 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2019-09-29 20:09
Over the years we have seen many different styles of barrels, both with rings and ringless. There are some makers (Fobes, Muncy and others) who make their barrels in ringed and ringless versions. Has anyone compared both versions by the same maker? What do you find to be the differences?
Post Edited (2019-09-29 21:39)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2019-09-29 20:32
My opinion has shifted over the years. I originally did appreciate the apparent added vibrance or "woodiness" of some of the ringless barrels. But I have come to the opinion of late that the difference (that is by the way not huge) we hear is only in our "close proximity bubble." Ironically besides listening within a concert hall setting, getting up close to a reflective corner (smooth, hard walls) tends to minimize the perceived color change and allows one to focus on the aspect of pitch (internal, intervalic pitch as well as global). The affect the barrel has on intervalic pitch is really the most important aspect of the barrel. Fortunately (or unfortunately) the manufacturers barrel tends to be one of the better choices every time......for good reason.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2019-09-30 04:04
Hi Paul,
Concerning "ringless" vs "ringed" barrels, Wesley Rice says: "Barrels with no tenon rings are more susceptible to cracking because there is nothing besides the wood to absorb the pressure." https://www.clarinet-repairs.com/repairs.html (Scroll down to Binding Tenons.) (Also, please note that Wesley manufactures "ringless" Grenadilla barrels. Although it appears that a contradiction is evident, IMO, it seems to me that the acclaimed positives of an "aftermarket" ringless barrel outweighs the risk of it cracking.)
It also appears that Wesley disagrees with your last sentence: "the manufacturers barrel tends to be one of the better choices every time......for good reason."
Per Wesley Rice on the page entitled: "Why Replace your Stock Clarinet Barrel?" Wesley states that "... replacing your clarinet barrel with an aftermarket one can greatly improve the playability of your instrument." Wesley continues with "Even if the stock barrel is brand new and not "blown-out", there are many things that will be lacking because of its inferior design" and then he continues with "Sharp upper notes and flat lower notes are a problem on almost every clarinet with a stock barrel, and so the Wesley Rice Clarinet Barrels were designed to bring down the pitch of the upper register notes, while bringing up the pitch of the lower notes. Also, if the notes are plotted on a graph, the curve is much smoother with the Wesley Rice Clarinet Barrel, as most stock barrels produce erratic tuning results."
Everything in the above paragraph can be found at https://www.clarinet-repairs.com/articles/whyreplace.html
p.s. Clark W Fobes states that his barrels "are designed to work in conjunction with FOBES mouthpieces and the his "ringless" barrels give "better resonance and warmth." https://www.clarkwfobes.com/collections/barrels/products/fobes-bb-clarinet-barrel-1?variant=6317060357
Brad Behn states that his hard rubber "ringless" barrels are "far more reliable than wood" (because the dimensions would never change), increase response, improve pitch, enhance resonance, and that his EVO barrels are designed to give what he calls "auto-focus). https://www.clarinetmouthpiece.com/evo-rubber-clarinet-barrels
From all of my readings, it appears to me that after market barrels are indeed better than stock barrels and that the ring on wooden barrels can increase the barrel material stability against cracks and can add resonance and warmth (per Clark W Fobes.)
Post Edited (2019-09-30 05:03)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2019-09-30 05:00
Dan Shusta wrote:
> Per Wesley Rice on the page entitled: "Why Replace your Stock
> Clarinet Barrel?" Wesley states that "... replacing your
> clarinet barrel with an aftermarket one can greatly improve the
> playability of your instrument." Wesley continues with "Even if
> the stock barrel is brand new and not "blown-out", there are
> many things that will be lacking because of its inferior
> design"...
This is a salesman selling his wares, which he is justified in doing. But it doesn't give his words here the status of Holy Scripture. There may well be reasons for a player to replace an original barrel with an aftermarket one - or not. For Rice (or anyone) to suggest that all stock barrels are by their nature poorly designed is silly if not pernicious. Some stock barrels are well-integrated parts of the instrument they come with and some are not.
You buy an aftermarket barrel if it seems to improve the instrument's playability. The only way to find out is to try different barrels. I have drawer full of them and keep coming back to the original barrels that came with my instruments. If you get better results without rings, go for it. If you like the result with rings, you probably have a better supported socket that will, as he says, be less likely to crack.
There's someone buying each variant or there would be no profit in making them. I happen to agree with Paul, though, that the differences, other than a barrel's effect on intonation, are generally not great enough for a listener to notice.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fernie121
Date: 2019-09-30 05:13
Don’t know much about ring vs ringless barrels. I do use a Brad Behn barrel though which is hard rubber and ringless. At first I felt it made me sound brighter. But after listening to recordings of myself taken by my gf from the audience and from feedback from others I’ve determined my sound is fuller and warmer with Behn’s barrel. I really think it has to do with the lower mass and better resonance. I’d imagine that with the wood ringless barrels you’d need far thicker wood in order for it to not crack. Which might take away from the resonance.
I also have noticed an improvement in intonation. Best I can say is try different barrels and see if you can figure out what you sound like from the audience. Not just in the practice room. Every now and then I try to use my wood barrel because I am satisfied with the deeper sound it gives in the practice room. One piece in and I switch back to the rubber because I notice the lack of presence in a larger playing area.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2019-09-30 05:24
I want to be open minded about Wesley Rice since I know him from his mouthpiece blank business and own a Clark Fobes model based on one of them. Mr. Rice has some street cred but as was stated above, it is not as though he is above trying to hype his business.
I would just add an anecdote that I got a few years back from David Shifrin. A pretty advanced student had just gotten a $450 after market barrel (Mr. Shifrin did not identify it) and was seeing Mr. Shifrin about an intonation issue. Mr. Shifrin asked the student to switch to the original barrel for a moment and try the problem passage again. The issue cleared up and the student was a bit exasperated over having just spent that money on the new barrel. Mr. Shifrin told that story to make the point that just perhaps, the manufacturer of the instrument may have a better understanding of the overall acoustic design of the horn.
For me, I got a little skeptical of the "custom barrel" market when I was told the story of a Backun customer who was just given a bunch of barrels to try until he found one that he particularly liked. Where is the bore size or shape addressed in a process like that?
Just wonderin'
....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fernie121
Date: 2019-09-30 06:35
I have seen clarinetists pick new equipment based partly on how it looks. An expensive, new, exotic looking wood barrel could make a player feel as though it’s an improvement.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2019-09-30 06:52
Paul, I agree with you in that there is certainly various amounts of "ad hype" to any ad for clarinets, ligatures, reeds, bells, barrels, mouthpieces, etc. That, to me, is to be expected. However, the "integrity" of the seller, IMO, plays a crucial amount of validity to what is being advertised and, IMO, there are only a few who fall into that very high integrity category.
As to the "advanced student" saga, it's just my opinion, but this "advanced student" should have noticed almost immediately the intonation problem with the expensive barrel. I simply don't understand how he or she could have missed it.
Now, as to Backun simply giving a bunch of barrels to one of his customers for them to try...from my view point, that certainly looks like plain, old, poor customer service to me. However, again, I don't know all of the details. My gut tells me that Brad Behn would never do anything like that. He probably would be asking a fair amount of questions before sending off anything.
Interesting thread...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2019-09-30 15:43
All wooden sockets need the added reinforcement of socket rings no matter how thick the wood may be as internal pressure within the socket (from the tenon cork, a very close or tight fitting tenon and also a loose fit where the socket can rock about) is going to induce stress and find the weakest point to be released which is the grain lines. Wood will naturally want to split along the grain and sockets aren't an exception to this.
If you like the look of ringless sockets, then metal or carbon fibre socket rings can be hidden under a wooden ring that's fitted over the top to conceal them.
If you have a ringless barrel or bell and are concerned with the tight fit of it on the tenons, then you can have it carbon fibre banded or have the decorative rings machined down, a metal ring fitted and new wooden rings fitted over that which is much easier to achieve with grenadilla provided you can get the colour match good if you want it all looking perfectly uniform (the lot can always be stained to achieve a perfectly uniform colour match if that's your thing).
Cocobolo, kingwood and other less dense and lighter coloured woods are more difficult to match the colour and grain pattern if doing that or using carbon fibre bands, so they'd have to be hidden as best as possible or made into a feature with contrasting colour rings or filler.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2019-09-30 18:28
Just to clarify the "Backun story," the point is that the clarinet is a pretty sophisticated acoustic machine with many variables working together to get the best balance of intonation vagaries tamed as much as possible. The bore of most professional instrument has points where it narrows a bit then flares a bit........and all of that was then play tested as a unit before shipping. When we go off and buy a random barrel, it flies in the face of that process. Of course there is NO perfect tuning and we ALL compensate for virtually every note in every situation. So it is a matter of whether changes we make to the equipment make that process easier, the same but more desirable for other reasons, or gets in the way.
And I do say that the perceived sound in "normal settings" (such as in the shop where you went.......to buy this great barrel, or in your living room where you practice) IS different with different barrels (and mouthpieces). But the best assessment is what it sounds like in an actual hall (where most of us don't get the chance to just sit and practice) or close up to a really reflective corner of a room. That last one is a bit artificial in its own way, but try several completely different barrels (or mouthpieces) that way and you'll hear what I mean.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Max S-D
Date: 2019-10-04 10:56
I really doubt that ringed/ringless, barrel material or external shape really make that much difference compared to the internal dimensions of the barrel (entrance and exit bores, taper shape, surface finish) and its overall length.
Not that those things don't make a difference, but I would guess that 99% of the difference you can hear and feel is attributable to the interior dimensions (assuming you have the right length). I have two Fobes barrels, one HDP and one blackwood, and they both play remarkably similarly. The differences are small enough that they might even be within the range of variance for two barrels of the same material. I could use either interchangeably.
For what it's worth, I played the same (ringless) Fobes barrel for about 16 years without any cracking issues. I only switched away from it because I started playing with a more relaxed embouchure and needed to move to a shorter barrel. It's still totally fine, though, with no cracks or other issues.
That's totally anecdotal and I also live in the unrelentingly moderate climate of San Francisco. If you have weather and a larger sample size, the story might be different. Or not. I wouldn't know.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
