 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Garth Libre
Date: 2012-06-24 00:14
How come violinists believe that violins get better with time, and that the best violins were made 250 years ago but clarinetists believe that after a decade or so, the instrument is blown out. A certain Strad may sell for 50 million even after more than two centuries but a Buffet R13 is most highly valued the day it leaves the factory. Two decades later it's worth a quarter of it's former value. I just watched a public tv show about the Guarneri and Stradavarius. We have no such ravings about instruments made even pre WW11.
Garth, 305-981-4705. garthlibre@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2012-06-24 00:20
Well, there are a few of us!
Bill Fogle
Ellsworth, Maine
(formerly Washington, DC)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: andrewcsq
Date: 2012-06-24 00:33
This topic has already been discussed in previous threads I think. But as a guitar player (in addition to clarinet) I think the key difference is this:
1) clarinets have a lot more mechanical parts to deteriorate as they get older. Springs go out of adjustment, keys get jammed etc etc. or someone could invent a new system of keys and yours could go out of fashion (Albert)
2) it's all in the wood. In violins (and guitars! Martin vintage instruments command a HUGE premium) the wood of the instrument is the stuff that vibrates and creates the sound. Therefore the tone of a violin is very very much dependent on the quality of the wood and the varnish used etc etc. and allegedly wood "ages" over time and vibrates easier / creates a better tone. There's also been some rumors about how during the time of Strad the winters were especially cold so the spruce (Alpine I think? Probably wrong) used for violins had an exceptionally tight grain not found today. This high quality wood supposedly made really good violins. Whereas in clarinets, wood plays a structural role. It's just there to hold the specs of the bore and tone holes. (readies self for flak about how THE WOOD IT'S MADE OF MATTERS!) the type of wood used therefore isn't AS IMPORTANT as that used in a violin and doesn't make THAT much of a difference.
Besides, older instruments are often valued for the superior (alleged) quality of wood (better aged, doesn't crack after 6 months) and I believe another member of the BBoard (GBK?) has given some extensive discussion into this myth and it's trueness.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: andrewcsq
Date: 2012-06-24 00:40
As an add-on to my previous post, it isn't automatically true that older violins sound better.
This myth is much the same as how some people yearn for the days of the old Morre reeds or 1960s boxes of Vandoren reeds. Yes it's probably true that they didn't have to use substandard cane back then (then again maybe not?) but an old reed doesn't AUTOMATICALLY sound better?
The Economist also recently published a blind test study (A/B by many famous violinists) that found some modern violins (made in china no less!) were rated higher than some strads. (the names of the Strad and the other highly valued antique violin being withheld to preserve their value, of course). Think about it as a study that took a serial number withheld "Golden Era" R13 and compared it against a Yamaha 650 (not a precise analogy by any account!) and found the Yamaha superior.
I'll add the precise link as an edit when I dig it up.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2012-06-24 05:36
Well, my 1912 and 1221 Buffet clarinets certainly are not blown out and play great. "Blown out" must be a myth.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2012-06-24 07:07
"Blown out" is not a myth. But it's not the instrument, it's the player. ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif)
PS if the subject is about the home town of Signor Stradivari, it would be "Cremona".
--
Ben
Post Edited (2012-06-24 07:10)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Campana
Date: 2012-06-24 09:06
I think that you have to differentiate between improving in performance with age and improving in value. I doubt mass produced violins will do either. I also suspect that Strads sounded great from the day they were first played.
The Strads were hand crafted by father and son using techniques the knowledge of which died with them.
Their value today is more associated with Ming Vases and Van Gogh's paintings, no copy done today, even if technically superior, could ever match their value because they are not just musical instruments but have entered the domain of Works of Art.
Anyway, you can't compare them with clarinets, the strads wouldn't play so well today if they had been filled with spittle every day of their working life.
Post Edited (2012-06-24 09:08)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2012-06-24 13:49
I think we should rejoice in the fact that old clarinets sell for bupkes -- and shut up about it. We should spread that "blowout" story far and wide and then scamper around buying up all the best-quality vintage clarinets we can find before the Antiques Roadshow crowd catches on! ![[tongue]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie6.gif)
Good point about water damage, though. I do see a lot of that in vintage clarinets for sale. If it's bad, the wood really can warp and make an instrument worthless. And no doubt some old clarinets went "sproing!" and cracked and warped all over the place, the same way some modern clarinets do, just because the stick of wood was bad in the first place.
But, I've bought early 20th century wooden clarinets that are fine instruments, IMHO as an amateur. These appeared not to have been played much or they'd been well cared-for and stored in environments with controlled temperature and humidity. An original case completely free of moisture damage usually means good news. Those instruments sometimes have had metal fatigue in the springs, simply from age, but the springs are easily replaced, the wood is fine and the instruments sound terrific.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
Post Edited (2012-06-24 13:50)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2012-06-24 14:28
Blow-out occurs on a clarinet that is used many hours a day in a professional setting. That is the only scenario I accept for "blow-out." In such cases, the *extremely* fine expressive capabilities -- those that are hardly reached by amateur players -- break down.
Bill Fogle
Ellsworth, Maine
(formerly Washington, DC)
Post Edited (2012-06-24 14:29)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2012-06-24 23:13
My take on Clarinet Blow Out: the joints have the wood grain running in different directions across the bore, and the circumferential and radial expansion/contraction behavior in those two directions are quite different. If/when the wood is allowed to vary in moisture (maybe oil) content and the wood warps, the bore in each joint goes out of round. The oval bores and the mismatch in adjacent joints = "blow out."
... but I can't get anyone to check this for me.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2012-06-25 18:57
Bill Fogle wrote,
>> Blow-out occurs on a clarinet that is used many hours a day in a professional setting. That is the only scenario I accept for "blow-out." In such cases, the *extremely* fine expressive capabilities -- those that are hardly reached by amateur players -- break down.
>>
That's a good point about amateurs not reaching the same levels as pros. I don't play on a professional level and it wouldn't surprise me if a clarinet I think is superb would get a lower rating from a pro. But if that's the case, then I'm happy to have bought clarinets that suit me perfectly well for a fraction of the price I'd have had to pay for new, top-quality clarinets.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2012-06-25 19:16
Bob, I think you might be pointing out the real issue. I had wondered about this for a while until I read Larry Naylor's article:
http://www.naylors-woodwind-repair.com/Grenadilla.htm
Naylor and others do immersion processing and claim great success in getting bores round again. I've never had it done, but the idea makes a lot of sense.
Then, there's this video of Morrie Backun working on Ricardo Morales' clarinet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weGxlC0YI2I
Here's what's quite interesting: the clarinet has only been used for a couple years, but after some investigation, Backun discovers that there has been some shrinkage that affects the way the clarinet plays. After rounding a tone hole and reaming the bore in a few places, the clarinet is back in peak condition.
Backun makes an excellent product, and he can't be blamed for the wood shrinkage. That's the way wood is. Still it makes me wonder. Should a wood clarinet require really periodic reaming of the bore and/or tone holes?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2012-06-25 19:53
As George Costanza has pointed out "there's shrinkage".
The violin has persisted in its basic form much longer than the clarinet has; that's part of the issue. Much of the remainder of the issue has to do with Myth and Prestige.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2012-06-25 21:05
Yes- Bob Phillips I am in total agreement...
I had a beautiful R13 Bflat, new in 1998 (hand selected from Bob Gilbert in LA), but by the year 2000 had started to notice the intonation change slightly and the tone a certain area of the instrument lacked some depth. It also started to feel as though the instrument still played well- but within restricted parameters (only in a certain dynamic range, with a specific setup).
At Clarinetfest 2000 Francois Kloc measured the bore and confirmed that while the top joint had retained its bore dimensions, the lower joint had shrunk. I sat nervously while he re-bored the lower joint, little bits of wood falling out! He also slightly reshaped a tone hole in the top joint and voila- a huge improvement in the clarinet. Of course, the "improvement" in the tone was impossible to measure- but several persistent tuning issues were instantly solved.
dn
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MichaelW
Date: 2012-06-26 12:41
Top vintage clarinets with fully developed German systems, that is from about 1900 and later (Oehler, Neidhardt, Fritz Wurlitzer, Warschewski and others) seem to hold their value and, as I suppose as an amateur, their quality as well. Problems, however, that sometimes can be hard to overcome, would be a different pitch or lack of compatible mouthpieces. Of course, quality normally has its price as you can see, for example, here: http://www.vioworld.de/musikermarkt/entry/list/bid/category/16/ . On the other hand, on some occasions I was lucky to find one in the well- known marketplace, not just for “bupkes” (thank you Lelia for the nice word. Over here some years ago a certain prominent banker made proverbial, instead, the “denglish” expression “peanuts”. Imagine how many bupkes might go into one peanut). My high-class oldies from the “bay” still came at very reasonable prices. The indispensable overhaul included I got some of them at the price of new middle- class instruments or, besides, some collector’s pieces from 1830...1870ties for less. Michael
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2012-06-26 15:24
I can't take credit for the word "bupkes" -- it's Yiddish, sometimes spelled "bubkes" in English. I picked it up from my Russian Jewish in-laws. But I agree it's a nice word -- highly effective in face-to-face conversation, too, when spat out, not loudly, but with a slight hand-wave of scorn.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony F
Date: 2012-06-26 16:55
A while back I had the opportunity to play a pair of Leblanc L7's that belong to a professional player of my acquaintance. They are his main instruments and have been for many years. He is well respected as a player and has a wonderful tone. I was excited at the chance to play them, but when I did I was bitterly disappointed.
The keywork was loose and noisy, the pads had definitely seen better days and the joint corks were flattened to the point where he had a few turns of teflon tape on the centre tenon of his Bb to keep the thing together. Not surprisingly, the A was in better condition, but not by much. When I spoke to him of this he said that he hadn't really noticed, they worked OK for him.
All of my instruments are in much better condition than his, but I'd give favourite body parts to be able to make mine sound like his clunkers. I suppose that to anybody else these would be considered to be "Blown out", but not to him.
Tony F.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2012-06-27 15:42
Tony F. wrote,
>> All of my instruments are in much better condition than his, but I'd give favourite body parts to be able to make mine sound like his clunkers. I suppose that to anybody else these would be considered to be "Blown out", but not to him.
>>
Funny you should mention it.... My first clarinet was a then-new 1957 Conn Director, with the mouthpiece that came with it. (This was not a C. G. Conn. The company name had been sold by then. The Director model was sold as a "step-up" for students.) The grammar school band director tried it out and pronounced it good for a beginner.
I failed to process the last three words of that comment -- in part because I loved my dad for bringing home a beautiful-looking wooden clarinet instead of the cheapest plastic one and I wanted to hear good news, but also in part because the director, a pro clarinet player (big band and jazz band first chair and soloist), sounded fabulous to me as he noodled up and down the scales, rattled off arpeggios, played glissandos and snatches of tunes and improvised variations. I thought wowie, great clarinet! I'd be playing like him in no time!
Uh, not so much. The clarinet hadn't played that stuff by itself. Little did I know that mouthpiece was a piece, all right: a piece of crap. The clarinet had built-in intonation issues, too. I didn't know any better. I didn't realize my teacher probably would have sounded brilliant on a Tuner Toy. I played that clarinet with that mouthpiece all the way through high school. Turns out I play better on Buffets, to put it mildly.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
