The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2015-11-29 03:14
WhitePlainsDave wrote:
> I think your saying that given the inherent lack of
> predictability in a reed's play over time ...adequate amounts of well
> performing cane (funds to pay customers experiencing insurance
> covered losses), as you personally define well performing cane
> (acceptable profit levels and risk.)
The metaphor seems a little forced, but, yes, that's the basic idea.
Like you, I have found from bruising experience that one or two reeds that play well on a given day are too fickle to trust the next. But reeds are inherently different enough that of five or six or even ten (the contents of two of my reed holders), something will work. Beyond ten (to get back to the original post) I honestly cannot keep track of how anything felt the last time I played it, so the process becomes too much of a crap shoot. That's better for insurance writers - fewer chances in a larger pool of an individual's getting sick or hurt and needing coverage. It's not so good for clarinet players - each reed in a very large rotation is less likely to have been properly adjusted or broken in.
Karl
|
|
|
BGBG |
2015-11-26 04:55 |
|
kdk |
2015-11-26 05:25 |
|
BGBG |
2015-11-26 05:44 |
|
kdk |
2015-11-26 20:22 |
|
WhitePlainsDave |
2015-11-26 20:57 |
|
Jerry |
2015-11-28 01:00 |
|
kdk |
2015-11-28 19:32 |
|
Agomongo |
2015-11-28 13:59 |
|
Tony F |
2015-11-28 20:19 |
|
Jerry |
2015-11-28 21:51 |
|
WhitePlainsDave |
2015-11-29 00:52 |
|
kdk |
2015-11-29 03:14 |
|
Una |
2015-11-29 05:20 |
|
Paul Aviles |
2015-11-29 07:45 |
|
kdk |
2015-11-29 16:56 |
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
|