 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2016-03-20 18:04
I wil assume you mean the actual mouthpieces made by their respective makers.
Kaspar was more contemporary to me, and his mouthpieces where THE mouthpieces to get in the mid-'70s because they were pretty consistent, hand made mouthpieces that worked, and were still pretty affordable back then.
I tried a Kaspar back then that WAS great, but the owner backed out of a deal. That mouthpiece was a medium open (#13 I think) mouthpiece that tended toward having an open sound, not really bright but just "large."
It is my understanding that the Chedeville (a much older mouthpiece) was more of the focused and smaller tip opening type. They are very rare now and if there are any "original" Chedeville around they are VERY expensive (pushing close to a grand a piece).
With today's technology, such as the CNC machine, mouthpieces don't need a "guru" to make them work. There are quite a few good mass produced mouthpieces out there to include Vandoren and ESM (of Germany).
...................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-03-20 18:36
My understanding is that the Kaspars, at least at the start, used Chedeville blanks and further worked them to produce their own concept of clarinet sound, much as a number of makers today start with standard Zinner blanks. I think they deepened the baffle and made other changes to the internal dimensions. I had a Kaspar that I bought new in 1965 from Anthony Gigliotti, who was well-known for playing on Chedevilles. I think even then Chedevilles had begun to be hard to find and the various Kaspars (Chicago, Cicero, Ann Arbor) were the newer replacements.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
