 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: TAS
Date: 2016-02-24 02:02
I wonder how the top clarinetists before 1975 (as an arbitrary and capricious point in time) did it. Playing so beautifully with just a standard ligature, a sole choice of one style of Vandoren reed and a one model Buffet, Selmer or LeBlanc clarinet - with the barrel and bell that came with the instrument. Their selection of professional mouthpieces could be named in a few seconds.
It seems to me that clarinetists today have been enticed by clever marketing and other procedures to purchase high priced trinkets that are "must haves" to be given admittance into the High Society of Clarinet Tooters.
Don't get me wrong. Some trinkets make barely minute improvements in playing - although the average listener can't tell any difference. Most are placebos.
I admit to having Cicero Kasper mouthpieces - becase I got them for free or a couple of bucks at his house while watching him make them as a neighborhood scalliwag. I also admit to owning a Moenig barrel, because my original barrel cracked. I splurged and bought one for my "A". I like them...but younger colleagues say I am dated as they check their iPHONES during rehearsals (they are banned from dress rehearsals). Vandoren reeds for the Kasper - since 1958 for me. I also admit to advanced age still having two favorite recital pieces, Bassi's Variations on Rigoletto and Cahuzac's Variations on un air du pays d'Oc...still can play 'em.
For the many on this board that insist on spending on (or lusting after) Toscas, Mecerdes Benz bells and Rolls-Royce ligatures I have no quarrel. I hope your one bedroom efficiency apartment or your parent's basement are comfortable living quarters.You can spend your hard-earned money any way you desire.
What I am suggesting is that you can be a great clarinetist using what world class clarinetists had to play on, more or less, without prancing about with the latest du jour clarinet contraption to wow your peers.
What's left in YOUR wallet?
TAS
Post Edited (2016-02-24 02:06)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2016-02-24 02:38
As far as clarinets go, I play on the barrels and bells that would've come with them originally. I do use a Selmer Mazzeo bell as it's definitely lighter in weight when it comes to playing a full Boehm A clarinet for long periods, but that's the one exception.
I've used the same Rovner ligature since I was in my teens and still play on Vandoren A1 crystal mouthpieces which I've also used since I was 15. I have used other mouthpieces, but always go back to the A1s and use them solely now.
I've seen some sax players chop and change several different mouthpieces in the course of one gig, but with so much choice on hand some people just won't settle down on a single set-up. So I prefer to find what I know works fine for me an stick with it. The audience aren't going to know if you're playing on an X mouthpiece with a Y ligature, Z barrel and an AA bell - they're only going to hear what you're playing and most are satisfied with that. You'll still sound the same to the listeners no matter what accessories you use.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2016-02-24 02:40
TAS,
Sorry but I can not totally support your hypotheses. I still regularly use:
1. 1955 Selmer Mark IV Alto Sax
2. 1965 Selmer Mark VI Tenor Sax
3. 1965 Selmer Series 9* Clarinet
4. 1970 Selmer Series 9 Model 30 Bass Clarinet
5. 1950s Selmer C* Tenor Mouthpiece
6. 1954 Selmer E Alto Sax Mouthpiece
7. !975 LeBlanc L200 Clarinet
8. Various other classic mouthpieces from Selmer, VanDoren, LeBlanc, Stowell Wells Schneider, etc.
Sure I have some new toys from Yamaha (great instruments BTW) and some really great mouthpieces (Borbeck, Rico Reserve, etc.). However, the instruments above are like old friends. One seldom gets tired of them.
Best regards,
HRL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: WhitePlainsDave
Date: 2016-02-24 07:46
TAS, I hear the spirit from which you write.
Many so called improvements in clarinet play are just gimmicks. Hard, metronome intensive work with the same etude books of 60 years ago is paramount in advancing, not cryogenically created ligatures.
But there have been and will continue to be advances such as decent synthetic reeds today, well designed wood alternative clarinets, and even, IMHO, the ATG method of reed adjustment.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: moma4faith
Date: 2016-02-24 19:47
Once I find something that works for me, I don't go looking for the newest and latest fad. I do have to admit, though, I love my Reed Geek. It has helped me improve many reeds for my students, and some for me as well.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2016-02-24 20:45
I expect some of the faddish stuff on the market today to disappear by tomorrow, but I'm willing to look at new ideas. Once upon a time, the Boehm system was the latest, greatest gimmick....
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-02-24 21:43
TAS wrote:
> I wonder how the top clarinetists before 1975 (as an arbitrary
> and capricious point in time) did it. Playing so beautifully
> with just a standard ligature, a sole choice of one style of
> Vandoren reed and a one model Buffet, Selmer or LeBlanc
> clarinet - with the barrel and bell that came with the
> instrument. Their selection of professional mouthpieces could
> be named in a few seconds.
>
True enough. But keep in mind, too, that many of the innovations that have come to the marketplace were initiated by those same players. Some of them, no doubt, had monetary return as a goal. But some were trying to solve problems for the mass-market that they had had to deal with individually by having their equipment tweaked, adjusted to standards they felt were needed to produce the musical results they did.
Reeds in particular were never a source of satisfaction to those mid-20th century players. There actually were more than the original Vandorens - Morres, Olivieris, later in the 1970s Luries. More players played hand-made reeds than probably do now. Because back then there truly were only two playable reeds in a box.
Bonade ligatures have been around since at least the '60s and I suspect there were others around as well, though Bonade inverted was my choice as a student in the late '60s - until Gigliotti began marketing his rail-based plastic ligature in the '70s (which he himself used through the rest of his career - he also played on his own mouthpieces and Selmer 10G).
Moennig barrels were being custom-made here in the U.S. for Buffet clarinets by Hans Moennig (using unfinished narrow-bored barrels made for him by Buffet) long before they became a commercial item after his retirement.
So, it really isn't as if those mid-20th century clarinetists were all making their exemplary music on the stock equipment you've described. That said, they certainly didn't need five different models of Buffet clarinet, three different Selmer models and the plethora of idiosyncratically designed instruments that are available today to create their individual, personal playing qualities. Things were indeed much simpler 40-50 years ago than now, if not quite as simple as we might remember.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kilo
Date: 2016-02-24 22:25
Looking back and remembering the days when everyone in the section used a 2 screw ligature and the only difference you'd notice was that a few of the more adventurous players' ligs were inverted.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dorjepismo ★2017
Date: 2016-02-24 22:36
I remember 1975, and scoring any kind of Kasper could be some kind of black art if you didn't happen across someone with the right knowledge. And, once scored, some of them were a lot better than others, so it could be an expensive hit or miss, but those might have been Ann Arbor and/or Kasper the Younger Kaspers. There were still a lot of options for makers, and for those of us with limited bucks, it could be a pretty daunting endeavor to assemble a good setup, especially since forums like this didn't exist, so information was harder to come by. As Karl says, there were also Morre and Olivieri reeds, each of which had their own whispered mythologies and torturous or uncertain supply chains. Harrison ligatures were a big thing for awhile, and there were some soft plastic ones. Then, there were the people doing refacing and interior work on the mouthpieces, which could go either way. People knew about English and German-style Boehm instruments, but it would have been hard to get a job with them, and the German ones were very expensive back then, too, unless you got Fritz Wurlitzers from the DDR.
I think the comments are true that really good players tend to sound and play really good on nearly anything. I also think there are a lot of us who are decent players, but need all the help we can get. Not going far enough with equipment can bite you worse than going too far.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TAS
Date: 2016-02-24 23:18
Let me add a humorous observation.
Clarinet neckstraps.
I attended a recital a few months ago where the college recitalist took the stage, spent an inordinate amount of time tuning and monkeying around with a reed. Then changing the reed....on stage.
The actual playing commenced, and I thought her real vocation should have been majorette -- primping in public before the first note was played and then contorting the torso every which way for every phrase with the neck strap flying about like it was in the midst of a Cat 5 hurricane.
The quality of the clarinetist indicated that she needed to revisit the Rubank methods with a competent instructor.
But the visual show was entertaining to watch. That gimmick of a neckstrap must have been attached to the instrument with Gorilla glue.
TAS
Post Edited (2016-02-24 23:32)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2016-02-24 23:19
...don't forget that the top players sent their equipment to Hans Moennig for more than mere overhauls or barrels. Often, he would rework and finish their instruments--reboring, etc. So it's not like the top players were playing stock instruments.
If you listen very carefully to the recordings from back then, you can also hear that intonation and evenness of tone throughout all registers, even in top players, tended to be more sporadic compared to the top players of today. At least some of the reason for the superiority of today's players in those basic terms is undoubtedly related to the equipment and variety on today's market.
Except for my reeds, I play all vintage gear...but snake oil aside (and there is plenty of snake oil on the clarinet gear market), contemporary equipment and variety is actually quite impressive. I'd actually favor even more variety...with the introduction of a new large bore Selmer reference CT model clarinet, and maybe a re-launch of Leblanc's Pete Fountain model.
Eric
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
Post Edited (2016-02-24 23:20)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2016-02-24 23:37
I'm guilty. I have a fairly well-paid job as a professional clarinettist and I have spent probably much more than necessary on gear and gimmicks. When your passion is also your profession you aren't too concerned about putting substantial money out on a tiny improvement in the quest for perfection. I may be a fool, but parting with my money has sometimes been a way to keep myself interested in exploring the instrument.
HOWEVER...
I have students who come in for a lesson every week and all they want to talk about is whether this or that barrel improves their sound. When I was a student I didn't have access to different mouthpieces, barrels or instruments. To improve my sound or playing, all I could do was have lessons, practice, learn how to adjust reeds and listen to better players.
Buying gear is a luxury for those who have the time and money for it. Practising is what makes you a better clarinettist. I don't think anyone would disagree with that?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-02-25 00:15
Liquorice wrote:
> Buying gear is a luxury for those who have the time and money
> for it. Practising is what makes you a better clarinettist. I
> don't think anyone would disagree with that?
Regrettably, there are a number of students here on the BB who might disagree.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2016-02-25 01:33
I'd say you have to have good equipment to start with, before we can simplify to saying practice is what makes you a better player. Practicing very hard on bad equipment can ingrain a lifetime of bad habits and overcompensation. I'm reminded of a story about Bernard Walton (I think), who the story goes, played on some ancient Reform Boehms. Supposedly he did a lot of compensating for the voicing and intonation of those instruments, but when Fritz Wurlitzer made him a new set, better in tune, he couldn't adjust his playing. In his case, it worked out alright--he apparently returned to his old instruments. But in many cases, bad equipment (or equipment poorly matched to the physiology of the player) becomes an obstacle to mastery of the instrument itself. When that happens, practicing is at best an exercise in frustration.
Having said that, equipment won't give you mastery. That's ultimately attained only by hard work and talent.
Eric
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2016-02-25 02:18
I'd say that "good" equipment is a necessity for any level of player, though absolutely critical for the less advanced who don't have the skills and experience to muscle their way through instrument deficiencies the way top players can.
But "good" does not necessarily correlate with "new", or "expensive", or made by one of the "Top-Four" brands or expensive boutique makers -- not at all. My own best Bb soprano clarinet (given that my skill level is just middling, I'm not a professional) is not a Buffet or Backun or Wurlitzer, nor is it made of cocobolo with gold-plated keywork (one of our readers will know what I'm talking about) -- it's a 1970s-vintage Boosey & Hawkes Series 8-10 I probably paid less than 50 bucks for on eVilBay with a few minor modifications made to it.
I wish I'd had this clarinet when I was a high-school bass clarinetist struggling with a lousy R-13 soprano my teacher had picked out for me -- I could never get it to play in tune, the keywork was awkward for my hands and fingers, and it nearly caused me to give up playing soprano clarinets altogether.
What really has improved between the current era and the pre-Internet age is our access to product information, and to the products themselves. We have a LOT more choices nowadays, partly because we're aware that those choices exist.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2016-02-25 06:10
I would say this: Having great equipment at my disposal has made me much more aware of the musical possibilities of the clarinet. With that knowledge, I've been able to get much better results out of less-than-great gear.
I must also admit this: I have a shoebox full of gear that has proven to be of no benefit at all--but I am still glad that I trialed it!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: seabreeze
Date: 2016-02-26 01:08
I'm 100% with you David on the practice and CONCEPTUAL TRAINING part. And YouTube for example makes the conceptual part so much easier today. Drucker said in an interview that when he was coming up most symphony players didn't even do recitals. For recordings you could listen to Reginald Kell. Today anyone can hear Martin Frost, Ricardo Morales, Sabine Meyer, Philip Berrod, Wenzell Fuchs, Shirley Brill, Andraes Ottensamer, Julian Bliss, Jose Franch-Ballester, and other clarinet wizards play concertos, recital peices, etc. for free or sample well over a dozen performances of Ginastera's "Variationes Concertantes" in which young clarinetists whizz through a whirlwind in the extreme altississimo that many players a few decades ago considered nearly unplayable! Elsa Ludwig's ability to play the Nielsen Clarinet Concerto was so unusual in the early 1960s that Michele Zukovsky used to call her "the Nielsen Kid," and everybody know who she meant. Today, I've lost count of how many Nielsen Kids are playing the Nielsen on YouTube, and many of them are playing it very very well. This advance in Ginastera and Nielsen did not happen because of the introduction of fat boy barrels, rose gold ligatures, cocobolo clarinets, or composite reeds; it happened because conceptual training spread and players learned to practice more practical techniques they can use in actual performance.
Post Edited (2017-02-06 03:56)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: A Brady
Date: 2016-02-26 02:14
I will use any piece of equipment which gives me any improvement, to my perception, whether it can be "proven" by a recording or not. If I feel I am playing with a better sound, response, articulation, etc, then I, simply put, will play better.
I was playing a gig about 20 years ago when an older gentleman, a big band veteran of Dorsey and others, asked what my clarinet ligature was (it was a Harrison.) As I started to tell him, he cut me off and imperiously stated that "Benny and Artie didn't have those gimmicks, and they sounded great." While I agree that these gentlemen did indeed sound great, the notion that all equipment choices should be frozen to reflect some mythical "golden era," often the youth of the protestor, is as absurd as the notion that oil lamps were really just fine for hundreds of years, and that silly Edison fellow just was selling "snake oil."
Of course not all developments in the clarinet world are effective innovations, but some are indeed, and this is an extremely subjective area. If a mouthpiece, ligature, type of reed, instrument, or any other piece of gear within my budget enables my practice routine to produce results more efficiently, that's exactly what I'm going to use. Or I suppose we could all just be playing on Boxwood instruments with two keys, as these worked just fine for Johann Christoph Denner.
AB
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2016-02-26 03:22
It changed quickly then, cause there were many players playing Nielsen in the 70's........
Played it in 11th grade - 1980, and was messing around with it in 78 after playing for 3 years. Way more common now though.
Shifrin played it with the Philadelphia Orchestra in the early 70's, and freaked out the other "players" at Curtis and Temple at the time.
Nobody would play the competition for several years afterwards.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
