Reeds

The reed in the photographs below was given by Marcel Tabuteau to his Curtis student, Ted Heger in 1951. The second photo shows a closeup of the scrape.

During the mid-1950s and early 60s, Frank Stalzer purchased gouged/shaped cane, reeds and oboes from Tabuteau that he freely shared with his students. The two Tabuteau reeds below were given to his pupil, Bennie Cottone, who kindly photographed them for this website.

Both reeds lack ‘rails’ and have only the slightest indication of a ‘heart.’

Short Reed Long Reed
Length 68.0 mm 75.0 mm
Staple 45.5 mm 46.25 mm
Start of scrape above thread 20.0 mm 21.5 mm
Width of tip 7.0 mm 7.0 mm

The two Tabuteau reeds pictured below from David Weber were made at the Drake Hotel in 1959 for Sam Robinson when Tabuteau returned to the States for a visit.

Longer Reed Shorter Reed
Length 74 mm 72 mm
Staple 45.5 mm 47 mm
Start of scrape above thread 24 mm 22 mm
Width of tip 7.0 mm 7.25 mm
Length above the binding 27 mm 24.5 mm

Below are five Tabuteau reeds, and one by David Weber scraped on by Tabuteau (white thread), from 1963. Courtesy of David Weber. Photos by Nancy Lehrer.

 Reed 1Reed 2Reed 3Reed 4Reed 5Reed 6
Total length70 mm70 mm70.5 mm70 mm69 mm67.5 mm
Staple46 mm46 mm47.5 mm47.5 mm46.6 mm46 mm
Width at tip6.5 mm7.0 mm6.5 mm7.0 mm7.0 mm6.5 mm

The four reeds pictured below were given by Tabuteau to Adrian Gnam in Nice during July of 1965. Courtesy of Adrian Gnam.

Reed 1 Reed 2 Reed 3 Reed 4
Staple 46.5 mm 47 mm 46.5 mm 47 mm
Shaper width at tip of reed 7.5 mm 7.5 mm 7.5 mm 7.5 mm
Total length 72.5 mm 72.5 mm 71.0 mm 72.5 mm
Tip started (from binding) 23.5 mm 22.0 mm 23.0 mm 24.0 mm

The four reeds shown below were sent by Marcel Tabuteau to Laila Storch in 1965 when she lived in Puerto Rico. Laila gave them to her student, Dr. Charles Larsson, who kindly sent in the following photographs.

 Reed 1Reed 2Reed 3Reed 4
Length above the binding24 mm23 mm23.5 mm24.5 mm
Start of the scrape above the binding21 mm20 mm21 mm21 mm
Tip width7.25 mm7 mm6.75 mm7.25 mm
Staple length46 mm46 mm46.5 mm47 mm
Total length70 mm69 mm70 mm72 mm

Charles “Chip” Hamann, principal oboe of Canada’s National Arts Centre Orchestra contributed the following images of a Tabuteau reed from 1965 given to him by his predecessor, Tabuteau student Rowland Floyd.

Overall length: 71mm
Tie length: 46.5 mm (tube might be 46.5 or 47)
Width at top: 7.5mm
Fish skin on the reed

Overall length 71 mm
Tie length 46.5 mm (tube might be 46.5 or 47)
Width at top 7.5 mm
Fish skin on the reed

Brent Hages reports that John de Lancie gave this Tabuteau reed to Fred Capps, who gave it to Michael Finkelman, who then gave it to the present owner, Brent Hages.

Total length69.0 mm
Length of Staple46.0 mm (cut down from 47.0 mm)
Location of the start of the scrape above the binding21.0 mm
Tip width7.0 mm
Length of tip1.50 mm
Length of hump 2.0 mm

Additional information:

  1. No spine
  2. Rails just barely present
  3. Scrape extends back to 5.00 mm above the binding
  4. The long area in back of the very short hump contains a 9.0 mm section at the bottom of the scrape which is a bit deeper than the area above it.

(High magnification photos by Nancy Lehrer)

The four reeds pictured here were obtained from Tabuteau’s widow following his death in 1965. They comprise part of David Ledet’s extensive collection of music and memorabilia (including Tabuteau’s reeds and tools) housed in the music department of the University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia. Photo by David Ledet. Oboe Reed Styles. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981.

Sections

Much of the material on this website is being presented with kind permission of the copyright owners. Any use and/or duplication of certain materials must be approved by the copyright owners. Therefore, you must seek permission at msmostovoy@comcast.net before using or duplicating any material to ascertain whether it is presently under copyright. Certain excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given as per the instructions you will receive from your inquiry. If this website has inadvertently posted material without the proper attribution or authorization, to remedy, please contact msmostovoy@comcast.net.

Frank Stalzer’s Reeds in High Resolution

Photographed by Nancy Lehrer

Short Reed

Long Reed

David Weber’s Reeds in High Resolution

Photographed by Nancy Lehrer

Longer Reed

Shorter Reed

David Weber’s Reeds in High Resolution

Photographed by Nancy Lehrer

Reed #1

Reed #2
The blades are caught one within the other!

Reed #3

Reed #4

Reed #5

Reed #6

Laila Storch’s Tabuteau Reeds in High Resolution

Photographed by Nancy Lehrer

Reed #1

Reed #2

Reed #3

Reed #4

What's New!

Marc Mostovoy Replies to the Facebook Posts Attacking Marcel Tabuteau

An audio interview with Joan Browne (Champie), a private Tabuteau student in the early 1950s.

A photograph of the music stand that was in Tabuteau’s private studio in Philadelphia.

An autographed photo of Marcel Tabuteau inscribed to Joan Browne Champie.

An autographed photo of Marcel Tabuteau inscribed to Vladimir Sokoloff.

Marc Mostovoy Replies to the Facebook Posts
Attacking Marcel Tabuteau

When she learned of Joan Champie’s death, and read the obituaries, Katherine Needleman, principal oboe of the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra and one of two oboe professors at the Curtis Institute of Music, posted on her Facebook page and again via video a message of outrage. Needleman’s central paragraph, in which she addresses herself directly to Marcel Tabuteau, is as follows:

“I don’t care if it was 1952 or 1954. I don’t care what you did for oboe reeds, as if anyone cares that you sometimes scraped them longer with your knife than your predecessors—what an innovation! I don’t care what you did for phrasing, and I don’t care how many (mostly men) students you inspired with your abusive teaching, which lived on for generations because they were unable to self-assess and grow past it. I don’t care about your number system. If you did not admit Joan to Curtis because she was a woman, and if you “let” her sweep your floor as a reward, this is how I remember you. *** you, Marcel Tabuteau. You know what would’ve been a real innovation that would have provided us all some benefit? Being a Very Big Fancy Man who supported women in music.

Needleman’s outrage is the result of the mention, in Joan Champie’s obituary, that Tabuteau hesitated to accept women at the Curtis Institute because 1) the likelihood of their being able to pursue a successful career was limited; and 2) because, after a successful lesson, Tabuteau “allowed her to sweep the floor.” 

Point 1 is, very obviously, one of the sad facts of orchestral life in the United States in the 1940s and 1950s, and, alas, even beyond. Conductors at that time rarely hired women oboists. The increasing presence of women in symphony orchestras in the United States, and around the world, is one of the signs of the remarkable gains made by women since the mid-twentieth century, gains akin to those that have been made in this country by other groups long dismissed or long oppressed.

Point 2, apparently troubling–although possibly the result of Tabuteau’s well-known mischievous sense of humor, needs to be understood in context. Those of us who knew Tabuteau or who knew others who knew him well, acknowledge that he could be a difficult taskmaster and act cold in lessons—not only to his rare female students, but to all of those who came to his studio. And yet most of his students remained faithful and dedicated to him because of his demonstrative artistry and the richness of his teaching. As Joan Champie herself said, after explaining to me in an interview how trying it could be to withstand Tabuteau’s sometimes severe remarks, “each lesson was a gift.” Champie was a courageous young woman whose desire to learn from an artist obviously quieted the discomfort that she felt.

What is most distressing in Needleman’s tirade is the dismissal of Tabuteau’s reed-making, which was part of his effort to achieve a kind of sound that combined the best of the French and Viennese schools of oboe-playing (a kind of sonority that Katherine Needleman herself well produces) and the dismissal of Tabuteau’s concern with phrasing, which, as it gradually infiltrated the players who sat around him, became one of the elements that caused critics such as The New Yorker’s Winthrop Sargeant to call Eugene Ormandy’s band the “Rolls Royce” of American orchestras.

Needleman’s reference to Tabuteau’s “abusive teaching” goes too far. That teaching has lived on for generations not because Tabuteau’s students “were unable to self-assess and grow past it,” but because it incorporated logical and inspiring methods of making music come alive.

I take no pleasure in refuting Katherine Needleman’s profane tirade. Nor does anyone on our board think of the bad old days of male chauvinism as the good old days. The Marcel Tabuteau First-Hand website continues to remain dedicated to promoting the musical ideas of a man who in our view had a highly positive impact on the development of musical performance in the United States during his lifetime, and during the period since his death. I ask those reading this response and my initial reply below to forward it to others who might be aware of Needleman’s Facebook attacks, so that the facts may be known.

Marc Mostovoy
Website administrator

To Katherine Needleman: A Belated Reply to
Your August 15th, 2024, Facebook Post:
“𝐎𝐃𝐄 𝐓𝐎 𝐉𝐎𝐀𝐍 𝐂𝐇𝐀𝐌𝐏𝐈𝐄.”

Katherine—your post on Joan Champie was just recently brought to my attention: https://www.facebook.com/profile/100058038401756/search/?q=joan%20champie. Having interviewed Joan last year, I thought it would be appropriate to respond. Kindly post this letter on your Facebook page and website. Thank you.

First I want to say that I wish you did have the opportunity to get to know Joan. She was a wonderful person and so inspiring. I felt privileged to have interacted with her even though it was only for a short period of time near the end of her life. Having gained insight into her relationship with Marcel Tabuteau through our conversations (including the live interview), I wanted to pass on to you what I learned from her.

As Joan pointed out to me, it’s important to understand that things were very different in her time. Viewed through the lens of today, Tabuteau’s treatment of her seems unjust. But she was a trooper and willing to accept the indignities because of the invaluable things he taught her. She felt it was well worth it as did all the other students who studied with him.

The reason Tabuteau did not like taking women students was because conductors of the major orchestras at that time wouldn’t think of hiring a woman oboist—even a Tabuteau student. Tabuteau felt putting all his time and effort into training a woman was futile because there was no career path for them, and he tried to dissuade women from taking up the instrument for their own sakes. But there were some women who wouldn’t take no for an answer, and he reluctantly taught them. They included Joan, Laila Storch, Thelma Neft, Marguerite Smith, Martha Scherer, and Marjorie Jackson. And may I point out that everyone cherished the time they spent with Tabuteau despite the rough time he gave them. He also dished out the same tough treatment to their male counterparts as you know.

Now you might ask why Tabuteau treated all his students as he did. It certainly would not be acceptable today. But that’s the way it was then. Gillet (his teacher) and many teachers of that generation practiced that method. Tabuteau continued it because that is what he knew and grew up with. The students who couldn’t take it dropped out, but those who persevered were grateful for what Tabuteau taught them. As a footnote, many of Tabuteau’s students said it was great training to go through because it prepared them for playing under the difficult conductors they encountered afterward such as Toscanini, Stokowski, Reiner, and Szell—all dictators in their own right. 

Laila Storch’s biography contains numerous tributes by his students: woodwind, string and brass players; pianists, vocalists – all attesting how important he was to their musical lives. Tabuteau gave them something special that their own teachers couldn’t. Those who learned from him can’t all be wrong in their praise. He was a giant to them.

Throughout your post, you chastise Tabuteau for his behavior, measuring it by today’s values. I ask you to please take a step back and try to see things as they were then. Also try to appreciate what Tabuteau did to advance oboe playing and for the musicianship he instilled in so many. Today (July 2nd) being his birthday, let’s grant him the credit he deserves. 

Finally, most oboists of the Tabuteau school wouldn’t agree with you in dismissing his importance in regard to reeds, phrasing, and so forth. Indeed, Tabuteau paved the way for you too, Katherine, whether or not you wish to acknowledge it. Surely, he was far from perfect, but does he really deserve the full treatment you give him? I think not. 

Marc Mostovoy

Click here to learn more. 

Please provide your name and email address, and I will send you the whole story.