 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-11 01:28
I'm looking for a mouthpiece for a Boosey & Hawkes "Imperial" resonite Bb Bass Clarinet, serial number 120632.
From the little research I've been able to accomplish, it was manufactured in 1974 or 1956 (The serial number sequence appears twice in the list I found.). I can find quite a bit of information on their brass instruments and the soprano Bb clarinets, but very little on their bass clarinets and even less on the ebonite ones.
Either way, the mouthpiece I currently use on my Selmer is too large to fit in the neck of this instrument.
I measure the inside diameter of the Imperial neck as 1-5/32" (29.45mm) and the inside of the Selmer neck at 1-3/16" (30.2mm). Since the joint dimentions are different, I have to wonder if other dimentions (interior volume etc) are different as well.
Does anyone know if there is a modern day equivalent that will fit? Can the neck joint be "reamed out" or a modern mouthpiece be shaved down (or both) the additional .25mm to fit?
I found a Conn neck on EBay that the is the same configuration as mine (Cork on the neck/body joint) and it says "fits Conn only" could an appropriate Conn mouthpiece fit?
Thanks in advance for any information you folks may have.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2012-01-11 01:57
Can you post a picture of the instrument? IIRC B&H did not make their own bass clarinets. Ones I have seen looks a lot like Malerne's.
Regarding the "fits Conn only" necks sold on ebay, I'm actually not convinced that they even fit Conn bass clarinets. I purchased one for my Conn bass clarinet and it didn't even come close to fitting.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-01-11 05:13
That's an ebonite bodied Imperial bass (with nickel plated keys) which were made by B&H for tropical or outdoor use - they were most likely made for the Armed Forces bands as B&H supplied ebonite Imperial Bb, A and Eb clarinets (and ebonite bodied Imperial flutes, piccolos, oboes and bassoons) to them. The serial number would put it at 1956.
The Emperor basses were Bundy stencils (as were the B&H "78" instruments).
These basses were (as far as I'm aware) unique in having an adjusting screw on LH2 which allows you to play the altissimo notes without having to roll LH1 down to uncover the aperture in the fingerplate, so standard clarinet fingerings for the altissimo could be used. I had an adjusting screw fitted to my Buffet bass for this same reason, but specified it sould become fully disengaged when unscrewed so the LH1 fingerplate will again fully open when LH2 is closed.
As for the mouthpiece, you're best getting the crook socket machined out to a wider internal diameter to fit all stock bass mouthpieces instead of ones with the tenons turned down to fit only that instrument and will be too loose in other basses.
The socket can be unsoldered from the crook, then mounted in a lathe and the inside machined out to a more standard diameter, then soldered back in place. The nickel plating shouldn't be affected and any discolouration can be polished out.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-11 15:48
Thanks Chris! Since they were probably "a-dime-a-dozen" is there anything you can think of that would justify investing money to restore? Do they play well? Historically significant?
Here are a couple more photos to verify identity/age.
The register key area.
A stubby lower B key
The bell engraving
Necks.
The top one is the Boosey & Hawkes
the bottom one is the Selmer.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-11 15:51
Attachment: IMG_5383_Register key_Cropped.JPG (150k)
Attachment: IMG_5384_Stubby B-Key_Cropped.JPG (231k)
Attachment: IMG_5385_Bell_.JPG (314k)
Attachment: IMG_5386_necks_Cropped.JPG (342k)
Thanks Chris! Since they were probably "a-dime-a-dozen" is there anything you can think of that would justify investing money to restore? I know that depends on the amount of work to be done, but do they play well? Historically significant? Or should I cut my losses at $200 and move on?
Here are a couple more photos to verify identity/age.
The register key area.
A stubby lower B key
The bell engraving
Necks.
The top one is the Boosey & Hawkes
the bottom one is the Selmer.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-01-11 16:03
They are pro model basses (in league with Selmer, Buffet and Leblanc pro basses) and the wooden ones were played by orchestral players. These basses are unusual in the lower joint bore isn't parallel all the way down - it flares out at the lower end like a soprano clarinet does (but not to the same degree).
I think you ought to get it restored as it'll be far better than a plastic Bundy, Vito or Yamaha bass. They definitely aren't 'two-a-penny' like most plastic basses, so weigh up the difference between a full rebuild and a new pro level low Eb bass and I think you'll see it's better to rebuild this one.
Just over ten years back, Pete Worrell built a detachable low C extension for a wooden Imperial bass, so if they weren't decent instruments, the owner wouldn't have spent the money in having that done as it wouldn't have been economical.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.worrell/gallery/booseybasscltextension.htm
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-11 16:44
Thanks again for the input.
In searching, I find mention of several wood Imperials but not ebonite ones for sale etc.
That was the confusing thing when trying to decide about restoring it. If they were truly poorly made and/or plentifull I'd expect to see several sites bashing them and several of them for sale as lamps. Or, if they were great, people "longing for the days" and outrageous EBay entries. This must be low(ish) production and/or not bad-not great so everyone forgot about it.
The extra Eb key cost quite a bit on my R13 Festival and this bass already has it. The plating is completly gone from the key pads, so it seems someone enjoyed playing it quite often.
The things I KNOW it needs is neck cork, Low Eb spring, and a couple of keys are slow to return (bent or gunked-up). If I can get a mouthpiece to fit it, I might fix it a little at a time.
Thanks again for the help.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-01-11 16:51
If anything, the ebonite bodied instruments cost more to make than the wooden ones due to the extra difficulty of manufacturing and the cost of ebonite. I think both grenadilla and ebonite B&H clarinets were priced the same, but the profit margin was considerably less on ebonite instruments.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2012-01-11 21:10
The B&H bass clarinets were pretty highly rated in the UK and used in many top orchestras.
I have heard comments that many pros thought they played much more like a soprano clarinet than most other makes.
From your photos the keywork looks near enough identical to that on my own B&H bass made in 1976.
The mouthpiece receiver on mine however measures 30mm and happily accepts standard mouthpieces e.g. Selmer, Vandoren, Yamaha, Conn etc.
B&H did in fact offer the option of low C on a few basses and mine has this factory made extension (same ser no on all body parts and in a B&H case fitted out to accept all the sections).
*** The instrument can be played as a low C bass or by removing the 3rd joint as a low Eb bass.
From the photos on Worrell's website it looks as though he has copied the factory design almost exactly however the 3 touch pieces below thumbrest are better executed and fitted with rollers, mine are just plain plates.
*** The bore of my bass does exhibit some flare towards the end of the middle section (in low E/F area) but the extension carrying the low Eb/D/Db reverts to the same parallel section (23.35mm) as the top joint.
These basses were only made in quite small numbers essentially by hand and even today in UK you will see them offered for in excess of £2000 ($3000) for the low Eb model and considerably more for the rarer low C model.
I haven't come across an ebonite version myself, I suspect not many were made as the Bass clarinet was not widely used in UK military bands during middle -later part of last century.
I agree with Chris P that it's likely they were at least as expensive as the wood version as that was certainly the case with the Imperial Bb models.
*** edits to original post
Post Edited (2012-01-11 21:30)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-11 21:54
Thanks for the additional information.
There is no provision for a floor-peg so it probably was designed for marching. The ebonite is heavy and this beast would be as much fun to march with as a bari-sax.
I’m at work and can’t check, but I’ll verify the bore this evening.
Lets hope scarcity eventually equates to resale value. (unless the ebonite ones were so bad they were all destroyed as cricket bats or turned into floor lamps)
Resale value is a while down the road. Right now, I’m looking for a nice playing horn that fits into a case that doesn’t take a truck to transport. (I like to ride my motorcycle to practice and my one-piece almost needs a “Wide-Load” sticker.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2012-01-11 22:07
> Right now, I’m looking for a nice playing horn that fits into a case that
> doesn’t take a truck to transport. (I like to ride my motorcycle to practice
> and my one-piece almost needs a “Wide-Load” sticker.)
Being a motorbiker myself, I can vouch for (100 times) for the Protec one-piece bass case. Works perfectly, as long as your bike has a pillion seat.
For a Low-C horn, however, you may want this.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-01-11 22:27
As ebonite is a more stable material than wood in that it's impervious to humidity changes, the likelyhood is they will play as well as when they were finished, whereas the tone on wooden ones can change over time. Ebonite discolours to some degree or other with exposure to sunlight and heat.
A low Eb bass will fit into a case exactly the same size as an alto sax box or lightweight case. There are plenty of lightweight semi-rigid cases on the market, but you will have to check which one this bass will be a good fit in, although the insides are usually made from soft foam that conforms to the joint lengths and widths.
Isn't there an attachment on the bottom of the bell bow for a screw in floor spike on your bass? I can't see from this photo as it's been cropped:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/download.html?1,2722/IMG_5385_Bell_.JPG
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-11 22:42
Attachment: IMG_5382_Case.JPG (427k)
No peg attachment point. Just the 2 strap hooks. The 2 body parts and the bell all have matching serial numbers so it's the original bell.
The case I got with it seems OK. I wouldn't trust it in a 45MPG fall, but it's OK.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-11 22:47
The bell attachment didn't attach, so here it is.
BTW, the ebonite doesn't look as brown as it does in the case picture.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2012-01-11 23:08
What is it with bass clarinets and motor cycles!! I still have 2 old bikes in my garage..
1974 Honda 350 K4 (owned since 1976)
1984 BMW R80 RT ( ex-police bike bought in 1992 )
unfortunately these haven't been on road recently as after a major surgery 4 years ago I was advised against lugging 1/4 ton of BMW up onto its stand and just haven't found time yet to get back on the road.
Of course you could flog the K1200 and use the proceeds to get a new bass (and at that price it would probably play itself).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-11 23:41
I don't know about anyone else, but I have found a huge similarity with bikes and musical instruments. You can't dwell on the problems of the day while "riding" either one of them!
They both take way too much concentration to have any other thoughts in your mind. Our 85 piece symphonic band practices on Thursday night and no matter how crappy of a day I’ve had, I always feel better after practice. (Sometimes I’m irritated in my performance, but the original problem seems smaller after 2 hours of not dwelling on it.)
The ‘99 BMW K1200LT at 860lbs (390kg or 61.4Stone for those on the other side of the road) plus my 230lbs and any tools, luggage ,ebonite (in the form of bowling balls or bass clarinets) turns into ½ ton on 2 wheels. Not something to be taken lightly by rider or on-coming cars.
I Can’t sell the bike to get a new bass. That would be like selling my left shoe to get a better right shoe … I “need” both. I took a 6,500 mile (10,460Km) trip this summer and am planning to do two slightly smaller ones next summer.
Too many hobbies, did I mention I also am a HAM radio operator (AC0FC) and do photography, and manage to keep a 45hr/week job as a technical writer?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ebonite
Date: 2012-01-12 08:08
Norman,
How's the intonation of the E/B twelfth on your B&H bass, with and without the extension?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-01-12 12:00
Just a bit about nickel plating - it was applied by only a few microns thick so it does wear out quickly which is why the fingerplates on your bass are down to base metal.
The wooden Imperial basses had silver plated keywork in which silver was plated over the top of nickel plate, but on ebonite instruments and the higher sulphur levels associated with ebonite, this caused silver plate to turn black very quickly. So the ebonite bodied versions of B&H instruments (the Imperial range of woodwinds and also some 1010 clarinets) generally had nickel plated keys as nickel isn't affected by the sulphur in the ebonite.
What remaining nickel plate your bass has is still bright and shiny, but there's absolutely no reason if you choose to fully restore this bass to have the keys replated in nickel to bring it back to its former glory. You only need up to 5 microns of nickel - any more than that will be very hard going on tools for fitting keywork (reamers, countersinks, barrel fraises, etc.).
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-12 15:30
It probably is against some unwritten law, but I was thinking of covering the finger pads with a thin decorative "cap". Something like the ones on sax finger pads. Could be pearl, black, chrome, anything I'd like.
It wouldn't help the Ab key or the pancake keys, but it would help the BIG ugly keys.
Hummmm.... yellow smiley faces!!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2012-01-12 21:56
Patrick,
First a caution - most of my playing in recent years has been on sopranos so my Bass playing is a bit rusty but currently trying to get back into it.
Generally the instrument does respond a little more freely when set up as an Eb bass than a C.
The intonation tends to be pretty good in the upper chalumeau / clarinet / altissimo regions but tendency for flatness below chalumeau G (both Eb and C setup).
Both low F and E are noticeably more flat but problem is exacerbated with the low C extension. The clarinet B and C do not seem to be affected by adding the extension and remain equaly in tune.
The lowest Eb/D/Db are also flat but bottom C is spot on!!.
I haven't done much experimenting with different mouthpieces but suspect that would not make so much difference in this region.
When I get back in the playing saddle I might seriously consider trying some tuning work but would look for plenty of experienced advice before tackling this.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-18 20:15
Well no luck in my local music stores.
Does anyone know if there are "vintage" B & H, or other, mouthpieces that would fit?
Possibly made prior to switch to metric? I measure the inside diameter of the Imperial mouthpiece socket as 1-5/32" and that doesn't convert (nicely) to metric.
Possibly someone knows an old B & H player (old instrument ... not player)that could measure their mouthpieces?
Also, I still haven't heard of another ebonite B & H horn in the era mine was made. I can't have the ONLY one. (I'm not fortunate enough to fine a one-of-a-kind.)
Post Edited (2012-01-18 23:33)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2012-01-18 20:33
You are mixing up Resonite with ebonite - your Imperial bass is made from ebonite (hard rubber), the Emperor basses which were Bundy/Buescher stencils were Resonite (plastic).
I'm sure there must have been more ebonite Imperial basses made just as there were ebonite Imperial Eb, Bb and A clarinets made - not made in the same numbers as their grenadilla counterparts, but definitely not made in so few numbers they can be counted on less than the fingers on one hand. I don't think this is a one-off, but I can't understand why the mouthpiece socket is that much narrower on yours than it is on any other.
The only thing I could suggest is find out the diameter of the tenon on a German mouthpiece for a German bass - these are a lot narrower (as is the bore) and take a smaller and narrower reed (around the length of an alto sax reed but narrower). See if Stephen Fox could shed some light as he makes German bore Boehm system basses.
http://www.sfoxclarinets.com/Bass_Clar.html
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2012-01-18 23:26
Have just been taking a closer look at the photos posted and it looks as though there are no discernable differences in outline between your ebonite bass (c 1955/56) and my wood model from 1976.
Since B&H made relatively few changes to their soprano Imperials in this period it is even more unlikely they would have made many to the essentially hand made basses.
I also note that there doesn't seem to be any lyre holder box in the photos (mine has none fitted either but can't imagine anyone wanting to march with a lowC bass!!)
Have you checked the receiver diameter at several different angles to ensure that it is not sqashed slightly oval?
I think your best bet would be now to modify the tenon of an acceptable mouthpiece, looks like you probably only need to reduce radius by about 0.25mm.
By the way I'm pretty sure B&H never went "metric" in any real sense. So any measurements I gave are purely direct measurements from my instrument but done with metric guages.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AC0FC
Date: 2012-01-18 23:50
<<I also note that there doesn't seem to be any lyre holder box in the photos (mine has none fitted either but can't imagine anyone wanting to march with a lowC bass!!)>>
No I didn't see a lyre holder either, but there is no provision for a floor peg. So it's going to be a neck strap even setting.
<<Have you checked the receiver diameter at several different angles to ensure that it is not sqashed slightly oval?>>
Yes. Actually the socket is in very nice shape probably due to the thickness of the collar around the lip of the socket.
<<I think your best bet would be now to modify the tenon of an acceptable mouthpiece, looks like you probably only need to reduce radius by about 0.25mm.>>
My biggest concern is, if the socket is a different diameter, and the neck tubing is 2mm smaller, was the original mouthpiece different in volume and bore thereby making it a problem when I install a more modern proportioned mouthpiece? I know makers/modifiers of mouthpieces say small variances in transition from the diameter inside the window to the main bore change the sound.
I don't want to modify my Peter Eaton and yet I don't want to handicap the sound by modifying a "cheap" one either.
I've even been looking to buy a new neck with the proper sizes. I found a Conn with the right size socket and body tenon, but it had no register key hole. (I would hate to think of the can of worms I'd open by trying to retrofit a register key.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2012-01-19 05:33
>> and yet I don't want to handicap the sound by modifying a "cheap" one either. <<
I don't think you'll handicap the sound, you can just try. Maybe get a relatively cheap but decent mouthpiece (like a Fobes Debut). Turn down its tenon and check the instrument. Plays great? Probably ok to enlarge the socket. Problem? Need to figure out why. You can compare the "cheap" mouthpiece and how it really plays (so you know before checking just on the B&H bass) by comparing it with your usual mouthpiece, both on your Selmer bass. You can always sleeve the cheap mouthpiece tenon back to normal diamete, if you want.
Post Edited (2012-01-20 04:38)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2012-01-19 23:11
I don't understand your statement about neck tubing being 2mm smaller. Smaller than what?
I would be 100% confident that B&H haven't changed the bore of the neck between 1956 and 1976.
If you buy a Conn neck you need to be certain that both the bore diameter and the effective bore length is near enough identical to the B&H.
Every maker will have subtle differences in those dimension
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
