 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Jeroen
Date: 2012-03-07 21:39
There must be some people on this bboard that play the 926 mouthpiece. I am interested in the different setups used: reed/facing. Besides the 'standard' B&H models Ed Pillinger offers a lot of different facings for the 926 mpc. Has anyone experience in choosing a specific facing?
fyi
I just started a 'British' project with a pair of Boosey and Hawkes Emperor clarinets. That's why I like to explore the 926 mouthpiece options.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2012-03-07 23:17
The key factor of the 926 mouthpiece is the bore rather than the facing.
The bore whilst conical like most French mouthpieces has a less steep taper than typical French. This aspect has a subtle effect on intonation although early B&H literature for the 926 clarinet does state that it can be possible to use a standard mouthpiece.
B&H only produced 3 facings as far as I know 1 - 2 - 3. (close/med/open).
Virtually all the 926 mouthpieces I have seen or played have been #2 which is moderately open and needs about #3 Vandoren or equivalent reed.
B&H own mouthpieces tended to be 1-2 mm shorter than most others, probably to counter the effect of the larger bore on overall pitch.
B&H did market mouthpieces designed? by Reg Kell for some years also but I can't recall the facing details.
Vandoren did at one time market their mouthpieces with a 1010 bore option but not I think a 926.
Since the bore of 926 mouthpiece is slightly larger than most French then it is possible to modify a French style by reaming to the new correct profile.
Several UK mouthpiece makers/repairers possess suitable reamers for this e.g Peter Eaton, John Coppen, Windcraft/Dawkes and probably others too.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2012-03-07 23:46
I tried a couple of the Kell mouthpieces many years ago (would you believe 1959). I don't remember much about them, other than that they seemed playable. There were two models, student and pro.
It's probable that they were labeled as coming from B&H, since Kell was working for them at the time. They took him around to conventions (for example, MENC), to flog his student model clarinet. My high school orchestra played at the MENC, and I was agog when I met him.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clancy
Date: 2012-03-08 16:36
I played a 926 mpc for a year in London. They are wonderful mouthpieces - IF you can get them adjusted and playing properly.
The sad fact about Boosey & Hawkes mouthpieces is the quality and consistency of facing and internal work was horrid. From my experience, 926 mouthpiece vary more than 1010 mpcs - facing, chamber and bore can be radically different from one mpc to the next.
They rarely play well in original condition. However, if you find a good one and have it faced properly they can work extremely well.
John McCaw played them during his career. Many French bore players saw them as an alternative to switching to the wide bore 1010 clarinets.
Most UK players who used them had more open facings applied - I would say 1.2mm and above. I have seen some of McCaw's mpcs - all were above 1.2mm.
When I played them, my 926 mpcs tuned very well with my French clarinets, had a lovely dark, flexible sound that carried easily in a hall.
I have quite a few of them in my collection which you are welcome to try - also could take a look at yours - very few people specialise in English facings today...slightly different animal from what players use in continental Europe.
R Wodkowski
www.ramonwodkowski.com
www.facebook.com/WodkowskiMpc
Post Edited (2012-03-08 16:40)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jeroen
Date: 2012-03-09 13:00
Thank so far. As a start I have sent a 926 mpc to Ed Pillinger to let it refaced with his P45b facing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
