Topic: Bore and wall thickness

Is there a way to establish if a bassoon is a long bore or short bore
and wether or not it has a thick wall?
I am just being curious :-)
Willy

Share

Re: Bore and wall thickness

Yes, you can measure the length of the various joints, and you can measure how long certain tone holes are. This would give you a measurement to compare against another instrument you would consider "thick" or "thin", "short" or "long". Those terms are somewhat objective, but they're only relative, as there's no definition of when a bassoon becomes a "long bore" bassoon for instance.

Are you trying to identify a specific Fox? That is easy to do. Heckel is more tricky as you really would have to measure it.

M.M.A., D.M.A. University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign: B.Mus. Lawrence University
Bassoon professor at University of Wisconsin Eau-Claire
Maker of the Little-Jake electric bassoon pickup and Weasel bassoon reeds

Re: Bore and wall thickness

I have a Moosmann 100 (European model), but the Moosmann website doesn't mention bore length or wall thickness.
As I already mentioned, I would just like to learn more about my bassoon, knowing
if it is a short or a long bore instrument won't make me more or less happy with it smile
Willy

Share

Re: Bore and wall thickness

Willy wrote:

I have a Moosmann 100 (European model), but the Moosmann website doesn't mention bore length or wall thickness.
As I already mentioned, I would just like to learn more about my bassoon, knowing
if it is a short or a long bore instrument won't make me more or less happy with it smile
Willy

I have a 150AP ("Advanced Performance"), which I guess is the designation for the American model. I asked Berndt at one of the recent IDRS conferences whether my horn is short-bore or long, thick wall or otherwise, and what might be the corresponding Fox or Heckel models. All he would say, rather indignantly, is that the bore design is *his* and doesn't correspond to that of any other maker.

But just between you and me, I'm pretty sure that the 100 and 150 are short-bore designs, and not thick-wall, roughly like pre-war Heckels, albeit with a single A-flat tone hole rather than double.

I imagine, however, that Trent, who also plays Moosmann, can speak with more authority on this topic than I can.

Christopher Brodersen
Maker of Historical Keyboard Instruments
Reviewer/contributor - Fanfare Magazine
Amateur bassoonist, baroque oboist, baroque bassoonist

Re: Bore and wall thickness

I bet that a note to Moosmann would elicit an answer to your question.

Share

Re: Bore and wall thickness

The terms "long" and "short" are only useful in describing certain things. Puchner and Moosmann don't really fit the mold. You can describe Fox bassoons this way because you are talking about them relative to each other, more or less. The 201 is thinwall and short, by comparison to the 660 which is thickwall and short. The 601 is often described as "long bore" but that's not really terribly accurate, in that it's not the same "long bore" as the model II (which is a thinwall). Whenever you change the length or tone hole structure you have to change something else to make the instrument work. I don't know exactly the details as I don't pretend to even partially really understand bassoon acoustics.

I can tell you that the Moosmann 150 is described by Justin Miller as a thin-walled instrument. The "A" and "AP" letters are not Moosmann designated letters, those are a Miller Marketing thing, if I understand it correctly. It gets further complicated in that the 222 models are all thick-walled, but some are thicker than others. I have a 222 ("A") but I know for a fact that it has a thinner design than many of the newer 222s. Bernd himself remarked that my bell seems thin at the ring end compared to what he is making now.

Now, if it's long or short, again, that goes back to my first post in this thread. You can measure the joints and see how the measure up to something like a Fox 240 to give you an idea. You may find that some parts are longer or shorter than others on a different instrument. I've had people tell me (for example) about their Heckel bassoon that's a short bore but with a long wing joint. Whatever the heck that means. I don't think the long bore and short bore designations are particularly useful for Moosmann or Puchner, as they're both just what they make in order to make the bassoons work.

M.M.A., D.M.A. University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign: B.Mus. Lawrence University
Bassoon professor at University of Wisconsin Eau-Claire
Maker of the Little-Jake electric bassoon pickup and Weasel bassoon reeds

Re: Bore and wall thickness

Thank you for the elaborate answer!
Willy

Share

Re: Bore and wall thickness

Trent wrote:

I have a 222 ("A") but I know for a fact that it has a thinner design than many of the newer 222s. Bernd himself remarked that my bell seems thin at the ring end compared to what he is making now.

For anyone interested in Moosmann 222's, the 222E is a thin-wall instrument and the 222CL is a thick wall. I have a 222A from around 2004 and a 222CL. The 222A has a thinner wall than the 222CL but I assume that it is a bit thicker than the 222E. Bernd informed me that the 222CL bore is basically the same as the 222. I assume that the 222E has a some bore differences based on its description.

Share

Re: Bore and wall thickness

What are the advantages/disadvantages of a thin-wall bassoon vs. thick-wall bassoon? How about short-bore vs. long-bore?

Thanks,
Barron

Last edited by Barronius (2018-03-17 09:38:13)

Share

Re: Bore and wall thickness

Short vs long bore is mainly a Fox thing. The long bore models, 220, II, 601, have more stable tuning but are less flexible. If that's what you want, it's a good thing. I personally don't care for the long bore models.

Thicker walls appear to create a beefier, darker sound. My 222CL has has the same bore as my 222A, but has a larger sound. The 222A sounds a bit more centered. The 222CL also has a thicker, harder finish which may contribute to the darker tone quality. I also find a #1 bocal better in tune on the 222CL vs. a #2 on the 222A. Having said all that, there are plenty of older and thinner wall designs that project really well so I'm not sure thick wall is necessary for a big sound. Playing style and player physiology, reed and bocal setup also make a huge difference in my opinion.

Share