 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Tony F
Date: 2016-09-29 10:49
Generally, when I do work on a B & H instrument the build quality is something that you can assume will be there, except perhaps in the last few months of production. I've just finished a restoration on a B & H Emperor which casts doubt on this. It was bought new decades ago, but the purchaser then had occasion to spend quite a long time as a guest of his government, and when he came out his interests had changed. The instrument was stored in a shed for decades, until I bought it from the estate of the original owner.
This could really be considered as "new-old stock" and I thought I'd scored a bargain, as I picked it up for pocket change. The serial number dates it to the mid-60's. The pads were rotted out and the corks were brittle, but I figured that with the B & H reputation for build quality it should be easy to get it into fine condition.
It has to be the worst B & H instrument I have ever come across. The keywork fit was unbelievably bad, with some key hinges bound up tight between the posts and other loose and sloppy. The wood quality wasn't up to what I expected to find, being open-grained and much lighter in weight than normal. After a couple of days work, a thorough oiling and polishing, new pads and corks and a lot of time making it leakproof it now plays as it should, but I remain amazed at this anomaly. It was as though it was build by an bored apprentice from the junked parts bin late on a Friday afternoon.
Tony F.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2016-09-29 14:59
Is the serial number in the 200000s?
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dorjepismo ★2017
Date: 2016-09-29 18:42
Can only speak from my own experience with a set of 1010s bought in '84 that sat for a couple decades, but when I started up again, the pads and corks were fine, and the keywork was and still is tighter than the Buffets I've owned. Since playing them regularly, I've had to replace some pads and corks, but not more than you'd expect. The shed might have had something to do with it, and maybe we should know what he was in for. Wouldn't want to keep them in a meth lab . . .
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2016-09-29 19:04
B&H build and finish quality since the '60s is massively variable from average to very poor.
Even 1010s aren't spared special treatment when it comes to finishing - while they may have pushed the boat out and used Gordon Beeson leather pads instead of skin pads, they were still glued in with Evo-Stik just as you'd find on a plastic Regent.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2016-09-29 19:18)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony F
Date: 2016-09-29 20:11
Hi Chris,
215xxx. I have a number of other B & H woodwinds to hand, a pair of Emperors, a couple of Edgwares, a couple of Imperials, a 1010 and a Symphony from various years from the late 30's to the mid 80's, but none of them are remotely as bad as this example.
Tony F.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2016-09-29 20:27
Attachment: plastic edgware.jpg (35k)
It was also around this time when B&H used the same width cutter to cut all the tenon slots, so leaving the middle tenon without a shoulder which made it unstable and can also crack the lower joint socket (terminating in the C/G tonehole). I build up the tenon ring as a matter of course when I get them in for a service or overhaul.
While the keywork was all over the shop, the best B&H clarinet when it came to tenons fitting perfectly in their respective sockets was a machined plastic bodied Edgware (with inset ebonite tonehole chimneys).
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
