 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Wookie001
Date: 2024-01-29 17:03
Are there still many professional musicians playing clarinets from the 1960s or 1970s? Or do most of them prefer the modern clarinets like Tosca etc.? I mean the older ones don't have a second Eb lever for example
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2024-01-29 18:12
One can live without the Eb lever. The clarinets from the 60s were less in tune than present-day ones. But by rectifying certain fingerings, it's possible to play them in tune. I think what they had going for them was better wood. I, personally, only know one professional clarinetist that has been playing ther same instrument for 40 years.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JamesOrlandoGarcia
Date: 2024-01-29 21:04
Most people I know working in orchestras and taking auditions are playing on newer instruments. Some people collect the older instruments but playing them on the regular isn't the norm.
And yes... one can live without the Eb lever but not happily, at least in my case. I hated that my CSVRs didn't have them and ultimately put Wes Rice's Eb key on my Bb/A/Eb horns.
James Garcia
Bass Clarinet/Clarinet III, Des Moines Symphony Orchestra
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2024-01-29 21:09
I prefer new instruments and happily remove the Eb lever which only gets in my way.
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2024-01-29 22:16
I recently got a 1977 R13 that is very even in tone and also tunes at least as good if not better than a recent R13 Prestige.
I also have a 1964 R13 that has slightly different tone comparing to the one from 1977 but tuning is also pretty good.
Many tuning problems can be corrected by adjusting keys opening height or, as Ruben suggested, using additional/resonance fingering.
I am not a professional. If I were, I think I would prefer a modern instrument, even from the reliability point of view- less chances that something goes wrong on a modern clarinet. Unless, of course, a vintage one was completely refurbished- ALL springs changed, all tone holes re-finished and so on.
Post Edited (2024-01-29 22:19)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2024-01-29 23:05
I'm a 1960s R13 player who actually added the left pinky Ab/Eb lever, although by no means am I a professional.
For about a week I had to get use to the placement of this key but thereafter it wasn't something I needed to conscientiously think about.
I don't use it much but where I do it's really indispensable for me. A classic example for me, for those familiar, is in the opening of the Cadenza in Messager's Solo De Concurs where many players accelerate and concurrently have to face a mid note pinky swap if they don't have this left pinky key.
When doing the etudes I've performed most of my life, where I already know where the pinky swaps lie, I'm inclined to not use this key, which doesn't get in my way. For me it's a nice to have.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2024-01-30 13:32
I'm a professional player, and if I could afford to pay for completely new keys to be fitted to my 1963 R13 then I'd use it for gigs etc. As it is, I've used it for rehearsals when I had unexpected problems with my 2004 Festival, and it worked perfectly fine. No one said "oh that sounds bad", and on one occasion I got a compliment from the (very experienced international player) Principal Bassoon who said something along the lines of "wow, that heap of junk sounds amazing".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ruben
Date: 2024-01-30 13:50
Donald: Did the R13 exist in 1963? At one point, a Buffet was just a Buffet and had no name for a particular model.
rubengreenbergparisfrance@gmail.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2024-01-30 17:01
"wow, that heap of junk sounds amazing" - I love this. Many professionals are said to play around multiple defects on favored instruments. If you can make it sound great, then the day is good, right? And a great R13 sound will always be great.
Yet for professionals the pressure and incentives to, if it is possible, upgrade must be strong. And younger professionals will increasingly not be playing vintage anythings.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2024-01-30 18:19
One of Hans Moennig's primary contributions to the clarinet world of the '50s through the '70s was that he worked out ways to tune the Buffets of his time. A "Moennig Buffet" wasn't an official model, but it simply described a Buffet (R13 and earlier) that Moennig had rebuilt with his corrections to tuning and response problems that were endemic to the Buffet clarinets from the factory. His modifications were the basis of the original Selmer 10G design.
Many clarinetists who play full-time believe a clarinet is "blown-out" after some number of years - the number varies with the player, but it's always a single digit, 5 or fewer. It was always feasible for clarinetists in the past to do this because new top-line clarinets were relatively inexpensive. That has changed over the past couple of decades. I wonder how many pro clarinetists today are still playing on clarinets, if not from the '60s and '70s, that are 20-30 years old.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2024-01-30 21:51
I wonder what the response would be if the OP asked, "How many play a vintage bassoon?"
if I understand correctly, many professionals play vintage Heckels and other makes.
Any vintage professional instrument can be a great player if it was not abused (IMO).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2024-01-30 22:10
My cynical answer is that it is not about the clarinet. It is a tool and it is what you do with it that matters. There have been many musicians who sounded terrific and tuned great using these instruments. If you have other preferences that is great, but you learn to make the instrument work for you.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2024-01-30 23:55
I'm glad you said tool. Lately I've been thinking that more and more. There was a time when the type of clarinet made more of a difference to me, such as Yamahas sound brighter, or R13s sound darker. But lately I'm not really picking up much of any difference in the larger concept of sound. For me now it is really more only differences in tuning amongst certain notes, or tendencies of tuning in one region (altissimo for example) from one horn to another.
On topic, I've played older horns that were great and the mechanics were surprisingly in good shape. But as I said up there, a new horn will just have a longer mechanical life. And now since horns sound more alike to me......just go new.
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2024-02-01 23:48
Paul Aviles wrote:
...
> On topic, I've played older horns that were great and the
> mechanics were surprisingly in good shape. But as I said up
> there, a new horn will just have a longer mechanical life. And
> now since horns sound more alike to me......just go new.
I do not see a reason to get a "new" R13 if playing in a community orchestra, or even if playing gigs occasionally. I have a 1964 and 1977 R13s, both are excellent players and can be played anywhere without a problem.
Yes, if the money for a brand new one are there, why not?
However, in that case, instead of buying a new R13 (or similar) I would buy a used Prestige/Festival-level clarinet.
The key word is "used", not abused.
My 2p
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: joe englert
Date: 2024-02-02 08:08
harold wright used the older models,,he would get older ones that were new condition,,,he had the best sound ever so that speaks for itself,,the new stuff is all gimmiks to me just to get you to spend more money,,tey may look pretty but,,,
6692325075
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2024-02-02 10:26
joe englert wrote:
>...the new stuff is all gimmiks to me just to
> get you to spend more money,,tey may look pretty but,,,
>
Hi Joe,
I cannot agree with you on the above- the "new stuff" is better in tune, more consistent and, IMO, is overall better than "the old stuff".
Back in the 60s-70s, the R13 was the top of the line clarinet;
Today, if you get a good Prestige/Festival level instrument, it will play better than older R13s- better tone, more even in tuning, etc.
Is it necessary to play Prestige to sound good? No.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Peacock
Date: 2024-02-02 13:45
> m1964: "I cannot agree with you on the above-
> the "new stuff" is better in tune, more consistent
> and, IMO, is overall better than "the old stuff".
I think we need definitions of old and new. I play a pair of Buffets from 1979 & 1982. If these count as "old", then I'd say they definitely outplay the "new" versions. I've tried many new Buffets in recent years and never encountered anything that made me want to give up my older versions - the depth of sound just isn't there. I suspect this is related to the quality of wood that was available then compared to what manufacturers have to use today.
Going further back, I can agree that instruments of the 1960s don't have the consistency that we find today. But I think that around 1980 was a sweet spot, where the engineering was pretty well as good as it is now, but the raw materials were superior (to say nothing of more time being invested in hand finishing).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2024-02-02 21:56
Quote:
harold wright used the older models,,he would get older ones that were new condition,,,he had the best sound ever so that speaks for itself,
Well, don't discount the fact that he had Hans Moennig do extensive work to modify the instrument- tone holes, bore, etc.
At the same time, as a fan of Wright, I am sure he could sound marvelous on a plastic Bundy! LOL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2024-02-03 01:17
John Peacock wrote:
"I think we need definitions of old and new. I play a pair of Buffets from 1979 & 1982. If these count as "old", then I'd say they definitely outplay the "new" versions. I've tried many new Buffets in recent years and never encountered anything that made me want to give up my older versions - the depth of sound just isn't there. I suspect this is related to the quality of wood that was available then compared to what manufacturers have to use today..."
Hi John,
I recently got a 1977 R13 which plays very well- in tune, has even tone and sounds just a hair better than my earlier R13.
However, I also have a RC Prestige that just sounds better- has more resonant, fuller tone. However, this is my second RC Prestige that I chose from four clarinets. My previous RC Prestige was not as good as the current one.
Your experience just confirms, again, that older instruments can be played anywhere.
Regarding your experience with newer Buffets: it is possible that you got a pair of exceptionally good instruments and the ones you tried were not the best...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2024-02-03 12:34
>> I think we need definitions of old and new. I play a pair of Buffets from 1979 & 1982. If these count as "old", then I'd say they definitely outplay the "new" versions. I've tried many new Buffets in recent years and never encountered anything that made me want to give up my older versions - the depth of sound just isn't there. I suspect this is related to the quality of wood that was available then compared to what manufacturers have to use today. <<
This is not the reason. Having tried hundreds of clarinets from just about all time periods, old ones in the sense of 70s and 80s are not globally better than current ones, but it's not the other way around either.
For example, my first R13 from 1990 was, in retrospect, about average. It the was the best of the three I could try at the time (my first good/professional clarinet). Having tried so many clarinets since then, I'd put it in the bottom half of pro clarinets.
I've tried clarinets from the 60s, 70s and 80s that were great, and many that weren't anywhere near great... at best.
For new clarinets, just of the several Buffets I tried very recently (some of which were the same exact model), one was as good as any clarinet, I wouldn't mind playing it if my own clarinet fell into a black hole. The others varies from still excellent to ok. These were all Buffets from the last few years, most were Festival, Prestige, Tosca and Tradition.
Statistically, newer clarinets I try tend to be decent to very good (as far as the way they play, not factory adjustment which is sometimes awful), with the occasional absolutely great one.
Older clarinets (let's say 80s and before, roughly), even though the worst ones have likely faded away (or at least more of them have), are on average not as good. Lower % of great ones, more often they are just OK.
Post Edited (2024-02-06 10:04)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: symphony1010
Date: 2024-02-05 17:42
As a professional player who is well into the Autumn of their career I have been surprised and somewhat disappointed by the quality of the limited number of new Buffets I have tried.
Pity the poor student buying an E13 where the joints swell and the wood continues to move for months or even years after that. So you move up to R13s but these are no longer top of the heap so they too are not made from the best wood.
When my own instruments were bought they were the best that Buffet produced at the time. They are R13 Prestige from 1987 and chosen from 24 instruments (equal number of Bbs and As straight from Paris at Boosey and Hawkes' Regent Street shop as, at that time, they owned Buffet!)
They were so much better in terms of tuning and evenness of reponse than my previous 1010 instruments. Try choosing from that number now. Buffet in Paris had a 1 year waiting time last time I heard!
A few years ago I casually tried everything Howarths in London had in stock but, like a few others here, I just didn't find the same response. Admittedly new instruments need to be blown in so I just put it down to that. A year or so ago a pupil went to try a Legende and a Divine and had to pay in full for both before they were allowed to have them on trial. She went for the Legende in the end but neither impressed me. She also has some older R13s which I prefer but she liked the shiny, new Legende and was determined to spend the money!
The Legende has freed up over the year but seems to lack the depth of sound I find in my own instruments. The bottom F key seems unnecessary on my own instruments but its positioning on the newer Buffets can mean quite a long period of adjustment.
Regardless of how it seems to many clarinettists I think the top end instruments are actually too cheap. Reliable sources relate that Buffet simply cannot afford to put the hours in on final setup for these instruments and rely on dealers and good technicians to finish the job!
I am lucky enough to live within 20 miles of an excellent technician and former pro player whose work includes setting up many new top-end instruments for pro players. His advice to many has been to look for an older instrument in good condition that comes from a period when that model was the best.
I would prefer to think I could just go out and source a new instrument better than the ones I own but, for me at least, that doesn't seem to be the case.
Post Edited (2024-02-05 17:45)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Globus
Date: 2024-02-05 18:28
I still play on a set (B-flat, A and E-flat) of R13s from the the late 1960s and have no intention of replacing them. In the last couple of decades, I've been offered a fair bit of change for them from several younger pros.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: symphony1010
Date: 2024-02-07 13:10
I had another older pair of R13s arrive with me yesterday. I haven't been able to check the date of manufacture but they seem to be late 80s or 90s. They seemed very close to the response of my R13 Prestige instruments and I could have happily played on them.
They had a response and fullness of sound far preferable to the new instruments that have come past me via pupils in the last few years.
I actually find it disconcerting that I can't just go out and buy something better that is new. It shouldn't be the case.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: symphony1010
Date: 2024-02-07 16:38
I wonder if the answer to the old versus new dilemma is to go with greenline. I notice that Nicolas Baldeyrou uses them frequently in performances where he's not directly representing Buffet.
I would be interested to know whether the greenline instruments degrade over time but otherwise one might expect good consistency in production, especially with regard to important things like the accurate finishing of tone holes where pad seating is all-important
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2024-02-15 13:52
symphony1010 wrote:
"I wonder if the answer to the old versus new dilemma is to go with greenline. I notice that Nicolas Baldeyrou uses them frequently in performances where he's not directly representing
Buffet.
I would be interested to know whether the greenline instruments degrade over time but otherwise one might expect good consistency in production, especially with regard to important things like the accurate finishing of tone holes where pad seating is all-important"
A good tech can refinish tone holes so that alone would not be a consideration for me.
In person, I have only heard a greenline R13 played by someone who sounds good playing anything.
Only time will tell if Buffet's Greenline or Selmer's Evolution system are as stable as advertised.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
