 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Raff P
Date: 2011-03-17 09:36
Hello forum,
I have to say that I got really excited earlier this week when I downloaded the update for my Vandoren app. It turns out that VD is coming out with a new line of clarinet mouthpieces: the MASTERS series.
For those who don't know of it, I'm not exactly sure where you can get info on it, as I tried the Vandoren site and it was nowhere to be found (though the ligature for the mouthpiece was).
All their marketing on the app for the mouthpiece sounds great -- maybe they'll be super consistent (crosses fingers).
Looks like I might be making an investment in the near future.
So what do you all think?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Andy
Date: 2011-03-17 10:18
I had the chance to try the two new models that Vandoren are releasing soon a few weeks ago, the CM4 and the CM5. The mouthpieces are quite a departure from the current Vandoren lines, they play in a similar fashion to many of the American makers I have tried (Fobes, Grabner, Lomax etc).
The two major characteristics for me were the slightly shorter length (approx 1mm shorter then the rest of the vandoren line) and the larger chamber on the mouthpieces (to compensate for the length reduction).
I'm not sure who has been advising them on this line, but as the changes are quite large from the rest of the range, I'm fairly confident in suggesting that Vandoren must have had input from at least one, if not more boutique makers who are familiar with the american school of mouthpiece making.
Both of the mouthpieces had a freedom of sound that I found refreshing from the rest of the vandoren range. I guess if I was pushed to make a comparison to the rest of the vandoren range I would comapre them to the M series, especially the M30, although these new models had much more behind them in terms of dynamic control and depth of sound.
While my testing was only 10 minutes on each mouthpiece, I was very impressed by them and look forward to trying them on a prolonged basis when they are released.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-03-17 11:25
I had heard that Vandoren had "borrowed" some original design ideas from the Charles Bay company most notably the 'duckbill design' (profile 88) and the red/black hard rubber versions. Perhaps they've found a way to copy them further.
...............Paul Aviles (resident cynic)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sonicbang
Date: 2011-03-17 20:40
I am curious if they had to design a completely new blank? The mouthpiece makers Andy mentioned are using zinner blanks as far as I know. Does anybody have any information about the prices?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2011-03-18 03:44
Thanks, again for the link
I'm disturbed that VD wants to sell you a ligature to go with their new 'pieces.
Although a "leather" lig will suffice --according to the last page of Ed's link.
BUT, hey the will offer the new lig in gold plate!
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Andy
Date: 2011-03-18 11:22
From my understanding the mouthpieces will be only available with the lig for the first few months, then they will be available as a mouthpiece alone. Although vandoren say that you need a different lig to fit the mouthpiece, this is untrue, most standard ligs will fit the new models.
The blank material didn't seem to be made of different a compound, just moulded differently. I found new chamber design to be much more resonant then the traditional line of vandorens that we are used to.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tom Puwalski
Date: 2011-03-18 13:08
I'm sure that Vandoren will be in frankfurt, I hope to give them a try. Tom Puwalski
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-18 15:43
The ligature: The screw from the optimum with the body of the masters. Not a bad idea, but not at all innovative or a new direction for design.
The mouthpiece has a slightly larger bore and chamber and a "facing specific to this mouthpiece". I hesitate to say that's a significant innovation, unless you consider the limited range of bore options from the vandoren line-up currently.
I'm sure the mouthpiece will work for lots of people and it will have success, since they have marketed their mouthpieces to people ranging from beginners to professionals. Whether or not they are remarkable or innovative, I don't think so.
As for the video with Paul Meyer. He's an incredible player. I played for him at a summer festival and heard him perform a solo recital with piano as well as the Mozart Concerto with a visiting major symphony orchestra. I played Mucynsky's Time Pieces for him, which he had never heard before. He borrowed the music from me on a Tuesday, and performed the piece on Thursday, two days later!.
At the time, he was playing a Vandoren 5RV Lyre with 3.5 blue box. I remember watching him get his clarinet out of the case and seeing 5 or 6 reeds fall out of the bell that were stored in the original vandoren cases (the cases used to ship them in the box). He pulled out one at random and sounded fantastic.
Does all of that mean that the 5RV lyre is the best mouthpiece? Or that storing your reeds in your bell in their original packaging is the best reed maintenance method? Nope.
I would caution against equating his incredible abilities as a performer and clarinetist with innovation in equipment.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2011-03-18 21:44
Ned -
There's no link to Paul Meyer on the Masters Mouthpieces page. Do you have a URL?
Thanks.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2011-03-19 00:30
Does anyone know the dimensions (tip openning and length of lay) of these?
The website (a pdf that it generates) suggests the same reed strength range for each mouthpiece, whereas Paul Meyer suggests softer reeds for one of the products.
Are the rails thin or thick?
A lot of hype, not much technical info.
Former creator of CUSTOM CLARINET TUNING BARRELS by DR. ALLAN SEGAL
-Where the Sound Matters Most(tm)-
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarimeister
Date: 2011-03-19 01:38
I got the opportunity to try out the new mouthpieces at RDG Woodwinds last week. I do say I am extremely impressed, and these new mpcs are the best Vandoren has to offer now. They were extremely consistent and they both produced a very beautiful tone. If I didn't have my custom Vacarro mpc I would totally jump on that. But, the only thing I didn't like about either model is that the altissimo register is very resistant. More so than other mouthpieces I've tried. This affects articulation for me, as it's a little tougher to produce a clean staccato up there. Otherwise it's a fantastic mouthpiece and I totally recommend it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2011-03-19 01:54
Quote:
Whether or not they are remarkable or innovative, I don't think so.
Despite the claims made by many makers, I don't know if there is anything really new out there. If they make a decent mouthpiece at a reasonable price, it will certainly be welcome.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-03-19 03:47
Is this one of the "LOW" pitch models (as the 13 Series)?
Do we have a suggested manufacturer's retail price yet?
......................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarimeister
Date: 2011-03-19 05:17
As far as I remember what the MRSP was for both the ligature and mouthpiece were $199. But, that is for BOTH. I dont think it was labeled as a low pitch mouthpiece. Just a standard.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-19 14:06
"Despite the claims made by many makers, I don't know if there is anything really new out there."
See www.behnmouthpieces.info for Vintage and Signature collections.
Difference from your average zinner:
1) Custom rod rubber material derived from Henri Chedeville.
2) Bore, Chamber, Baffle, rails, table, and every other dimension are custom to each model mouthpiece.
3) Custom angled mouthpieces (patented designs) that change the angle you hold the clarinet and changes the sound and acoustics of the mouthpiece.
And more...
For the most part, people just do different things do zinner mouthpieces, many making them worse.
(Not a paid endorser, just a satisfied customer)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2011-03-19 20:45
I am familiar with Brad's work. The angled mouthpiece is a new idea. The rest of the concepts, are well executed. I believe that Brad follows pretty traditional concepts of design. (btw- that is not a criticism)
It is great that you have found mouthpieces that work for you. That is always a good part of the battle.
Post Edited (2013-10-13 03:28)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-19 22:00
Ed,
Indeed it is difficult to 1) have an innovative idea and 2) to execute that idea and make it reality. I agree with you to a large extent that it is rare for significant innovation in mouthpiece making because so many designs and materials have been used and are currently in production.
I would say however, that research in and construction of quality material and designing of blanks is itself innovative.
Other makers do vary the aspects of design to achieve different results, of course. Indeed there are other good makers that make fine mouthpieces.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sonicbang
Date: 2011-03-20 11:08
I think to present a new mouthpiece with such a good player as Paul Meyer is simply cheating...the company should find an unreliable, inconsisnant, awkward, clumsy clarinettist. I can't belive Mr. Meyer would sound consiberably worse with a broomhandle.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2011-03-20 11:55
Sonicbang it doesn't matter at all because one mouthpiece doesn't fit all and you need to try it yourself.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dgclarinet
Date: 2011-03-20 14:04
"the company should find an unreliable, inconsisnant, awkward, clumsy clarinettist." Well, they asked, but I'm kind of busy right now.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Claire Annette
Date: 2011-03-20 17:01
Ha, dg! They must've contacted you after I turned down the opportunity!
Aftet reading this thread, I'm very interested in trying out this new line.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-20 18:11
Paul Meyer is an amazing player, but not the go-to reference for evaluation of equipment.
Any idea when these mouthpieces will be available in the U.S.?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2011-03-20 18:52
NBeaty wrote: "Paul Meyer is an amazing player, but not the go-to reference for evaluation of equipment"
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Could you elaborate?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cxgreen48
Date: 2011-03-20 19:04
NBeaty probably means that Paul Meyer can make anything sound good; hence "the company should find an unreliable, inconsisnant, awkward, clumsy clarinettist."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-20 19:12
See above comments. He's played the same setup for his entire career (to great success).
Most professional players in the states have tried most everything out there, so what they end up using has been chosen over many other options. If you haven't tried much, then it's not as affective to advocate for one particular thing over many others.
Paul Meyer is an incredible player and performer, but I only say these things to caution people that he doesn't go as crazy with equipment as most people in the U.S. do.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alseg
Date: 2011-03-20 20:07
What are the tip openning and length of facing dimensions? Anyone?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-21 00:26
I don't think anyone has taken measurements, and they certainly haven't been advertised. I would imagine the more open bore would keep them to a fairly traditional lay (something between 35-37) and maybe a 1.04 and 1.08 for tip openings for the two options.
Although considering their last new mouthpieces (M30D and B40D) had the very open tips and long facings of their normal french counterparts (M30 being a 1.15 with 40,26,14,8....those numbers vary depending on the mouthpiece and the gagues but you get the idea), they may be sticking to a more open and quite long style.
Until someone measures one, it's just shots in the dark. I doubt that one will learn a whole lot from what facing they decided on. One would hope though, that they didn't include the incredibly thick tip rail that they put on their D models.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: claaaaaarinet!!!!
Date: 2011-03-22 18:16
NBeaty,
What was the name of the festival where you played for Paul Meyer? I've played for him in the past and would love to do so again, but he doesn't get to N. America too frequently as far as I can tell. I believe he has given masterclasses in Canada, but I'm not exactly sure where.
I saw that he will be in L.A. to perform at ClarinetFest... Is anyone aware of other N. American appearances this year, especially in a teaching capacity?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2011-03-22 19:59
At the ClarinetFest, you can buy a private lesson ticket through the Fest office. Just be sure to grab the player you want a lesson with early, or get in touch in advance.
There will always be master classes, which you should sign up for ASAP.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-23 00:47
It was at the Domaine Forget music festival in Quebec, Canada (north of Quebec city). I'm American, but I got my Masters in Montreal at McGill University. It's a somewhat lesser known festival, but they bring in top notch people!
Between the two summers I attended, the following teachers were there:
Laurie Bloom of the Chicago Symphony
Paul Meyer, French Soloist
Bob Spring, ASU
Eric Mandat, SIU
Marie Picard, Quebec Symphony
David Cambell from the UK.
The facilities are also amazing. Situated on the coast of the river (which is north enough to have waves and tide).
This upcoming summer is going to feature the principal with Berlin...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Miller
Date: 2011-03-29 01:22
I had a couple hours with a few dozen of these mouthpieces and I have to say that I am extremely impressed with them. The only problem is that they're tuned fairly sharp - maybe even to 442? - and because of this I wish that Vandoren would have kept the length of the old blanks.
The CL5 has a fairly thick tip that gives it a very dark, chocolatey sound, but I think it blunts the articulation a little bit too much and runs the risk of making your sound rather ponderous. The mouthpiece also allows you to play some HUGE dynamics without blowing out, but (for me) it's a bit too much of a blunt-force-trauma kind of mouthpiece. It would have been a good mouthpiece when I was in one of the Fleet Marine Force bands.
The CL4, however, is by far my favorite of the two Masters series mouthpieces, and of the Vandoren line of mouthpieces in general. I am trialing a couple of these over the next several weeks and am fairly sure already that I'm going to switch - they seem to be a very good match for my S&S M1000 instruments.
It is far more agile in character than the CL5, articulates very cleanly and clearly, with a very dense core to the sound with easily ringing overtones. Register changes are also effortless with the mouthpiece. The big solo from Pines of Rome smoothed out nicely, with no bumps or breaks to the line even through the very wide leaps, and I didn't feel like I had to be chewing on the mouthpiece or make any massive changes to make that happen. I just blew straight through the clarinet and it worked. The high pitch of the mouthpiece does concern me a bit but a few tuning rings seems to have fixed that issue.
The M|O ligature seems to be a solid addition to this line of mouthpieces as well. I tested a couple Rovners, a BG, a Bonade, and a Spriggs with the CL4 and CL5 mouthpieces. They all played well but the M|O is pretty clearly specifically designed for the Masters series mpcs and provided a clearer sound than any of the others. I have not yet tested the M|O on any other mouthpiece, as I go through the coming weeks I'll have more information on it.
All in all, the Masters series is an outstanding addition to the Vandoren line. Very nice sound, clean articulation, consistent pitch. Again, they're tuned sharp, so you'll either need longer barrels or some tuning rings to compensate. They also seem to take somewhat softer reeds, so you can expect to get serious some use out of your reed knives and sandpaper.
Disclaimer: none. I don't work for Vandoren (or for anybody else for that matter...)
Cheers
Edited for clarity
Post Edited (2011-03-29 01:27)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-29 01:29
Paul,
Does the pitch seem higher than other vandoren mouthpieces (the non-13 series) or just higher than the 440 mouthpieces?
What reeds did you find worked best? How soft do you think you'd have to go to have consistent success without sanding them way down?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Miller
Date: 2011-03-29 06:31
NBeaty, I'll answer your question and then give some more unsolicited opinions/impressions about the Masters mouthpieces.
Pitch is about consistent with the non-440 Vandoren mouthpieces, somewhere between 441-442. I couldn't tell you what it wants to do with an R13 since I haven't played on one in over a year now... but the other players in my studio seem to have fairly good results when they pull out a bit more than usual at the barrel.
On my Fobes CWF I have been using V12 4.5 reeds cut down to about a medium 4. With the CL4 I was getting good results with a V12 4 out of the box, but I think I might take a very small amount of material to loosen things up just a bit.
Then again, I also like the Rue Lepic 4s on the Masters mpcs. I usually adjust the V12 to have a similar profile to Rue Lepic reeds (i.e., higher center, lower rails), but the RL reeds work quite nicely on the CL4 and CL5. Basically, if you're using well-matched reeds to a Zinner blank with a reasonably narrow tip opening, you can expect to go down a half strength on whatever kind of reed you're using to make things work well. If you're already on a mouthpiece with a fairly open tip you might not have to make any changes to your reed.
We had a Vandoren night here at SFCM a few hours ago and I tried a few more mouthpieces. I still like the CL4 better than the CL5 - on my setup it works VERY nicely. If you are using a fairly resistant setup, the CL5 might feel more familiar to you. I picked out a pair of well-matched CL4s and will continue taking notes, so keep your eye on this thread if you're interested in these mouthpieces.
I think it's worth noting that one of my favorite players in the studio (a young man who scares the hell out of me; we'd all better get jobs soon because he'll drop into the audition circuit like an atom bomb) prefers the German version of the M30 mouthpiece to either the CL4 or CL5. He's playing on cocobolo Fobes barrels on a fairly decent set of R13 mouthpieces. I tried his setup tonight - didn't work for me at all, but he and I seem to blend extremely well together. I'm not sure if that's because our weird equipment setups just work well together or if it's because we have similar tone concepts, but it's a good reminder that there's no reason to change gear if you already have something that works well for you. I'm not sure if I'm just having a bit of a honeymoon with these CL4s or not. It might just be a flash in the pan, who knows....
I'm playing on a set of Schwenk & Seggelke M1000 instruments. I have a set of Backun cocobolo barrels that aren't working well with my instruments + CL4s (although they work VERY nicely with the CWF mouthpieces...), so I've gone back to the (really excellent) stock barrels that came with the horns. This setup seems to work a bit better. I'm using a 67mm on the Bb and a 66mm on the A to compensate for the sharpness of the mouthpiece.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-03-29 10:13
Thank you Mr. Paul Miller for the extensive reviews of this product. I must say I am VERY enthusiastic about the pitch issue. The 13 Series (as well as the preponderance of low pitched customs out there) have been a point of great concern to me since they tend to teach ALL OF US to play to the upper end of our pitch limit. Personally I prefer being in the middle to have the flexibility to adjust down OR up at for any given situation as it comes up. Also internal pitch problems have been exaggerated by this school of thought.
Three cheers to Vandoren!!!!
.....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-29 13:42
Paul (Miller),
Those are some hard reeds! =) I would imagine the pitch would be even more maneageble with 3.5 or 3.5+ and less bite.
I'm always surprised as to how thick vandoren makes the tip (and side) rails. The M30D and apparently the CL5 fall even more victim to this idea. Nothing is gained from this in the positive, but response and clarity are lost. Even their normal mouthpieces seem to be less than ideal in this area.
The preponderance of very open mouthpieces also seems troubling to me. It sounds like the CL5 is in the M30Lyre-M30 range, along with the generous rails. I don't see any gains tonally or otherwise from having such an open tip. With softer reeds, they can work, but most everyone I've met using this style mouthpiece is using 4's or 4.5's and biting an unreasonable amount.
This CL4 really sounds better than the Fobes? What advantages does it seem to have over the Fobes? The CWF does have an asymetric facing, which is generally resistant, so I imagine the CL4 would feel a bit more free (even if the tip is more open than the Fobes).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2011-03-29 15:06
I believe that any asymetry that Clark uses is VERY slight, unlike some out there that are very extreme. This gives a hint of a resistance that seems to add some color or depth.
I played the CWF for a while and was very surprised to find that there was any asymetry. I wouldn't have known it from the feel.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NBeaty
Date: 2011-03-29 15:25
Thanks for your thoughts Ed. I imagine it's not asymmetric to the degree that a certain other maker would have...
I personally don't find an advantage to asymmetry and have always found improvement when the facing is evened out. That is a matter of opinion/preference though, I suppose.
Im asking certain questions of Paul to get a better idea of his preference so I can see how the vandoren relates. His setup is quite different from mine, which almost makes it difficult for me to relate to his comments on the mouthpiece.
P.S. Most makers don't use asymmetric facings as a standard (neither does Fobes, actually). However, you'd be surprised how many custom mouthpieces are asymmetric that are supposed to be symmetric!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2011-03-29 16:41
I have spoken to various mouthpiece craftsmen who tell me that they have measured a number of mouthpieces from the legendary players and found them to be asymetrical. I suspect in a number of cases that these were not by design, but happened to turn out that way.
There are so many things to choose from- long, short, close, open, asymetrical, flat or concave tables, etc. While I have certain preferences in my own playing, the most important thing is how the mouthpiece plays. There are so many factors that can balanced be out in mouthpiece design.
I have tried some things with all of the "right" numbers that played terribly for me and others that I thought played beautifully, yet were of completely different design and dimensions than what I generally like. I have found that the numbers are just a starting point.
I recall that years ago Everett Matson told me that the rails on Drucker's mouthpiece were all skewed. After he straightened it out, Drucker played it and asked him to put it back the way it was.
Post Edited (2012-05-13 03:42)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Miller
Date: 2011-03-29 18:17
I have a feeling that I'll eventually find the right strength reed for these mouthpieces - probably in the 3.75 - 4 range on V12s or Rue Lepics. The pitch should become a bit more manageable at that point. The Fobes I've been playing on seems to like fairly hard reeds, so using that as a starting point it's not too surprising that I'm sharp on everything else!
As for the Fobes CWF mouthpiece vs. CL4... I don't think I have enough time with the Vandorens to make a judgement call as to which one is a better mouthpiece. The sound of the CL4 is completely different from the CWF... I've been playing on Fobes mouthpieces for five years now and have always had extremely good results.
I don't think I could say that one is better than the other; the two mouthpieces are just too different from one another, so like everything else in the clarinet gearhead world, it's really just a question of what works for you....
As an aside, the Fobes mouthpieces all have a very slight - and deliberate - asymmetry to them. I'm agnostic and and a bit apathetic on that particular issue: all I care about is whether a mouthpiece sounds good and plays well, not how the maker made it that way.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2011-03-29 19:06
Quote:
As an aside, the Fobes mouthpieces all have a very slight - and deliberate - asymmetry to them. I'm agnostic and and a bit apathetic on that particular issue: all I care about is whether a mouthpiece sounds good and plays well, not how the maker made it that way.
According to what I see on Clark's site, I believe that only the CWF and 2M* are asymetrical.
I agree that sometimes it is best to just play and not worry about all the dimensions.
Post Edited (2011-03-29 20:30)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Miller
Date: 2011-05-31 17:51
Yes, the Klassic works well on the Masters mouthpiece. I've been using it for the last month or so with very good results.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2011-07-19 01:49
I have started to see these mouthpieces listed at some online shops, but have not yet seen one. Has anyone had the opportunity to try one or do any of the original folks who tried them have long term impressions?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TianL
Date: 2011-07-19 03:26
i ordered several from wwbw.. they are $99 without the ligature. I'm still evaluating but so far they've been pretty amazing to me.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: claaaaaarinet!!!!
Date: 2011-07-19 17:14
Funny... I ordered one of each model from WWBW a couple of weeks ago and they got back-ordered. They must have sold out right away and I missed them when they were in stock. Also, I didn't see the $99 option sans ligature, or I definitely would have gone that route.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Old Geezer
Date: 2011-07-19 17:55
I suppose the competition has gotten to Vandoren.
It's a stroke of marketing genius (sleaze?) to require a new ligature to go with it!
Next they'll probably come out with a bent (sidways?) mouthpiece to keep up with the other guys!
I still have my original Benny Goodman plastic slide ligature from 60+ years ago...works pretty good yet!
Clarinet Redux
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2011-07-19 18:04
Ummm...
Can anyone who has tried one of these tell what the unconventional external body shape (which is the only reason the ligature choice is restricted) contributes to the way the mouthpiece sounds or responds? Is the external shape reflected in any way inside the bore or chamber?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TianL
Date: 2011-07-19 18:07
yeah the ligature is not necessary.. if you have a synthetic one like the rovner dark, it would work fine (mine does).
claaaaaarinet!!!! (not sure if i got the number of a's correct): yup you were just a bit late. i bet each of us who were quickly enough ordered several to try so they ran out pretty quickly by the way, you can easily cancel your current order and just order the $99 ones.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TianL
Date: 2011-07-19 18:12
karl, i think it might have to do with the distribution of the pressure around the reed, like with this new shape of the ligature/mpc combination, the lig touches the reed entirely. with the conventional way, since the shape of the ligature isn't the same as the contour of reed, thus the ligature will miss the reed just by a little.
.. but.. i think this is quite trivial and probably doesn't do anything really.
BUT it is kinda cool - looking.. lol.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2011-07-19 18:20
My understanding is that the new shape is due to different internal dimensions compared to traditional mouthpieces.
Post Edited (2011-07-19 18:28)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Niethamer
Date: 2011-07-21 17:00
kdk - a little late to the party here - I tried two of the C4 last weekend, and found them underwhelming. With a couple of good reeds which seemed to be an appropriate strength, there was a lack of resonance, and the response was inconsistent from one mouthpiece to the other. Reeds that were well balanced on my current Grabner seemed to be unbalanced on the Vandoren mouthpieces, and in different ways for each mouthpiece.
I used a Vandoren leather ligature, which seemed to hold the reed as firmly as necessary - no need for the "special" (think Dana Carvey!) ligature, which always seemed to be a bush league ligature in the past. Adding a fancy screw doesn't seem like it would make all that much difference, though in fairness I haven't tried the new version to see if it really IS different.
Of course, just my $0.02, YMMV, yadda, yadda, yadda...
David
niethamer@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/dbnclar1/index.html
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MViton
Date: 2012-03-19 02:18
I currently play on a Leblanc Cadenza mouthpiece (very similar to a vandoren B45) with a rovner Mark 3, ive tried an 5RVLyre13 and it has a very airy sound in the lower register. I was wondering if anyone knows wether the cl4 or cl5 is closer to the B45 than the 5RVLyre13?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarimeister
Date: 2012-03-19 02:26
The CL5 is more open than the CL4. They'll need about a 1/4 to half strength softer reeds than the CL4. That's really as close as you'll get.
I just recently tried the CL4 and CL5 within the last week (I had tried them before but the price was a downer, especially when you have to use their ligature [I prefer metal ligatures so leather or fabric wasn't an option for me] and have to buy it). The low register is fantastic and so is most of the upper clarion. But what killed it for me was the lack of response in the 3rd register altissimo. Have to work much harder than I prefer. Way too resistant. My Gregory Smith "Old Chedeville" 1++ was a no contest winner against both master's mpcs. Not even close in every category.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2012-03-19 02:34
MViton wrote:
> I currently play on a Leblanc Cadenza mouthpiece (very similar
> to a vandoren B45) with a rovner Mark 3, ive tried an 5RVLyre13
> and it has a very airy sound in the lower register. I was
> wondering if anyone knows wether the cl4 or cl5 is closer to
> the B45 than the 5RVLyre13?
Please remember that in order to post on this bulletin board I require a valid email address. You can choose not to allow it to be visible to the public, but I must have it on record.
Mark Charette
Woodwind.Org, Inc.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bartmann
Date: 2012-03-19 17:09
Hello fellow clarinetists,
I've been away from this board for a while but thought some people could benefit from my experiences with the Vandoren Masters clarinet Mouthpiece CL4.
In my years as a clarinetist I have been very happy using Vandoren mouthpieces on my Buffet R13. The M13, M13 Lyre, and now the M15 is the mouthpiece I use the most in my community orchestra.
I was eager to try the new Masters mouthpiece from Vandoren. I have the CL4 mouthpiece which is a bit sharp and needs a 67mm barrel. I tried an assortment of aged Vandoren V12 reeds strength 4, 3.5, and 3 over a period of a couple of months. In my opinion, the 4 strength reeds were a bit too airy, while the 3's were a bit too soft.
The mouthpiece in general has a clear and bright tone which I like. However a major concern with the Vandoren CL4 mouthpiece was that the throat tones sounded sickly. Especially G#, A and Bb, these three notes were VERY different in character from all the other notes. Resonance fingerings actually made the tone worse. There is nothing that I can do to make these tone ring clearly and brightly.
I may go back to exploring the CL4 mouthpiece with a different brand of reeds like Rigotti Gold. But as it stands now, this new mouthpiece is certainly not for me.
Bartmann
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AndreClarinet
Date: 2012-04-29 17:56
Hello. Which masters mouthpiece ( CL4 or CL5) has an opening more similar to B40? I play an B40 with 3.5 Reserve Classic, Grand Concert Evolution and sometimes V12 reeds, and I think that for me the CL5 would be more appropiate but I'm not sure. Can you help me ? And just more one question, did someone try this mouthpiece with a rovner ligature? I have a rovner light and I really enjoy this ligature. Thanks
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarimeister
Date: 2012-04-29 19:18
The CL5 is definitely more open than the CL4. So, that may be the mouthpiece you're looking for. Definitely try it out, and try a few of them out at once. It may not be very close to the B40, but it's the more open facing. The Rovner ligature should work fine on it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AndreClarinet
Date: 2012-04-29 19:27
I'm trying to try the CL5 in the Summer. I hope the Rovner ligature works. I really like the sound of my B40 but I'm very curious because it looks that the Masters are very different from the others Vandoren mouthpieces. Do you ever tried them ? Do you know if the Optimum ligature works in this CL5 too ? thanks .
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: richard1952
Date: 2012-04-29 19:58
yes, the Optimum ligature does fit on the CL5. I recently bought a CL5 with the silver plated ligature and found that the ligature oxidizes and turns black in a few weeks if left on the mouthpiece.
richardseaman@cox.net
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: richard1952
Date: 2012-04-29 20:19
I do like the CL5. I also play a Vandoren B46 and a Stowell Wells Schneider B3 mouthpiece. I do switch off between them from time to time. I have been playing a Forestone #3 reed most of the time on all three mouthpieces, however I also switch at times to a Rico Royal Reserve and a Alexander Superial Classique, both #3 strength.
richardseaman@cox.net
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: AndreClarinet
Date: 2012-04-29 20:28
I'm very curious and I will give it a try. I play B40 always and I like the warm sound that I have with this mouthpiece but new can be always better and I'm trying to have a better sound always. Thanks for your help Richard!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Clarimeister
Date: 2012-05-13 02:01
Well, I bit the bullet and tried out the CL4 and CL5 once again. I figure since I have changed my approach to my embouchure and playing, I can get an easier sound of it. My problem before was the resistance factor in the upper register. However, this time, the resistance is working to my advantage. I am loving the CL4. I went to try a CL4 and CL5 out and was blown away by how good the CL4 sounded. Great focus, ring, articulation and clarity to the sound. Perfect for orchestral playing. Just need to get my teacher to approve of the sound. Anybody else having any success with these? I'd love to know!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SamuelChan
Date: 2012-05-13 06:11
I tried the CL5 recently, and it was too sharp for me, I could not get it in tune until I pulled my barrel and middle joint a great deal. However I get perfectly in tune with my b40 lyre. That was my experience anyway, althought I loved the sound of the CL5.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2012-05-13 12:31
The pitch was my biggest issue when I tried them. I had the opportunity to play some a while back. I liked some qualities in the CL4. When I turned the tuner on it immediately knocked it out of any consideration. The mouthpiece is designed to tune at a higher, so called "European" pitch. It was quite sharp on my instrument. A colleague found the same issues. Without going through a lot of changes I would find it impossible to play in any ensemble.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2012-05-13 13:26
I am currently auditioning the CL4 and find the pitch to be the VERY thing we all need.
I don't know why we've gone so far down the "dark sound" road that we don't realize how screwed up our 12ths are because of it. Just because the needle on the Korg reads "0" on a clarion high C, doesn't mean your clarinet is in tune !!!!! really, it doesn't.
In fact I am surprising MYSELF at just how much this mouthpiece is making a difference to my playing. I had been playing a Gennusa G** for a year or so solely because the response was better than others in my drawer when my Greg Smith was accidentally smitten from the Earth.
The Gennusa is like many many custom mouthpieces these days along with the Vandoren 13 Series that generates a lower tone (actual generated pitch mind you) to achieve a 'darker sound.' The problem is that your throat "F" will be flat at any moderate volume, your second ledger "C" will be flat in context, your altissimo "Eb" and "F" will need a lot of biting and venting. ALL of which is cleared up with the CL4 !!!! And by the way the CL4 also responds wonderfully, sounding like the B40 but doing it with the longer lay.
Ok, you may need a 67 mm barrel (as we ALL used in the 70s) but all the internal pitch nightmares will disappear !!!!!
....................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: KSL
Date: 2013-02-18 17:33
I have recently switched from the Vandoren M 30 to the new Vandoren Masters CL4 mouthpiece and love it. Although it is pitched higher, the intonation on my R 13's ( A and B-flat) is definitely improved. I noticed it immediately when I played ensemble. I use Legere Signature reeds, strength 3 1/2 with a Rovner III ligature.
With Legere, a matter of extreme importance, at least for me, is the correct placement of the reed on the mpc. The tip of the reed should be flush with the very top of the tip rail and centered exactly. For me this results in a beautiful tone with widened dynamic range and improved articulation. With incorrect reed placement there is noticeable increased resistance and some fuzziness in the throat tones and clarion register. Another bonus is the lack of shrillness in the altissimo and upper clarion registers. The solo in Mussorgsky's Night on a Bald Mountain comes across very well.
Ken
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jacobhardy25
Date: 2013-02-19 18:42
my opinion on the mouthpiece (i used it for a year) and please just dont base all of your opinions on someone elses opinion. go try it out. articulation was less than admirable and it was a little too resistant for my liking. i did have the cl5 and i wish to have tried the cl4 instead. the tone was really nice but the lack of easiness in articulation and hard resistance was enough for me to try another mouthpiece.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: pplateau
Date: 2014-03-06 05:30
Just received on trial a Buffet Masters CL4 , so far it's great , especially with Legere signature and/or Forestone's new "Black Bamboo." Of course I don't have much time with it yet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-03-06 06:52
Are any of those 'Masters' mouthpieces suitable for jazz? I play an 11-dot-6 Vandoren now on an R13.
B>
Post Edited (2014-03-06 06:53)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2014-03-06 23:46
I am generally of the opinion that any mouthpiece will work in the jazz idiom. It is what YOU do with it that creates the style.
That said the CL4 is open enough to do just about anything. I am still fond of mine and use it as my primary.
...................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Funfly
Date: 2014-03-08 21:23
I'm very much a student but have changed to a CL5 recently after doing a comparison in a (very helpful) music shop.
I have found it has helped me a lot.
I use it with a Legere Signature and am playing with a 2.75. So it works well with a soft reed.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Funfly
Date: 2014-03-08 21:26
I have to add that one of the problems with the CL5 is the steep angle which makes it difficult (impossible) to stop the metal ligature sliding off even if you get the one recommended for the mouthpiece. I tried it but have had to go back to my fabric one.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
