 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: rtmyth
Date: 2012-02-15 19:03
Interesting, new, two-part comment by Sherman Friedland at his web site.
richard smith
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2012-02-15 21:38
I won't contradict the history of Boston as told by Friedland, but in Chicago, the Selmer was seen as the clarinet to have for jazz, helped along by Benny Goodman being a lifelong Selmer man. The Selmer ALWAYS had a slightly more diffused sound (easier to bend notes with the severely undercut tone holes as I understand it). But the serious symphony players around the mid-west had always tended toward Buffet. Poor Leblanc was left out of serious discussion to even become the butt of some jokes at Marcellus' master classes at Northwestern.
......................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2012-02-15 21:52
Paul Aviles wrote:
> The Selmer ALWAYS had a slightly more diffused sound
> (easier to bend notes with the severely undercut tone holes as
> I understand it).
I think you may be confusing Selmer and Leblanc to some extent. Selmer didn't undercut the toneholes prior to either the series 9 or series 10. Leblanc on the other hand did use extensive undercutting. When I look down the bore of my Selmer CT's and my Leblanc Dynamique the difference is shocking.
I do agree that Selmer was generally more preferred in the jazz genre. There is an interview of Artie Shaw where he states that the Selmer gave the best big band sound while the Buffet was more subdued.
I suspect the preference for Selmer clarinets in Boston was at least in part due to Alexandre Selmer being a former principal clarinetist for the Boston Symphony.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
