Mouthpiece Work / Materials
FROM: tilemakerpro (tilemakerpro)
SUBJECT: Materials
I will note some facts on materials (reference; Mc Master-Carr supply Company). Black Rubber, "Rock Hard SBR": As hard as most plastics, can be machined into small parts. 1 in. dia. for soprano---------3 ft. for $40.72 1 1/4 dia. for alto & tenor----3 ft. for $57.50 1 1/2 dia, for bari------------3 ft. for $81.17 add shipping and handling Black Delrin 1 in. dia.---------------------pr. ft. $5.56 1 1/8 dia.---------------------pr. ft. $7.76 1 1/4 dia.---------------------pr. ft. $8.71 1 1/2 dia.---------------------pr.ft. $12.31 add shipping and handling Toxicity of the Metals Free-machining Brass (alloy 360) 61.5% copper 35.4% zinc 03.1% LEAD Unleaded Navel Brass (alloy 464) 60% copper 39.25% zinc 00.75% TIN Free-machining Stainless Steel (alloy 303) iron-chromium-nickel alloy note: additional phosphorus and sulfur, for better machining. David K
FROM: tenorman1952 (tenorman@...)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
I was first introduced to Delrin as a kid running slot cars. There were
axle bushings and gears (with beautifully cut teeth) made from Delrin.
Even in recent years, the gears in radio controlled model helicopters
have Delrin gears... and these are transferring 1 to 2 hp. Delrin's
self lubricating properties make it very easy to machine, from what I am
told, it doesn't melt and gum up on the cutting tools.
Stainless takes special skills and tools to cut, and is out of the realm
of most home workshops. Even commercially, there are very few stainless
mouthpieces. The preferred material seems to be brass with chrome
plating for metal mouthpieces.
Many mouthpieces that are assumed to be hard rubber are not, they are
ABS, which is not a great material for mouthpieces, in my opinion.
Paul
tilemakerpro wrote:
> I will note some facts on materials (reference; Mc Master-Carr supply
>
> Company).
>
> Black Rubber, "Rock Hard SBR":
> As hard as most plastics, can be machined into small parts.
> 1 in. dia. for soprano---------3 ft. for $40.72
> 1 1/4 dia. for alto & tenor----3 ft. for $57.50
> 1 1/2 dia, for bari------------3 ft. for $81.17
> add shipping and handling
>
>
> Black Delrin
> 1 in. dia.---------------------pr. ft. $5.56
> 1 1/8 dia.---------------------pr. ft. $7.76
> 1 1/4 dia.---------------------pr. ft. $8.71
> 1 1/2 dia.---------------------pr.ft. $12.31
> add shipping and handling
>
> Toxicity of the Metals
> Free-machining Brass (alloy 360)
> 61.5% copper
> 35.4% zinc
> 03.1% LEAD
>
> Unleaded Navel Brass (alloy 464)
> 60% copper
> 39.25% zinc
> 00.75% TIN
>
> Free-machining Stainless Steel (alloy 303)
> iron-chromium-nickel alloy
> note: additional phosphorus and sulfur, for better machining.
>
> David K
>
>
> 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.
FROM: kwbradbury (kwbradbury)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials - Tools
Paul Coats Wrote: > Stainless takes special skills and tools to cut, and is out of the realm > of most home workshops. Even commercially, there are very few stainless > mouthpieces. The preferred material seems to be brass with chrome > plating for metal mouthpieces. So far, I have only worked on one SS MP. It was an older Runyon and it was not too bad to work on. Probably not as hard as some Stainless Steels. I had to reshape the tip curve using a 1/4" fine metal file. I refaced it open some to get some tip rail width, then I thinned the tip rail with strips of sandpaper wrapped around my favorite 1/2 round file shape. The SS was hard, but this just required that I use one grade coarser sandpaper than I would normally use for the facing, etc. 220 for heavy cutting instead of 320. 320 instead of 400 normal shaping. 400 instead of 600 for fine work. 600 instead of croucus cloth for final work. I did not do any chamber work so I did not need any other special tools. Its nothing special, but I put a photo of it in the tenor sax photo section here at the MouthpieceWork group site. Because the original chamber was blackened, you can see where I had to sand the baffle to thin the tip rail. The file set I use is #60526 from Micro-Mark ($14.95). Its a set of 10 "Coarse" needle files. The 1/2 round file that tapers to a point is the best all-around shape. There 2-3 other shapes that also get used for some chamber and side rail work. The rest are not needed, but at $15, who cares? For SS work I would think harder files are needed. Perhaps the Micro-Mark #80741 ($32.95) would probably be a good choice, but I have not tried them. Its a 5 file set made of Tungsten Carbide. This may be the only set you would need to buy for all materials. Be sure to get a File Card too. Micro-Mark has them and I saw the same one recently at Home Depot for a little less. A Rifler file comes in handy too. I have one I got from my Father-in- law. A full set may be more than you would need. I've worked on a couple of plated brass pieces. I really enjoyed it. They filed and sanded easily and polished up real nice. Hard rubber and plastic take a lot of work to get out scratches from your file work. The plastic used for Rico Royal Metalite mouthpieces is very hard. Seemed much tougher to cut than brass!
FROM: tenorman1952 (tenorman@...)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials - Tools
> So far, I have only worked on one SS MP. It was an older Runyon and
> it was not too bad to work on. Probably not as hard as some
> Stainless Steels.
Santy commented to me once those were difficult to work.
"Be sure to get a File Card too. Micro-Mark has them
> and I saw the same one recently at Home Depot for a little less."
I got mine from Ferree's... YES, a necessary item!
> A Rifler file comes in handy too.
Micromark has these, too.
"Hard rubber and plastic take a lot of work to get out scratches from
your file work."
I go over the filed baffle with first 600 paper, then 800 to remove file
marks. Then I use a little tool Santy told me how to make. I use a
3/8" wood dowel, cutting a flat on one end about 1" long. Using CA Gel
("superglue" gel), I glue on a piece of 1/16" cork, and over that, a
piece of chamois. So, now I have a nice little polishing tool with a
handle. Nothing on it is hard enough to scratch the plastic or hard
rubber. I use a plastic polishing compound sold at Autozone called
Scratch-Out, by Kit. This is sold for polishing plexiglass faceplates
on motorcycle helmets, plexiglass windshields, and other plastics. I
put a little dab of this on the chamois, and a drop of water, and polish
the filed and sanded area. This makes my work nearly invisible. For a
final polish on the table and rails, I turn a piece of 600 or 800 paper
over, paper side up, and polish the table and rails on the backside.
There is just enough silica dust impregnated in the paper to put a nice
shine on the table. Use very light pressure on the side and tip rails.
The Kit Scratch-Out can also be used, just applied with a soft rag and
buffing by hand, to really shine up an older mouthpiece. I do this for
a nice, professional looking finish to any mouthpiece work I do.
Paul
--
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.
FROM: kwbradbury (Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...>)
SUBJECT: Materials
As with a lot of these opposing views discussions, I think the truth will lie somewhere in between the ends. Material probably matters less than many musicians are willing to realize and it probably matters more than can be shown by lab studies.
FROM: tenorman1952 (Paul Coats)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
I like silver 'cause it looks pretty.
Paul
"Keith Bradbury " wrote:
> As with a lot of these opposing views discussions, I think the truth
> will lie somewhere in between the ends.
>
> Material probably matters less than many musicians are willing to
> realize and it probably matters more than can be shown by lab studies.
>
>
>
> Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
> MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
>
> Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see
> the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
>
> To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
>
> 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's at:
http://briefcase.yahoo.com/tenorman1952
and view photos.
FROM: kwbradbury (Keith Bradbury)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
>>>I like silver 'cause it looks pretty. Me too. I had a custom silver plated Yamaha alto neck for a while but it played the same as my stock neck so I sold it. I did not want people to think it was the neck that made me sound decent. I usually avoid colored mouthpieces for the same reason. I had a gold plated Ponzol neck too, but it had noticably different dimensions. Ya notice that no one markets necks and headjoints made out of el cheapo materials. How about chrome plated cast iron? At least there are some inexpensive mouthpiece choices. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
FROM: kymarto (Toby)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
I have a really sweet ol Super 20 Tenor and I'm secretly very proud of the silver neck. It sounds very different from my Martin and I wondered if it was due to that pretty thing, then I measured and profiled the two tubes. Apples and oranges. Toby ----- Original Message ----- From: Keith Bradbury To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 1:00 AM Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Materials >>>I like silver 'cause it looks pretty. Me too. I had a custom silver plated Yamaha alto neck for a while but it played the same as my stock neck so I sold it. I did not want people to think it was the neck that made me sound decent. I usually avoid colored mouthpieces for the same reason. I had a gold plated Ponzol neck too, but it had noticably different dimensions. Ya notice that no one markets necks and headjoints made out of el cheapo materials. How about chrome plated cast iron? At least there are some inexpensive mouthpiece choices. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work. To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
FROM: kwbradbury (Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...>)
SUBJECT: Materials
This is the best thing that Toby presented supporting his "side". Sounds like Coltman was very careful to make these instruments identical. Most of our attempts to do the same probably pale in comparison. We just do not have the patience, skill, tools, gauges, etc to get really identical items to compare. Nor the resources to do double blind tests. >>>Coltman's famous experiment using identical flutes made of different materials is a good example: to make sure that the player could not identify the instrument by feel he made sure that the surfaces were identical to the touch, and mounted all three flutes on a rotating wheel so that the players couldn't tell by weight which was which. He then had a number of players and listeners play/listen to the flutes at random in a double blind situation and asked them to say which was which. Neither the players nor the listeners came up with anything statistically over average guessing odds--IOW with all visual and tactile clues removed neither the players nor the listeners knew which was which. Only one player sussed out one clue-- he knew that one of the flutes warmed up faster than the other two.
FROM: mdc5220 (michael d. collins)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
toby, went through our book boxes and found john backus's "the acoustical foundations of music: musical sound: a lucid account of its properties, production, behavior, and reproduction." published by norton. for a quick excerpt, see page 234 where states that "The material from which brass instruments are made has generally been considered to have an important influence on its tone; in fact, the term "brassy" implies a certain tone quality. However, opinion on this matter has been divided, as is usually the case. One investigator made a trumpet of wood; according to his report, it had a tone that could not be told from that of a brass trumpet when both were sounded behind a screen." This is easily one of the best list groups i ever had the pleasure of participating. Keith Bradbury wrote: > This is the best thing that Toby presented supporting his "side". > Sounds like Coltman was very careful to make these instruments > identical. Most of our attempts to do the same probably pale in > comparison. We just do not have the patience, skill, tools, gauges, > etc to get really identical items to compare. Nor the resources to > do double blind tests. > > >>>Coltman's famous experiment using identical flutes made of > different materials is a good example: to make sure that the player > could not identify the instrument by feel he made sure that the > surfaces were identical to the touch, and mounted all three flutes on > a rotating wheel so that the players couldn't tell by weight which > was which. He then had a number of players and listeners play/listen > to the flutes at random in a double blind situation and asked them to > say which was which. Neither the players nor the listeners came up > with anything statistically over average guessing odds--IOW with all > visual and tactile clues removed neither the players nor the > listeners knew which was which. Only one player sussed out one clue-- > he knew that one of the flutes warmed up faster than the other two. > > > Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com > > Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see > the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work. > > To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
FROM: kymarto (Toby)
SUBJECT: Materials
OK I agree to disagree ;~)
Actually soldered vs. non-soldered tone holes makes a significant difference, but that has to do with the shape of the tone hole edges, the shape of the walls and certain deformations that take place in the tube during extrusion. Ditto the effect of open holes vs. closed holes. The open holes add compliance due to the extra space, and the sound waves are affected by hitting the pads of the players fingers, plus the extra edge of the hole. Not to mention the different venting and impedance and changes in the lattice cutoff frequency caused by the extra holes.
It is also true that different materials feel different and cause the player to play quite differently in an unconscious feedback loop. This can make a big difference in the final sound. Call it an indirect effect of wall materials.
Now let's not go into the non-effect of different wall thickness of the same material :~0
An interesting point about scientific instruments is that they can be made to respond in different ranges. Humans can detect pitch changes of a few cents, and loudness changes of about 3dB. Scientific instruments can be made to discern differences many orders of magnitude smaller.
What scientific instruments cannot do is to integrate all the data they collect into a synthesized whole. That is up to the scientists who use them, and I would be the first to admit that what we know and can do consciously is only a small drop in the bucket compared to what we know and do unconsciously. And scientists must proceed very conservatively to make sure that they have analytical control of what they study. It is possible that they have just not caught up yet at some level, as they have to drag a lot of extra baggage around, albeit very powerful baggage.
To be honest I would be overjoyed if science discovered a meta-realm of acoustics that proved that things like cryogenic treatment, material, magnetization, angel's blessings or whatever did have some bearing. It could happen. At present the scientists in the field, who are not dumb people and are bringing all their very sophisticated techniques and instruments to the task, cannot find a chink in the armor of physical laws. In fact every time they set up controlled experiments (like Coltman's) they show that people and scientific instruments both are unable to discern differences in response due to materials.
The seminal question is: do you believe in magic?
Best,
Toby
----- Original Message -----
From: Bootman
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 5:40 AM
Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
Toby,
Lets agree to disagree, I have tried various heads on the same body, different combinations of materials etc. I have a wooden head join there that does indeed sound very different to silver head joint which in turn sounds very different to a gold head joint. There is difference in embouchure holes as well, more difference than can be found in the materials the instrument is made from. The differences that a player feels to be huge differences are perhaps not as obvious to the listener. The differences that are apparent on the playing end change the physical way you play a given instrument.
I also suppose that soldered and non soldered tone holes make no difference to the sound of a flute either? I have found that there is a difference in how the tone holes are formed in how a flute plays, same with a sax. Perhaps these differences aren't able to measured by electronics. I also don't totally believe in the infallibility of electronics and scientific measurements either as the sensitivity of the human ear, within the hearing range is pretty astonishing. There is also a difference in open hole and closed hole flutes in how they feel and respond to the player, sonically there is very little difference though.
I also prefer the sound of silver on the neck area of a sax, wether plated or solid, it adds more focus to the sound of a given sax. I have proved this to myself on more than one occasion with different saxophones too. I experimented with a Selmer Bari neck, I played it as a lacquered neck, I then stripped the neck and then I silver plated the same neck. The bare brass was significantly more vibrant than the lacquer and the silver plate was better again. The differences between the bare brass and the silver where less pronounced than between the lacquer and the bare brass. I am talking about how the sound of the instrument is to the player behind the instrument.
-----Original Message-----
From: Toby [mailto:kymarto@...]
Sent: Thursday, 19 December 2002 3:53 AM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
I have an Almeida handmade and a Powell handmade silver flute. the tubes are identical in diameter--the heads are interchangeable. The two headjoints are very close as far as I can measure with my vernier calipers. The Almeida is a classic old Powell style head with a rectangular embouchure hole. The Powell head is a Cooper style. The difference is like night and day. There are significant differences in the way the bodies take air and respond as well, which is quite remarkable when you think that these are two cylinders with identical diameters.
With differences like those in two flutes of the same materials I don't know how anyone can claim to tell the differences caused by the materials. This was also the conclusion in the flute test I mentioned a few posts back.
You say that it takes more air to make a gold flute "resonate". What does that mean? The total expansion of a flute tube caused by pressure waves in the bore is well under a millionth of a meter. It is the air vibrating in the tube that causes the sound, not the vibrations of the tube.
I've played quite a few flutes in different materials too and I've never noticed any consistent differences that couldn't be attributed to variances in internal dimensions.
I'm not saying that the materials make no difference, only that the difference is several orders of magnitude below what most folks think.
So I guess I also have to agree to disagree on this with you too ;~)
Toby
----- Original Message -----
From: Bootman
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 1:23 PM
Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
Toby,
There is a difference between wood and the various other material flutes are made of. I have played these model that you speak of and I am not a fan of Haynes, they sound good up to a point but a good Muramatsu sounds as good and probably is a little darker. I have played several $40,000 gold flutes and they do take more air to get resonating than does an identical model in solid silver. Silver does respond faster than does gold in terms of a flute body. Platinum feels and plays differently again to both gold and silver. I am fortunate enough to have access to well known flute maker who has many of the head joints and flutes at hand. Personally I love the sound and feel of Gold flutes ( I can't afford one though) so I use a solid silver Muramatsu with a solid gold tube platinum lip and riser head joint. I also have a solid silver head joint for this same flute, the sound difference between these two head joints is dramatic. I also have a solid silver head platinum lip and riser head joint to which responds very differently to the gold tube head joint. I also have a wooden head joint for this same flute. Each head joint changes the way these flutes behave and play. These are just my own flutes, I have also played many more different flutes.
There is a difference in playing of these various materials of flute. These differences that are apparent to the player may not show up as readily in a lab test. I may try this at home here and use a spectrum analysis program. I will post the results. A = 440Hz and A = 880Hz..
Scientific or psuedo scientific studies are well and good but in the end it comes down to what a given performer feels most comfortable with when performing. We mustn't lose sight of the big picture here for the details.
A metal mpc does indeed respond differently to a Hard Rubber model which again is different to a plastic model.
Bootman
-----Original Message-----
From: Toby [mailto:kymarto@...]
Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2002 12:33 PM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
I have to respectfully disagree Bootman. At present I have two handmade silver flutes, and in the past have owned or played a number of good Boehm flutes in silver, gold, wood and early plated handmade French flutes. I found nothing that could have been attributable to the material rather than the chimney height, undercut angle, tube smoothness and diameter, head dimensions, etc. It's a myth pure and simple that the material affects the tone, and everyone has bought into it and perpetuates it. I had a Grenadilla Haynes that played much more like my silver Haynes than my silver Haynes played like my present Powell flute.
I think the link I provided earlier to the Coltman paper in the Marl collection at Stanford might make interesting reading for you. I think most of the differences that players find between flutes of different materials is what they expect to find.
Yours,
Toby
----- Original Message -----
From: Bootman
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 5:05 AM
Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
A gold Flute does play quite differently from a silver flute. The material and cut of the embouchure has a more significant effect on the tone, as does the material that the Chimney is made from. Gold, Platinum and silver all respond differently when you play them on a Flute, there is a noticeable difference in resistance to the player.
Material of mpcs also does make a difference, I have experienced the same things Paul describes with the Quantum mpcs. I have even had a Bronzite model made up as well, an exact replica of a Quantum and it plays differently to the Delrin and the Metal model.
Bootman
-----Original Message-----
From: Toby [mailto:kymarto@...]
Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2002 1:13 AM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
The reed can't shrink and expand laterally, as it is effectively the thickness of the cane from tip to butt in that dimension. It can only flex perpendicular to the thin axis, or the tip can flex around the center which causes squeaks. As I remember Backus from USC did extensive studies of reeds on clarinet mpcs and it seems that they only close the tip--no other movement of any significance. There is some question about how long the closed part of the cycle lasts.
Nederveen suggests that the inertial mass of the mpc might have some effect on a sax since the flexure of the reed could cause some flexing in the neck which could affect the embouchure. He posits a max of 3 dB due to this which could be significant. Still and all we are talking small potatoes compared to the dimensions and configuration of the interior.
As to Ralph Morgan's statements: it is well known in acoustic science circles that almost all players and makers claim that the material makes a significant difference. Just look at any ad--flute makers claiming "rich" tone for gold flutes, "bright" tone for silver, etc. It appears to all be hype, and we all get sucked in without the least critical reflection on the subject. Partly this is due to the very real effect of wall materials in other types of musical instruments such as violins and guitars and pianos, where the vibrations of the material reinforce the vibrations of the exciting mechanism and to a great extent produce the sound. That's easy to see if you compare the sound of a plucked string on an acoustic guitar with the same string on a solid body electric. Worlds of difference.
Woodwinds and brass are a whole different ballgame. Compression waves in the air itself cause the sound, and the walls of the instrument are only there to define a shape for the air so that it can vibrate effectively. To say that walls change the sound--assuming they are sufficiently rigid and smooth--is like saying that the material of a rifle barrel affects how far a bullet will travel and with what velocity. If two barrels are identical in dimension and smoothness, and don't deform under the pressure of the expanding gasses that propel the bullet then the trajectory of the projectile is going to be the same. The same thing with instrument bodies. Ad mouthpieces.
Toby
----- Original Message -----
From: Danny Barrett <danny_tb@yahoo.com>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 1:21 PM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
What about differences in the coefficient of friction? As the reed
vibrates there might (?) be more to its movement than simply rolling
closed over the facing and rolling back off it (?).
Is it possible that the reed might actually go closed at the tip
first, then close up closer to the butt of the reed (of course, still
on the vibrating portion of the reed), sliding the tip slightly, then
as it comes back open, opens up first closer to the butt of the reed,
causing the tip to slide, followed by the tip of the reed opening up
again? Of course, this is just speculative pondering/"what if" type
of stuff, but who knows the answers? I sure don't.
Does anyone know of any scientific studies that have shown what the
exact form of vibration is? Ie: whether there is anything to my
speculative pondering or not?
DB
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Toby" <kymarto@y...> wrote:
> This opens the whole can of worms about whet effect the material of
a mpc has on the tone. I personally think (based on all my reading of
the science involved) that the effect is really minimal--almost
unnoticeable. I believe Phil Barone has said the same thing--that as
long as the internal dimensions are similar the material doesn't
matter. On the other hand Jon van Wie thinks differently.
>
> The problem is that to really find out you have to eliminate all
the variables except the material. This would mean making identical
mpcs (at least inside dimensions) in different materials. Phil has
that ability and I tend to side with him. Certainly the acoustical
scientists would claim to a man that this is the case. They say that
very small differences in the dimensions can make a big difference,
but that materials of the same smoothness will all sound alike, as
long as they are rigid enough not to deform under the pressure of the
sound waves generated by the beating reed . There will be some small
vibrational deformation of the material caused by the slap of the
reed but it is not hard to see that that too is minimal compared to
the displacement of the reed tip. There would be a slight difference
based on the differing thermal coefficients, but we are talking about
absolutely inaudible differences here.
>
> I'd be happy to send references if you are interested in reading up
on the effects of wall materials in woodwind instruments.
>
>
> Toby
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Ruhl
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 9:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] MC Gregory Model A alto
>
>
> This is where the material the mouthpiece is made from comes into
play. The
> blends of rubber used to make the MC Gregory mouthpieces were a
closely
> guarded secret. Ralph Morgan makes mention of this in a series
of
> "Saxophone Journal" columns he wrote on Gregory mouthpieces.
>
> Mike
>
> >From: "Andre Rhieu <upgrade_complete@y...>"
> ><upgrade_complete@y...>
> >Reply-To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> >To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [MouthpieceWork] MC Gregory Model A alto
> >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:00:34 -0000
> >
> >Ok, I know that this isn't the perfect place for this...
> >Is there anyone who is willing to sell an
> >
> >MC Gregory Model A alto in original 4A16?
> >
> >I have been looking for one everywhere without success
> >and i thought some of the mouthpiece enthuasists in
> >here might come across...
> >
> >If anyone has one or knows one really well, I have
> >a question. A Gregory model A is ostensibly
> >a really dark sounding piece, for its conservative
> >design(low chamber and round chamber, rounded innersided
> >walls), but I have read that it actually sounds
> >Bright in a unique way, plasticky and ringing? I hear that
> >sound in some of Art Pepper and Paul Desmond's tone.
> >Which area of the mouthpiece can create that unique
> >brightness in the tone despite its low baffle and
> >rounded inner sidewalls+round chamber? Could it be the
> >short facing? or the small tip opening? or what else?
> >A help from experienced people would be very appreciated.
> >
> >-Andre
> >
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
>
> Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to
see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
>
> To see and modify your groups, go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
FROM: tenorman1952 (Paul Coats)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
Defects found while parsing message: [{'multipart/alternative': ['CloseBoundaryNotFoundDefect: A start boundary was found, but not the corresponding close boundary.']}]
FROM: mdc5220 (michael d. collins)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
Defects found while parsing message: [{'multipart/alternative': ['CloseBoundaryNotFoundDefect: A start boundary was found, but not the corresponding close boundary.']}]
FROM: kymarto (Toby)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
Defects found while parsing message: [{'multipart/alternative': ['CloseBoundaryNotFoundDefect: A start boundary was found, but not the corresponding close boundary.']}]
FROM: realbootman (Bootman)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
No, don't believe in magic.
I need to touch it and see it for myself before I believe something. Call me
a doubter if you will. I call things as I see them and I am quite prepared
to be wrong or for something to be proved otherwise.
Later
God Bless
Bootman
Richard Booth
www.bootmanmusic.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Toby [mailto:kymarto@...]
Sent: Thursday, 19 December 2002 12:54 PM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Materials
OK I agree to disagree ;~)
Actually soldered vs. non-soldered tone holes makes a significant
difference, but that has to do with the shape of the tone hole edges, the
shape of the walls and certain deformations that take place in the tube
during extrusion. Ditto the effect of open holes vs. closed holes. The open
holes add compliance due to the extra space, and the sound waves are
affected by hitting the pads of the players fingers, plus the extra edge of
the hole. Not to mention the different venting and impedance and changes in
the lattice cutoff frequency caused by the extra holes.
It is also true that different materials feel different and cause the
player to play quite differently in an unconscious feedback loop. This can
make a big difference in the final sound. Call it an indirect effect of wall
materials.
Now let's not go into the non-effect of different wall thickness of the
same material :~0
An interesting point about scientific instruments is that they can be made
to respond in different ranges. Humans can detect pitch changes of a few
cents, and loudness changes of about 3dB. Scientific instruments can be made
to discern differences many orders of magnitude smaller.
What scientific instruments cannot do is to integrate all the data they
collect into a synthesized whole. That is up to the scientists who use them,
and I would be the first to admit that what we know and can do consciously
is only a small drop in the bucket compared to what we know and do
unconsciously. And scientists must proceed very conservatively to make sure
that they have analytical control of what they study. It is possible that
they have just not caught up yet at some level, as they have to drag a lot
of extra baggage around, albeit very powerful baggage.
To be honest I would be overjoyed if science discovered a meta-realm of
acoustics that proved that things like cryogenic treatment, material,
magnetization, angel's blessings or whatever did have some bearing. It could
happen. At present the scientists in the field, who are not dumb people and
are bringing all their very sophisticated techniques and instruments to the
task, cannot find a chink in the armor of physical laws. In fact every time
they set up controlled experiments (like Coltman's) they show that people
and scientific instruments both are unable to discern differences in
response due to materials.
The seminal question is: do you believe in magic?
Best,
Toby
----- Original Message -----
From: Bootman
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 5:40 AM
Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
Toby,
Lets agree to disagree, I have tried various heads on the same body,
different combinations of materials etc. I have a wooden head join there
that does indeed sound very different to silver head joint which in turn
sounds very different to a gold head joint. There is difference in
embouchure holes as well, more difference than can be found in the materials
the instrument is made from. The differences that a player feels to be huge
differences are perhaps not as obvious to the listener. The differences that
are apparent on the playing end change the physical way you play a given
instrument.
I also suppose that soldered and non soldered tone holes make no
difference to the sound of a flute either? I have found that there is a
difference in how the tone holes are formed in how a flute plays, same with
a sax. Perhaps these differences aren't able to measured by electronics. I
also don't totally believe in the infallibility of electronics and
scientific measurements either as the sensitivity of the human ear, within
the hearing range is pretty astonishing. There is also a difference in open
hole and closed hole flutes in how they feel and respond to the player,
sonically there is very little difference though.
I also prefer the sound of silver on the neck area of a sax, wether
plated or solid, it adds more focus to the sound of a given sax. I have
proved this to myself on more than one occasion with different saxophones
too. I experimented with a Selmer Bari neck, I played it as a lacquered
neck, I then stripped the neck and then I silver plated the same neck. The
bare brass was significantly more vibrant than the lacquer and the silver
plate was better again. The differences between the bare brass and the
silver where less pronounced than between the lacquer and the bare brass. I
am talking about how the sound of the instrument is to the player behind the
instrument.
-----Original Message-----
From: Toby [mailto:kymarto@...]
Sent: Thursday, 19 December 2002 3:53 AM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
I have an Almeida handmade and a Powell handmade silver flute. the
tubes are identical in diameter--the heads are interchangeable. The two
headjoints are very close as far as I can measure with my vernier calipers.
The Almeida is a classic old Powell style head with a rectangular embouchure
hole. The Powell head is a Cooper style. The difference is like night and
day. There are significant differences in the way the bodies take air and
respond as well, which is quite remarkable when you think that these are two
cylinders with identical diameters.
With differences like those in two flutes of the same materials I
don't know how anyone can claim to tell the differences caused by the
materials. This was also the conclusion in the flute test I mentioned a few
posts back.
You say that it takes more air to make a gold flute "resonate". What
does that mean? The total expansion of a flute tube caused by pressure waves
in the bore is well under a millionth of a meter. It is the air vibrating in
the tube that causes the sound, not the vibrations of the tube.
I've played quite a few flutes in different materials too and I've
never noticed any consistent differences that couldn't be attributed to
variances in internal dimensions.
I'm not saying that the materials make no difference, only that the
difference is several orders of magnitude below what most folks think.
So I guess I also have to agree to disagree on this with you too ;~)
Toby
----- Original Message -----
From: Bootman
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 1:23 PM
Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
Toby,
There is a difference between wood and the various other material
flutes are made of. I have played these model that you speak of and I am not
a fan of Haynes, they sound good up to a point but a good Muramatsu sounds
as good and probably is a little darker. I have played several $40,000 gold
flutes and they do take more air to get resonating than does an identical
model in solid silver. Silver does respond faster than does gold in terms of
a flute body. Platinum feels and plays differently again to both gold and
silver. I am fortunate enough to have access to well known flute maker who
has many of the head joints and flutes at hand. Personally I love the sound
and feel of Gold flutes ( I can't afford one though) so I use a solid silver
Muramatsu with a solid gold tube platinum lip and riser head joint. I also
have a solid silver head joint for this same flute, the sound difference
between these two head joints is dramatic. I also have a solid silver head
platinum lip and riser head joint to which responds very differently to the
gold tube head joint. I also have a wooden head joint for this same flute.
Each head joint changes the way these flutes behave and play. These are just
my own flutes, I have also played many more different flutes.
There is a difference in playing of these various materials of
flute. These differences that are apparent to the player may not show up as
readily in a lab test. I may try this at home here and use a spectrum
analysis program. I will post the results. A = 440Hz and A = 880Hz..
Scientific or psuedo scientific studies are well and good but in the
end it comes down to what a given performer feels most comfortable with when
performing. We mustn't lose sight of the big picture here for the details.
A metal mpc does indeed respond differently to a Hard Rubber model
which again is different to a plastic model.
Bootman
-----Original Message-----
From: Toby [mailto:kymarto@...]
Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2002 12:33 PM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
I have to respectfully disagree Bootman. At present I have two
handmade silver flutes, and in the past have owned or played a number of
good Boehm flutes in silver, gold, wood and early plated handmade French
flutes. I found nothing that could have been attributable to the material
rather than the chimney height, undercut angle, tube smoothness and
diameter, head dimensions, etc. It's a myth pure and simple that the
material affects the tone, and everyone has bought into it and perpetuates
it. I had a Grenadilla Haynes that played much more like my silver Haynes
than my silver Haynes played like my present Powell flute.
I think the link I provided earlier to the Coltman paper in the
Marl collection at Stanford might make interesting reading for you. I think
most of the differences that players find between flutes of different
materials is what they expect to find.
Yours,
Toby
----- Original Message -----
From: Bootman
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 5:05 AM
Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
A gold Flute does play quite differently from a silver flute.
The material and cut of the embouchure has a more significant effect on the
tone, as does the material that the Chimney is made from. Gold, Platinum and
silver all respond differently when you play them on a Flute, there is a
noticeable difference in resistance to the player.
Material of mpcs also does make a difference, I have experienced
the same things Paul describes with the Quantum mpcs. I have even had a
Bronzite model made up as well, an exact replica of a Quantum and it plays
differently to the Delrin and the Metal model.
Bootman
-----Original Message-----
From: Toby [mailto:kymarto@...]
Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2002 1:13 AM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
The reed can't shrink and expand laterally, as it is
effectively the thickness of the cane from tip to butt in that dimension. It
can only flex perpendicular to the thin axis, or the tip can flex around the
center which causes squeaks. As I remember Backus from USC did extensive
studies of reeds on clarinet mpcs and it seems that they only close the
tip--no other movement of any significance. There is some question about how
long the closed part of the cycle lasts.
Nederveen suggests that the inertial mass of the mpc might
have some effect on a sax since the flexure of the reed could cause some
flexing in the neck which could affect the embouchure. He posits a max of 3
dB due to this which could be significant. Still and all we are talking
small potatoes compared to the dimensions and configuration of the interior.
As to Ralph Morgan's statements: it is well known in acoustic
science circles that almost all players and makers claim that the material
makes a significant difference. Just look at any ad--flute makers claiming
"rich" tone for gold flutes, "bright" tone for silver, etc. It appears to
all be hype, and we all get sucked in without the least critical reflection
on the subject. Partly this is due to the very real effect of wall materials
in other types of musical instruments such as violins and guitars and
pianos, where the vibrations of the material reinforce the vibrations of the
exciting mechanism and to a great extent produce the sound. That's easy to
see if you compare the sound of a plucked string on an acoustic guitar with
the same string on a solid body electric. Worlds of difference.
Woodwinds and brass are a whole different ballgame.
Compression waves in the air itself cause the sound, and the walls of the
instrument are only there to define a shape for the air so that it can
vibrate effectively. To say that walls change the sound--assuming they are
sufficiently rigid and smooth--is like saying that the material of a rifle
barrel affects how far a bullet will travel and with what velocity. If two
barrels are identical in dimension and smoothness, and don't deform under
the pressure of the expanding gasses that propel the bullet then the
trajectory of the projectile is going to be the same. The same thing with
instrument bodies. Ad mouthpieces.
Toby
----- Original Message -----
From: Danny Barrett <danny_tb@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 1:21 PM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: MC Gregory Model A alto
What about differences in the coefficient of friction? As
the reed
vibrates there might (?) be more to its movement than simply
rolling
closed over the facing and rolling back off it (?).
Is it possible that the reed might actually go closed at the
tip
first, then close up closer to the butt of the reed (of
course, still
on the vibrating portion of the reed), sliding the tip
slightly, then
as it comes back open, opens up first closer to the butt of
the reed,
causing the tip to slide, followed by the tip of the reed
opening up
again? Of course, this is just speculative pondering/"what
if" type
of stuff, but who knows the answers? I sure don't.
Does anyone know of any scientific studies that have shown
what the
exact form of vibration is? Ie: whether there is anything to
my
speculative pondering or not?
DB
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Toby" <kymarto@y...>
wrote:
> This opens the whole can of worms about whet effect the
material of
a mpc has on the tone. I personally think (based on all my
reading of
the science involved) that the effect is really
minimal--almost
unnoticeable. I believe Phil Barone has said the same
thing--that as
long as the internal dimensions are similar the material
doesn't
matter. On the other hand Jon van Wie thinks differently.
>
> The problem is that to really find out you have to
eliminate all
the variables except the material. This would mean making
identical
mpcs (at least inside dimensions) in different materials.
Phil has
that ability and I tend to side with him. Certainly the
acoustical
scientists would claim to a man that this is the case. They
say that
very small differences in the dimensions can make a big
difference,
but that materials of the same smoothness will all sound
alike, as
long as they are rigid enough not to deform under the
pressure of the
sound waves generated by the beating reed . There will be
some small
vibrational deformation of the material caused by the slap
of the
reed but it is not hard to see that that too is minimal
compared to
the displacement of the reed tip. There would be a slight
difference
based on the differing thermal coefficients, but we are
talking about
absolutely inaudible differences here.
>
> I'd be happy to send references if you are interested in
reading up
on the effects of wall materials in woodwind instruments.
>
>
> Toby
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Ruhl
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 9:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] MC Gregory Model A alto
>
>
> This is where the material the mouthpiece is made from
comes into
play. The
> blends of rubber used to make the MC Gregory mouthpieces
were a
closely
> guarded secret. Ralph Morgan makes mention of this in a
series
of
> "Saxophone Journal" columns he wrote on Gregory
mouthpieces.
>
> Mike
>
> >From: "Andre Rhieu <upgrade_complete@y...>"
> ><upgrade_complete@y...>
> >Reply-To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> >To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [MouthpieceWork] MC Gregory Model A alto
> >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:00:34 -0000
> >
> >Ok, I know that this isn't the perfect place for
this...
> >Is there anyone who is willing to sell an
> >
> >MC Gregory Model A alto in original 4A16?
> >
> >I have been looking for one everywhere without success
> >and i thought some of the mouthpiece enthuasists in
> >here might come across...
> >
> >If anyone has one or knows one really well, I have
> >a question. A Gregory model A is ostensibly
> >a really dark sounding piece, for its conservative
> >design(low chamber and round chamber, rounded
innersided
> >walls), but I have read that it actually sounds
> >Bright in a unique way, plasticky and ringing? I hear
that
> >sound in some of Art Pepper and Paul Desmond's tone.
> >Which area of the mouthpiece can create that unique
> >brightness in the tone despite its low baffle and
> >rounded inner sidewalls+round chamber? Could it be the
> >short facing? or the small tip opening? or what else?
> >A help from experienced people would be very
appreciated.
> >
> >-Andre
> >
> >
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with
MSN 8.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
>
> Visit the site at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to
see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece
Work.
>
> To see and modify your groups, go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of
Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and
Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork
to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork
to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to
see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to
see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see
the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see
the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the
Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
FROM: danny_tb (Danny Barrett <danny_tb@...>)
SUBJECT: Re: Materials
I couldn't have said it better. That's the sort of thing I was trying to say (but I used too many words).... --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@y...>" <kwbradbury@y...> wrote: > As with a lot of these opposing views discussions, I think the truth > will lie somewhere in between the ends. > > Material probably matters less than many musicians are willing to > realize and it probably matters more than can be shown by lab studies.