 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2024-02-09 08:19
Hello,
I recently obtained two Buffets- one from 1965, another from 1977.
I also recently sold a very early R13 from 1955, and before that I sold a 1953 Pre-R13.
I feel there was a distinctive difference between a pre-R13 and R13 clarinets. My pre-R13 had low resistance, was easy to play and had a pleasant/sweet but 'simple' (for the lack of a better description) tone.
My early R13 (551xx s/n) had retained some of the that low resistance allowing effortless blowing, with a more sophisticated tone/sound.
I find, however, that later R13s had changed significantly- they are more resistant and have different sound- fuller, warmer, more focused comparing to my early R13 and pre-R13 clarinets.
I also feel there is a different tone quality when comparing 1965 to 1977. The one from 1965 seem to have more intimate tone/timbre, and the 1977 one is more even and homogeneous.
Both tune well and pretty much the same. I was going to sell the 1965 one, but after playing it for a while, I have grown to like its sound.
My question for those lucky to have more than on R13: what are you observations and feelings? Which year(s) did you like more and why?
I do realize that I am comparing just two instruments- a very small sample size.
Thank you.
***I am aware of the old threads discussing the same topic, for example in this thread:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=170831&t=170719
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: stevesklar
Date: 2024-02-09 16:23
Those three generations you mentioned have been tweaked through out the years.
If you have them in hand the one easy one to see is the placement of the register vent, just compare them next to each other. I have a video I've never put together about it .. sooner or later.
The early R13s it was higher. The 1960s it was lowered more towards the throat keys. 1974 and later a bit closer and enlarged. In 1995 it had another revamp. Of course there was also tonehole modifications to improve intonation, response of the instrument.
My favorite for the "sweetness" the R13 is known for is the later 1960s. I have several generations including my 1967.
but if I had the spare change I'd buy one of the original (released in 1996) Buffet Vintage which was a remake of the early R13 from the late 1950s with improved intonation, keywork etc.
I also had the pre R13 right before the R13s with the Master Bore tapered UJ design. I loved that instrument, such a deep wide flexible tonal color. I preferred it over my Selmer Centered Tones.
==========
Stephen Sklar
My YouTube Channel of Clarinet Information
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2024-02-09 18:43
An old friend of mine (pro player in Denmark and UK, often guest principal in UK orchestras) had a Buffet "Vintage" model R13 A clarinet that was the best buffet A I've ever played. She got it quite randomly (bought it without play testing) and was very lucky to score big time...
It got stolen on a train, never to be seen again.
I LOVE my mid 1970s R13 A clarinet, but it's quite resistant. Perfect for 2nd clarinet, would have to fight to perform a concerto on it. Many other things about it that I love, but you do feel like you're "fighting" the instrument to play above mf dynamic.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lmliberson
Date: 2024-02-09 19:29
I think it's not as easy to generalize R13s (or any brand, model, etc.) purely by when it was made. I've played very fine R13s from all "generations" and pretty poor ones from the same - of course, that's strictly according to my own preferences and desires in an instrument.
I have an "earlier" Buffet R13 (56157) that I played throughout my high school years and my first year of college. Not a bad sounding instrument but the pitch was iffy (of course, that could have been due to the player?🤷🏻♂️). That instrument now lights up a corner on my desk - it was made into a very nice lamp!
I have four instruments (R13s) that I purchased at the same time in 1986 - two Bbs and two As. I find them to be wonderful instruments and I'm still playing them today - and they all have millions of miles on them by now, for sure. I doubt if I will ever part with them.
I've had friends/colleagues/students who have purchased newer instruments (of all makes) that are very, very fine. I remember one of them bringing me a new set from a certain maker where the A clarinet was pretty great but the Bb wasn't the slightest bit usable! (again, in my estimation)
I've had former students who brought instruments for me to try (from the same vintages) that weren't worth the time I took to blow into them.
Bottom line to me is that consistency is hardly a strong point in instrument manufacturing, huh?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2024-02-10 01:20
Mr Liberson, let me know if you ever "need" to sell one of those A clarinets :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2024-02-10 04:51
Thanks a lot to everyone who replied to my post.
I have been playing these two R13s ('65 and '77) back to back, and these are my impressions:
The one from 1965 has retained some of the openness/lesser blowing resistance of the early R13s, and has sweeter tone.
The 1977 R13 feels slightly more resistant, but has more homogeneous and slightly warmer tone, at the expense of volume.
The differences are minimal but can be heard, esp. when I play them back to back.
My "feeling" is that the 1977 R13 can be played at the Lincoln Center and the one from 1965 on Broadway. This, of course, is a very naive description because either one can be played anywhere when in the right hands.
I do not have an early R13 (1955) anymore, so I could only visually compare the two I got.
Barrels and bells look identical- to the degree that I had hard time, distinguishing what barrel/bell goes back to what clarinet.
The only clear differences are the flat C#/G# key spring on 1965 vs. needle spring on 1977 and slightly different shape of the bridge key end on the upper joint.
I could not see any differences in tone holes placement or register tube placement with my eyes.
I took the barrel + upper joint from 1965 and put it together with the lower joint+bell from 1977, and mixed the other parts opposite way.
Both clarinets played quite in tune, with the barrel+upper joint seemingly determining the tone and response. It was not a scientific comparison and I did not check with a tuner.
The middle tenons fit just fine, without any wobble.
Whatever changes occurred between 1965 and 1977, looks like they did not affect outside dimensions much.
Anyway, I hope this discussion can help someone else in the future when choosing an instrument.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
