 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Elise W.
Date: 2004-08-07 16:48
Could anyone explain the difference between a regular Buffet R13 67mm barrel and a 67mm Moennig barrel? Is it worth buying a Moennig and what are the advantages?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2004-08-07 20:38
GBK, does reverse-taper mean "slightly larger at the top [mp] than at the bottom {U J]" . Ive tried both and via my poor ears couldn;t tell any diff ! Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-08-08 04:47
Don Berger wrote:
> GBK, does reverse-taper mean "slightly larger at the top [mp]
> than at the bottom {U J]" .
Yes...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-08-09 14:24
GBK -
The Moennig barrels provided by Buffet, with the Buffet logo, have, I believe, a continuous reverse taper from top to bottom. I think the Buffet Chadash barrels are the same design, with a different taper. I'll be happy to be corrected.
The Hite page is not specific, but he appears to say that Moennig's own barrels had the same, continuous taper, which was different from those made by Buffet.
The barrels I use have a reverse taper at both the top and the bottom, with the narrowest part in the middle. The angle of these tapers, and the point at which they meet, are unique to each barrel length, barrel material, mouthpiece, instrument and player. The shorter the barrel, the more critical the adjustment. The process of adjustment involves the maker working with the player to find the particular combination that works best. The difference between these barrels and cylindrical ones, or Buffet Moennig or Chadash tapered ones, is not subtle.
I'd be interested in whether other barrel makers have tried non-uniform tapers.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-08-09 15:50
Ken -
The Moennig and Chadash barrels both employ a reverse taper. I suspect that their top and bottom measurements are very similar.
The difference between the two types of barrels is that the Chadash barrel uses a more gradual taper from top to bottom.
My guess is that the Chadash barrel has a very small cylindrical section in the middle of the barrel before it completes the reverse taper.
Having watched Guy bore a few barrels for me in his shop, it is definitely a two step reaming process...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-08-09 16:24
In conversation with Mr. Hite I asked a good deal about his thoughts on the Reverse taper Moemmig barrel and he said they had a definite reverse taper...the characteristics this gives is it tends to send a wave form throught the upper joint of the clarinet which lowers the pitch througout the entire scale.
As to technical matters I am sure others have written extensively...I have used the Moennig Barrels on both Selmer and Buffets with David Hite pieces in orchestra and found they have excellent pitch and tonal characteristics...
however, the player has to also find the right barrel for the instrument he or she is playing...this means maybe trying a couple for no one person is the same as the other so a personal choice means finding a barrel that allows for nice tuning with excellent tone and control...
as a matter of conjecture I have always wondered why so many players seem mystified by the concept of a Mooenig barrel...Selmer and Buffet are primarily what Moennig designed for as to how well they adapt to Yamaha and Leblanc others may want to step forward....they may not work so well with certain bore configurations is definite...! Primarily the Moennig firm made for Selmer and Buffet players....
The main aspect that I like about Moennig barrels is the response and the superb 12ths throughout the entire compass...this is no easy matter in an instrument with a bore so unstable as the clarinet.
As to the success others have had with Moennig barrels the popularity of them is evident...
The American clarinet school is noted for it's refinement of tuning and wonderful ease of sound production...no doubt in part due to the like of the Moennig barrel...
David Hite was very helpful with me about his knowledge of the Moennig barrel...and yes there are people about who can readjust older Moennig barrels to bring them to the original measurements!
As to sound production they tend to bring a deep rich lustre to the sound witout sacrificing projection which can be the case with some types of equipment....
as to mouthpieces they really do help a fine mouthpiece act and project the way it should. A number of older school players like Hite, Gigliotti and Gennussa were adament that the Moennig barrel gave to tone a set of properties that tended to stabilize the sound and centre the tone.
David Dow
Post Edited (2004-08-09 16:27)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2004-08-09 20:18
"...and yes there are people about who can readjust older Moennig barrels to bring them to the original measurements"
Guy Chadash, Albert Alphin, etc (I am sure there are others) will take a barrel and rebore it to the correct dimensions. I have also seen Guy put in a hard rubber inset and then rebore it if the dimensions are too big.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Avie
Date: 2004-08-10 20:35
I was told that the pine (spelling?!) barrel is similar to the Chadash and the moennig. Of the three types what barrel would you choose for an R13 that plays sharp in the upper register presently with a 65mm barrel and what would be the advantages?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Grabnerwg
Date: 2004-08-10 21:33
Once again, we are oversimplifying.
Let's talk about Moennig-style or Chadash-style barrels. I am sure both of these gentlemen in their careers have made barrels with differeing measdurements. I would be very surprised if they did not, in order to satisfy their customers.
The general information above is correct, as far as it goes.
The Moennig or Chadash style barrel is a has a reverse taper bore. What is not generally recognized is that many, if not most barrels in use these days may have a taper.
I have a very fine Buffet barrel, which is at least 30 years old. No other designation on it except Buffet , made in France, B65 (Bb clarinet, 65 mm).
It has a very nice reverse taper. I use it as a model for many of the Bb barrels I use.
Please also remember that there is a BIG difference in Bb and A barrels and seldom can they be interchanged without negative results, the internal measurements, not just length, do differ.
Almost all the clarinet mouthpieces in use today terminate in a 15 mm bore. We simply LIKE the sound they produce. Most of our clarinets start with a 14.65 - 14.76 bore.
Also we like the "POP" in the sound produced by having the barrel terminate in a smaller bore than the opening of the top joint. This is called a "choke" and I understand it changes the standing wave in the clarinet, adding an additional dimension to the sound and response.
Thus, the reverse taper bore barrel was born. It is associated with the late Hans Moennig, but was used before his time as well.
Barrel makers "play" with the shape of the taper to adjust the 12ths in the upper joint.
In a barrel I made recently I modified the taper to an "hourglass" type shape. This is done by reversing the reamer and tapering UP from the bottom. I did this because the throat tones were sharper than I wanted, yet the barrel was the right length.
So...there is no "one" taper. You do what you can to tune the individual clarinet at hand.
Walter Grabner
www.clarinetxpress.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2004-08-10 21:35
I'll stick my neck out....but a 65mm barrel on an R13 probably should play sharp! It's Pyne, by the way. I have a couple of his plastic barrels and like them. I liken the barrel on a clarinet to the old carburetors cars. Experts could do wonders with a car's performance by adjusting the carb, cleaning it or replacing it. I had a Moennig bbl for some time that didn't seem to do anything for any of my clarinets until I put it on an old Gutowski I was refurbishing where it worked wonders. Yes, there is magic in barrels that few of us understand.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Aussie Nick
Date: 2004-08-12 12:33
"The main aspect that I like about Moennig barrels is the response and the superb 12ths throughout the entire compass...this is no easy matter in an instrument with a bore so unstable as the clarinet... "
After reading this thread and relating it to the tuning problems (the 12ths) I have been having with my new clarinets (mainly the Bb) I went into a music store and borrowed two 66mm Moenigg barrels to try. Sure enough, the 12ths in the upper joint became narrower... I could now play the upper clarion B in tune without lipping down alot. As for the sound characteristics I'm not so sure whether I like them or not. My prestige barrel seems to have a slightly sweeter sound, and I think the Moeniggs possibly darker. I will hold on to the Moenigg I preferred out of the 2, and I will compare it to the remaining Moeniggs in the shop. They only have one Chadash which I might be able to try. Would Chadash barrels improve these 12ths as well?
When I put the 66mm Moenigg on my A the pitch was quite good, except for possibly on the upper clarion C being a little under. How important is it to get specific A clarinet barrels? Is it ok to use the Bb one?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: shmuelyosef
Date: 2017-03-10 01:39
If Mr grabner is still watching...I'm curious about the following
I have posted some measurements of some vintage and modern barrels at
https://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?246449-More-clarinet-geek-out-Barrel-tapers
If you look you will see a remarkable amount of variation that is "reverse taper"
Is there any general wisdom about the shape or is the dominant parameter the diameters at the ends?
Post Edited (2017-03-10 03:14)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Grabnerwg
Date: 2017-03-10 10:17
There is no "one" reverse taper that is better than all others. If you are doing a custom job, you need to bore the barrel so that it fits the given clarinet.
You are, of course, limited by the number and type of reamers that you have on hand.
Walter Grabner
www.clarinetxpress.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Peacock
Date: 2017-03-10 18:16
In considering the effect of various bore tapers, it should be remembered that all barrels are individuals. On various occasions, I've sat down with a bunch of Buffet barrels, all allegedly the same model, and been astonished at how different they felt and sounded. This is also true with other quality manufacturers. I'm still at a loss to understand how this can be, given modern manufacturing methods. One hypothesis is that maybe the wood changes a little in shape after being bored; the other is that different pieces of wood have a different resonance via their internal grain structure (Peter Eaton told me he believes in the second hypothesis).
But in any case, this means it's not so easy to take one Buffet standard barrel and one Moennig model and say much that is useful about the effect of the taper. You might well like the Moennig one better, but this could be for reasons that are not due to the design philosophy. Maybe if you had 5 of each some pattern might emerge.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Steven Ocone
Date: 2017-03-11 01:21
Here is my information regarding barrels made by Hans Moennig. Take it or leave it - I wasn't there taking measurements.
He originally started making new barrels for A clarinets. He used a 67 mm barrel to compensate for the other changes he made to the clarinet. It had a straight taper, approximately 14.75mm on top and 14.6 mm on bottom.
The Bb barrels had an hour glass shape,(and here my notes switch to inches) .585 on top and .575 on bottom. My notes don't specify what the choke diameter is.
That would be 14.86mm on top and 14.6mm on bottom
Steve Ocone
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2017-03-11 08:25
Steven Ocone wrote:
> Here is my information regarding barrels made by Hans Moennig.
> Take it or leave it - I wasn't there taking measurements.
>
Hans Moennig, of course, hasn't made a barrel in decades (he died in 1988), and he was reaming them individually by hand.
I'd be curious to know if anyone has target measurements of either the current Buffet barrels or the current Moennig-Buffet ones, both of which I assume are machine-reamed.
I also wonder who makes the Moennig-Buffet barrels. I've assumed that Buffet does.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Grabnerwg
Date: 2017-03-14 02:46
Actually, Karl, I have toured the Buffet factory twice, and both times seen the final reaming done by hand, with very long reamers, and they ream the barrel and upper joint assembled. The times I saw this, they were working only on R13's, so I don't know if it is true of the other models.
If you ever get a chance to tour the factory, do so. It is extremely interesting.
Walter Grabner
www.clarinetxpress.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2017-03-14 04:23
Walter, when they do that, are they actually reaming the bore of the top section, or is the taper of the reamer already small enough to miss touching it?
What do they do about making barrels that are to be sold separately from any clarinet? Are those simply reamed to standard entry and exit diameters?
Are the "regular" - non-Moennig - barrels (made as you describe them) reverse-taperd or are they straighter than a Moennig bore?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2017-03-14 06:35
Don't buy the Moennig barrels unless you are playing on the older horns. Actually don't buy any Moennig barrels. They are probably off in measurements.
I was lucky enough to study with him in Philly. The new Buffet bores are too big, from about 1975 on.
I have his measurements. Not just the 67mm length.
Your best bet is to talk with Guy Chadash to get the right fit with the newer horns.
Even when Hans ordered barrels from Buffet often the tapers were off so he'd have to readjust them, thus the reason why I am suggesting to deal with Guy. Hans would get so mad at Buffet. I learned a few swear words in German. Hans had a temper. When things weren't right he'd get pretty angry. This happened a lot when getting barrels and pads from Buffet. Sometimes he would throw away 4 or 5 pads before finding a good pad to use when working on horns. If he were alive today I'm sure he would not use Buffet pads.
On the 67mm barrel he used a .20" taper. On other barrels it depends...He always used a wood lathe, never used a hand reamer. Some tapers were only .10". He bought barrels 50 at a time, or more. Most of which needed adjustments.
Guy now has adjustable barrels and a type of plastic so the pitch should remain steady.
You may want to send your horns to Guy. He's not cheap. But the horns will play better in tune. Tell him "Hi" for me. He's a good man. One of the things I agree with him on is moving the octave key down. It's too forward. This one adjustment will help tune the newer Buffets, then match up a barrel to tune the 12ths. This can prevent a lot of undercutting holes and make the notes much more even.
So in general, a new barrel will NOT solve all of the Buffet issues. This is why I've made the switch to Yamaha, but if you have Buffet's spend the money and have someone like Guy adjust the whole horn with a matching barrel. You will then be a happy musician.
Designer of - Vintage 1940 Cicero Mouthpieces and the La Vecchia mouthpieces
Yamaha Artist 2015
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: shmuelyosef
Date: 2017-03-14 06:56
Karl, this is a question for you potentially (as Hans cannot answer)
A corollary question to Karl's is:
I hear conflicting stories about the barrel function, and have been testing in the context of an old Leblanc Dynamique that is missing it's original barrel...the conflicting views are:
1. in one scenario about what barrels can do...a barrel that is diameter-mismatched to the bore (of the mouthpiece at the input or the LH joint at the output) provides acoustic reflections. Like any 'transmission system' a diameter change provides an opportunity to bounce some of the frequencies back. This can happen at both ends of a mismatched barrel and set up the opportunity for a standing wave...capturing some specific bands of the acoustic spectrum and effectively isolating the frequency response of the "mostly cylindrical" section of the bore. This is supported by the 0.589" - 0.580" taper that we often see. Interestingly, I recently measured a 2006-era R-13 and the top bore of the LH joint is exactly 0.589". Most mouthpiece bores in the 50s (at least in the USA) were about 15mm or 0.591"...close to the 0.589" in the barrel top
2. in another scenario, custom barrels are made by matching the mouthpiece diameter at the top and matching the LH joint bore at the bottom. This would be consistent with reaming the barrel in situ with the LH joint. Presumably you would line up the logos and ream through to assure the bores match exactly...if the grain were lined up as well in the wood, these pieces would shrink and distort simultaneously. If the top of the barrel ended up at ~0.590" it would perfectly match common mouthpieces. Intuitively then, this would minimize reflections/disturbances in the transmission of acoustic waves down the bore as there would only be gradual transmissions (lossy, but much less reflective).
Some examples from horns in my studio/workshop:
My personal Series 9...great intonation and free-blowing
Barrel has a linear taper from 0.593" - 0.582". Original HS* mpc has exit bore of 0.590". I use a Fobes piece with an output bore of 0.592" (measured). At the bottom, there is a discontinuity as the LH joint upper bore is 0.582". Perhaps one reflection is better than two? In that case matching the Buffet at this interface is brilliant as the mouthpiece mismatch is up to the customer and can't be controlled.
I also have here a modern Selmer B015 clarinet made in 2008. The barrel is nearly cylindrical but measures 0.575", much smaller than any plausible mouthpiece and also much smaller than the 0.590" input bore on the LH joint. This clarinet has very good response and intonation, but plays a bit flat with my Fobes (need to use the 65mm barrel provided for 440 intonation), however is awesomely in tune with a Grabner K-14.
I have notices that some custom barrel vendors actually do ask that you send them your clarinet. This would lend me to believe that there is, in fact, some consistent art involved...maybe even some science!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2017-03-14 07:11
shmuelyosef - You are correct. The bores on mouthpieces are now all over the place. This is why I did NOT give out Moennig's exact measurements.
This is also why I would suggest using Guy. He can adjust the tapers accordingly. Mouthpiece bores are more important than the barrel bores. Almost all of the mouthpiece bores made today are simply made wrong, from the expensive Zinner's to most of the Vandoren's and every mouthpiece you can think of. It's horrible...
Designer of - Vintage 1940 Cicero Mouthpieces and the La Vecchia mouthpieces
Yamaha Artist 2015
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: shmuelyosef
Date: 2017-03-14 07:11
Attachment: Clarinet_Barrel_Tapers.JPG (64k)
I have here (at the moment) a Chadash-labeled barrel that varies 0.006" from input to output, but is obviously reamed using two different tapers with a cylindrical region in the middle. See the chart in the attachment.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RKing
Date: 2017-03-14 16:15
Thanks for the graph. If you turn it on its side, you can almost visualize the different bore shapes.
Post Edited (2017-03-14 16:16)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2017-03-15 02:45
Interesting graph! On a $35 Triebert clarinet for my granddaughter, the low register right hand notes were too sharp. With a reamer made from a dowel with an imbedded hacksaw blade backside, set with an approximate Moennig taper, the barrel was modified so that the tuning was quite good. The mouthpiece was an M3 Lurie from me.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
