 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: J. J.
Date: 2006-04-16 03:20
Does anybody know what's going on wiith the prices for Pyne mouthpieces? I noticed recently that the Signature models (non-Bell Canto) are going for 285 dollars!!! I can't remember exactly, but when I bought one less than three years ago, it had to have been in the 185-200 range at most. How can they justify this new spike?
Jim
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bufclar
Date: 2006-04-16 03:51
Other makers are selling mouthpieces for up to 700 dollars so I guess that might explain the spike. Man with the prices of barrels, bells, and mouthpieces, it like doubles the price of an instrument. Scary times but still we have it so good compared to string payers that buy 5,000 dollar bows. With school prices and gas prices the way they are, I'm amazed people can afford all this stuff.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Kchui999
Date: 2006-04-16 06:35
I, personally, am surprised to see all these prices go up. My $175 greg smith is now $225. Those nifty backun pieces are..what...$500? Chedeville copies are going for something similar. So i'm not too surprised that pyne is also raising their prices.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J. J.
Date: 2006-04-16 16:57
I am surprised, however, because there have been no improvments made. I had a Pyne for a while and it served me very well, but they're just not good enough to justify that kind of price. The only explanation I'd accept would be a rise in the price of the blanks he uses, but I doubt that's been the case.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-04-16 17:00
J. J. wrote:
> I had a Pyne for a while and it served me very well, but
> they're just not good enough to justify that kind of price.
The value, of course, is in the ear, tongue, and lips of the beholder ...
> The only explanation I'd accept would be a rise in the price of
> the blanks he uses, but I doubt that's been the case.
All blank prices from Europe have been steadily rising over the last few years as the US dollar's value has decreased vis a vis the Euro. Good for US exporters, bad for US importers.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J. J.
Date: 2006-04-16 17:30
Excellent point, Mark, about the definition of value. That was a bit irresponsible on my part.
I still find it unlikely that currency rates would necessitate such a dramatic change in prices, but I realize I don't have that information on hand.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2006-04-16 17:44
Those asymmetrical blanks can be very expensive ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif)
...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: calclar
Date: 2006-04-17 02:47
I imagine that it's also rising costs from suppliers of working materials (sandpaper, blanks, new/maintainence of tools, R & D, general inflation, etc).
More importantly I believe that the introduction of $500 - $700 mouthpieces into the general market has a profound influence on pricing stucture throughout the industry.
My understanding is that the mouthpieces that are in this category do not have all that much higher a cost to the maker per piece in relation to the final sale price. They may range from perhaps $10 (Pyne) to maybe $30 (Zinner blanks) $100 (Behn, Hill) per piece.
As someone posted before in another thread, the more important question is why would a Hill mouthpiece sell for approx. $250 and a Behn for $650? In other words, why would Behn be passing on the price of his R & D to customers when Hill is not? After all, it's essentially the same process and investment to make for both blanks...at least as I understand it.
Also, I doubt that the mouthpiece makers in the $160 - $300 range want to have their mouthpieces perceived as being less valuable than the newly marketed 500 - 700 dollar mouthpieces (especailly if they are made from the same blank - like Zinners). This is what I meant by the $500 - $700 mouthpiece prices pushing up all others over time.
Post Edited (2006-04-17 02:49)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2006-04-17 03:03
The "upmarketing" by the makers of $500 to $700 mouthpieces has put enormous price pressure on the rest of the custom mouthpiece market.
However, the new $500- $700 price structure of some mouthpieces should not relegate the $200 custom mouthpieces to a 2nd tier level.
Unfortunately, many clarinetists are starting to think along those lines...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bnewbs
Date: 2006-04-17 03:21
I can't Imagine I would like a Backun or Behn vintage much more than my Grabner/Hill, which was around $200 total ($100 for the Blank) and I couldn't be much happier with. I don't know the difference between a Behn and a Hill blank but they did set out to accomplish the same goal and Behn is FAR more expensive. I also don't know how everyone else feels, $650 is getting up in the range of a good used instrument, and beyond my means for a mouthpiece. Thats like a Heckel Bassoon bocal. But I guess some people drop that on real kaspars and chedevilles regularly. As long as your happy with the investment.
Ben
Post Edited (2006-04-17 16:51)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RodRubber
Date: 2006-04-17 04:36
Bnewbs,
There is no comparison between a Behn and CH blank. Those who have played both will report a huge difference. I personally prefer the Behn. They are not similar.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2006-04-17 07:06
I am guessing each mouthpiece maker sells their mouthpieces at the price that they think will get them the most profit (i.e. price of mouthpiece compared with number of mouthpieces they can sell). If that price is $500 or $700, then that's the price they are going to have.
Sometimes living in a remote country has an up side, which is less shopping craze, especially with clarinet equipment since it is simply not available here....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: calclar
Date: 2006-04-17 16:45
RR said:
>"There is no comparison between a Behn and CH blank. Those who have >played both will report a huge difference. I personally prefer the Behn. >They are not similar."
***
They may be different in the dimensions and a very slight difference in rubber formulation but they were made essentially by the same process - and with the same goal in mind. One just has a different "Chedeville" that they are using as their ideal model from which to copy.
To me, and I am sure others, it still doesn't explain the price differential.
BTW, as I understand it, Chris Hill was the first to copy the original material and dimensions with the exact same techniques despite the claim made to the contrary on the Behn website.
Post Edited (2006-04-17 16:47)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RodRubber
Date: 2006-04-18 03:54
Calclar,
Your statement is accurate in regards to the same end in mind. Both CH, and Behn are trying to make a vintage style rubber mpc. THat being said, the Behn mouthpiece has a much more vibrant sound that really is like the old chedevilles and kaspars. I have played a lot of vintage mouthpieces, including a wonderful Henri Chedeville, on which Loren Kitt originally used.
The CH blank is (for me) so dead, stuffy, and inefficient with the air. I wonder if Guy Chadash feels the same way, because he does not use a CH a mpc.
Best
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris Hill
Date: 2006-04-19 00:55
While no mouthpiece plays for everyone, there are quite a few players, including Guy Chadash, who play a Chadash-Hill mouthpiece. (Guy has a collection of old Cedevilles and Kaspars that he likes to show off, but he generally plays one of ours, at least until he sells it to someone who likes it, and then I have to get him a new one.)
The reason our mouthpieces are less expensive than some is because we order everything in large quantities.
Chris Hill
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2006-04-19 02:21
Rod Rubber said:
"the Behn mouthpiece has a much more vibrant sound that really is like the old chedevilles and kaspars."
==================================================
I wouldn't be surprised if others agreed that perhaps this statement deserves a "for me" qualification in addition to the one along side the comment about the C/H mthpc...in the interest of being consistent.
Gregory Smith
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2006-04-19 02:27
C. Hill said:
"The reason our mouthpieces are less expensive than some is because we order everything in large quantities."
================================================
Yes, but $400 less per piece?
Surely you're being kind.
Gregory Smith
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris Hill
Date: 2006-04-20 00:13
Since I strongly believe in our product, I thought about raising the price to reflect the quality. However, I want to keep them within reach of professional and college players. Remember: the least common phrase in the English language is: "Look at the professional clarinetist driving by in his brand new Corvette."
Chris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2006-04-20 02:02
Chris Hill said:
"Since I strongly believe in our product, I thought about raising the price to reflect the quality. However, I want to keep them within reach of professional and college players. Remember: the least common phrase in the English language is: "Look at the professional clarinetist driving by in his brand new Corvette."
=========================================
My sentiments exactly Chris. I've been holding down prices on my mouthpieces for many years now and had similarly thoughts of raising the prices to reflect their quality! : >)
Coincidentally, Robert Marcellus was one of those that fit those least common of phrases that you mention having purchased new, a '65 Corvette convertible at age 37 for he and his lovely wife, Marion.
He claimed that Kaspars then were going for twice the standard mouthpiece price - $20 - (as were his lesson fees) and he collected them like mad for he and his growing class of talented students at the Cleveland Institute of Music and later at Northwestern University where he finished his teaching career. He even gave me a few on what he jokingly referred to as "a 99 year lease".
He mentioned that his whole life seemed in front of him. Mortgages were generally around $40 - 45 a month for a middle class, Midwestern, 2 bedroom on Wood Court in Cleveland - 8 minutes from Severance. He was both right and unknown to him, tragically as it turned out, wrong.
In 5 years he would be making double the salary of any principal orchestral wind player (let alone clarinetist) which was an astounding $40,000 a season in 1970 when orchestras of Cleveland's size were far short of even playing 52 week seasons. He had just purchased a spectacular 4 bedroom home on Castleton Rd. in upscale Cleveland Heights...his just reward.
In the summer of 1973 while playing some of the orchestra's final concerts at the 5 year old Blossom Music Center - the summer home of the Cleveland Orchestra - one of his eyes hemorrhaged from deterioration of the blood vessels at the back of the eye due to a lifelong struggle with Diabetes. His last concerts included the Vocalise of Rachmaninoff with the final vocal line being given, appropriately, to the clarinet.
Yes, everything is relative...isn't it?
Gregory Smith
Post Edited (2006-04-20 02:03)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
