 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2018-02-28 00:06
To compile my Clarinet Mouthpiece Refacers list, I searched and searched the Internet in vain trying to find contact information for Lee Livengood. I did use the "search" function, but I only read responses from people who have either met with him or advised another player to see him with no contact info given.
While going through search responses on a different topic, I happened to read that a fellow named "Ed" drove a long way to meet with Lee.
After viewing Ed's contact information, I emailed him and he just emailed me back with Lee Livengood's contact information.
If anyone feels the need to contact Lee Livengood, his email address is:
melleefone@yahoo.com
Now, I'll be adding Lee's contact info to the Refacers list.
Post Edited (2018-02-28 22:13)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brad Behn
Date: 2018-02-28 01:27
Lee Livengood is a member of the Utah Symphony's clarinet section. He is one of the finest refacers in the world, he is inexpensive as refacers go, and he is a very kind and decent person. I am very good friends with him and highly recommend his services. Thanks Dan for sharing his information with this community. I don't think Lee spends time on this BB, however don't hold it against him. If you are in the market for a fine refacing, or a lovely clarinet mouthpiece, he is at the top of the field. So much so in fact that Rico hired him as a consultant to help them make their mouthpieces. Indeed there were many cooks in the kitchen involved in that project, but I can say that everything good that came from that project is a direct result of Lee's influence.
Lee makes clarinet mouthpieces, bass clarinet mouthpieces, Eb clarinet mouthpieces and refaces mouthpieces as well. He has a full shop of options.
Brad Behn
http://www.clarinetmouthpiece.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2018-02-28 04:45
To clarify, I have not personally had Lee do work for me. I have played a number of pieces that he has done for others and have been very impressed with the quality of his work.
I have had Brad do some work for me on some vintage pieces and can say that Brad and Lee are some of the best out there. Both do excellent work and have a great understanding of vintage mouthpieces and what it takes to make a mouthpiece "work".
I would highly recommend both Lee and Brad for any mouthpiece work. There are a number of others out there today and we are very fortunate to have so many fine people making and working on mouthpieces.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brad Behn
Date: 2018-02-28 23:50
By the way for those of you who find pedigree important in considering who your refacing pro should be, Lee has some excellent credentials:
Teachers: Stanley Hasty (Eastman School), Mitchell Lurie (UCSB)
Orchestras: Present -Utah Symphony, Past - Savannah Orchestra, Tulsa Philharmonic. Please know that he is an ACTIVE professional musician. He holds a full time position with one of the nation's larger orchestras. It is an ICSOM organization, with an annual budget sufficient to sustain a full size orchestra's roster with significance. He has held full time positions with other ROPA orchestra's to include the Savannah Orchestra and the Tulsa Philharmonic as well.
Lee served as chief consultant for Rico/D'Addario during their clarinet mouthpiece project for years, and travelled the world to represent the product during that tenure as well.
Furthermore, Lee was the International Clarinet Association's president, and served on the board of the ICA for 6 years!
You won't find a more comprehensive package.
Brad Behn
http://www.clarinetmouthpiece.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2018-03-01 04:58
Lee once refaced a mouthpiece for me and did a spectacular job. This fellow knows what he is doing. dn
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2023-12-17 14:50
I just "re-found" this thread... worth noting that Lee now has a website where you can buy his mouthpieces (including a very reasonably priced mouthpieces that play very well) and contact him.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2023-12-29 01:51
Disclaimer: I received written (emailed) permission from Lee Livengood to write this article.
I decided to click on the link provided by Ed in the above post. I found the Classic line of acrylic mouthpieces made by Lee Livengood. I noticed that no tip opening or facing information was listed so I emailed Lee and asked him for this info.
Lee emailed me back and wrote the following: "The tip opening on the Classic line ranges from about 102-104. It's made to be easy to play with a 3-3.5 reed".
Because no facing length was mentioned, I emailed Lee back with the following: "Does your Classic line have a 36 facing? Or, do you make adjustments on the facing while play testing them?" (I began to suspect this when the tip opening had a range of numbers instead of a fixed number.)
Shortly afterward, Lee emailed me back again from his iPhone and stated the following: "Facing length is nominally 34-36. But again, each is faced and play tested to achieve the optimal voicing. Even on the same blank, minor adjustments and changes can make a huge difference in the playability."
So, there you have it. When I looked at the $79.00 price, I suspected that Lee was spending time with each mouthpiece, but, I wanted to find out for sure.
Allow me to make the following statement: I don't know of any other maker of acrylic mouthpieces that play tests and makes adjustments on each and every one of them to achieve optimal voicing and playability before they are offered for sale. (If I'm wrong, I sense that somebody will correct me.)
Disclaimer #2: I have no financial affiliation with Lee Livengood. I simply wanted more information about his Classic line and thought it would be useful to share it with everyone.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Robert N.
Date: 2023-12-29 02:02
Thank you for the information. It makes me want to try out his mouthpieces!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-12-29 04:59
Interesting
I couldn't get a facing length out of Lee. Those parameters don't really make me want to try his mouthpieces. I'm not fond of 'ranges.'
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2023-12-29 05:43
Hi Paul,
I understand what you're saying, however, the "range" difference (as far as tip openings) is really quite small (IMHO). 1.02mm equates to just a hair over 0.040" and 1.04mm equates to just a hair under 0.041". So, the total tip range is less than 0.001 of an inch. To me, that pretty small, however, to others that may be a huge difference. I wonder if a seasoned player could really tell the difference. Personally, I don't think so.
And, as to the 34-36 facing range, that, of course, equates to a 1mm difference that gets inserted into a player's mouth. (17mm and 18mm respectively.)
Although I haven't asked Lee, I believe he would be willing to accommodate a request for a specific tip opening or facing length.
To me, the important thing to take into consideration is that the adjusting being done is by a person whose accolades are well versed by Brad Behn in 2 separate postings above.
That carries a lot of weight for me. And, I'm talking about adjustments being made on acrylic mouthpieces.
As I stated above, I don't believe anybody is doing what Lee Livengood is doing.
Edited to correct word usage error.
Post Edited (2023-12-29 08:24)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-12-29 17:23
I'll elaborate.
I guess that's a bit of a sore spot with me because I've heard the "that's such a small difference" argument before. I sat down with at least one mouthpiece maker who made the argument by saying, "well that's a difference less than the width of a human hair," rather than attempt a further adjustment.
If you look carefully at the dimensions listed for German mouthpieces (Wurlitzer or Gelchweit or Maxton or ESM), for example, you'll find entirely separate models listed by differences of one, one hundredth of a millimeter. So I guess some folks aren't surprised by small differences.
............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2023-12-29 22:26
"I guess that's a bit of a sore spot with me because I've heard the "that's such a small difference" argument before. I sat down with at least one mouthpiece maker who made the argument by saying, "well that's a difference less than the width of a human hair," rather than attempt a further adjustment."
Paul, even though I look upon this discussion as fruitless, I decided to look a little deeper into what one of your mouthpiece maker's remark about the "width of the human hair". Per Wikipedia, the human hair ranges from 17um to 181 um with a nominal width thickness being 75um. Converting this nominal value to mm yields 0.075mm. Lee Livengood's range is 0.02mm. (1.02-1.04mm) So, IMHO, Lee's "range" is actually much smaller than the nominal hair width thickness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair%27s_breadth
"If you look carefully at the dimensions listed for German mouthpieces
(Wurlitzer or Gelchweit or Maxton or ESM), for example, you'll find entirely separate models listed by differences of one, one hundredth of a millimeter. So I guess some folks aren't surprised by small differences."
Of course there are going to be voicing and playability differences between different makers even if they have the exact tip opening dimensions. Now, I know I'm not telling you things that you don't already know, however, what can make them entirely different is: 1) tip rail thickness; 2) facing length; 3) the arc of the facing curve; 4) the thickness of the rails; 5) the spacing between the side rails and their possible sloped angle; 6) the configuration of the throat and it's dimensions and 7) the depth and configuration of the baffle.
So, from my point of view, tip opening and facing length measurements actually don't reveal much about how a mouthpiece is going to sound nor can they reveal the playability factor.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-12-29 22:37
allow me to restate that:
I have personally over the last ten years attempted to make "mouthpiece shopping" more fruitful and more efficient. It would be helpful to know what type of facing you as a player prefer. One does tend toward a TYPE. So if you prefer longer lays (17mm or more...real millimeters, not the half millimeter measurement), trying short lay mouthpieces MIGHT yield a surprisingly good mouthpiece but chances are it won't. Same applies to tip openings. It's not much different than the pros who prefer to get familiar with a certain Vandoren (say an M13 for example) so that it is replicable if disaster befalls good ol' number one.
I merely pass along the suggestion that it may be more efficient to weed out the mouthpieces that won't work so that you have only "possibles" in front of you.
…………..Paul Aviles
Post Edited (2023-12-30 00:10)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2023-12-30 00:05
Paul Aviles wrote:
> So those dimensions should be completely disregarded and
> searching for a mouthpiece should just be an expensive crap
> shoot.
>
> Got it
Oh, c'mon Paul. We all know that you know better.
It seems interesting though that Everett Matson once told me that a difference in tip openings of less than .05mm really wasn't meaningful. By that he meant, not that a good player couldn't tell the difference, but that a difference <.05mm could be managed through reed choice or small changes inside the mouthpiece.
Matt was working on every brand of mouthpiece (of his time) under the sun and a lot of the work he did on them involved internal tweaks and rail adjustments once he had cleaned up the facing. His reasoning was that once you got a well balanced (straight) facing that was in the ballpark of what you had wanted, you stood a better chance of ruining it by trying to get to an exact measurement. Like reeds, it's painfully easy to go past what you want, and you can't put material back. So, if I asked him to put a 1.02/34 facing on and he got it to 1.03 or even 1.05/34, he would stop there and ask me to play on it at home with different reeds and see if I could become comfortable with it.
Then, while I'm on the subject, there are the discrepancies among tools used to measure tip openings (the length is much easier to measure consistently). I have two different dial gauges and two taper gauges, and I get different measurements from each. When I measure a mouthpiece I've bought and know the maker's tip opening measurement, I often find that I get different ones. My gauges all come out higher (more open) than Clark Fobes's numbers. Some of my Vandorens come out closer than the openings VD advertises. So, if Lee Livengood promises a range of facings, he's simply telling you his facings fall in the accepted range of close facings. The absolute number really **doesn't** mean very much, but the type of facing his numbers describe **does** matter.
Still, for students reading any of this, it matters very much what the rail, chamber, baffle and other points of measurement are, aside from the tip and length. Meaning, you can shop by facing measurements, but you won't like every mouthpiece that meets your specs.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2023-12-30 00:22
Yes Karl, I am also specific about the rail thickness when I order a custom mouthpiece (one less variable to work with). I actually have been enjoying the results I get from various makers who are given precise parameters to work with. And, I have been getting more "similar" results than "dissimilar" ones.
I stand grateful to Mike Lomax for figuring out that I preferred short lays on Boehm mouthpieces. That was helpful. When I do change up on equipment it a much easier transition when the change is done in increments. Another argument for knowing a little something about the parameters that you prefer.
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2023-12-30 06:58
Quote:
Allow me to make the following statement: I don't know of any other maker of acrylic mouthpieces that play tests and makes adjustments on each and every one of them to achieve optimal voicing and playability before they are offered for sale. (If I'm wrong, I sense that somebody will correct me.)
I believe Clark Fobes adjusts all of his mouthpieces, including the inexpensive Debut and the step up Nova.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2023-12-30 08:10
Paul Aviles wrote:
> Yes Karl, I am also specific about the rail thickness when I
> order a custom mouthpiece (one less variable to work with). I
> actually have been enjoying the results I get from various
> makers who are given precise parameters to work with. And, I
> have been getting more "similar" results than "dissimilar"
> ones.
>
I was only reacting to the snippiness of your comment. Of course the parameters you know about can make a meaningful difference. I agree with your restatement above.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2023-12-30 11:05
Ed wrote: "I believe Clark Fobes adjusts all of his mouthpieces, including the inexpensive Debut and the step up Nova."
After doing some research, I found out that the adjusting that Clark Fobes does on his Debut acrylic mouthpieces is limited to the tip rail.
https://clarkwfobes.wordpress.com/
“My experience with the injection molded acrylic mouthpieces from Babbitt has been exceptional. The tolerances and consistency of these mouthpieces is remarkable. I do finish every single mouthpiece by hand (about 8,000 last year!), but I have a very consistent starting point which makes large production runs much simpler. Injection molding is such an accurate method that molds can be made to exact dimensions and the tolerances of the molded product are extremely fine. Also, injection molds can be very highly polished leaving a very fine finish on the mouthpiece that needs very little buffing. Babbitt puts a facing on my Debut clarinet and alto sax mouthpieces from cams that I have had custom made. No other maker is allowed to use these facing cams. The nature of acrylic is that it resists the cutting wheel extremely well and when i receive a run of 500 mouthpieces from Babbitt they are all exactly alike. The slight variation from mouthpiece to mouthpiece is only seen in the tip rail width, which i adjust as part of my final finishing. I love the sound of these mouthpieces and I doubt that anyone would guess that it was acrylic in a blind test.”
The above comment is dated 10/21/2008.
From https://cafesaxophone.com/threads/clark-fobes-debut-alto-mouthpiece-pass-around.6600/, TomMapfumo said: “Clark Fobes hand finishes and play tests all his Debut mouthpieces (8,000 pa) before sending them out.” (Comment dated 01/21/2012)
On the same page is an analysis comment by rhysonsax:
“Interesting statistic. Say 200 working days per year, that would be 40 mouthpieces per day, throughout the year and so about 10 minutes per mouthpiece for all hand finishing, play testing etc without doing any other work at all.
Doesn't sound right to me - have I misunderstood or made a mistake?”
Again, in Clark’s own words, his hand finishing of the Debut is limited to adjusting the tip rail and doing very little buffing. Nowhere does he state that he play tests every mouthpiece and makes adjustments for voicing and playability.
It still appears that only Lee Livengood does that.
Post Edited (2023-12-30 11:46)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2023-12-30 23:35
I know that over the years Clark had said that he adjusted the Debut. Years ago I recall seeing evidence of hand adjustment on them. He may have tweaked the process to the point that it is not necessary on recent versions, so perhaps it is true that Lee is alone in adjusting an acrylic blank.
For the Nova, which is hard rubber he states-"My NOVA series mouthpieces are professionally finished, hard rubber mouthpieces that produce wonderful results at an affordable price. The popular NOVA Bb clarinet mouthpiece is my custom proprietary mold manufactured at J.J.Babbitt Co. All of my Bb mouthpieces are hand bored for excellent response and intonation, finished with a CF+ or 3L facing and play tested and adjusted for optimal color and response."
Post Edited (2023-12-31 00:57)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
