 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: William
Date: 2001-06-22 18:50
Would it be possible for the clarinetists of this website to petition Selmer or LeBlanc to manufacture a plastic (or hard-rubber) low-C bass clarinet? Sign in and register your thoughts.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal
Date: 2001-06-22 20:17
Amen! Another thought: Reasonably-priced add-on low-C extensions for low-Eb bass clarinets, although, truth be told, in my 25+ years of playing bass clarinet, I have rarely needed the extra notes (fortunately I don't have to play much 'modern' repertoire which, I am told, uses the additional low notes extensively). I have most often encountered the low D, so I've built myself a very ugly but functional low-D extension out of PVC pipe and junk tenor sax parts. Such an extension could be built very cheaply (and far more attractively, I would hope) by any reputable instrument maker. Adding the next two notes (C# and C) would add considerably to the complexity and cost of an extension, but certainly can be done (as Stephen Fox in Canada does, although his are quite beautifully made and not at all cheap).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Robert Small
Date: 2001-06-23 01:14
Buffet would smart to offer their basses in the Greenline material. And a plastic or hard rubber low C bass of good quality is a great idea.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mike Harrelson
Date: 2001-06-23 03:58
It would be a nice option for the player. But if you were Selmer or LeBlanc you would have to ask yourself if there is really a market for a low c plastic bass. By and large the people who purchase bass clarinets are not the people who play them - school band directors. Does this group want that product and would they be willing to pay extra for it? If I were betting my own money on it, like Selmer or LeBlanc, I would say no.
But you can email suggestions to LeBlanc from their web site.
I do agree with the person who said that the first company to make a good priced plastic low c bass will make a lot of money.
(Hey, let's get a double register key, too)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joseph O'Kelly
Date: 2001-06-23 22:11
Why make a plastic bass with low C extention? People who need those low notes are obviosly outgrown the plastic stage. When I purchase my bass clarinet (probably years and years from now) I want a nice quality Buffet Prestige bass with the low C. I don't want any plastic junk. I've played on many of many plastic bass clarinets by Evette, Vito and Selmer and none of them can match any wood bass clarinet I've played. The reason they don't make plastic low C extentions is for the same reason they don't make plastic A clarinets; It is something that wont be appreciated by the player, infact there wont be any players of these because they wou'd cost more than a conventonal bass which would steer parents and band directors away because it is a feture they couldn't care any less about and as I said, the wood models would be what the experienced player would want. I'd rather have Buffet's entry model wood Bass clarinet with Eb extention rather than inferior plastic anything. The only non-wood thing I will allow on my horn is the mouthpiece.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-06-23 22:18
Joseph O'Kelly wrote:
>
> Why make a plastic bass with low C extention? People who
> need those low notes are obviosly outgrown the plastic stage.
> When I purchase my bass clarinet (probably years and years from
> now) I want a nice quality Buffet Prestige bass with the low C.
> I don't want any plastic junk. I've played on many of many
> plastic bass clarinets by Evette, Vito and Selmer and none of
> them can match any wood bass clarinet I've played. The reason
> they don't make plastic low C extentions is for the same reason
> they don't make plastic A clarinets; It is something that wont
> be appreciated by the player, infact there wont be any players
> of these because they wou'd cost more than a conventonal bass
> which would steer parents and band directors away because it is
> a feture they couldn't care any less about and as I said, the
> wood models would be what the experienced player would want.
> I'd rather have Buffet's entry model wood Bass clarinet with Eb
> extention rather than inferior plastic anything. The only
> non-wood thing I will allow on my horn is the mouthpiece.
This is one of the most mis-informed posts I've ever read on the BBoard. Period.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joseph O'Kelly
Date: 2001-06-23 22:29
Hey, what can I say?
I do not think that plastic is a good material to make PROFESIONAL clarinets, bass and otherwise with. If you think I am missinformed on this I will ask every one I know (including pro players of the DSO and Detroit oppera house) and see what they say. A player who is as picky as they are with their instruments will laugh at plastic.
All I am saying is it will not sell.
Period!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joseph O'Kelly
Date: 2001-06-23 22:33
PS.
Isn't this why we don't make plastic A clarinets. They would be the worst marketing strategy ever. Just because a few people want a plastic low C extention bass dosn't warent LeBlanc to make it.
I wonder who's missinformed here?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-06-24 00:12
Joseph,
Check around. You'll find professional A and Eb clarinets made from composites. You'll find contras made from plastic. How 'bout that hunk of metal on your bass called a bell?
You're just totally misinformed on how a clarinet makes sounds. But that's fine - just be prepared to back up your statements with facts. Tell those people (professionals) that are playing composite or plastic horns that they're no good - that you know better. Tell them that you're better than Morales - since Morales played Greenlines for a while. If you try and say "but Greenlines have wood" - greenlines are sawdust. There's no grain, no "special magic" of natural wood.
I don't care what Larry and Ted are playing today - they might just change tomorrow if they find a new clarinet. And they're not so stupid as to say ":geez, it's not wood, it must be junk." They're much smarter than that. I've been at Ted's house many a time. I know he's sharp. I've met Larry. I've corresponded with him. I think he's pretty sharp, too. I don't think you'd get either of them to say such things.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Robert Small
Date: 2001-06-24 02:02
And with the increasing scarcity of grenadilla wood, horns made of plastic, hard rubber, and composites make more sense all the time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2001-06-24 02:26
Greenline is only the beginning.
It can't be long before a clarinet playing, molecular design engineer specializing in polymers creates a polymer/composite that perfectly imitates wood and has many superior qualities. With nanotube technology it could even have grain tubules. Time to update to the present, Joseph.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-06-24 02:42
Gordon,
There's really no reason other than aesthetics to imitate wood. A material of sufficient workability and density is really what's required. The Greenline composite is not as workable as wood (it'll dull wood-turning machinery quickly - Buffet had to start a new, more modern line to make the Greenlines). The clarinet is not a resonating body like the string instruments.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: willie
Date: 2001-06-24 05:43
As for a student needing notes down to low "C", my daughter has come accross this several times now at the high school. Many modern compositions now use these notes. I noticed at the regionals that some of the better (richer) schools had provided thier students with low C Prestiges even with Bay necks. Others like ours had the good old Vitos and Selmers (plastic). The local junior college let us use one of their plastic Selmers as the school horn was in such bad shape. She made It! That old Selmer has a beautiful tone.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joseph O'Kelly
Date: 2001-06-24 21:21
All I was trying to say was it wouldn't neccasarally be all you hoped it would be. I was assuming the reason one would ask for a plastic bass with low C extention was to save money. My point is they would be demanded in such a low quantaty that the money saved wouldn't be as much as anticipated. Why are oboes signifigantly more money than clarinets? Because they are made in lesser quantities. Why is the R-13 clarinet the most affordable pro. clarinet? Because they are demanded the most out of the pro. clarinet. Many quality plastic oboes cost more than the R-13.
With this in mind I don't believe the price differences between a plastic C extention bass and wood would sway many to buy the plastic.
Yes I am fammiliar with the green line instruments, they are nice horns. They are also the same price as their wood counterparts. I thought the idea of a plastic C extention was to save money.
Mark wrote, "You're just totally misinformed on how a clarinet makes sounds." This is wrong and also insults me. I guess the many people who use wood are missinformed as well. Please tell me how I'm missinformed.
You also wrote, "Tell those people (professionals) that are playing composite or plastic horns that they're no good - that you know better." They can play whatever they want. My coments were directed towards plastic, hard rubber. I put the greenlines in another catogorie. They are far superior to any plastic or hard rubber clarinet out there. I am not saying this will always be the case but right now it is. I was basing this on the majority of clarinet player's oppinions and why a plastic C extention bass would be ruled out by Buffet, LeBlanc, Selmer and Yamaha. I was just hypothosising a market survey.
One final note, I have always said that I hope they will perfect a pastic that will play just as good as the finest wood clarinet to put make cracking and high costs a thing of the past. Whenever I share this hope with others they think I'm stupid.
I do not appreciate being torn appart and insulted for my posts. If this continues I will siece to visit this site. I have always recomended this site to my students and friends. I can guarentee my atitude has dramasticly changed. The fact that it was Mark Charette, who runs the site, is appaling.
I will only hope this is not my last post. I thought this site was different.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-06-24 22:10
Joseph O'Kelly wrote:
> Mark wrote, "You're just totally misinformed on how a
> clarinet makes sounds." This is wrong and also insults me. I
> guess the many people who use wood are missinformed as well.
> Please tell me how I'm missinformed.
Have you read the books on musical acoustics? Do you know how a clarinet works? If you have, would you point out the sections on how a clarinet body influences the sound?
Just because most of the finest clarinets are made of wood does not mean that <b>have</b> to be made out of wood. A century and a half ago they weren't even grenadilla - they were boxwood. They still sounded like clarinets. There are a few metal clarinets that are the equal of any wood ones. Have you tried an Eaton PVC clarinet? Do you know that they exist? Do you know that they are considered a professional model?
> I put the
> greenlines in another catogorie.
Why? They're not wood - they're a lot closer to plastic than anything else. They dispel any notions of "wood magic" they have totally different material properties.
> One final note, I have always said that I hope they
> will perfect a pastic that will play just as good as the finest
> wood clarinet to put make cracking and high costs a thing of
> the past. Whenever I share this hope with others they think I'm
> stupid.
The cost of a clarinet is not in the material. That billit of grenadilla is pretty cheap compared with the price of the instrument. Making a clarinet out of plastic doesn't really save much money.
> I do not appreciate being torn appart and insulted for my
> posts. If this continues I will siece to visit this site. I
> have always recomended this site to my students and friends. I
> can guarentee my atitude has dramasticly changed. The fact that
> it was Mark Charette, who runs the site, is appaling.
Anyone who says "I don't want any plastic junk" or "The only non-wood thing I will allow on my horn is the mouthpiece." is obviously prejudiced. What did you expect from those of us who repeatedly have said that it's the care in designing, making, assembling, and hand finishing clarinets that makes all the difference?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joseph O'Kelly
Date: 2001-06-24 22:33
Mabey I am prejuduced because I have not encountered ANYTHING better than wood. Not even the Greenlines. When they perfect the plastics I will change my aditude. I'm just a traditionalist.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-06-24 22:50
I don't think you're going to find anything that sounds better than wood. or plastic. or Greenline. or anything else of sufficient rigidity and mass. Because what the clarinet is made of doesn't materially affect the sound.
You're not going to find that the material affects the price much, either. The amount of handwork, the keys, the mechanisms, the adjustments cost the same no matter what the body is made out of.
You will find that the tolerances will stay good longer, that the instrument will be in tune under greater temperature regimes, and that it probably won't crack so easily.
But it won't be as pretty as wood.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joseph O'Kelly
Date: 2001-06-25 03:20
I'd like more information on this Eaton PVC clarinet.
By the way, If the Greenlines and PVC clarinets are so great then how come the large majority of players choose wood. I am one of the many that hate the penalties of owning a wood instruments (cracking,) ,Many players that I have talked to did not like the characteristics of the Greenline. I as well did not like any of the five Greenlines I tried equaly as I do my Festival. Many many players including myself swear by wood. I will not change to any composite untill it plays just as equal to the finest of wood instruments. You can argue with me about how close we have come and how possible it is and I will not dissagree but I will tell you we have not gotten to that point yet. I know someday it will be a reality.
That "plastic junk" I was reffering to was every plastic clarinet I have ever played. None of them would ever be in my oppinion equal to a R-13.
Wood will always hold its appeal and charm. I don't think I see myself playing in a symphony orchestra on the same material that my pipes are made of.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-06-25 03:44
Joseph O'Kelly wrote:
>
> I'd like more information on this Eaton PVC clarinet.
Sorry, I was mistaken. It's Howarth of London - http://www.howarth.uk.com/
> By the way, If the Greenlines and PVC clarinets are so great
> then how come the large majority of players choose wood.
Because the large majority of good clarinets are wood. The Greenlines are becoming more and more accepted among professionals. Buffet lists Michel Arrignon, Nicolas Baldeyrou, David Campbell, Alain Damiens, Romain Guyot, and Robert Spring as using Greenlines currently.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-06-25 03:46
Joseph O'Kelly wrote:
I don't think I see
> myself playing in a symphony orchestra on the same material
> that my pipes are made of.
Talk to your oboe playing friends. They accepted plastic a long time back ... and they use those pieces of plastic in the world's finest orchestras.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jim
Date: 2001-06-25 04:02
Hey Joseph,
At one time, some plumbing pipes were made of... WOOD. (There are still 100+ year old wooden water mains in use.) So you do play on a material pipes were made of! (Yeah, I know you were talking about PVC pipes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joseph O'Kelly
Date: 2001-06-25 04:08
I still stand by many of my comments. I will agree that many of my points were not well thought out. Yes, I relize it is possible to produce a clarinet out of plastic or metal that matches the performance of wood. Someday a composite clarinet might be put in my hands that will make me want to play on composite other than wood, but it has not yet happened. That day has not happened for many clarinetists out there either. If Selmer, LeBlanc or Yamaha was to make such a low C extention bass clarinet I don't think they would make it equal to their wood counterparts, it would probably be their basic student model made longer with more keys. All these student models are junk to me compared to their top of the line. This is what I was reffering to in my origonal thread. I was thinking of some beginer low C bass, not a profesional composite bass. I think Buffet should make a greenline bass with low C.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: joevacc
Date: 2001-06-25 05:13
Mark wrote: "Because what the clarinet is made of doesn't materially affect the sound."
Having studied musical acoustics informally but quite seriously for many years, I have not come across any studies that have stated that the material of a instrument has nothing to do with the sound of that instrument. If you have, I would love to read that data.
My opinion on the subject is quite opposite from what you have stated. Some of our scientists can correct me if I am wrong, but all materials, to my knowledge, have a resonate frequency that will affect how something sounds when it oscillates.
Before I started reading this BB I never considered the fact that material does NOT affect how an instrument sounds. I give it a lot of thought now because I have grown to appreciate the opinions of the people on this BB. I have not yet however been persuaded to change my mind.
The fact that a clarinet sounds like a clarinet is do to the physical shape of the instrument, I think that we can all agree on that. The fact that all acoustic instruments sound unique is argument for me that material does make a difference in sound.
Another opinion...
jv
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Robert Small
Date: 2001-06-25 05:15
I played a Greenline the other day and it was a very nice playing horn. But everything being equal I would still probably go with a wooden horn simply because of the appearance of fine wood and the mystique it has.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Robert Small
Date: 2001-06-25 05:23
And having said that, if Leblanc offered a composite or hard rubber pro model soprano, and Selmer offered a composite or hard rubber pro model bass, I would want one. They would make great backups and good number one horns for outdoor gigs, especially in cold weather. The Greenline I played the other day I would be happy with in any situation.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2001-06-25 08:18
This is the old question of whether the material makes an acoustic difference. There are two schools of thought, each as entrenched as a religious sect (or so it seems). Here's my sermon.
Buffet publicity says of the Greenline that it responds acoustically like wood, and short of giving their copy a totally legalistic reading, they are associating that with the high content of wood dust. It follows, as per their view, that the wood content makes an acoustic difference. I attended a recital the other week by Lawson playing on his "new" box wood Muhlfeld reproduction clarinets in the Brahms quintet. The programme notes stated that the use of boxwood made the instrument blend better with the strings than is the case with African Black. My mouthpiece maker says that the material used for a mouthpiece affects the tone it produces. He does not make wood or crystal mouthpieces. He was talking about the differences between the various resins and rubbers he uses.
That is just one side of the story, but the one I personally find more convincing. The only further point for those who agree with the above is that it is the very fact that the material can make a difference which should keep our minds open about new developments in the available materials.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-06-25 11:39
There's no religion in the science of acoustics and the taking of measurements. The clarinet body's vibration has been measured, and the contribution to the overall sound is so miniscule as to be able to be disregarded. It's the air column that vibrates for clarinets, not the wood - the cutoff and resonant frequencies of a clarinet are determined by bore length and diameter (and the tone holes affect both the effective diameter and length. There's sound wave diffraction and some changes in frequencies due to keys because of the incomplete opening of the tone holes, and acoustic mismatches between the tone holes and the outside.
joevacc - the clarinet body is sufficiently rigid as to not affect the sound. The body vibrations are -70db down from the air column vibration (1 ten millionth of the air column vibration amplitude). String instruments and thin-walled instruments do utilize wall vibration and resonance; the clarinet does not. There's more in the Benade books and there's the Benade library (papers) online. I used to work as an acoustical engineer, trying to keep torpedoes from finding ships ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2001-06-25 13:18
Mark, you mentioned Howarth PVC.
Howarth told me that the PVC does behave like African Black but that the Cocobollo and Kingswood do not (that said, the main benefit of Kingswood is that it is light). Patricola say their rose wood clarinets sound different to the African Black ones.
You may be right on research data, but if so, it is the manufacturers who believe in alchemy and witchcraft.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brent
Date: 2001-06-25 14:11
Just to throw a little more fuel on the fire...
I have a Selmer Paris Bb clarinet made from hard rubber. It dates from the thirties and so is a large bore model. To compare it to my 10G is unrealistic, of course. However, i've played other Selmer large bores from the same time period, and this instrument is as good as any of them. I use it in concert band when i don't want to take the wooden instrument into the cold (heat/rain). It's a fine instrument, and i don't think that the material of which it is made has any deleterious effect on the playability, sound quality or intonation. The large bore makes intonation more tricky, of course, but that's a geometry issue and not one of material.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SusieQ
Date: 2001-06-25 15:48
I would like to put in my 2 cents, for what it is worth. I for one would love a plastic intermediate level bc that would go to low C. Wood is not practical for everyone, not because of the cost, but because of playing conditions. 90% of the concerts I play in are outside and in a northern climate. I would be an idiot to by and expensive wood instrument to play in those conditions, however I would love something other than a student model. You have my vote!
SusieQ
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2001-06-25 16:05
Brent
The material may alter the tone, but it may be just as good if you like that sound. Hard rubber clarinets were very common about 100 years ago and many excellent players used them. They solved the temparature/splitting problem, but would shatter if you knocked or dropped them (de-vulcanisation may also have plagued them).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: C. Hogue
Date: 2001-06-25 18:18
Hey, some of us LIKE the way our hard rubber bass clarinets sound. I'm not too keen on the plastic ones myself, but a hard rubber bass is a horse of a different color.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Leanne
Date: 2001-06-25 18:46
Anyway you slice it, a bass clarinet is an expensive instrument. I think it is impractical to have two bass clarinets, one for inside, one for outside. If the manufacters would make a plastic (or hard rubber) low C extention bass, we wouldn't need two instruments.
I have played on a wooden bass before, and I loved it, but price is an issue here, and I would be willing to play on a plastic horn for those extra notes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mike B.
Date: 2001-06-25 19:30
One point that seems to lost here is that the instrument maker is going to make a decision based upon performance AND marketing. For example, Buffet does make the Greenline R13s, and they are essentially a plastic composite. However, they chose to include Grenadilla wood dust in the composite. Did they do this for the sound of the instrument? Not if you accept the material has no impact on sound theory. If you don't accept this theory, its hard to believe the amount of wood dust could properly mimic solid wood. Nope, they did it to improve the chances that the buying public would be more acceptant.
I'm going out on a limb here, but I would guess that if a manufacturer made a professional plastic low C bass clarinet, they probably wouldn't sell too many of them. At least not now. I have yet to SEE a Howarth PVC clarinet, although its existence has been widely reported . . .
Also, if a manufacturer made Eb to low C extensions, they would sell far fewer low C horns. Not in their best interest.
One last comment. I am by trade an electrical engineer. Often times, there is a lot lost in the transition from an ideal model (physics), and the ugly variations and complexities of the real world. IMHO, a number of people who propound the material makes no difference theory are far too trusting of the ideal model exactly reflecting the real world problem of instrument design. Not to say it isn't true, but a bit more scepticism is a very good thing. Regards,
Mike B.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Arney
Date: 2001-06-25 20:39
Hey Y'all, speaking of hard rubber Basses the beat goes on. Dave Spiegelthal sent this to me just this morning:
" I shipped your Conn/Malerne bass clarinet this morning, USPS Priority
Insured. You should have it by mid-week. It is an awesome horn now! I
believe it plays a bit better than my Kohlert, and it is definitely better
looking. I think you're gonna like it.
Cheers,
I'm in heaven. (Sorry for the shouting font but my email does it like that knowing I have trouble rading it in the early morning 8-] )
Bob A
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2001-06-26 13:46
Mark.
1. Do the experiments on material suggest that all significant sound comes out through tone holes and the end.... that NO significant sound is transmitted THROUGH the body material?
2. Although the timber may not be a significant vibrating body in itself, is it possible that in its role as a 'container' of the vibrating air that it provides significant 'feedback' to this vibrating air column?
3. I know one of the world's top recorder makers, who developed equipment for perfectly copying the dimensions of the world's top recorders. He experimented with many timbers, and found, in spite of being as cynical as people come, that the material was quite significant, in spite of the acoustic theory, which, incidentally, I would like to accept in total.
Arguments like those in the posts above do not seem to exist among recorder players, who still play on a wide variety of timbers. It seems to be totally accepted that each timber has its own characteristics. 'Rosewood' is a very popular choice.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-06-27 01:16
Gordon (NZ) wrote:
>
> Mark.
> 1. Do the experiments on material suggest that all significant
> sound comes out through tone holes and the end.... that NO
> significant sound is transmitted THROUGH the body material?
-70 db (1 / 10,000,000) of the amplitude of the air column.
> 2. Although the timber may not be a significant vibrating body
> in itself, is it possible that in its role as a 'container' of
> the vibrating air that it provides significant 'feedback' to
> this vibrating air column?
Surface roughness has effects, but that's not a unique property of wood per se.
> 3. I know one of the world's top recorder makers, who
> developed equipment for perfectly copying the dimensions of the
> world's top recorders. He experimented with many timbers, and
> found, in spite of being as cynical as people come, that the
> material was quite significant, in spite of the acoustic
> theory, which, incidentally, I would like to accept in total.
There are effects in the mouthpiece and barrel where any surface differences and density changes could (and probably do) make changes to the sound. Once we're past that, though, and we're in the upper/lower joints the effects of undercutting, tone hole dimensions (placement and volume), bore sizing, etc. come into the picture.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2001-06-27 18:32
Interesting. I suppose that for a recorder the material of the fipple would be significant like a clarinet's mouthpiece, but possible the rest of the recorder material is irrelevant.
On surface roughness I have heard of oboe players dragging steel wool through the bore to roughen it to improve the tone. Perhaps the steel wool smoothed the bore, or widened it, or reduced the taper..... Goodness knows.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2001-07-03 07:33
There may be some other factors in the material debate. The plastics such as Resonite are a lot harder than wood and are more difficult to drill, undercut, ream, countersink, etc. The tools also wear out quicker than for wood instruments. Thus, if an instrument requires a lot of work with tools, it may cost more.
A plastic instrument seems to cause the saliva inside it to collect in larger drops than in wood instruments. This is a hazard for the oboes with small bores because a glob of saliva in the bore can interfere with a note, usually causing it to be too flat.
These discussions about wood vs other materials have been going on for many years and will probably continue for many more. In the meantime, I'll stick to wood clarinets and oboes.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2001-07-03 13:25
I imagine a finely scratched plastic bore would be less likely to collect water in drop form.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
