 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Mel
Date: 2002-06-26 00:09
I'm just looking for an opinion on pricing here being i'm not that knowledgable in that field. Would a 1930 Evette and Schaeffer that is competely overhauled right before shipping for $300 be a good price to pay for a clarinet that will be used almost everyday? I ask mostly because of the particularly old age of the instrument. There is also an Evette (non-master model) for $275, from 1972, but I understand that the E&S is designed to be a better model. I understand there would probably be differences in keywork, etc, but I'm just asking if the price is right. Thank you for your ever valuable opinion.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jbutler
Date: 2002-06-26 00:23
Mel,
You are really wrestling with this clarinet issue. I will give a direct <b>"No".</b> Fisrt of all, the older Evette will have German silver keys (cupronickel) which are soft and do wear a lot faster than drop forged nickel. I've seen some of these older clarinets that have rings soooo thin that I honestly thought if I buffed them too much I would wear a hole in part of the ring. Secondly, you can get a used E-11 for not much more money and <i>probably</i> will have a clarinet that will be better in tune with the section. Do what you want, but you asked, so there's my advice.
jbutler
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Meredith
Date: 2002-06-26 03:08
Wouldn't a 1930's instrument be higher pitched? If so, wouldn't that make playing it with an ensemble nearly impossible. I could be wrong here but I know brass instruments were repitched in the 1960s, instruments were adjusted by extending valve and tuning slided but these instrument are still really hard to play with modern instruments.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob
Date: 2002-06-26 14:27
Can't imagine why you would buy an old instrument like that to play everyday. Agree with jbutler's suggestion.
Question to jbutler: You seem to believe that "drop forged nickel" is different from "nickel silver". I believe that "drop forged nickel" is drop forged nickel silver alloy. I would be surprised if nickel or nickel alloy was used for keywork by any processing method. Maybe the keys that were so thin were the result of the absence of any nickel plating or they might have been some other alloy such as zinc.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jbutler
Date: 2002-06-26 15:07
Bob,
German silver is nickel and copper. Copper is a softer metal than nickel. Clarinets today use nickel. I'm not going to guess what the process of "drop forging" is, because I really don't know, but I assume it has to do with the anealing process to make the metal harder. I do know from working with older instruments that German silver keys are soft. Some are softer than others depending on the amount of copper use in the alloy. I overhauled an older Selmer a couple of years ago that the lower joint rings were barely there on the outer edge. I think that plating these older keys does help. I can tell you that the instruments made today have stronger keys. Also, many improvements have been made with the use of stainless steel rods (arbors, steels, whatever you call them in your area), and stainless pivots. I do, however, prefer the blue steel needle spring action to the stainless steel needle spring action. I'll put up with the sharp points impaling my hands once in a while to put up with them.
jbutler
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 2002-06-26 16:17
I have a clarinet with "nickel silver" ("German silver") keys and they are not particularly soft.
As far as pitch goes, instruments of the 1930 time period were usually (but not always) marked as to whether they were High Pitch (HP) or Low Pitch (LP).
Although brass bands in some parts of the world did not make the switch to Low Pitch (i.e. modern pitch) until quite late, the changeover, in general, was accomplished by the end of the 1930s.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob
Date: 2002-06-26 17:38
jb..thanks for the reply but if I were you I wouldn't bet any money on the use of "nickel" for clarinet keys until I checked it out further. Some advertising blurbs talk about nickel keys but what they are referring to is nickel plating on top of german silver or the german silver itself....which as you so correctly point out is a nickel-copper alloy.... or alloy family since there are several different compositions of the alloy. Drop forging is a shaping process. Clarinet keys made from German silver alloys are typically shaped by either drop forging or machining. Some clarinet keys have been made from zinc based alloys which are "shaped" by the die casting process and have been claimed by some as inferior.
As new alloys and processes are tried from time to time I would be interested in hearing of any you come across.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jbutler
Date: 2002-06-26 23:39
Dee,
The softness of the keys depends upon the alloy mixture. I'm currently working on an old clarinet that has very soft keys. One can bend them quite easily with finger pressure alone. I don't think it is going to stay in adjustment. I've talked with the customer and explained the situation...oh, well. By contrast, I also am working on an older Evette and Schaeffer with German silver keys, but they seem much sturdier in construction.
jbutler
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2002-06-27 00:07
We have had "German" [I prefer nickel] silver discussions here and on Early Clarinet, previously. In a 1930's Chem-Phy Hand book there were at least 10 formulations of this ternary alloy of copper, nickel and ZINC , NO Silver!!. My 1950s HB shows only 2, 65 Cu, 18 Ni, 17 Zn and 55, 18, 27. I would expect the latter to be the softer [and cheaper]. I have no idea what compositions the French makers may use. I would expect solid nickel to be nearly as hard as a "soft" steel [like good old 1040!]. As far as I know, any of these metals will accept [bright] nickel, silver or chromium plating. As J B has said, we find keys of differing hardness often, too much zinc [pot metal] makes keys brittle, easily breakable. Nuff for now. Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2002-06-27 13:01
Mel,
I have an early E&S that I date to the early-mid thirties based on its keywork (serial number has an A prefix). I also have an Evette from 1972 that I reconditioned for my daughter to use as her (middle) "school" horn. Her "home" horn was a Buffet E11.
The keys on my E&S don't strike me as soft and are not excessively worn and the instrument plays pretty well in tune. I think it is a fairly decent example of an early 20th century small-bore clarinet. Considering the cost of an early E&S "in the rough" these days (usually $100 - $125) on eBay, the cost of the materials that go into an overhaul (pads, cork, oil, key polish, glue, etc.), maybe a new case (?), I think $300 for one that has been newly overhauled is reasonable -- not a steal, perhaps not generous, but reasonable. It's what I would want for mine. It's alot less than what local music stores would ask for one in St. Louis. I don't think it is the clarinet for you, however. While generalizations from a sample of one are fraught with danger, let me say that I consider my old E&S about comparable to a decent modern wooden student model. I think it would be best suited to a beginner looking for a fairly inexpensive first instrument, particularly if they (or their parents or their teacher) insisted on wood. If you are a decent player and have even a semi-decent (plastic?) instrument now, I think you should be looking for more of a step up before you spend your money.
I really like my daughter's Evette. I think it actually has better keywork than the E11. (E.g., it has pin-and-socket linkage for the left hand cluster keys like most (all?) higher-end clarinets rather than the cheaper overlapping lever setup used on the E11 and other student models.) If the overhaul has restored it to "like-new" condition, I think $275 is a fair price -- actually I would want a little more for mine, I think. However, again, I don't think it would be enough of a step-up for you.
It sounds to me like you are trying to find a high-end horn at bargain basement prices. There's nothing wrong with that but, in my experience, if you don't want to spend money, you have to spend alot of time searching and you have to be patient and you need some good luck. And you have to do alot of homework up front so that you can recognize a great deal when it comes along (you have to know which models to look for, how to evaluate condition, age, etc.) -- because if you can't act on it when you first see it, it will likely be gone before you come back.
If you only have $300 or so to spend, my advice would be to put it in the bank and add some more to it. A post 1962 Evette & Schaeffer, particularly numbered above K16000, in fully overhauled condition (Master Model would be a plus) might be a decent step-up. IMO, any price under $450 would be a good one (for a fully reconditioned instrument) but realize that you will *not* be getting an R13 reject. In the under-$600 price range, I think the best buys are older Leblanc Professionals, particularly the Symphonie III and above or the L7 (or subsequent members of that series). You might also find a Selmer Series 10 in some flavor in this range.
When "equipment lust" hits, it is difficult (impossible) to control. There is, however, an old cliche that I have quoted before, "Marry in haste, repent at leisure." IMHO, the same principle applies to buying a clarinet.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mel
Date: 2002-06-27 15:56
Jack,
What is the difference between Evette & Schaeffer and an Evette & Schaeffer Master Model? I was under the understanding that they were the same thing.
Mel
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2002-06-27 22:45
I have a copy of an older, undated Buffet brochure, courtesy of another follower of this board. It is clearly more recent than the one from 1941 which has been reproduced on this site. It came with a 1968 price list but it may predate the price list by at least around 15 years because it refers to the R13 as the "Master Bore Buffet" and "Master Bore" was the designation Buffet gave their bore before they introduced Robert Caree's polycylindrical design. According to that brochure, after a discussion of the Evette & Schaeffer Model, designated as an E-13, (probably according to the Carl Fischer model number scheme if I am right about the brochure's date):
"Instruments that embody considerable hand-craftmanship, as do all the Buffet products, will vary slightly from instrument to instrument. Those Evette & Schaeffer Clarinets that surpass the suberb quality characteristic of all Evette & Schaeffer instruments, are set aside to comprise the ME-13 Master Model Evette & Schaeffer Clarinets."
I have some trouble with dating the brochure because, on the one hand, it refers to the R13 as being a Master Bore instrument and says nothing anywhere about a polycylindrical bore. On the other hand, it clearly indicates that not all Evette & Schaeffers are Master Models.
Here is the problem. After digging into what history I could find regarding these instruments off-and-on for the last 3 or 4 years and following them, particularly on eBay:
a. I have never seen an Evette & Schaeffer Master Model with a serial number below around K4500. They may exist but I've never come across one among the 15 or 20 models in this serial number range that I've seen on eBay. Perhaps they were too scarce for one to have surfaced. I don't know.
b. I have never seen an Evette & Schaeffer with a serial number between around K4500 and around K10000 that was NOT a Master Model. I have probably seen around 30 in this range and all are Master Models. Again, non Master Model E&S clarinets may exist in this range but, if most E&S were not master models during this time period (around 1952 -- 1961), what are the odds that I wouldn't have come across at least one in 30.
c. After around K10000 (or perhaps K11000), most E&S that I have seen were not Master Models but there have been several that were.
The use of the term Master Bore suggests that the brochure predates 1955 but the description of the E&S Master Model as a particularly good E&S (along with the price list) suggests that it dates from later than 1960. So there is an anomaly in my theory. Did Buffet continue to refer to its polycylindrical bore as a Master Bore for awhile? Are there some Master Models in the K0001 - K4500 range that have not yet surfaced? It's a mystery.
In any case, however, according to Buffet, at the time of the brochure I have, an E&S Master Models was a particularly good E&S.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2002-06-28 04:58
Hi Vytas,
Thank you for pointing that one out. I haven't really tried to find the exact cutoff when, it appears, the E&S all become Master Models but I have suspected for quite awhile that it's somewhere in the K4000's and K4144 may be the lowest numbered MM I've seen. As I recall, the highest non-MM I've seen (below K10000) is in the K3000 series. It would be interesting (to me, anyway) to find something between K4144 and K4500 that was not a Master Model.
Keeping Mark Charette's caveat about the Boosey numbering charts in mind, the lowest K-series E&S they have listed now is K4000 (1952). This is somewhat lower than what they had before they expanded their info (around K4475, I think).
With regard to your instrument, mw forwarded me a link to an eBay auction last year for K512. There was a bill of sale with the instrument dated early 1943 that appeared to belong to the instrument. This was quite a bit earlier than I thought the K-series began and, if it is accurate, the 1930's is a distinct possibility for yours. I know of an A-series and a B-series that predate the K's. I dated my Axxxx instrument with reference to a pair of (Fischer) "R13's" whose serial numbers place them in 1934. Their keywork is similar, if not identical, in design to my E&S. One particularly obvious feature is that the throat A keys do not have an adjusting screw. I'd be curious to know if yours does. It's always possible that mine is older than I think.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vytas
Date: 2002-06-28 15:11
jnk,....
The throat Ab key and the side of the throat A key on my E&S # K179 are mounted on the same post. The throat A keys do not have an adjusting screw. Single, pivot design for the left-hand E/B and F#/C# keys. The C#/G# key for the left little finger has a flat spring under it, but the screw does not come through to the upper surface. There is no LP mark on the instrument. This clarinet does have undercut tone holes and it was done at the factory and not by a repairperson. I've never seen E&S with "soft" German silver keys. BTW, keys have NO wear whatsoever. This instrument plays pretty well in tune, definitely better in tune than 1972 Evette I compared it to......V
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: linda
Date: 2002-06-29 03:22
Just stumbled in here trying to get an idea of value on an old clarinet. You all sound pretty knowledgable. It's a Harry Pedler, all silver in color,not sure what its made of, but very old. It has a 4 digit serial number starting with a 3. I'm wondering of it's age and possible value. Any suggestions would be appreciated. thanks
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2002-06-30 23:38
Vytas (if you're still monitoring this thread),
On my old E&S, the G# and A keys also share a post and the G# key (which I misidentified as the A key in my previous message) has no adjusting screw. However, on mine, the C#/G# key uses a needle spring on the post and the left-hand cluster on the lower joint has two pivots rather than one. In particular, this last item suggests that your instrument may actually be older than mine. I don't know what to make of it.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vytas
Date: 2002-07-01 14:46
jnk,....
I've checked serial number, but the list did not returned dates for K179. I entered serial number with a space between K and the number ("K 179"). List returned: "The manufacturing year is 1930"....V
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2002-07-01 17:21
Vytas,
I would never have thought to try that! However, I tried entering K 179 when I got to the list and it wouldn't return anything at all. Then I tried the sequence k179 (returned year 0) followed by k 179 (returned 1930). So I experimented similarly with k570, k 570 (returned 0 then 1930), k5000 then k 5000 (returned 1953 then 1930) and k50000 then k 50000 (returned 1979 then 1930). I'm afraid it's probably just a glitch in their program rather than a date of manufacture.
I have two old Evette "Sponsored by Buffet" models. They have the shared post for the G# and A keys and a single pivot on the lower joint but they have the post needle spring on the C#/G# key and an adjusting screw on the A key! There is a 1941 Buffet brochure somewhere on the site -- it was posted to the bulletin board awhile ago and then, I think, Mark found a place for it. One of its pages shows a picture of an Evette & Schaeffer. In that picture, the G# and A throat keys share a post and there is clearly only one pivot for the left-hand cluster keys. Unfortunately, the resolution isn't good enough (for me, anyway) to tell if there is an adjusting screw on the G# key.
Right now, I think the evidence supports at least two interpretations: (1) (Remembering that for some unexplained reason, the numbering lookup begins with K4000 (1952) at the Boosey site.) Buffet used a K prefix on some very early E&S instruments (including yours) then switched to an A prefix and then a B prefix before returning to the K prefix, perhaps around 1952, or (2) Buffet used an A prefix and then a B prefix, adopting the K prefix in the late 1930's or early 40's. The relatively small number of these instruments made prior to 1952 could be explained by WWII and Buffet's financial difficulties immediately afterward. This would date your instrument most likely in the late 30's -- early 40's.
My interpretation:
1. Shared post by the G# and A throat key -- tells us nothing because it is the same on both the A and early K instruments. (I don't remember what the B instruments had.)
2. No adjustment screw on the G# key -- again is the same on both the A and early K instruments. The presence of an adjustment screw, in combination with the single pivot on the lower joint in the early Evettes is, however, puzzling to me.
3. Flat spring on your C#/G# key vs. needle spring on my "A" model -- The flat spring might seem simpler, older technology. However, the needle arrangement existed long before 1930. I have a Boehm C clarinet manufactured by Laube which (if my memory is correct) Langwell's says ended production in 1898. The instrument has a wrap-around register key, a donut ring on the middle finger, upper joint tone hole ..... and a needle spring on the C#/G# key. Considering that Buffet used the flat spring arrangement on R13's in the 50's and 60's (indeed this is one of the identifying marks that some dealers used for identifying "golden age" R13's), it seems possible that Buffet may have used the needle spring initially, adopted the flat spring in the late 30's or the 40's and used it through the 60's until it returned to the needle spring. If so, this particular difference between our clarinets could suggest that mine was the earlier.. ..... or perhaps not.
4. Single vs. double pivot on the lower joint left-hand cluster. Suggests that your clarinet is the older of the two -- though the existence of a single pivot on the 1941 model might indicate that Buffet switched back and forth on this, perhaps depending on what they had available during the war.
So ..... I guess you pay your money and take your choice. Thank you again for sharing your information with me. For some reason, I just find this particular model interesting.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vytas
Date: 2002-07-02 02:59
jnk,
IMO K-series instruments represented particular and popular Buffet design/model and do seem to have been made at the same time with prefixes other than "K".
BTW my instrument DOES NOT have an adjusting screw on the G# key.....V
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2002-07-02 15:23
Hi,
As an owner of two Master Models (one is K5093 and the other is 54568) with some of your descritpions, it would seem that I have two entirely different production models. This fact I knew but let me tell you about some of the items that are unique about each. For ease of discussion, let's call one K and the other 5 digit.
K: Shared A/G# post; needle spring C#/G#; G# adjusting screw.
5 digit: Separate A/G# posts; flat spring; G# adjusting screw.
However, there are two distinct differences in the two clarinets that I have not seen noted. On the 5 digit, the upper key guide on the top two right side trill keys is round and rather substantial looking (like on an R13): on the K, the guide is flat and looks a bit flimsy. The other difference is found under the four right side little finger keys (Eb, B, C, and C#). On the 5 digit, there is an area routed out below the spatula just like on R13s and on the K model, there is no such routed area.
As far as how the clarinets are different playing-wise, the tuning is pretty much within about 5 cents on all but just a very few notes on each instrument. The 5 digit has a somewhat bigger sound.
Thought you might find this interesting although I play my Series 9 more often as it is almost right on for intonation in all registers and it has a big sound as well.
Regards,
HRL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2002-07-02 17:27
Oh, one other thing on the clarinets that I discuss in the email above. On the 5 digit model, the posts in the lower section have additional screwplates where the post meets the body of the instrument. On the K model, the post is attached to the body with no additional screw plate. All in all, the K model looks like a more cheaply built instrument (but considering I paid only $15 for it at a music store going-out-of-business sale, how can I complain).
HRL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vytas
Date: 2002-07-05 15:54
IMO, its an older instrument. Could you post the link of that listing? I would like to take a look at keywork.
BTW, stay away from: "Evette, Sponsored By Buffet, Paris France".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vytas
Date: 2002-07-05 15:57
Sorry, the last comment belongs to the another thread
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vytas
Date: 2002-07-07 19:04
<img src="file:///C:/Web%20Site%20Documents/Laughing%20Smilie.gif">
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
