 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Beau
Date: 2026-04-07 16:11
I play Albert clarinets exclusively (just my preference) and recently read somewhere (can't remember where, sorry) that although the Albert bore size is more similar in many respects to a Boehm clarinet, an Albert player might find they get better intonation and response from an Albert using an Oehler mouthpiece.
I primarily play a 1926/27 Penzel-Müller Albert Improved (so about as modern and close to an Oehler as you're going to get without it being an Oehler), but use either a Vandoren B40 or 5RV mp.
Do we have any Oehler players (or otherwise) who might have personal knowledge of using an Oehler mp with an Albert horn?
I'm looking to improve the overall intonation across the horn as it suffers from the usual issues of flat lower notes (bottom E especially) and sharp throat tones (G# and A in particular).
I'm new here and this is my first post, so if I've missed something obvious in researching this on the forum, please be kind. My digging around on the internet and asking German friends who are players hasn't really delivered anything that convinces me one way or the other.
Thanks.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: m1964
Date: 2026-04-08 01:32
Have you tried a mouthpiece designed for the system?
While the B40/5RV may "work" with your clarinet, a MP designed for it "should" provide better tuning. I am sure you can find something similar to those two in terms of tip and length openings.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Beau
Date: 2026-04-08 17:28
I honestly wouldn't know what constitutes a mp designed for use with the Albert system.
Jesper Capion Larsen quotes the following regarding this Albert horn:
https://capionlarsen.com/g-bardelli/?utm_source=perplexity
"The pitch is A=440 with a Vandoren B45 mouthpiece."
I'll email him and see he says.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fuzzy
Date: 2026-04-09 02:43
I play an 1898 Albert (and have for decades). I've never heard of the Oehler mouthpiece idea before...though I've often wondered if an 1890s mouthpiece would make a differrence.
Frankly, I've come to believe that most of it is simply a limitation of the Albert design itself.
However - if you find something that works, please let us know!
Fuzzy
;^)>>>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RBlack
Date: 2026-04-09 05:20
I wrote a whole big post and then the computer ate it. Oh well.
The short version is I reccomend measuring your instruments bore, usually going by the bottom of the upper joint.
No point getting a German mouthpiece if your horn has a more French bore.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Beau
Date: 2026-04-09 10:41
Thanks, m1964
I'll have a look at those links.
I contacted Jesper and he said my two Vandoren's should be fine, but perhaps I want a longer barrel. I feel I've accomplished the same thing by using an O-ring between the mp and barrel, but I need to discuss this further with Jesper.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Beau
Date: 2026-04-09 10:45
Fuzzy wrote:
>I play an 1898 Albert (and have for decades). I've never heard of the Oehler >mouthpiece idea before...though I've often wondered if an 1890s mouthpiece >would make a differrence.
>
>Frankly, I've come to believe that most of it is simply a limitation of the Albert >design itself.
>
>However - if you find something that works, please let us know!
>
>Fuzzy
>;^)>>>
I tend to agree, but does that then mean that all these horns were slightly out back in the day and people just coped?
I'd really like to try an Oehler one day to see what that's like.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fuzzy
Date: 2026-04-12 07:13
Hi Beau,
"I tend to agree, but does that then mean that all these horns were slightly out back in the day and people just coped?"
I believe that could very possibly be the case. I think there is a real possibility that what we consider "normal" today might have sounded/seemed odd at the time.
Just my personal opinion. However, I'd love to find a mouthpiece that proved my existing views on the topic to be wrong! Hahaha!
Warmest Regards,
Fuzzy
;^)>>>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gertz
Date: 2026-04-12 22:17
> "I tend to agree, but does that then mean that all these horns
> were slightly out back in the day and people just coped?"
According to this article about Marie Ross' Brahms recordings, that was indeed the case:
https://worldliteraturetoday.org/blog/cultural-cross-sections/marie-rosss-brahms-olga-zilberbourg
"During this period, it became painfully clear that one of Ross’s clarinets — the 1905 piece that had been played more — had a serious problem with intonation. It basically sounded off-key. This problem, too, had a historical reason. In Brahms’s era, intonation wasn’t a priority for the instrument makers. Valuing the dark, rich tone of the instrument, they made the conscious decision that certain notes would be out of tune."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2026-04-13 13:06
Of course instrument makers STILL have to make certain compromises (most of which are similar across different brands and designs) however the boundaries now tend to be closer (10c in either direction rather than say 20c). While it's true that the makers 100 years ago greatly valued maintaining tone quality, a great deal of flexibility in pitch was REQUIRED in the days before electronic tuners etc. A wide variety of pitches may be encountered by a performer (especially if travelling), more value was placed on tuning intervals correctly rather than the vanilla equal temperament encouraged by electronic tuners, and of course you may need to play with other performers on other instruments that were out of tune. The Clarinet has more difficulty matching wild intonation than a string instrument or an oboe for example. Flexibility was valued.
Disclaimer- Dr Marie Ross is my wife, but she had no input into this BB post....
L
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2026-04-13 14:39
Of course instrument makers STILL have to make certain compromises (most of which are similar across different brands and designs) however the boundaries now tend to be closer (10c in either direction rather than say 20c). While it's true that the makers 100 years ago greatly valued maintaining tone quality, a great deal of flexibility in pitch was REQUIRED in the days before electronic tuners etc. A wide variety of pitches may be encountered by a performer (especially if travelling), more value was placed on tuning intervals correctly rather than the vanilla equal temperament encouraged by electronic tuners, and of course you may need to play with other performers on other instruments that were out of tune. The Clarinet has more difficulty matching wild intonation than a string instrument or an oboe for example. Flexibility was valued.
Disclaimer- Dr Marie Ross is my wife, but she had no input into this BB post....
L
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
