 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2012-04-28 18:22
I've traditionally used close-tip, long facing mouthpieces and gravitated towards those. But I'm just curious on an open mouthpiece. I have in my possession a crystal Pete Fountain mouthpiece, and I guess I can start there. If I try to use my size 4.5 or 4 reeds on it, it's pretty much impossible to play.
So two questions...
1) About what reed should work well on a crystal pete fountain mouthpiece? Don't want to get something way too hard or soft. I'm thinking 2.5 or 3? Any suggestions?
2) For those of you using open mouthpieces, anything to keep in mind? I'm just figuring that there it's going to be more sensative to embouchure changes and therefore more likely to flatten or sharpen if my embouchure isn't rock solid. Is this about right?
For what it's worth, I play mostly marches and some concert-type stuff, but at my next band I'll be starting up a dixie band and clarinet quartet
Alexi
PS - Right now, I'm using an M15 13-series with size 4.0/4.5 wooden reeds for WWQ and concert band, and 4.25 legere signatures for marching band and standard military ceremonies.
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2012-04-28 19:47
My thoughts:
1) A 2.5 reed would be a logical place to start on an open-tip mouthpiece.
2) Don't worry too much about your embouchure. You'll adjust your intonation on-the-fly as with any other mouthpiece. Just play it!
I haven't had any luck at all with Legeres below 3.0 in strength, but Fibracells have worked well for me.
I don't think an open-tip mouthpiece is a prerequisite for Dixieland. I play on a medium-tip Chedeville-blank Buffet piece that works well for Dixieland, jazz, concert band, marching...everything. All I have to do is pick the right reed for the style of music at hand, and I'm set.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Randall
Date: 2012-04-28 20:01
I agree, 2.5 to 3, though it does depend upon the brand. I play some very open mouthpieces and generally 2.5's are easy to play, but 3's can give a bit more body to the sound. You can always scrape the reeds. Have fun, R
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2012-04-28 20:35
DON'T DO IT !!!!!!!
The transition back to sanity is not an easy one.
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bethmhil
Date: 2012-04-28 20:39
I agree with Randall's notion... I would start with 3's in Vandoren, and then sand them if necessary. It's better to have at least something to work with in terms of balancing.
I think the biggest issue with open mouthpieces with the soft reeds is the aspect of control, which you mentioned Alexi. Yes, the pitch will be more sensitive, but the tone will be much more sensitive to the slightest change in the embouchure. Michele Gingras talks about this in better detail in a chapter of her book, More Clarinet Secrets... check it out!
Understand that you will not have to push nearly as much with your bottom jaw to make the reed vibrate as you would on a traditional closed, long faced mouthpiece. I was playing on a closed Pyne Signature for a while, and then switched to a more open Gennusa. My tone was definitely more vibrant & rich, but it also had a definite "buzz" to it-- this was caused by me pushing too much into the reed with my bottom jaw. It took me a long time to get used to it, and once I did, I didn't like it any longer!
BMH
Illinois State University, BME and BM Performance
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bethmhil
Date: 2012-04-28 20:47
Paul is also right...
BMH
Illinois State University, BME and BM Performance
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2012-04-28 21:24
Paul Aviles wrote:
> DON'T DO IT !!!!!!!
>
>
> The transition back to sanity is not an easy one.
>
>
>
> ...............Paul Aviles
>
Some of us would say that playing with popsicle sticks for reeds is not exactly the definition of sanity either.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2012-04-29 02:47
Paul is absolutely right.
I did neglect to mention that open-tip mouthpieces can be very tiring to play. I've mostly abandoned open-tip pieces as they wear me out quick.
Cheers, Ursa
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mvjohnso
Date: 2012-04-29 03:26
I personally use 4.5 (RGMSE, so 5 in Vandoren speak) on my M30 (medium (115 1/100 mm) tip/ long facing); and if I decide to plunge into insanity with a 5JB (very open (147 1/100mm mouthpiece) it is generally a whole reed (really 1.5, but I sand the rest myself usually)switch for me. Hope that helps, I generally just forgo the use of the 5JB (its honky and unpredictable) and I stick to my guns.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JHowell
Date: 2012-04-29 04:19
A number of years Pete Fountain was a pops concert guest with my orchestra at the time. He put on a great show and was a great guy. At rehearsal break he came back to the wind section to say hi and gave me and the second clarinetist each a box of his personal reeds (new, of course). I've got them around somewhere, black box, maybe Marcas? Strength was . . . 1 1/2.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Barnhart ★2017
Date: 2012-04-29 05:16
I've played a wide variety of mouthpieces from Selmer HS*/HS**, Van Doren B45/M13Lyre/M30/B40Lyre/B40, Greg Smith 1+/Personal and I've found reeds to get a great sound and playing experience on all of them. For years I played crystals and my favorite was a Selmer HS*. When I broke that (MoS) I tried a lot of crystals, including the (then Leblanc) Pete Fountain (I played along with all of his records). I never found one that played really well and ever since have played hard rubber.
I think you are considering two separate issues: closed/open facings and crystal/rubber mouthpieces. I think you would be better served to address one or the other at a time.
I think crystals can be fine mouthpieces, but I think its harder to find a good one because they are harder to make accurately. I looked for years to find one that I liked and finally gave up. A friend of mine recently got a new Pete Fountain crystal (2515-L3) from "order@conn-selmer.com" which is both quite different from and MUCH BETTER than ones I had gotten through Leblanc years before. He's playing (Marca?) 2.5 reeds on it and its a GREAT mouthpiece. If I though I could get one like it, I'd order one myself!
In recent years I've moved towards more open/longer facings (M30/B40Lyre) and recently bought a B40-13 that is really fantastic (largely because I have to play a solo-clarinet work that calls for multiphonics that seem to be easier on shorter, more open facings like the B46/B40). I play V12 and Standard #3 reeds on both the B40 Lyre and B40 and they work fine and I think the B40 might also work well even with a 2.5. The B40 has a velvety sound, great hold/control and amazing flexibility (e.g., to play classical/Jazz or multiphonics or whatever).
As noted by an earlier poster (Ursa), Jazz doesn't mandate an open mouthpiece. I would say that there are many great musicians that play Jazz with closer/longer facings and many that play classical with more open/shorter facings. It's a person choice based on one's concepts, abilities and approach to playing. You just need to experiment.
If you have to go from a closer/longer rubber mouthpiece to more open/shorter crystal one, I think it would be easier to resolve your facing issues with rubber mouthpieces first, before considering switching to crystal ones. Conversely, you could just order one of the Pete Fountain crystals that my friend has. If you get a good one I'll be jealous of you too!
Bob Barnhart
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2012-04-29 05:35
It's a bit tricky but start by putting a reed on the mouthpiece, put it in your mouth and blow air. Then go from there...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2012-04-29 18:42
Right now i play around with dixie and can smear, bend, scoop, whatever i need with my m15 . I agree that its not the mouthpiece that makes the music, and i can make the m15 do whatever i need it do. I am curious as i've heard that a more open mouthpiece can help generate a little more power and projection. But also, right now, it's more of a curiosity. I have two crystals, and one of them mis very very good, but very picky about what reed works on it. I haven't tried the pete fountain, and used to have an older wider mouthpiece which played well.
Essentially, i think i'm just having a relapse into my gear aquisition syndrom days (GAS) and am ready to change things up a little just for fun. I'll probably end up back on the m15 as i know and am very comfortable with it, but i want to just give it a shot and see what i think. Never know until you try, right?
Alexi
Paul, you're assuming i was sane to begin with........
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: annev
Date: 2012-04-30 17:39
I played on an M15 series 13 mouthpiece for about two years and was very happy with it. A few months ago I bought a lovely mp from Bob Bernardo, which has a more open tip. I'm not sure what it measures but it's much more open then the M15 and is also more open then my son's 5RV Lyre. I needed to go from a 3.75 rue Lepic Vandoren reed on the M15 to a 3.0 on Bob's mp. It took me about three weeks to adapt to the more open tip, but now that I'm used to it I really like it. It feels like the clarinet accepts more air, especially in the clarion, and there is more projection (it can give the most beautiful pianissimo, as well as forte). I'm experiencing more resonance overall, but again especially in the clarion register. Initially I was afraid that I wouldn't be able to find the warmth and focused quality of sound that I had with the M15, but after a while that came too (I guess you always sound like yourself no matter what you play since those are the things that your ear looks for). I wouldn't be hesitant to experiment. Although there are several features that make Bob's mp such a pleasure to play I think the more open tip is probably one of them and it's been very worthwhile for me. As much as I liked the M15 I would be very sad if I had to go back.
Post Edited (2012-04-30 18:08)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2012-04-30 18:34
A bit of a warning to those who feel they can sound identical with an open facing as they can with a closed one: you can.............to a point. That point may be exceeded before you know it and going back to FOCUS is a much more difficult a journey.
Take it from one who 'went to far.'
The other side of the coin is the ability to experiment with all those 'dirty' jazz sounds, gutteral sounds. But quite frankly they come at a price.
The sound that you hear from recordings of Harold Wright, Karl Leister, Robert Marcellus are on the other end of the spectrum from the open mouthpiece.
Chose wisely.
........................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2012-04-30 18:55
Paul Aviles wrote:
> The sound that you hear from recordings of Harold Wright, Karl
> Leister, Robert Marcellus are on the other end of the spectrum
> from the open mouthpiece.
Part of the problem is that there is no universal definition as to what is a closed facing, a medium facing, and an open facing. Often it seems that "medium" facings get unfairly labeled as "open".
Personally I do most of my playing on a mouthpiece with a 1.13mm tip and a ~17mm facing while using a #3-3.5 reed (depending on brand). I have had people tell me that this is a very "open" setup even though I feel it falls more in the medium range.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Randall
Date: 2012-04-30 19:48
Since this thread continues, I'll, again, try to add to it. I think it's worthwhile to try different mouthpieces with different facings, since all the opinions in the world that other's express will teach us little. One's experience and needs rarely equate to an other's. At one time, since I played jazz, I thought that I needed a wide open facing, and sought those mouthpieces that would satisfy my, with hindsight, dogmatic thinking. Not true. Although I was never comfortable with a closed facing that demanded a strong reed, I've found that, at least some, open, free blowing mouthpieces can sacrifice a rich, woody clarinet tone to volume. I suppose my point is that compromising on that sound we want to hear from ourselves for the sake of other considerations, is a poor trade. I like open pieces, but carefully choose those capable of the rich tone I demand. Perhaps that's why so many of us maintain a collection of mouthpieces; the losers, hopefuls, and the winners. RC
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2012-04-30 19:57
SteveG_CT wrote:
> Part of the problem is that there is no universal definition as
> to what is a closed facing, a medium facing, and an open
> facing. Often it seems that "medium" facings get unfairly
> labeled as "open".
>
> Personally I do most of my playing on a mouthpiece with a
> 1.13mm tip and a ~17mm facing...
Which is definitely middle-of-the-road or less when compared to a Vandoren 5JB, for example, with a 1.47mm tip opening, or a B45Lyre at 1.27mm, or a Pomarico crystal jazz mouthpiece at either 1.39mm or 1.48.
Does anyone know what tip the Pete Fountain crystals had?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Randall
Date: 2012-04-30 21:08
If I recall correctly the PF crystal was more of a medium opening, and not very open a facing as compared to many others. R
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Michael E. Shultz
Date: 2012-04-30 22:39
Mouthpiece measurement tables are confusing and contradictory, in part because the gauges are not even uniform.
A quick review of the web, including some printouts, shows the Pete Fountain crystal mouthpiece having a tip opening of 1.14mm (0.045"). This is the same as a Bay MM, Portnoy BP02, or Vandoren M30.
I have not yet found a measurement for facing length of the Pete Fountain crystal mouthpiece.
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read."
Groucho Marx
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mvjohnso
Date: 2012-05-01 02:48
IMO the "rich woody tone" has nothing to do with the mouthpiece, primarily at least. I find that you get a woody tone by using a woody (thick) reed. Though, by that logic your mouthpiece opening is effected; inasmuch as, a more open mouthpiece usually necessitates a softer reed. Also, I would think that the term medium depends on what you focus on (size, millimeters and whatnot/ or, the distribution of players that play on that size). As, in the first case 115mm is about medium; but, in the second it is way above average (as most seem to play on closed pieces)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2012-05-01 05:13
>> The other side of the coin is the ability to experiment with all those 'dirty' jazz sounds, gutteral sounds. But quite frankly they come at a price. <<
I play a relatively open mouthpiece, or rather, the mouthpiece I prefer just happens to be open (I just liked it and later found it is considered open). I don't think anything I play would be impossible or even particularly difficult with a much more closed mouthpiece.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: annev
Date: 2012-05-01 17:04
Earlier in this thread I mentioned switching from a Vandoren M15 mp to a mp made by Bob Bernardo. If I had to guess, Bob's mp is somewhere inbetween the tip opening of the Vandoren 5RV Lyre and B45, which would make it a "medium" opening, I think (and nothing as open as a Vandoren 5JB - the terminology is confusing!). Still, it's a significant change from the M15 which is the most closed tip type of mp I've tried. There's no doubt that, for me, Bob's mp is a more comfortable fit.
The discussion on this thread reminds me of an article on Ed Palanker's website (eddiesclarinet.com) called, "Does one mouthpiece fit all?". Mouthpiece choice really is individual and what works well for one person may not work well for some one else. In the end it comes down to what feels and sounds best for each person.
(edited for typos)
Post Edited (2012-05-01 21:31)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
