 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: javier garcia
Date: 2002-03-05 11:21
I'm not economist but...
I guess wooden clarinets have an overprice for the cracked pieces that are replaced under guarantee.
So, why greenline clarinets have the same prices (for the same models) as wooden ones?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: javier garcia
Date: 2002-03-05 14:55
Javier, it's the old law of the jungle! Get all you can get. When the market falls off, back it down. But In think there are major production costing factors you have to consider. In time, maybe, the prices will drop but do they ever?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2002-03-05 15:39
I suspect that the ratio between replaced (due to cracks) and unreplaced joints is quite small and not a factor in driving the price of wooden clarinets up. Most cracks are repairable by gluing or pinning and do not affect the playing of the instrument after repair. The main expense, in my estmation, is a result of the manufacturing process, the rarity of the material involved and the need to realize a profit in a world of declining wind instrumentalists. The law of "supply and demand" is not a factor in the clarinet world--there are more than enough to go around. The problem is in convincing players to buy the "new" while the "old" still is playing magnificiently. Fortunately, instrument manufactures have not "caught on" to the auto industries idea of "planned obsolensense" and are still building instruments to last a lifetime and not wear out (or rust) after three years "on the road." So, we pay the price--or not. Good Clarineting!!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sylvain
Date: 2002-03-05 15:46
I would think Greenline if anything would be priced higher.
According to Buffet, the intrument cannot crack, and they must have put some money in R&D to develop the right combination of materials.
So higher technology, higher price.
The only reason I see why it's the same price is to be able to sell them. I don't think this instrument would have become popular if more expensive than teh traditional wooden clarinet. It must have been already quite hard from a marketing standpoint to market this product as an instrument that sounds just as good as a wooden one, especially when we all know how reluctant to innovation most musicians are.
-S
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw
Date: 2002-03-05 18:19
Javier -
Materials cost is a negligible part of the total -- under $100 for the wood or Greenline material, for sure. The rest is labor -- milling the material, making and fitting the keys, tuning and finishing.
In fact, the per-instrument cost to Buffet for Greenline instruments is almost certainly higher than it is for wood instruments, since the Greenline material needs all new drills and reamers, which had to be designed, tested and made. Amortization of the capital cost of that is rolled into Buffet's calculations of the cost of making Greenline instruments.
You of course pay something for the Buffet trademark, but compared with the cost of a professional flute, oboe or bassoon, it's not much. A Heckel contrabassoon is as much as a Lexus. A Boesendorfer grand piano is as much as a house. And ask Mark about his boat....
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Arney
Date: 2002-03-05 18:50
Sorry, the second bead on the thread here was not Javier's but mine with a wrong tag. Don't throw things at him.
Bob A
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
