 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2007-12-03 15:05
I was always curiously intrigued by the idea of naming a mouthpiece the "tone edge", as in Otto Link.
[removed after thread topic was clarified]
James
Gnothi Seauton
Post Edited (2007-12-03 16:55)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2007-12-03 15:12
And before this thread gets too long, let's definitely state that these are opinions and opinions will vary (before some maker of a mouthpiece comes after a poster . . . it's happened to me before after posting here).
For me, I can't really remember too clearly, but I think it's probably between a Buffet C-crown that I bought off of the auction-site-that-must-not-be-named. It was advertised as a kaspar copy, but it is so resistant I feel as though my cheeks would explode before sufficient air goes through. That, or one of the models from Roger Garrett. I loved his reed case, and I ordered three mouthpiece models. One of them I found to be completely unplayable. Another one wasn't as bad, and one was pretty good. I can't remember which models, but one of them just didn't agree with me at all.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2007-12-03 15:27
Not trying to get into a bash the top mouthpiece manufacturers are there are many who swear by them (the above mentioned for sure - may Lomax mouthpiece players and the same for Pyne, Ricardo played Pyne for many years).
I'm talking about the ones which are just awful, not the ones which didn't work out for somebody personally.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2007-12-03 16:00
I nominate the Selmer C*
Also, there is that Mitchell Lurie M3 that I took out of the box and flattened the concave table before playing it. SIGH
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2007-12-03 16:08
The ones supplied with Bundy clarinets, probably the same as the cheapo placcy Goldentones.
UMI ones weren't much better.
Any plastic mouthpiece from beyond the (former) iron curtain.
And the ones supplied with Taiwanese clarinets in the '80s.
I wonder what the mouthpieces that come with those Indian simple-systems (poor copies of the old Boosey&Co. claris) are like? Even worse for the Eb version I'd suspect (as well as the Eb probably being a much worse instrument, if that's possible!).
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: claritoot26
Date: 2007-12-03 16:11
I foolishly bought a ruined Chedeville off of an auction site. It was super bad. I recently tried the old Hite Premiere that I used in middle school, hoping that I might be able to sell it to a young student. It was so horrid for me that I threw it out. I don't know how I ever managed at all on it...maybe why I was a late bloomer. The new ones are probably better.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tdinap
Date: 2007-12-03 16:27
Ditto on the Hite Premier. I occasionally used one as a backup in high school, but stopped for good when the director once asked which saxophone was out of tune, and it turned out to be me (on Bb clarinet). I made sure to always have my 5RV with me after that.
Tom
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevesklar
Date: 2007-12-03 16:56
I had a beechler in here in which the table started ramping up the further you got away from the window. basically like a ski jump - you could visually see it just with a reed placed there. It was horrible playing - if you want to call it that. after "chopping" that ramp-up off though it played remarkably easyl.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2007-12-03 17:28
Hite Premiere? ha, that's funny- i know a pro player here with a draw full of Pyne etc etc who keeps a Hite P in the case as a back up as it "sounds as good as any of the expensive ones"...
surely the Rico Graftonite should rate a mention? Many good mouthpiece brands will have good and bad examples, but this one is consistently BAD
dn
Post Edited (2007-12-03 17:29)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2007-12-03 18:54
donald wrote:
> surely the Rico Graftonite should rate a mention?
I wasn't going to comment because I've written this a few times before, but
the Rico Royal Graftonite mouthpieces have to be the ABSOLUTE WORST clarinet mouthpieces ever offered for sale, anytime, anywhere, any century.
When first marketed in 1986, they were given out by the thousands - free to band directors, most of whom immediately threw them in the trash.
(I had thought I got rid of all of mine - but just noticed I still have 4 new ones on the shelf in my studio. I truly hope they are not multiplying. ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif) )
They were Made from Graftonite™ - a graphite/rubber compound.
They should have left the graphite in the pencils.
Thick rails, thick tip, very resistant blowing, badly designed facings (the A7 had a tip opening of 1.40 and a facing length of 20mm), raised reed table, thin sound - nothing good whatsoever about them, except that they were (sadly) indestructable and impossible to reface.
Toss it in the landfill where it belongs.
I think that the the half-life of lead is 22 years...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2007-12-03 19:17
The worst mouthpieces I ever played were the first couple of dozen I tried to reface many years ago. Fortunately they never left my house.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2007-12-03 19:49
I'm converting one of those specipeople into a chanter reed interface, just for fun. Can't sound worse than before. ![[tongue]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie6.gif)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2007-12-03 19:57
I remember having this brilhart mouthpiece which was a POS. Don't know if that's with the whole brand, but it had a white cap where the teeth rested, and it was cheap, VERY bendable plastic. So those are pretty friggin bad.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mnorswor
Date: 2007-12-03 20:00
Wow.... leave it to clarinet players to create negative threads. No wonder so many say we're mean.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: davyd
Date: 2007-12-03 20:08
One of my colleagues doesn't like my Vandoren B45. But he doesn't have any suggestions for anything different.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2007-12-03 21:03
The one I liked least was a Selmer B* Bernard Portnoy picked out at Interlochen and insisted that I use.
I had been using a Stowell-Wells-Schneider C3, picked out by Keith Stein the summer before, which was extremely open and deafeningly loud. Portnoy probably wanted to quiet me down and learn to get volume some other way, but I hated the B* from the first moment. It had impossibly high back-pressure and a thuddy, constipated tone.
I stuck with it for a couple of years until I got a Chicago Kaspar.
The first mouthpiece that came with the Pan-Am that was my first beginner's instrument was probably worse, but I have no way of evaluating it.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Synonymous Botch
Date: 2007-12-04 12:47
Grenadilla mouthpiece from the Buffet company.
One day beautifully responsive, the next unplayable.
Personally, I like the Rico Graftonite - they're tremendously durable doorstops.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2007-12-04 13:40
I tried to melt down some Graftonites once to recycle the plastic, but they wouldn't even melt gracefully. Had to just throw them away.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2007-12-04 14:05
I have spent more money on, had more models of, and have been consistently unable to play or enjoy ... Vandoren crystal mouthpieces. I know they are supposed to be great. For me they are reed fussy, so resistant that even the A1 gags on a #3 reeds, seriously sharp on my R13, and stufffff-ffffyyyyyyy.
There, I said it. Now let the lions maul me. I am not afraid. I am at peace.
Bill.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2007-12-04 15:04
I don't see how expressing someones opinion could cause trouble - there is freedom of speech afterall, this isn't Russia. I'd think as long as you qualify it by "in my opinion" you can say most anything.....
I've never liked any Vandoren Mouthpieces I've tried, but wouldn't bash them as they are still a top quality mouthpiece company, just not for me.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ABerry
Date: 2007-12-04 16:18
When I bought my Buffet Anniversary model R13 back in 1975, my instructor, Efrain Guigui, wouldn’t even let me open the mouthpiece package. He took right out of my hand and round filed it…He did however, let me have the mouthpiece cap…
Allan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2007-12-04 16:42
DavidBlumberg wrote:
> I don't see how expressing someones opinion could cause trouble
> - there is freedom of speech afterall, this isn't Russia.
It's the Internet, not a specific place ... but ... tell me that expressing an opinion on the Internet can't get you in trouble ... I'll point out a few flaws in that ...
But mouthpieces might be relatively safe.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2007-12-04 17:00
I had the same problem with Fobes mouthpieces as I have with the VD crystals. I mean, I really do understand that they are esteemed equipment, but I just don't "get them." I sold my first Fobes mouthpiece and then on a lark tried one again, and it blew me away. I finally got it, learned to appreciate them. It's not happening with the VD crystals. I've owned four.
I was being comic about the lions mauling me. I know it's more like a firing squad.
Bill.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2007-12-04 17:16
Yup, I get you Mark - folks get sued all the time for most anything. I've also heard of companies bullying opinionators and/or websites. Even if it isn't for a legit reason people get sued and lose or have to settle due to the costs.
Allan - Guigui's family to me. Must have been a treat to study with the little giant.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 53engine
Date: 2007-12-04 17:40
I am always amused at the postings on the mouthpiece threads. I sold literally thousands of clarinet and saxophone mouthpieces on ebay between about 2000 and 2004. I know that many of the regulars on the board bought from me as did several well known symphony players. At one time, I had 11 Kaspars, one of which was a bass clarinet mouthpiece and a similar number of qualite superieure's and obviously, I tried them all. Each one in turn, I would play and then play my Greg Smith. To make a long story short, I sold half of them, kept half of them as an investment and still play my Greg Smith. If you want to search for the perfect mouthpiece, fine; but if you want a mouthpiece that you can play in such a way that you concentrate on making the music and not worrying about the mouthpiece, call Greg. He's also a very nice guy.
By the way, I don't have any affiliation with Greg, I just think that his mouthpieces are about as close to perfection as it gets.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MichaelR
Date: 2007-12-04 17:42
mnorswor wrote:
> Wow.... leave it to clarinet players to create negative threads.
Please let the young player with limited cash who is saved from buying a substandard mouthpiece decide if this thread is negative.
I'll assert protecting buyers is not mean.
I'll assert giving manufacturers feedback on their product is not mean.
--
Michael of Portland, OR
Be Appropriate and Follow Your Curiosity
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2007-12-04 18:00
The worst mouthpiece I have ever played is the one I currently play on.
It is responsive, reed friendly, in tune and can produce the nicest sound.
In fact it such a high quality mouthpiece that if anything wrong comes out of it, only I can be blamed.
There is no doubt in my mind that if my mouthpiece can't take the blame for my own mistakes, it has to be the worst mouthpiece I ever played
At least with my last vandoren, I could claim it was a machine made piece of junk, but was it?
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ABerry
Date: 2007-12-04 21:05
David,
It was indeed a treat...As an instructor he could be demanding at times, but he was always encouraging...He had a way making you feel ok after a not so great lesson...
I also consider myself fortunate to have played under him at Dartmouth.
Allan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Carol Dutcher
Date: 2007-12-04 21:34
Pomarico Crystal Jazz M.P. It is very pretty but I can't play it. I thought it was me. Every six months ago I try it again, and still can't use it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mnorswor
Date: 2007-12-04 21:40
MichaelR wrote:
>Please let the young player with limited cash who is saved from buying a
>substandard mouthpiece decide if this thread is negative.
>I'll assert protecting buyers is not mean.
>I'll assert giving manufacturers feedback on their product is not mean.
Agreed, however the thread that was created did not ask why one thought this nor did it suggest that any feedback was requested for makers or companies to improve their products.
Also, is the young player with limited cash being considered here? If one does not "how" something might be substandard, then how is one to know what to look/not look for? So, is this thread geared toward constructive criticism, which is a good thing, or just towards venting frustrations for equipment that didn't work for one reason or another and not disclosing how or why that product did not work for that particular player?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2007-12-04 21:46
Carol Dutcher wrote:
> Pomarico Crystal Jazz M.P. It is very pretty but I can't play it
The Pomarico crystal jazz mouthpieces are VERY open mouthpieces. There are 2 models, with tip openings of either 1.39mm or 1.48mm.
I normally play a pretty open mouthpiece, but even for me these are way too much.
Perhaps for someone else... .
..GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MichaelR
Date: 2007-12-04 22:02
mnorswor wrote:
> Agreed, however the thread that was created did not ask why one
> thought this nor did it suggest that any feedback was requested
> for makers or companies to improve their products.
Very true, exposing the bit of hyperbole engaged. Carping in the choir isn't a direct way to go about giving feedback. An alert company would monitor boards like this one to collect feedback they don't get through normal channels.
> Also, is the young player with limited cash being considered
> here? If one does not "how" something might be substandard,
> then how is one to know what to look/not look for?
If the mouthpiece is mentioned here and never in threads praising mouthpieces it's a good one to avoid. Finding negative reviews is difficult. Many of the posts here have included information on the experienced defect.
--
Michael of Portland, OR
Be Appropriate and Follow Your Curiosity
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2007-12-04 22:54
There are several inexpensive mouthpieces on the market that are "good".
Genusa, Hite, Fobes, Pyne all have a student line as well as Gigliotti.
All are pretty good.
(edited as I thought Mike played a Lomax, but he plays Behn)
That's why I didn't want the thread to bash the big names as all have very good players playing them with others who don't like them at all.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
Post Edited (2007-12-04 22:58)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2007-12-04 23:12
DavidBlumberg wrote:
> That's why I didn't want the thread to bash the big names as
> all have very good players
The enlightening part of that thread is that there is no "one size fits all" rule here. That's why we have variety and quite a number of manufacturers.
(It still remains a mystery what Rico is keeping manufacturing Cruftonite plugs, tho')
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2007-12-05 11:26
If one played a German mouthpiece the title of this 'thread' could easily be misinterpreted, and some possible answers might be: "cotton", "silk", etc.
Glad I could add to the discussion. Hope nobody spends much time reading this, and please don't waste any more time responding.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RogerGarrett
Date: 2008-06-12 17:59
I was emailed the URL to this thread and the content of a couple of responses. Because of one report, I was urged to "tell my story" so I am doing so. I hope everyone chooses to read carefully and understand all information before making decisions to purchase a mouthpiece. Here is my response:
I understand what David Blumberg was trying to do when he initiated this thread - and I believe it was well-intentioned. Unfortunately, some missing information and, sadly, some incorrect reports resulted. One person reported negatively about one of my mouthpieces. However, this person didn't order directly from me - they ordered trial mouthpieces from another company and didn't like one. Thee models were tried - one was reported as "completely unplayable," one "not as bad," and one as "pretty good." The particular models tried were not identified, and the tester couldn't recall which model was so poor. We don't know much about the circumstances surrounding the tests, nor do we know much about the person who tested the mouthpieces - age, expericence, etc., but now someone may read that they should not try this brand mouthpiece.
What do we actually know about the mouthpieces that were tested?
They had my name on them. That's about it. We don't know anything about the mouthpieces between the time they left my shop and when they were tested. I have a problem with this kind of reporting.
Here is a very good example of how consumer reporting can and should occur:
Fine Woodworking Magazine is considered an excellent publication for wood workers (I've been a subscriber for nearly 10 years). They publish comparison studies on power tools and woodworking tools/equipment all the time. Some companies receive bad ratings. But Fine Woodworking is a respectable mag with people who have credentials, are highly respected in the field, and order directly from the manufacturers. They hire well-regarded woodworking pros to test the equipment - and they do so under conditions and with materials that provide for a fair and unbiased test. The manufacturers are also given the opportunity to provide directly the product that will be reviewed. If they don't provide the product, the product doesn't get reviewed. The problem with my using this example is that playing a clarinet is unique for each person; cutting, planing, turning, and or staining/finishing lumber is not. The variables associated with playing mouthpieces have a lot to do with a person's ability to play on all equipment or only a select few kinds.
Here is something else to consider:
Several years back, I was asked to measure all brands of mouthpieces for one of the musical instrument catalog companies so that they could publish the tip openings and curves in the catalog. What I found was disturbing. Approximately 10% of the stock I was given access to (literally all of it - 100s of mouthpieces) had been refaced by different purchasers before being shipped back during trials. It would not have been obvious to a retailer or end user, but it was obvious to a mouthpiece maker with the tools and measuring equipment designed to examine each mouthpiece. In some cases, it was obvious that someone tried to add a dip into the table, and in some cases the tip was way off. If the tip was off, the curve was way off as well. This means the mouthpieces that had been refaced were no longer representative for that brand.
Flash forward a year ago. A young man purchased a mouthpiece made by me on eBay for dirt cheap ($5). He contacted me and asked if I could check it out because it looked like it had been refaced. In fact, when he sent it, it was completely off. There were file marks in the tip baffle, the side rails were uneven, and the table showed that someone had used a heavier grade sandpaper on the mouthpiece then I would ever use. This was a D model that should have been 1.20 tip but measured 1.04 on my instruments. There is no way that this could have slipped by me - that's nearly .2 milimeters off. The closest model I make is 1.10. I refaced it, reworked it, and sent it back. The student reported that it played so much better.........go figure!
I was given a Kasper Cicero Superb mouthpiece about ten years ago - the guy traded it for a D mouthpiece that I made for him. The Kaspar wasn't working for him, and he had spent $350 for it. The reason it played so poorly? Same as the above story with the D I had to fix - someone had messed with it. When I was done refacing it and correcting the issues, it was truly an outstanding mouthpiece - made from an outstanding blank no longer available. I sold it as a refaced mouthpiece for $500.
When offered a chance to purchase a Kaspar mouthpiece now, I always ask if the person who is selling the mouthpiece is the original owner. If not, there is always a chance it was refaced/reworked and is no longer a Kaspar. Facing, curve, tip, bore - all can be reworked and often are. I own an original Kaspar - and Robert Scott, a respected mouthpiece maker, asked if I wanted him to rework it when I was a college student. I strongly considered it, but I eventually decided to keep it original. It's only original once!
Finally, while I agree that reports legitimately comparing mouthpieces can be helpful under controlled circumstances, that never happens. When a report occurs, it is always helpful if the reporter provides information about himself - what does he do, how old is he, how long has he played, what professional/school ensembles does he play in, what students have gone on to various careers etc. Essentially - it helps to know if the person is qualified to know what "good" or "bad" is. For example - when I first tried Jim Pyne's mouthpieces as a Freshman at University of Michigan - they were stuffy, flat, and unresponsive. Three years of study with David Shifrin later, I tried them again and found them to be warm, round, and lovely. What had changed? I had improved and developed in my playing. As Mark Twain once said (and I paraphrase) - "My dad sure learned a lot between the time I was 16 and 21." Now - I don't prefer every model made by Jim Pyne - but I understand why some play the way they do for me and others play better. Isn't it interesting that so many professionals play on different setups - one can play on a Pyne "M" Clarion model and the next can't play the same mouthpiece? Why is this? Would the one pro who doesn't like the "M" model be fair in stating to a group of people that the mouthpiece was "unplayable?" This is why there are different models within a particular line - so a clarinetist can find one in the range that meets his needs - no matter how narrow that range is.
One may ask themselves - what makes one mouthpiece by the same maker "good" and one "bad"? Many things will affect a person's reaction to a particular mouthpiece - tip opening, curve schedule, bore taper, bore exit, window size, tip and side rail thickness, baffle depth, asymmetry or symmetry of the curve, a dip in the table vs. flat table, and on, and on, and on. If the tester doesn't know anything about this kind of information, then they have no idea why they don't like a particular model. It would be like me test driving three cars made by Cheverolet - Impala, Corvette, and one that has all the looks of an Impala but was designed for stock car racing. After test driving all three, I deduced that the Impala was too big and heavy, that the Corvette was good but the suspension was not very forgiving, and I could hardly control the stock car when driving around town. Not knowing what they were designed for or what their specs were, I then wrote on a public board that, "I tried three models of cars made by Chevrolet. One of them was "undriveable, one wasn't as bad, and one was pretty good."
I hope this long email helps those of you who wonder about mouthpieces, their characteristics, and their playability. I, like many, am available to give mouthpiece clinics in your area if you are interested. I've done dozens of them, and students gain quite a bit of insight (not to mention a free refacing if needed). If anyone has questions about mouthpiece - I welcome them. Please try to report your findings responsibly and in ways that inform rather than cloud the issues.
Thanks for reading.
Best wishes,
Roger Garrett
--
http://sun.iwu.edu/~rgarrett/RogerGarrett/Welcome.html
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2008-06-12 18:35
Roger brings up many good points. I wanted to add that the quote he mentions is one of my favorites-
"When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much he had learned in seven years."
-Mark Twain
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2008-06-12 20:21
RG said:
"They had my name on them. That's about it. We don't know anything about the mouthpieces between the time they left my shop and when they were tested."
-----------------------
Good point.
That's why I don't retail mouthpieces and only work with individuals (with one exception a time back).
There is literally no control over the product, no matter how knowledgeable the sales staff. If one of the models is not appropriately stocked, the customer goes away after not having tried all that is available basing their decision on incomplete information. This gets back to everyone the customer talks to.
As a maker you obviously can't individually work on a back and forth basis if you mass market. I've even received a mouthpiece or two back after trial over the years where the client thought that I wouldn't notice that it had been touched.
It is always preferable IMO to work with each individual maker on a one to one basis if at all possible. Many of the things mentioned in this thread wouldn't come to pass if most clarinetists took the time to select mthpcs this way.
Gregory Smith
http://www.gregory-smith.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BP
Date: 2008-06-12 21:20
I collect mouthpieces and the absolute worst one I ever played was one manufactured in Great Britain. It was white plastic and the brand name was: Brite Tone and I nicknamed it "No Tone."
Bill Payne
http://www.billpayne.wordpress.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ebclarinet1
Date: 2008-06-13 12:07
Roger's post hit the nail on the head. A very interesting read too.
About a month ago I sat down with eight different basset horn/ alto clarinet mouthpieces and at first compared them with my standard set up of Gonzalez #3 sax reed and Van Doren Optimum ligature. Two different Hite mouthpieces were at the top of the list. That was sort of my own prejudice before doing the side-by-side.
However, I had also bought several brands/ styles of reed including specific alto clarinet reeds and alto sax reeds and also varying the ligature from the Van Doren to the Rovner ligature (Dark I believe). This time the list of preferences changed as other mouthpieces, including a Pillinger and a Garret and a Grabner about equal (better on high notes) than the Hites using Van Doren alto clarinet reeds and the Rovner ligature.
I did go back to one of the Hites as I like the Gonzalez reeds for consistency much better.
Anyway, bottom line is that the OTHER equipment is also an important factor in all of this. They radically change the perceived quality of a given mouthpiece. I was surprised at just how much different they were.
Of course now I have to do the same switcheroo with my other clarinet mouthpieces!
Eefer guy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2008-06-13 13:40
For me, "worst mouthpiece" only makes sense if I name the clarinet on which that mouthpiece played "worst." Someone mentioned the Hite Premiere, a mouthpiece I think is a terrific bargain and excellent for jazz on a modern clarinet. It's the best mouthpiece I've got on my Selmer Signet Special, the clarinet I'd choose for jazz. It also plays well on a Leblanc from the 1970s and on a 1977 Buffet. It's the only mouthpiece I've got that turns a plastic Bundy (1980s) into a playable clarinet for an outdoor band.
But, that same mouthpiece is unplayable on Buffets from the 1920s and 1930s, and on other early 20th century clarinets, and that's not a criticism of the mouthpiece. It was never intended for a clarinet that old and therefore belongs, not in the "worst mouthpiece" category, but in the "unsuitable for this instrument" category, a very different thing.
The worst mouthpiece I ever played was the one that shall remain nameless (one of the cheapest that the manufacturer throws in with new beginner clarinets) because the brand name on it became meaningless when I tried refacing it myself. I made such a mess of it that I destroyed the evidence. Gained considerable respect for those who know what they're doing!
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: beejay
Date: 2008-06-13 13:50
I had a wonderful Vandoren B40, which is now among the world's worst mouthpieces since a dog chewed it. I have polished out the worst of the damage, but it now plays very badly. In the opinion of board contributors, would it be worth sending to an expert for refacing?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2008-06-13 13:54
I knew a guy in College who was told a theory that Mouthpieces often aren't quite finished in the kiln process and would be better if they were heated longer.
So the guy put his (I think it was his main one too!) Mouthpiece in an oven at 250.......... Melted the crap out of it.
That's dumb enough to actually deserve that one. Man did that story spread quickly too.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2008-06-13 15:10
Charles Bay "Ithica" custom mpc #033, which goes to prove you can't judge a mouthpiece by its label. If it doesn't play for you, it simply isn't any good no matter who made it.
[the mpc now adorns one of my wall hanging metal CSO's]
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2008-06-13 15:22
> Approximately 10% of the stock I was given access to had been refaced by different purchasers before being shipped back during trials.
That's atrocious!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: xarkon
Date: 2008-06-13 16:38
Surprisingly...just bought a Selmer Signature Bb from eBay with a Selmer C85 120. The instrument is great, but the mouthpiece has a tip rail so thin that it is unplayable.
The Selmer C85 105 that came with my Signature A is beautiful, however.
Strange.
Dave Kumpf
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tenthchair
Date: 2008-06-20 21:36
When I bought my Opus II clarinet, it came with a mouthpiece called Larry Combs. From the name, I initial thought this mouthpiece would be very good since Mr. Combs, a highly respectful clarinetist, probably helped to design it. When I tried to play the mouthpiece, I thought it sounded awful. The sound did not feel supported and I sounded very flat. Do you know if Leblanc just pay Larry Combs to have his signature on the mouthpiece? Does Larry Combs use this mouthpiece? Does anyone here own a Larry Combs mouthpiece? If so, what do you think of it? This was my personal experience with this mouthpiece, but do you think it should be regarded as "worst mouthpiece" (for those who own it)? My answer is yes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2009-11-27 23:59
Worst mouthpiece was a Py*e something or other (some combination of two letters) that I got on ebay. Unplayable, warped facing. Sent it to the Master Himself and was Granted a Refacing (he doesn't agree to reface all of is own mouthpieces ... he has to look at them first and decide on a case-by-case basis). Came back as bad as ever. Asymmetrical, sulphurized garbage.
Bill Fogle
Ellsworth, Maine
(formerly Washington, DC)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony F
Date: 2009-11-28 09:30
Not the worst mouthpiece, that I reserve for a Vandoren b45, which is for me completely unplayable. A while back I was given an old LeBlanc crystal mouthpiece. I carried it in my junkbox unplayed for years, but recently I decided to give it a whirl. I cleaned it up, stuck a reed on it and it played wonderfully. It had a clear, precise tone, particularly in the upper registers, and gave me a degree of control I'd rarely experienced. When I took it off, I dropped it and it smashed into a thousand shards.
Tony F.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2009-11-28 10:23
Gutted! I've heard so many accounts of players accidentally breaking or someone else breaking their crystal mouthpieces that it chills me to think of that happening.
I'm always nervous about my crystal mouthpieces and make sure they're either on the instrument or I'm sitting down when putting the reed on so if they do happen to fall, they'll land on my lap instead of smashing the floor.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rusty
Date: 2009-11-28 10:37
The first half of Roger`s comments were great, probably the second half too, but I had to go to bed.
I put the Van. B45 on the list with Tony. For me hard to blow and it smelt of that awful sulphurised rubber pong. Paid US$165 got back $54 from "the
Auction."
Post Edited (2009-11-28 20:04)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2009-11-28 17:46
And my #1 best MP is a VD B45 that has a tiny chip in the tip that I got off a clarinet that I paid $25 for. Shortly after starting to sue it, I played a show gig with another clarinetist who said "Man, are you sounding good...."
My worst is any Selmer HS*. I have never found one that plays well for me.
HRL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LonDear
Date: 2009-11-28 18:40
I must have one of the HS* that Hank hasn't tried. It was given to me and it is amazing. The person that gave it to me claims it hasn't been modifed at all.
I remember playing a lot of my students' mouthpieces that were bad and had them swapped out. Mostly stock Bundys and Vitos. The worst piece in my collection is a "KING" B.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Molloy
Date: 2009-11-28 21:07
"What's garbage for one is gold to another."
I do find it hard to believe that a mouthpiece (an individual mouthpiece, not an entire line) one person thinks is the worst ever would be thought great by somebody else.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2009-11-28 21:17
Molloy wrote:
> I do find it hard to believe that a mouthpiece (an individual
> mouthpiece, not an entire line) one person thinks is the worst
> ever would be thought great by somebody else.
I don't. Each snout is different...
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-11-28 21:54
I always thought of the Golden Tone MP to be a best buy for the money, very little by the way, for beginners of course.
My worst mouthpiece was a Buffet stock MP that Hans Moenig suggested I use when he was unable to correct to large 12th on my old Bb clarinet, the E-B. He decided, after several hours, that it must be the fault of my then, Wells MP, and gave me the Buffet as the solution. I sounded like a goat. ESP http://eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2009-11-28 22:00
I have fond memories of the Goldentone...
The good thing about Buffet stock outpieces is that they sell for good money on That Auction Site.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2009-11-28 22:25
It really depends on how the person tried the hated mouthpiece. If I try to put the reeds I use on my current mouthpiece on a mouthpiece with a very different facing or considerably more internal resistance, I might well think it "unplayable." But if I were to take the time to figure out what reed is needed, I might have at least a more moderate reaction.
I tend to think in the other direction - I find it hard to believe that any mouthpiece (even David's Goldentone) that hasn't been physically damaged can really be unplayable, given the right reed (and the player's time it takes to find it). It may not be my favorite or even one that I'd want to play on, but any mouthpiece with its rails intact and its body not cracked could be played in a pinch. "Unplayable" is just shorthand for "I would really prefer to play on almost anything else if I have the choice."
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jacoblikesmusic
Date: 2009-11-29 05:02
My worst is a selmer mouthpiece I bought for 10 bucks at my local music shop. I used to bite a tad bit when I was a begginer, and my teeth sunk right into the plastic as if it was made out of cheese. It wasn't a took mark, it was a tooth CRATER. Oh and it played like junk.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony F
Date: 2009-11-30 07:32
Just goes to show, different strokes for different folks. I love the Selmer HS*, but it only works in some of my clarinets. In a Buffet Evette or a Selmer Soloist, Signet 100 or CL200 it works superbly, but in my B & H Emperor it sounds pretty bad.
I've generally got good results from the Yamaha 4C or the Selmer Goldentone 3.
Since my last post, in which I said that I found the VD B45 was unplayable, I've experimented a bit, and I find I can now get a good sound from it with a harder reed than I normally use. I still wouldn't use it as first choice, but I could now use it for performance. Probably my embouchere has changed since I last tried it.
Tony F.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: gabclarinet
Date: 2009-12-27 14:57
Probably the worst mouthpiece ever made came with a russian clarinet - once I have had a chance to try to destroy one : step on it , throw to the wall, jump on
the kind of mouthpiece looking object, but nothing could harm that...
certainly I was not able to play an acceptable note with that, but after all the
"process" I started to admire all of those guys who have started them carrier playing on them....
gabclarinet@freemail.hu
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wicked Good ★2017
Date: 2009-12-27 18:28
Portnoy BP01 was the worst for me. Couldn't get a decent tone out of it to save my soul. A standmate has one, sounds like a buzzsaw. I couldn't do any better with it. A Graftonite might have sounded better!
Followed closely by the Woodwind mouthpieces supplied with Vito Dazzlers. Absolutely horrid (to me).
(In the "never thought I'd say this" category: I find recent Vandoren Profile 88 mouthpieces to be pretty darned good. In particular, the M13 Lyre & M15 work well for me on my R13s, Buffet Custom, and Vito V40 clarinets. I wouldn't hesitate to play a concert on either.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
There are only 10 kinds of people in the world:
Those who understand binary math, and those who don't.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2009-12-27 19:50
David, the trouble is that most of us will never know if a particular mouthpiece is really "completely unplayable" because as soon as it doesn't play well *for us* most of us put it aside and revert back to one we're used to. Of course, a Goldentone (in your original post) will never play as well as anything any of us currently plays on by choice. But I've had students who played for their first few years on them and got decent results. At some point anyone who is at all serious about playing will have to move on to something better, but even those Goldentones (or the Yamaha C4s that come with the entry level rentals the kids get) can produce a characteristic clarinet sound with the right reed. I don't believe that Buffet back in the mid-20th century was deliberately producing completely unplayable mouthpieces to pack with their R13s and earlier models - SOMEone must have been able to produce an acceptable sound with a correctly matched reed. But as you know, no one in the Philadelphia area would have been caught dead trying to use one - I can't say more than that because my exposure to the clarinet world back then was much too limited to be have known what players anywhere else were doing.
I've had a couple of *damaged* mouthpieces that I'm certain genuinely were unplayable. But this thread seems to show that one player's worst may well be more than acceptable to someone else.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: super20dan
Date: 2021-11-20 08:37
the umi mpcs were mentioned above-well the eb version is very good. came as a big suprize . broke mine and bought 3 spares. they were 19$ ea . spent big $ on a vandy xystal bass mpc. hated it -sold it quick.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris Sereque
Date: 2021-11-21 05:29
For a while, I played a mouthpiece from a premium maker, which had a great sound. Only problem was that after about 60 seconds of not playing it, no sound, nothing at all, would come out of it. Zero! Needless to say, I didn’t stick with it!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
![[grin]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie5.gif)
