The FOCUS TEST with 10 different Buffet R13 Clarinets 

I sent you a mail mr. Fedele... Thank you in advance

Absolutely!!! There are good horns in every serial range. But you'd be amazed how consistent some serial numbers were. 72, 73, 74xxxs all play remarkably similar...each specimen I've tried within that range. Obviously there are many other examples. But those are some of the prime horns.

Hey Greg, I know how you feel as I've been slowly improving my saxophone chops, and I hear these amazing players that I will never be in the same universe of. If you ever want to talk, I have some cool tips that might make clarinet a little easier

I need that on a shirt!! #merch

Thank you for watching, and for trying that test! I used to have a Prestige from 1986, it was one of the very best horns I've ever played! I sold it to my friend Matthew Fontana-check him out on RU-vid and Instagram! He's a great player and that very early Prestige really sounds great with him! But it looks like you have one even earlier! I am jealous!

It's funny, I recently got a 32xxx (definitely postwar) and I find it to be inferior not only to my favorite true Polybore R13's (from the 60's), but also the earlier pre-R13's. I've never played 25xxx, but I have played a few 18xxxs that were superior to the 32xxx. I can only assume, as it is technically prewar, that your 25xxx is much like the 18xxxs I've played. I also hear some of the very early Buffets from the late 1800's are exquisite. That is what Bonade played. In my opinion, a good Buffet is a good Buffet, and there are good and bad from every period. But there are definitely low periods, and the immediate postwar period is definitely one of the lowest, in my estimation. One thing that I will say, is the modern concept is so much darker. And it's difficult to get a horn before say 1963 to play very dark. The polybore nature of what we understand today to be an R13 really helps to create a chameleonesque flexibility of sound.

@@DaleFedele Thank you very much for your extensive explanation. I really appreciate your RU-vid videos, they are so much revealing about the nature of the clarinet sound production. Thank you. But may I ask, did the early Buffet clarinet models have no "names"? Were they all simply a "Buffet-Crampon" clarinets?

It's so funny you ask that, I recently got a modern horn that's not bad. The design has certainly improved however they are as inconsistent as ever, and I don't have the same glow to the sound as I do with the golden era horns

If you mean silver plating vs nickel plating on modern horns, I agree with you...the differences are unbelievably subtle (though perhaps a difference on feedback). However, if you felt the weight difference between the 71xxx and 72xxx, you would find the 72xxx to be considerably lighter. That's because the solid German Silver keywork is 20-25% heavier, and that absolutely makes a difference in the sound. Such a tangible difference that Buffet immediately started producing instruments with thicker walls to make up for the weight difference.

@@DaleFedele I understand, thank you! Do you personally like the weight/sound of German Silver horns? I've purchased a 1918 A clarinet (Buffet/Robert) with solid keywork and I'm very interested to hear how it differs from my modern R13.

@@Cantabile 1918 should have the octave pip on the front. Look up "Bolero Ricardo Muti" on RU-vid ...the Eb solo is Donald Montanaro on a solid German silver Eb of the same period. I've NEVER heard a better Eb sound...and you know how hard Eb is to tune! It sounds like you got an amazing horn...

@@DaleFedele Yep, it has a "teacup" register along with the donut ring and 3rd lh ring. I'll definitely check that out! And I'm quite excited to receive the horn and send it to my tech to get re-padded.

Can you email me at dalemfedele@gmail.com ?

I covered that in the video, most of these are set up by the same person that I sat down with and meticulously adjusted the key height. I think it mostly has to do with the exit bore of the upper joint.

Even more interesting is thickness of pads and beveling, which is also consistent.

@@DaleFedele One would have thought they were the same dimensions across all of the R13's. That would explain everything.

🤡🤡🤡 lmaoooooo

Yes!!! Absolutely...very much agreed. I think besides the double lip players, only Montanaro's school and Allard's school consistently produced players that didn't bite (at least of what I've heard. I also know Bonade taught double lip on and off, so there's definitely an aspect to that in his playing and pedagogy)...and I'm just referring to American players here

@@DaleFedele I practice double lip , but I also play normal . My teacher was so against double lip , but then once he heard me and he realized the sound is rounder and better .... . I have Italian school teacher he did conservatory in Italy. How can double lip be bad if Goodman used it and other greats too!!!!

@@smokingjazz5067 I couldn't agree more!!! The ONLY negative is if you pick up flute, it can affect your doubling chops

@@DaleFedele no no chance flute. Maeby alto sax , I been playing didgeridoo for years , I'm happy with clarinet . Btw I need to upgrade I have a buffet b12 , vandoren b 45 mouthpiece .... Any advice? I'm not very rich...

It's difficult! I think it's like trying to describe how something tastes. I think of it in relation to the body of sound. A focused sound does not spread...it is not hollow. It has ordered overtones that "ring" but is also clearly ordered with a dense core. That is where the center comes from...you can easily go from ff to pp and the sound holds with a great deal of consistency. That quality at "pp", that control, can be had at ff...and that to me is a big indicator of center and focus.

It depends!! I do feel that great equipment is objective...and that ease is more important to an adult beginner than anything...ALSO these old Buffets can be had for bargains.

@@DaleFedele I have an R 13 that was made in the 50s. The specialty music store here in L.A. tried to find out exactly when and where it was made with the serial number buy could only tell me it was from the 50s. Is this a nice clarinet to learn on?

@@chadb7694 Could you tell the the first two digits of the serial?

@@DaleFedele 47297 is the number

@@chadb7694 I have a beautiful 48xxx I just got! And it's one of the best horns I've ever played. Congratulations to you!!! I'm sure it's an exquisite horn and will bring you many years of joy.

Wait for part 2 when I make them (mostly) work! It's a very interesting experiment, but essentially, it's a question of what is negotiable. I also think it's a great example of how inconsistent this company was (and, someday, I'll find enough modern Buffets that will be far worse...) I wish this was 80 grand of clarinets...but, anyway, stay tuned for many, many different barrels and mouthpieces in part 2.

I would be surprised if that number was better. When buying a new clarinet it's best to try 8-10 and choose one. Some horns work for some people, other work better for other people. Each one is different.

@@IsaacW. But the purgatory of subjectivity that is Clarinet is more limited by the gauntlet of needing to project & still blend in large halls. With saxophone, it's much easier to say, "whatever works for you." But with clarinet, knowing to look for specific attributes can lead to a much better long-term relationship with the practical demands on one's horn.

@@DaleFedele doesn't that help prove my point?

@@IsaacW. The problem occurs when you don't know what variables to look for. For example, trying out horns in an expo hall, or in a practice room at a music store, instead of in a concert hall. That perception takes years to develop...the unknown unknowns are killer. My main point is how this contrasts with other instruments that, in my opinion, are far less objective. You know what? This sounds like a new video!