The Mouthpiece Review - reviewing a wide variety of mpcs

[SteveSklar]

I thought I would give an insight into my mouthpiece testing, or swapping as it may be. I'll be play testing a ton of my mpcs - picking which ones to sell in the near future; customers mouthpieces; or trials, so I thought would give an idea of what I thought of them

My 3 primary clarinets are
[1] Selmer Centered Tone
[2] Leblanc LL, and
[3] BUffet R13 - 1955 models

Primary ligatures: Rovner dark, BG Revelation, Vandoren Optimum w/top and bottom traversing ridges

I should also mention, when optional I always tend to get the traditional pitched mpcs - tuned to 440

There are days when everything sounds the same. And other days when it's a clear black & white difference. So, I guess I have to be in the right mood to interprete mpc tonal characteristics. So, my definitions may change day to day, and my "best" mpc may change. Maybe it's the humidity ? or the wind?

WHAT TONAL QUALITIES AM I AFTER ?
my Selmer CT is my jazz clarinet. I'm normally after a nice clear tone that can cut through a jazz ensemble. It must be able to handle a wide variety of dynamics and alot of air pressure without feeling like it has too much resistance (ie, can't shove a tone of air into it).

On mY Leblanc LL, this is my most variable instrument. I don't have a particular tonal quality I prefer from it but I prefer more of the complex tonal qualities from better mouthpieces. On more symphonic mouthpieces I'll tend to migrate towards the harder Vandorens, like traditional 4s or 3.5s as the harder reed helps in intonation and a good full, woody tone.

Buffet R-13. Here I'm looking for that certain R-13 ring that is mostly accustomed to the mid 1960s R13s. Okay, mine is a 1955 model so I'm looking for a nice ring and an elegant and smooth tonal quality.

RATING
I'l put a ranking of each mouthpiece per my taste of A, B or C for each of my instruments.

A being top pick. Good complex tone, ease of range on the clarinet, good response, player friendly. Though a clear tone may be needed/wanted in certain settings.

B - a good pick - nearly the same as A except lacking in a complex tone. So more clear of a tone. maybe the response is not as fast, but easily overcomeable by practice. Basically, a very good mpc just a minor lacking in one or two areas.

C - it doesn't match well to that particular instrument (or me). Maybe be deficit in a few areas

D - off to the drawer

CATEGORIES
We understand that mouthpieces may not be best suitable for a particular genre. Thus in my ratings I will also provide a category of the general type of music that a mouthpiece may be suited for.
S - Soloist (Classical type)
O - Orchestra, or large group
C - Chamber or small ensemble
G - General playing, concert bands etc
J - Jazz

MOUTHPIECE CATAGORY - I may rank a Student Mouthpiece differently than a Professional mpc. based on tonal qualities and price and the overall value received.
Student - student mouthpiece (NOTE: an A in the Student category isn't an A in Professional)
Professional - professional mouthpieces

DEFINITIONS
LH - Left Hand

RH - Right Hand

mpc - mouthpiece

Response - does the mpc respond well, allow notes to change quickly.

Dynamics - the ability to easily crescendo without too much resistance.
Resistance - the "push" back a mouthpiece gives are you blow air into it. As you increase dynamics on a small tip it becomes increasingly more difficult to push more and more air through. As some point your eyes may pop out.

H Frame - This is in reference to the design of the throat. If you look into the round end you will see the throat. A "H" frame is simply parallel walls.

A Frame - (see H frame for more info) Throat walls that are not parallel. Usually the top is closer than the bottom which may span out. The more it spans the less centered the tone is (more spread) and the core tone gets more washed out as it spreads more.

Reeds
I don't use very many types of reeds. I use 3 primary reed types:
[1] Vandoren purple box. These are not made anymore and are from the 1970s- 1980s. I'm not sure when the Blue box (Traditionals) came out but I have plenty of purple box reeds. They come in Medium, Medium Hard, Hard categories. But for simplicity I'll use the 3, 3.5, 4 etc numbering system
[2] Vandoren Traditional (Blue Box) reeds. These are the standard current production reeds from Vandoren.
[3] Mitchell Lauries Reeds. These are a Rico brand. They are sometimes considered a premium student line of reeds. They tend to be on the soft side and (for me) are good to pick up and play. After they start retaining moisture they tend to lose their tone and get thin sounding. But overall a very nice reed.

I have a few other reeds laying around - Superials, Vandoren 56s etc and will only use these to find a better response or tone reed for a particular mouthpiece.

I'll use "Vandy" for Vandoren and "ML" for Mitchell Laurie in my writeups.

MOUTHPIECES
I try to make sure the mpc is an original facing mpc. No alterations or other modifications. For vintage mpcs, that is quite hard. Luckily alot of my mpcs were obtained years ago but over the years you never know if a good refacer did an exceptional job at making it look like a factory job.


RANGES OF THE CLARINET
Chalumeau - this is the lowest range, from low E to mid Bb. It contains what is called the "throat" tones or the two top keys, the Ab/G# and A keys, which are often quite weak sounding on the clarinet (some teachers also includes everything from F# on up as throat tones). These keys normally are also called the "break" area as it take quite some practice to be good going up and down the break.

Clarion - This is the midrange of the clarinet, from mid B to 2 lines above the staff to high C.

Altissimo - starts at high C# and goes on up as much as you can stand it.

for a good fingering chart go to here
http://www.wfg.woodwind.org/clarinet/

[SteveSklar]

Currently on my Buffet R13 my favorite mouthpieces are
[1] an early Selmer crystal, B facing. This mpc provides my tone a velvety and smooth quality. Very early Chedeville 1920-30s like. You would swear it was a HR piece but it's not, it is missing some depth to the tone, thus a little clearer but it is a fabulous piece.

[2] Vandoren M13 lyre. with the M13 lyre I was looking for the early american sound, yes, we're talking the 1920s-30s Chedeville sound. This mouthpiece is close and allows for greater expressionism due to a larger tip. This is definitely my current favorite for my R13 and also my LL. It does not have that "velvety" tone that I mentioned with the [1] Selmer B crystal but is a very nice HR piece.
used with a Vandoren 3 to 3.5

The M13 lyre replaced a [3] WC Sumner Accousticut 3 mpc. This was a very, very nice mpc. Easy playing in all registers, good response, etc. It sounded really good too when matched with the R13 or LL. It was just lacking more depth in tonal quality that I am striving for and not projecting that woody sound as well as other mpcs. Even when matched to a harder reed the tonal quality just was not there (as much as I wanted it to be), it was very good, very nice BUT just not as full and not pushing that R13 ringing tonal characteristics that it is known for. I would definitely use this for other clarinets (definitely in the class where if i'm not feeling well to use this mpc. It makes playing easy) and it may stay with my LL case.

I've recently bought a [4] Vandoren M13 (non-lyre). Vandoren presents this mpc as the mpc for a 1920-30s American sound. So we will see. In intial testing it takes about a Vandoren 3.5 minimum. It likes harder reeds due to the closer tip and Medium facing. Good expressionism though different resistance than it's slightly larger tipped cousin the M13 lyre.

After I play test it some more ill give more of my insight into it.

fyi,
I plan on play testing vintage Woodwind NY, vintage & somewhat modern Selmer mpc, Chedevilles, Kaspers, early Buffets, OBriens, vintage Links, and a slew of others including some rare mpcs.

for pictures of these and more mpcs please see :
http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgallerympc.HTM

R-13
[1] Selmer B crystal - "A" it actually is more off a complex tone, and a silky smooth tone.
[3] WC Sumner Accousticut 3 - a very clear tone mpc - "B"
[2] Vandoren M13 lyre - "A"

LL
Selmer crystal - A
WC Sumner - "A" - clear but a good match to the LL
[2] Vandoren M13 lyre = "A"

CT
Selmer crystal - B
WC Sumner - B
[2] Vandoren M13 lyre - did not test

[Ed Svoboda]

The Sumner jazz pieces for sax have a similar look to the table but the chamber opens differently.

[SteveSklar]

rare Wells keyhole

These are interesting mouthpieces. I believe their initial design intent was to provide a mouthpiece that the player not only can play subtlely quite passages with but also extremely loud fortissimmos with.

The keyhole design is the visual appearance one sees when looking upon the window and sees the standard tip window opening, which, when moving towards the end of the facing - to the sqaured off part of the window - it immediately takes a large taper into the window. The width greately decreases in the middle section. This is a fast tapering to the throat.

This mouthpiece takes practice to make smooth transitions between ppp and fff. Its quite easy to get too loud with when blending in with a band/orchestra. it seems to be more directed towards a lead or solo part, possibly for the jazz player.

As mentioned, it takes alot of practice to make nice smoooth crescendos as it wants to "jump" from a mf to a ff quite quickly. Somewhat like a car that either likes to go slow, or fast. You really have to learn how to use the accelerator.

The mouthpiece has exceptional response, like alot of high quality mouthpieces. It does favor the higher partials though so some of the depth is lost as with good Ched based designs. It still maintains some good centering but not as centered as many other mpcs out there. The throat is more A type and it has that moderate spread tone that a moderate A throat has.

You can really make your LJ and bell rattle with this mpc quite easily. Tone is pretty good as you can get with a hard reed on it. 3.5 to 4 Vandoren for me. The only negative I can come up with is that for some reason i can barely hear some really high partials which most would not prefer when you get above G. A different reed may make a difference.

But overall, I prefer the OBrien solution for making a loud mpc, crecendos are much more easily controlled - more natural. More about that particular mouthpiece in a later writeup.

tested on my 1955 R-13
pictures can be see at
http://www.clarinetperfection.com/clmpcWells.htm

CATEGORY - Soloist, Orchestra, Chamber, General, Jazz
RATING
CT - "B"
R13 - B
LL - B
the even flexibility (or lack of) of the mpc is the kicker here for me.

[SteveSklar]

So why are the old Otto Link clarinet mpcs not in the selection of your symphony players.

Quite simple answer actually:

I slapped a Vandoren Traditional 3.5 on this 5* and I got nothing but a headache and the swoosh of air. Down to a 3 .. much better

On my Leblanc LL this mouthpiece roared. It roared too much. It made every thing rattle, not really rattle but shake and roar was more like it. The tonal quality was not so good for the medium sized bore no matter how much I held back. LH tones were weak and thin, RH were very full and robust and spread.

So out I pull a large bore Selmer CT clarinet.

This mpc made that Selmer CT an absolute joy to play There seemed to be no limit on how loud one could get. Push more air and it simply got louder pull back to a nice whisper. Perfect for the lead in a Big Band. Very responsive, very excellent tone top to bottom.

On the Chalumeau register there was almost a sweetness to the tone that I have not heard before from my CT. That sweetness went through the Clarion and stopped dead in it's tracks as I simply could not change my airflow enough to get above altissimmo D due to the large tip opening. I'm sure with more practice I could have kept going.

This certainly brought the sweetness out of the CT that I've only heard in those "sweet" mid 1960s R13s. Quite a match to the CT. maybe I should go on a search for a 3-4* mpc and something that I could tame more for the altissimmo

If you own a large bore clarinet - CT, Series 9, RC ? B&H 1010, Leblanc Dynamic H this certainly would be one to search out for it. Quite a nice match.
If I can find a smaller tip, and master the altissimo some more it could certainly transform my CT into a fine symphony clarinet.

Luckly, as a sax and clarinet player my embouchure is quite well defined otherwise keeping a good embouchure would have been hard. But my CT certainly wanted vibrato and sounded excellent with it. What a joy to play.

Quite a surprise to this mouthpiece test. One certainly to put on your list if you play a big bore clarinet.

RATING
R13 - C
LL - C

CATEGORY - SOJCG (I'm not sure where to place it, just a very flexible and great sounding mpc. Would take some time to get used to it but i'm sure it would be well worth the time)
CT - A

[SteveSklar]

What else can follow that Reso Chamber than a Slant Lig. A holy grail in the tenor saxophone world !!

So I slapped a Vandoren Traditional 3 on this 6 tip (learned my lesson on the ResoChamber) and the tone was .... well ... "clear" comes to mind. Very clear, very crisp unlike the covered sweetness of the ResoChamber.

The tone was more reserved throughout, but boy was it clear compared to the ResoChamber. Not as equally dynamic, a tad more resistance. You could still belt out some notes, but nothing like that Reso Chamber. The tone is fabulous, nice and woody, full and spread. But .. I know .. but going back to that Reso Chamber .. if there is an Otto Link Holy Grail for clarinet it would be that Reso Chamber so far.

Altissimmo was an ease with this mouthpiece. Nice and clear altissimmo notes. You can certain sing above the band with this mouthpiece. You would certainly cut through a band too with those clear notes. Very well balanced tone throughout the range of the clarinet.

This is a very nice mouthpiece for the jazz player looking for a mouthpiece that cuts through the band that is well articulated and holds itself well throughout the entire clarinet range.

It also played slightly reserved thus losing some of the extreme dynamic range that the ResoChamber had. A very nice mouth piece in it's own right.

CATEGORY - Jazz

RATING
CT - "A" but in a different way than the ResoTone. A very clear tone but great response all over.
LL & R13 - not tested

[SteveSklar]

Reed selection seems so important in getting a certain tonal quality.

I use Vandoren purple boxes (vintage) or Traditional 3.5 and 4s
I also use Mitchell Lauries (ML) Premium 3.5 and 4. The ML 3.5 would be a Vandoren 3, and the 4 a Vandy 3.75. I also use clipped or sandpapered Vandoren 3.5 or 4 to get a 3.75 Vandoren.

But if the reed is slightly too soft the response is nice rght away, but the tone is often slightly brittle and thin. And, normally, later on the reed starts losing it's tone even more as it starts getting water logged, especially with the ML reeds.

Of course the facing length and tip opening (assuming both are correct) have a lot to do with reed selection.

This particular mouthpiece, a 1930s Buffet Evettine was slightly hard to find a good reed for. I actually noticed my playing suffering alot depending upon the reed. I finally settled on a Vandoren 3.5 Traditional (4 too airy, ML 3.5 too thin). This reed gave good response, good tone, and my playing was nice too

the tip opening on this was 1.13mm with a 16.5mm facing length

The early Chedeville and guarantie superiore "blanks" seem to give clarinets a really good "ring" and excellent projection. This is supposedly a blank from that era.

I obtained this mpc from ebay years ago on a description that read "old 1930s Buffet mpc" and a fuzzy picture. It went fairly cheaply, I think I was the only one that bid on it. It was one of my more favorite mpcs until my collection grew more, then it got regulated to the "B" box.

Now my M13 is very close to this mpc, except the Buffet has a more complex tone. Some may say this particular complexity is "muddy" with this mpc. Either way, it plays nicely, has a nice vintage sound with a nice ring to it. It matched nicely to my R13.

Unfortunately, at least today, it just doesn't "inspire one". Don't get me wrong, it's a very nice mouthpiece, just good for my B box. I would certainly like to try this mouthpiece with a pre R-13 Buffet just to see, but that will have to happen some other day.

Until then, this Buffet Evettine is a very nice mpc. Good solid & full tone top to bottom, good response, complex tone (on the edge of muddy). Maybe it's that ... being on the edge of muddy that makes this a really nice and not a great mpc. Back to the B box for now.

CATEGORY - Orchestra, Chamber, General

RATING
R13 - B
LL - B
CT - did not test

[SteveSklar]

So I've realized I have too many mouthpieces. And too many mouthpieces that I simply have not played in a while. Some that I thought were good, others not so good just to change my mind.

I pulled out one of my early Selmer table HS* with the lower logo (below the lower ligature lines). I played it for the first time on my R13. I was expecting it to make the R13 play elegantly, precise and very fluid. One perception of expectations can be greatly tarnished when actually comparing a wide variety of mouthpieces.

The lower logo, table HS* simply did nothing with the R13. It was drab, not much response and a good amount of resistance. So I put it on my Leblanc LL; same problem. Maybe it was a reed match

the tip opening is 1.13 and the facing lenth is 21mm. Yes a VERY LONG facing.
go here and scroll down a bit for tip opening and facing length comparisons
http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgallerympc.HTM

So I pulled out a ML 4 and slapped it on the mpc.

I haven't really analyzed reeds any time lately but the Vandoren seem to be consistently thick even on the sides and the MLs are thinner on the sides. Thus the MLs seems to flex better than the Vandorens even though the cane itself has the same shoulder and middle heights, and everything thing else (put up against a light) seems the same. but the Mitchell Lauries reeds simply work with this mouthpiece whereas the Vandorens do not. I also had to clip a ML 4 to get rid of some of the tinny tone.

But back to the mouthpiece now that I have a reed for it. It plays very nicely, good response top to bottom. Now a long facing mouthpiece requires a bit of a different style playing than a shorter facing (assuming ones' embouchure takes into account the longer facing). The response is slightly delayed thus you have to be "on top" on the mpc a bit more than a shorter facing. Once you get over this hurdle you are on your way.

The mouthpiece plays very nicely. The tone was more on the clear side - not a overly complex tone. It played nicely top to bottom, good response, responded to articulation very well once you learned to play the mpc correctly. What I mean by "playing correctly" is it seems you have to play your articulation slightly ahead of when you actually play it.

Unfortunately there's not much to say here. The journey was finding a reed brand that matched well. The mouthpiece is nice. It belongs in my A-/B+ box mpc (if I had one).

< more to come >

[SteveSklar]

Everyone knows about Yamaha Custom saxophones. They also make a very nice line of Custom clarinets, though few professionals play them. In addition to the clarinets there's a line of Yamaha Custom mouthpieces. I have not seen very many of them but I happen to have one from a trade several years ago. It used to be in my A box but disappeared. I found it in bubble wrap in my lathe tool drawer ..... but i degress

First off, the mouthpiece seems to be reed sensitive. I have not put it up to my mouthpiece refacing kit to see if there is a rail adjustment needed or anything. On a Vandoren 4 it was all resistance, on a Vandy 3.5 it was very tough, a ML 4 reed it was a little tough. On ML 3.5 reed it played nicely though I could easily scretch the tone up into the stratosphere .. like over shooting an octave. Strange. wrong cut for the facing.

So I rummaged through my reeds and found a Vandoren 56. Stabilized the mouthpiece tone and kept it from going Maynard Ferguson but the tone was a tad lacking. Found a Traditional 3 and wow .. nice deep full tone, a bit resistant from a larger opening thus needing a good amount of air support. If Vandoren made a Traditional 2.75 it would probably be perfect for this mpc.

The mouthpiece and reed combination made my LL and R13 sing very nicely. Good full tones down low, and nice accurate full tones all the way up to altissimo G#. I always forget the fingerings past that .. note to myself - practice altissimo.

But the tone on this was very very nice on the LL and a bit better on the R13 especially the Chalumeau register. other registeres were just as full and easily controlled. I love the tonal quality of good clarinets in the Chalumeau register.

Notes clearly and easily popped out. Not quite as easy to play as my M13lyre but it allowed a bit more dynamics. I have a piece that I play that goes from pp to ff constantly and this was a nice mpc for that. This piece was in a book I just found which I bought back in the 1980s called 30 caprices by Ernesto Cavallini, #28, page 58 .. a popular book from what I recall. I used to practice it all the time in High School. A good student book.

If one is on a budget I highly recommend this mouthpiece. They go for cheap. Might make a choice to move up to something significantly more expensive a tonal challenge.

CATEGORY - Solo, Orchestra, Chamber, General, maybe Jazz (a smaller tip would limit it more to SOCG)

RATING
R13 - A
LL - A
CT - did not test

This mpc is going back to my A box and maybe one of my cases.

FYI - Maynard Ferguson was a professional trumpet player. Most known in the 1970s and 80s. He loved playing peashooter mouthpieces which allowed him to play in the stratosphere for trumpets.

[SteveSklar]

Vandoren defined the M13 as "Offers many of the characteristics of older American mouthpieces which are so widely sought after. The M13 permits easy blowing with harder reeds and produces a rich, dark, centered sound. Response is particularly sensitive"

I would have to agree to Vandorens definition of this mouthpiece. But also add that the mouthpiece, though liking harder reeds is thus a bit resistant (due to the harder reeds). But the harder reed provides that rich and dark sound. The response is sensitive and requires a bit more control so this mouthpiece may not be for the beginner.

Though the tone is centered and rich and dark it does have it's negatives. It seems the mpc is designed for an orchestrial setting. basically, good in a section not in a small ensemble or as a soloist piece. Why ? The closed tip just does not allow enough air passage to provide the reed stimulation to get excessive dynamics. A good "balanced" and "tamed" mpc, perfect for the orchestral setting

To me the M13 lyre is a much more flexible mouthpiece while still having many of the characteristics of the M13. This mpc is easily an A if you were going to use it for strictly orchestra settings. But for me it falls into the B category simply due to my necessity for improved dynamic capabilities.

CATEGORY - Orchestra
LL - A
R13- A

CATEGORY - Solo, Chamber
RATING
LL - B
R13 - B
CT - not tested

[SteveSklar]

For years my main piece on my Normandy 4 and Noblet 45 was a vintage Woodwind K9 mpc. The Normandy 4 was my first clarinet, handpicked for my by the local music store owner Mr Herb Couf. Mr. Couf used to be the principal clarinet of the Detroit Symphony Orchestra until 1957 under Paul Paray (?) until they had financial distress and the DSO cut all the 1st chair players. He then started his own music store and worked with Keilwerth to brand his own line of student and professional saxophones. Back in the day, he was just Mr. Couf to me. A very nice older gentleman who loved to hear me play during my sessions at his store. I heard later from the lady that did the sheet music that the studio room I was in was clearly audible in the entire store. Fancy that ... an early version of elevator music.

Of course, the Normandy 4 it just a high-end student instrument. But tonally, not much different from the Noblet 45 I also later added, both being larger bore clarinets.

The K9 fit well to the large bore clarinet. But for some reason I put it aside years ago when I went to Leblanc professional clarinets (medum bore) and haven't really played it much since.

In an old Woodwind ad
http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgal ... M#Woodwind (http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgallerympc.HTM#Woodwind)
The K series was used mostly by symphony men.

This mouthpiece provides a nice full dark and deep tone. And surprisingly on my LL a very nice ring to the tone, maybe slightly better than on the R13.

The tone is that particular tone of a hollow, full and woody tone you get in the Chamuleau register. Very seductive in a sense. These mpcs were very highly wanted back in the day and still draw their admirers of people that know of the mpc. I'm certainly glad that I've kept mine. I'll need to compare the K9 to a K8*, K8, K7 etc that I also have. Though I would think the main (and hopefully only difference) is the tip opening. The K9 allows pretty good expressve dynamics. Great for solo and small ensembles and orchestras too. It's not as open as one would think with a "9" and thus as you increase dynamics it can get to be a bit resistance, a K10 would be better which does exist per the ad. I played this reed with a 3 Vandy Traditional. 3.5 was a bit too hard. But this mouthpiece works equally well on a small bore and a large bore clarinet.

If I had an A+ rating this mpc might very well get that rating. This is going back into my case as a primary mpc ... though with the LL or R13 !?!?

CATEGORIES - Soloist, Orchestra, Chamber, General

RATING
R13 - A
LL - A
CT - A

[pete]

For the longest time, I thought Herbert Couf was James Houlik because of the ubiquitous H-Couf sax ads.

(Herbert Couf became the president of WT Armstrong, Corp.)

[SteveSklar]

For the longest time, I thought Herbert Couf was James Houlik because of the ubiquitous H-Couf sax ads.

(Herbert Couf became the president of WT Armstrong, Corp.)

Yes, Mr Couf retired in 1989. sold his music store to employees and retired from WT Armstrong. he then tried to create a line of his own instruments all with the H Couf insignia. But he apparently also signed away the rights to his name and could not produce instruments with his own name on them !!

[pete]

For the longest time, I thought Herbert Couf was James Houlik because of the ubiquitous H-Couf sax ads.

(Herbert Couf became the president of WT Armstrong, Corp.)

Yes, Mr Couf retired in 1989. sold his music store to employees and retired from WT Armstrong. he then tried to create a line of his own instruments all with the H Couf insignia. But he apparently also signed away the rights to his name and could not produce instruments with his own name on them !!
Hmmm.

After the H-Couf horns from Keilwerth -- essentially Toneking and New King stencils -- Armstrong put out the A3200/T3200 horns that were labeled "H-Couf". While Keilwerth has said that they do some further cooperation with Armstrong after the "famous" H-Couf models, no one has been able to tell me if the 3200 was actually a Keilwerth body with Armstrong keywork or whatever.

[Ed Svoboda]

The Armstrong Heritage horns were made by JK but I haven't seen the 3200's in person to say for sure. Some people have contended that they copied the JK design but I'm not sure if the 3200 was the horn that was purported to be the copy.

[SteveSklar]

Keep in mind that the Couf Royalist II alto and tenor was a copy of the JK Royalist horns. They were reverse engineered/designed in the Detroit office of WT Armstrong (built in Elkhart). This was in order to try and provide a more affordable entry level horn than the german built JK Royalist and Royalist I at the time.

So Armstrong already designed an instrument from the JK horns. I would think the 3200 is simply an evolution of that Royalist II which was designed and built in the W.T. Armstrong era

matter of fact, you can thank that same Detroit office for providing the design of the modern keywork layout of the RH side F# and high F# for the JK german horns during the Couf era.

<sarcastically> and each came supplied with a clarinet mpc such as the Vandoren 2RV and predecessor 2V which I'll be reviewing in one of these writeups soon ...... trying to get back on topic

[pete]

You have the powah to use offtopic code, you know. :P

[SteveSklar]

I'm not sure what model this Beechler was as I'm actually going back to some notes to write about this mpc. This mpc was a refacing job as a customer had issues with it playing. The back of the table actually ramped up like a ski ramp. And the facing curve had a nice bump on it which prevented the reed from actually closing on one side. So, in essense, it played horribly down to not playing at all unless you used a really soft reed.

After the back part of the table and facing curve was corrected this mpc played fairly effortlessly. It is a rather open mpc with a short facing; large throat. It has a very distinct rollover baffle. Tonally, it was very bright and can be pushed quite effortlessly. This is clearly a sax/clarinet doublers mpc for jazz playing.

If you played this in an orchestra they would tonally promptly place you in the trumpet section. It might be too much for a general concert band too. But boy can you make a clarinet wail with this mpc. great for jazz, little blowing resistance and fairly inexpensive.

CATEGORY - Jazz (doubler's embouchure)

RATING
LL - A
CT- A
R13 - not tested

[SteveSklar]

Slightly reseved, soft, somewhat velvety, woody tone. That's the definition I give to this vintage Buffet C, close cousin to the C crown mpcs. These vintage mpcs come from a Chedeville blank back in the 1950s through 70s (?).

These are more commonly identified by the ligature lines. 1 line up (1 line at the top of the mpc) and 3 lines down (3 lower ligature lines). Though, with a lathe one can make as many lines as one wants. I think many people see these ligature lines on mpcs and think if they have 3 lower ligature lines they are identfied as a Chedeville blank.

This mpc gave a very nice ring to the Chalumeau range and a nice smooth tone throughout the instruments' range. I recently purchased this and then put it aside. I also have 2 different vintage C Crowns which I 'll be testing.

The C is certainly a nice mpc. easily a daily player for most players. Though it may be lacking in the more extreme dynamics that I prefer for solo work, it certainly is a very nice playing piece. Played with a Vandoren Traditional 3. Good all around dynamics, very nice tone and these can be purchased for a song and a dance or so.

This mouthpiece does seem like it was slightly refaced at one time then polished up, then the lig lines recut over the table to look original. I have not seen enough original Cs to compare. But it could be original. Either way, the mouthpiece is very nice to play.

CATEGORY - Orchestra, Chamber, General

RATING
LL - A
R13 - A

[SteveSklar]

Once in a while you notice things that you haven't noticed before. Or maybe it is a new occurence ... how do you know ?

While playing the 1974 Buffet C Crown I noticed that the air flow through the tones holes as a little more than usually on both my LL and R13. But, that when my fingers rolled down to close the toneholes on the LL they sounded like a soft leather making a squishing sound as the air tries to escape around it .. kind of like a "whoosh, thwap" sound for each finger. I have a very smooth action on the toneholes with enough finger height to provide optimal sound dispersion (no flailing fingers here) and quick finger movement to make the note transition smooth from note to note, so my fingers don't just mash down on each tonehole, I guess this technique brings out that weirdness every so often. I'm sure that would not be heard by anyone further than a few feet away. But an interesting, if albeit slight annoying sound.

The C crown sounded very nice on a Vandy Traditional 3, and slightly darker with a 3.5 though I would prefer a 3.25!! It has slightly more ability for ease of expressionism as compared to the C (non Crown) and a nice full woody tone through the Chalumeau register and a nice full tone throughout the entire clarinet range, just like the C.

It has the standard visual characteristics of the 1 line up and 3 lines down ligature lines on the body. These mpcs have had rave reviews in the past and would make an excellent mpc even if this was the only one in the case.

These mouthpieces are very nice to have and wonderful to play with the same characteristics of the C. A good primary mouthpiece for most players.

CATEGORY - Solo, Orchestra, Chamber, General

RATING
LL - A
R13 - A

[SteveSklar]

The "Premiere by Hite" is sold as a student mpc. It is molded plastic which keeps the price down. Retail price is only about $33 and street price in the $20s.

A ML 3.5 reed makes the tone slightly thin but still pretty good for a softer reed. A Vandy Traditional 3 really gave this mpc a nice tone. The internal dimensions somewhat mimic that of the early Chedeville - narrow width H frame and a deep baffle. This keeps the mpc material from having a large impact on tone. Design is everything sometimes.

Response was the only issue, and only slightly. I had to play "on top" of the mpc, or articulate very slightly ahead of a faster response mpc. But other than that for the price it's top notch. This will give a student a very nice tone very similar to vintage or much higher priced mpcs. It won't have all the "special" qualities, but you'll find alot to like about the tonal qualities (and the price) .. slighty warm, nice and deep, full and 'round' tone.

If you currently have a student mpc this is definitely a move up. If you have a high quality professional mpc and a good ear you might find that this mpc lacks in certain tonal characteristics and would be a step down, but you'll certainly save alot of money.

For the price it definitely is an A, if it was a higher priced mpc it probably would be an B or B+ mpc. If I had some more time I might try a harder ML reed to see if the response issue was resolved while still maintaining a good tone.

MPC CATEGORY Student
CATEGORY Orchestra, Chamber, General

RATING
LL - A
R13 - A

[SteveSklar]

I have in my collection one of those original Woodwind NY mpcs. This is before they started categorizing the K, G, C facings. It has no facing marking on it at all.

At first I was playing this mpc with a Vandy Traditional 3 reed. It played pretty good. Sounded pretty good. But there are instances when a reed (or something else) just isn't right. Something slightly wrong. And when that happens sometimes nothing else really works 100%. It seems as though my articulation is slightly off and I can't quite correct it. It seems as though the keywork or my fingers are slightly off and I just can't seem to correct it.

Well, I put on a ML 4 reed on this and everything came together again. Articulation, fingering, etc. Tonally I don't think I lost much of anything going from the Vandy to the ML, though I did not give it a good 30 minute (more like 15-20 minutes) workout which normally the MLs then tend to get soft and get thin sounding.

The tone on this is well rounded, nice and dark and woody in the Chalumeau register. Good even tone thoughout the entire instrument. Altissimmo was not an issue as it spoke well and quickly. It has a certain level of tonal complexity, not as much as its later K9 that I have but it's pretty nice.

It's a very nice mpc, not quite as nice as the vintage Buffet C Crown or the Woodwind K9 for Solo work but great for about everything else. There's so much competition out there even in this short writeup so far that it could easily be a great mpc for many players and their styles. For me though it's just missing some of that complexity that I like and the response just isn't spot on for me. But if you like a mpc that has some complexities to the tone (but a little clear) then this is a very good match. I can't rank it a B because it is nice, though it seems to be slightly reed picky as mentioned above.

CATEGORY - Solo, Orchestra, Chamber, General

RATINGS
LL- A
R13 - A

[SteveSklar]

So what are we trying to accomplish with mpc testing. Well first and foremost we are trying to give everyone the opportunity to understand the differences, though many times slight, between mpcs and how they affect the tonal quality of a particular instrument. Sometimes mpcs just don't work well with a particular instrument. That is why, sometimes I test a mpc with 3 distinctly different instruments, at least bore-wise. I use a small bore R13, a medium bore Leblanc LL and a large bore Selmer CT.

But as a tester/reviewer there are many challenges. First and foremost there is a description.

There are many variances that come into play that make a review of anything up to each individual, whether cars, paint colors, the best pots and pans, etc. What we have to understand is that the variance also may include experience at many different things, such as:

Definition of "dark" - everyone may define dark much different than the next person. After all, we all know what dark chocolate looks like because we can physical see it. But try describing the difference between dark chocolate and regular chocolate, and keep in mind that it tastes different to different people. A bright mpc to me may be someone elses dark. It's a sliding rule for each and every person.
Everyone has a different level of ear training. Everyone hears differently. After all, what is the tonal difference between a nice Steinway grand piano and $500 spinet special? How does it vary from a carpeted living room to an auditorium? Is there a difference? how about from a Steinway baby grand to a regular sized Steinway grand where the lower note strings are longer and thus sound more "richer" .. we're talking tonally and not the $$$ associated with bigger Steinways To the people that have more acute hearing there certainly is a difference.
Embouchure - your embouchure has great effect on the outcome of your tone, of course, it all depends upon how your hear too. But air support, oral cavity ... the entire "playing" thing has an effect.
And let's not forget about your instrument. is it properly set up - how do you define properly set up ? any minor leaks greatly affects (depending upon your perception) the tonal quality. And of course the reeds and reed strength too.

Basically everything can affect ones tone in a certain way. But the mpc review is just that. A review of a wide variety of mouthpieces in my perception. The descriptions may make a difference and help you select a vintage type or a more modern mouthpiece, or it simply may confuse one even more.

Either way, I hope the evaluations help as I have many more mpcs to evaluate.

[Carl H.]

Steve, how many of these mouthpieces have flat vs concave tables? On the ones with concave tables did switching ligatures change the way the piece responded?

[SteveSklar]

Carl,

very good question.

I did not check that for most of the mpcs. I tend to use a very light pressure on the ligature and do vary it a tad but if a light pressure lig has a problem then I'll take a look a the table and curve.

If you use alot of pressure on a concave table then you may end up "bending" the reed which will "create" a larger tip opening and it forces the reed to respond to the facing curve in a different way. Then, normally, the embouchure has to make up the difference and pinch to bring the reed back to the facing curve. I want to let the reed respond to the curve the way it was desgned to be, thus light ligature pressure.

the concave table, i believe (from the picky clarinet players i've talked to) is a method of suspending the reed, and with light lig pressure you get the most "vibrant" reed. Somewhat like the various ligs but in reverse for the table.

[SteveSklar]

should also mention that i've been using mainly the BG Revelation lig for most testing. This is a leather ligature but has a metal plate with vertical metal "fins" as the reed platform that maintains pressure on the reed.

It is also very important to make sure that the screw threads are well greased - you could use cork grease, or regular grease or oil - as long as the screw(s) becomes very free moving. This allows one to apply pressure at the desired level.

[SteveSklar]

Vandoren has some pretty interesting information in some of their published magazines. one such online magazine reviews Clarinet mouthpieces.

It also has articles such as "the experience of a tester" and "how to describe sound"

Here's a link to it.

http://www.vandoren.fr/en/vandomag2us.pdf

here's choosing a reed
http://www.vandoren.fr/en/vandomag3us.pdf

selection and quality of reed
http://www.vandoren.fr/en/vandomag1us.pdf

It is all very interesting reading this information from Experts in the field.

Just like anything else it takes alot of "studying" and experimentation to be able to perceive these.differences. Not only that, but you have to be able to play to the qualities of the mouthpieces. As mentioned in a previous post, if you pinch a mpc,then you also "pinch" the sound.

Many mpc makers who work wth professionals always recommend taking in more mpc, but keep in mind that with the angle of the clarinet going down you should be taking in a good amount of mpc as it is - your lip has to go out a bit to meet the reed versus biting UP to meet the reed.

More often than not, most players simply do not take in enough mpc (or meet the reed correctly) and their tone suffers or shall I say is not as full as it can be (mostly unknown to them). AND it's a quick & simple solution that is only a little of effort. Of course, many simply go back to their old style of embouchure and thus end up sounding the same as before even on a variety of mpc due to this issue.

Now my search is on to find a M15 and V-series mpc.

[SteveSklar]

Many professional players play on a Vandoren B45. I've never been a great fan of the B series. No real reason, it's just not the sound that I prefer. But this doesn't mean that it isn't a great mpc in it's own right. It certainly has alot of followers and players who swear by them.

The B45 was created in 1968 by Bernard Van Doren. When he created it, it was adopted by many leading players. it has certain attributes such as:
a wider tip (wider, not larger tip opening)
medium length facing

The mouthpiece is easy to play with a Vandoren 3, but intonation and sound seems to be a bit better with a Vandoren 3.5

The sound is very nice. Very full and "round" though slightly spread tone and even throughout the registers. I was able to get great expressionism with this mpc while maintaining tonal smoothness. The tone was more on the pure side , not as much "woody" and covered tone as the M series I've tried and enjoyed.

I would think this mpc is an excellent place to start if one is considering venturing into new mouthpieces.

The throat is a trapazoid - "A" frame, which, when looking and trying to define how it "may" play one would think a slight spread sounding mpc. The Baffle drops down and has a smooth surface which keeps it darker though it responds well to large octave changes and doesn't require as much air stream changes to get into the upper altissimmo as I had to do with the M13 and M13lyre, so overall a very easy playing piece.

It has rich harmonics throughout the entire range the clarinet on the LL, R13 and CT. probably moreso on the CT by a bit but a great fit across the range of small, medium and large bore clarinets.

A very enjoyable mpc to play and have. It should be an option for everyone to try.

CATEGORY: Solo, Orchestra, Chamber, General and probably Jazz too

MPC: Professional

RATING:
LL, R13, CT - "A"

[SteveSklar]

Woodwind company of New York made some well respected mouthpieces back in their period. This one, a Woodwind G5 is stamped G5 on the back of the body, and not the table. basically signifying that it was a later production model ... later being 1960s maybe. I'm unsure of the exact year of Woodwind production and various physical attributes to date them.

The G series is defined for "most flexible all-round facing for dance and symphony players". It has a very slight "A" frame to the throat and the roof that goes deep into the chamber. a very slight tip baffle.

The first thing that struck me to this piece versus the Vandoren B45 that I had just played was that it was a just a little bit brighter tonally. It played pretty well with a Vandoren 3.5, probably a bit easier and less resistant with the Vandy 3 but a little more raspier/edgy. As compared to the B45 it may have responded just a bit better too being ever so little easier to play than the B45.

It played really nicely on the LL and R13, but seemed to have played a notch better on the CT - at least tonally the CT sounded better than with other mpcs, more full, a bit more power while still maintaining good tonal control.

This mpc seems to be slightly more suited to the CT than the LL and R13, though would be comfortable on either. It leaves a few issues, which makes categorizing it a bit harder. If one prefers a slightly more open and brighter sound then it will suit one quite nicely. Keep in mind "bright" is no where as bright as say a Brilhart mpc. it is brighter than a Vandoren B45 but no where as bright as a Brilhart.

MPC: Professional
CATEGORY: General, Jazz
CT - A
LL, R13 - A

CATEGORY: Soloist, Orchestra, Chamber
LL, R13 - B
CT- A

[SteveSklar]

You probably have read me mentioning that a soft reed plays flatter. But why, well, I think I found a nice explanation of that.

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/clarinetacoustics.html


The effect of reed hardness
In the preceding section we have ignored the compliance of the reed, discussed above. This acts in parallel with the bore, and its impedance decreases at high frequency, so its effect is to reduce the rise in impedance with frequency: softer reeds give lower overall impedance at high frequency. Further, the very high resonances are weaker and occur at lower frequency when you use a soft reed.

http://www.clarinetperfection.com/work/reed.jpg
On this figure, the single dots are the experimentally measured impedance spectrum for E3, with a value of the compliance corresponding to a hard reed. The continuous line (actually the experimental points joined together) shows the spectrum for a soft reed. At low frequencies, there is not much difference, but you can already see a slight difference in frequency: the hard reed plays sharper, all else equal. As you go to higher frequencies, you see that the soft reed gives lower peaks. Lower peaks are harder to play, so the hard reed makes it easier to play high notes. (Unfortunately, a hard reed also makes it easier to play squeaks.)

To understand more about the detailed shape of these impedance curves, see the discussion of the experimental results for E3.


in other words, a soft reed (of the same make and brand) play flatter.
Other effects of the reed
As well as controlling the flow of air, the reed has a passive role in clarinet acoustics. When the pressure inside the mouthpiece rises, the reed is pushed outwards. Conversely, suction draws the reed in towards the bore. Thus the reed increases and decreases the mouthpiece volume with high or low pressure. (Techncially, we say it is a mechanical compliance in parallel with the bore.) Indeed, it behaves a bit like an extra volume of air, which could also be compressed and expanded by changing pressure in the mouthpiece. It has the effect of lowering the frequency of each resonance a little. However, soft reeds move more than hard reeds, so soft reeds lower the frequency more than do hard reeds. Further, this effect is greater on high notes than on low, so soft reeds make intervals narrower and hard reeds make them wider. This is useful to know if you have intonation problems. (See also tuning.)

of course there are some things that can be done with mpcs to make them play sharper in certain ranges. Normally student mpcs are designed this way to accomodate softer reeds. Some professional mpcs also take on these attributes .. but like with anything else there is always give and take on other attributes.

[SteveSklar]

So what is a Tone Booster ?

If you have ever seen on WWBW.com these little oval shaped doohickies that you put in your mpc near the tip and they are supposed to improve the response or something - that is a tone booster. O'Brien was known to have done these on a few mpcs, they are very rare and of course hard to find. I happened to have obtained one on a clarinet that I bought where I recognized the mpc as potentially an O'Brien.

Just below the tip about 1/8 of an inch is this "rise" in the roof below the tip baffle. It's oval in shape and covers 2/3rds of the width and about 1/2 inch long. It's just a little rise, not much at all really but it provides a dramatic difference in the way the mpc plays.

I was first introduced to O'Brien mpc back in 1980 when I purchased one for my Normandy 4. I thought it looked neat and since I needed it for High School jazz band I figured it was a good choice. There wasn't too many mpc makers and options back then like we have today. I can't say I used it much or even knew much about mpcs back then. What I was told by a few musicians and some audience was that I was clearly audible as the tone cut and projected well above a high school jazz band (even with over zealous trumpet and trombone players) and that has been reaffirmed throughout the years

But O'Briens were also known to be used by symphony players too, not just "jazz" players.

Recently I obtained from an old metal clarinet a Selmer crystal B facing - clearly an O'Brien made mpc. The odd, fairly quickly seen characteric about this mpc was that it was longer than my original. The window also did not open as much - more straight side rails. This mpc is perfect for a symphony player. more smooth tone, quick response and hard to discern from a good rubber mpc - but that one is for another review.

But this mpc is a 3rd variant of the O'Briens (excluding various tip openings) that I have come across. It's design is really the same as my 1980 O'Brien except with that weird tone booster. I did not recognize the tone booster when I first tried it but I had to figure out what the difference was that really allowed this mpc to play so loudly with great ease !!

In another review, that of the Wells Keyhole design, I mentioned how that design relied upon the player to really learn how to control the mouthpiece's ability of diverse dynamics. The mouthpiece reacted some what like an on/off switch between pianissimo and fortissimo, thus requiring alor more player control input. The Selmer/OBrien really is the better design as the player can control dynamics with great ease as the tone booster simply better accomodates the airstream variations.

But how does it sound ?

In a college band that i'm subbing for I had to sit in as 3rd section. They told me I had to basically fill in as the section. So at first I used this mouthpiece and the LL. Not too bad but to get the volume I had to push too much and the resistance was too high for the medium bore. So out I brought my trusted Selmer CT. Boy can you get this mpc to really wail when needed. Not wail in the sense of outlandish brash sounds but extreme dynamics. From a nice pianissimmo to extreme fortissimmos with extremem ease at anything in between. I could easily play as an entire section with this mpc. Tonal quality was very nice, though not as nice as a nice Chedeville type tonal quality. But it was an excellent match to the CT but tonal wise and being able to fill the bore as much as needed.

On the LL it was a bit more reserved, though limited by the medium sized bore. On a Leblanc Dynamic, a large bore with smaller toneholes than a CT I am able to get more expressiveness than the LL but nowhere as near as much as the CT.

It also was a surprisingly good match to the R13, considering that it came with an old, lost R13. The tone was a bit brighter than that of a M13 with a Vandoren Traditional 3.5. I would work a bit better with a 4 but I was not quite up to it tonight.

tonally, across the board the mpc was a little brighter than the Vandoren M13 and M13lyre, though very much in the realm for orchestral playing.

Dynamic-wise this was the mpc to have on any instrument from a Selmer CT to a Buffet R13. It proved well matched to any instrument. You can easily moderate your dynamics. In an earlier post I tested a Well keyhole design. That mpc was very good at pp and fff but hard to control in a smooth fashion anything in between. This mpc design is the better design for more controlled but excessve dynamics. Very nice and very easy to play. It's a regular O'Brien crystal with that special Tone Booster built in.

Pics of Obrien crystals
http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgal ... HTM#obrien (http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgallerympc.HTM#obrien)

Pics including Selmer Crystal
http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgal ... HTM#Selmer (http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgallerympc.HTM#Selmer)


CATEGORIES: Solo, Chamber, Orchestra, General, Jazz

RATING
CT, R13, LL: A

[Gandalfe]

Kessler sells a tone booster for saxophones. It's an insert that fits into the corked end of the neck before the mouthpiece is put on. It is said to focus the air flow a little and when I used it on the Kessler Custom I was very pleased with the result. I think Chuck turns them on a metal lathe.

[SteveSklar]

Kessler sells a tone booster for saxophones. It's an insert that fits into the corked end of the neck before the mouthpiece is put on. It is said to focus the air flow a little and when I used it on the Kessler Custom I was very pleased with the result. I think Chuck turns them on a metal lathe.

Yes, here's a link
http://www.kesslermusic.com/KesslerCust ... ooster.htm (http://www.kesslermusic.com/KesslerCustomSax/tonebooster.htm)

To me, since my dad taught me plumbing years ago ... i looks like regular copper/brass tubing that you can get from HomeDepot then use the normal tools to expand or contract it to fit a neck, and curl the end a bit (partial roll). Not too difficult to make. It centers the sound a bit more and increases the resistance a bit.

And of course, for a Saxophone

[Bill]

I play a Frank Wells (Handmde) mouthpiece from the early 1970's with an R-13 from about the same time. Vandoran #4's fit the set up very nicely. I have another Well's as a spare and then a Kaspar that I use occasionally. I have not changed my set up for over 30 years. Actually I would be a little afraid to. I have played all types of music with it with no problems: classical, jazz, lead clarinet in big bands...so I have been really happy over the years. I'll be in real trouble though if it is dropped, it would be very hard to replace.

Bill

http://www.billpayne.wordpress.com

[pete]

Hi, Bill! Nice to have you aboard!

[SteveSklar]

This past weekend I had the opportunity to reface 3 mouthpieces. 1 no-name, 1 HIte and another 'made in france' and stamped N4 next to the table.

I certainly was not expecting much from these 3, with the Hite having name recognition but being more for the jazz player. The "N4 certainly was surprising. It had this very nice ringing & woody tonal quality - reminds me of those sought after early Chedeville/Kaspers.

This "N4" mpc could give any clarinet that sought after "ringing" tonal quality .... it just kind of oozed out of this mpc. You didn't really have to work at it at all. This just goes to show you that sometimes you find a mpc that is just combining the right materials and design, or could be the right blank, and can really surprise the player. I certainly will be on the lookout for french "N4"s from this point out ... I'm sure they go for real cheap.

[Ed Svoboda]

The N4's are probably Riffult blanks. I have some floating around the house and agree that they have good stuff in them.

[pete]

The N4's are probably Riffult blanks. I have some floating around the house and agree that they have good stuff in them.
Which can probably be removed with alcohol or bleach.

[Ed Svoboda]

Now that's funny! :p

[SteveSklar]

I haven't done a mouthpiece review lately due to lack of time. been very busy trying to get clarinets and saxes fixed up and shipped back to their owners. It's amazing how quickly one looses the comfort of a clarinet embouchure and the air support to support harder reeds. When your air support is not there a 3.5 can sound airy, but when everything "clicks" together again that airiness goes away. Now, if i can only get rid of that dizziness !!

But even after a month reprieve (from my last concert on clarinet) I was able to quickly move up from a 3 to a 3.5 Vandoren Traditional. And my dizzness is probably due to my kids eating my lunch, rather than myself.

I pulled out one of the boxes of mouthpieces I had and grabbed a Vandoren 2RV. Now the 2RV is supposedly the old name for the 5RV. Vandoren, due to a marketing change changed the name from 2 RV to 5 RVin the US. But they supposedly called it the 5RV in Europe. Also, there apparently was a "french" 2RV which has slightly different characteristics than the 5RV/American 2RV which had a closer facing. Anyways this changed occurred sometime before 1999 and now it is called a 5RV.

The first thing I noticed on my Leblanc LL is that the 5 . .err .. 2RV is easy to blow, and seems reed friendly playing both the Vandoren and the Mitchell Laurie reeds quite easily, though the Vnady seems to sound better as they have more thickness in the middle to them creating a generally more fuller tone.

The 2RV has good response top to bottom and easily speaks into altissimmo. You could push very easily with this mpc and get some pretty good fortissimmos and then get whisper quite again. A very nice mouthpiece for flexibility. But tonally it was just not spectacular for me. It didn't help provide an extremely woody tone nor much of a ring. The lower register spoke well and sounded good though wasn't reminiscent of those great soloist tone that you hear on recordings or over the radio.

Overall I think a good practice mouhtpiece and good for students though I don't think many players will be grabbing one as their primary mouthpiece, as least not for me on my LL

On my R13 I came to be about the same conclusions except it seems to have a bit more resistance. The tone was very nice and woody though lacks more character which I prefer. Very nice playing mouthpiece and great for blending in a larger group and for that matter, if one likes the tonal quality, great for soloing in too.

CATEGORY: Solo, Orchestra, Chamber
R13/LL RATING: A - B

CATEGORY: General,
R13/LL RATING: A

< CT review coming soon >

[SteveSklar]

I've recently added a 1950ish Buffet Master Bore (mostly known as a "Pre-R13") Full Boehm Bb clarinet. As soon as I get some time to brnig this one up to snuff I may also start mpc testing on it.

[SteveSklar]

In my mpc stock I have a pre 1938 and a post 1938 Selmer mpc. What significance is that .. well at first I thought the only difference was the Brand system markings on it. These were simple marking that specified the facing and tip opening.

But on prepping the pre 1938 for sale I noticed alot more differences that aren't realized by just looking. First off the mpc went on a mpc arbor much more further ( 0.58 inches - over half an inch) than the other one. So this brings forth that the internal shank bore design is much different.

But how does the shank bore affect the tonal quality of the mpc ?

It's realitively quite simply, though quite complex as even minute changes - hundreds of an inch can have some pretty drastic effects.

For example:

A smaller diameter bore can make the lower register including the throat tones relatively sharp. This can also make the higher register flat and less sonorous.

a larger diameter bore can do the opposite - make the lower register including the throat tones flat. But to the contrary make the higher register sharp but more sonorous.

Of course one can ream out the bore to be cylindrical or conical. And on a conical bore the taper will affect how the mpc plays based on the diameter at various points of the taper.

But these two mpcs have at least a 3 stage reaming .. ala polycyclindrical bore of different varying sections.

In examinging two 1926ish Selmer mpc we have the same variation. One is a HS, the other a HS*. The HS has a overall smaller diameter bore than the HS*. THe HS seems to have 2 smaller tapers, and the HS* has 3 larger tapers.

As you can see it seems as though it can get quite complex. So 2 mpcs of the same brand, and made only a few years apart, can be quite different.

A little later we'll summarize review the tip, side rails, and more importantly the roof of the mpc (opposite the window) and how slight changes to it can greatly affect intonation and timbre

[SteveSklar]

As a technician I have a good amount of material on how to repair instruments, both old and new, in addition to other writings about all areas of sound production. In one particular book from Ernest Ferron the clarinet revealed

To quote a section from this book


Even with an ordinary mouthpiece, pressure tends to separate the reed from the mouthpiece which explains the role of the ligature in sound production: a ligature made from a flexible material conteracts this phenomenom.


This doesn't exactly answer all of our questions about ligatures. Some people can hear a difference and others cannot with various ligatures. To me, as the player, I can perceive differences in a wde variety of ligatures. But one important aspect is to make sure that you never over tighten a ligature. I always tighten it just enough to keep the reed in place, then a tad more.

On some ligatures, such as a Vandoren Optima there is a plate that has 4 "pins" on it. If you overtighten this plate, the pins simply dig into the reed and you are subjecting the reed to the entire flat plate. Even Rovner ligs can be overtightened. I've heard of people tightening them so much that they bend the screw ?!?!

If you take a look at a lig on the mpc, there are alot of sections where the ligature does not touch the sides of the reed. It basically holds the reed up to the mpc without creating a "squeezing" effect to the reed. On a basic Rover flexible fabric, it holds all aspects of the reed. On very old metal ligs it pinches the reed.

Several years ago I was playing clarinet for a retired pro clarinet player. I was using a standard lower double screw metal lig - yes, one of those cheap ones. Now, newer (and older) double ligs can have a cradle for the reed. I'm talking specifically about one that is simply a round band that has no cradle.

As I was playing (mostly 20s-50s tunes) he commented that my tone had a high pitch ring to it. It took me a few minutes to actually hear this anomaly (ie, ear training). But when I did, it was quite annoying. I probably tried 7 clarinets, half a dozen mouthpieces and reeds and the high squeal was still there. It was very annoying. I then grabbed one of his ligs and that squeal disappeared.

It was quite an eye (or actualy ear) opener for me and the impact a simple ligature can have.

Of course, the ligature holds the reed to the table of the mpc, and the mpc table should be as flat as possible and rails should be as even as possible. Otherwise, a bad mpc can have adverse effects no matter what ligature or clarinet you are playing.

[SteveSklar]

Grabner clarinet mouthpieces have been known for nice finishing and excellent playing pieces. I test played a few couple years ago such as a K11 and a K14. I plopped this customer K13 onto my LL with a Vandy Traditional 3 reed (I haven't played in a while) and it gave the instrument a very nice, full and deep low register. Very nice. Put it on the R13 and the low register was even better than the LL with a bit of ring to it. MId range was very nice, very smooth sounding tone. Upper register was also very good. Though probably would be better with a 3-1/2.

With the 3-1/2 the mpc sang nicely on the R-13. Low register was very full and deep. mid range was nice and the upper range was clear. On the LL it was a bit different at least with this reed. mid range and up it sounded just a bit stuffy though clear. Not as complex of tone as on the R-13. Back in the day (I read) Leblanc designed their clarinets to have impeccable intonation and gave up a little in the tone department. And of course Buffet went for tone and gave a little bit up in the intonation department.

The K13 was good dynamically on the R13 but less so on the LL. For some reason on the LL on higher dynamics the air going through the toneholes was slightly noisy. I ran across this on an earlier mpc of course one could simply not blow that hard and I really do not think it would be heard from the audiences perspective.

Overall a very nice mouthpiece. On well suited for a varity of work though for jazz i'd prefer a larger tip to get those higher dynamics.

Category: Solo, Orchestra, Chamber, General
RATING: LL/R-13: A

[Merlin]

Steve, I just picked up a pair of minty Sumner m/p's in original boxes.

Got a #3 Bb clarinet, and #3 bass clarinet.

I can get another #3 Bb and a #5 Bb as well from the same source.

The Bb mouthpiece plays well - a tich bright, quite sprightly.

Haven't had an opportunity to try the bass piece yet - my bass is in the shop.

[Gandalfe]

Merlin have you tried the Grabner's and if so what did you think? I've been using the Grabner's on bass and contrabass clarinet to great effect.

[Merlin]

Merlin have you tried the Grabner's and if so what did you think? I've been using the Grabner's on bass and contrabass clarinet to great effect.

Got to try a Grabner LB very briefly. I'd like to give one a real workout.

I have my own refaced contra piece, and I've A/B'd that with one of Clark Fobe's piece. I like mine a bit better on my horn.

[Carl H.]

How much would that #5 run? Is another Bass available?

I'm liking my Sumners on Eb, Bb and A and wouldn't mind trying one on Bass or a 5 sop.

[packardmanmusic]

Of course, the Normandy 4 it just a high-end student instrument. But tonally, not much different from the Noblet 45 I also later added, both being larger bore clarinets.

The K9 fit well to the large bore clarinet. But for some reason I put it aside years ago when I went to Leblanc professional clarinets (medum bore) and haven't really played it much since.

In an old Woodwind ad
http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgal ... M#Woodwind (http://www.clarinetperfection.com/CLgallerympc.HTM#Woodwind)
The K series was used mostly by symphony men.

This mouthpiece provides a nice full dark and deep tone. And surprisingly on my LL a very nice ring to the tone, maybe slightly better than on the R13.

The tone is that particular tone of a hollow, full and woody tone you get in the Chamuleau register. Very seductive in a sense. These mpcs were very highly wanted back in the day and still draw their admirers of people that know of the mpc. I'm certainly glad that I've kept mine. I'll need to compare the K9 to a K8*, K8, K7 etc that I also have. Though I would think the main (and hopefully only difference) is the tip opening. The K9 allows pretty good expressve dynamics. Great for solo and small ensembles and orchestras too. It's not as open as one would think with a "9" and thus as you increase dynamics it can get to be a bit resistance, a K10 would be better which does exist per the ad.

I found a Boosey and Hawkes Edgware SN 59238 on Ebay and was the successful bidder. I wanted to use this for salvage for my B&H Edgeware SN 89627. In the case were two mouthpieces, neither of which fit the barrel (mouthpiece barrel opening is slightly smaller than the newer B&H, they both fit the newer barrel). One of the mouthpieces was a Woodwind Steel Ebonite K12 which surprised me after reading Steve's posting and referring to the Woodwind advertisement at his website - any ideas on production and when this was made?? The other mouthpiece is an Evette & Schaeffer model C with a Buffet Crampton ligature and cap, which I would value at more than what I paid for the whole package = $46.00.

This is my first posting on The Woodwind Forum - I joined today to research mouthpieces - and I very much enjoy the postings and inside humor between members. :-)

[packardmanmusic]

The original posting was my first, and the picture sizes were much too small, so I've attached them again in a larger size so the imprinting can be read. Thanks for your patience. :oops::lol:

[SteveSklar]

The E&S looks to be a chedeville based mpc. normally these are quite good.

The old Woodwind K12 - i've never seen a reference to a K12 - only up to K10s - so that must be one open mpc. I never really was sure about the age of the old woodwind mpcs but I would guess that they were in parallel with the years of other makers of putting sizes on the tables which would place that mpcs in the 1930s - 40s

[Gandalfe]

Welcome to the forum PMM. You take nice pictures and look to be a conscientious photographer. It will be nice to have another mouthpiece expert here. Do you dabble in sax mouthpieces too?

[SteveSklar]

This past week I overhauled a customers old 1907 Buffet Bb clarinet with the wraparound octave lever and teapot register.

And excellent instrument, apparently handed down through the years. Unfortunately it had a replacement non-Buffet barrel but was a good match.

What we have here is not really how well either the old Buffet mpc (age specific for the Buffet) vs the Gennusa was, as the Gennusa was a very easy playing mpc. But the play test just showed how different mpcs can really be.

The Buffet a fairly long at 89.75mm with a bore width of 15.04mm and the Gennusa at 86.75mm long and 14.78mm bore.

The upper socket bore of the clarinet was 14.80mm - so more in line with Gennusa than the Buffet mpc.

Tip width is 11.9mm Buffet v 11.15mm Gennusa.

internal dimensions, are of course, very diffferent too.

In reading several books and articles about mpc design looking at the specifications (and knowing other blueprinting numbers i have for the internals) I would suspect that the two mpcs would play well but would provide different final results with the clarinet.

In this case, intonation with the Buffet was more or less fantastic top to bottom. With the Gennusa, intotation was really off in several areas especially in the upper register.

Tonally one could hear a difference too - at least from my perspective. The Buffet giving a much more full and solid tone. The Gennusa a round tone, though less full and less powerful.

The old Buffet - approximate age specific mpc really made this old Buffet sing with it's powerful and singing tone. Sounded great to me. This really is the reason fanatic clarinetists have tons of mpcs and tons of clarinets as the right combination is just glorious sometimes :grin:

reed: legere Quebec
ligature: 1970s Bonade, nickel plated, inverted


If I had the spare time I would have played the Gennusa on my CT, LL and R13 as another comparison.

[SteveSklar]

FRANK KASPER - CHICAGO clarinet mouthpiece
3 lines down, 1 lines up for those that like to "identify" mouthpiece blanks by those ligature lines that one can so easily etch on a mouthpiece body.

I receive mouthpieces from time to time to correct their playing characteristics. Of course getting a Kasper (or Chedeville) one has to pause a bit as one doesn't want to mess it up in any way.

The visual attributes of this mouthpiece are similar to hundreds of mouthpieces out there. Upon close inspection one can find a parallel H sidewalls in the throat (looking in to the bore of the mouthpiece). Near the top of the "H" the sides slightly bend inwards. Siderails were relatively thick but nothing out of the ordinary and the tip rail was the standard thickness. There was no roll-over baffle which one would expect with the blowing easy. I have measurement (which I haven't compared to other mpcs) but I think the baffle is slightly raised throughout the length down to the throat with a slight concaveness. This would give it it's faster airflow without a roll over baffle.

In other words, it looks like any normal vintage Selmer or Vandoren mouthpiece that meets the visual identifiers.

This mouthpiece had a few balance issues in which I corrected. When correcting a mouthpiece symmetry is key, and making sure the "curve" of the rails slowly drops down to the tip, with more rake near the tip. With the proper experience just playing a mouthpiece one can identify curvature issues. If the rake is too much near the top of the rail then playing becomes more difficult (like selecting a too hard reed), and thus one can get an airy sound. But the key is a curve that allows one to use a harder reed while still very easy blowing characteristics.

After a few corrections to this mouthpiece it just sang. It's hard to elaborate until you have played a multitude of mouthpieces but air flow was faster than normal and response was super fast, tonally it was more on the bright side. But boy was this an easy mouthpiece to master to play the idiosyncrisis of playing the clarinet at a complex level. This played much better than a perfect Vandoren M13 or M13lyre, or a variety of other mouthpieces that I own. It was better than anything that I have owned before.

I didn't play this on my identified test clarinets other than my R13 as it was one of those "too good to be true" moments of a mouthpiece.

The Kasper is a legend along with those "Chedevilles" until one has played a fine specimen just like this one. This was one of those Legends. This certainly brought alive those playing characteristics that only a few have truly played.

I wish this mouthpiece was for sale as I certainly would loved to have had it.

This was definitely one of those "I think i need to save up money to buy one of these" moments.