 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: clarinetmc
Date: 2011-03-01 13:24
Hello:
I was wondering about anyone's opinion of and/or experience with mouthpieces made with Zinner blanks. I have found many mouthpieces made with this material to play on the sharp side of 440. Is this because of the actual interior dimension of the mouthpiece (Hawkins, Smith, Backun for example) or does the material change when it warms up? Also...sometimes I feel the sound of Zinner blanks to be more on the dull side or with less of the "highs" or brilliance in the sound, or could this be the actual mouthpiece too? I love the feel and flexibility of mouthpieces made with these blanks, but feel I get a wider spectrum of color in my sound when I play a Vandoren...maybe it's just the design of the Vandoren...I have no idea to be honest. I am just trying to find a voice on the instrument and get the clarinet out of the way so I can just make some music, like we're all trying to do here!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2011-03-01 14:12
I have never had a problem with pitch on the Zinner-based mouthpieces I've used made by Walter Grabner. I think you're right, though, that the design of the blank tends to tone down "brilliance" in the sound. They are aimed more at "warmth" and I find them generally resonant and full-sounding, but in general not powerful. I've experienced the same result (using reeds in my comfort range) on other Zinner-based mouthpieces as well.
What you choose depends at least in part on where you play and what kind of ensemble you play in. Getting the clarinet "out of the way" may be a worthwhile dream, but the reality is that you have a lifetime partner in your music making. Find the best setup you can, but making your best music will always involve some negotiating and accommodating.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2011-03-01 14:43
Some people who play blanks from Zinner
are sure what they've got is a winner.
But I say to thee:
that the facing is key!
to not sounding like a rank beginner.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2011-03-01 15:23
See the following post. I blew it trying to make attachments to this one.
sorry.
Bob Phillips
Post Edited (2011-03-01 15:36)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2011-03-01 15:28
Attachment: D Stock M30 D5.jpg (57k)
Attachment: D Livengood M3013.jpg (57k)
Attachment: D Zinner D5.jpg (56k)
Well, in the previous post, I attempted to attach a file; and ended up on a real estate loan and ripoff site.
Trying again here...
I have made spectrum measurements of three mouthpieces, and will attempt to share those.
The first is a stock Vandoren M30 (not series 13),
Then comes the Vandoren M30/13 (with the 88 thin beak) and a Livengood Facing
Finally, the Zinner blank with the Livengood facing.
All are playing D5
My reading of the spectra is as follows:
The Zinner is quieter (but that could have been me)
Both of the Vandorens are richer in the higher harmonics
The M30/13 is the richest, but I don't know if that's the facing or the chamber volume.
What do you think?
Bob Phillips
Post Edited (2011-03-01 15:35)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2011-03-01 20:03
20 years ago or so, one could purchase Zinner blanks from WW&BW for about $30 and I bought some for finishing. They were all too low in pitch compared to a typical Vandoren, if there is such a mp. I even shortened a couple of them to raise their pitch. Perhaps they were made for the American market.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2011-03-01 21:50
Those made from the E blank player higher and with more brilliance. A number of makers use these.
I have played Clark Fobes mouthpieces for some time, which are from a Zinner blank of his design. Pitch is great with plenty of highs. For me they produce a well balanced tone with lots of ring and color.
http://www.clarkwfobes.com/clarinet_mouthpieces.html
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: weberfan
Date: 2011-03-01 22:03
I play a Richard Hawkins "B" model. I love it. No pitch problems whatsoever on an R13, or even the Yamaha 250.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-01 22:39
There are two zinner blanks that are most commonly used. The A blank (lower baffle, generally 440) or the E blank (higher baffle,generally 442).
The odds are excellent that whatever zinner you have, it's an A blank. Check with your mouthpiece maker to verify which it is.
The A blank has a deep baffle and lends itself to sounding lower in pitch and darker\duller in tone. To some extent, response is affected by this as well.
The material (although it's generally the highest quality of any mass produced mouthpiece) lends itself to sounding with less highs and has much more "ahhh" in the sound than "eeee".
These mouthpieces should only ride high in pitch relatively to vandoren 13 series or mouthpeices that have been internally "hollowed out".
There seem to be two schools of thought on these blanks, which is apparent if you go through zinner mouthpieces from several makers at the same time.
Group A: Makers notice that many people are wanting to sound as dark as possible or with the least amount of "highs" in the sound. They take the already dark sounding mouthpiece and use facings and other modifications that make this darkness even more apparent. Many times this approach suffers a loss of projection, focus, clarity, and "ring" in the sound.
Group B: Makers make adjustments to bring the tone of the mouthpiece into balance with the highs and lows of the sound. Various modifications that tend to create quicker response and focus to the sound are usually done. These makers see the dullness and darkness as an inherent quality in the blank that needs to be compensated for.
Group C: Makers that try to provide mouthpieces for both preferences. Most often, which ever one they prefer is the one that they are best at producing.
Just some things to keep in mind when trying mouthpieces! Hope it's of some help or interest to someone!
-Nathan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2011-03-01 23:52
It's more important to have the facing that matches you're playing than the blank itself but different blanks will add to or subtract from tone color etc. A good facing on any blank is more important than a poor facing on a great blank. I once tried a
Vito mouthpiece that played wonderful, sorry I didn't buy it. ESP
http://eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2011-03-02 18:01
I've worked on a couple of high-dollar Kaspars that played like refried doggy ca-ca when I received them (which is why they were sent to me in the first place).
Just for grins, a few years ago I took a cheap, no-name white plastic student mouthpiece and modified the heck out of it -- it's now one of my best-playing Bb mouthpieces.
I often play on crystal mouthpieces, which according to the Brad Behn Theory of Material Springiness (or whatever) shouldn't even produce a sound, much less sound good (which mine certainly do).
On saxes I usually play on stainless steel mouthpieces (please refer again the the Brad Behn theory; these shouldn't work either).
My current 'best' Bb soprano clarinet mouthpiece is probably from the turn of the century, made from that sort of Bakelite-ish material they had back then which isn't quite plastic, but isn't quite hard rubber either.
These are just examples which may be counter-intuitive to a lot of clarinetists.
Please be open-minded about mouthpiece blank materials --- I submit that they are not as critical a factor as some other folks (some of whom are very experienced and knowledgeable indeed) have suggested.
The FACING is the most critical part of the mouthpiece, followed closely by the BAFFLE, then the rest of the CHAMBER, then perhaps the bore diameter and material have some influence. That's my story and I'm sticking to it, unless someone pays me a sufficient amount of money to change my tune. I'm open to offers...........
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-02 18:28
David,
Do mouthpieces with the same facing all play the same? No, of course not. Are there other factors besides the facing that have a significant impact on their sound and function? Yes. Material isn't really a theory, it's physics. There's a reason why reeds aren't made of metal of the same dimensions, for example.
If you had 100 different mouthpieces of different materials with the same dimensions of facing and internals, none of them would play and sound the same. Some may sound more similar than others, but they would indeed be different.
I assume you're trying to say that the difference isn't big enough to worry about? I don't think most mouthpiece makers would agree, since most of them find the best material available for their business.
I'm not sure I follow your last point. "Please be open minded" followed by "that's my story and I'm sticking to it" (implying that you're not going to budge) followed by an implication that for a certain amount of money you'd change your mind.
Sorry if I'm being too blunt.
(P.S. I'm not at all discounting that design has a huge impact on a mouthpiece. The better the design and better the material, the better the mouthpiece).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2011-03-02 18:56
David Spiegelthal wrote:
>
> My current 'best' Bb soprano clarinet mouthpiece is probably
> from the turn of the century, made from that sort of
> Bakelite-ish material they had back then which isn't quite
> plastic, but isn't quite hard rubber either.
>
Careful, David - the turn of which century?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2011-03-02 20:26
Good point, Karl! I meant ca. 1900.
NBeaty, you're not being too blunt, but you are making the common mistake of taking me too seriously. Lighten up, dude!
We'll never know if two mouthpieces with ALL dimensions EXACTLY identical, but made of different materials, will sound the same, because with current technology and materials it is not possible to make two mouthpieces exactly identical. So your assertions can neither be proven nor disproven. Nor can mine! Everything we are writing here is informed speculation, no more and no less.
That said, the truth plays second fiddle to Marketing most of the time, so we should all believe what the marketeers tell us, and not worry so much about the truth. End of sermon.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-02 21:02
It seems illogical and flat out wrong to say that the limit of exactness by Cnc machines is a reason to assume material has no affect. It just doesn't hold water.
You can make all kinds of changes to design and facing and still hear qualities of the sound that are just the material. It's not a matter of microscopic measurements.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-02 21:50
By the way, I have no cash for you David, so I suppose we will never see eye to eye. On a lighter note, are you wiling to sell that plastic mouthpiece that plays so much better than all the hard rubber\chrystal ones? I need something to keep my door held open...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2011-03-03 04:45
NBeaty wrote:
>
> If you had 100 different mouthpieces of different materials
> with the same dimensions of facing and internals, none of them
> would play and sound the same. Some may sound more similar
> than others, but they would indeed be different.
>
If the dimensions were truly identical, I'm not certain that this is at all self-evident.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-04 17:06
David- if you could be so kind as to show where you read that Brad Behn said that no other materials will work, I'd be glad to see it. To my knowledge he's never said this, ever.
Perhaps even more relevant a comparison:
Take 10 of the most common mouthpieces of varying materials:
Vandoren
Zinner
Babbitt
Babbitt (plastic)
and Behn Vintage
People who really know mouthpieces know what effect various changes in design have on the mouthpiece. Things like thickness of rails, baffle shape, length and size of bore, and shape of sidewalls\chamber are known quantities. Those who work with mouthpieces (such as Brad Behn) know exactly what each individual part does and how it affects the rest of the mouthpiece.
So, whether or not design is 100% identical is not really relevant. These changes would be noticeable to the expert.
Zinner rubber put in the mold of vandoren (same production for design and dimensions) would not sound like a vandoren. The opposite is also true. It is also the reason why you can't make a Henri Chedeville mouthpiece out of vandoren or zinner or babbitt rubber because it's simply not the same and not going to yield the same result.
If plastic were the best sounding material, everyone would use plastic. The fact is that it does not vibrate and resonate the same as rubber. So, moving on, all rubber is not created the same either. The materials are constructed differently and contain different elements.
David- if you could be so kind as to show where you read that Brad Behn said that no other materials will work, I'd be glad to see it. To my knowledge he's never said this, ever.
If you talk to any mouthpiece makers, most all of them are careful to say chedeville or kaspar models are "in the style of" and not direct copies. They simply don't have the materials and have to make design adjustments to create a similar feel and similar sound of these vintage mouthpieces.
Brad Behn has had the material analyzed (fully, and at great personal expense) and reproduced in rod rubber. Prototype rubber were produced and analyzed to be a match to the original Henri Chedeville rubber.
It is fair to say that they are expensive. It is not fair to say that he's trying to swindle people out of money for marketing purposes or that he thinks his stuff is the only material that will work.
Material, design, and finished by a true artisan are qualities he has worked very hard for a very long time at great expense to attain.
Do a search on the board to find discussions of brad's work. The only real negative things said are that it's expensive.
Porsches are expensive, but they're awesome.
(I'm a happy customer of Brad's and a supporter of his work, but am not paid in any way for my thoughts).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
