 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Grover
Date: 1999-02-11 02:29
I have an old wooden Buffet mouthpiece that I had from a 1913 vintage Buffet clarinet. It's in pretty nice shape and for kicks, I recently tried it out with my R13. I was very impressed with it's performance. I thought it blew easier and had a nicer tone than my Charles Bay, my Hite, my V13, M13, 2RV Vandorens, my Brilhart Tonalin mouthpieces, etc. I haven't decided whether I like it better than my B45's or not. (I am such a mouthpiece hog!)
Does anyone else have any experience with wooden mouthpieces or comments? I would love to hear them.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark P.
Date: 1999-02-11 02:53
I've got one that came with an Albert system A clarinet, I haven't tried it out yet because the cork is gone. One of many things I haven't gotten too... LOL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Daniel
Date: 1999-02-11 22:52
the main problems with wooden mouthpieces is that, being wood, they have the same tendancies to cracking. And due to humidity, the insides will change sometimes making the mouthpiece unplayable at times when others it plays fantastic.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 1999-02-12 03:09
I have a Pomarico(Italy) mouthpiece made of grenadilla.It seems to emit round tone but lose crispness.Greg Smith also makes wooden mouthpieces for your choice.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Nancy Buckman
Date: 1999-02-12 19:12
I am currently in the process of selecting two wooden mouthpieces from Gregory Smith. He sent me four to choose from and they all play well. Each of them does have its own personality though. This is the first time I have ventured into the area of wooden mouthpieces. The main reason I wanted them was to enhance performance on my new rosewood clarinets. I especially like the response they deliver. They make my high notes sound wonderful and,in general, are more free-blowing with these new instruments. I also notice a difference in playing with a thin clear patch on them, as opposed to the hard rubber Hites with patches I used with my R13s. They have patches on them also, but the patch seems more noticable physically on the Smith mouthpieces. It doesn't seem to affect their tonal qualities though. Maybe a thinner patch might work better. I like these new mouthpieces enough that I think I am going to ask to have Mr. Smith send me one of his hard rubber ones for my e-flat clarinet, too, as he doesn't have wooden ones for e-flat clarinet. These wooden mouthpieces definitely seem to have characteristics all their own. I really do like them and am not sorry I am choosing them over the hard rubber ones that are somewhat less expensive. If want to know how they seem to be working out over time, just e-mail me and I'll be glad to share information.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Daniel
Date: 1999-02-12 21:48
You can't go wrong with Greg's Eb mouthpieces. Though i'd still suggest getting two or three on trial. As with every otner type of mouthpiece, each one is a little different. He sent me three mouthpieces and two of them seemed to play fine and about the same, but the third was a winner after playing only one scale.
Which kind of wood are you trying out. He has several different choices.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ray Swing
Date: 1999-02-14 18:57
Since we all know that as has been repeatedly stated on this Board, materials make no difference in the tonal or timbre of the instrument. That is other than shape change as pointed out by Daniel, as when physical distortion sets in. I myself always use my 50/60 year old Crystal MP. It is completely uneffected with PTH changes. Also, since I am very careful and don't drop it on any concrete, it has never chipped, cracked or shown any type of wear.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Wusow
Date: 1999-02-15 08:29
I must disagree with Ray. If you read any books pertaining to acoustics (of the clarinet, or any other instrument in which sections can be made of various materials...) you will find that wood, hard rubber, plastic, etc.. all vibrate differently. The vibrations are also affected by temperature, humidity, altitude... a number of factors. i would suggest reading "Clarinet Acoustics" by O. Lee Gibson or "The Art of Clarinetistry" by Stubbins. Materials DO make a huge difference!
It may be possible for those people using wooden mouthpieces to seal the inside with a sealent such as Thompson's. This product is absorbed into the wood, therefore it does not weight the wood down, nor does it place a coating on the surface. These products are often used to seal the bores of clarinets and oboes to help keep moisture from being absorbed into the wood--thus preventing (or helping to prevent) cracking. Because the sealent is absorbed into the wood, it must be repeated when moisture begins to collect heavily in the treated area(s). Perhaps Greg Smith treats his mouth pieces with such a product.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 1999-02-15 11:54
Paul Wusow wrote:
-------------------------------
I must disagree with Ray. If you read any books pertaining to acoustics (of the clarinet, or any other instrument in which sections can be made of various materials...) you will find that wood, hard rubber, plastic, etc.. all vibrate differently. The vibrations are also affected by temperature, humidity, altitude... a number of factors
---
Paul,
The Benade book on acoustics, arguably the premier book on woodwind acoustics, refutes that statement, along with a number of experiments that have been done (including a concrete flute and organ pipes surrounded by water). In these cases no audible differences were perceived. Measuring the wall vibration of a clarinet shows it to be less than 10^-6 (one millionth) the amplitude of the air column vibration, adding a negligible amount of audible energy.
There are a number of theories on interroughness and such affecting the air column vibrations. There have also been some songle blind studies done with the R-13 greenline where people have not been able to distinguish between the greenline and regular grenadilla wood. The greenline's density and stiffness orientstion is totally different than regular grenadilla wood and, according to Gibson, should have sounded different. Benade said they should have sounded the same. Benade's won that round so far.
I have not heard the Howarth PVC clarinet yet, but that should be interesting, too.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Wusow
Date: 1999-02-15 16:21
If thie is the case (materials make no difference) then why are so many clarinets made from grenadilla wood? A quote from "Clarinet Acoustics"--which, by the way, does cite the Bonade book--"The physicist's definition of density (mass per unit of volume) IS important in a woodwind, for it and the quality of an instrument's inner surfaces determine not only timbre but also energy losses in the walls." Gibson does mention "blindfold" tests, and how through the opinion of the listener, these factors are less critical. But you cannot argue with science... materials do matter, or else all clarinets would be made from alternative materials. Traditionally thay have been constructed from grenadilla. Gibson also states that wood of a certain should be used in a clarinet of a certain pitch.
So I am not disagreeing, Mark, I am only trying to clarify. What sounds good to the listener is of primary importance... but materials do make differences.... Think about gold flutes vs silver vs wood... box wood clarinets sound lighter and more neutral... etc..
Thanks for the input, as all of these facts are interesting and important... especially when purchasing an instrument...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 1999-02-15 18:21
Paul Wusow wrote:
-------------------------------
If thie is the case (materials make no difference) then why are so many clarinets made from grenadilla wood?
---
A recent tradition. Clarinets, of course, have been made from many materials over the years: boxwood and metal for many years, along with rosewood, cocabolo, kingwood and other woods. Grenadilla is relatively impervious to moisture, easily turned, and is strong for mounting posts and springs.
-----
A quote from "Clarinet Acoustics"--which, by the way, does cite the Bonade book--"The physicist's definition of density (mass per unit of volume) IS important in a woodwind, for it and the quality of an instrument's inner surfaces determine not only timbre but also energy losses in the walls."
---
Benade - easily confused with Bonade - disputes the "density" argument thoroghly in his book. Gibson and Benade both agree on the quality of the inner surface, however.
----
Gibson does mention "blindfold" tests, and how through the opinion of the listener, these factors are less critical. But you cannot argue with science... materials do matter, or else all clarinets would be made from alternative materials.
---
That's not even a good straw man. They _are_ made today from materials other than grenadilla. Single blind tests have shown no repeatable difference in sound for equivalently constructed instruments (e.g. - R-13 and R-13 Greenline, RC Prestige and RC Prestige Greenline, Howarth Grenadilla and Howarth PVC).
Now, as to why people buy wood clarinets: If you see a beautiful wood clarinet next to a plastic one, both for the same price - which would you choose? I personally enjoy the aesthetics of wood.
-----
Traditionally thay have been constructed from grenadilla. Gibson also states that wood of a certain should be used in a clarinet of a certain pitch.
----
I don't think Gibson's argument would stand any test, and it has been empirically shown that this is wrong for equivalently contrstucted clarinets.
----
So I am not disagreeing, Mark, I am only trying to clarify. What sounds good to the listener is of primary importance... but materials do make differences.... Think about gold flutes vs silver vs wood... box wood clarinets sound lighter and more neutral... etc..
Thanks for the input, as all of these facts are interesting and important... especially when purchasing an instrument...
-----
I haven't come across a boxwood Boehm system clarinet yet (they may exist - but I haven't seen one) so I can't make that comparison. I have heard 3 and 5 key boxwood, but that can't be compared with a modern clarinet. The flute people have been having this same argument, too, and many were taken aback a couple of years ago at a conference when during a live demonstration none could hear any discernable difference between a silver, gold, or concrete flute. Until I see empirical evidence to the contrary, I will not believe that materials (in the case of a clarinet) make any difference - even though I _feel_ they should.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dee
Date: 1999-02-16 00:41
Mark Charette wrote:
-------------------------------
... Until I see empirical evidence to the contrary, I will not believe that materials (in the case of a clarinet) make any difference - even though I _feel_ they should.
-------------------------------
And you can bet any marketing expert worth his paycheck knows that the way to make money is to sell to the customer's feelings rather than worry about facts!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hiroshi
Date: 1999-02-16 01:00
As to material effects,there have been no objective experiment conducted in the past.
At least these observation should be conducted:
1)Measure surface roughness.It makes votices at the wall.
2)Photograph how vortices are produced an move.
3)Measure the mouthpieces own vibration to know how their
harmonics are resonated with the scales.
4)Measure the sounds waves shape,what shape they have.
Generally speaking if a wave consists of many small harmnonics besides primary tone,it is a darker tone.
I don't know why mouthpiece manufacturers do not conduct these "simple2 experiments.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 1999-02-16 01:10
Hiroshi wrote:
-------------------------------
As to material effects,there have been no objective experiment conducted in the past.
--
Hiroshi, you need to start looking. A. H. Benade did _many_ experiments. Don Casodonte wrote a thesis on reed/mouthpiece coupling, along with vortex shedding and tip vortices, especially as related to initial reed vibration. There's _plenty_ out there if you'll just look around.
BTW - it is non-trivial to measure laminar/turbulent flow boundary conditions and vertex generation in a mouthpiece model, and Casadonte found that scaling doesn't work as well as anticipated. Reed vibration was much more complex that imagined, especially coupled with non-uniform pressure gradients (the holes on a clarinet are not uniformly distributed from left-right, causing a gradient at the mouthpiece). Casadonte finally did create an FE model which could predict reed modes rather well, at least as compared with movies taken from inside the mouthpiece as a clarinet was played.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rex Tomkinson
Date: 1999-08-22 10:27
As to whether production materials effect sound and so on.....Whilst I have to admit that the foregoing arguments are interesting and absorbing, we must remind ourselves that, although we might wish to gain knowledge in these areas, there is no end to this line of thought. The experts will be arguing the toss long after we are gone!
We need every advantage or 'edge' we can muster in the lifelong search for technical excellence. After 40 years of playing I remain convinced that if we BELIEVE that a particular material enhances our sound quality it probably will. Belief is half the battle.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rex Tomkinson
Date: 1999-08-22 10:27
As to whether production materials effect sound and so on.....Whilst I have to admit that the foregoing arguments are interesting and absorbing, we must remind ourselves that, although we might wish to gain knowledge in these areas, there is no end to this line of thought. The experts will be arguing the toss long after we are gone!
We need every advantage or 'edge' we can muster in the lifelong search for technical excellence. After 40 years of playing I remain convinced that if we BELIEVE that a particular material enhances our sound quality it probably will. Belief is half the battle.
Mark P. wrote:
-------------------------------
I've got one that came with an Albert system A clarinet, I haven't tried it out yet because the cork is gone. One of many things I haven't gotten too... LOL
Mark P. wrote:
-------------------------------
I've got one that came with an Albert system A clarinet, I haven't tried it out yet because the cork is gone. One of many things I haven't gotten too... LOL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
