 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Chris Ondaatje
Date: 2001-01-28 22:25
I often read literature where there is an assumed corrolation between the size of the bore and the size of the tone. Does anyone know of any objective research into this.
Chris
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roger T
Date: 2001-01-28 23:38
Bore size has very little to do with an individual's tone produced. Instrument
manufacturers use this tactic alot in advertising to induce the non informed
to think by buying a "large bore" horn, that this will automatically give the
player a huge sound. A player's own sound has alot to do with his emboucher
and throat opening, his own technique if you will. A lot of well known players
with a huge sound have used medium to small bore instuments.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roger T
Date: 2001-01-28 23:49
Bore size has very little to do with an individual's tone produced. Instrument
manufacturers use this tactic alot in advertising to induce the non informed
to think by buying a "large bore" horn, that this will automatically give the
player a huge sound. A player's own sound has alot to do with his emboucher
and throat opening, his own technique if you will. A lot of well known players
with a huge sound have used medium to small bore instuments.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Anji
Date: 2001-01-29 01:13
I have three horns that I play regularly; a 1920 - something Buffet in A, my Master Model in Bb and a Conn 444N which was designated a "Big Bore" horn in all of the adverts.
The Conn is very bright and forward when played hard, kind of "Lossy" when at mp to pp. I think most of it has to do with matching to a larger volume mouthpiece chamber and barrell.
The biggest advantage, I think, is that these horns tend to have less resistance, so if played with a Sort reed/Open tip combination you could cut through the crowd noise without a mic.
It has a straight bore, no undercutting and plays pretty evenly.
The Buffets both have sticking points in the registry, but with more resistance, they have a wider range of tone.
The Conn 424N was supposedly a nice player, too. The 444N shows alot of effort in assembly and parts choice.
anji
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Sparkman
Date: 2001-01-29 09:58
Hi hris - I think the bigger bore horns favor the low register so the feel of the sound is bigger. Also, resistance is different, and the sound seems to project less and "stay home" more so the player hears it better. This is all pretty subjective, but it does produce a different sensation for the player, if not the listener, so is more fun!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Evan
Date: 2001-01-29 20:31
one thing that will change the sound is the straight bore, most big bore horns have a straight bore. I don't know if it is the shape or the size but these horns tend to have a tubbier sound than a tapered bore horn, like an r-13.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Daniel Bouwmeester
Date: 2001-01-29 21:12
The english school plays large bore clarinets (boosey&hawkes 1010, and today : Peter Eaton).
I love the sound of Jack Brymer, and I haven't found any equivalent sound in small bore clarinets, and french players.
My mum has studied in the english school (RAM) and she plays b&h 1010. The instrument has a much larger bore than french instruments, and has got a very beautifull sound indeed.
The big problem with it is the tuning.
I love the 1010 but I play buffet RC (much easier to play). I am thinking about Peter Eaton clarinets. People have said they have the sound of the 1010 and the ease of french clarinets.
I suggest you read the book : Yehudi Menuhin music guides :Clarinet, Jack Brymer (McDonald and Jane's)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
