 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: C2thew
Date: 2006-11-18 19:17
I'm a bit confused as to why the chedeville mouthpiece manufacturing company went under. From what i understand, they were producing mouthpieces for buffet, and had their own custom line? of lelandais mouthpieces and reeds. I have a vintage destroyed alto sax reed that has the markings of A. lelandais. So what went wrong? Their mouthpieces had the right material, so how does such a remarkable company plummet?
Did buyers just stop buying their product line?
Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. they are but improved means to an unimproved end, an end which was already but too easy to arrive as railroads lead to Boston to New York
-Walden; Henry Thoreau
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2006-11-18 23:43
I would love to know the Chedeville/Lelandais story. From everything I've read, Brad Behn seems to know the most at least about their different mouthpiece blanks and who used what.
As everyone probably knows, Glotin owns the Chedeville trademark now.
Bill.
Bill Fogle
Ellsworth, Maine
(formerly Washington, DC)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brad Behn
Date: 2006-11-19 23:35
It is very common for small businesses to cash out at a certain point. As far as I can tell, there are no great secrets but it is mostly a case of simple business economics plus family business/personnel dynamics: antiquated equipment, aging family ownership, new competition from Vandoren and others.
At a certain point, they simply determined that it wasn’t worth the effort any more.
Brad Behn
http://www.clarinetmouthpiece.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: C2thew
Date: 2006-11-20 02:55
So i guess they were afraid that vandoren would supercede their mouthpieces that they produced for buffet? I understand that small busisness would love to cash out in a timely matter, was that enough to just end the buisness like that?
i'm guessing they had a
1) production line (buffet chedeville c Crown mouthpieces)
2) artistic line? (charles chedeville)
They made some pretty darn good mpc blanks.
All i know is that charles bay bought out (smart move) their rest of their blanks and produced his own line of mpcs.
If they were producing something that was of THE standard, they should have been flourishing or at least bought off. rather they went under or chose to go out of business.
last question: wasn't qualitie supiere mpcs produced by the chedeville group?
Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. they are but improved means to an unimproved end, an end which was already but too easy to arrive as railroads lead to Boston to New York
-Walden; Henry Thoreau
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2006-11-20 12:45
I have "Chedeville" Qual Sup mouthpieces that are very different from one another in shape of blank, shape of baffle, diameter of bore, angle (and width) of sidewalls, and markings:
1. "Old" Qual Sup: CBC Bettoney, Linton, and various without commercial name stamp. Baffle and throat opening differ widely, but numbering system is consistent (#5-8). One ring up, one down. FRANCE to the left (or just beneath "Qual Sup").
2. "Not quite as old" Qual Sup: Charles Chedeville and A. Lelandais (with same numbering system as in 1, above) and D. Bonades. The Ch. Chedeville (and Lelandais) blanks bear no similarity to the Bonades except for the "Qual Sup" markings; different numbering system also. One ring up, two rings down. FRANCE to the left.
3. "1970s Chedevilles": No Qual Sup marking; Charles Chedeville ("scroll") and Charles Bay. Old numbering system abandoned.
One problem with my imaginary dating above is that the Bay mouthpieces have very wide exit bores. They do not match c. 1960s-70s Buffet barrels at all. Curious.
In any event, Chedeville was the General Motors of mouthpieces! -Bill.
Bill Fogle
Ellsworth, Maine
(formerly Washington, DC)
Post Edited (2006-11-20 12:53)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2006-11-21 02:34
Merchants have the same problem as biological cells, royal dynasties, and empires.
A noted economist commented that we should not lament the passing of business entities. It is a natural phenomenon. Cell biologists have a name for this, and it is one of the things investigated by cancer researchers.
Apoptosis.
They only live a certain length of time, and only replicate their intrinsic units a finite number of times.
Their "shells" may be purloined by other entities--hermit crabs, corporate takeovers, or they may be imitated, just as goverments imitate Ghengis Khan or Greek Democracy....but.....the originals die! It is a fact of life.
Former creator of CUSTOM CLARINET TUNING BARRELS by DR. ALLAN SEGAL
-Where the Sound Matters Most(tm)-
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2006-11-21 16:37
Maybe fewer and fewer people wanted to buy their "renowned" mouthpieces...you think?
Clarinet Redux
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-11-21 17:08
Old Geezer wrote:
> Maybe fewer and fewer people wanted to buy their "renowned"
> mouthpieces...you think?
Or take a small, thriving business that is perfectly sized for the customer base, split it among descendants when a principal decides to leave the business or passes away, and then you have more than one company, the aggregate of which is too large for the customer base. Sometimes one drops out, sometimes all.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
