 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: libraman
Date: 2008-01-14 03:56
I read many topics in this board, most of them talking about buffet R13. Why do only a few mention about RC? I ask because after I search this board and decide to try as much as clarinets as I can. However, I can only find RC and RC prestige in Milan, no R13 at all. So can you please tell me the difference of these 2 buffet horns. And is it worth if I buy an RC or RC Prestige instead of the most popular R13?? Thank you..
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2008-01-14 12:46
The R13's market since the model's inception has mainly been the US - that's back in the 1950's. The other two markets that buy R13's by a substantial majority are Japan and relatively lately, in numbers, England. R13's are played by a relative minority in other countries compared to the US hence the probability of it being less available.
The RC was designed by Buffet acousticians sometime in the late 70's or early 80's as a *tribute* to the R13's designer, cheif acoustician Robert Caree. It is *not* a model that Caree designed. The "RC" designation is the company's tribute to the R13 with a few modifications.
The most important similarity between the RC and R13 is the size of their mid-body cylinder which is essentially remains the same. Other acoustical compromises include the change of the placement of a few of the tone holes. Also the register vent has been relocated higher on the body.
The main acoustical difference between the R13 and RC (Prestige or not) is the degree of flare at the bottom of the cylinder as it extends down through to the bell. The RC has a greater degree of flare or "opens up" more than the R13. One may notice that the top portion of the RC bell is opened up or scooped out to accommodate for the final continuation of this larger flare.
To my ear, this creates a kind of megaphone effect that results by some musician's description as a "bigger" sound. The sound of the RC is certainly differently shaped but I personally do not hear this different shape resulting in a "bigger" sound.
Gregory Smith
http://www.gregory-smith.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2008-01-14 14:34
I have an RC that replaced an older "R13". This particular RC is a good clarinet. It has much better intonation than my old instrument --but that is probably because the old instrument is a "bad" one --with misplaced tone holes and a warped bore.
My teacher has R13s and doesn't think that the extra cost of an RC brings anything worthwhile. When we play together, our intonation matches much better than when I use my old instrument.
I can not see or feel the scooped-out flare in the bell of my RC. I don't notice this horn having a fuller voice than my old instrument.
I believe that all "good" Buffets are interchangeable.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NorbertTheParrot
Date: 2008-01-14 15:59
Gregory Smith wrote:
The RC was designed by Buffet acousticians sometime in the late 70's or early 80's as a *tribute* to the R13's designer, cheif acoustician Robert Caree. It is *not* a model that Caree designed.
www.buffet-crampon.com tells it differently:
Developed in 1975 by the extremely talented luthier Robert Carrée, who plays an important role in the history of BUFFET CRAMPON, the RC clarinet has a pure, sweet sound.
Some scope for confusion here, methinks.
The Buffet site also tells us that the R13 is pitched at 440 Hz, and the RC at 440/442/444 (whatever that might mean).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2008-01-14 16:01
When I bought my Festival clarinet more than 2 and a half year ago I tried Buffet Tosca,R13 and RC all Prestige and Festival,Selmer St.Louis and Leblanc Opus II. Of all the models I didn't hear any difference at all between R-13 and RC. The most difference was that all of the Buffets did produce a warmer and sweeter sound than the Selmer St.Louis and Leblanc Opus II and with greater projection.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2008-01-14 16:45
RTP said: "<www.buffet-crampon.com> tells it differently:
Developed in 1975 by the extremely talented luthier Robert Carrée..."
------------------------------------------------
My source is from inside the company. The website explanation could perhaps be loosely interpreted to mean that Carree may have overseen the project in some initial way, but he was not the manifest designer of the RC model. It could also be loosely interpreted to mean that the RC design stands on the shoulders of Carree's considerable talents having initially designed the R13. And there's always the prospect that something is being lost in translation making these explanations all the more likely.
Actually Buffet bodies are pitched to play at 441 to provide flexibility for different markets (440, 442, etc). Barrels of different lengths, diameters, tapers, etc, help make the body interchangeable as does the choice of mouthpiece. I believe there are or were models designed to play higher and have a "F" stamped in front of the serial number.
I bought my first and only RC, an Eb, in 1980. Being told that it was a new design at that time and not knowing the year of manufacture, my guesstimate of the late 70's wasn't too far off.
Gregory Smith
PS. All *modern* RC bells have a larger diameter entrance bore at the bell to continue the larger flare of the lower joint. Whether one perceives that as a "scoop" or simply larger depends on any given individuals' perception. During manufacture, Buffet even stamps their bells to correlate with each model so that bells are not inadvertently switched or mixed up.
http://www.gregory-smith.com
Post Edited (2008-01-14 16:58)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: pelo_ensortijado
Date: 2008-01-14 16:45
the major differences i find is that it is easier to play a dark "american" sound on the r13 than the RC.
the right hand toneholes are a bit closer together on the RC. atleast it feels like it.
i love my RC and wouldn't change it for a r13 even if i got paid! :P
i find the r13 to hard to controll.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Andy Firth
Date: 2008-01-16 13:02
I too tried the RC Buffets and I couldn't hear any difference. Having said this however, I didn't like the feel of them as much as the R-13. I think that the R-13 is the best Buffet ever produced. But that's only my opinion.
Cheers!
Andy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LarryBocaner ★2017
Date: 2008-01-16 15:26
I am presently playing a "golden-age" R13 Bb and a 1980-ish F-numbered RC A clarinet. Love them both, and they play very similarly. I chose the RC A because it blew more freely than most of the R13 A's that I've had.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2008-01-16 16:52
Naturally the slightly larger bore scoop (or flare) will result in slightly less undercutting in that area of the cone in respect to tone holes...these holes may also be slightly smaller to adjust the 12ths...all of this hereby changes the timbre and also resistance of the instrument.
Even a minute change will affect greatly the way not only the intonation but also the adjustments the player has to make in playing the clarinet.
...a slight change in where the register vent is placed as well on the RC which makes a huge difference as well not only in tuning but also certain response aspects...
Greg Smith nails on the head the differences as well. I tend to prefer the R!3 which has a great responsiveness on the upper joint notes when adjusted properly. For some the Rc seems to be more flexible, but I have found it too open on certain notes...
David Dow
Post Edited (2008-01-16 16:55)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: libraman
Date: 2008-01-16 19:25
Thanks for your opinions. There are much knowledge here in this topic. So I think I should try both of them, but shouldn't expect the difference, right??
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
