 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2024-07-23 18:36
My "testing," which is probably not anywhere near comprehensive enough to even approach scientific, has not found significant intonation differences between my Vandoren Series 13 (A=440) and non Series 13 (higher pitched) mouthpieces.
Can others concur with or refute this finding?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2024-07-23 19:07
My experience was that the 13 series is a bit lower, but for me it tends to throw off the internal pitch of the horn. I've played on some for awhile but always preferred the standard, non-13 versions.
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: gwie
Date: 2024-07-23 19:49
I've had the same experience as Paul. It's not such a drastic difference most of the time, but all it takes is a few hours of playing where one is subconsciously having to push up the pitch ever so slightly to cause fatigue and bad embouchure habits.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alexey
Date: 2024-07-24 00:00
Here are a couple of quotes from Donald Montanaro:
"The 13 series mouthpieces were designed with a deeper baffle and a larger bore in order to produce a more mellow tone quality".
"For those players that have not yet tried the 13 series mouthpieces I think that, aside from benefiting from the slightly lower pitch, they will enjoy the dark, rich, and responsive sound of the 13 series".
These are the reasons why I prefer the 13 series. However, I am not completely sure nowadays it's true for every mouthpiece of the 13 series.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: gwie
Date: 2024-07-24 10:53
I'm currently experimenting with a BD5-13 on my Yamaha CSVR, and the pitch is decent as long as the ensemble sticks to tuning to A-440. I just played a production of "Into the Woods" on it and with the electronic keyboards keeping the pitch locked in at A-440, it worked well. When it got warm I still had to pull out the barrel slightly. The cover that the mouthpiece offers is quite attractive in the pit, as it mitigates some of the higher overtones that could be too much in an amplified setting with individual mics for each player.
I've recorded myself from the back of a big concert hall (1000+ seats) to compare, and I have to really work to project to fill the space with the BD5-13, and my Behn Epic HCV is preferable in those kinds of performance situations where it makes it much easier to generate the focus and projection needed to cut through a big orchestra and balance with big string sections without having to resort to too-stiff reeds or letting the sound get too strident.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jarmo Hyvakko
Date: 2024-07-24 13:26
As far as i remember the deeper baffle shape flattens most the throat notes (e'-bb')
Jarmo Hyvakko, Principal Clarinet, Tampere Philharmonic, Finland
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Peacock
Date: 2024-07-24 15:42
Jarmo: this chimes with my experience. I played in an orchestra where the 2nd and I always tuned pretty well. Then he got a 13 series MP and his throat notes were so flat that I just couldn't match them with any amount of lipping. The problem is largest on notes that already tend to be a bit on the low side with many Buffet models (E & F natural). I've since experimented and found the same issue - so 13 series mouthpieces are unusable as far as I'm concerned. But for some instruments and players they can and do work. The 13-series mellow tone quality is potentially attractive - but I would suggest that anyone thinking of getting one should check their E/F with a tuner before committing.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: zhangray4
Date: 2024-07-24 16:53
the 13 series makes throat A and Bb more in tune for me but also makes it so that I need to add the C# key or Eb key to sharpen the E & F natural. again I have an R13 and these 2 notes tend to be low on Buffet models, so ymmv
-- Ray Zhang
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2024-07-24 18:27
As with others experience, I always found the 13 series to be slightly flat, especially in the throat range. Of course, one could get shorter barrels, but it is a bit of a nuisance to have to start fussing with other equipment. I know people who have had the mouthpiece shortened by a good tech with a lathe. They end up shortening the tenon and then shortening the base of the body of the mouthpiece. It works well, but again, a bit of a hassle.
If I were looking at Vandorens, I would be inclined to look at the non 13 series, although not every model comes that way
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2024-07-24 19:38
Ed wrote:
> As with others experience, I always found the 13 series to be
> slightly flat, especially in the throat range.
Keep in mind that the throat notes will always be most affected by the intonation influence of either a barrel or a mouthpiece because the different internal volume represents a larger portion of the length of the short tube notes. The pitch of the throat notes can often be adjusted slightly up or down mechanically if you decide to stay with a mouthpiece that affects their pitch.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2024-07-24 19:53
I wouldn't recommend a "13" Series as they won't offer you much in tuning flexibility, especially when cold. Stick with the standard models.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2024-07-24 20:13
Thank you for your responses..which I may have begun to realize are the product of an original question that might be better phrased. 
That question being, is it better to be too sharp or flat in terms of the remedies, and their effect across the instrument's range. 
I imagine, like many other things clarinet, it depends on the circumstances, notes effected, and who you are speaking to....
Post Edited (2024-07-24 20:14)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2024-07-24 20:33
There is the old British maxim: It is better to be sharp than out of tune.
People hear flat better
But I refer to issues of pitches around the 'short tube' notes being a bit flatter. You can zig and zag around that but I prefer sharp problems because it is easier to "relax the embouchure," and it is less stressful to it than the opposite.
............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2024-07-24 21:10
Paul Aviles wrote:
> There is the old British maxim: It is better to be sharp than
> out of tune.
>
>
> People hear flat better
>
>
>
> But I refer to issues of pitches around the 'short tube' notes
> being a bit flatter. You can zig and zag around that but I
> prefer sharp problems because it is easier to "relax the
> embouchure," and it is less stressful to it than the opposite.
>
>
>
> ............Paul Aviles
>
Personally I agree Paul. I feel that flattening through embouchure not only gives me greater relative control of intonation than having to use it to bring pitch up, but, as mentioned, requires less expenditure of energy.
Energy conservation, and I mean the kind on the clarinet, not the green type (both which both are noble) isn't, for me, to be discounted. I strongly adhere to the Mark Nuccio school of thought that the easiest setup that doesn't compromise your artistry is best. Long pieces on hot performance days inform this preference for me, and running resistant reeds on open mouthpieces just isn't my thing and likely to be less my thing as I age.
Of course, others MMV.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2024-07-24 22:35
It's far easier to correct being sharp than being flat.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2024-07-25 00:48
Quote:
It's far easier to correct being sharp than being flat.
For sure. Years ago I remember a mouthpiece (possible an M13lyre) that worked fairly well. But, I found that if the room was a little cold, if I had not warmed up sufficiently or if I was switching clarinets I would struggle to keep the pitch up.
SO much easier to be a little sharp and then just pull out if needed!
Post Edited (2024-07-25 00:49)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2024-07-25 02:44
I don't have an ax to grind in the VanDoren mouthpieces debate - I don't use any of them. But it may be worth considering that Montanaro and whoever worked on the Series 13 design after him were not so much trying to produce a lower-pitched VanDoren mouthpiece. I always had the understanding that Montanaro was trying to come up with a mouthpiece that was "darker," and rounder sounding than the "traditional" Vandorens of this time, more like the Chedevilles that he (and many others) played as they became rarer and more expensive. The slightly lower pitch was, I think, a side effect. I had no relationship with him before or after so I don't know first-hand what he really wanted to do, but I believe he was trying to produce (or have a major mouthpiece maker manufacture) a replacement for the Chedevilles that he could recommend to students.
Unlike Gigliotti, who performed on his own mouthpieces from the time they came on the market, Montanaro didn't (AFAIK) perform on the M13 or M13 Lyre that he helped design and recommended to his students. But even he acknowledged (while extolling the generally lower pitch as an advantage for American players) the problem of flat throat notes, which would have been a predictable result of scooping out the baffle. I don't actually know how he solved the problem for his students, but it must have involved either barrels or tone hole adjustments. But the point of the larger chamber wasn't primarily the lower pitch (there are other ways to do that); it was the mellowing of the traditional Vandoren tone.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jimis4klar
Date: 2024-07-26 22:36
I've lately been trying M15s, profile 88 and 13 series. I find the profile 88 having easier response although the 13 series more balanced sound, not so much shimmer. Although I Iike the sound and feel of 13 series, I prefer the profile 88 because of the more immediate response. There is a difference in tuning but that shouldn't be a concern as can be fixed with barrel lengths accordingly.
Post Edited (2024-07-26 22:46)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JamesOrlandoGarcia
Date: 2024-07-26 23:14
Try both. Depends on the player. I use the 13 series. I tend to find I have to work harder to keep throat notes down otherwise.
For me pulling out to correct the sharper non 13 series means then thumb f and e are too low.
Everyone is different.
James Garcia
Bass Clarinet/Clarinet III, Des Moines Symphony Orchestra
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2024-07-26 23:42
Jimis4klar wrote:
> I've lately been trying M15s, profile 88 and 13 series. I find
> the profile 88 having easier response although the 13 series
> more balanced sound, not so much shimmer. Although I Iike the
> sound and feel of 13 series, I prefer the profile 88 because of
> the more immediate response. There is a difference in tuning
> but that shouldn't be a concern as can be fixed with barrel
> lengths accordingly.
>
This whole discussion has confused me as the implication has been that Profile 88 and Series 13 are mutually exclusive. Not all of the Series 13 mouthpieces are available with a Profile 88 beak shape, but the M15 comes in 3 versions - a traditional (CM317), a Profile 88 beak (CM3178), and a Series 13 with Profile 88 beak (CM4178). With M15 you don't need to choose between Series 13 and Profile 88.
You can see all the Vandoren mouthpieces at https://vandoren.fr/en/vandoren-mouthpieces/m15-bb-clarinet-mouthpiece/.
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}
