 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Clarinator
Date: 2002-02-19 12:51
I've been seeing a lot of these on ebay lately. However no one indicates if they're rubber or plastic. Also I've seen what appears to be different facing numbers....as in #2...#6..#3...etc.
Can I presume that the larger the number the more open the MPC?
Are these MPCs any good? Have a picture of Artie Shaw using a black one with the white insert, so....What do you folks know about these? Thanks....
The Clarinator
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2002-02-19 18:08
Brilhart mouthpieces were made of "Ebolin" or "Tonalin," whatever those things are (plastic). To understand why these mouthpieces sell, background on Arnold Brilhart himself may help.
Brilhart was a fine alto saxophonist who started his career in the 1920s, playing with a lot of bands that became very popular. In the '30s, he began making mouthpieces on a fairly large scale, larger than any other "specialty" mouthpiece maker of the time. Many well-known players used Brilhart MPs. Among other things, Brilhart was, I believe, the first to produce and sell usable plastic reeds. Most players claimed not to like them, but a lot of them sold over the years. Brilhart also marketed (manufactured? I don't know) a line of excellent cane reeds. He sold his name as a Trademark to Selmer in the late 1960s. For about fifteen years or so, until well over 90, he worked for Rico. He died about four years ago at age 93. I suspect many who buy the mouthpieces on eBay may be trying to grab a piece of history, although I'm sure some players still like them, whether it's because of superior playing qualities or just the respected cachet.
I believe the mouthpiece numbers of the older ones, such as 2, 3, 4, are comparable to those of other suppliers, with the increasing number indicating more openness. Later Brilhart MPs, as I recall, had other numbering. Perhaps someone else will post additional intelligence on this, an area where my knowledge is somewhat fuzzy.
(My ex-wife's husband once worked for Arnold Brilhart as a mouthpiece tester -- tough job, but somebody had to do it. For whaqt it's worth, he says Arnold was a very fine person.)
Regards,
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2002-02-19 18:56
The Ebolin mouthpieces seem to be made of something like celluloid as that is the odor I perceive when I've worked on them. The newer ones generally are very inexpensive but need a lot of rework before they play well. For these, the tip and side rails are usually too wide and the table not right. Some of the alto sax mouthpieces produce a unique, wonderful sound for classical playing, most probably due to the material.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Scorgie
Date: 2002-02-19 23:23
To add a bit to the excellent posting above by JMcAulay:
When I began playing clarinet and saxophones in the 1950s, in my part of the midwest Brilharts were the most popular aftermarket sax mouthpieces, and were also popular for clarinet. Kind of a best buy replacement. As I remember most of his sax and clarinet mpces were off white with black lettering, altho both of my Brilhart rubber mpces are black. Whenever you hear an old sax player with an old sax and an old sax mpce, and a nice big sweet sound which also has some real body to it, chances are that he or she is playing on a Brilhart mpce (the Runyons, Meyers, Links, et al. were nice if you could afford one).
Brilhart offered several different facings, and his chamber designs tended to produce a brighter sound than the deep chambers found on many of the French style mpces of that era. Brilharts and Runyons were similar in this regard, altho the Runyon partisans will howl at that statement. I still occasionally use a Brilhart metal tenor mpce, a Brilhart rubber tenor mpce and a Brilhart clarinet mpce.
The Selmer company still produces mpces with the Brilhart name, and sells them at rather low prices, but I haven't played them and thus don't know if they bear any resemblance to my classic Brilharts. Hopefully one of the younger players will read this string and follow up with some up to date advice on the current Brilhart line.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal
Date: 2002-02-20 14:57
When I was growing up (purportedly) here on the Right Coast, Brilhart mouthpieces were considered student or marching mouthpieces ---- serious players didn't use them. Not my opinion, just an observation. They were basically just cheap white plastic mouthpieces, though probably better than most other cheap student mouthpieces. The current rage over them is probably a fad, like the Selmer Mark 6 sax fad, like the Chedeville/Lelandais/Kaspar/Bay mouthpiece fad, etc. etc. Eventually people will see these things for what they're worth FUNCTIONALLY (maybe!!). Until then, by all means talk endlessly about them and spend huge amounts of money on them --- helps stimulate both the conversation and the economy.
Dave the Grinch
Virginia, USA (where the cows are)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2002-02-20 16:17
Well said, Dave, I didn't pay much for my Mark 6's, but have told my grandkids not to sell them cheap, they still do play quite well! Do you still want to reface my bass cl glass mp?? Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2002-02-21 15:19
Dave the Grinch wrote, in part:
"When I was growing up (purportedly) here on the Right Coast, Brilhart mouthpieces were
considered student or marching mouthpieces ---- serious players didn't use them."
David, not knowing the time frame of which you write, your comment doesn't ring my bells. Surely you don't think Artie Shaw and Charlie Parker were not serious players. Or were they just not around when you were growing up? Or maybe they were students then? Or were they marching?
When I was growing up, the "official" student mouthpiece was the one that came with the instrument. That, of course, was in olden days. It was only the *very serious* students who coughed up enough money to buy an "extra" mouthpiece.
Frankly, I do not know from direct experience if Brilhart mouthpieces were worth a hoot: I have never played one. However, Brilhart reeds were quite okay -- but I rarely bought them, because they used to cost me more than Vandorens.
I'm not sure why I have a personal fascination with Arnold Brilhart. Perhaps it's the thought that he was once an excellent performing musician who became a manufacturer, pretty much bailing out of his playing career. And I'm a person who was once a performing musician (although hardly excellent) who left that to become several other things, none of which had very much to do with music at all. So maybe my interest in Arnold is because he so completely turned his work-life around a few times, evidently with some success.
Regards,
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal
Date: 2002-02-21 15:44
John,
I was speaking Grinchedly of the 1970s, during which decade I was in high school and college. Most of the Brilharts I saw then(mainly of the white plastic Ebolin variety) seemed to be used by casual players, marchers, and "users of school-owned instruments". I don't think I ever saw a 'serious' classical or jazz sax player among my peers or acquaintances actually use a Brilhart for their 'serious' playing. I used one myself on tenor sax for marching in college --- it was OK, but nothing special. Pretty much the same with the Brilhart clarinet mouthpieces.
I don't know if current players in the 'vintage' style (a la Shaw, Parker, whatever) like Brilharts, but hardly any players in the more modern styles of jazz use them, with the possible exception of the metal Level-Aires. Again, all this babble is just my dim memories of personal observations from the distant past. Your mileage may vary.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2002-02-21 20:19
Hi again, Dave:
Aha. That might explain it. As noted in my first post, Arnold sold his trademark to Selmer in the 1960s (Rather late, as I remember, something like '67 or '68). I've heard that the Selmer Brilharts were really scum, when compared to the ones made by (or for) Arnold's own company. So in the 1970s, I would doubt that many students were playing on "real" Brilharts, but rather Selmer-supplied same-named shadows of former greatness. Remember, Arnold's MPs were individually play-tested before delivery. Hardly something done with a mass-produced MP. The situation is sort of as if B & H were bought by General Motors and R-13s then would be built on auto-style assembly lines. Not a pretty thought.
BTW, the Brilhart Mouthpiece Web Page (yep, there sure is one) tells that Ebolin was black, while Tonalin was white. Maybe Selmer changed that, too. Arnold Brilhart also sold some hard rubber mouthpieces, which were said to be the best of his. And contrary to my first post, it's also mentioned on the site that the numbers on Brilhart's earliest stuff do *not* relate to numbers on other suppliers' MPs.
Regards,
John
who, for the record, departed High School (diploma in hand) in 1953
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: drdca
Date: 2010-03-03 00:21
My old age is showing, I fear: Tonalin was a material much used for a recorder-like instrument called a Fluteophone, which was popular in early grade school for some years. It had raised fingerholes (no keys) so beginners could easily feel where the hole was before moving to wood recorders.
As far as getting back on topic, :-) I still play the Brilhart Ebolin mouthpieces on Clarinet (so does my wife). I played it all through my professional career, although I used Berg Larsens on all my saxs.
Currently I believe only 3 and 5 are available in Clarinet (though I could be wrong). The presence of a * means a short lay, the absence means long (They don't make a medium length). 3 is a medium tip opening, and 5 a wide one.
Hope this helps!
Cheers, Dallas
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2010-03-03 02:13
Plastic for sure. I worked with Arnold at Rico for about 13 years. He used injection molding machines. During WW2 (World War 2) he made an injection plastic device for the government, but he had no idea what it was used for. Later on he was told it was part of the triggering device used in the Manhattan Project, to explode the bomb before it hit the ground. Knowing Arnold it was most likely the same plastic used in his mouthpieces. I'm pretty sure the plastic was in pellet form, heated, and forced into the mold.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DougR
Date: 2010-03-03 02:39
I have no direct experience with REAL (vintage, serial-numbered) Brilharts, but I have an Ebolin alto mouthpiece from the Selmer era in a drawer someplace, and it is, indeed, junk.
However, I've played many a big band gig with an alto player who was all over the place in the 40s and 50s: baritone with Sammy Kaye, alto & baritone with Jimmy Dorsey, alto with Bubbles Becker (and dozens of other territory bands), and alto with the Les & Larry Elgart band back in the 60s.
Larry Elgart was a major booster of Brilhart Tonalin alto mouthpieces, says my friend Myron (and a perfunctory Google image search confirms this)--Larry used to order them by the crate. Myron always preferred the Ebolin version, though; he didn't care for the Tonalins at all. In fact, he still talks with deep pangs of regret about his favorite Brilhart Ebolin 3 that he lent to someone back in the 60s and never saw again; he claims to have NEVER found a mouthpiece anywhere near as good, ever.
I believe (although it's been a while since I looked at the Mouthpiece Heaven section on Brilharts) that the versions with serial numbers are the ones that command a premium.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bill G
Date: 2010-03-03 21:37
When I started playing professional dance jobs in 1943 the tonalin mouthpieces were very popular for clarinet and alto. I bought a new Boehm system clarinet and tonalin 3* clarinet mouthpiece in l943(after playing a wooden mouthpiece on my Albert system clarinet for about 7 years). I thought the Brilhart was GREAT, but that's not surprising in light of the comparison. Eventually that clarinet and mouthpiece were stolen . I played an ebolin alto mouthpiece in the Navy, and thought it was GREAT, but never owned one. As far as I recall the tenor Brilharts never were very popular, but the clarinet and alto tonalins were very popular at least into the 60's.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: blazian
Date: 2010-03-03 22:29
I bought a brand new Brilhart Ebolin (black plastic with white plastic on it (not an insert?) about three years ago. I haven't gotten around to using it. It's mediocre, nothing special. I'm sure it's much different from the older, more sought-after ones.
- Martin
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: afmdoclaw
Date: 2015-02-28 22:08
Brilhart made professional mouthpieces in his day that were played for years by many great pro's. My teacher Hal Tennyson (RIP) was a GREAT musician. Played with the best-- Teagarden Glenn Miller etc etc. He used a Tonalin on alto and a Ebolin on clarinet (beautiful tone). My first mpcs were a Tonalin on alto and then a Personoline for years before buying a Meyer in college. These mpcs play great on old horns like Conn 6m alto (ala Med Flory (RIP) of the Grammy winning Supersax founder in the late 70's). Love my Tonalin with my 6M.
THE BEST EXAMPLE of how a Brilhart mpc can sound with a modern player- Grammy nominated BRAD LEALI-- professor of saxophone at the University of North Texas (still NTSU to me). Leali has a phenomenal tone!!! He was lead for Harry Connick, Basie and other NYC bands. I first saw/heard him in person with the legendary Jerry Dodgion at an IAJE in NYC--- wow. The cats I was sitting with (Julliard grad woodwind Broadway pit musicians) were equally impressed with his sound.I wonder how many NTSU sax students play a Brilhart now.
And don't forget Gene Ammons--- HUGE tenor tone.
Plastic mouthpieces are lively mpcs. The Runyon 22 is only $28.00 and a refacer can make it really sing for less than a hundred bucks.
BTW -- the Mark VI is not a fad and is still the best tenor -- worth the $$. Of course I bought my "64 VI for $600.00 in 1968 --- still love it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: chris moffatt
Date: 2015-03-01 02:25
Theo Wanne has some info on his site (www.theowanne.com/knowledge) about mostly Brilhart sax mpcs. I have a number of Brilhart mpcs. The best are the ones with Great Neck or Carlsbad serial numbers - these mostly have bite plates. But they are all individual no two exactly the same no matter what the lay number is. I guess back in the day QC was a bit more hit & miss. AFAIK the plastic material was something like Dupont Lucite with black or white coloting agents added (or not in the case of the tonalites). There are also Brilhart hard rubber mpcs, the supposed top of the line personalines, a classical style mpc and a line of true beginner mpcs with the name Nilo Hovey on them - these are mostly what keep turning up on that auction site. I don't remember when Brilhart stopped putting serial numbers on his mpcs but AFAIK none of the Selmer made ones - which are not of the same musical quality - have a number. Early mpcs can be excellent - I use a Great Neck 2 with a Conn improved Albert and an Adler german system
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
