 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: travelingclarinetist
Date: 2011-06-10 03:54
What makes a "professional level" clarinet "professional"? What makes the difference from a beginner, intermediate etc. Shouldn't a good horn be just that? I mean, some of these "lower level" horns cost into the thousands. If a horn costs more than a few hundred dollars, why isn't that considered professional? Why should students feel that they must work day and night or bleed their parents dry to get "the top level" horn.....Just a soapbox and legitimate question.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Miller
Date: 2011-06-10 04:32
I'd like to be able to say that you get what you pay for, but I don't think it's necessarily true. I've seen E11/Schreiber instruments that blow away 99% of the R13s I've played, hell, I've even played on a top-of-the-line leblanc instrument that was garbage. But I've also played on top-of-the-line leblancs that were incredible, and on amazing R13s, and on garbage E11s etc etc.
In a nutshell, the "professional" horns basically have more time put into them in manufacture, have tighter dimensional and mechanical tolerances, and are typically made with higher-quality materials. Your plastic Vito clarinet will get the job done, can be beat to hell and still work, but it won't sound as good because it's not designed to be highly accurate. So you might get small burrs in the bore or a loose feeling action. For a young student that's probably OK. For a serious or a professional player, it's not. Every professional clarinetist I know or have heard about spent a good amount of time picking out their instruments, or have had another professional pick out instruments for them.
Basically, once you get into the $2500+ range you're talking about pro-quality instruments. Does that mean all of those horns are good ones? No, in fact depending on the manufacturer, there may be quality control issues. There's also the fact that you can cut wood very accurately, but it probably isn't going to hold those dimensions very long.
I'm not really a fan of the "professional" designation on instruments because they all play differently from one another. If you're into shooting sports, you can put a hole in a piece of paper with any old rifle, but if you want to do it accurately from a thousand yards, you're going to need some good gear, and even then you can't do it unless you've got some experience. It ain't the car, it's the driver, as they say...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-06-10 11:45
Professional and prestige level should mean instruments from a choice selection of materials, higher level of workmanship and results in an instrument that outplays the lower level models, suits the needs of the player who expects to get the best out of it and commands the high pricetag to justify the hours spent in making and fine-tuning it.
But nowadays you'll find a lot of professional level instruments have gone through exactly the same manufacturing processes as lower level instruments from the same company and the fit and finish is about the same.
Manufacturers have rationalised things so instruments are more often made on production lines with all parts coming together fairly late in the process rather than being made as individual items from an earlier stage. This keeps the cost of manufacture down, but in a profit driven business the end price would still be relatively high to the customer.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2011-06-10 12:20
For a compromise, you can spend a lot less and end up a lot better by buying a cheap horn and having it professionally overhauled/tuned. For instance, an older professional instrument (perhaps a $500 old Leblanc symphony or LL or the likes) and send it to a great repair tech (Ridenour, Muncy, etc) and ask for a complete overhaul including tuning. Shouldn't be more than another $500 and you'll have $1000 into a horn that will more than likely play better than any new "off the assembly line" horn of today, at about 1/3 the price.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-06-10 12:31
Good advice there Alexi as there are plenty of excellent older pro models out there that have plenty of life left in them and deservedly so. If the pads are shot, then have them completel overhauled. They can be brought back to life and last a lifetime.
All too often people want brand new (and most importantly) shiny clarinets, but there's nothing wrong in buying used and worthwhile spending the money on having them done up so they're better than new.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GLHopkins
Date: 2011-06-10 12:32
A professional player can play anything and make it sound great if it's in good playing condition. A derp can play the most expensive clarinet made and can make it sound awful.
There are expensive clarinets and inexpensive clarinets. Precision, materials and brand usually dictate price.
Doreen, the New Orleans street musician, plays, and has had photos made with, a Selmer Signet. She can outplay most of us in that genre of music. I don't know how good her classical chops are, but she makes a living playing with a clarinet I wouldn't own.
Artie Shaw played a Conn at times. I thought those only made good lamps.
Some make money playing Vito, Normandy, Bundy, Lyrique or whatever.
Players are professionals. Clarinets are their tools. Find an instrument that suits your needs and don't worry about what others might think. We have more than enough to worry about just finding a mouthpiece and matching reeds to it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2011-06-10 12:46
Not so sure about that $500 limit on the cost of overhauling and tuning.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2011-06-10 12:48
GLHopkins wrote:
>
> Artie Shaw played a Conn at times. I thought those only made
> good lamps.
>
I'm never quite sure about those early recording stars - did he actually play on a Conn or just allow them to take photos of him with one?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-06-10 14:29
kdk wrote:
> I'm never quite sure about those early recording stars - did he
> actually play on a Conn or just allow them to take photos of
> him with one?
We'll never really know. The same could be said about Benny Goodman and the Selmer CT. At least we know that Benny did actually play Selmer for much of his career although not necessarily the CT model.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: weberfan
Date: 2011-06-10 16:48
Earlier this year, I was in New Orleans and heard two excellent clarinet players. One was at a club called Fritzel's, on Bourbon Street. His name is Tom Fisher. The other, a fellow named Ricky, was playing in front of St. Louis Cathedral in Jackson Square. Tom played a plastic Conn with a Vandoren 5JB mouthpiece and a No. 3 Rico Reserve reed. Ricky played a plastic Selmer, with a no-name mouthpiece and a No. 2 1/2 Rico Royal reed.
Each played the kind of New Olreans-style jazz that Doreen does. Each owns a "professional" clarinet; Ricky told me that he has a Buffet at home. But the hot, humid weather in N.O. means that they're both safer with plastic, especially outdoors.
Each had great technique, and that seemed to go a long way. Hard to imagine that they could have been much better with a more expensive instrument.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2011-06-10 16:57
I do find the tone quality of my plastic Yamaha is fine until I push it and then the tone quality goes. Even though it's a good instrument (an old YCL-24), it is limited as to what it'll allow me to do unlike my Selmers which can be pushed a lot further.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2011-06-10 17:11
If you allow me the analogy - this was a professional pianist's chair. Doesn't look professional to you? Well, so do many clarinets. They may not be shiny, or even sightly, but they apparently have what their owners like about them and what allowed them to excel.
I think it's not about a professional model or set-up, but what a pro's fingers feel at ease with. Everyone's different and has different needs. And the sound apparently starts in your head, not only at your finger tips.
My vote goes to sound, and ergonomics (both highly subjective). And serious practicing, practicing, practicing. And, of course, talent.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2011-06-10 18:59
This thread reminds me of an anecdote about the violin virtuoso Jascha Heifetz. A fan came up to him backstage after a concert and gushed about how marvelous his Stradivarius sounded. He held the violin out at arm's length, tilted his head to one side, then said, "That's funny. I don't hear anything!"
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: claaaaaarinet!!!!
Date: 2011-06-10 22:01
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't some student line instruments pitched a bit higher than "professional" instruments in order to compensate for the flabby embouchures and poor air support of most beginners? This would definitely be one non-subjective difference to take into account.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Barry Vincent
Date: 2011-06-11 00:32
When I first noticed the word 'horn' on this BBoard ' I thought it was an odd term to have on a BBoard concerning Clarinets, Clarinets being single reed pipes.
I know of Orchestral Horns (double and compensating) and the Saxhorn family of brass instruments and maybe the Saxophones that kinda look like horns (or rather old style tobacco pipes) but the Clarinet ?
Doesn't look anything like a horn.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2011-06-11 00:50
Google images "horn" and this is one of the top hits. Through some tone holes on there and it's the SPITTING IMAGE of a metal clarinet (sorta)...
lol. Just wait till you hear about people talking about playing their "axe" and it meaning their Bb soprano clarinet. It's happened...
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Barry Vincent
Date: 2011-06-11 03:47
Good try sfalaxi, and I must admit that it does look like the bell end of a metal clarinet but there is a very important difference, that old blaster is a wide conical tube from one end to the other making it a real horn, the clarinet is cylindral through most of it's length making it a pipe.
But maybe I'm grinding my own 'axe' here
Skyfacer
Post Edited (2011-06-11 07:26)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2011-06-11 04:44
Back to the original question, I haven't had the fortune of listening to a lot of live concerts. But one thing I've seen/heard is that if a professional orchestra is going to play outdoors, they use their non-wood backup clarinets. I've heard models such as Vito resitone and other types are used. I wonder if anyone else in the audience would have realized a difference in sound and if they would have known they didn't sound as good.
Just wondering how big of a sound difference is there. Seems to me.that many people (including me) agrees that for sound production and quality, it's mouthpiece setup first, barrel second, and THEN the clarinet. So really, if you picked a clarinet based SOLELY on intonation and evenness from note to note, how it feels under the fingers, and played your best mouthpiece, and tried out a few barrels, wouldn't that make a darn good, near professional quality instrument?
FWIW, a while back I had the opportunity to play on a plastic German student clarinet. I was offering free lessons to a woman who came from germany just to help her out with our community band music. She did not have a good sound at all. I was curious about the oehler network and wanted to try it out. And I got the same sound out of it as I did my selmer 10g that I had at the time. She was amazed that it could sound better and so was I. We both figured it was just the instrument. So really I think the difference between all these student and pro models is not necessarily the sound they make, but more tuning and fit/finish and perhaps how strict they are with maintaining measurements on the machine. I don't think buffet would spend as much time and effort making sure they machines making their B12 are still in exact spec as they would the machines making their buffet vintage.
Alexi
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2011-06-11 13:09
sfalexi wrote:
> So really I think the difference between all these student and pro models is
> not necessarily the sound they make, but more tuning and fit/finish and
> perhaps how strict they are with maintaining measurements on the
> machine. I don't think buffet would spend as much time and effort making
> sure they machines making their B12 are still in exact spec as they would
> the machines making their buffet vintage.
No manufacturer would be so stupid as to deliberately make their "lesser" instruments with less precision as this would just dissuade their customers at a very early stage. I agree that student instrument just were considered "good enough" at an earlier stage in the whole finishing and tweaking process. (eg skip the undercutting, skip the golden springs, skip the extra keywork plating bath)
So if you buy a (good) student or intermediate instrument and have a fine technician to the final touches, then you end up with an instrument that could satisfy professional needs. Whether this is economical or not is up to the customer.
In other areas this is courant normal - think of all the motorbike and car tuners that refine off-the-shelf vehicles and sell them as "custom versions".
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2011-06-11 13:20
"So if you buy a (good) student or intermediate instrument and have a fine technician to the final touches, then you end up with an instrument that could satisfy professional needs."
I think this is rarely the case. I have never played a student or intermediate level instrument that plays in the same ballpark as any of my pro line horns. I do agree that it could happen, and I also have played "pro" horns that were dogs.
"No manufacturer would be so stupid as to deliberately make their "lesser" instruments with less precision as this would just dissuade their customers at a very early stage."
That's not the way they look at it (I would guess) -- they put less precision, time, effort, and material quality into their student instruments but sell them at a much more economical price (to the company) so that their instrument will start a beginning and generate the later interest needed for that student to upgrade to something else.
Besides -- a beginning player would rarely be dissuaded. They don't know nor have enough experience to discern how, why, and to what degree the pro line is better. Now many will be able to tell the pro is nicer or better in general, but not specifically.
Skip the undercutting? Can't be THAT important.
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2011-06-11 14:37
Tobin wrote:
>> "So if you buy a (good) student or intermediate instrument and
>> have a fine technician to the final touches, then you end up
>> with an instrument that could satisfy professional needs."
>
> I think this is rarely the case. I have never played a student
> or intermediate level instrument that plays in the same
> ballpark as any of my pro line horns. I do agree that it could
> happen, and I also have played "pro" horns that were dogs.
Oops, I think I have forgotten a word - I meant to say "...then you may end up with...". I didn't mean to say that you will do so.
But we all know of student-line instruments that do have a potential to becoming something better - french-made Vito clarinets, Yamaha or Yanagisawa-made Vito saxes, Bach-made Bundy brass instruments, ...
>> "No manufacturer would be so stupid as to deliberately make
>> their "lesser" instruments with less precision as this would
>> just dissuade their customers at a very early stage."
>
> That's not the way they look at it (I would guess) -- they put
> less precision, time, effort, and material quality into their
> student instruments but sell them at a much more economical
> price (to the company) so that their instrument will start a
> beginning and generate the later interest needed for that
> student to upgrade to something else.
That's what I meant as well - as opposed to the often-heard "it's a student instrument, it does not play so well". It's just not as refined, but it should be in tune and have an even scale nonetheless, even with all omitted manufacturing steps.
> Besides -- a beginning player would rarely be dissuaded. They
> don't know nor have enough experience to discern how, why, and
> to tell the pro is nicer or better in general, but not specifically.
Maybe not the beginner per se, but rather the teacher. We all know the stories of teachers with students coming with substandard instruments, and word about these goes around rather quickly.
> Skip the undercutting? Can't be THAT important.
Some swear by it and probably wouldn't touch an instrument without...
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2011-06-11 14:39
sfalexi wrote:
> But one thing I've
> seen/heard is that if a professional orchestra is going to play
> outdoors, they use their non-wood backup clarinets. I've heard
> models such as Vito resitone and other types are used. I wonder
> if anyone else in the audience would have realized a difference
> in sound and if they would have known they didn't sound as
> good.
>
The sound outdoors isn't as important as intonation and response, mostly because so much of the actual tone quality is lost in the outdoor acoustics and, even more, in the electronic amplification that's used to overcome the naturally poor acoustics. The lack of genuine sound fidelity reaching the audience makes the trade-off worthwhile in protecting the expensive instruments from potential damage from moisture and temperature.
> So really I
> think the difference between all these student and pro models
> is not necessarily the sound they make, but more tuning and
> fit/finish and perhaps how strict they are with maintaining
> measurements on the machine. I don't think buffet would spend
> as much time and effort making sure they machines making their
> B12 are still in exact spec as they would the machines making
> their buffet vintage.
>
There is a running thread that pops up every now and then here and on Klarinet in which people passionately debate whether or not material makes a difference in an instrument's sound, all else being held equal. Of course, that last phrase is the crux of the problem. It seems to be debatable that the plastic itself is the difference between an instrument a pro would play and one only a beginner could love. But there's so much else involved that is just not practical to control on an assembly line.
Part of this topic, too, has to be the advances that have been made over the past 15 to 20 years in instrument design and manufacture. So much more is known about acoustical design today that even the completely mass-produced instruments, largely untouched by human hands throughout the manufacturing process, can be made to more precise and predictable standards than they could when the designations of "student," "step-up," "intermediate'" and "professional" became commercially significant.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony M
Date: 2011-06-12 00:06
I'm not sure if this should be another thread or if it continues the question. How do they make clarinets?
Take an example from a different field. When cameras used to have film, they (the word around amateur photographers) used to say that the difference between a Nikon and a XXXX (enter the name of your preferred cheap brand) was that Nikon had more inspectors and retooled their machinery much more often so that what you bought was the product of more stringent checking processes. You could get a good XXXX but it was luck. With Nikon (and other top brands) you were paying for a guarantee of quality. yet the process of making the cameras and lenses remained the same whosoever made the product.
Back to music. I play harmonica and prefer Suzuki harmonicas because I find them to be better tuned out of the box and the tolerances (reed to slot) are much more consistent. They claim to use a laser cutting process for the reeds and I accept that as the source of the (in my opinion) superior quality.
Back to clarinets. Which parts are machined, mechanised, etc. and which are done by hand (assembly only?) and how does this contribute to difference between student, intermediate and professional models?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
