 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Clarineteer
Date: 2017-09-28 16:42
Which bore size requires more air or wind to play. Orchestral bore for example 14.6MM or big bore for example 15.2MM.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dorjepismo ★2017
Date: 2017-09-28 17:32
Depends somewhat on the setup of each, but my experience is that a B&H 1010 (15.2mm, and which people do actually play in orchestras, that being what they were intended for) takes more than various Buffets, which might range from 14.64 to 14.75 at the top. Different reeds can affect potential phrase length significantly, though, and the difference cased by the bore alone probably isn't enough to drive the decision of which bore size to play.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dibbs
Date: 2017-09-28 17:51
"Orchestral bore". Where did that term come from? Buffet?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Toolaholic
Date: 2017-09-28 17:56
I bet he is referring to the notion that big bore clarinets are used for jazz i.e. The Leblanc "big easy". So therefore the smaller bore clarinets are for orchestra. But apparently not as someone posted a big bore clarinet used in orchestra.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2017-09-28 18:10
Gino Cioffi played large bore Selmers during his time in the Boston Symphony Orchestra, so they weren't the preserve of Artie Shaw and Benny Goodman and other Jazzers.
Selmer made large bore clarinets until the early '60s when the Series 9* was introduced with a much narrower bore compared to the Balanced Tone, Centered Tone and its sister instrument, the Series 9.
More recent Selmers have much narrow bores and the Recital has perhaps the narrowest of all bores for a soprano clarinet, as well as the widest diameter joints that are straight-sided from the top tenon shoulder all the way to the lower joint tenon shoulder making for a heavy weight instrument.
Even earlier Buffets from the 1930s had large bores compared to the much narrower R13 or RC bores.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2017-09-28 20:08
Many of the classical Vienesse clarinets auch as played in the Vienna Philharmonic have bores well in excess of 15 mm and also some German instruments e.g. Shwenke and Segelke Reform Boehms.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dorjepismo ★2017
Date: 2017-09-28 22:14
Caroline, currently, at least, S&S reform Boehms are 14.85 mm, which is also their "wide" bore for German system. They make a "Vienna model" German system instrument right at 15 mm, but don't advertise that as available for French system. Although Jochen has done quite a few extravagant things for people on special request, so nothing can be ruled out. Their French bore starts at 15 mm and tapers to, I believe, 14.55 mm at the bottom of the top joint, so I'm not sure how people would categorize that.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2017-09-29 02:03
William, I guess my understanding on S&S reform Boehm is based on a pair I have worked on several times in past few years for a local professional player. Those were definitely >15 mm but would probably be somewhere between 5-10 years old now.
I'll have the exact measurements somewhere in my repair notes when I can put my hands on those.
I don't believe they were a "special" re bore size at that time but I accept S&S are very flexible with their designs over time.
My understanding of French bore classification is that it is based on the major parallel section, normally around the middle joint, so 14.55 would be pretty narrow on that score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dorjepismo ★2017
Date: 2017-09-29 07:01
The numbers I mentioned were what they gave me last May when I visited there. Jochen seems to love experimenting, so what you say isn't a surprise, especially given the typical Viennese bores. It would be interesting to know the size of the ones Alan Hacker had, as they're said to be quite nice.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarineteer
Date: 2017-09-29 14:58
Again does a large bore require more pressure to play or does a small bore require more pressure. In other words which is harder to play.
Post Edited (2017-09-29 15:00)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dibbs
Date: 2017-09-29 15:21
I think resistance has much more to do with mouthpieces and reeds than bore size.
FWIW I do feel that my large bore B&H 1010 plays considerably louder than my Buffet R13 for the same amount of effort. But I don't use the same mouthpiece so who knows?
Post Edited (2017-09-29 15:21)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2017-09-29 15:30
I find large bore clarinets don't take any more air than narrow bore ones as the differences in bore sizes are only fractions of a millimetre.
But from my own experience I find large bore clarinets far easier in the altissimo register and also offer some trill fingerings that don't work so well on narrow bore clarinets.
One of my favourite trill fingerings being a high A-B trill where you can trill LH finger 1 and keep LH2 held down for a less clunky trill as you're only uncovering/covering a tonehole and not opening/closing the LH2 ring key and pad which can be noisy. I also use the side Eb/Bb key as a G-A trill key which works well too as trilling with LH3 can get tiring after a while.
You also don't need to use the Ab/Eb key for altissimo D on most large bore clarinets - there's a video of Gino Cioffi playing altissimo C#-D and he's not using that key for the D.
https://youtu.be/TQwww-dhQ54?t=36m47s
Another clip of him:
https://youtu.be/TQwww-dhQ54?t=28m4s
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2017-09-30 01:07
William, The S&S Reform Boehm clarinets I worked on were apparently virtually identical to those of Alan Hacker.
My customer was in fact studying with Hacker at the time Hacker bought his instruments from S&S and after trying those instruments my customer commissioned an almost identical pair (I think the only differences were some extra venting links on the upper joint and which I subsequently repadded with cork).
I worked on those instruments quite a few times between between 2-2007 and end of 2015 when I retired. From the records of my last work on them the serial indicates those instruments dated from 12/2004.
Somewhere in my earlier records will be the exact details of the bore sizes etc as I was very intrigued by those clarinets, the first Reform models I had worked on.
ps. I tried to play those instruments to see how the bore worked but had great difficulty as the mouthpieces were narrow with a very long lay and very close tip (<< 1mm). His setup was really light compared to my VD Crystal A1s and 3.5 reeds on Leblanc LLs. He however sounded great on them, albeit with a very pronounced Germanic focused tone. Totally different to the typical spread sound of B&H 1010s that had a similar bore size.
Post Edited (2017-09-30 01:17)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dorjepismo ★2017
Date: 2017-09-30 20:53
Caroline, thanks very much! That's quite interesting to know. I played German system for a time, and the mouthpiece and reed setup does take a period of transition to make them work. On the typical 1010 sound, when I had the opportunity to visit Ed Pillinger, I tried several mouthpieces in a series he made that all had me sounding just like Reginald Kell. Other 1010 mouthpieces of his allow a sound that's quite compatible with the darker variety of American players. So the bore itself is quite flexible and works well with a variety of setups. Assuming my information on the current models at S&S is correct, I wonder why the've become narrower. Aren't some of the Howarths around 14.8 mm?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2017-10-01 04:31
I think that the Howarths (now no longer made) came in 2 or 3 models in region 14.65/14.75mm and used a polycylindrical design much like Buffet.
Peter Eaton's International model is 14.8mm and with only a small top cone.
MY LLs are exactly 14.8 mm and again perfectly cylindrical top joint
The S&S Reforms were, like the 1010s, absolutely parallel throughout the top joint and in the S&S virtually parallel in the lower joint too with only a very small flare starting at around the lowest tonehole.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2017-10-01 08:44
Howarth S1 and its replacement the S2 had a 14.75mm bore and the S3 was 14.65mm.
There was talk of 1010 bore and German bore models and I even suggested a Selmer BT or CT-style model, but none of them even made it to the drawing board. But sadly as is the case with a lot of smaller quantity clarinet producers in such a competitive market, they're up against the dominant force that's Buffet.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dorjepismo ★2017
Date: 2017-10-01 19:20
Thanks very much, both of you! Have to say that based on my limited experience of different makers' instruments, I've no confidence to say anything definitive about bores. 1010s play and sound a lot better for me than Buffets as long as the mouthpiece is right, and I attributed that to the large and straight bore until I tried the S&S French bore, which tapers significantly more than Buffets and also works quite well for me. The only consistent factor is that they're wide at the top of the top joint. I'm glad at least a few of the small workshops are surviving. In talking with Jochen, it sounded like Holland is fueling a lot of interesting experimentation through buying and requesting odd new things. S&S, anyway, seems to be doing well enough, as they employ about a dozen folks and the waiting period for us plebs is about a year now.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Micke Isotalo ★2017
Date: 2017-10-04 22:14
Clarineteer, recently I tried out a Martin Foag Reform Boehm which I measured to 15,99 mm at the upper end of the upper joint (15,25 mm at the lower end of the same joint). However, with the same mouthpiece as on my 14,8 mm Wurlitzer I didn't recognize any particular difference in resistance - or that one needed more air than the other.
As has already been said above, it seems also to me to be more about the mouthpiece and which mouthpiece is "ideal" (concerning sound and tuning and for each player) for each clarinet that makes a clarinet more or less resistant than another one. Perhaps also other aspects of bore design, but not so much the bore size alone.
On the other hand, and especially when it comes to manufacturers offering different bore sizes for the otherwise same kind of clarinet, there may be some differences. I don't have personal experience about this, but Ludwig Dietz told me about some of the differences between their Reform Boehm clarinets, which they offer in three different sizes (14.68, 14.73 and 15,0 mm).
He said that the smallest one is "direct in response" (of course not to be confused with resistance), for the middle one that its "response tends to be a bit harder" (I understand this as a little bit delayed compared to the smaller one), and then for the largest one that "the response is really easy" but that it "also seems to need more air and force when playing."
Thus according to him the most air consuming should be the largest one. I assume it's with the same kind of mouthpiece on all three clarinets.
If practically possible, the best approach also here would probably be to try out for yourself the alternatives you are interested in.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
