Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2018-03-13 17:53
Burt said," Seriously, I can't imagine any advantage to having such bad mismatches between the barrel and the adjacent sections."
As I indicated I used his model for over a year before any of my colleagues realized it, and only when I told them and showed it to them. I didn't find any real advantage to it at all, but it played and tuned as well as the barrels I was using before so it was worth experimenting with it for Phil. I was his Guinea Pig from the first day he showed me his very first ligature.
The first barrel he made was made of plastic with a standard round bore and had indented rings around it. It played OK but really looked funny and I told him no would use it because it was no better than a standard wood barrel. After a while he came up with this design made of plastic too that looked like wood and played OK too. The he took a Buffet barrel, rimmed out the bore and but his insert in it made of some hard material which I do not know. So it looked like a standard Buffet barrel which is why no one ever questioned me until I finally showed them. As I said, it played well, was as good as anything I used up till then, but I can't say it was any better than a good normal barrel. He never put it in production because I convinced him it would not sell enough to warrent the expense of manufacturing it. He explained to me the advantage of the way the sound waves worked and the rectangular bore added on dimension. I never actually understood any of that but liked playing it at the time. That's the end of the story.
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
