The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: John Peacock
Date: 2017-01-27 13:26
Tony: I tried a similar exercise, although not entirely with the same results. I agree that the wood on the older instruments is in a different class, and their craftsmanship can be outstanding. But in terms of tuning, it seems to me that really the 1950s polycylindrical design took things into a new league. Let's stick to Buffets, where I've collected examples from 1936, 1946, 1949, 1959. The 1959 instrument tunes pretty much as well as modern ones, but the others are all inferior, with narrow 12ths, especially in the left hand. The 1936 instrument is the best of the bunch and I have performed on it, although it needs care. But the 1946 and 1949 instruments are so far off that I would never play them in public.
These are only individual examples, of course, and doubtless there were good and bad instruments made at any given time. But I also see similar tuning deficiencies in other pre-polycylindrical instruments.
|
|
|
Tony F |
2017-01-23 10:05 |
|
Re: Tuning, old versus newer instruments new |
|
John Peacock |
2017-01-27 13:26 |
|
Tony F |
2017-01-27 17:14 |
|
John Peacock |
2017-01-27 18:44 |
|
Caroline Smale |
2017-01-27 21:24 |
|
Wes |
2017-01-27 23:46 |
|
seabreeze |
2017-01-28 01:18 |
|
Tony F |
2017-01-28 03:08 |
|
seabreeze |
2017-01-28 09:48 |
|
Tony F |
2020-03-16 10:51 |
|
TomS |
2017-01-28 19:31 |
|
JohnP |
2020-03-16 12:24 |
|
Bob Bernardo |
2020-03-16 18:13 |
|
Bob Bernardo |
2020-03-16 19:00 |
|
Djudy |
2020-03-16 19:39 |
|
Bennett |
2020-03-17 04:27 |
|
Tony F |
2020-03-17 09:44 |
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
|