The difference in using the US vs Metric... the mm markings are .03937"
apart.  The US gauge has markings of .040".  This is discussed in the
manual from the Madison Enterprises kit.  Those glass gauges have .040"
markings.

For all practical purposes, they will give identical results.

Facing lengths were designated, in the old Eric Brand manual, by numbers
that were on half mm markings.  That is, a facing length of 20 mm would
be 40 half mm's, and would be a facing length of 40.

It was felt by Eric Brand, and from experience, I agree, that 1/2 mm is
more than close enough to define any point on the facing vs a feeler
thickness.  And by using his system, halves or decimals were avoided.

So, a facing length of an alto sax that was 19.5 mm would be designated
a 39.

Back to mm vs US.  The markings on the Madison glass gauge is in .040"
increments.  You simply double the number for an equivilent in the Eric
Brand system, if that is what you want.

Now, the facing length vs feeler, this is the distance from the tip that
a feeler of X thickness can be slid under the glass to where it stops.
So, you are going roundabout to define where the facing curve is in
relation to a flat plane, the plane of the table, the undersurface of
the glass.  So, in defining this curve, it makes very little difference,
certainly not within what we can produce by our meager methods, whether
the increments on the glass are .040" apart, or .03937" (1" = 25.4mm, or
1 mm = .03937").

Also, I discussed this with John Winslow...  for the thinnest feeler,
the "1 and a half thousandths" (.0015"), this is used to measure the
facing length, the total length.  It has been the standard for many,
many years.  But this .0015" feeler is very thin, easy to wrinkle.  If
you get a wrinkle in it, it is junk, useless.  So, get a couple of
these.

But John sent me a .0020" feeler.  This is more resistant to damage, and
gives very nearly the same reading as the .0015".  Just FYI.

The original Eric Brand kit had only 5 feelers, up to .050"  This was
fine for the days when mouthpeices were fairly narrow.  Today, I find
the 9 feelers supplied in the Madison Enterprises kit to be necessary.
This includes .063", .077", and .094" feelers.  Also, this kit has a
.048" instead of .050" feeler, but this is insignificant.

You say you ended up with some slight differences in thickness, such as
.0095 vs .010, or .079 vs .077.  This will not really affect the
readings you get when measuring from the tip.  So, you are in good shape
there.

You can get a great dial caliper from www.micromark.com for about $35.
A digital is a little more.

You can get some great files from Micromark, too.

So, it sounds like we are both on the same page!

Back to Eric Brand... he had a system for designating a facing.  It used
a 5 digit system.  The first two digits were the facing length in half
mm's.  So, a number of 44xxx would have a facing length of 22 mm's.

The last three digits were metric, too.  A tip opening of 2.10 mm's
would be 210 in his system.  So, a facing for a tenor sax could be
defined as 44210.  It would have a length of 22 mm's, and a tip opening
of 2.10 mm.  ( 2.10 divided by 25.4 = .083" )  So much for the "serial
number" on many mouthpieces.  Some were serial numbers.  Most were Eric
Brand facing numbers.

Paul

kwbradbury wrote:

>  Some discussion has started through the "Glad to be here" thread.
>
> I'll be posting a complete list of the tools I've accumulated, along
> with prices and sources.
>
> The best way to get started is to measure, measure, measure.  To do
> this you need gauges and a notebook.  I posted a data sheet I use in
> the Files area.  Its a MS Excel spreadsheet.
>
> You must get a glass gauge.  These come with the kits or you can buy
> them seperatly from Babbitt (Jim Green 219-293-6514).  They were $15
> last year.  They come in a few variations: Narrow (like a reed width)
> or Wide (1").  Setback zero or Flush (zero is the edge of the
> glass).  Metric (2# = 1 mm) or Inches (1# = .040").  They do not
> offer all the different combinations of these variations, but they do
> have at least 3-4 to choose from.  I have the wide/setback/metric.
> The wide and setback supports the feelers nice but is cumbersome on
> soprano MPs.  I'm planning on getting a narrow one too soon.
>
> It seems fairly standard in the US to us metric for the facing length
> and inches for the feelers and tip openings.
>
> Feeler gauges can be found for about $5.  I got mine from
> SevenSaturdays.com for $3.95+1.50 s/h last year.  Just be sure you
> get a set that has a .0015" feeler in it.  Not all sets do.  For some
> of the larger feeler sizes needed to work on large tip tenor and bari
> MPs, I just taped 2 or 3 feelers together with electrical tape on the
> ends.  Not ideal, but usable.  You may need to combine two sets to
> get the intervals you want.  Just make sure the feelers are not bowed
> or bent.  You will get different readings whether they are pinched
> tight with your fingers or not.  I just use flat feelers (about 4"
> long).
>
> Now the pricey tool.  You need something to measure the tip opening.
> I like using a digital caliper because it is also usefull for other
> measurements.  Mine was a gift, but I'm sure most are over $100.
> I've never tried a wand, but they probably work well and give
> repeatable results while using the same wand.
>
> Paul Coats suggests trying to measure the very tip of the
> mouthpiece.  I think this is too difficult to do and not neccessary.
> If you use a wand, it seems to me that it would measure from where it
> contacts the mouthpiece on the inside edge of the tip rail.  I think
> this is a good place to measure the tip opening.  I hold the
> mouthpiece on the glass gauge and use the calipers to measure the
> distance between the glass (against the table) and the inside of the
> tip rail.  I do this about 5 times until I get what I think is a good
> reading.  By measuring from the inside of the tip rail, you can be
> off a little in how far you insert the jaws of your calipers into the
> mouthpiece.  To hit the tip of the mouthpiece is a lot tougher.
>
> Tip rail width variations will effect your readings.  But I think
> this is manangeble.  Most of what I measure compares well to the tip
> opening charts.
>
> Another suggestion: use your calipers to measure the width of your
> feelers.  Some of mine were off by .0015" and some were not the same
> from one end to the other.  This is another reason why you may need
> two sets of feelers.  Mark the actual size on you feelers if they are
> off.
>
> The Winslow kit has .0015, .010, .014, .024, .034, .048, .063.
>
> I ended up
> with .0015, .005, .0095, .0165, .0245, .033, .0485, .065, .079, .0955,
>
> and I could use some larger ones, like .125", for some of these
> mouthpieces that go up to .150" tip opening.
>
> I spaced out my gauges to where the intervals made sense to me.  This
> makes it difficult to share readings, but I have a computer program
> to assist in fitting a curve to the readings and converting the curve
> into whatever your set of feeler gauges you have.
>
> Be sure to check out the files, photos and bookmarks areas.  I have
> put a lot of goodies in there.
>
>
>                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                        ADVERTISEMENT


>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

--
Link to Paul's articles from Home page of "Sax on the Web":

  http://www.saxontheweb.net

or directly to Paul's articles at:

  http://www.saxontheweb.net/Coats/

Listen to Paul's MP3 samples at:

  http://briefcase.yahoo.com/tenorman1952

and click Paul's MP3's.

Nice post.  I think we are really laying down the basics.

The metric vs inches scale is not a big deal.  A significant 
difference will only show up on a long tenor or bari sax facing.  a 
2" long facing would be 50.8 (~51) on one scale and 50 on the other.  
If the rails are even, a player may only barely notice the difference.

Speaking of even rails.  When I take my mesurements, I write down the 
left and right numbers if the rails are uneven.  I even split hairs 
and record them to the nearest 1/2 number.  It is not too difficult 
and I find it easier than agonizing whether to round it up or down 
when it appears right in the middle.

For example, here are the measurements I get for the Vandoren B46 
clarinet mouthpiece I played on for over 15 years:

.0015: 36/35
.0050: 29.5/28.5
.0095: 23.5/23
.0165: 17.5/17
.0245: 12 (both sides even)
.0330: 7

Tip opening: .045" (vs .044 published)
Tip rail width: .023"

This is exactly how I do my records.  So, yours are the E. Brand
numbers, a typical clarinet facing length would be about 17-18mm's... so
your 36/35 would be half mm markings?

Paul

kwbradbury wrote:

>  Nice post.  I think we are really laying down the basics.
>
> The metric vs inches scale is not a big deal.  A significant
> difference will only show up on a long tenor or bari sax facing.  a
> 2" long facing would be 50.8 (~51) on one scale and 50 on the other.
> If the rails are even, a player may only barely notice the difference.
>
> Speaking of even rails.  When I take my mesurements, I write down the
> left and right numbers if the rails are uneven.  I even split hairs
> and record them to the nearest 1/2 number.  It is not too difficult
> and I find it easier than agonizing whether to round it up or down
> when it appears right in the middle.
>
> For example, here are the measurements I get for the Vandoren B46
> clarinet mouthpiece I played on for over 15 years:
>
> .0015: 36/35
> .0050: 29.5/28.5
> .0095: 23.5/23
> .0165: 17.5/17
> .0245: 12 (both sides even)
> .0330: 7
>
> Tip opening: .045" (vs .044 published)
> Tip rail width: .023"
>
>
>                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                        ADVERTISEMENT


>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

--
Link to Paul's articles from Home page of "Sax on the Web":

  http://www.saxontheweb.net

or directly to Paul's articles at:

  http://www.saxontheweb.net/Coats/

Listen to Paul's MP3 samples at:

  http://briefcase.yahoo.com/tenorman1952

and click Paul's MP3's.

Yes, the numbers I listed would be 1/2 mm.  The lines etched into my 
mm gauge each represent 1 mm, but each line represents 2 numbers.  
They are label every 5 lines as follows: 10, 20, 30 ... up to 70.

I goofed in my last post on the 51 vs 50 comparison.  The Inch scale 
used by Winslow would read 25 for a 2" facing length.  The mm scale 
used by Brand would read 50.8 = ~51.

So, when I read to the nearest 1/2 number on the mm scale, I'm 
actually reading to the nearest .25 mm.

When working on some mouthpieces, I have actually tried to get even 
finer.  I'll put a "+" or "-" on the number if I think it is in the 
cracks between the 1/2 numbers.  This is not neccessary for good 
work, but I find it easier than rounding or recording to the nearest 
1/4 number.  It may help when working on smaller mouthpieces, or it 
may be overkill.

kwbradbury wrote:

I goofed in my last post on the 51 vs 50 comparison.  The Inch scale

> used by Winslow would read 25 for a 2" facing length.  The mm scale
> used by Brand would read 50.8 = ~51.

No, on the Winslow gauge, a 1" facing length would read 25.  On the
brand metric system, it would be 50.8.  Still, insignificant as far as
the curve of the facing.  In this, I am talking about the distance from
a particular point on the curve, X distance from the tip.  The deviation
from the plane of the table at X distance, measured with either scale,
would be so close as to make no difference in the playing of the
mouthpiece.

My point is, either the Metric or the .040" increment glass gauge will
do equally well, and can be compared interchangeably for all practical
purposes.

So, we need to make sure when we describe these readings we are using E.
Brand numbers, or mm's (which should be considered equiv to .040"
increments).  So, we measure a facing length, using the .0015" feeler,
on a tenor sax mouthpiece.  We need to specify that it is 22 mm's, or
that it is 44 E.Brand.

I would write this at the top of the facing schedule, such as:

Runyon Custom #8

Feeler (")        mm's
.0015"            22
.010"                18
.014"                16.5
.024"                14
.031"                 11
.048"                7
.063"                5
.077"                3
Tip Opening    .098"

Or

Runyon Custom #8

Feeler (")       E. Brand
.0015"            44
.010"                36
.014"                33
.024"                28
.031"                 22
.048"                14
.063"                10
.077"                6
Tip Opening    250

This mpce would be designated 44250 in the E. Brand facing numbering
system.

Conversion back to Winslow or other numbers:
44/2 = 22 mm's (or 22 on the .040" increment gauge)
250, this is 2.5mm / 25.4 mm per inch = .0984"

So, we can do it both ways, we just need to specify.  Whichever you use,
stick to one system.

Keith, you go farther than I go, I just write it down to the nearest 1/2
mm.

BUT, no matter what else I do on a mouthpiece, I first make a few
strokes of the table on 600 paper.  I then look at the marks left on
table of the mouthpiece.  Is it flat?  Is the sanded area even over the
whole table?  If not, the table is not flat.  You cannot measure
accurately with a warped table.

So, first order of business is to flatten the table.  Each time, before
you put the glass gauge on the mouthpiece, you must wipe the table
clean.  The slightest stray particle will throw off your measurements.

Paul

Thanks for clarifying it for us all.  I figured out there was a 2:1
difference in the way the gauges are marked.  I'm just away from my info
and did not think it out accurately in my head as to which way it was.

==Here me at http://www.geocities.com/kwbradbury/MojoCD.html
We are popular across the nation at Swingtop40.com!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
http://sports.yahoo.com/