 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Bill Fogle
Date: 2001-04-30 15:27
I've always been curious: When someone says "It's a Chedeville-style mouthpiece," is that person referring to (a) bore size, (b) internal shape (baffle, windway, etc.), or (c) facing specs? What about "Kaspar style"?
I ask because I've always wondered whether Chedeville mpcs are bigger inside (I had always read that Kaspars had the large bores). Last evening I was matching mouthpieces to my larger-bore Buffet (pre-R-13). I'm rather careful about mpcs with that clarinet because I feel that it's best to use older mpcs with larger bores in order to match the tuning (as well as, perhaps, other features more in keeping with an older clarinet). I attached my Greg Smith mpc (Chedeville-style, of course) to the barrel and found that there was very little size difference between the top bore of the barrel of my clarinet and the Smith mouthpiece---something I did NOT expect to discover!
So, what is the "Chedeville" gene? What makes a mouthpiece Chedeville and not a Kaspar? --Bill.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2001-04-30 16:49
Bill,
First of all, Kaspar mouthpieces were made by the Kaspars--Frank, et al. You might look up Clark Fobes article here on Sneezy about the Kaspars.
The Chedeville mouthpieces were famous for their blanks. The inner chamber makes the difference in both the Kaspars and the Chedeville mouthpieces. Both, by the way, are highly recommended and great mouthpieces. Many people make copies of these famous hard-to-find mouthpieces: Bay, Fobes, Smith, etc. But it's hard to immitate the base material from which the Kaspars and the Chedevilles were made. That's why you read things like, "came from the original Chedeville stock," or "made from the Chedeville blank."
Lots of other people out there know more about these than I do, but I own a genuine Kaspar and it is simply a delight to play. I've owned several Kaspar copies and none are like it. I also had a Charles Bay Chedeville from the old Chedeville blanks once and it was fantastic--sadly, it is in Russia right now in the hands of a happy Russian clarinetist with whom I once played. He begged (through his interpreter) repeatedly for me to sell it to him and I caved in on the last concert. I've since been unable to find another one as good. Sigh!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill Fogle
Date: 2001-04-30 18:44
Well, my point was, what are the characteristics of these designs? Kaspar is (quite) dead, but Kaspar copies are still being made. I think Ched E. Ville is gone, too.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2001-05-01 14:13
It's been a while since I played a Chedeville, but the Kaspar I own is a genuine Cicero and yes, Kaspar is dead---but he lives on in the music we play. And, that's why Kaspar mouthpieces are so expensive--unless you bought one years ago before he passed into eternity.
The Kaspar gives me more volume and better quality of sound than any mouthpiece I've ever played. It has a warm, clear, smooth tone with absolutely dead-on intonation. I've played hundreds of mouthpieces (since I've been selling them for a few years now and play-test them every day), and never had one to take its place for me.
The Chedevilles sound great as well, but they tend to be a bit brighter. Of all the old-time mouthpieces, Chedevilles and Kaspars seem to reign supreme. If you find a good one, buy it. If you don't like it there's always a market for it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
