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: 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.