 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2010-02-08 15:35
In your opinion, which material gives the "best sound": Grenadilla wood or hard rubber?
I've read ads by various barrel makers who use Grenadilla wood, hard rubber, Delrin, etc., and they all promise that "dark sound" with better intonation.
Hard rubber appears to be the material of choice for mouthpieces because of their density and dimensional stability, i.e., not affected by temperature and humidity. (Per an article written by Ralph Morgan http://www.docstoc.com/docs/19877267/Does-the-material-used-make-any )
However, various forms of wood, especially African Grenadilla wood, appear to the material of choice for barrels.
(I am aware that the dimensional design of the barrel can greatly influence tone, intonation and resistance.)
Your thought please?
Thanks.
Dan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JJAlbrecht
Date: 2010-02-08 17:08
The main reason grenadilla became the default wood for clarinet making was its ease of maching, so that a (relatively) consistent product came off the production line.
"Darker" tone in a barrel tends to come from the thickness of the material, to some end. Tom Ridenour has written about this. The "fat" barrels tend to be a bit more resistant and have fewer of certain overtones, which gives them the "dark" sound, according to Ridenour.
I'm sure Dr. Segal (the board's resident barrel expert) will be able to shed much more light on the subject than I would ever be able to do.
Oddly enough, though hard rubber is supposed to produce a "dark" tone, my daughter claims my Ridenour clarinet (hard rubber from barrel to bell) is bright. Go figger!
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 (2010-02-08 17:10)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Franklin Liao
Date: 2010-02-08 18:06
The author in that article that Dan posted argued that Ebonite's hardness has an impact on acoustical profile, and the very thickness of the beak area with Ebonite can either dampen, or resonate should the thickness be optimal. Said article seems to also caution against metal, with only the exception of sterling silver...
I guess the closest thing that I can think of in comparison of same dimensions using different materials would be Buffet's B12 to E11 and the Leblanc LB320/LB310 to LB210. From what I've gathered out of the feedbacks, the general satisfaction on grenadilla is more than composite materials, but I cannot say for certain.
Post Edited (2010-02-08 18:07)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: srattle
Date: 2010-02-08 18:11
everyone's concept of 'dark' or 'best' is different so there is no way a material can make the 'best' sound. . .
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-02-08 18:21
My barrels are made of different woods that Backun uses to make his barrels. On my A clarinet I have King wood and my two Bbs I use Cocobolo, both bells and barrels. I think it's more the bore size and cut then the material but of course different materials will enhance or diminish tonal quality. The only possible way to tell is to try as many as you can. I tried well over a dozen for each of my clarinets before I settled on the ones I'm not using. ESP http://eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2010-02-08 19:05
Thanks for all of your comments.
I'm quite familiar with "try as many as you can", however, I should have mentioned that I need to rely on the opinions of others because my hearing is quite bad (severe high frequency loss) and still have conversation difficulties with my hearing aids on (which are maxed out on the high frequency response end).
So, needless to say, I appreciate all of your subjective opinions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2010-02-08 19:55
I'm in the "the barrel (bore) shape has more influence than the material it is made from" camp.
I probably couldn't tell the difference between a hard rubber, resonite, ABS or wooden barrel, provided they have the same length and bore diameter. But perhaps I'm a Neanderthal, or these things aren't very important to me.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LonDear
Date: 2010-02-09 02:23
Dan,
I have quite a bit of hearing loss also, so those with good ears can just sign off from this post.
I have a very wide variety of barrels, mostly grenadila and plastic, but with some very fine specimens of cocobolo and hard rubber.
I get the most "zing" from coco, almost to the point of feeling out of control. I often bring the coco's out just to feel really in control, if that makes any sense.
The plastic barrels have never done much for me, so I have drilled most of them for transducers, hoping for the ultimate Dixieland amplified clarinet setup. They work well for that function and I don't have the guilt of mutilating an expensive piece of wood.
I played stock grenadilla barrels until about eight years ago, and I thought they were fine until I met in person with a well known master m/p and barrel maker and ended up with my best barrel until I got the coco's mentioned above.
But, my hearing continues to decline.
I find that very good custom hard rubber barrels give me the best sound and are very ear friendly. They allow me to blend very well with classical, jazz and blues ensembles. I put a coco barrel on rarely these days, just for fun. I need to get the coco's up for sale.
Taper and length makes a big difference also.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2010-02-09 03:10
Some years ago I was sure the material of a clarinet (and barrel) made a big difference. I was sure wood was better than plastic, different woods made a different tone, etc. Then I started questioning myself and found cracks in what I knew...
Basiclaly the opinions of musicians (almost) always come from what they feel and general impression. When people notice a difference, they usually think of the reason they notice imediately, in this case the differet material. They usually don't measure very accurate to see if the dimentions are the same, or try 30 in a BLIND test.
Someone who is trying a different material barrel and finds that it is better is also a lot more likely to tell you about it than someone who didn't find a difference worth remembering. When I compared barrels from different materials I found just as many times it didn't make a difference. You can also notice that the supposed acoustical effect of each material is almost always based on psychology. The more expensive the metal, the better the tone... the lighter the material, the tone is brighter... rarer material, more unique tone, etc. etc. What a coincidence... Actually this is very common and very likely to happen with humans...
I recommend reading this article http://www.shwoodwind.co.uk/misc/myths_and_materials.htm it's about saxophones but the same principal applies to clarinets.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2010-02-09 10:54
clarnibass wrote:
> ... You can also notice
> that the supposed acoustical effect of each material is almost
> always based on psychology.
According to anything I've ever read written by a physicist, you can take almost out of the sentence.
One thing that may be an advantage for cocobola or any other lighter-colored wood is that it's prettier looking than grenadilla, or at least the grenadilla that's been stained and oil-soaked for most clarinets. The more grain is visible, the more attractive is the appearance for many people, including clarinetists. That's not a criticism - there's a lot to be said for the psychological effect of playing on an equipment that looks as good as you want it to sound. (Doesn't your mouthpiece sound clearer and feel better when it's been freshly cleaned? Why are so many players attracted to glossy plated keywork?)
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2010-02-09 13:18
That would be a great test, then. If you could get your hands on a piece of snakewood (what is it like, anyway?) and have whoever made the barrels you like make one out of the snakewood, especially if he'd ream it to the same bore shape as the one you now use, you might end up with a barrel that you can love for both its looks and its sound. Or, you'd demonstrate that material really does matter.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: grarob
Date: 2010-02-09 13:47
I recently bought a crystal mouthpiece and a crystal barrel. The mpc is possibly a 1980 O'brien inscribed 'woodwind' on the top but I can find no references to glass/crystal barrels. The barrel has a silver coloured metal band each end. The top is marked 'Selmer' and the bottom is inscribed 'Rangefinder' It is 57mm long. Can anyone advise me?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2010-02-09 15:57
I find that snake oil treated barrels of almost any kind work better than snake wood.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2010-02-09 20:14
Dan Shusta sent me a private e-mail and asked me to chime in. Thanks. I hope that the following helps:
The usual disclaimer applies....I make and sell barrels. OK here goes.
1.Wood changes over time.
When Dan contacted me, I was busy preparing a barrel to be shipped to France. The barrel was Grenadilla, and I made it a month ago....so why the preparation? This particular barrel had a bore of 0.564in. when I made it.....Now, it measures 0.560 and needs to be re-reamed. Lesson here is simple.....wood is not static.
Okay, so we have a pliable substrate with a mind of its own (I get my wood from Pandora).
Yes, wood species have different characteristics. Most Rosewood barrels might TEND to be mellower than Cocobolo which might be mellower than mpingo, which might be mellower than rubber....BUT, given the same shape and bore, each will be somewhat different: So.........
2. The characteristics of a species of wood (color of sonority, projection of sound, etc) plot out on a bell shaped curve, and these curves overlap between species. Right now, the most projective barrel in my instrument case right now is cocobolo....go figure.
3.The inner shape of the bore determines characteristics, but is also dependent on the individual piece of wood, the mouthpiece used, and of course the instrument.
a. whether taper or cylindrical (especially crucial when addressing
intonation)
b. size of bore inlet and outlet (esp. varies with mouthpieces used).
c. the shape in between the inlet and outlet.
d. smoothness or roughness in the bore is of NO consequence IF the
barrel sounds good.
4.The outer shape of the barrel will effect the sound to some extent, but is LESS important than the bore. Heft will help stabilize the bore dimension, but is counterproductive after a certain point. I tend to favor and feature a more traditional shape that is just a tiny bit thicker than a stock barrel . I do make fat ones for those who want the "look."
5.Rubber is stable. More about rubber barrels is forthcoming, so I will not reveal much more for now.
6.An A-barrel is typically different internally than a Bb barrel, although sometimes they can be interchanged on a given set of instruments for a specific player.
Former creator of CUSTOM CLARINET TUNING BARRELS by DR. ALLAN SEGAL
-Where the Sound Matters Most(tm)-
Post Edited (2010-02-09 20:19)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevensfo
Date: 2010-02-09 20:31
But surely the material itself must affect the sound.
What do people trying to soundproof their studios put on the walls? Why? It absorbs the sound.
The vibrations in the air passing throught the barrel very fast are going to hit the sides of the barrel.
If the barrel is made of wood, will it absorb more or less energy than a crystal or plastic barrel?
How does this affect the sound?
Steve
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2010-02-09 21:00
stevensfo asked "But surely the material itself must affect the sound...[snip]..If the barrel is made of wood, will it absorb more or less energy than a crystal or plastic barrel?
Please refer to my statement above; "Yes, wood species have different characteristics. Most Rosewood barrels might TEND to be mellower than Cocobolo which might be mellower than mpingo, which might be mellower than rubber.." You can read "mellower" as darker, if you wish. I also mentioned rubber in passing. I will say this....Vintage type hard rubber makes a very projective and stable barrel with its own characteristics. I will not report anything further at this time, but watch these pages closely.
Former creator of CUSTOM CLARINET TUNING BARRELS by DR. ALLAN SEGAL
-Where the Sound Matters Most(tm)-
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fruitbat
Date: 2010-02-10 10:12
I like the grenadilla barrels with carbon fiber rings. They give a better response on my instrument (strong blow resistance and nice dark sound). On my secound clarinet with larger bore I need the metal rings for resonance and darker sound. The carbon ring barrel sounds poor on it.
I think it's more than psychology but no magic. The type of material and shape of the barrel is definately important. In my experience a low density wood or plastic barrel gives less blow resistance and lighter sound. The higher the density of the material and the bigger the shape of the barrel the darker the sound and the higher the blow resistance. It is the same mit mouthpices (plastic compared to glass).
Bore does matter but not some micrometers. When you pull out the barrel for tuning it should be worse but it is not.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2010-02-11 07:57
I think material is about as meaningful as homoeopathy is.
You have to believe in it. If you do, then you may get benefit, from the belief, not the product.
Steve wrote "But surely the material itself must affect the sound...."
There is arguably no reason why it should. The sound comes from a vibrating air column, not vibrating timber.
"..What do people trying to soundproof their studios put on the walls? Why? It absorbs the sound...
What happens to a travelling wave, when it hits a surface, is very different from what happens to the surface of a container of a standing wave. The sound from a clarinet is produced by standing wave, which does not travel.
"...The vibrations in the air passing through the barrel very fast are going to hit the sides of the barrel..."
Not quite the right concept. They don't hit. A wave travels to the far end of the air column, and because that is open air, it "reflects" back up the clarinet. "The end result is that the two waves cancel out each others "travel", producing a standing wave.
This consists of parts of the air column having oscillating pressure - pressure nodes. Sure, this alternately applies more and less pressure to the walls of the bore at that location, but that force has been measured, and it is known that the effect on the timber, providing it is made to a given level of rigidity, is not enough for the timber's resulting response to have an effect on the sound.
I see mouthpieces as a rather different story, because another activity is occurring. The reed slaps against the mouthpiece material, quite severely. How the material responds to that slap determines the reed's response to that impact, hence affects the motion of the reed, which in turn has an effect on the vibration in the air column.
But there are "fashions" in mouthpiece material also. A few decades ago you were hardly a valid clarinet player unless you were playing a crystal mouthpiece. and people raved about how much better they were. Now almost nobody uses one.
What arouses my curiosity would be a mouthpiece made from Liquidmetal®.
This uniquely amorphous metal is very rigid, and the remarkable property of returning almost 100% of the energy back to object that impacts it, say a reed. That to me must be a property worth exploring in mouthpieces.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2010-02-11 16:03
> What happens to a travelling wave, when it hits a surface, is very different from what happens to the surface of a container of a standing wave. The sound from a clarinet is produced by standing wave, which does not travel.
As a professional pedant I'm going to take issue with that. A standing wave is just two travelling waves of equal amplitude moving in opposite directions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2010-02-11 17:01
Check this graphic:
http://www.chemmybear.com/standing.html
The orange wave travels in one direction.
An identical blue wave travels in the opposite direction.
The RESULT is the white wave, which is not travelling.
The travel each has destroyed the travel of the other, so the situation becomes one of no wave travelling anywhere.
Post Edited (2010-02-11 17:04)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
