Author: shmuelyosef
Date: 2018-03-14 03:21
All of the various barrel designs have a common factor...they all 'engineer' (I use the term loosely) a discontinuity in bore size/shape purposefully at the upper joint interface (and because mouthpiece exit bores vary so much generally one exists at the top of the barrel as well.
My understanding is that these are designed to make intonation a little more predictable, if not always improved, by confining the primary resonant cavity to the main body of the clarinet (upper and lower joint) and isolating the excitation module (mouthpiece and barrel) and launch module (barrel).
Except for the mouthpieces, most of these designs are roughly circularly symmetric; because of the reed and the shape of the human mouth, the mouthpiece is required to be asymmetric, except for a side-to-side mirror symmetry.
I can imaging that there was some thoughtful intent in this design to try and improve the efficiency of coupling the asymmetry of the pressure waves that the reed launches.
It's enough of a different variable, that for $90 might be an interesting experiment.
These discontinuities are important...it is often surprising how much effect pulling the barrel or mouthpiece out a mm is on resistance and intonation; note that this creates a bore discontinuity...and hence the use of tuning rings to fill the space.
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
