 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Aaron
Date: 2001-11-09 13:44
I was in my college instructors office this past week before my lesson and saw hisclarinet sitting oer in the corner. I took it out and started playing. And i was blown away! The response, the feel, intonation and clearness of the notes from top to bottom was amazing. Even compared to my R-13 from 94 is no comparison.
The ser. number is 92XXX. I have proposed buying this horn from him and I bug him everyday and he has begun to think about doing a trade with my R-13. The horn itself is NOTHING to look at. Keys that have really worn plating(not a big deal at all), pads that are a little rough and need to be replaced, and a few places around the tennons where the wood is rounded. But the horn is stable, no cracks, no bent or broken keys. Needless to say i really want this horn.
MY POINT to this discussion is that, well, all the pads need replacing. The tone holes/cups are in fine condition. I'm just worried that if I get new pads onthe horn it wont play like it does now. I can play faster and easier with less effort than I can on my R-13, everything seals just right. My horn has has work done, as far as new pads and making shure everything is sealing correctly. BUt if I get new pds on this horn will it work the same?????
What are your thoughts........
Aaron
Now i only have to find an A calrient that plays this well and I'll be set for life!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw
Date: 2001-11-09 14:00
Aaron -
The 90,xxx series was quite good for R-13s. They didn't get back to that level until recently. Also, instruments from that period have a different sount -- a bit smaller but more colorful.
I have an excellent 99,xxx R-13 A clarinet that was picked out by Marcellus. You can contact me privately about it if you're interested.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2001-11-09 14:40
I have 95,8xx (I'm not selling, just chatting). It's an A clarinet. I had Steve Fowler of Pasadena, MD, overhaul it with cork pads on top.
I've read opposing (well, I think opposing) things about these clarinets---praise for their status as the "golden era" of Buffet and criticism that the Buffet A clarinet is a very, very poorly-engineered instrument.
I feel the tone of this clarinet is remarkable, although not so fabulous as my 25,0xx from 1938. But there is a real problem with evenness of resistance (keep in mind this is an "A"). As has been noted, these are generally very resistant clarinets.
But both older Buffets beat the stuffing out of my 1985 Buffet---a good-playing clarinet, but alnmost totally without personality. --Bill.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2001-11-09 15:02
I've read postings that players tend to sound the same on any horn they play. I don't quite agree.
My 87,6XX R-13 sounds different and better than any other horn I own. I will always be on the lookout for neat horns, but I doubt I'll ever get rid of that 1966 beauty.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2001-11-09 17:01
Of all my Buffets (I have 9) my favorite, and primary horn is 96,2xx. The sound and the feel are something that is not found in my newer horns. I think it has a lot to do with the quality of the wood and the curing process which was used during that era. It seems to be tighter grained, and the bore shines like a mirror. Even my 2nd favorite horn, 162xxx, is still fabulous, but not in the same league..
You will also notice that the horns in the range 85,000 to about 110,000 have a flat spring on the C#/G# rather than the current needle spring. I had heard that Moennig was upset with the fact that Buffet changed the spring on that series after about 110,000...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Douglas
Date: 2001-11-09 17:22
Something that really bothers me, Aaron, about you post, is that you picked up your teacher's clarinet and played it without his permission or knowledge. Perhaps he didn't mind when he found out, but be assured most players don't want someone else playing their instruments without permission.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill
Date: 2001-11-09 18:46
GBK---funny, I often think about that story of Moennig and the C# spring!!! Another entry, unless I am wrong, from the "Alvin Swiney" stories. His insider tales from the Moennig shop make irresistable reading, if occasionally rather incredible. --Bill.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kenabbott
Date: 2001-11-09 19:02
I just bought a 1959 R13 FB ($405 to buy, $600 to overhaul). It has a BIG sound, much darker than my Rossi or Selmer. The action is very light. I'm told that the wood they used then was superior.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Aaron
Date: 2001-11-09 20:14
Douglass,
I can see your concern for me just picking up his horn and playing it. However the situation with my teacher is much different than one might see in other colleges. I go to his house many times for dinner or just to hang out. We play many gigs together and he also gave me a key to his ofice in case I need to get in there to make reeds fo clarient, bassoon, oboe, etc. or just to have somewhere to go between classes. Keep in mind tht I still have the utmost respect for him and his abilities and he has taught me well. He's actually letting me use the horn until about janurary, unless we trade before then.
So we're on a little differnet terms than what would normally be a typical student teacher relationship.
I am more formal with my toehr teacher, Ben Freimuth, principal of the Kansas City Symphony. I sould NEVER ttouch any of his horns unless he gave me permision to.
Aaron
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Meri
Date: 2001-11-09 20:43
I too love my late '60's R-13 (102XXX). I prefer it to every other instrument I've played. I find that the new instruments, while they have great intonation, have generally sacrificed tonal flexibility (in both pitch and expression) and a certain darkness.
Meri
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Culbreth
Date: 2001-11-10 03:12
My sixties buffet is an 89xxx. Everyone who plays it wants to buy it. Charles Bay offered to buy it on the spot a few years back. I looked many years for "the horn". I have owned several very nice instruments and actually sold a new leblanc picked out by Tom Ridenour to buy this horn. Barring any major catastrophies, I will play this horn for the rest of my career.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2001-11-10 14:16
Around 1984 I spoke to Geoffrey Acton, who had just retired from the B&H factory making clarinets (and who had invented the vent key on 1960s and later 1010s) and asked him what it was that made early (1930s) 1010s and Martels (c. 1905 - 1915) sound so much better than instruments of the 1970s and 1980s (he wholeheartedly agreed with that proposition). He said the wood had matured. I pointed out that we had recordings of Martels sounding brilliant when they were new, and he shifted his position a little and suggested that the wood had been more mature when it was used to make the instrument. That was his only explanation, since he had made replicas of Martels and they had turned out disappointing.
This suggests that density of wood may have some part to play in tone production, although the scientific evidence seems against this. I have noticed some people on this board suggest that the Greenline sounds different (and some say better) than the wooden equivalents. Buffet reports that it is 10% denser than the alternative wood, and perhaps this reinstates the levels of density of the wood used in the clarinets up to the early sixties.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joris
Date: 2001-11-10 15:30
Another theory: there is a huge spread in quality of instruments. As they get older the not so good ones are trown away. 40 years later only the really good ones have survived and now everybody thinks that all instruments were good at that time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: James
Date: 2001-11-11 05:10
If you want that horn to play even better than it does now, then you should take it to brannan woodwinds, they are the absolute best in their field and they make any horn play better. THey are a sponsor go see for yoruself. I would think the price would be about 400 to do it but its totally worth it especially if you want to be a pro.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2001-11-11 07:41
So many wood instruments have chips in the toneholes that are so small you need a magnifier to see them. A good repairman will inspect the toneholes and resurface those that have these
chips. Even with good new pads these chips can cause leaks. Instruments directly from the factory have these chips and new chips occur in used instruments with time and temperature changes as well as the continual pad contact. These tiny leaks are one of several things that can make a fine clarinet sound and play not as fine. Obviously, the Brannen people make sure that the toneholes have no chips.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2001-11-11 19:32
Since the topic is 1960's R-13's, it's best to know that Brannens does not accept older horns. I'm sure they make excpetions, of course, depending on who is requesting it, but it is not an option for the general public. I think their cut-off is at about 100,000.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob
Date: 2001-11-14 15:47
There are some who say that the material used is immaterial as regards the sound produced. Note the greenline and unfilled plastic instruments, for example. Of course inadequately cured wood will eventually crack and even plastic will crack or degrade under certain conditions. However.....accurate machining of the bore and tone holes, which is important, is not possible on some materials so, for that reason, maybe the material does make a difference. Go figure.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
