Author: seabreeze
Date: 2016-10-31 08:35
If the period clarinet makers know from players' repeated experiences that the wooden mouthpieces are prone to swell, warp, and crack, why do they continue to make them? With CNC machines and other devices available today, why not use rubber, acrylic, or some other more durable and reliable material?
Is it adherence to a tradition of the cosmetic appearance of the mouthpiece on the instrument that keeps them using wood or some deeper acoustical need that requires wood to acheive an historically authentic sound?
Post Edited (2016-10-31 17:21)
|
|