 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: ThomasMcDrum
Date: 2011-06-30 15:55
So it turns out I was reading the serial number wrong on the instrument. The 1 is actually an I, and the numbers are obviously reversed. It's 810I.
As a beginner, I am wondering if I should just sell this thing and buy something cheaper. At the same time, this will more than likely be my only chance to own something this cool. Does anyone out there know what a value would be on something like this? If it's high, I will probably sell it. If not, I'll probably keep it.
Pictures.. http://s581.photobucket.com/albums/ss260/ThomasMcDrum/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2011-06-30 16:19
I'd be hard pressed to spend a lot of money on a clarinet that is that old, before many of the acoustical enhancements of today. I say keep it, fix it up, and let be a conversation starter.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bmcgar ★2017
Date: 2011-06-30 17:31
You'll find a picture of this clarinet in the Shackleton catalog. It's a collector's item, for sure, though it looks in fairly rough shape.
My teacher during my high school years still plays his 1913 version of this--full boehm, doughnut ring, articulated G#, one-piece body--and though I had an awful time playing it because of the key placement, I found it to still have a beautiful sound (superior to many "modern" "pro" instruments I've played.
Barring bore changes and wear-and-tear that might make this horn unrefurbishable (!), I wouldn't sneeze at a clarinet like this because it supposedly lacks some of the so-called modern "acoustical improvements" (whatever they are).
B.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ThomasMcDrum
Date: 2011-06-30 17:42
The condition isn't really all that bad. It could certainly go for a complete overhaul and restoration, but the guys at the shop I just took it to said it was in pretty good condition, and they just replaced a couple pads to make it playable. Not that I can tell. I can hardly get it to make a sound. I have, a few times, made it sound quite nice, but since I have never taken a lesson, and don't really know how to blow into the thing, it's pretty rough. :o)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2011-06-30 20:04
At the moment, I'm playing on an 1889 Buffet Bb and a 1906 Buffet A:-)
This information is probably not much use to you personally in your situation; but it serves to underline that the notion of 'acoustical improvement' is not an absolute.
For example, some of us choose to play classical music on classical clarinets, or copies of them, accepting and correcting the acoustical deficiencies, because we find that those instruments have qualities that modern instruments don't have.
It's a question of where you want your problems -- and of course, what you think the 'problems' are.
I suppose that your instrument in a playable condition is 'worth' around $1K -- depending on who wants it, of course. But if you're not an expert player, you might be better off with a more conventional beginning instrument, because the 'problems' of playing such instruments are different from the problems of playing more modern instruments.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2011-06-30 21:48
I have a regular (two piece bodied) Buffet Bb from about the same year and I really enjoyed it's tone and the pitch was good, too. I stopped using it, however, because I got tired of adjusting the soft keys every weekend.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2011-06-30 21:58
skygardner wrote:
>> I stopped using it, however, because I got tired of adjusting the soft keys every weekend.>>
As I said, different people have different priorities. Some are musical priorities, some not.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2011-06-30 23:15
The "musical priorities" had become a problem because the instrument was mechanically unreliable.
I consulted technicians about it and the only option was to replace most of the keys and posts- something I could not afford at the time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
