Large Bore Clarinets

saxhound

saxhound

Moderator
Staff member
CE/Moderator
Even though I've been a Buffet R-13 player from the start (or nearly so - I've tried to block out my Martin Freres experience!), I'm fascinated by the large bore concept, especially for big band doubling. Doing a little digging it seems like the list of these includes:

LeBlanc Noblet (various series including the Pete Fountain model)
Selmer Series 9
Selmer Centered Tone
Selmer Balanced Tone
Penzel Mueller Brillante
Conn models?

What others am I missing? For those that have dabbled in this arena, do you have any thoughts on how these compare to playing a good R-13? Ergos, tone, ease of blowing, etc.
 
off the top of my head .....

Eaton Elite
Noblet 45, 40, Normandy 4
Leblanc Dynamic/Dynamique to evolve into the P.F. model
Selmer Series 9 and alot of their older models too
Buescher True Tone (vintage)
B&H 1010

and i'm sure there's others
check this link for a list of some
http://www.clarinetperfection.com/clbore.htm
 
You know, I really don't hear a difference in the sound between a large vs. a normal bore. Maybe that's just me. But some guys swear by them. I've hear players say that the large bore is a louder and bigger sound. I would think a smaller bore would be more powerful. Shows ya what I know. I'd luv to hear what the pro's think.
 
To my untrained clarinet ears, bore-size doesn't matter. The whole issue of bore size is a myth in my view. And before someone refers me to one text or another, or some scholastic exercise, I am not interested in researching it beyond my own experiences and cynical viewpoint.

A few years ago, I asked Rheuben Allen (a noted repair tech and entrepreneur, distributing the Kenny G soprano saxophone) about clarinet bore sizes and his reply was that it only involves a few thousandths of an inch, and dropped the subject. His attitude was clearly that it didn't matter.

If the lists in the WW&BW catalog are to be believed, it DOES only involve a few thousandths of an inch. I admit that maybe that can make a difference, but in my testing of clarinets several years ago in preparation of buying a new one, I settled on my Buffet RC Prestige. I played LeBlanc, Selmer, Yamaha, and Buffet and none of the clarinets I tried came close to the Buffet RC Prestige I bought (and still play today). I have no idea if my clarinet is a "big bore" or a "small bore", but only that it plays extremely well with a huge, fat tone.

I have the same opinion about Alberts vs. Boehm. Those who play Alberts in trad jazz claim they do so because Alberts have a bigger sound. I don't buy it. I think they struggle with the Albert only because their favorite players used Alberts and the players must conform.

Sorry if I may have offended some strongly held beliefs, but that's my take on the issue. DAVE
 
I have a 424 Conn. I also owned a Noblet 40. I just gave away a cheapo Vito. All played pretty much the same, with the same mpc's. The only real difference was the feel of the 3 clarinets. The Vito had a cheaper feel, but played rather nice anyways. I bought the Conn hoping it would project more, but to me it isn't any louder . Perhaps it might measure a bit louder with a good db meter, but the difference is not really noticeable to me otherwise. To be honest, I'm a little disappointed with the Conn.
 
I don't feel that the sound is all that different to the observer, but it certainly is to the user. I have a Series 9 that has a full, easy to mould sound, and a Series 10S horn that feels "stuffy" to me when I play it, even though the sound is the same to the listener.

But, I also like the sound and feel (I really like the feel) of a Selmer Recital horn. Go figure.
 
Thanks for the antacid guys. I no longer have this particular strain of GAS.

I did get a free clarinet recently that is scheduled to become wall art. It's a Couesnon A. Fontaine model. Any thoughts on whether it is worth something before I start drilling holes in it?
 
saxhound said:
Thanks for the antacid guys. I no longer have this particular strain of GAS.

I did get a free clarinet recently that is scheduled to become wall art. It's a Couesnon A. Fontaine model. Any thoughts on whether it is worth something before I start drilling holes in it?
Click to expand...
I know people who swear by Couesnon clarinets, who'd rather nail their Buffet to the wall. Give it at least a test honk.
 
saxhound said:
Thanks for the antacid guys. I no longer have this particular strain of GAS.

I did get a free clarinet recently that is scheduled to become wall art. It's a Couesnon A. Fontaine model. Any thoughts on whether it is worth something before I start drilling holes in it?
Click to expand...

If you want wall art I've got a formerly Mazzeo model clarinet I'll swap for yours.
 
Carl - sent PM.

Wow, it actually plays pretty well. Had to clean some scum off it before I wanted to play it. The tenon corks are shot, so it wants to fall apart in your hands, but it's surprisingly smooth. Played some scales and arpeggios, and it spoke cleanly from low E to altissimo G. Above that was a little dicey, although I did manage to play up to the double C. I'll have to wrap the tenons with some teflon tape and do a side by side with the Buffet.
 
The meek (clarinet) shall inherit the earth!

Horns can surprise you.
 
In many emails I get from people they always ask me what kind of clarinet to get for a particular situation.

Since I happen to swap between 3 different clarinets, a Selmer CT, a Leblanc LL and an R 13 I think that they each bring differing levels of capabilities.

When we mentioned the bore above what we didnt' take into account is if also the size of the toneholes. For instance, the CT has a large bore and large toneholes versus a Leblanc Dynamic which has a large bore and medium toneholes (using large and medium unscientifically here though i have measured a few in the past).

The Leblanc clearly was not the equal in the term of upper end dynamics (loudness to the player) to the CT, also not as free blowing. I attributed that more to the tonehole size than anything else - though truthfully only a guess on my part.

But recently i've been more attentive to the tonehole size (and undercutting) in relation to the bore and the "playability" of the clarinet itself.

In other words, i'm now more in the camp of a particular clarinet can be a "jazz" clarinet versus a symphonic type clarinet. But that can't say that a player can't use one for the other, it all depends upon alot of other factors.

But if i had to play a clarinet in a bigband, unmic'd .. i certainly would use my CT with a Lnk mpc that i reviewed in the mpc section. That combo can whail :)
 
SteveSklar said:
In other words, i'm now more in the camp of a particular clarinet can be a "jazz" clarinet versus a symphonic type clarinet. But that can't say that a player can't use one for the other, it all depends upon alot of other factors.
Click to expand...
When I talk about saxophones, I generally point out that the Conn saxophones (practically all of them made prior to 1971, except for the 28M Connstellation) are designed to be "jazz" or "big band" horns: they're fat (stubby) horns you can put a lot of air through. They have large bores.

There's just so much tweaking you can do to the bore of ANYTHING before it starts havening bad intonation problems or no longer sounds like what it's supposed to be (i.e. your sax doesn't sound like a sax, your clarinet isn't a clarinet). Something's gotta give: if you want a bigger bore and maintain the same length, you need to do something about those toneholes, not only size, but placement, too.

A further sax-related comment: one of the reasons why people may say that modern pro saxophones sound "the same" is because they're designed on computers and designed to maximize intonation. Could be the same about clarinets. Hey, I seem to remember seeing ads about the "large bore" Buffets only about 20 or so years ago.
 
you're lucky that i have a complete list of all clarinets ever made and their bore sizes in a listed order from largest to smallest.
NOT !! :emoji_imp:

but this may help dependent upon your definition of Big Bore
http://www.clarinetperfection.com/clbore.htm#bore
 
If you read any of the published papers on acoustics, available online for free, of which you have compiled a pretty complete list of here:

http://www.woodwindforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=768

you will see that, throughout the development of all of our favorite woodwind instruments in the last 200 years, what has always determined a great deal about the total personality of any instrument, is what is called the "cutoff frequency" - the frequency, set by a combination of the size/bore diameter ratio, height, spacing, and open/closed relationships of the open tone hole and the tone holes below it, at which the active harmonic resonances are blocked from exiting the horn via the open tone hole. Not all the sound gets to come out of the horn!

Usually, only the resonances of the fundamental, and the first 2 or 3 overtones come out of the tone hole. For the higher resonances, the impedance of the air at the open tone hole, acts as a wall, sending their waves on down the body tube.

Benade wrote in FMA, p. 488, "I have taken a pair (matching Leblanc pair) of brand new Bb clarinets ....and carefully reoworked them so that one has it's fe (cutoff frequency) raised by about 3% while the other has it's fe lowered an equal amount. Both instruments are well tuned and have excellent response. Players of classical music are very much attracted by the low-fe instrument, while they consider the other clarinet to have been ruined; serious Jazz clarinetists are equally positive in holding the opposite opinion! Both instruments have been borrowed from time to time for public performance."

By comparison, there is very little material concerning relative bore diameters.
 
Gibson does discuss the bore in his book, chapter 8-9, pgs 28-35.
and references Bonades 'On Woodwind Bores" article (which I'm trying to find)

The placement of the toneholes and especially the placement of the register vent impact certain characteristics where as, in general, the wider cylindrical bore tends to sharpen harmonics which can be countered by tonehole size and placement.

but, for players I equate large bores to being more "free" blowing and one is able to get greater dynamics, assuming proper mpc selection, et all as compared to a small diameter clarinet. I can easily compare this from my Leblanc LL to R13s, to CT even compared to a Series 9 which is eeriely similary in measurements to a CT except for the lower joint toneholes, and being slightly longer.

But a larger bore isn't necessarily freer blowing. in cylindrical terms it may be (tonehole size also impacts that), but the R13 (and previous models) 2 and 3 step bores allow more free blowing and balanced characteristics as compared to a similar sized cylindrical bore.

but even then so, some instruments such as a Silver Throat Deluxe which has the same dimensions as a malerne silver throat has major differences in tone hole sizes one being much more limited in dynamic flexibility than the other .. or even a CT compared to a Leblanc Dynamic (large vs medium tone holes).

but then, add the player, mouthpiece and reed selection and all may be varied anyways.
 
I'd equate a smaller bore with more immediate response, a better stacatto, a smaller low register and an easier high register, and less general tonal flexibility. The large bore would lend itself to a fuller, fatter sound in the low register, more tonal flexibility, though a weaker high register and more sluggish response - although, all for the amount of effort invested in blowing. A big, strong player, will get more out of a big bore instrument.
 
FWIW, it really doesn't matter the size of the bore: if it doesn't sound good, has poor intonation, poor keywork and/or poor construction (quality), it's a bad horn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom