Talk:Clarinet family

Predictions
Anonymous editor 108.71.77.253 included various predictions that this or that type of clarinet "will be obsolete in 20 years". I don't see any informative value in such "predictions". Unless they were just pranks or vandalism. Evidently there's not enough people who watch this page. In any case, in my opinion, they do not belong in the article and should be gotten rid of. Please state any objection here. Signed: Basemetal ( write to me here) 20:31, 28 April 2013 (UTC) PS: got rid of them


 * ✅ Eruditess (talk) 22:41, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

B-flat piccolo clarinet
Much less common than the A-flat piccolo clarinet, and I think it's because at that size your fingers are kinda too large for the keys! (I've never seen it.) Double sharp (talk) 15:42, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Confusion of articles "clarinet" versus "clarinet family"
I wound up at this article when I sought information about a clarinet: its history and what defines the instrument, much like articles about other instruments. So I think there should at least be a sentence at the beginning saying "for information about the clarinet, see here". I haven't attempted to add this because I think the issue is related to the existence of two articles rather than one, and possibly a need for different titles. Would someone who works on these articles please consider the change. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I find the introductory paragraph to be entirely clear, but have added a link to clarinet. - Doctroid (talk) 14:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

How many octocontra-altos?
See Talk:Contrabass_clarinet for discussion of the number of octocontra-altos that were made. - Doctroid (talk) 13:44, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Most common clarinets - delete section?
The "Most common clarinets" section has multiple problems. The attribute "most common" isn't defined: Most compositions written for it? Most examples existing in the world? Most examples in active use? In any case no quantitative information and no references support the "most common" claims. In fact the section is entirely unsourced. It makes doubtful claims such as "Every professional clarinetist playing classical music has [an A clarinet]". (Every single one?) Other claims are outright false, such as "All other varieties of clarinets are only used in older music (pre-20th century)." It confusingly conflates E♭ alto and soprano clarinets, and C and A♭ sopranino clarinets (C is not even usually regarded as sopranino; it is a soprano). The section presents little information, and none that is referenced, beyond what is already present in the preceding section. I propose deletion of this section entirely. - Doctroid (talk) 14:08, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Eruditess (talk) 22:42, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Doctroid agree. "Every professional has one" with no source tag. Ziggyzaggy300 (talk) 12:46, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Duplicate?
Regarding the duplication|dupe=Clarinet#Extended family of clarinets tag: The section in the clarinet page is a summary, with a link to this page as the "main article". Arguably that section is duplicative but in the other direction, providing more detail than is needed there. Some of those details are absent here. It would make sense to merge those details into this page and condense the summary in the clarinet page. On the other hand, merging the entirety of this page into the clarinet page section would bloat that article badly. - Doctroid (talk) 14:23, 4 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the late reply, but perhaps we should just merge this into the parent page. I know I helped divvy out and unmerge the Types of trombone article which now redirects to the parent Trombone article, and Saxophone family currently redirects to the Saxophone parent article. Why? I Ask (talk) 02:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Delete descriptions about each clarinet?
Perhaps I shouldn't wait for somebody else's opinion and just do it, but I feel like a lot of the descriptions of each clarinet are a bit excessive, especially if they have a separate Wikipedia article. The Bowed string instrument article does not have any descriptions about any instrument and the article is much cleaner and easier to navigate. HistoryTheorist (talk) 03:39, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Baritone Clarinet
Is there anything such as a "Baritone" Clarinet? 2600:4040:BFEF:9F00:9CBE:8848:BB57:3C1C (talk) 17:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC)


 * No... but clarinet nomenclature is uniquely complicated and confusing in this regard. The saxophones, for instance, were lucky to have been conceived as a family all at once, in eight sizes of alternating E♭ and B♭ keys, from E♭ sopranino to B♭ subcontrabass. Clarinets, having been around a lot longer, have undergone a lot of evolution (improving key systems, range, and other improvements), and nomenclature has varied across several centuries and even between languages. If we were to rename everything consistently now, we might name the tiny A♭ and G clarinets piccolo, the E♭ and D sopranino, the B♭ and A would remain soprano, as would the E♭ alto; but from here we'd run aground, because we currently skip the tenor and baritone designations in other families, and jump straight to the B♭ bass clarinet, and contrabasses in E♭ (contra-alto) and B♭. The subcontrabass ("octocontrabass") clarinets in ludicrously low E♭ and B♭ were only ever Leblanc prototypes. If I ever became king of space I would issue a royal decree to rename the bass clarinet the baritone, and rename the E♭ contra-alto as the bass. Having "contra-alto" as a thing is just silly, because it's too easy to confuse it with "contralto" which means "alto", when it's really a (contra)bass instrument. While we're about it, no reliable sources I can find use "great bass" as a name for any clarinet, although it was posited by Bret Newton at one point as a possible better name for the contra-alto. Not sure any of this brain-dump really helps with your question... — Jon (talk) 01:46, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * But it doesn't make sense! 2600:4040:BFEF:9F00:ED71:5D6D:CDEB:1BFE (talk) 01:16, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Correct! Why? I Ask (talk) 01:56, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * And actually, given the lovely low register of the standard common-or-garden B♭ clarinet goes down to D₃ in the bass stave, we could argue that it's really at least an alto clarinet, and the current alto clarinet in E♭ could be named a tenor. But all of this is never going to happen, at least any time soon, and we're just stuck with weird clarinet nomenclature. The same problem exists for oboes and flutes. The cor anglais can scrape by as an alto oboe, but one octave below an oboe and we're suddenly at bass oboe, which, with a lowest note of B₂ barely qualifies as a baritone instrument. Similarly the bass flute's low note is C₃ and there is a bunch of inconsistently-named contra-alto, contrabass, subcontrabass and double contrabass flutes in C and G below that. So, yeah... such is life.—Jon (talk) 02:11, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes. And the basset clarinet should be the TRUE "alto clarinet"(also if alto clarinets count as a "alto clarinet", basset horns are "tenor clarinets"). 2600:4040:BFEF:9F00:4131:81C3:E9C7:156B (talk) 00:03, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

B-flat vs. B♭
The opening paragraph of the article makes mention of E-flat and B-flat clarinets, which are (along with other transpositions) then always referred to using the flat sign (E♭, B♭, etc.). It feels like this should be made consistent, but using the flat sign version in the opening paragraphs assumes the reader knows what they are. On the other hand, changing all the flat signs used later in the text to their spelled-out versions just adds unneccessarily to the character count. Any opinions? Connoissaur (talk) 10:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * (Moved new topic to bottom of page) see MOS:MUSIC and WP:CM/G; use either E-flat or E♭ in prose, consistently throughout the article. I tend to use the ♭ and ♯ everywhere, and since only the spelled out "sharp" and "flat" can be used in headings and article names, I tend to use ♭ and ♯ in the link text as well. — Jon (talk) 02:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Update references
One problem with this article is the explicit references in the prose to particular lists of instruments by Rendall and Shackleton, which were published in the 1970s and constitute superfluous detail. More up-to-date information has since been published by Anthony Baines, in the Cambridge Companion, and by Albert Rice. Also, none of these sources use the term "great bass" for any of the instruments. — Jon (talk) 02:53, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Jon (talk) 02:53, 5 February 2024 (UTC)