 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Dr. Jacob Mathias
Date: 2002-06-18 03:28
I have a set of 1010s made in the mid 60s which are in excellent shape and had a set of mouthpieces desgned for them by Timothy Eaton. I was wondering what value they are as they seem most unpopular here in North America. I still use them in a civic band and just love the open quality of sound they produce. They are very well in tune in spite of the large bore work. what value are they used? I am 75 years old and may soon stop playing. Sincerely Jacob
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2002-06-18 08:16
In a London shop (or elsewhere in the South East of England) I would expect them to be offered at a price of around £1000 - £1150 for a pair. As I am not after one of these I do not know whether they would accept a reduction on that price. I do not know what the market is for them elsewhere and would suspect much lower prices apply in the US.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paulie
Date: 2002-06-18 12:35
Dr. Mathias,
Are you certain that you will give up these lovely creatures?
I have wanted a pair of these for some time.
Please contact me through my email address,
voodoodadd2@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-06-18 13:40
Dr. Jacob Mathias wrote:
>
> I was wondering what value they are as they
> seem most unpopular here in North America.
Possibly wrong word. Boosey and Hawkes never really pushed much marketing here, so they're essentially unknown, not necessarily unpopular.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Arney
Date: 2002-06-18 14:17
Hey Dr. J, You are supposed to START at 75, not give it up. I restarted at 75 and am having a ball.
Bob A
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal
Date: 2002-06-18 19:42
Pay no attention to that Arney guy, he plays those funky French Robert Malerne whatchamacallits..............
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: HAT
Date: 2002-06-19 13:32
The 1010s were not popular here because they were associated with players that no one in North America wanted to sound like.
They are also notoriously difficult to play in tune, which is why they (eventually) fell out of popularity in England as well.
David Hattner, NYC
www.northbranchrecords.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2002-06-19 15:18
HAT
It's worth giving some examples of who those players were. One thing that has surprised me is how the English trained clarinetists have managed to find audiences in USA which have not been paralleled by US clarinetists coming to UK. But though they seem to sell records/performances etc. in US, the British made clarinets were indeed a failure there. Short of Mark's simple explanation, there seems to be an inconsistency in this.
The tuning was a problem for the 1010, but not the 926.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dr. Jacob Mathias
Date: 2002-06-19 16:15
My set of 1010s is spot on at 440 and throughout the entire clarion dead on except the high c whick is adjustable at 2 cents above on my Korg. The fact is, I am 75, and may consider giving them to a grandson who is interested in the saxophone...poor child. Howevever, I am quite robust and find only the chaulmeau low e a bit flat the rest are all quite decently in tune...freinds of mine have had less success, but, they rushed into buying the 1010s they had , instead of going to the factory as I did. Sadly though Cecil Beaton who chose them for me has passed away about 2 years ago in Surrey. Brymer apparently has a set that are spot on the mark, of course players like that get 1st choice. (Alas, Mr. Brymer has problems with his vision ,and is doing very little playing if any). Yes the tunig is very tricky on the 1010 but I found them quite good if you had a decent one, also with a mouthpiece appropriately made for it as well. The silver on mine is like new and they also never cracked. Eaton did an overhaul on them about 7 years ago and said they excellent ....my favorite recording of a Brit clarinetist is the Brahms quitet by Thurston which I have on an old 78, but the other favorite record of mine is the Szell Marcellus Mozart which I still play on LP. I must admit I have done alot dammange in ensembles with sloppy rythmn though!....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: thomas piercy
Date: 2002-06-19 16:39
My experience has been dissimilar to the above comment that no one in North America wanted to sound like players that used the B&H 1010 instruments. I know and knew many clarinetists and non - clarinet playing musicians that loved and wanted to sound or play like the sounds of Brymer and early De Peyer.
Tom Piercy
thomaspiercy.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: HAT
Date: 2002-06-19 16:56
Ok, I should say that there were few if any orchestral players who wanted to sound like that. I am sure there were others who wanted to emulate the Brymer or DePeyer styles, which were quite wonderful. If there were any major orchestral players who played 1010s, I am unaware of them. Certainly there were amateurs and enthusiasts who played them.
It was said that there was limited popularity of American clarinet artists in England similar to the 'enthusiasm' for Kell (who didn't play 1010s but that's another matter), DePeyer and Brymer here. First of all, there was certainly an appreciation of Benny Goodman, America's most influential clarinetist. And now the Buffet clarinet so beloved here is found to a certain extent in England.
David Hattner, NYC
www.northbranchrecords.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dr. Jacob Mathias
Date: 2002-06-19 18:18
Dear David : thanks for the delightful posting above, and a few comments to add to an already inexhaustable forum. Sadly, the main problems many artists on the Booseys experienced was more or less the whole area of choosing the right one out of batches. So it seems dozens of clarinets may be made, yet, only a few feel and seem right. Trusting in the advice of a seasoned orchestral player, he went ahead and tried numerous models of various design and found a set of clarinets that he liked...beign a gifted hopefully amateur, I unabashedly purchased as quickly and went about keeping up my playing as well as a medical practice. In the 60s I moved to Canada and soon found myself enjoying myself in the company of French models(not female but clarinets!). I saw and really rarely had trouble blending, and this whilst looking over at the wonderful shiny look they had! Well, I didn't do the unthinkable, but maintained and stayed with what would be then referrred then as the Boosey and Squakes models in possesion...the I will make a further admission is that I am also a great lover of the american sound, yet after tring a mouthpiece by Gino Cioffi with a Selmer series 9 (I played and felt so bad )as to go back to what I was used to...Depeyer was really my favorite of the two between him and Brymer I always loved the wamrth and generous phrasings of Depeyer....sadly Boosey went belly-up and with it something of a tradition....My favorite experience in London however was seeing Furtewangler conduct the Philharmonia with another otherworldly player. Mr. Bernard Walton who poured out phrases that would bring tears to the hardened criminal...he would be the highwater mark of the English orchestral creme de la creme and in spite of his set up, had a wonderful warm focus that records caught so well....It seems the concert was Beethoven 6 with Furtwangler and then some Wagner bits with Flagstad (soprano)from Tristan. The beauty of the sonority of the Philharmonia in those days was entrancing, and I should say every bit as expert in artistry as Berlin or Cleveland of those bygone days...I also had a subscription in 58 for the season when in London and saw just about all the Klemperer concerts...I believe one was Bruckner 4 which brought the Albert hall down almost! The 1010s really I guess quite a tricky one to choose, yet for me the set I have played quite well. They remind me of those great days when you could buy a coffee for 5p and the Lb pound was worth something! The new chappie Pay under Msarriner is a crackerjack as well and I loke his stlye...and of course there is always Marcellus who is another god!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jamie Talbot
Date: 2002-06-19 23:50
I,ve recently changed back to 1010s after 11 years on R13s.
British clarinetists changed to small french bore(Charles Aznovour?)
due to a fashionable swing to international conformity,which
is now slowing.
Many players are playing large bore Peter Eaton clarinets with
great results.
On the subject of tuning,1010s are as in tune as any clarinet(or maybe I wasn,t paying attention when the clarinet was perfected!)
For a great example of the 1010 being played musically and in tune,
try the Jack Brymer recordings of the Mozart Concerto(w Thomas Beecham or
Colin Davies)and the quintet with the Allegri sting quartet.
I rest my case!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2002-06-20 08:15
Dr. J.M. Lovely memoirs of Philharmonia concerts! I have only ever heard the recordings of them with Walton (and Thurston in the early 50s), not live, but absolutely share your feeling that Bernard Walton was the creme de la creme. But he did not play 1010s or any other Boosey & Hawkes instrument.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jez
Date: 2002-06-20 11:56
HAT writes "If there were any major orchestral players who played 1010s I am unaware of them"
In the 1950's/60's there were few people playing anything else in British orchestras. This trend was only curbed by the aggressive marketing policy of Buffet UK.
The intonation question is interesting. I don't believe the 1010 is any more in or out of tune than the Buffet, merely different. Is there any clarinet which is absolutely in tune with itself or anyone else?
Dr. Jacob M. writes "sadly Boosey went belly-up" Who is it that now owns Buffet?
Could the current trend towards 1010 style instruments (Peter Eaton, Rossi) lead B&H to go back to production of their most famous instrument?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: HAT
Date: 2002-06-20 12:28
Obviously, I was referring to the United States when I said that no Orchestral players used 1010s.
Aggressive marketing by Buffet? Please. There has been aggressive marketing by every other clarinet manufacturer here in the US and Buffet remains dominant. Why would aggressive marketing defeat the 1010 in England? Are English clarinet players less stubborn about equipment than Americans? I doubt it.
The Buffet small bore clarinet is simply easier to control intonation wise at wide dynamic levels than a large bore instrument like the 1010 or the Selmer Series 9. Moennig-adjusted Buffets were used by most US principals in the 50s and 60s with great success.
Of course there were players who played the 1010 remarkably well in tune. But they worked incredibly hard at it. But some of the best 1010 players had problems you can hear on their recordings (as did some Buffet players). The standard of intonation in British woodwind sections (and some American ones) has risen dramatically since 40-50 years ago. Players need equipment that is going to help them out. It seems that the newer, hand made Eatons and Howarths have addressed this problem.
Saw the name Tony Pay mentioned here. One of the first English players to switch to the Buffet.
David Hattner, NYC
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2002-06-20 12:43
Following on the Jez/HAT exchange, hmmmm this is interesting.
Buffets were making their first big strides against the 1010 around the time of my late teens, so I tried R13s head to head against the 1010 before selecting the 1010. I doubt very much I had the right mouthpiece to make the best of the R13, but this is what the impression of the difference was to me. R13 very easy to control and make speak compared to 1010. In particular R13 had more centre to the tone whereas 1010 could sound flabby and harsh when pushed to f or ff. R13 seemed gutless and lacking in fluidity. It was flat in the extreme register.
To me at that time, the 1010 seemed flawed but made better music. I was convinced in my choice at that time by going to an orchestral performance by the London Philharmonic and listening to Robert Hill (still its principal) and the sheer grace of the playing on 1010s convinced me.
Later I became unconvinced and switched to Martels, which, of course, are not available so of no assistance to those looking for a new clarinet.
Anthony Pay has never been a mainstream player of the British School, though he is a fabulous player. Ditto Alan Hacker. Both players have sought the type of effect that takes them far away from Brymer/Hill/Bradbury etc. etc.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Todd W.
Date: 2002-06-20 20:05
Jamie Talbot --
"small French bore (Charles Aznavour?)"
Good one!
Todd W.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jez
Date: 2002-06-20 21:38
I don't have any axe to grind (do you use that expression?) I've played 1010s, Selmers, Buffets, & Yamahas. (My current choice)
The marketing policy of Buffet UK, led by Alan Lucas, was phenomenal. They must have given away hundreds of instruments on the basis that pupils will emulate their teachers.
I've nothing but the greatest respect for Buffet clarinets, but I can't help feeling that the fact that the high notes are so consistently flat leads people to play them in a way detrimental to their sound quality.
Possibly the best clarinet I've ever owned was a Buffet RC Prestige Bflat, but it was so dissimilar from the A that I couldn't cope with changing.
jez
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dr. Jacob Mathias
Date: 2002-06-24 13:22
Dear Freinds: Most wonderful thanks for the great post. Just went to UK for a week and just got back. The allure of buying any new product is always there, and much of the problem of our world seems just as much the manufacture of public opinion. I retained my instruments mainly becuase I was personally comfortable with them, and Yes many players in England still own 1010s, in spite of the fact some were dreadfully out of tune and required work. Somewhere in these threads I noted a Bass Clarinet player who got their new Buffet overhauled , and bored out so to speak, due to some disatrous intonation faults. I have never played the Bass but could imagine how expensive this could be...sadly Boosey is like any company and the discontinuance of the English clarinet division at Boosey and Hawkes was a marketing descision. I saw Bernard Walton play and do believe that he was on Imperials for a good deal of his career. It was a fascinating mix of colours that I remember in his tone, and this led many americans to his door. He was a great kind gentlemen from ewhat I had heard as well, and his premature death in the 80s was a great loss. I also saw the Becheem RPO a good deal between 52 and 57 and can tell you it was a crack ensemble which played with lightening precision! Some of the records though don't give this impression, but try the Rimsky Scheherezade on EMI with Beecham and you jaw will drop! I saw Beecham alot and knew that he had a special effect on any group, much like a Szell or Berstein. To really appreciate the Boosey tone best any of the records of the 50s in England from the era of the 33 can tell you just how homogenous the tone derived from this larger bore could be. I also remember seeing Beecham and Brymer do the Mozart Concerto and that was something to hear...alas time to hit the garden...Thanks Dr. JM> "Seeing is believing"}} but in music "Feeling with our brain and hearing with our heart" is a closer equivelant.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: thomas piercy
Date: 2002-06-24 23:05
May I also add that Luis Rossi has done a great job addressing the intonation issues on his large bore instruments based on the B&H 1010.
Tom Piercy
thomaspiercy.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Eduard van der Graf
Date: 2002-06-25 12:43
Apparently from what professional colleagues have told me these are very fine clarinets and deserve a try...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
