 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2023-06-11 13:41
I have always found it baffling that well-known clarinettists sometimes spend years testing and working on the concept of a particular model of clarinet and then give up playing it shortly after it comes out. The Yamaha CGIII is a recent example of this. In the past, there was the Leblanc Ambiance and the Buffet Elite. Is it that ultimately they are disappointed? This would seem like a chef that won't eat his own cooking!
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2023-06-11 15:13
The best policy for any maker is to use their own model number or naming system rather than naming any instrument after a specific endorsee if that endorsee gets all flaky and jumps ship to another maker.
Imagine what a kick in the teeth it is to have your top level instrument named after someone when they no longer endorse it, then having to rebrand and effectively relaunch that same instrument as something different (and probably doing some cosmetic tweaks here and there to make it appear different) while it's essentially the same thing in a sort of erasing history exercise, especially if it was a rather acrimonious split between maker and endorsee.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mojo
Date: 2023-06-11 16:53
It seems that, most of the time, the attempt to create an instrument or mouthpiece as good as the artist’s favorite one fails. It comes close, but is not close enough for the artist to use it long term. Either the artist or the maker gives up trying after several rounds of modifications.
MojoMP.com
Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
MojoMouthpieceWork@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Julian ibiza
Date: 2023-06-11 23:01
I would imagine that good clarinets are designed by top technicians with adequate playing abilities, rather than top clarinetist with limited technical understanding.
It's basically a machine after all .
Julian Griffiths
Tel. 34 696 798 853
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2023-06-12 09:17
Julian ibiza wrote:
> I would imagine that good clarinets are designed by top
> technicians with adequate playing abilities, rather than top
> clarinetist with limited technical understanding.
>
> It's basically a machine after all .
Hi Julian,
I don't agree with that- a new model may be "designed" by in-house engineers/acousticians, but the final tweaks are done by the maker's artists, who will play the prototype and give their feedback to the maker.
And those final tweaks make the new model different from other similarly priced models.
For example, RC Prestige A clarinet now comes with C#/G# tone hole chimney. Not only the chimney improves the sound of the C#/G#, but also minimizes water collection in the tone hole.
I was lucky to be able to play R13 Prestige, Festival and RC Prestige A clarinets- both the R13 P. and the Festival had C# somewhat dull-sounding and collected moisture easily in that tone hole. RC Prestige, with the chimney, has C# sounding in line with C and D, and I rarely get water in that tone hole.
An owner of a clarinet shop in Paris confirmed to me that the chimney was introduced to solve both above problems.
How did Buffet came to this tweak of the original model? Probably by receiving feedback from their artists.
In Selmer's world, there are Privilege and Muse models, looking very similar (and feeling very similar too under my fingers).
They do, however sound different-Muse has more open, easy-flowing sound.
How did Selmer come to the need to introduce the Muse? Probably by receiving feedback from their artists.
Now, going back to the original question: why the maker's artists do not use the equipment they endorse?
Well, some probably endorse only because they are being paid, others may like the piece of equipment initially but later find something else they like more.
I know personally a clarinetist who is a Selmer artist, and he does play Selmers and likes the sound of Selmer clarinets.
So, the answer to the original question can be different depending on who is the individual endorsing the equipment.
Also, what is the ratio of those artists who do play the equipment they endorse vs. those who don't? We tend to notice that "this player advertised [Buffet/Selmer/Yamaha] but was seen on YouTube playing a Patricola clarinet". But how often do we see that?
Another consideration could be the music being played: that same Selmer artist told me that for one particular contemporary piece of music, that requires playing double-notes, Selmer just would not play those in tune, but a Yamaha did, so if he needed to perform that piece, he would use Yamaha.
So, it seems to me that there is no straight-forward answer to Ruben's question.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2023-06-12 09:27
1964: You are absolutely right: the musician in charge of a model accompanies the research and development of the new model every step of the way. There exists, at times, the after-the-honeymoon syndrome: you're delighted with a model until you've lived with it for a while and started noticing its faults. Also, the acid test is how it sounds in the concert hall and makers sometimes don't test this sufficiently.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Julian ibiza
Date: 2023-06-12 12:36
You guys clearly know more about this top musician and designer relationship and its actual fruits .
The input of maestro musicians has ever played a significant roll in the design and development of all musical instruments.
I was really just speculating on the interesting question posed by you Ruben, and imagining how this collaboration would be likely to work but maybe in some ways fail .
I'm guessing it's probably similar to when a top racing driver collaborates in the design of a car .
He can no doubt tell the designers in great detail about the vehicle's handling shortcomings, a few of which may be news to the designers and they set them right , but others of them are quite likely things they we're already well aware of, but aren't able of prepared to amend . So for all the top drivers dedicated input , he may not end up truly favoring the vehicle .
I just pose this scenario as a possible answer to your question .
Julian Griffiths
Tel. 34 696 798 853
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2023-06-13 03:30
...because one vendor pays them to offer input on a design while another vendor pays them to actually use their gear...?
("It's about the money son," I hear my late dad telling me.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fuzzy
Date: 2023-06-13 07:50
Another way to look at it...is that the musician is basically spending someone else's money. If it works out, great! If it doesn't work out - the musician walks away with a pocket full of money - having incurred no expenses.
I'm guessing here - is this correct?
If so, then I don't see a real incentive for the musician to stick around if the results don't turn out as hoped.
Or...perhaps this simply demonstrates even further how players are/can be convinced that the grass is always greener on the other side - and why we have so many ligature conversations (amongst other gear-related posts)?
Fuzzy
;^)>>>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2023-06-13 12:47
I would just like to add that I have never personally met anybody that receives payment simply for their endorsement. Only the tester does, and rightly so, as he or she comes in regularly to take part in the research and development of the instrument and does a real and demanding job. On the other hand, endorsers receive free gear and free publicity.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2023-06-13 19:09
I agree with Ruben (mostly) - the endorsers, as far as I know, do not get paid but do receive the equipment/instruments. Those musicians would be able to buy the equipment/instruments anyway, so it's not like they are "being paid" by equipment.
Regarding the publicity- I think that the company improves its publicity by finding endorsers who are already known in the community.
The Selmer artist I mentioned in my post above, is really talented musician and also has a ton of knowledge and expertise about clarinets (and not only clarinets). So, it is the company (Selmer) that gains from having him more than the opposite, IMO.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2023-06-13 22:40
I would imagine that many endorsement deals involve NDAs (non-disclosure agreements) that prohibit discussion of not simply the terms of those agreements, but that the agreements even exist or have an NDA clause.
So, we may not know if artists are actually getting a check in addition to equipment, but even if not, just because the artist might have purchased that gear anyway doesn't mean, I think, that they're not getting compensated: just not in cash.
In fact the very notion that the artist would have bought the gear regardless allows the free gear to make available funds to the artists to acquire other goods and services that don't have to go to the gear to effect their craft.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
