 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: johnwesley
Date: 2024-03-04 07:03
Found one for sale but can't get any info on just what a 476 is. I am playing a Dynamique and want something with a bit smaller bore. I've heard that the 476 might have been a forerunner of the Classic. Also heard it was a prototype, but nothing on the internet about it. Any ideas?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NOLA Ken
Date: 2024-03-04 07:24
Try looking here at Clarinet Perfection:
https://www.woodwindforum.com/clarinetperfection/snleblanc/#ql_Model476
That model appears to be a bit of a cipher according to that source. It's an early model (late 50s or early 60s). If it's in either the Classic or Symphonie line it's smaller bore than your Dynamique. You can look bore specs up on that site under "Technical Info".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghoulcaster
Date: 2024-03-04 08:08
The 476 is the Classic.
I think it is a misconception that the Classic is a smaller bore horn, Classic doesn’t mean classical.
People associate the Dynamique as being the large bore jazz horn because Pete Fountain played and endorsed it, but that was not until the later ‘60s, before that he played the LL and the Symphonie.
I have never played a Classic, but catalogs make me think that it was a large bore horn with tone holes with less/almost no undercutting, like Selmer.
My theory is that is why it is Classic — classic design.
That might account for the price difference in this quote from the 1957 catalog. (I saw more detailed descriptions in an early ‘60s catalog which I now cannot find…)
—
1957 Catalog
“Model 476 -The Classic -
Free-blowing model for musicians preferring modern relaxed style. Ideally suited to dance and school bands. $295.00
Model 776 -The Dynamic -
Incorporates a high degree of controlled response, providing more flexibility for the advanced player's needs. $325.00
Model 1076 -The Symphonie II -
Designed especially for the artist-features greatest sensitivity and refinement of tone, easily modulated to any degree of warmth or brilliance.
In Bb soprano, $350; іn A soprano, $350; in Еb soprano, $325.”
—
The clarinet more suited to your desires is probably a Symphonie (any model) or most readily available, an LL.
LL is by far most common with extra mechanism, if that matters to you.
Quite possibly my nicest clarinet is a silver plated 1968 26,xxx Full Boehm LL.
Some considerations I can think of, Symphonies (except the later 3 models and the rare IV) would have unplated keys. most LL and other 60s models will have nickel plating, which for some people wears terribly (looks ugly) and feels more slippery.
Supposedly many LL models were rebored, but the talk I have heard/read of it indicates probably happened later decades, and I am not sure of the extent regardless.
Mine is European (has a Geneva dealer stamp) so buying from Europe could be a way to make sure, but I personally wouldn’t be too paranoid buying a nice ‘50s-early ‘70s models.
Certainly cheaper than Buffets and Selmers…
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NOLA Ken
Date: 2024-03-04 20:12
Thanks for the old catalog info ghoulcaster. I'm sort of a Leblanc nut and have been hoping to run across such older info. Any chance you might post those catalogs online?
Bore sizes seem to fluctuate some from example to example. I have a 1967 vintage Classic II, which according to the Clarinet Perfection site mentioned above and the expert who restored it for me should have a 14.80mm bore. But mine is 14.98mm - the same or almost the same as my Pete Fountain model. Puts it more in the large bore category and it plays pretty much like a large bore - big throaty dark sound that is nevertheless more focused than my Pete Fountain. It has been suggested to me that something was done to it (rebored?). But if that was the case it was done very well, as the bore looks as clean as my other instruments and the tuning is very good (unlike the reports of Leblancs that have been identified as having been rebored.) So it might not be very representative of the 476/Classic line. It's also finicky about mouthpieces.
I would describe my Symphonie 3 as having a brighter and sweeter sound than the more contemporary Buffets that my band mates play. But it plays well with them. Would also be a great chamber music instrument.
I like both of these instruments, but for different reasons.
JohnWesley didn't mention why he's considering a smaller bore instrument. If the 476 he's looking at plays anything like my Classic II, it doesn't play well with a section of Buffets. In concert band I've been told to back off my volume several times when I've tried to do so. If staying with a Leblanc is desired, something in the Symphonie or LL line would probably prove more satisfactory and can be had for very reasonable prices. These older Leblancs are very well made and play nicely if one doesn't mind staying with the old non-polycylindrical bore design.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghoulcaster
Date: 2024-03-04 21:44
Ken, I am hoping to get some kind of vintage clarinet webpage setup, inspired by clarinet perfection and the like to post some findings and materials, history, etc.
Your Classic II being a large bore horn sounds in line with the catalog description and my suspicions.
So I have some doubt it has been rebored. And if Classics really are large bore horns, they might have been fueling reboring suspicions amongst those unawares…
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NOLA Ken
Date: 2024-03-05 19:25
I've been collecting info on Leblancs off of this BB and find various bores reported for the Classic II and even the original Classic.
In February, 2003 one post here stated:
"I bought the Classic II . . . . I checked with Leblanc. They said my SN 309xx was made in 1969, professional model, .582 bore." (14.78mm)
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=105002&t=104992
In Nov. 2008 a post here stated:
" . . . I think that Leblanc bore sizes may vary with models over time. I have just measured the bores of 3 instruments in my possession
LL (early 1960's) 14.8 mm
Symphonie (late 40's/early 50's) 14.9 mm
Classic II (late 60's) 15.0 mm
all are fully cylindrical throughout"
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=287872&t=287840
In June, 2020 I stumbled across a for-sale listing for an overhauled Leblanc Classic (not the Classic II) for sale on the web site of a tech. He listed the bore on the Classic he had for sale as .590". (14.98mm)
In a post in Sept. 2019 I reported:
"After returning to playing a couple of years ago I got around to actually measuring the bore (of my 1967 Classic II) and found that the upper joint bore measures 14.97mm at the top and 14.98mm at the bottom (plus or minus 0.01mm) . . . ."
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=477027&t=386824
There is of course no way of knowing how accurage these measurements were. And there is no way of knowing which, if any of these were shipped from the factory in France with these bores or were effected by Leblanc USA's reported reboring practice. But it is interesting that the Classic IIs (and maybe even the Classics) sitting around seem to come in different flavors. And probably with different playing characteristics.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: johnwesley
Date: 2024-03-06 02:52
Reason for wanting a smaller bore than my Dynamique is for a more centered, softer sound. More like an R-13 which I used to play.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghoulcaster
Date: 2024-03-06 08:29
Attachment: IMG_4208.jpeg (621k)
Attachment: IMG_4209.jpeg (1144k)
Attachment: IMG_4207.jpeg (408k)
If you are wanting a more R13 like experience you should look at the L series, L7 L70, L200 or L300 (chronological).
These are 70s and 80s models that still have the classic Leblanc keywork.
Drucker famously posed for ads ( scans courtesy of GBK), but did not play them! I don’t see why he couldn’t have!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
