 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2023-08-28 00:15
I'm all in favour of REPAIRING cracks over replacing the entire top joint for a new one in the event of a joint cracking. My reasoning being:
The majority of cracks are repairable - even cracks that go right through to the bore. Most cracks tend to only go to a depth of around 3mm to maybe 4mm into the joint and with a wall thickness of between 7mm and 8mm on most clarinets, that's hardly any depth at all considering pillars are often sunk to depths of around 5mm or even more (eg. the sunken LH lever threaded pillars) and toneholes are drilled all the way through the joint wall.
If it's a clarinet you chose over many others because you like the way it plays in comparison, repairing the crack is still retaining the original top joint which in turn is preserving the qualities you chose in that instrument, whereas replacing the top joint for a completely new one means the clarinet is no longer as it was when you chose it - you may indeed like the new top joint better, or if not, then you're stuck with an instrument that was never like the one you chose.
Another factor is the new top joint will need to be played in as though you've just bought the clarinet brand new and in certain conditions, the timing couldn't be worse for playing in a brand new top joint if the weather is cold and humidity levels are low which will increase the risk of the new top joint cracking. Repairing the original cracked top joint will mean you can still carry on playing it if it's already been fully played in right after you get it back from having been repaired.
Cost is another factor - if the instrument is out of the warranty period, a brand new top joint will cost far more than having the crack repaired by whichever method and having any damaged toneholes bushed. Similarly with an instrument still under warranty - it'll cost the company less to repair the crack than replacing the entire joint and what a waste the old top joint would be as it can only be repurposed by pulverising it and turning it into wood dust to be used as filler.
As and when cracks happen, don't panic as it's not the end of the world as they can usually be repaired with hardly any adverse effect on the instrument. Count them as being minor inconveniences and something that's always a probability because of the nature of the wood clarinets are made from as it's not a perfect medium for the task. Possessing certain specific properties to be made into a clarinet doesn't always mean it's the perfect substance to make them from - that would be metal, but even metal has its downsides.
There - I've had my say on this matter, now you have yours.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2023-08-28 01:09)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2023-08-28 05:05
Hello Chris,
If my instrument was covered by warranty, I would strongly consider a replacement joint.
Otherwise, I do not see any reason to replace the whole joint. Cracks do not affect play-ability of the instrument, just cosmetics and re-sale value.
For me, the only reason to replace the whole joint that is not under warranty would be if the crack was huge - went through the bore and was longer than half of the joint length-wise.
Another consideration (for me) would be access to a good repair tech who can perform repair.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2023-08-28 05:18
I have no real issue with cracks. Many if not most instruments seem to have cracked. Having someone do a good job fixing it is perfectly fine.
I have known of some players who think that the wood has a natural tension and once it cracks that tension is released and it actually improves the instrument.
I guess there are all kinds of opinions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2023-08-28 06:26
A student of my wife at Auckland University had a terrible crack in her Tosca Bb, and it really was the worse crack I've seen. Was repaired, then got worse.
However, this is unusual- as Chris says most cracks really aren't much of a problem as long as the joint can be sealed.
- I had a crack running into a tonehole on my old R13 (1990s instrument) that was repaired, opened up again... then a repair shop put a plastic tone-hole chimney in to make sure it sealed. This instrument was played for hours and hours a day for 10 years after this repair with no problems. When I sold it, the teacher/dealer who bought it to onsell to a student said it was the best R13 he had ever played.
- The former principal clarinet of APO had an A clarinet with multiple (repaired) cracks. He's retired now, I'd buy his A clarinet right up in a second if it goes on sale, cracks schmacks that is one great clarinet. He actually put it up for sale about 5 years ago, and then changed his mind and kept it, cracks and all....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2023-08-28 07:36
Loree now offers a plastic top joint as a replacement when a player does not want to use the wood joint (e.g. when playing in less than ideal conditions).
Buffet has Greenline instruments and Selmer now has their Evolution system to combat cracks.
I think we will not be seeing as many new instruments crack as we did in the past. The main issue, IMO, is not to play a new/dry instrument for more than 30 min./day, for a few weeks, just like Buffet recommends.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2023-08-28 15:31
m1964 "If my instrument was covered by warranty, I would strongly consider a replacement joint"
I raised this exact point and stated that if you had the joint replaced with a new one, it would no longer be the same instrument you chose on the strength of how it played in comparison to others. Therefore repairing it is the much better option regardless if it's covered by a warranty to replace the top joint which is the easy (but more costly to the manufacturer's) option.
While oboes have for decades been supplied with synthetic top joints or fully or partially lined top joint bores (or both joints with lined bores which is overkill), it's only just catching on in the clarinet world. I think Selmer 10G were the first to have ebonite sleeved barrels and the Prologue having plastic sleeved sockets and tenons, but they were slow to take on offering clarinets with sleeved/lined bores. Bushed toneholes were seen on Leblanc Symphonie VII clarinets and more recently on some high end Buffets, then Yamaha offered the YCL-450 with a resin lined bore, but all this is a recent development when it all could've been done many decades ago.
Buffet Greenline clarinets have their inherent problems with the notoriously weak middle tenons and they can also crack between toneholes like wooden clarinets, but a little thought of using such a brittle material as a bore liner in conjunction with the tensile strength of a wooden body will offer the best of both properties of both materials.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2023-08-28 17:24)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2023-08-29 09:29
>> I'm all in favour of REPAIRING cracks over replacing the entire top joint for a new one in the event of a joint cracking. <<
I replace the top joint even less often when the crack is on the lower joint
>> Another factor is the new top joint will need to be played in as though you've just bought the clarinet brand new <<
>> The main issue, IMO, is not to play a new/dry instrument for more than 30 min./day, for a few weeks, just like Buffet recommends. <<
True and recommended, but when comparing new clarinets that are played regularly vs. new clarinets that are broken in slowly, statistically I don't see a significant (or even any) difference in cracking.
>> Cost is another factor - if the instrument is out of the warranty period, a brand new top joint will cost far more than having the crack repaired by whichever method and having any damaged toneholes bushed. <<
Outside the warranty I don't know a single person that chose to have a section replaced instead of repairing a crack (not talking about e.g. a completely smashed and broken section).
Regardless of who is paying for it, there are additional costs depending on how a new section is supplied. Some give them without keys and even springs. Some just with springs. Some with keys. Etc.
It could end up as a half overhaul, if all keys need to be fit, all pads might need to be replaced/installed.
>> and what a waste the old top joint would be as it can only be repurposed by pulverising it and turning it into wood dust to be used as filler. <<
Environmental reasons are very good reasons to have a lot of things repaired instead of replacing them.
>> don't panic <<
Yes, it's not really possible to know in advance, but some cracks don't even need to be repaired. I don't know it from not repairing them, I always recommend repairing cracks. I've seen more than a few clarinets with old cracks that were never repaired and they remain stable and don't leak being played for many years. They just stopped at some point. A crack might be tiny and slowly grow and eventually leak, or it could be a sudden huge crack that stops and doesn't cause any problem. From the player's point of view it's partly psychological and from the physical aspect it's partly a guessing game.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2023-08-30 00:30
Chris P wrote:
m1964 "If my instrument was covered by warranty, I would strongly consider a replacement joint"
"I raised this exact point and stated that if you had the joint replaced with a new one, it would no longer be the same instrument you chose on the strength of how it played in comparison to others. Therefore repairing it is the much better option regardless if it's covered by a warranty to replace the top joint which is the easy (but more costly to the manufacturer's) option."
I was told by a very knowledgeable clarinet player (who also is a great repair tech) that upper and lower joints are not matched to each other during production but put together at the end of the manufacturing process and the s/n is engraved then.
A replacement joint can be as good as original, better or worse. Most likely, with very small variations during the manufacturing process, the replacement joint will play very close to the original. The tech swapping the joint should be able to work out voicing and tuning problems if any arise.
I only can tell what I would do if my instrument had a large crack.
I am not suggesting anyone else do the same.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2023-08-30 03:01
m1964 wrote:
Sorry to be a little late to this thread - I've been sick and not keeping up for a couple of weeks.
> I was told by a very knowledgeable clarinet player (who also is
> a great repair tech) that upper and lower joints are not
> matched to each other during production but put together at the
> end of the manufacturing process and the s/n is engraved then.
>
I've heard that, too. I'm sure it's true.
> A replacement joint can be as good as original, better or
> worse.
Isn't it also as likely as the original to crack at some point, leaving you in the same boat.
> The tech swapping the joint should be
> able to work out voicing and tuning problems if any arise.
>
Possibly. But, in support of repairing, you don't have to do any revoicing or tuning when you repair the crack.
> I only can tell what I would do if my instrument had a large
> crack.
> I am not suggesting anyone else do the same.
Of course, everyone will make the best choice they can given their individual circumstances. I would add, though, that when I was a student and then a young player, a crack, as Chris, suggests, was just something to fix - a little more time consuming than replacing a torn pad, but, truly, not much more consequential. It took a really disastrous opening - like having run over the instrument with your car (Oh, I forgot it was back there) to prompt a repair tech to suggest a replacement.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LFabian
Date: 2023-08-30 08:17
I have a Selmer Q, circa 1955 that was banded on the upper joint. In fact I don’t know when it was put on. But it plays fine. When did pinning a crack become the norm for cracks?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2023-08-30 09:01
>> upper and lower joints are not matched to each other during production <<
When someone chooses a clarinet it's after the fact, it doesn't really matter how it "got there".
>> A replacement joint can be as good as original, better or worse. Most likely, with very small variations during the manufacturing process, the replacement joint will play very close to the original. <<
In that case, why even choose a clarinet? Just get any random one of the same model. People still try several and choose a specific clarinet for a reason, the same reason that replacing a section might not be as good/close.
>> The tech swapping the joint should be able to work out voicing and tuning problems if any arise. <<
Beyond key venting issues and/or gross voicing problems, I would only do voicing repairs with the player there trying the instrument, going back and forth. It's critical to make them with the player playing using their own mouthpiece. This can add quite a lot of time.
I've just done it with someone who had some voicing work done by the manufacturer's main technician, but it wasn't good enough. If they had to replace a section then it might mean they would need all that work done all over again (they chose a specific clarinet out of several, then had specific work done on it).
Post Edited (2023-08-31 08:36)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
