Author: SecondTry
Date: 2023-06-06 21:39
Sorry all: another somewhat verbose bit of editorial follows.
The Federal Drug Administration or FDA, for those perhaps outside of the US that don't know, is a US Federal regulatory agency responsible for, among other things, permitting certain drugs, too dangerous to be freely purchased by the user, to be sold with the permission of those licensed and trained (i.e. doctors, nurse practitioners, etc.) to do so by prescription.
Before a drug is granted indications for use (prescription or not) it must undergo pretty rigorous (if not full proof) testing (i.e. double blind trials.)
The rationale for such a system, at the risk of pointing out the obvious, is that medications have indications, contraindications and side effects: or maybe stated more succinctly they can be dangerous, used incorrectly. How much a patient takes and for what conditions, what drugs can't be taken simultaneously, the potential in some drugs for addiction and abuse, and side effects worse than improvement in the treated condition are just some of the reasons for the controls.
But yet another reason for testing and controls, which I think has its closest parallels sometimes to clarinet gear purchase is desperation, which leads to irrational decisions. We don't want medical patients facing dire conditions making irrational care decisions that can lead to their taking snake oil like concoctions that at best lack therapeutic value, and at worse do harm.
~~~~~~~~~
Now, because clarinet gear at worst just doesn't work, or work as promised, and isn't apt to do physical harm, and because such a small percentage of the population plays our instrument, the (financial) incentive for a testing body like Consumer Reports to exist, much to the delight of manufacturers, doesn't exist.
Clearly, some gear does help some of us to play better. And some high end gear does, for the most advanced of players, offer slight marginal improvements. And still more, many players aren't caught up in the “next greatest ligature,” foregoing purchase until considerable consensus and peer review deems a product worthy.
But I'm afraid too many of us search for holy grails in gear. Maybe it's just more interesting to talk about here than “Exercise 7 in Etude Book 11,” etude books, and their rigorous use (a.k.a. practice,) by the way, being this contributor's belief to be closest thing to our holy grail.
Maybe many aspiring players don't substitute such practice for the next greatest instrument, after all there are only so many hours in a day that we can physically practice.
But it amazes me as to the variety of the most nuanced gear, from cryogenic ligatures to brass particle infused mouthpieces available, relative to the number of professionals in our discipline, and people's willingness to buy such things. Sometimes I think there are less gear choices in professional sports where both salary and population size is remarkably higher.
Thoughts?
|
|