know it today was applied to the clarinet in the 1840s (see Rendall) by Klose. The Full Boehm has been around for at least 80 to 100 years. Thus it is correct to say that the Boehm system has remained unchanged.
In reading Rendall, for example, he states that the Albert system had been applied to instruments of different bore diameters/designs. Thus bore is a parameter that is independent of the system.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BAC
Date: 2000-04-20 16:02
I'm in the very process of looking at new horns. I just received yesterday the Selmer Signature and an R13. I have an old Master Model with a small crack in the bell, and a check in the upper joint.
I played all three of these three times to my family, who were blind to which ones I played. The vote was, number 1, 2, or 3. Each time I mixed them up. All votes for all three plays: Signature came in dead last each time. The new R13 came in frist all but once, the old Master Model came in first once.
Next I did tests just playing notes. This was a much harder judgement call. The Master Model and the R13 were generally the winners, sometimes the Signature. As I said, this was a hard one for people to pick the best.
Anyway, the question came up -- "why buy a new clarinet if it is so hard to tell the difference between the old and the new"? A ligit question. Now consider the Master Model has a crack in the bell and check in the joint -- a 45 or 50 year old horn sounding better than the Signature and not much difference with a new R13.
I just want a new one - but this does go to show, there are a lot of good old instruments out there.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Graham Elliott
Date: 2000-04-20 17:34
Naff means poor quality, disfunctional.
Dee wrote:
-------------------------------
I had no real problem understanding your post but would like a definition for "naff" please. I'm not really up on the British version of English.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia
Date: 2000-04-20 20:34
I've ranted on about the joys of cockroaching around at the flea markets so often.... Well, one more thought about that: If you're ready to buy your first fine-quality instrument, I'd suggest not buying sight-unseen (from an online auction site, for instance). People who already own a good clarinet can get away with gambling a bit and making a mistake. For the first used instrument, I'd go for something in good enough condition that you can try it out or at least give it a good looking-over to make sure it's got all the keys and so forth. I'd also recommend buying it on approval, then promptly taking it to a good repair tech or teacher for inspection, so that you can undo the deal if it turns out there's something major the matter that didn't look obvious at first. It's easy to get excited about something that looks like a great buy at the point of sale, but overlook the problem that led to the low "bargain" price. (Been there done that!) But I'm a big fan of recycling instruments other people don't want any more. I got my best clarinets that way -- a 1937 Buffet Bb and a 1979 Selmer alto. There was nothing serious the matter with either of them.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: beejay
Date: 2000-04-21 09:42
Graham is obviously too polite to tell you, but in certain circles in England, telling someone to "naff off" is quite rude.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
