In speaking about mouthpieces, those who are able to accurately measure each of the many different dimensions and demonstrate how these proportions affect the emission of sound are the best qualified. Subjective impressions and empirical evidence are less valued. My own belief is that performance is affected as much by how a reed interacts with the facing curve of a mouthpiece as by the architecture of the mouthpiece itself. A single mouthpiece can sound very different when you change reeds.

For example, you know that your sound is darker with a reed that has a greater amount of wood closer to its tip, even on a mouthpiece that in other respects might be considered "bright." For me, this is really where tone and response begins. And the adjustment of reeds is an essential part of clarinet playing. So, I believe a lot of what we search for in different mouthpieces can really be obtained simply by knowing how to adjust a reed.

Treasure Hunting

Yet, armed with an understanding of reed adjustment, a great variety of mouthpieces can provide pleasure. You gain freedom from the idea that only certain mouthpieces ensure fine playing (and you learn what a truly crappy mouthpiece sounds like).

Great mouthpieces can be both brand new and very old. My personal enjoyment is in searching out rubber mouthpieces made in the 1930s and early 1940s, when there was a different process - and material - for making them. When you find a good one, there is a certain buttery warmth, a special depth of sound, that becomes evident.

Sadly, the names of legendary old mouthpieces have become vernacular - in a bad way. Players who have never known the originals are faced with terminology that is in danger of becoming meaningless: what can you really expect by acquiring a mouthpiece marked Kaspar, Chedeville, or Lelandais? It's true that certain design features, mainly having to do with the baffle, can be attributed to one or the other. Yet the specifics remain a mystery for many. For instance, some old Chedevilles had high baffles and sounded bright and edgy. Others had wide throat openings and lacked focus. Whether an old mouthpiece was made by the Chedeville Company is no guarantee of anything. And most Kaspar mouthpieces that have survived to the present day have been refaced, thus eradicating the whole point of owning them.

Narrowing the Playing Field

I think there is some technical mastery to be gained by narrowing your equipment choices. This is the point at which the idea of yourself as a musician diverges from your pleasure as someone who simply (and justifiably) enjoys collecting. They are two rather different activities.

Yet the fact of how music is produced on the clarinet will always beg the question of equipment. The very fact that the quality of our art depends not only on the selection of a mouthpiece (as it does for brass players) but also on organic cane means that choices will constantly be necessary. And while it is true that the human voice can produce a variety of sounds, still, compared to a vocalist a clarinetist's life is one involving constant equipment choices and analysis. It's nicer to think of this situation as an asset.

As with everything else, in the end it is your lifestyle that will dictate how you approach your time with the clarinet, what your goals will be. The longer I live, the more the instrument is a comfort and source of enjoyment for me. The more I play, the more I listen to recordings and pay attention to clarinet sounds I encounter in movies and in the theater. My idea of the beauty possible in clarinet performance is deepening, and my own playing benefits from it.