The ClarinetPages Forum

Quote from: ghostler on October 15, 2026, 11:56:25 AMExcept for the crack it seems rather clean and at a good price, too, thanks for sharing.

At this point having enough uncompleted project clarinets will pass.

Understood.  While I do not have one of these early production models, I also don't need it.

I believe someone is going to have a nice professional horn for a good price.

Quote from: 350 Rocket on October 15, 2026, 02:27:20 PM

Quote from: Windsong on October 15, 2026, 11:37:41 AMThis is the earliest P-Series I have seen; P2626.  This is pre-war model from 1936-1938, I believe.

I believe the wartime break in production happened somewhere between P9000 and P12000, so my guess is it's a bit earlier.

So, you are thinking pre 1936?  It certainly could be.  Annual production was never very high, per model line.

Interesting that you have seen two other older ones. Especially with the interchanging of spellings.  We have established, pretty universally, that models without the "E" are the pro models.  Such a devious distinction.  I wonder if they had not yet established these terms back in the early 30s.

I am in need of dimensions from anyone with any of the following Selmer Paris models: 

-Later Balanced Tone (1948-on)
-Centered Tone (all)
-Series 9 (all)

Specifically, I need the exact distance between posts for the upper bridge key AND lower bridge key.  These are the outswept, triangular-ramped bridge keys that have become a ubiquitous Selmer Paris characteristic (see Photo)

I have a theory about this late 1920s mystery Selmer of mine, and I may be on the cusp of discovery.

Thank you!

(Measurements in fractions of an inch or mm are fine!)

This is the earliest P-Series I have seen; P2626.  This is pre-war model from 1936-1938, I believe.  It is an 18/7 top-line model, and it is rare.  Despite all the little cracks, I believe most could be repaired invisibly and quite satisfactorily with Cyanoactryate, still.  They are all very slight, except the barrel crack, which should be pinned:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/168202700948?_skw=Harry+Pedler+%26+Co.&itmmeta=01M50CVAKFGJTA927HMXQYDMH6&hash=item2729a98894:g:A1AAAeSwMENppyyF&itmprp=enc%3AAQALAAAA0CHNgUiiE%2FjQhlDTaMiAde%2BkbpUqbBF%2BZH1JEzPjYgQRihqNl96w%2B%2FgylwL3M2jX3fjfY4lt25Sob1488k9nlfYMAU%2BBCB3Lk4QDqTgtOW8uJgGRsCJLF8sPxtSc%2B9v8NRoBkf7h5FQ2l4O%2BiHBf1al8fVrtXsAXs73WTbeUpe2QINc5oZDQjv6jb4as%2FS6TaZG7T2UK12KzqICl1Xb04lvHCzLe2uSAwza57BvMHr3FOGAcWW0GUrWBImZ0z5ZFfXQ8WvUzto5xVj6jbSCqU1w%3D%7Ctkp%3ABk9SR4iq7YyoaA

Added! 
It appears to be all original, and the hard rubber looks very nice.

I typically use 3.5 strength reeds.  The exception is with these C, D and Eb clarinets, where, due to the reduced dimensions, a 3.5 feels way too stiff, so I drop back to 2.5s.

Here are additional measurements:

MP diameter (At base, just above tenon) = .946" (24.03mm)

MP diameter @ table (At base, just above tenon) = .892" (22.65mm)

Impressive stuff!

I don't have the ability to take reed height in that fashon.  I had a really nice dial gage,  but the tension spring broke, and it was not cheap(!), so I have been lax about replacing it.

Bore = .483"
Table length 2.25"
Tenon length = .500"
Outer Tenon cork lip = .710"
Window length = .985"
Window width, base = .280"
Window width, tip = .395"

Here are dimensions of the D mouthpiece, to show how diminutive it is.

For perusal and comparison, in respective order, are three mouthpieces:

1) An Austro-Hungarian Key of D mouthpiece (1870s-1880s)

2) An 1860s-1880s Austro-Hungarian Key of Eb mouthpiece (the Austro-Hungarians also used this size for Key of C horns)

3) A modern Woodwind Co. "Imperial" Eb mouthpiece, with shaved tenon for fitment in small bore Ebs.

Quote from: Jeabrams on October 10, 2026, 06:58:09 AMWindsong pm me the inside outside and height measurements for the mouthpiece you need.

 I can scale the one I have and get close I think. There are other dimensions that are much harder to measure without tools but I can make some good guesses about reed hight etc.

Will do, and thank you for being willing to take a look.  Despite the D natural being proportionately longer than Eb, as an A is to a Bb, the D uses a miniscule mouthpiece not even remotely adjacent to the modern or historical Eb mouthpiece--both in terms of length, width, table dimensions and internal bore. I must cut down Eb reeds to allow them to work.

So as not to derail this thread, I will be starting a new MP thread.

Jeabrams,

That is super cool.  I trip over my fingers playing my Eb and D natural, so I cannot fathom the hands needed to play this one quickly.  The body appears to be rosewood.  And is that an Italian maker's inscription on the upper joint just under the Buffet logo? 

That is a proper standard Albert right there.  2 rings is perfect.  Literally all you need, save for a decent F#, but that is how it is with most Alberts. 

Congrats!

(Please let me know if you would like to make me a 3D Key of D mouthpiece for my one and only wooden one. I will pay gladly.)

Quote from: Jeabrams on September 20, 2026, 07:26:30 AMI think it may be a Bettony by Silva but I cant determine if its late 1920's or 1930's and there doesnt seem to be much info out there on Bettony alto or bass instruments.

Welcome Jeabrams.

As far as I am aware, Silva-Bet was a trade name of Bettony, and most often associated with their "Silver" (cupronickel, maillechort, etc.) clarinets.  They also had a flute line, but it was not as well known.

I applaud the work you have done to return this one to playing condition.  It looks good!

Quote from: Millerpgh on September 16, 2026, 05:20:12 AMI somehow won an auction for one!  Not yet a collector, but my son is a 4th generation clarinetist and he is very excited to welcome this one when it arrives next week.

I can certainly understand his excitement.  4th generation, eh?  That is remarkable.  What a great family legacy.

Welcome, Miller.

It is still not a brand I am familiar with, but I would certainly be attempting to procure it, in that I collect obscure, cottage industry things, and this is that.

It was likely a labor-of-love for Williams and Pierce.  Research and production costs, if not a stencil, (and I have never seen torsion springs in any capacity on a clarinet) almost assuredly never paid for themselves with such a low production instrument.