 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2009-03-12 12:16
Hi everyone,
I want to discuss some practicalities of mouthpieces. I actually know pretty much nothing about them, and nor do I want to obsess over every tiny little detail about tip openings etc. I'm more concerned with how they play, feel, and what to look for in a good one.
I currently play on a Greg Smith Kaspar Cicero. It has everything I want except lately I find it a little too 'open' to play - it seems to take a lot of air and produce less sound that I think it should for that amount of air. Softer reeds do not remedy the situation. (I'm using Gonzalez FOF 3 1/2)
Is it correct that a more closed mouthpiece will take harder reeds and produce sound more immediately and an open one will take softer reeds and perhaps not be as immediately responsive?
What kind of mouthpiece tip openings etc. should I be looking at if I'm looking to improve the response and reduce airiness in the sound?
Thanks!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-03-12 12:32
I don't know anything about the Gregory Smith mouthpieces except I know that this model has no choose of facing like his Old Chedeville has. Actually a more open mouthpiece would have a larger sound. With the same reed I can get much more projection with Grabner K-14(1.07mm opening and medium curve) than with his old model SW1(0.95-98mm opening and short curve) which was replaced with the Chicago C35 model. Try asking Gregory if opening your mouthpiece or lengthening the curve could solve your problem.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: johnniegoldfish
Date: 2009-03-12 13:05
Good question, I would appreciate some input on this also.
In addition are the Grabner Mouthpieces all wood?
Also would the Grabner K14 CXZ, describer as a Klezmer or Jazz mouthpiece, be easier to blow?
A technical answer will baffle me, so please advise as if i never heard of openings or curves or tips if possible?
Thanks!
Hhmmm!
Post Edited (2009-03-12 18:14)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2009-03-12 13:18
Here's Walter's website, and having just scanned it I didn't see any wooden mouthpieces. He uses Zinner blanks, and despite the fact that Zinner makes wooden mouthpiedes the majority of Walter's are hard rubber.
http://www.clarinetxpress.com/mouthpieces.html
Sending Walter an email would be the best way to find out what you're looking for.
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2009-03-12 13:31
There are some many variables in the design of a mouthpiece. Certainly the facing plays a big role, but interior dimensions, such as the baffle, bore, chamber, etc can have a great impact as well. In addition, the tip opening is only one part of the equation. The type of curve and length have a lot to do with it as well. I have played mouthpieces that blow completely differently than their numbers might suggest, due to the many variables.
One article that may give you some insight:
http://www.ridenourclarinetproducts.com/facings.htm
If you like the results that you get with the Greg Smith, you should contact him for his input. He knows a great deal about the subject and is very good about corresponding. He can likely offer some guidance.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JJAlbrecht
Date: 2009-03-12 13:31
Walter Grabner's mouthpieces, like Gregory Smith's mouthpieces, are mostly made from Zinner hard rubber blanks. Walter had (and may still offer) a mouthpiece made from cocus wood. Gregory Smith also offers hardwood mouthpieces. You can find out more about the Smith pieces here: http://www.gregory-smith.com/Models.html and more about Walter Grabner's pieces here: http://www.clarinetxpress.com/mouthpieces.html
Both are excellent craftsmen and a pleasure to deal with. I own a mouthpiece from each of them; a Grabner K13 and a Smith Chedeville H1.
Jeff
“Everyone discovers their own way of destroying themselves, and some people choose the clarinet.” Kalman Opperman, 1919-2010
"A drummer is a musician's best friend."
Post Edited (2009-03-12 13:32)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2009-03-12 14:00
I have noticed that mouthpieces that have a wide tip-rail (e.g., B40, B40L, M30) tend to produce something of a 'covered' tone that, like you describe, seems to need a lot of air for not quite enough sound. Conversely, narrow tip rails give me a more piercing sound.
As an experiment I once filed out a wide tip rail to produce a narrow tip rail. Of course, this also made a convex baffle near the tip. The result was almost unplayable but REALLY loud :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2009-03-12 14:11
Excellent article, thanks for that! Very informative!
I guess I might hazard saying that my Greg Smith mouthpiece could do with a closer tip opening; I only really want an easier response and more control. I doubt I would seek to modify the existing mouthpiece, but rather look for another; I would want to ruin my current one in the process!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-03-12 17:24
A good mouthiece has to match not only the player but the instrument and set up you use. Not all players are shaped in the same way so why we everyone use the same facing or design.
A more important aspect is being able to produce a wide dynamic range with ease and good intonation. Alot of players think a mouthpiece is going to do everything..but are later dissapointed when they find out there is an aspect of the mouthpiece they have that is "touch and go."
..every facing has an area of weakness such as response in a given area or range .. even ability to speak quickly enough given the passage in front of them. A good mouthpiece helps alot but does not always solve the musical problems of going about the instrument. Sometimes reeds and having them properly set up gets rid of some of these problems..but one still has to get all the notes..
David Dow
Post Edited (2009-03-12 17:25)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2009-03-12 17:26
There are no simple answers to mouthpiece questions, no single variable (or even two or three) that can be used as a basis for selecting mouthpieces, and simply no substitute for trying many, many mouthpieces in order to find one suitable for you.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roger Aldridge
Date: 2009-03-12 17:46
To add to what David just said.... The "for you" also includes matching mouthpieces to your specific clarinet and its bore size & design.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2009-03-12 17:53
Roger, I agree with you to a certain extent, but I've found that in general, a really "good" mouthpiece (for a given player) will work well on a wide variety of instruments, while a "bad" one will be universally bad! There is a middle ground, I'll admit, where some mouthpieces work well with a particular clarinet and/or barrel but not with others.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-03-12 18:05
I would probably look for a mouthpiece myself if I wasn't so busy. Finding the right piece could take a long time...many pros just don't have the time between work and family and students to be able to look diligently. If one plays every day for years one thing is for sure..the mouthpiece should be fairly easy to get the sound you want out of. On top it shouldn't add to the fatigue of performing in any way...
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2009-03-12 18:23
Well here I go again. There is no one set of numbers to fit all, or anyone for that matter. Every mouthpiece, even the same ones, play differently. The tip opening, as so many others have said, is only one small part. There are so many other variables involved. Here is a perfect example.
I play an old Morgan MP, it has a 28 on it but the tip opening is really about a 17 by my, and several others, measurements. It plays very much like his 6 and 10 facings. As a matter of fact my back up is actually a 6. I'm almost just as comfortable on that 6 as I am on my "28", which is really a 17.
When I first got the MP in the early 90s I called Ralph Morgan and asked him why this 28 plays more like a 6 or 10. He told me that the one I owned was one of his first and that the blank is different than his new ones, this was in the early 90s. He told me his older tools we not as accurate as his newer ones and that mine probably was more like a 16-18 then the 28s he was producing at the time, his "Jazz" facing he called the new 28s. He said the reason it plays so much more like a more closed facing was because of what he did differently on the inside of the mouthpiece. The baffle and the bore and the chamber. He said it has a deeper chamber so it takes more volume of air and other things that I can't remember right now. You just can't go by the tip opening alone. My suggestion is to try as many MPs as you have the patience to get on approval until you find what you like. Most mail order companies in the USA will send you 3-4 with only putting one on your credit card and credit most of it back to you when you return them. Yes, you have to pay postage and "cleaning" fees but this way, in a month or two, you can try well over a dozen MPs. Of course if you live near one of these places you can make a trip and spend the day. That's exactly how I found my Morgan years ago when I was trying out MPs for my students at Wieners in NY. See if there is a shop in England that stocks many like those in the USA. I guess it's a bit more difficult there then it is here because we have so many. Remember, no two people have the same reaction to the same mouthpiece. ESP www.peabody.jhu.edu/457
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-03-12 18:53
Well I know many players who play on Grabner K-14(even the ones that are most opened) and I've heard like from my former teacher who plays on Buffet Tosca clarinets that he likes the more open ones(I got two to try out some time ago and the two were even closer than my teachers one) and he said that he owns K-13 and Chicago C35 and C40 and he says it's most easy to play the K-14 and it has the most projection of them all. Well he and the others that I know who play on them mainly play classical music with reeds #3.5. I own SW1(previous to Chicago C35) and AW and have also tried the Chicago C35 and I have to say that K-14 has the most projection and even the AW has more projection than SW1 and Chicago C35 so my guess is that shorter curve like the SW1 and Chicago C35 take a lot more air. So I would guess that longer curve get more projection than shorter. I don't know but I would guess that Grabner(let's stick to one maker) make the Chicago C35 and C40 fairly similar except the C35 has shorter curve and therefore takes more air to play.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roger Aldridge
Date: 2009-03-12 20:00
David,
What I was trying to describe is how clarinets do not have a uniform amount of resistance and performance characteristics between companies and clarinet models. With that in mind, a particular mouthpiece & reed set up can work beautifully on one clarinet but not as well on another. That is, the other clarinet may have more resistance (as an example). In such a case, one would need to either use a softer reed on that mouthpiece or try a mouthpiece with a smaller tip size (in order to use the same reed strength).
As you might remember, I have two Couesnon Monopole clarinets. They have different bore sizes. In matching Grabner mouthpieces to my CMs, I absolutely love a K14 on the CM I use as my performance clarinet. However, I discovered that a K13 works better for me on the other CM. There is not a large amount of difference between the K14 and K13 but it's enough so that I feel more comfortable with the K13 on my backup CM.
Roger
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Grabnerwg
Date: 2009-03-12 21:15
Wow!
It is weird to sign in, read a bunch of posts, and find out all this discussion of my products.
A couple of things:
Right now, I am not offering wood mouthpieces. I have in the past, and probably will again in the future. It has a lot to do with standardization and quality. It is a side business anyway, 99% of all mouthpieces sold are hard rubber.
Another thing - one of the problems in discussions like this is that people concentrate on tip opening and facing length. These are only two of MANY variables that go into making a quality mouthpiece.
Please remember that there are many different blanks available for mouthpiece craftsmen and that each has it's own characteristics, in terms of tone, response, and pitch. Again tip opening and facing length are just two of many variables that we, as craftsmen, deal with on a daily basis.
Also, it is possible to make a mouthpiece that "hits all the numbers" yet is still quite average, and what we are all after is the superb mouthpiece that stands head and shoulders above all others.
I am open to any and all questions, either on the bulletin board or by private correspondence. Also, quite frankly, I don't have all the answers, and in my opinion, neither does anyone else.
I tell my customers, no one else plays YOUR clarinet, with your mouth! Pick what works best for you at the given time.
Also, be aware, that different playing environments might favor different set ups.
I happen to play often in a rehearsal room that overly promotes the the upper partials in the tone. Everybody who plays in that room sounds a little bright and this, and tinny. We have worked with the management to get a better room and some improvement has been made. But it's still hard to sound really good in that rehearsal room. When you go up to the stage, it's a completely different experience. Dealing with this makes it hard to get a set up where one sounds good in both environments.
Walter grabner
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2009-03-13 04:05
Quote:
Excellent article, thanks for that! Very informative!
I guess I might hazard saying that my Greg Smith mouthpiece could do with a closer tip opening; I only really want an easier response and more control. I doubt I would seek to modify the existing mouthpiece, but rather look for another; I would want to ruin my current one in the process! For myself, I found that it wasn't the face opening that seemed to respond quicker or slower, but moreso the style of mouthpiece. For me, Kaspars do not sound well. I've tried a few mouthpieces, and EVERY style of mouthpiece that was a kaspar-style mouthpiece, has not sounded good and has had that "less than immediate" response, with a tone that I just don't care for. I guess my chops, or at least my ears, prefer a chedeville style mouthpiece.
Have you tried any chedeville style mouthpieces? I guess a good (decent?) test of whether it's the style mouthpiece would be to find a maker that makes BOTH styles and try them side by side. Greg Smith comes to mind in that respect, and if I could ever convince Walter Grabner to go back to using the chedeville blanks he used to use a few years ago, I'd snag one from him in a heartbeat.
Alexi
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2009-03-13 07:26
sfalexi I also own a Greg Smith Chicago model which has a 'nicer' sound but the tone seems shallow to me. My Cicero has a lovely, heavy, seemingly bottomless depth to it! I has a +1 for about a year that didn't like any reed I put on it...
I need to record myself with ear plugs in maybe?
I'm sensing a few hours at Howarth with a lot of cash in my wallet at some stage... Unfortunately this all costs money!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2009-03-13 11:49
Hey Morrigan,
Are you sure that you are not taking in too much mouhtpiece on the Cicero?
I find that checking every now and then helps keep me in the right spot, that is, playing open "G" starting from the tip of the mouthpiece and slowly moving up until I squawk. Moving back just a hair from that "SWEET SPOT" is the perfect place.
With this technique I can now move quickly from a long facing to a short facing within a day and get great results from both.
...........Paul Aviles (Greg Smith mouthpiece advocate)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2009-03-13 11:54
I've used the Gonzalez FOF reeds. They're nice reeds, but in my experience they are very sensitive to humidity. Are you storing them in some type of humidity-controlled reed case? That might make a difference. Another possibililty is that these reeds might be a just a little too hard for you. Have you tried 3s? I've used 3s in the past, and I've had some success with them.
Here's my personal Gonzalez/humidity story. Late last summer, I bought some FOFs and they seemed to work fine. I didn't have a decent reed storage system at the time. Even though I broke these reeds in very slowly, they all slowly went dead on me. Then, in September, we had a very rainy afternoon. The humidity in my house was off the charts. Guess what? Those "dead" Gonzalez reeds suddenly came back to life.
In previous posts, I've mentioned my enthusiasm for Rico Reserves. You could try both 3s and 3 1/2s, and you might be pleasantly surprised.
If after experimenting with different reeds you don't get better results, than it might be worth trying out other mouthpieces.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Morrigan
Date: 2009-03-13 14:59
That may be just the ticket Paul; at the moment I'm playing quite far down the mouthpiece as evidenced by the teeth marks, a little over halfway down. Probably too much, I'll give what you recommend a go.
In terms of Gonzalez, I think they're the right strength; I bought boxes of 3s and 31/2s and the 3s are barely hard enough to get a sound out of. I store my reeds in a box where they are held on their side, not against anything flat and it has large vent holes in it. I've never had good results storing reeds in some kind of controlled environment; I believe in storing them in the same environment you're going to play them in.
But this threat isn't about reeds, that part's sorted!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2009-03-13 19:45
Morrigan said:
"I'm playing quite far down the mouthpiece as evidenced by the teeth marks, a little over halfway down."
---------------------------------
It's always difficult to diagnose anything over the Internet but "Practically speaking" (the title of this thread):
Unless you have a terribly pronounced overbite, I think Paul's advice is apt in your case.
This kind of thing also deserves a reexamination of the top/bottom relationship of the jaws (making sure of the "more reed than mouthpiece" configuration - not equal amounts of both - nor more mouthpiece than reed).*
No mouthpiece will play at it's optimum unless *your* occlusion is optimal - not the length of the lay, the tip opening - nothing.
*This of course is all related to the angle of the clarinet to the body/jaws and could be the result of, when holding the head straight as if looking to the horizon, an angle that is too great or straight out to achieve the optimal top/bottom relationship. Simply swallowing the mouthpiece doesn't address the issue of the top/bottom jaws relationship.
Gregory Smith
http://www.gregory-smith.com
Post Edited (2009-03-13 22:55)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
![[toast]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smiley15.gif)
