Jazz Clarinet Q&A: Mouthpiece Strategy for Selmer Centered Tone

Hi,

Great blog. It's a joy to read. Because of your blog, I have a question. I'm a life long sax player, studied in college, etc. Unfortunately, I never needed to play clarinet. My double was always flute. Anyway, for the past year or so, I've been diving into clarinet. I've always loved it, especially in traditional Jazz and Brazilian choro. I play soprano in a trad jazz group and in a choro group, but I really want to play clarinet as well.  So...

I recently acquired a beautiful Selmer Centered Tone and I'm in love. Can you recommend one, two or a few good mouthpieces that seem to work well with the Centered Tone? It came with a HS* oval mouthpiece which is way more closed than I'm accustomed to, but it definitely sounds good. I know how personal sound and mouthpiece choice are, but some of problems have to do with how open I should go. I know a lot of sax players seem to like open clarinet pieces, but I like to approach the clarinet as its own instrument.

Thanks.

Wayne Swanson

Saxophone, Clarinet, Flute & EWI

www.wayneswanson.net

***

Hey Wayne--

Congrats on the Centered Tone and thanks for the kind words regarding The Jazz Clarinet. As you probably know I'm a CT player myself--I think they're the Mark VI of the clarinet world. 

As to your mouthpiece question, all the usual caveats apply (I'm sure you know them)--the choice is individual; use what works for you; etc., etc. 

Having said this, I think you're smart to ask, because it's quite possible to make a mistake with that HS* oval, which would be a real shame. The obvious advice would be to say "go ahead and have someone open it up", but the trouble is that it's axiomatically easier to take rubber off than add it back on, and you're looking to stabilize your concept right now, first and foremost. 

So, my suggestion would be to do something like this:

Although they're not perfect for a CT bore, you can sometimes get very good results from a contemporary Selmer C85 mouthpiece. If you have the time, money, and inclination, I'd buy, or at least test, a few different facings (105, 115, 120), and see if one of them is more comfortable than the others. You're job might be done there--if a C85 120, for example, works well for you, the search might be over. Be forewarned, though, that while many players like myself have had no trouble with the C85 on a Centered Tone, others have experienced intonation problems--a lot of it comes down to embouchure and air flow concept. 

After experimenting with the C85, and determining which facing is best for your playing, you might want to have the HS* oval opened up to your specs. But I'd make sure you really believed in what you were asking for first--in other words, make sure you know and are comfortable with your playing before having a great vintage piece worked on. That HS* oval is, in my opinion, the equivalent of a vintage Otto Link for a tenor player. If and when you get to that point, let me know and I can offer a suggestion or two regarding who to send it to.

Keep swinging, man!

Eric   

Mouthpiece Review: Vintage Great Neck, N.Y. Brilhart 'Tonalin' with Serial Number

Vintage Brilhart 'Tonalin' Clarinet Mouthpiece

Whenever I get the chance to pick up a vintage Brilhart Ebolin or Tonalin mouthpiece, I try to do it, if only to preserve a piece of jazz history. Unlike the saxophone market, there are very few clarinet mouthpieces, accessories, or instruments made with any sophisticated notion of jazz in mind--we are usually left to re-purpose classical equipment. This has had catastrophic results for jazz clarinetists, especially since the demise of the large bore clarinet. Of the major Parisian manufacturers, only Leblanc continued to make a worthy large bore jazz model clarinet after the early 1970s--the Pete Fountain model, which has since been discontinued. Mouthpieces suffered a similar fate, with occasional nods made to jazz players, but usually with a shallow understanding of jazz history and equipment. It's a false stereotype that jazz players use soft reeds on wildly open mouthpieces. At least two major jazz clarinetists (Benny Goodman and Edmond Hall) used medium close or close mouthpieces during important years of their careers.

Likewise, the merely raucous has been celebrated as the "jazz sound." Young players are sometimes advised to stick chewing gum into the mouthpiece, lowering the baffle, in order to sound like a "New Orleans" player. (Those who give such advice never say just which New Orleans player that is supposed to sound like--it's doubtful they've ever heard Albert Nicholas, Jimmie Noone, Irving Fazola, or Pete Fountain, among many others). The fact is that jazz clarinet sound is as diverse as jazz saxophone sound, and once upon a time there was a diversity of equipment to enable that individuality. During that time, among the most interesting mouthpieces were those made by Arnold Brilhart during his Great Neck, NY period.

Brilhart was a veteran of the Big Bands, and worked closely with Artie Shaw at one point--even co-writing Shaw's Clarinet Method. Shaw's famous clarinet sound is closely associated with Brilhart mouthpieces, and while owning one won't make you sound like Artie, I have a hard time thinking you'd get very close to that sound without something very similar to a good Brilhart Ebolin mouthpiece.

The Tonalin is a very different sort of mouthpiece. Distinguished by its ivory color, and made famous by it's association with players like Charlie Parker (on alto sax) and Woody Herman on clarinet, it seems to have been designed to emphasize a more mellow, less biting quality than the outspoken Ebolin.

For me this mouthpiece is a real treat--smooth, full, warm--the sound really cushioned in all registers. It yields a very big sound that can hover when called upon. I don't know of anything currently on the market to match it.

Brilhart Tonalin Clarinet Mouthpiece

 
Just as vintage large bore clarinets are becoming standard equipment for jazz clarinetists looking for the flexibility and personality of a bygone era, so too with these mouthpieces. My hope is that, one day, some mouthpiece maker will be inspired to reinvigorate the jazz scene by making new models based upon vintage models. An artist who could create a line of mouthpieces to match the old Selmer Benny Goodman Signature model, Brilhart Tonalin and Ebolin models, Pete Fountain crystals, and a few others, would be doing a great service to music.

Mouthpiece Review: Selmer HS * Oval (c.1955, refaced by Bradford Behn 2013)

Widely considered among the finest Selmer made, "HS*Oval" mouthpieces from the 1950s are getting more difficult to acquire. For anyone playing a Selmer Centered Tone clarinet, though, it's a good idea to have at least one of these, if only to get an idea of what the horn sounds like with its intended mouthpiece.

Selmer HS* Oval c.1955

I'm not one to insist upon matching vintage 'pieces to vintage horns--my philosophy has always been to use whatever works, even if it strikes others as unorthodox. There are those, for example, who would suggest that a C85 mouthpiece "shouldn't" be used on a large bore horn, as it was designed for the narrow bored 10S clarinet. I don't share this opinion, and have mixed and matched many different eras' equipment successfully over the course of my playing career. Having said this, I think it's a very good idea to get a baseline reading of an instrument by matching equipment, keeping in mind that doing so doesn't produce a magic wand (ultimately it's more important for a jazz musician to find a personal sound--whatever the names and dates on the equipment.)

Hoping to get exactly that sort of baseline, I acquired several vintage Selmer mouthpieces last year, this HS*Oval among them. It was in pretty rough shape when I got it, though not damaged significantly. I sent it off to Bradford Behn for refacing and was deeply impressed with the results.

Brad did a fantastic job, on this and a Benny Goodman model, both of which match well with my 1955 Selmer Centered Tone. Before this, I'd been very happy to play a C85, but after the refacing, everything got easier--volume, depth of sound, richness of tone, and even facility over the break. Everything is just much smoother, with plenty of timbral range, mellowness or bite, and on the HS*Oval in particular, an even stronger chalumeau.

These mouthpieces are getting more difficult to find, and prices are going up. Unfortunately, too, there seem to be some mouthpiece refacers who think they can be marketed as "jazz" models by opening them up to excruciating degrees-which for many of us is tantamount to mangling them. As a jazz clarinetist who uses a relatively close facing (as many jazz clarinetists do) I'm very much against this, and hope that any mouthpiece craftsmen reading will reconsider the practice. Considering the scarcity of these vintage pieces, please do not open them up before finding a player who wants it done! For those looking for a great mouthpiece to match a vintage large bore, I highly recommend this piece.

  

Mouthpiece Review: Vintage Ebolin Brilhart with Serial Number

One of the most iconic pictures of a jazz clarinetist depicts Artie Shaw, meditatively putting a Brilhart mouthpiece to his lips, with fingers thoughtfully poised over an enhanced Boehm Selmer Balanced Tone clarinet. It's such a cool mood shot that it can make you want to go out and buy a BT, then cap it off with a Brilhart.

Vintage Brilhart with Serial Number

Fortunately, The Jazz Clarinet's instrument and mouthpiece museum contains both items, and I've done exactly that today to find out what the combination might yield.

What can I say about this beautiful vintage 'piece?

First, it's important to distinguish these from the cheap Brilharts made since the late 1960s by Conn Selmer. The contemporary Brilharts are very cheap, and generally sound that way. While the current design owes a debt to the earlier Brilharts, vintage pieces have characteristics of being a more serious, professional level mouthpieces--in terms of projection and depth of sound especially.

The sound of this one is round and open: very loud and strong. The core is not easy to control at first, tending to split in several directions until one's period of adjustment is over. But with time and patience, you can adjust!

Honestly, the Shavian sound concept can be reached with this mouthpiece--the big roundness, the edge, the pinpoint altissimo. The more you play it, the more the unique Ebolin material yields. 

Remember that Artie knew and worked with Arnold Brilhart (Brilhart even collaborated on Shaw's Clarinet Method). So this is about as authentic a mouthpiece as one can get for the late 1930s/ 1940s sound world. And they certainly don't make them like this anymore. 

Brilhart Ebolins are increasingly hard to find these days, but if you can get your hands on one with a four digit serial number and an original facing, they are very special. My live album - "Bootlegs from the Bop Stop" - was made on a four digit Brillie, which was my main gigging mouthpiece for over a decade. 

Most importantly, perhaps, they were designed with jazz and dance band playing in mind - not for the classical market. This makes them indispensable nearly a century later. 

Mouthpiece Review: "Circle BG" The Benny Goodman Signature Model by Selmer (c. 1955)

Benny Goodman Model Mouthpiece by Selmer (c.1955)

The newest addition to The Jazz Clarinet's ever expanding mouthpiece museum is a vintage Benny Goodman Model by Selmer. This piece was a particular treat for me to test drive, as my main horn is a 1955 Selmer Centered Tone, and the BG Signature (or "Circle BG" as it is also known) was undoubtedly intended to match such a clarinet.

There are various internet anecdotes regarding Benny's mouthpieces, some of them purportedly first hand accounts of testing those housed at Yale. As of this writing, I have neither seen nor played those, but the usual story is that they are rather non-descript, very open pieces that play with extremely soft reeds (Vandoren 1.5 is usually mentioned). There are many difficulties with such accounts--or with any mouthpiece reviews, for that matter, including this one. The individual playing the equipment is a profound and decisive factor concerning the 'proper' reed setup, for instance. But when faced with stories of Benny's equipment, many other questions arise, not least of which being when Benny played the mouthpiece in question. Was it the height of his jazz career from 1935-45? Was it during his switch to a double-lip embouchure under the influence of Reginald Kell in the 1950s? Or was it from his long retirement, when he divided his time between concerto performances and reunion shows? Age, repertoire, and venues all have their potential influence.

[Update as of 3/25/14: I recently read another report about Benny's mouthpieces, albeit another internet anecdote suggesting that the late Ralph Morgan measured Benny's facing and found it medium-close. Based on my own experience, I tend to agree with this].  

Beyond these historical questions, the subject of this review wasn't from Benny's equipment bag, but a mouthpiece marketed by Selmer for the general public. As such it was probably not played by Goodman, but designed to give the average clarinetist a mouthpiece that might replicate, in some sense, the Goodman sound.

One of my goals for The Jazz Clarinet is to begin measuring all of the gear presented here and to update these reviews. But even without exact measurements, some unique properties of this piece are obvious on sight. This is now the longest facing of any French mouthpiece in my collection. It's even longer than many of the German pieces I own; closest to a 1951 Fritz Wurlitzer and the newer Vandoren Deutsche models. Also, like the German pieces, the facing is quite close--considerably closer than a Selmer C85 105, and the bore is considerably wider.

Playing it, I got a real jump and boom. This thing is a real bazooka; probably the loudest piece I own. Despite my penchant for medium close mouthpieces, the facing of this was a bit constraining for me, and if I ever intended to use it regularly, I'd have to have it opened up. The altissimo was by far the nicest of the registers, followed by the clarion. Both of these yielded a balanced, round, full sound without the annoying buzz that many clarinet mouthpieces give when pushed. The lower I got, though, the thinner the sound, with the chalumeau being the most challenging. Glissandi, articulation and overall flexibility were very good, considering the facing, but once again it would have to be altered to suit my needs.

I found that taking less mouthpiece in the mouth was helpful, but less comfortable for me personally. In retrospect, this might have been part of the design. I once knew student of Gino Cioffi who insisted on playing with only the very tip of the mouthpiece, and blowing through the horn like a pea-shooter. This was never an approach I liked, but the era in which these mouthpieces were made was also the golden age of Selmer in Cioffi's Boston Symphony section. Perhaps this mouthpiece was designed with that sort of classical pedagogy in mind.  

Overall, this is a fascinating mouthpiece, with real potential for jazz.

[Update 3/25/14: I had this mouthpiece refaced by Bradford Behn several moths ago, and it has become my number one mouthpiece for gigs--without a 'classical' embouchure.] 

Mouthpiece Review: Morgan RM06 (c. 1989)

Morgan RM06

One of the more unusual mouthpieces in my collection is a Ralph Morgan RM06, which has a scoop beak more common to saxophone mouthpieces, purchased in New York City in 1989.

The designation RM06 makes this a 1.06mm tip opening of their standard pro model.

Morgan RM06--profile view

It's easy to jump to the conclusion, based on the outer shape of this mouthpiece, that it might sound brash, or saxo-phoney. Playing it rather immediately dispels those concerns. The tone it produces for me is warm, round, yet slightly diffuse. I don't find the "core" or "edge" sound of a Selmer C85 in this mouthpiece, which tends rather towards a nice floating softness instead. There is also, for me, a sense of greater separation from the sound when I play this one. In many ways, this piece behaves like a Vandoren B40, but with a little more directness and compactness--there is a feeling that the Morgan's sound can be turned more quickly and nimbly.

The intonation and timbral consistency of this mouthpiece is exemplary, from the bottom of the chalumeau to the top of the altissimo. It also holds sound shape very well at extreme dynamics. These are undoubtedly the qualities that convinced me to buy it--especially considering the angle I tend to the hold the horn (more elevated than the usual classical posture). With this Morgan, I can blow "straight down the horn" and get a solid, timbrally consistent sound, well in tune.

I bought this mouthpiece back in 1989 on an impulse. It sounded fantastic in the store, and was too good to leave behind. Almost immediately after getting it home, though, I found that the scoop beak wasn't for me--however nice the sound, I could never "forget" the mouthpiece enough and just wail. Since then, it's basically sat in an obscure, yet honorable place in my mouthpiece museum.

Bottom line: The Morgan RM06 is a very good mouthpiece--obviously a high quality design, excellent tone and articulation. Other players might find the scoop beak ideal. I recommend it especially for players coming from the saxophone--not because this will yield a saxophone sound, but because it can give the player a solid clarinet sound, yet with something closer, perhaps, to what a sax player is used to in terms of beak shape and embouchure comfort.

Mouthpiece Review: Vandoren B45 (c.1985)

Vandoren B45

It has been a long time since I've played a Vandoren B45. The ancient specimen seen above was my main mouthpiece from about 1986 to 1989, when I was in High School. It was given to me by a teacher, so I'm not sure what vintage it is exactly--early to mid '80s is the most likely date.

The B45 was at one time considered by many as a baseline Vandoren mouthpiece--a sort of standard reference point for gauging others. I've read some internet opinions of them recently that encouraged me to pull mine out and give it another go. I was deeply impressed.

This B45 has an excellent amount of power and depth. It has a boom to the sound--especially the chalumeau--that my more diffuse and softer sounding B40 lacks. Articulation is crisper than the B40, especially clarion and altissimo attacks so common in the playing of jazz players. The tone is full and has quite a bit of "jump", though not as much for me as the Selmer C85. I'm really impressed by the smooth quality and feel of the 'piece--it's tubby quality down low when pushed seems ideal for jazz. Most gratifying is that it avoids the "fuzz or buzz" problem of so many classical mouthpieces.

For those who want a little more complexity to the sound--more layers and "ring" to the tone, the C85 series is still my preference. But this B45 has depth with room to the sound--probably more than any other mouthpiece in my collection after the C85.

Earlier on this blog, I've mentioned my opinion that players should ideally be able to play on a 'standard' Vandoren or a Selmer C85 series mouthpiece for a several reasons, including their price and availability. Playing on the B45 again has only strengthened that opinion for me--and strengthened the opinion that players should hold onto their primary mouthpieces--even several years after switching, you just might come back around to an old favorite.

Mouthpiece Review: Vandoren B40 (c. 1991)

I've always felt the Vandoren concept favored a warm, slightly diffuse sound that nevertheless held shape consistently throughout the various registers of the clarinet. For jazz playing in particular, I'm a fan of the B40 as an all-purpose "utility" mouthpiece.

This particular mouthpiece was chosen from a few, and plays very well in tune from the bottom of the horn to double C, produces a solid, warm tone, and can be used in a wide variety of settings, making it a pretty good mouthpiece to keep in the case as a backup. I've owned it for just about twenty years, and though it's never been my primary mouthpiece, I feel better having it around.

For those who like a full-bodied sound, but prefer a softer-edge than the cutting clarity of a Selmer C85, the B40 might actually turn out to be optimal. It doesn't articulate as cleanly as my Selmers, but the two seem complimentary mouthpieces in basic response--they take the same reeds and react almost identically, save for final tone quality.

There has been a big movement in the clarinet world over the past decade and a half, especially, towards very expensive custom mouthpieces. I have several in my collection, and have even recommended certain models to players--there are many good reasons to work with a custom mouthpiece designer. By the same token, there are horror stories of players breaking their one, perfect, custom mouthpiece and not being able to perform well without it. My personal philosophy is that a player ought to be able to play 'standard' equipment if needed. If your custom, deluxe, $700 mouthpiece shatters, you should be able to pull out a Vandoren or a Selmer and comfortably play a gig. This won't be everyone's attitude, but for me it makes sense--I wouldn't be comfortable if the only equipment I could reasonably handle had been altered to the point that it behaved like no other 'piece.

For that reason, I recommend that players know how to play on Vandorens and Selmers. As far as mouthpieces go, they are pretty consistent, intonation is solid, range is solid, and they are economical.

Mouthpiece Review: Charles Bay 1989 MO-L

1989 Charles Bay Mouthpiece
 

The battle tested Bay in this photo was my first handcrafted pro-model mouthpiece, purchased in 1989 (the grooves were caused by a Bonade inverted ligature, since banished to a cold corner of The Jazz Clarinet's "ligature museum"). Charles Bay's website states that his mouthpieces are intended to give clarinetists the "ability to project one’s unique sound whether Classical or Jazz." This flexibility of purpose strikes me as important, as many top mouthpiece makers seem less concerned with the jazz market. It's nice to deal with someone who takes jazz into consideration, and who values individuality of sound. 

Of all the mouthpieces I've owned, this Bay has probably seen the most diverse use. Between the ages of 17 and 25, I played it constantly and in all circumstances, including symphony orchestras, opera and show pits, jazz gigs in New Orleans' French Quarter, solo concerti, and Mozart with the Emerson String Quartet.

The mouthpiece is marked MO-L, which I believe means "Medium Open - Long" facing.

It's dominant attribute is a free-blowing, forward, booming sound. Articulation is surprisingly good, especially when slightly harder reeds are used--one excellent characteristic is that it can accept a wide variety of reeds for different styles of music.

In the chalumeau and clarion registers, this mouthpiece is ideal for gaining a fat New Orleans sound, with that 'forward in the mouth' feel. For jazz purposes, I would recommend it most strongly to players looking for a very specific type of retro-NOLA 'talking' quality, represented by players such as Albert Nicholas, George Lewis, and Dr. Michael White. This mouthpiece gets me into that sound world much quicker than others in my collection.

Mouthpiece Review: Pomarico Crystal 1 and 1L (c. 1999)

When I played Buffet R13s, these mouthpieces were my bread and butter for pops concerts and jazz--in fact, they were the only mouthpieces I ever ran across that would smooth out the sound of an R13 to the point of giving a decent masquerade of the old Selmer sound.

Pomarico 1 and 1L crystal mouthpieces, c.1998

They also perform well on the classical repertoire. The darker, more used looking cork to the left is the Pomarico 1, on which I won my first professional audition. The 1L was bought as a backup, and despite the difference in facing length (I'm fairly sure "L" stood for "long" in the old Pomarico nomenclature, which has since been replaced by various gems and other symbols) it plays and responds similarly. The old Pomarico 1s were roughly equivalent tip opening to the current "Nigun" models. [ Readers of The Jazz Clarinet should note that I don't play stereotypically open "jazz" facings, but tend to medium/medium close facings.]

I'm not one who thinks crystal mouthpieces sound in any way "brighter" than hard rubber, acrylic, or wood mouthpieces. Depending on reed selection and embouchure, they can actually sound much denser, smoother, and less "bright" to my ear.

These mouthpieces yield a very consistent and uniform sound to all registers of the clarinet. This was particularly helpful when playing the R13, which was never an easy experience for me in terms of timbre. The dynamic range is very good, especially at the soft end of the spectrum, holding the sound shape firmly while producing the lightest pianissimo. At maximum volume, they resisted distortion, but also lack the type of 'jump' or 'shout' that can be gained with a Selmer C85.

Articulation is solid, but not quite as crisp as can be attained on other mouthpieces.

These mouthpieces are highly recommended for those playing instruments with timbre-control issues. For mellowness, the Pomarico concept is really quite extraordinary, and is what I most associate with them.  They really are a smooth ride and quite enjoyable to play.

Mouthpiece Review: Selmer C85

Of the fifty or so mouthpieces in my collection, only one--a Morgan purchased in 1989--might qualify as a specifically made "jazz" mouthpiece. All of the others, like each of my clarinets, were manufactured with a classical market in mind. [editor's note 6/27/18: This review was written before I purchased nearly 25 vintage Brilhart mouthpieces, and a Benny Goodman Selmer model, all of which could be said to have been designed for the jazz market--E.S.] While mouthpiece choice is ultimately very personal, with no two players getting the same results from the same equipment, jazz players often have to re-purpose materials from the classical market. This ongoing series of reviews is therefore written in the hopes that giving one player's opinions and experiences might be of some help to others.


SELMER C85

Selmer C85 105

First and foremost, this mouthpiece is loud. But loudness itself isn't really a positive quality unless it's accompanied by other aspects of sound. Depth, flexibility, color spectrum and dynamic range all play their parts and will determine whether it's worth listening in the first place.

What makes this loud "good" and others less successful is the depth, flexibility, and a certain plaintive quality this mouthpiece yields, deep in the tone. There is an inner motion to the sound possible--rather than giving one generic sound, it's multi-layered. It also has a strong edge to the sound, without sacrificing body.

All registers respond immediately to this mouthpiece--it very much feels like a hair-trigger megaphone, freeing the player up to focus on the music rather than any physical challenges. Player who like to exert while playing might find this mouthpiece shouts too much (or that it has too little resistence), but those who like to lay back while getting big results will probably like the feel and response of the C85.

I've read elsewhere on the web that the C85 series was designed specifically for the Selmer 10S/Recital series clarinets, and that they don't work particularly well for pre-10S Selmers. This hasn't been my experience--the C85 works very well on my 1955 Centered Tone and 10S alike.

I can tolerate a pretty wide variety of facings, from fairly close (105) to fairly open (120), and have used both the C85 105 and C85 120 on my horns. They yield similar results, though I prefer the 105 (pictured above is a new 105, purchased as a backup--the one I use more often is a "vintage" 'piece from the early '80s, with an inlaid stamp of the Selmer logo, letters and numbers).

In the grand argument about whether material matters, count me with those who believe it does. These mouthpieces are made from rod rubber, and the sound seems, from both a listening and playing perspective, a bit more defined and harder edged than the molded hard rubber mouthpieces in my collection. Whether it's ultimately material that accounts for this will be debated by those more expert than I am, but my "player's opinion" is that the rubber itself does seem to contribute to that difference.

For those who like Vandoren B40s or B45s, but are looking for a slightly edgier sound, this mouthpiece handles very similarly (with the 120 being the closest facing to those popular Vandorens), and being reasonably priced, it's worth looking into.