 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: L. Omar Henderson
Date: 2006-10-05 13:42
(Disclaimer - I sell woodwind use and care products but this has nothing to do with my products in particular)
I need your help! I have been asked to give a series of lectures on woodwind use and care products and also about common "myths" in the woodwind community. The audience includes the range of woodwind players from beginner through professional and some university graduate students in music education and performance.
I would like to approach this from the format of the popular TV show "Myth Busters" (which presents a myth topic and then strives to experimentally prove of disprove the myth basis) and present scientific evidence from an experimental perspective where possible to bear on the topic. My plan is to be as objective as possible and where direct experimentation is not possible, plausible, or applicable the result might be: "Possible", "Plausible", or "Just Don't Know" in addition to "Busted".
Please help and give me the value of your experience and folklore to suggest some common myths that may useful to address. Some examples that come to mind: Bore oil does not penetrate Grenadilla wood; B-45 is the best student mouthpiece; "Pad Savers" remove moisture and protect pads, vintage mouthpieces are better than modern mouthpieces, etc.
I do not plan to use this as a springboard for a similar BB discussion.
Thanks,
L. Omar Henderson
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ohsuzan
Date: 2006-10-05 14:12
Wooden instruments can become "blown out" after a certain amount of use.
Susan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2006-10-05 14:16
Disclaimer: I wanted this to be its own thread but here goes.....
The commonly used mouthpieces in the US with LARGE tone chambers produce a rich sound and DON'T affect the pitch.
I have just acquired a Wells mouthpiece from circa 1970 that plays like a dream, but it pointedly brings up the mouthpiece/pitch issue. I went from pushed all the way in and hoping to warm up properly to be in tune, to pulling out a good 4 to 5 millimeters and hoping I could keep the pitch down!!!!!
Anyone of you can see what I'm talking about by holding your stock Buffet mouthpiece up to the light, beak toward you, face up. Now compare the size of the hole you see with that of the "leading custom mouthpiece."
HOLY CRAP
This necessitates an overall larger tone chamber and a considerable shortening of the length of the clarinet to compensate for the difference.
Doesn't this affect the 12ths that we all complain about on our R13s? Isn't this a much more tangible difference than say the slight difference in the exit bore size of the mouthpiece versus the entrance bore size of the barrel? And yet IS ANYONE out there talking about this ???!!!???
......HELP,
.....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John O'Janpa
Date: 2006-10-05 14:19
If a wooden clarinet hasn't cracked in the first year, or several years, it won't ever crack. (Had one crack after 45 years)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: L. Omar Henderson
Date: 2006-10-05 14:26
You folks really get to the hard issues quickly which would take a lifetime to adequately address - please also help with some easy ones that you have heard or encountered and quickly dismissed by "common sense" or a quick experiment - they are still around believe it or not!!!
Thanks,
L. Omar Henderson
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ken
Date: 2006-10-05 14:35
It's harder to play classical than jazz on clarinet. v/r Ken
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2006-10-05 14:39
There are only four worthy mass market brands of clarinets and only one for mouthpieces. (emphasis on "mass market")
Stock mouthpieces are crap.
A #2.5 reed is too soft.
Plastic sounds cheaper than wood.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Matt Locker
Date: 2006-10-05 14:52
.... swab only from {bell to barrel/barrel to bell} .............
.... never swab a mouthpiece, it will wear out .................
MOO,
Matt
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2006-10-05 14:56
Things that may or may not be true:
Swab top down is better than bottom up.
Key material affects sound.
Clarinet material affects sound.
Mouthpiece material affects sound.
Reed material affects sound.
Swabbing a mouthpiece erodes it.
Clarinets blow out.
A single bad pad seal (towards the top of the clarinet) affects the whole playability of the instrument.
Two barrels with identical interior volume but different taper tune identically.
Sounding "bright" means more higher partials and less fundamentals.
Sounding "dark" means more fundamental and less high harmonics.
Ligatures affect sound.
...
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2006-10-05 15:05
Alcohol enhances your performance, but only on tenor sax.
This is actually true. I can play soprano or alto sax by adjusting my clarinet embouchure, and baritone is so different that I can just relax and let it honk. Tenor is right in the middle. I do best after a couple of beers.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2006-10-05 15:12
Keywork plating has an effect on the tone,
The logo on all barrels is stamped on the 'sweet spot',
All clarinet bodies are made from the same piece of timber,
Cork pads make the tone bright,
Cork pads deaden the sound,
Cork pads aren't airtight like skin pads,
Cork grease is the same stuff as lip balm...
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2006-10-05 15:41
OH, what a good group, 10 years of Research? LOH ? How about bore-matching of ALL pieces. Big bores 15.0+ mm are jazz horns, 14.8- are classical [perhaps?]. The left L F Ab/Eb lever is "desireable" , how about the other 3 F B additions? Need more "grist"? Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2006-10-05 15:54
"Dark" and "Bright" mean something about clarinet tone to everyone?!
Clarinet Redux
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2006-10-05 16:49
I'm not sure this quite counts as a myth, and neither is it woodwind-specific, but it would be very nice to do some sort of experiment/demo to determine how accurately people actually play in tune. (And yes, I am well aware that "accurately in tune" and "in tune with a piano" are not the same thing.)
There is a lot of talk about the intonation tendencies of certain designs of instrument, and about the need to make adjustments to particular notes on particular instruments. Perhaps this could be put into the context of what actually happens in performance, as opposed to what happens when playing long tones into a tuner.
Unlike many of the topics mentioned above, it is something that could be done live in front of the audience.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Beck
Date: 2006-10-05 17:18
How about;
Long E/B F/C sound better and/or are more in tune on full Boehm clarinets.
Pulling off the barrel more than a mm or so will cause the instrument to go out of tune with itself.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2006-10-05 17:31
Omar,
This brings out the research methodologist in me (which is one of my day jobs). HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY TRIED TO CONDUCT THE STUDIES OUTLINED BELOW TO DETERMINE IF THESE STATEMENTS ARE TRUE? HAVE THEY BEEN CONDUCTED WITH LARGE ENOUGH RANDOM SAMPLES TO BE RELIABLE AND GENERALIZABLE? (In spite of all of the posts to this Board, I think I know the answer.)
In a double blind sound test, typical musical audience members can reliably hear the difference between the four major brands of clarinets when played by highly skilled professionals.
In a double blind sound test, professional clarinetists can reliably hear the difference between the four major brands of clarinets when played by highly skilled professionals.
In a double blind sound test, conductors can reliably hear the difference between the four major brands of clarinets when played by highly skilled professionals.
Additional studies -- substitute: "major brands of custom mouthpieces" or "major brands of professional ligatures" or "major brands of reeds" for "major brands of clarinets."
In any of the experiments outlined above, if there is a statistically significant difference in a reputable experiment, is the effect size sufficiently large so that it has any practical significance?
George
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: PE Bb
Date: 2006-10-05 18:06
If you have many beginers or non-clarinet playing education majors, how about:
Bigger mouthpeice tip opening = more sound volume or more projection
or even: more volume = more projection
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2006-10-05 18:10
A mouthpiece with a large tip opening is essential for playing jazz.
A custom made bell effects the sound of the ENTIRE clarinet.
Classical composers chose to use the Bb, A or C clarinet because of the sound, rather than by key signature...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: L. Omar Henderson
Date: 2006-10-05 19:26
Great questions, many too cumbersome to research in my lifetime however - I need some more of the urban myths - grandmother's advice like: Suck on a lifesaver before playing and it will keep your mouthpiece clean !!!
Thanks,
L. Omar Hendeson
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2006-10-05 19:42
Food related myths:
Eating bananas can calm nervousness.
It is best to play a recital on an empty stomach.
Drinking caffeine before playing can be beneficial ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ohsuzan
Date: 2006-10-05 20:47
Well, I buy into the banana thing.
But one "myth" (that I have seen repeated on this board) is that you shouldn't drink milk or eat dairy products before playing/singing, because they will "coat your throat" and create a phlegmatic sound. Utter nonsense.
Susan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Terry Stibal
Date: 2006-10-05 21:51
A clarinet and Bb clarinet "sound different' (the A horn is "warmer", for example).
We ran a week's worth of tests on this in college, and found that the two sound the same when played with the same mouthpiece by the same player on pre-transposed music heard from behind a screen. They do sound different to the player, but we felt this was due to being accustomed to the Bb horn primarily.
We only had one C clarinet available, and in limited testing with properly transposed music, it too "sounded the same". Even with the Bb horn mouthpiece...
leader of Houston's Sounds Of The South Dance Orchestra
info@sotsdo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2006-10-05 23:25
Oh yeah, the old 'A clarinet sounds completely different to a Bb' crap!
I had someone give me this when I did 'Annie' recently - to be honest, I reckon he couldn't even tell which I was playing on at any given moment. And then he had the nerve to call my full Boehms 'bastardised' Selmers due to all the extra keywork! And he was the one with the (badly) relacquered MkVI tenor!
Another one I heard was 'You need a large tip opening to do all the pitch bends in Kletzmer, Jazz, etc. etc. which is why I use a 5JB - you can't do this with a small tip opening' - I play on an M15, and in front of this person proved that pitch bends can be done.
If he wore a hat that evening, I'd have passed the ketchup.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: FDF
Date: 2006-10-06 01:29
Myth or truth, a wooden clarinet has superior tonal quality compared to a hard rubber clarinet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2006-10-06 03:18
The Clarinet is the easiest instrument to learn to play.
At least that's what my parents were told by my fifth grade music teacher, and that's why I play the Clarinet.
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DaveF
Date: 2006-10-06 04:18
We argued this one earlier this year........ Myth:
Beta blockers enhance musical performance, helping you play better than you ordinarily would be capable of, and therefore are similar to performance enhancing substances banned by many sports for their athletes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2006-10-06 04:46
Vandoren has an employee whose only job is to put one good reed in each box.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2006-10-06 04:52
I'm wondering if all those myths are actually things a lot of clarinetists believe in? Outside this forum that is. I notice almost all posting here are from America, and maybe that's because there are just a lot more clarinetists there, but here non of these myths I've ever heard of from any clarinetists in my country. Maybe that is because there are so few clarinetists here and there is no "community" of clarinetists to meet and talk about (invent) these things? Basically I'm interested how these myths actually started.
OK here is the only myth I've heard - harder reeds are better. My teacher made sure I wouldn't belive in this myth.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2006-10-06 09:03
Often urban myths arise when we have no bigger problems than to pamper our equipment and enviously stare on our neighbour's. And we tend to hold the gear responsible for bad performance (yet we pat our own shoulders for a good one). We tend to substitute "skill" with "technology", not entirely dissimilar to pro sports. We see competition when we'd better have fun.
Duh. I sound like a reverend.
Truth or fiction:
- it is possible to get a satisfying playing experience with Rico Royals.
- it's better to stick the reed into your mouth while assembling the clarinet than to soak it in a glass of water.
- It's better to wipe the reed with your hankie and then put it into its case than to let it dry on open air.
- knife and sandpaper can do an equally good job as some reed conditioning products
- the average audience hears when an instrument or a singer is more than 20 cents out of pitch.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2006-10-06 09:26
Does copying the *exact material content* OR *exact physical dimensions* of a particular mouthpiece style/type allow one to more likely sound like Harold Wright, Robert Marcellus, Ralph McLane, Daniel Bonade, or Louis DeSantis?
Or does it simply allow one more likely to sound like one's own self?
Or Not!
(Given that it already scientifically proven that the vibrating air column itself accounts for nearly 1,000 (10,000?) times the quality of sound vs. the "vibrating" material of the mouthpiece.)
Gregory Smith
Post Edited (2006-10-06 09:54)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Maarten
Date: 2006-10-06 09:33
Clarnibass - I have often heard the myth about A and Bb clarinet sounding different (I'm from the Netherlands), with the A being the better sounding (warmer, deeper). Using a spectrum analyzer it should be easy to show that one player on two similar setups has the same (strength of) overtones for same-pitch notes. At least I don't hear any difference between my A and (full boehm) Bb clarinets.
To come back to another myth mentioned here: I do like the written E better on my Bb than the written E on my A (both Selmer CTs). Maybe that has to do with the bell on the A not being the original one though. Again, if you can get hold of a spectrum analyzer it would be very easy to compare a normal and FB clarinet of the same brand on strength of overtones.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2006-10-06 11:02
Many of these ideas seem to be a confusion between "myth" and "opinion". "Better tone quality" can not be calculated. Here's a couple that can be tested (even though most of us know the answers, it might be interesting and new for the audience ot that TV show).
1. Wood clarinets have better and more stable intonation than plasic clarinets.
2. At very high or low temperatures (above 85 degrees F, Below 65 degress F), it is completely impossible to pull out or push in to make an instrument in-tune with itself again.
3. The strength of reeds is completely determined by its thickness. (I have heard this, but if you buy a box of vandoren 1.5 and a box of 5. There seems to be a difference in the grain density.)
Good luck with the TV show.
Sky
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Beck
Date: 2006-10-06 12:08
As for a blind instrument test mentioned by guhba above, see; http://www.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=220046&t=219639
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2006-10-06 12:54
Playing another instrument such as a trumpet or trombone will ruin your clarinet embouchure.
Only a clarinet teacher can teach you to play clarinet.
A brass player can never be a good clarinet teacher.
I could go on and on (not a myth)!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bawa
Date: 2006-10-07 19:20
Skygardener,
I think GBK (or was it someone else?) once talked about how reed strength is done.
If i remember correctly, reeds are not made to a particluar strength: rather they are all made or cut the same way and then sorted into categories after testing their strength.
I understood from that that the difference may then lie in each cane and/or part of the cane each reed comes from.
So it was more a natural rather than something Vandoren or Gonzales does.
Anyone else remember that post?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Veldeb
Date: 2006-10-10 19:05
The only way to get two Eb Soprano's in tune is to shoot one of them (ok maybe that's not a myth) :-)
Blake Velde
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2006-10-10 19:13
'bout rite, Blake, who needs two? Like for my Eb Alto cl, in the newer compositions, there is only ONE part [if any !]. Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Cuisleannach
Date: 2006-10-11 02:20
The only way to get two Eb Soprano's in tune is to shoot one of them (ok maybe that's not a myth) :-)
Blake Velde
Blake, that's an article of faith....
Myth or truth:
cork pads sound different than bladder pads
the watery stuff inside a clarinet is not spit but condensation (this would be fun to do)
playing with some sort of upper respiratory problem (cold, sore throat) will give you an ear infection (your friendly neighborhood ENT should be able to address that one)
the bell is necessary for intonation for most of the notes on the instrument (easy to test)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: hinotehud ★2017
Date: 2006-10-11 11:18
An interesting research project would be to determine if the process of only blowing on a new reed for @ 5 minutes the first day and gradully increasing the playing time, actually prolongs the life of a reed.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bubalooy
Date: 2006-10-12 18:09
I think if you normally play on a reed for an hour, this method should increase the number of days you play the reed by at least 11.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bennett ★2017
Date: 2006-10-15 17:38
Reed opinions/myths are numerous.
As mentioned, you have to break them in slowly.
And
They're not flat from the factory; the back side must be sanded smooth/flat.
You should rub the back side on paper to close the pores.
You should rub the front with your thumb's body oil to close the pores.
They must be stored 'compressed' so they won't warp.
They should/shouldn't be moistened in water vs. saliva.
They must be stored at some ideal moisture/Relative Humidity.
20 year old boxes of reeds are much better than current ones.
And
Double lip is better/worse than single lip
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: OboeAtHeart
Date: 2006-10-16 04:28
As an Eb clarinet player, I resent that remark. ;D
...but in all seriousness, one Eb is enough - good lord, those little demons are loud!
*~"The clarinet, though appropriate to the expression of the most poetic ideas and sentiments, is really an epic instrument- the voice of heroic love."~*
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brad Behn
Date: 2006-12-04 17:19
Greg Smith wrote:
“Does copying the *exact material content* OR *exact physical dimensions* of a particular mouthpiece style/type allow one to more likely sound like Harold Wright, Robert Marcellus, Ralph McLane, Daniel Bonade, or Louis DeSantis?”
“Or does it simply allow one more likely to sound like one's own self?”
“Or Not!”
“(Given that it already scientifically proven that the vibrating air column itself accounts for nearly 1,000 (10,000?) times the quality of sound vs. the "vibrating" material of the mouthpiece.)”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you talking about Greg?
The vibrating material of the mouthpiece has profound influence over the sound and playing experience. To me it sounds like you are stating that mouthpiece material doesn't matter, but on the other hand on your website you state: "In the early 1990's I became acquainted with French mouthpiece blanks made by Hans Zinner of Bavaria. I found the material to be the finest sounding that I had ever played, including my vintage Kaspar & Chedeville mouthpieces."
Please explain.
Brad Behn
http://www.clarinetmouthpiece.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinet@55
Date: 2006-12-04 23:33
If a clarinet won't tune, is always flat, then lipping up , tightening up the embochure will put it in tune.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2006-12-05 03:32
Dear Brad:
As has been my experience long enough to know by now, as usual, you exaggerate. Needless to say, that kind of thing is not helpful when it comes to conducting reasonable discourse during any kind of intelligent discussion about relatively complex subjects.
As everyone reading my words in this thread can clearly see, I've never categorically stated that "mouthpiece material doesn't matter" as you've plainly stated. The *degree* to which it matters is the question.
It is my view that the Zinner material *combined with the mouthpiece's design* is superior in relation to my own Kaspars and Cheds. That's why I worded my home page statement as I did, why in context it makes sense, and why it is the main reason that I personally play my own modified Zinner blanks bearing my logo and name in the Chicago Symphony Orchestra.
More importantly, I think that it would be of keen interest to the perceptive readers of this bboard to know why they can supposedly sound more like Robert Marcellus, Harold Wright, or Daniel Bonade if they simply choose the "right" mouthpiece (as you have gone to exorbitant lengths to clearly imply on your website).
I'm sorry, but as everyone in the profession of symphonic clarinet performance clearly understands, just the implication of such misleading ad copy would seem laughable if it were not so sad.
It's also obvious to anyone that is in the least politically savvy that you continue to recruit clarinetists to post on your behalf here. I've never done anything to cross that ethical boundary and am happy to say that I personally have a clear conscience as a result.
Finally, it wouldn't surprise me if there were many out there in clarinet-land that would agree with my assessments.
Gregory Smith
on edit:
What I and others perhaps may find perplexing is that a two month old thread would be sought out and resurrected for seemingly little or no constructive purpose.
=======================
Clarinetist
Chicago Symphony Orchestra http://www.cso.org
Chamber Soloists of Chicago
Chicago College of Performing Arts - Clarinet Professor
Handmade Mouthpiece Artisan
2737 Hurd Avenue
Evanston, Illinois. 60201-1209 USA
1.847.866.8331
1.847.866.9551 (fax)
Email: Gregory@gregory-smith.com
Website: http://www.gregory-smith.com
=========================
Post Edited (2006-12-05 04:00)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EuGeneSee
Date: 2006-12-05 12:43
Doc: More on the subject of this 2 month old thread ----> How did the "Myth Buster" lecture series work out? Which myths did you explore and debunk or substantiate? I would love to see an after action report.
Eu
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: L. Omar Henderson
Date: 2006-12-05 13:18
(Disclaimer - I give lectures for very little money)
My cup runneth over with ongoing demand from dry university courses in acoustics and music theory, trade shows, and more esoteric venues for a little comic relief mixed with science about myths in the woodwind community. Thanks to all the BB folks for a life time of material to talk about. The next venue is the "1 encuentro clarinete Xilema" in Valencia, Spain at the end of the month entitled "Myths, The Good, Bad, and Ugly of Woodwind Use and Care Products" (Clint Eastwood is more famous than Eddie Daniels in Spain !!!). The myths currently threatened by my comic science bombs (term borrowed from Dave Spiegelthal) are bore oil, reeds, materials of hardware, blind testing disparate instruments, and the virtues (not) of various members of the clarinet family of instruments, etc., etc.
L. Omar Henderson
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mnorswor
Date: 2006-12-05 15:45
Dear Greg,
As you are a respected member of the Clarinet community, I'm taken aback by your remarks to your colleague and fellow mouthpiece maker, Brad Behn.
Brad asked a question based on information he retrieved off of your website as to your statement of the effects of a material on sound. This was a valid question, in my mind. You did answer the question and I thank you for your opinion as it is always nice to receive clarifications and wisdom by the respected craftsmen of our time. I consider you and Brad to be such craftsmen and I'm grateful for both of your opinions.
What I find disconcerting are the statements you make which call into question the character of Brad and his business ethics and most importantly your assertion that he implies that those who purchase his mouthpieces will sound more like Wright, Marcellus, etc.
I've read his entire website, front to back and yours as well. Nowhere on his site does he say that you will sound more like this or that famous player from the past. He merely states that the sounds and concepts of those people have provided the inspiration for his line of products. Never has he said that if you play his mouthpieces you will sound more like so and so.
Your implication that Brad or any other maker "recruits" people to post on his behalf is offensive and clearly displays some jealousy, on your part, of the success of other makers.
I'm so thrilled that there are so many choices today; choices that were clearly not available 50 years ago. It's a wonderful thing for me to be able to recommend 10 craftsmen to a student or colleague when they are looking for new equipment. For the record, I DO recommend Brad and I DO recommend YOU as well as Fobes, Grabner and others.
Furthermore, I find it disturbing that you use your status as a major orchestra player in a condescending manner. Many makers do not hold major orchestral positions, i.e. Brad, Walter, Clark, et al. The fact that they do not play in the same type of professional situation as you do does not mean that their opinions or equipment is of any less value that yours. If anything, I'd hope that you would use your status as a player to be instructive and constructive, not to tear things down. I am not an orchestra player, however, (by choice mind you because the situation bores me) so perhaps my opinions do not register on the Smith scale.
In closing, I'd like to state for the record that I have never been paid by you or any other maker (except for Buffet, for whom I am a newly added artist). I have never been asked by anyone to post to this Bboard or any other type of internet discussion group on their behalf. I have never received residuals, discounts, or compensation of any kind for my recommendations or preferences toward equipment. Finally, I play on an Opperman mouthpiece, another maker that I am happy to recommend and support as I do all great craftsmen.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2006-12-05 17:31
Michael Norsworthy writes:
>"Your implication that Brad or any other maker "recruits" people to post >on his behalf is offensive and clearly displays some jealousy, on your part, >of the success of other makers."
-----------
GS:
More likely: It would seem more than a little suspicious that the one thread that keeps being resurrected here contains testimonials from posters, approx. 1/3 of which are either posting for the very first time or have totaled fewer than 5 posts in their entire history on this Bboard.Specifically: http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=219164&t=209777
I and others are not naive enough to observe that fact as coincidental. I see no such thread of similar length having those same characteristics no matter whom they are referring to. *That* fact to which I was referring, clearly has nothing to do with jealousy.
--------------
>"...your assertion that he implies that those who purchase his >mouthpieces will sound more like Wright, Marcellus, etc....
>Nowhere on his site does he say that you will sound more like this or that >famous player from the past. He merely states that the sounds and >concepts of those people have provided the inspiration for his line of >products. Never has he said that if you play his mouthpieces you will >sound more like so and so."
------------
GS:
Again, not explicitly, implicitly - as you have just done *for* him once again. You seem to want to universalise your own understanding of ad copy for everyone else's. Obviously not everyone perceives that kind of promotional material, *couched as "instructional"*, in the same way.
------------
>Furthermore, I find it disturbing that you use your status as a major >orchestra player in a condescending manner. Many makers do not hold >major orchestral positions, i.e. Brad, Walter, Clark, et al. The fact that they >do not play in the same type of professional situation as you do does not >mean that their opinions or equipment is of any less value that yours. If >anything, I'd hope that you would use your status as a player to be >instructive and constructive, not to tear things down.
------------
GS:
I do know about that which I speak but nowhere do I, or have I ever made it a practice over the many years invested here in approx 250 posts to condescend to anyone. Quite the opposite.
Claiming that I play my own mouthpiece in the orchestra is simply real world proof offered to back up my statements. My comments have been instructive as to misleading ad copy which I feel obliged to call it what it is. I'm sorry if you don't see how easily that kind of ad copy can and will be misconstrued by others.
In regard to "tearing things down", it's once again instructive to note the person who actually resurrected this two month old thread for no constructive purpose that I can see - especially from such a learned and highly skilled individual.
------------
>"....I'd like to state for the record that I have never been paid by you or >any other maker. I have never been asked by anyone to post to this >Bboard or any other type of internet discussion group on their behalf. I >have never received residuals, discounts, or compensation of any kind for >my recommendations or preferences toward equipment."
---------------
GS:
And the platform, spotlight, etc, that goes along with associating themselves explicitly with such a fine maker at International Clarinet Conventions by helping run their exhibit, posting opinions on these Bboards and other such beneficial associations? Simply friendship you say?
If life and politics were only that simple....
Gregory Smith
http://www.gregory-smith.com
Post Edited (2006-12-05 17:38)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevensfo
Date: 2006-12-05 17:34
I'd just like to say that this thread is one of the most interesting I've read for ages. However, it would be nice if more people discussed the issues raised.
What's a myth to one person may be gospel to another.
e.g. With closed eyes, can you tell a Bb from an A clarinet?
Breaking in reeds slowly. Why? It's a piece of dead wood. Do you break your new front door in slowly?
Rotating reeds? Why?
Sanding reeds? For me, not a myth. I've rescued plenty of reeds with sandpaper!
Audiences notice if an instrument is more than 20 cents out? Don't agree.
Wasn't sure about Omar's mention of Blind testing. Personally I'd like to see more of this. There's a tendency now to dismiss clarinets with a smug, self-satisfied "Oh, another CSO" rather than "My teacher noticed it didn't sound in tune". If a clarinet is rubbish, let's know why.
Great thread!
Steve
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2006-12-05 19:01
> Rotating reeds? Why?
I was wondering about that too. There's exactly one position in which they're working for me. ![[tongue]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie6.gif)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mnorswor
Date: 2006-12-05 19:03
------------------
GS:
"I'm sorry if you don't see how easily that kind of ad copy can and will be misconstrued by others. "
------------------
MN:
And vice versa with regard to your products and stature as a player in a major orchestra.
------------
GS:
Again, not explicitly, implicitly
------------
Implying something requires inference from the reader. Perhaps this is what you are inferring, which is subjectively bound in your perception as the reader. I, personally, do not get that implication, nor do I infer it. I find it helpful and useful when a maker, any maker that is, tells me where their concepts came from. On your website you mention Kaspars and Cheds, and even name your models accordingly. Shall I infer that in "carrying on the great mouthpiece traditions of the past" that your mouthpieces will sound and feel like my Kaspars and Cheds? Better? Worse? Further, I'll pose the question again, does the material matter? If not, then why do you offer both rubber and wooden mouthpieces? You state that, "The *degree* to which it matters is the question." To what degree does it matter to you is, I believe, the question in the first place. I'd love to hear your opinion so will you give us a response?
And I would find it hard to imagine that you, or any one of us, were not influenced by a particular sound or player. You note that you were a Marcellus student (I'm very envious of that, btw). Did Marcellus have an impact on your concept of sound or method of production? I would hope so!!
My reading of what Brad says is that the people mentioned have had an effect on his own concept. He also, in the same breath, says that not everyone agrees and that he is happy to help the player find something suitable to them, whatever he/she desires as optimal in a mouthpiece. I find this inviting and intriguing, from a consumer's point of view. This puts the customer in the driver's seat and I'm always happier when I'm the one driving
--------------------
GS:
And the platform, spotlight, etc, that goes along with associating themselves explicitly with such a fine maker at International Clarinet Conventions by helping run their exhibit, posting opinions on these Bboards and other such beneficial associations? Simply friendship you say?
If life and politics were only that simple....
--------------------
MN:
Yes, you are correct in saying that I helped Brad run his table at the ICA this past summer. What you're not aware of is that I made the same offer to several friends of mine, including makers such as Clark Fobes. I offered my assistance to these people in the spirit of friendship, truly, beccause I find value in their character, their products and them as people and colleagues. I did NOT nor have I EVER received compensation for this. If you choose to believe otherwise, that's entirely your prerogative. I have a clean conscience knowing that the above statement is factual and honest. Sometimes friends just offer their help because they are, in fact, friends. With regard to life and politics, yes, I wish the same were true. Sadly, you're correct there.
And Greg, about tooting your credentials... it seems rather suspect that you chose to list your resume at the end of your posting in response to Brad's question. Personally, I think you're a great player and I'm grateful for your input and comments here and elsewhere. I still find your tone in the original response to be cynical and condescending, in my opinion. I just had higher expectations from someone who is supposedly so learned and respected. It's not your fault that I have those because perhaps you weren't aware that those expectations were in place. But at least you know now so that in the future you can conduct yourself with the dignity and character that you once had and that I respected very much.
All the best to everyone!
P.S. I won't be replying this thread again. Besides, I need to practice sometime and stop staring at the monitor!
Post Edited (2006-12-05 19:10)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2006-12-05 20:09
I usually don't respond to hit and run posts such as the one above but in this case...briefly:
It is extremely interesting to me there are so few here and elsewhere that so willingly (or otherwise) misinterpret or misrepresent my comments. I am usually as clear and concise as possible with rare misunderstandings that are usually cleared up or a mutual "agreement to disagree" is arrived at.
But to be instructed about condescension while being condescended to is something quite new to me. I'm sure that it is obvious to the readers of this Bboard that in this particular case, one can't have that fact both ways.
No matter how my assertions are construed, I am not inclined to repeat myself.....again. My posts speak for themselves.
Gregory Smith
On edit:
With several hours of hindsight, what I find most odd in retrospect about this thread is that a one, Michael Norsworthy, would mount such a vociferous defense of something that he says he has very little investment in while Mr. Behn has remained silent on the matter - a matter that Mr. Behn chose to bring up *months* after this thread was started. I am confident that time will tell. In the end, the truth always has a way of working it's way out from the darkness.
Post Edited (2006-12-06 13:14)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seafaris
Date: 2006-12-05 20:43
I for one Greg have always appreciated your posts. I have found you to be extremely helpful and very prompt to reply to questions in your field of expertise. I to was curious as to why this thread was resurrected especially in the way that it was. Strangely that question was not answered. Thank you for being such an asset to this board.
...Jim
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: FDF
Date: 2006-12-05 22:50
"It's so funny to me that we have so many mouthpiece makers making mouthpieces with Zinner blanks like Fobes, Hawkins, Smith, Grabner, Lomax, Livengood, Redwine, etc. It make me wonder if we have too many cooks in the kitchen?"
Not if they are cooking one at a time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2006-12-06 12:33
clarnibass wrote,
>OK here is the only myth I've heard - harder reeds are better. My teacher made sure I wouldn't belive in this myth.
>
Yes. If there's one myth I hope gets busted, it's that one. I think the "harder reeds are better" myth is by far the most common superstition among students--common fifty years ago when I was a beginner and still common now, despite all these decades of teachers dutifully repeating the mantra that the best reed is the one that suits the player's mouthpiece, clarinet and mouth. Peer group pressure drives this myth: "That little weak reed is for babies. Buying harder reeds means you're more mature. Real professionals use the hardest reeds!" All a load of dirty old swab rags.
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: GoatTnder
Date: 2006-12-06 17:43
Here's one:
Swabbing a mouthpiece will change the dimensions of it over time.
Maybe repeatedly pull a silk swab through a mouthpiece repeatedly (100 times?). It'd probably work better if you made sure the cord didn't rub against the mouthpiece, but rather just the silk. You could take before and after measurements.
Andres Cabrera
South Bay Wind Ensemble
www.SouthBayWinds.com
sbwe@sbmusic.org
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevensfo
Date: 2006-12-06 19:03
Agreed.
Yep, like the ocean currents will change the coastline over time.
Of course the MP will sound different after many years of swabbing. But I'm willing to bet it's more to do with the person's embouchure/habits/lung pressure/ideas changing.
Steve
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
