Extended Tenor Recorder Test
by Jim Hanks, Feburary 2006
The Instruments
- Aulos
211, plastic, keyless, $45
- Mollenhauer
Canta 2446, pearwood, keyed, $297
- Moeck
Rottenburgh 349A, boxwood, keyed, $553
- Huber Model III,
cherry, keyless, $686
- Kung
Superio 2503, cherry, keyed, $774
First of all, thanks to Bill Lazar of
Lazar's Early Music and David
Green of
Antique Sound Workshop
for providing the instruments (except
for the Aulos which I already own). I would have liked a few more wood
keyless models in the comparison but without involving a third vendor
like the
Von Huene Workshop
that would have been impossible. And I have
recently visited von Huene where I tried a number of keyless models,
although less thoroughly. I decided on this mix of instruments by
selecting an example from Mr. Lazar's catalog in the low, medium, and
high (to me) price ranges. Since he only carries keyed tenors, they are
all keyed. Also, I selected the Huber keyless after much consultation
with Mr. Green, whose business model does not allow sending more than
one instrument at a time. By the way, I know the price ranges are
subjective. Despite Mr. Green's assertion about the Huber being a
"mid-priced tenor," I just can't pay $1000 or more for one
instrument, hence my designation of $700-800 as "high".
Weight and Overall Feel
Subjective weight analysis says Kung is the heaviest, followed by the
Mollenhauer, then Moeck, Aulos, and Huber, although the latter three
are pretty close. But none of the instruments seem unnaturally heavy
and I doubt I'd put a thumbrest on any of the woods, although I do use
one on the Aulos.
The Huber feels more "balanced" than any, the Aulos being somewhat top
heavy. The keyed models aren't "unbalanced" per se, just different in
some way I can't describe.
Key Mechanisms
Of the keyed models, all the key mechanisms and C/C# holes are of
different designs. If you're used to keyless instruments (soprano,
alto, or tenor) where you cover both holes to get C and uncover the
left hole (looking down at the instrument while playing) to get C#, the
Mollenhauer is "backwards." You press the left key to get C#; you press
the right key to get C. Since the C# "key" is really a roller, it's
easy to roll off C# down to C. The C key is wider and easier to hit.
This makes sense since you generally need the C key more than C#, but
is a learning adjustment.
The Moeck keys are also "backward"; not quite as easy to fall from C#
to C since there is no roller, but not hard, just a slightly different
movement than the Mollenhauer.
The Kung keys are "normal" in that the left key is C and pulling back
to the right key is C#, but after playing the other two, the
"backwards" system actually seems more natural. The Kung has the best
and easiest to hit C# of the lot, but C (and other notes requiring both
keys, mainly F) are harder to get.
Intonation Issues
I'll cover specific intonation issues in the next three sections.
Low Register
I'm defining the "low register" as low E down. The worst low register
would be the Aulos as these notes are somewhat "quavery" and tend to
sound "coke bottle-ish." The Moeck and Huber are also a little
"quavery" and the Moeck D is hard to feel as these tone holes are small
and not indented very much. Both the Mollenhauer and Kung have a strong
low register with a slight edge to the Kung. C, C#, and D can be
"pushed" pretty hard on the Molly and Kung without the note breaking;
the other three instruments have much more fragile low notes.
Middle Register
None of the instruments have any problems in the middle register. The
only real difference is in the amount of breath required to play in
tune. The Aulos, Mollenhauer, and Kung all require more breath than the
Moeck and Huber.
High Register
I'm defining the "high register" as high G and up. None of the
instruments have any problems from G to B.
- Bb is a tricky note in that the Aulos, Moeck, and Huber need the
"alternate" fingering (/12 567) whereas the Mollenhauer and Kung use
the "standard" fingering (/12 456). But other than that, no problems.
- C is harder to get on the Aulos and Mollenhauer then the others.
- C# can be played on the Kung quite easily while any of the others
requires stopping the bell hole.
- D is harder to get on the Mollenhauer and Moeck. All the D's are
a little sharp (about 20 cents) and the Huber needs all of 7 to get
even there. Looking at Winifiried
Bauer's recorder fingerings, there may be some other possibilities,
but I didn't investigate too deeply.
- Above D - the Kung fingering chart has notes up to G. The best
thing I can say about these notes is that they are there. Intonation on
these notes is definitely not as good as an octave down or "normal"
high notes, and they require a good blast of air. Also, there is no
rhyme-or-reason to the fingerings in this range; you just have to
memorize each pattern. I can see these notes being good for "accents"
but I can't see playing a melody up there.
Finger Reach/Ergonomic Issues
Differences in the left hand stretch on all 5 models are just about
imperceptible. There may be 1-2mm of difference somewhere but nothing
that affects playability at all.
Right hand stretches are a different matter. Without question, the
Huber is easiest to reach and feels the most natural to someone coming
from altos and sopranos. The holes are slightly lower down the
instrument than an alto (e.g. compared to my Yamaha 302), but the
stretch is only 1-2mm more for each finger with total stretch from hole
4 to 7 of 90mm for the alto and 95mm for the Huber. The Moeck stretch
is also quite small, pretty much the same as the Huber. Reach to the
keys is even slightly less than the Huber. Smaller handed folks should
have no trouble with either of these instruments. Measurements on the
Aulos are very close to the Moeck and Huber but since the Aulos's foot
is "flat" instead of "flared" like the Huber, the Huber hole 7 is
slightly easier to reach.
The Mollenhauer and Kung are very similar to each other in stretch,
which is born out by
Bill
Lazar's Finger hole distances chart. The big difference between
these two and the others is the stretch from hole 5 to 6. Huber and
Aulos are 25mm, with Moeck at 31mm, Canta at 33mm, Kung at 34mm. I can
reach but haven't played for an extended period yet. The holes
definitely do not "fall readily to hand" like the the others.
Tone
The Aulos is rather windy throughout the range and has a "plastic-y"
tone. It's OK as a practice instrument, but truthfully, I wouldn't want
to perform on it. And I'm not being a plastic snob; I have performed
with my Yamaha 302 alto went decent results.
The Mollenhauer in the windiest instrument. It's not awful but very
noticeable. The Moeck is also a little windy but less so than the
Mollenhauer.
The Huber and Kung have the best tone. Very little windiness so you can
hear "more of the instrument." I would give a slight edge to the Huber
overall, although the Kung is better in the extreme low and high
ranges. Perhaps I should also add here that with the Huber, ASW claims
to
have optimized tuning with the head joint pulled out about 4mm.
Doing that requires more breath pressure to play in tune,
increasing the volume but also the windiness. I prefer the tone and
breath pressure with the head joint pushed all the way in; tuning seems
fine to me that way.
Extras
Each of the instruments come with a case, but the designs are quite
different. Starting with the worst, the Aulos case is a zippered vinyl
case with vinyl dividers for the three instrument sections. Plastic end
caps and a small jar of joint creme are also provided.
The Mollenhauer case is a zippered cloth case with three pockets for
the instrument sections. There are also pockets for a small jar of cork
grease (provided) and a swab (provided, but it's the furry
multi-colored thing you're not supposed to use, right?). No oil
since it is wax impregnated and doesn't need it.
The Huber case is of similar quality to the Mollenhauer, but different
design. It's made of canvas with velcro closures and "unrolls" flat.
Inside are canvas pockets to hold the three instrument sections as well
as a small pocket for cork grease (provided), cleaning rod (provided),
and another small pocket that I guess could be used for a small bottle
of oil, but no oil was provided. There is also a flap for a cleaning
cloth (provided.)
The Kung case is a step up from the Huber. It's made of canvas but the
canvas covers a fairly rigid top and bottom. It is zippered and trimmed
in leather with a leather carrying handle (the
only case with a handle, actually.) Inside are canvas pockets like the
Huber case but no "oil pocket." A cleaning rod is provided but not a
cleaning cloth.
The Moeck has the best case of the lot. It is a hard case with
individual, fitted, compartments for each of the instrument sections
and an extra long compartment for swabs. A cleaning rod and cloth are
provided as is a jar of cork grease. Also provided (stored outside the
case) is a bottle brush for oiling the bore, a small paintbrush for
oiling the labium and small bottles of oil and an anit-clogging fluid.
The Selection
If you have ever seen the movie "The Princess Bride," I feel very much
like the character Vizzini; I "clearly cannot choose the instrument in
front of me!" Bad joke aside, I like elements of each.
The Aulos I already own, although that's almost all (other than price)
it has going for it. It is OK as a practice instrument and not a bad
way to get started with tenor, although the Dolmetsch Nova might be
another option. As far as I know, it is the only keyless plastic tenor
in production.
The Mollenhauer is a very good value. For under $300 you get a decent,
low maintenance (no oiling) tenor with a solid low register. But it is
windy, takes a higher breath pressure, and has a hard-to-get upper
register.
The Moeck is quite ergonomic with better tone and less windiness than
the Mollenhauer and comes with the best extras package. But it does
have a hard-to-feel low D and weaker low register than others.
The Huber is the best ergonomically, has a very nice tone, and requires
fewer adjustments in playing technique compared to soprano/alto. But
the low register is a little shaky.
The Kung has a very nice tone, strong low register, and the possibility
of higher notes than the others. But it is the most expensive and the
keys are harder to deal with than some others.
Enough suspense; I decided to go with the Huber, almost by process of
elimination. The only reason to get the Mollenhauer would be the cost,
but since I am allowing myself to spend the money, I'd rather get the
better tone of one of the cherry instruments. Likewise with the Moeck,
although if I had not tried the Huber, I probably would have gone back
to a keyless Moeck as I tried at von Huene. I was very tempted to go
with the Kung for the extended notes, especially the high C#. But in
the end, I have to admit the keys are a real issue for me. I have some
carpal tunnel issues in my right hand and using the keys requires a
noticeable "squeeze". That combined with the greater 5-6 stretch is
going to make playing the Kung for any length of time a problem for me.
If not for this physical limitation, I would have gone with the Kung
for the extra versatility. But I don't view the Huber as too much of a
compromise. I love the tone and the feel. As the review period has
progressed, the low notes have gotten easier. And I'm not too concerned
about the lack of extended range; if I want to play there, I'll just
use the alto or soprano.
So there you have it. One man's journey through the land of tenor
recorders. I hope this has helped you in some way, although as always
"your mileage may vary."