The ClarinetPages Forum

A new clarinet for $300 that's playable and will remain so will be difficult, if not impossible, to find. The least expensive one I know of that's borderline reputable is well over $500.

A used plastic clarinet with a complete mechanical overhaul can likely be had for under $300. You might even find a wood model for that - a Normandy or a Signet would be two of the most likely options.

The stamping looks more like M.SAUB to me, although that doesn't seem to bring up anything either.

This arrived last week, but I wanted to play-test it before posting about it.

You cannot view this attachment.

This is a 1930 Martin Handcraft metal clarinet, which as you can likely guess by now, is a Pedler, which Martin had acquired earlier that year.

You cannot view this attachment.

I'm not sure what Pedler model this corresponds to; it would ostensibly be a higher-end one if Martin put their engraving on it, but not the top of the line, as the Precision Hand Made had a detachable bell as well as the "appliance". It has a gold-wash bell and appears to have had a tuning barrel, which was disabled.

It has about a .590" bore, which it shares with my ca. 1937 American. The keywork has plenty of differences which could be chalked up to being a different model and/or several years of design tweaks. The lower 2/3 of the barrel is the same as the American, and the thumbrest is the same.

It uses what I call a "crow's perch" on the F/C key as you can see below.

You cannot view this attachment.
You cannot view this attachment.

The case is original and has Martin emblems outside and inside.

It plays nicely. It's a bit flat at the bottom of the chalumeau. It seemed squirrelly at the top of the clarion as well, but I suspect that's more me than the instrument. Tone seems very nice. The action is smooth, and the keywork feels light but sturdy. Spring tension varies a fair bit between keys but it's hard to infer much from that 95 years after it was made.

However, equally important is this: its 107xx serial number is stamped in the usual places for a Pedler, on the back of the body just above the bell and underneath the low F#/C# lever. There is another number stamped just above the bell on the front of the body, with a different set of stamps and by a different hand - 1012xx. The only logical explanation is that Martin added their own serial number to it. The Martin serial number chart, which looks precise enough to have come from factory records, puts that in late 1930, which fits the engraving style - it's similar to what Martin put on Handcraft saxophones at the time - and is very plausible given other Pedlers I've seen around that range.

If that's true, then this is a highly-accurate data point and it has me very close to being able to compile a serial number chart for metal Pedlers.

It would be fascinating to know if this was (however briefly) a standard offering in the Martin catalog, or if it was specially made for a Martin-endorsing saxophonist who wanted one for doubling. My favorite tenor sax is a Martin and I've paid attention to Martins for years - I can't recall ever seeing another clarinet like this.

The Cooper scale isn't the only consideration.

I have often heard that many older flutes are copies of a French A=435 design with the head joint cut down to approximate A=440, and are woefully out of tune with themselves as a result. Some older flutes are made to a true A=440 scale - the Haynes Commercial is the example most frequently given, and other American makers like Armstrong and Artley supposedly patterned their instruments after the Haynes design. I've seen very old Conn ad copy touting a true A=440 scale - doesn't necessarily mean it is, but it'd fit Conn's usual style for it to be.

Unfortunately, there's very little information out there on how to tell. The only real data I've found is here and on the "McGee Indicator" page linked within, but it's pretty sparse on old American flutes. I have an H.N. White American Standard flute and based on the measurements I think it might be a cut-down A=435, but it's pre-WWII so that doesn't necessarily write off '50s Kings and Clevelands.

The head cork seals the end of the tube and its position affects the tuning.

It definitely fills in a lot of gaps. And to think this all started from a $25 metal American I bought at a lumberyard.

Making it to 1960 was indeed a good run, considering the headwinds. Pedler operated at a loss in 1951 due to competition from lower-priced European imports - it cost 300-500% more to build a woodwind in the U.S. It's a wonder any of them made it to the '60s (and a bigger wonder that Penzel-Mueller and Pruefer made it to the '70s).

Quote from: Windsong on December 27, 2025, 04:31:03 PMIt sounds like Paul Richards was a bull in a China shop.  I would be interested to know his background, and whether he was just a "businessman" or whether he had any real, passionate attachment to the music industry.

He'd previously been general sales manager for a prominent Elkhart instrument manufacturer - one might say that he was a Conn man before he was a con man.

In his defense, he sort of had the right idea - the electric guitar was wiping out interest in wind instruments, and I think by the early '60s the writing was on the wall for the industry. But I don't think that his amalgamation made sense - Martin had the Committee trumpet that was revered in the jazz world, largely-unknown background brass, and saxophones with a great tone and build quality but an obsolete style. Reynolds had a full line of competitive-but-not-high-selling brasswinds, and Blessing was, from what I hear out of the brasswind world, at best a maker of second-rate trumpets and trombones. Too much overlap; he was building the musical equivalent of British Leyland.

The extravagant marketing campaigns contributed to Richards Music Corporation losing over 1.34 million dollars in 1962 - while management was providing the board with false figures. Chapter XI bankruptcy came in 1964.

Advertising, however, did wind down. Despite Martin being well-advertised, Pedler no longer was. I found one last reference to Pedler in September 1960 - the Martin ad below. Doesn't quite give confidence that they were still making them, but shows Martin still cared enough to mention them.

This does, though, bolster my theory that it was Paul Richards who pulled the plug on Pedler as part of creating RMC in December 1960. I've never seen evidence that Pedlers were sold under the RMC banner. But there's an issue with that theory. Paul Richards was, by all indications, an awful businessman. There was nothing at which he couldn't throw money he didn't have, and why build a band instrument empire only to immediately toss aside the only woodwind maker? The "Music Man" marching band competition that RMC put on in 1962 included "Official Music Man" editions of an array of instruments - clarinet and flute among them. But clarinets didn't appear in Martin or Reynolds catalogs in that era. The "Official Music Man" Martin Committee III saxophones are well-known and well-regarded. But I can't find anything of the sort relating to clarinets.

I have discovered some very enlightening information about the later years of Pedler.

Metal clarinets remained available through at least 1955: the entry-level Model 90 at $100 and the Model 100 Custombuilt at $120. Judging by instruments I've seen, Pedler wasn't making many metal clarinets after WWII - the highest serial number I've seen is 51897, so if the 45xxx U.S. military one I've seen was WWII production, they did less than a thousand a year.

The Grenolite was introduced in 1957. The advertisement below appeared on the back cover of the April 1957 issue of Music Journal and there were no ads for it prior to that. Unfortunately, it appears Pedler never trademarked their model names, so there are no first-use dates to go on for these or any others.

Music Journal's "1957 Annual" (presumably from late in the year) has an ad that answers more questions - it announces the Medalist, Trophy, and the Pennant line, in grenadilla, Ebonite, and Grenolite. It also touts the mysterious "Perma-Pads", something I also saw in Artley flute ads. Skin pads were available "if you insist", so they must really have liked whatever this new pad material was.

The above prove conclusively that Pedler stayed in business past 1956, and give a pretty good indication on when the model changeover happened.

The October 1958 issue of Music Journal, as part of a celebration of Elkhart's centenary, included a series of articles on Elkhart instrument makers, and Pedler was included in this. There was no indication that production was winding down, so I believe the 1959 price list I referenced in a previous post does indicate that Pedler was still making instruments then.

The only way that bell would have any value whatsoever is if it were a very early stamped one - and even then, $10 at most. $45 shipped is more than I ever paid for complete Bundy clarinets I overhauled.

Sometime in the '50s, they'd reversed course.
You cannot view this attachment.

I've read previously that the Buescher family pronounced their name "Bisher", but the company was often "Busher". I'm not sure what the basis for this is though, besides maybe long-term recollections of those in the industry.

In any case, the most well-known Buescher today is probably the one who drives the #17 Ford for Roush, and he pronounces it "Busher", so that'll probably stick for a while. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZq_WBAf81Y

I've never been able to get my hands on a proper Buescher. One slipped away years ago and I haven't seen one locally since. (I do have a ca. 1923 Wurlitzer stencil C-melody that was made by the Elkhart Band Instrument Co. and is a Buescher design, but it has all its original pads and I've yet to decide what to do with it.)

Gus Buescher's words still ring true today.

Quote from: Windsong on December 19, 2025, 07:38:20 PMYes;  with the 2nd "e".  Forgive the oversight.
Good postulations for an uncommon clarinet, Rocket.
It's certainly a curious one.

Nothing on you; just that I've seen plenty of single-E Premiers in wood so it's probably an important distinction.

Not the best marketing strategy on Pedler's part to use both "Premiere" and "Premier" - especially since the former was aimed at school bands and the latter was seemingly a higher-end model. (I have two of the latter, 40 units apart, both 18-key/7-ring variants that certainly wouldn't've been aimed at the student market. In 1940, the Premier was priced below the Professional but above the American.)

Quote from: 350 Rocket on April 26, 2025, 03:08:43 PMI recently found "Music Instruments for Band & Orchestra", 1959-60 Edition, published by The Instrumentalist Co. The introduction states that the information is correct as of October 1959.

Pedler clarinets, flutes, piccolos, and oboes are listed in the book, which would contradict the past belief that Pedler woodwinds ended in 1956...

I just got a hold of the 1958 (first) edition of the same publication, which had heretofore been unavailable. I had hoped at least something would differ, as evidence that Pedler was indeed still making instruments then (rather than the price lists indicating merely a warehouse full of unsold inventory), but all models, prices, and features are the same. Prices not changing doesn't mean much though - a lot of clarinet makers didn't change their prices between '58 and '59.

Quote from: Windsong on December 18, 2025, 05:25:58 PMRocket first pointed out that Premier models got serialized by 1928.  While (I believe) his assessment covered only metal Harry Pedler "Premiere" clarinets, it may have been model wide.  (Rocket--please correct me, if I have misremembered.)  This certainly appears to be a special release of that model.

The only information I was ever able to find was that the metal Premiere was introduced in February 1928. No other material was mentioned then.

For what it's worth, I'd only seen two non-metal Premiere (with the second "e") models before: a wood one, P249, and an Ebonite, E171.

Since the prefixes aligned with the material - A, P, T, and W for wood, E for hard rubber - it's not impossible for someone to have picked up the wrong letter stamp at the factory and then have to change the "P" to the only other thing it could be turned into. It's interesting that this one doesn't have a serial number on the upper joint as well.

For some reason, the only plastic clarinets that have any resale value now - playing condition or otherwise - are Yamahas. And yes, they're good, but it isn't as if Vitos come up short in comparison.

With a close look at the toneholes, they appear to have a concave bevel, something I've come to suspect is a sign of Martin-era manufacture - but the bell is engraved instead of stamped.

Chamber size is something I've never been able to figure out on clarinet mouthpieces... they all look the same to me. (Yet it's very clear for me with saxophone mouthpieces.)

I think any single-reed instrument can be like that, where it may need a certain mouthpiece design to work properly. Some older saxophones, like my Conn 12M, notably need a large-chamber piece to play in tune.