• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy subm itted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Bell & Howell Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 ® UMI THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE A STUDY AND COMPARISON OF FOUR PROMINENT CLARINET REED MAKING METHODS A DOCUMENT SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS By RANDALL STEWART PAUL Norman, Oklahoma 2001 UMI Number: 3004864 Copyright 2001 by Paul, Randall Stewart All rights reserved. UMI UMI Microform 3004864 Copyright 2001 by Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Bell & Howell Information and beaming Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Copyright by Randall Stewart Paul 2001 All Rights Reserved A STUDY AND COMPARISON OF FOUR PROMINENT CLARINET REED MAKING METHODS A DOCUMENT APPROVED FOR THE SCHOOL OF MUSIC BY Dr. David Etheridge Major Professor Dr. EugMie Enrico Dr. MichaeLRagers Dr. V ^ rie W att^ Dry Roy ICnapp ACBCNOWLEDGEMENTS This project and resulting document would not have been possible without the assistance of many people. In particular, I would like to express my appreciation to Stanley Hasty, Christopher Serique, Daniel Gilbert, and Robert DiLutis for sharing their ideas freely and making important contributions to the field of clarinet performance. Any incorrect statements that might occur concerning their respective reed making methods are absolutely unintentional and are solely the result of misunderstandings on the part of the author. I would also like to thank my wife Nora Louis Paul and all my friends for the help and support they have shown during this project. If it were not for their understanding and cooperation during this process, a successful result would have been impossible. Special credit is due my father, Brayton B. Paul, who created all the illustrations used in this manuscript. He is a forty-year career draftsman and mechanical engineer in the aerospace industry. His experience includes working for the Bendix Corporation, the Martin Company, the McDonnell Aircraft Company, Seamans Electric Company, Central Scientific, and the Lockheed Georgia Company. His career includes work on precision approach radar systems, as well as the XB-51, B-57, F-18, and the C-5A Galaxy aircraft. His mechanical drawings and expertise added much needed clarity and credibility to this document. Finally, this manuscript is dedicated to my mother, Gertrude Elizabeth Paul, whose wish to have me achieve my educational ambition has finally been realized. IV CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................................................................. iv LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS............................................................................................ vi ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................ \il Chapter I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 1 II. SUMMARY AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE........................ 12 in. THE REED MAKING METHOD OF STANLEY HASTY........................... 23 IV. THE REED MAKING METHOD OF CHRISTOPHER SEREQUE............ 39 V. THE REED MAKING METHOD OF DANIEL GILBERT........................... 50 VI. THE REED MAKHvIG METHOD OF ROBERT DILUTIS........................... 59 Vn. A SUMMARY OF THE REED MAKING METHODS .................................. 68 Vm. EPILOGUE: THE REED MAKING METHOD OF RANDALL PAUL.............................. 75 SOURCES CONSULTED............................................................................................... 90 APPENDIX........................................................................................................................ 103 A Selective List of Retail Suppliers of Cane and Equipment LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Tube Cane Detail ............................................................................................. 26 2. Stanley Hasty Blank Detail ............................................................................. 29 3. Stanley Hasty Primary Vamp Detail .............................................................. 32 4. Stanley Hasty Vamp Swoop Detail................................................................. 33 5. Stanley Hasty Vamp Surface Detail .............................................................. 35 6. Stanley Hasty Reed Dimensions ..................................................................... 37 7. Christopher Sereque Vamp Profile Detail ...................................................... 46 8. Christopher Sereque Reed Dimensions .......................................................... 47 9. Daniel Gilbert Reed Dimensions .................................................................... 57 10. Robert DiLutis Reed Dimensions .................................................................... 66 11. Reed Making Methods ..................................................................................... 69 12. Randall Paul Reed Tip Detail ........................................................................... 83 13. Randall Paul Reed Balancing Detail .............................................................. 85 14. Randall Paul Reed Dimensions ...................................................................... 88 VI ABSTRACT A STUDY AND COMPARISON OF FOUR PROMINENT CLARINET REED MAKING METHODS BY: RANDALL STEWART PAUL MAJOR PROFESSOR: DAVID ETHERIDGE, D.M.A. The purpose of this study is to document and compare the clarinet reed making methods of four prominent professional clarinetists. This study is intended to give critical insight and needed specificity to a process that often seems mysterious and confusing. The clarinetists that were chosen for this study represent four diverse methods of reed making; therefore, a comparison of these methods will give greater insight into the process. The individuals chosen, and the reed making method that they represent are: Stanley Hasty, former Principal Clarinet of the Rochester Philhtirmonic and Professor Emeritus of the Eastman School of Music, uses a hand made method that he developed and taught at Eastman; Christopher Sereque, Principal Clarinet of the Seattle Symphony, uses the reed making machine the REEDUAL; Daniel Gilbert, Second Clarinet of the Cleveland Symphony and Professor of Clarinet at Oberlin Conserx'atory, uses the reed making machine the BKM 4; and Robert DiLutis, Second Clarinet of the Rochester Philharmonic, uses a reed making machine that he invented called “The Reed Machine.” V ll The first chapter details the need for the study and the interview method used. The second chapter reviews important background research in the form of published books and articles. The next four chapters detail the reed making methods of the interviewees. The seventh chapter summarizes these four methods and the last chapter details the reed making method of the author. There is a bibliography, and an appendix that lists retailers for equipment and supplies. vm A STUDY AND COMPARISON OF FOUR PROMINENT CLARINET REED MAKING METHODS CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Background Of the physical features that are specific to the clarinet, the reed is by far the most variable.^ Each reed has a set of characteristics that are unique and may or may not suit the performer’s needs. In addition, each individual reed undergoes changes depending on a variety of factors including humidity, age, and even altitude." Given the nature of these reeds and their innate inconsistencies, the clarinetist that desires more predictable performance results inevitably turns to a serious study of the clarinet reed. As one would expect, a plethora of books and articles are devoted to reed making and adjustment. As one surveys the literature on reed making and adjustment, the rationale for this interest falls into several important categories. These reasons essentially answer the question: Why do clarinetists want to make and adjust their reeds? The first reason is that of consistency. As a performer, one is obviously interested in doing the best job possible each time they are in front of listeners.

Load more

  115

Copy Link