 The Oboe BBoard
|
Author: mjfoboe
Date: 2012-05-26 23:57
Hi,
I decided to try the Lucarelli shaper tip. My teacher had one - she bought the shaper tip from him in the eighties.
Well, the shaper tip has more belly to it as comapred to my rdg -1.
So I make three reeds... the sound is very lush .. I am very impressed ... except - the upper register is always slightly flat and feels less fleixible.
That belly which gives so much more resonance in the middle register ... is another animal in the upper registers (second octave key).
My narrower rdg -1 sings like a bird in the upper regiser .... but lacks the depth in the middle as compared to the Lucarelli shaper tip.
What a world!
Copmments? suggestions?
Mark
After measuring the shaper tip by my micrometers .... I don't think I used a Lucarelli Shaper Tip. It is wider than the dimensions on the comparison chart.
Post Edited (2012-05-27 14:31)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DrewSorensenMusic
Date: 2012-05-27 00:15
Hi Mark,
A quote from Westwind on the Lucarelli: "... feels fuller in the bottom octave without sacrificing control of the top of the range."
I guess it's a case by case basis
Have you tried a Mack+? It would seem that it would meet you halfway.
Drew S.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mjfoboe
Date: 2012-05-27 03:08
I made three reeds ............ they all had a flat upper octave; however, one of them I managed to get in tune. So ... I'll wait and see how the cane settles in on the others.
I might have to adjust my scrape or/and tubes as well as reed overall reed length .. etc............. to get the pitch up and get more flexibility.
There is no question that the tone is fuller and more resonant with the Lucarelli shaper tip.
Right now - I am ambivalent. I need to make more reeds. I will have more time after my next concert.
Mark
One more thing .......... I made the assumption that this tip - which was purchased from Mr. Lucarelli in the eighties has the same dimensions as the one posted on the shaper tip comparison chart....I measured the tip (very inaccurately) and it is wider than the chart dimensions.
Post Edited (2012-05-27 14:17)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DrewSorensenMusic
Date: 2012-05-27 11:41
I agree that more time is needed to fully acclimate to the change. The two shapes do appear quite different upon viewing and on paper.
There was a discussion on the Clarinet boards a few months ago, and I think the title was something to the effect of "Tone vs. Response". To summarize what I took away from this and other discussions to the same effect, when choosing a mouthpiece (or in this case, shaper tip), one should choose the shape which responds well in all registers, with minimal strain to the performer.
A few things about tone:
1. It is subjective, so you're concept will be different from others
2. It will change with uncontrollable factors: Temp, humidity, shape, scrape, performance area, etc...
With response, there's no real question there. Either it plays the note easily, or it doesn't. You can control it, or you can't. Maybe you'll find a way to scrape to make it work for you, but maybe it's not the right shape for you as well. You cannot adjust your muscle structure, or your internal dimensions, and this is why we have so many different shaper tips, cause we are all different.
But at the end of the day, you are the one performing and enjoying what you are doing. If you like the tone, and how it resonates in you, there's no reason to hold yourself from that feeling.
Drew S.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: huboboe
Date: 2012-05-29 20:15
Mark - I looked back through my records and found that I had measured and made the first prototypes of Bert Lucarelli's tip in Feb/March of 1991. This means if your teacher had bought her tip in the 80's it wouldn't be the tip I measured.
Bert's tips were made then by Freddy Pfeiffer, and his manufacturing techniques (and those of Bob Brannen and Gilbert's machinist, Ed Laker) involved grinding the profile in a setup much like a key copying machine at the hardware store.
The problem with grinding in general is it heats up and expands the work so that when it cools it is smaller than when it was ground. When you grind the profile, you introduce errors that are different from part to part, since they don't heat up the same each time.
When I measured for my Pfeiffer/Mack and Brannen X tips, I did 16 of the first and 13 of the second (I measured mine, my friends' and those of friends of friends). No two were alike and the spread between the widest and narrowest of each was considerable. I arrived at my numbers by putting each measurement into an Excel file, lining them up from widest to narrowest with the wrap point (arbitrarily my own, 5.1 mm) at the same level, then discarding the outside three from each side and averaging the middle to get a number I consider the middle of the bell curve. When measuring a tip to compare to my chart, find the place on the tip where the width is 5.1 mm and call that '0'. Then measure the points 5, 12 and 23 mm above that point to make the comparison.
My copy of Bert's tip is an exact copy of the tip I measured, as are all of my subsequent copies; I use wire EDM to cut the profile, an extremely accurate and reproducible process. Tips made 20 years ago and tips made today are exactly the same.
All of the Westwind tips have a black oxide coating with the type stamped just above the stem. If it's black with an 'L' on it, I made it. If not it's not a 'real' Lucarelli tip, 'cause I'm the only authorized manufacturer...
The M+ is in the same ballpark as the -1: it's an overall narrow tip. If you like the feel of wider throat in the bottom octave you might try a middle-of-the-road tip like the Brannen X or the Pfeiffer/Mack. There's less of a difference between the tip and throat, so you might get more even octaves.
Ultimately, as Drew says, it's all about what works, so keep trying.
And let me remind you that you are welcome to a 30 day trial on any tips in the Westwind catalog...
Robert Hubbard
WestwindDoubleReed.com
1-888-579-6020
bob@westwinddoublereed.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DrewSorensenMusic
Date: 2012-05-29 23:24
Robert,
Do you still have that Mack spreadsheet? And I know you put a lot of work into it, but would you be kind enough to let us see it? I'd really learn quite a lot from it I believe.
Drew S.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mjfoboe
Date: 2012-05-30 00:44
Thanks for the information.
No matter how much I tried I couldn't raise the pitch on that shaper tip; furthermore, the wider shaper made my enbouchure different in a manner which I did not appreciate.
I probably will try your shaper tip.
Mark
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: huboboe
Date: 2012-05-31 05:30
I'm sorry, Drew. I would if I could, but somewhere in the several year, four computer upgrade timeline, those archived files disappeared. I've looked for them to no avail. I've still got the original measurements, but the thought of putting all those numbers back into a spreadsheet is daunting, given everything else on my plate. I'm sure I'll do it someday, but...
Robert Hubbard
WestwindDoubleReed.com
1-888-579-6020
bob@westwinddoublereed.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DrewSorensenMusic
Date: 2012-05-31 14:05
Robert: That's understandable. It's really just out of interest seeing how much or little his reeds would vary between each other. I'm guessing they probably wouldn't tell the whole story anyhow, as we probably wouldn't know the weather/climate or even if they sounded good or were duds. Also, as they say, what works for John Mack may not necessarily work for some of us.
Mark: Have you maybe tried ordering shaped cane in different shapes, tying them next to the shape you have currently, and each other, and then seeing what you may like better? I've done this with Hodge as a supplier, because they seem to have the widest selection of shapes available for shaped cane. It may be easier than ordering a whole bunch of shaper tips, and then having to return most of them.
Drew S.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mjfoboe
Date: 2012-05-31 17:17
That's a good idea; however, I have a special blade curve (gouge) which I use which gives me great pitch stability.
I going to try something else.
I will shape with a RDG 1 instead of my RDG -1 and use an emory board to adjust the dimension on the upper body.
I'll post my results in a few weeks ... right now I have plenty of good reeds and a concert this Sunday.
Mark
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
