I'm thinking of changing this site to a lurker's only format.  Seems 
to be popular lately.

Or mabe the topics need to be broadened?  Like: does anyone like 
breathing air?

We do not need everyone to participate, but it bugs me to see this 
forum go stagnate.  I put more than a little time into it.

Someone got a question?  ...or an answer?

>I'm thinking of changing this site to a lurker's only format.  Seems
>to be popular lately.

What's that mean?

>Or mabe the topics need to be broadened?  Like: does anyone like
>breathing air?

No!!!  You want to turn it into another SOTW?

>We do not need everyone to participate, but it bugs me to see this
>forum go stagnate.  I put more than a little time into it.

You have to admit, it is a very specialized topic, with not many 
practitioners.  Other than you and Phil Barone, who else in the current 
membership is actually doing work on mouthpieces?

I joined the group out of intellectual curiosity, hoping to expand my 
knowledge of mouthpieces and how they work.  I can think of lots of 
rudimentary questions to ask, but most most of them are related to how a 
mouthpiece functions, rather than how to work on mouthpieces.  I've 
hesitated for fear of getting off what others would consider to be the true 
topic (working on mouthpieces).


>Someone got a question?  ...or an answer?

Sure!

1. Could someone explain to me the practical effect of varying tip- and 
side-rail widths?

2. Lots of people talk about the "airstream", and the role of air 
"turbulence" inside the chamber, and the effect of a baffle on the 
airstream.  I think most of that is misconception.  I see very little 
discussion of how the sound waves bounce around inside the mouthpiece, are 
reflected/deflected off the baffle to the reed, then up into the mouthpiece 
chamber, as described in the Ferron book.

So my question #2 is, what is truly the most significant effect of a baffle 
in a mouthpiece?

I'll save some questions for next week... ;-)

Mike R.

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

How about:
What tools would I need to effectively alter a mouthpiece tip, table, 
chamber, baffle, etc?  And where would I find these tools?  Other than Ralph 
Morgan's kit.

Peter
http://www.geocities.com/pwillis791/saxophone.html

Mike R.: I'll split up your questions in the anticipation that we 
could have a thread on each one.

 > 1. Could someone explain to me the practical effect of varying tip-
 and side-rail widths?

Here is my current understanding, subject to change based on what 
others post.

Minimizing the rail area that the vibrating reed strikes against, and 
maximizing the window area (air space), allows more of the reed to 
participate in making the tone.  Thick side rails only seem thick to 
the reed if the reed covers all of the rail.  Some mouthpieces like 
RIAs and RPCs have rails that are thick, but the reed never sees them 
(unless you are using a bari sax reed on a tenor mouthpiece, which 
will work on these pieces).  So thinning side rails to make the 
window bigger generates more sound volume.  Making the window wider 
near the tip is more effective than widening it elsewhere.  The tip 
is where the reed amplitude is the greatest, so you get the biggest 
effect there.  I think lengthening the window into the table area, 
like on some Rovners, does not help with volume.  The reed is not 
vibrating (very much) in this area.  It looks cool though.

Thin tip rails help with adding volume and make it easier to set the 
reed in motion.  Great for fast articulation.  It makes the sound 
brighter since the very tip of the reed is allowed to contribute 
higher partials to the sound.  This is not desirable for someone 
going for a dark classical sound.  The thin tip rail also needs to be 
matched to the shape of the reed tip.  Otherwise there will be a leak 
or the reed tip will hang over the tip and eventually get damaged.

How thin can you go?  I've seen about 018" - .020" tip rails on some 
hand refaced soprano and alto pieces done by the recognized masters 
in the field.  Going too thin makes the tip fragile.  Going too thin 
on the side rail overlap wears out the side edges of the reed.  I 
have Fibracell reeds that start failing first on the side edges.  The 
sound can also get buzzy without a decent side rail overlap.

Now if the reed is wider than the rails and overhangs on the sides, 
this can put a hurt on your bottom lip.  My favorite bari piece was 
OK at home but was hurting me when I took it out for some hard 
blowing over several sets.  I now sand the sides of the reed down to 
match the table and outside rail width.  One day I'll probably face 
it down farther so I can use the reeds "as is".

Just a little note from a lurker who has done some amateur refacing: I have noticed that it is very important to make sure that the area of the baffle just behind the tip rail is cut away sufficiently. If this area is too high it seems to increase chirps and squeaks. I use a fine curved file (or a dremel drill with stainless mpcs) to cut back the area just behind the tip rail and this always seems to greatly increase the stability after opening the tip.

Best,

Toby Marshall
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: kwbradbury 
  To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 1:04 PM
  Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Rail Width


  Mike R.: I'll split up your questions in the anticipation that we 
  could have a thread on each one.

  > 1. Could someone explain to me the practical effect of varying tip-
  and side-rail widths?

  Here is my current understanding, subject to change based on what 
  others post.

  Minimizing the rail area that the vibrating reed strikes against, and 
  maximizing the window area (air space), allows more of the reed to 
  participate in making the tone.  Thick side rails only seem thick to 
  the reed if the reed covers all of the rail.  Some mouthpieces like 
  RIAs and RPCs have rails that are thick, but the reed never sees them 
  (unless you are using a bari sax reed on a tenor mouthpiece, which 
  will work on these pieces).  So thinning side rails to make the 
  window bigger generates more sound volume.  Making the window wider 
  near the tip is more effective than widening it elsewhere.  The tip 
  is where the reed amplitude is the greatest, so you get the biggest 
  effect there.  I think lengthening the window into the table area, 
  like on some Rovners, does not help with volume.  The reed is not 
  vibrating (very much) in this area.  It looks cool though.

  Thin tip rails help with adding volume and make it easier to set the 
  reed in motion.  Great for fast articulation.  It makes the sound 
  brighter since the very tip of the reed is allowed to contribute 
  higher partials to the sound.  This is not desirable for someone 
  going for a dark classical sound.  The thin tip rail also needs to be 
  matched to the shape of the reed tip.  Otherwise there will be a leak 
  or the reed tip will hang over the tip and eventually get damaged.

  How thin can you go?  I've seen about 018" - .020" tip rails on some 
  hand refaced soprano and alto pieces done by the recognized masters 
  in the field.  Going too thin makes the tip fragile.  Going too thin 
  on the side rail overlap wears out the side edges of the reed.  I 
  have Fibracell reeds that start failing first on the side edges.  The 
  sound can also get buzzy without a decent side rail overlap.

  Now if the reed is wider than the rails and overhangs on the sides, 
  this can put a hurt on your bottom lip.  My favorite bari piece was 
  OK at home but was hurting me when I took it out for some hard 
  blowing over several sets.  I now sand the sides of the reed down to 
  match the table and outside rail width.  One day I'll probably face 
  it down farther so I can use the reeds "as is".







        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. 

I have done some experimenting with widening the window on some 
mouthpieces. My experience is exactly as Keith describes. In the tip 
area it has a big effect on the sound, further from the tip the main 
effect seems to be that the chamber is somewhat enlarged. This may be 
usefull for tuning purposes, as I have not noticed any significant 
effect on sound or playability. Opening the chamber allows one to 
push the mpc further on the neckcork, which gives a different sound 
and may result in a diffent 'internal' tuning of the instrument, as 
it may have more effect on 'left hand' notes than on 'right hand' 
notes. This may be an issue for another thread.
I like the 'fatter' sound that results from opening the window in the 
tip area. Also, altissimo respons seems to be improved, which may be 
related to the fact that more higher partials are present. On one mpc 
(a HR Link for soprano) I have gone a little too far. It has a great 
fat sound, unbelievable altissimo respons (on soprano G4 pops out 
easily), but unfortunately chirps easily, and reeds wear out much too 
fast.

I also agree about the importance of the baffle area just after the 
tip rail. I have done considerable experimenting with this as well, 
inspired by the interview with Jon van Wie (by Paul Coats, on the 
SOTW forum). Jon mentioned that taking some of the 'hump' out of the 
rollover baffle opens up the mpc. I point the file approximately to 
the middle of the throat (a bit higher or lower makes it brighter or 
darker), and lowering the baffle without altering the angle of it. I 
round it a little to get a somewhat smooth transition into the tip 
rail. The best results so far I got by lowering the baffle area a 
little more in the middle than on the sides - resulting in a slight 
concave shape. But I have no hard rule - usually I do this baffle 
work while playing the mouthpiece extensively, fooling around until 
something happens in the sound and respons.

BTW Keith, thanks for setting up this forum, I really appreciate it.
I am a little busy sometimes (now mixing a CD recording), so I can't 
always contribute on a regular basis.

Henk


--- In MouthpieceWork@y..., "Toby" <kymarto@y...> wrote:
> Just a little note from a lurker who has done some amateur 
refacing: I have noticed that it is very important to make sure that 
the area of the baffle just behind the tip rail is cut away 
sufficiently. If this area is too high it seems to increase chirps 
and squeaks. I use a fine curved file (or a dremel drill with 
stainless mpcs) to cut back the area just behind the tip rail and 
this always seems to greatly increase the stability after opening the 
tip.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Toby Marshall
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: kwbradbury 
>   To: MouthpieceWork@y... 
>   Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 1:04 PM
>   Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Rail Width
> 
> 
>   Mike R.: I'll split up your questions in the anticipation that we 
>   could have a thread on each one.
> 
>   > 1. Could someone explain to me the practical effect of varying 
tip-
>   and side-rail widths?
> 
>   Here is my current understanding, subject to change based on what 
>   others post.
> 
>   Minimizing the rail area that the vibrating reed strikes against, 
and 
>   maximizing the window area (air space), allows more of the reed 
to 
>   participate in making the tone.  Thick side rails only seem thick 
to 
>   the reed if the reed covers all of the rail.  Some mouthpieces 
like 
>   RIAs and RPCs have rails that are thick, but the reed never sees 
them 
>   (unless you are using a bari sax reed on a tenor mouthpiece, 
which 
>   will work on these pieces).  So thinning side rails to make the 
>   window bigger generates more sound volume.  Making the window 
wider 
>   near the tip is more effective than widening it elsewhere.  The 
tip 
>   is where the reed amplitude is the greatest, so you get the 
biggest 
>   effect there.  I think lengthening the window into the table 
area, 
>   like on some Rovners, does not help with volume.  The reed is not 
>   vibrating (very much) in this area.  It looks cool though.
> 
>   Thin tip rails help with adding volume and make it easier to set 
the 
>   reed in motion.  Great for fast articulation.  It makes the sound 
>   brighter since the very tip of the reed is allowed to contribute 
>   higher partials to the sound.  This is not desirable for someone 
>   going for a dark classical sound.  The thin tip rail also needs 
to be 
>   matched to the shape of the reed tip.  Otherwise there will be a 
leak 
>   or the reed tip will hang over the tip and eventually get damaged.
> 
>   How thin can you go?  I've seen about 018" - .020" tip rails on 
some 
>   hand refaced soprano and alto pieces done by the recognized 
masters 
>   in the field.  Going too thin makes the tip fragile.  Going too 
thin 
>   on the side rail overlap wears out the side edges of the reed.  I 
>   have Fibracell reeds that start failing first on the side edges.  
The 
>   sound can also get buzzy without a decent side rail overlap.
> 
>   Now if the reed is wider than the rails and overhangs on the 
sides, 
>   this can put a hurt on your bottom lip.  My favorite bari piece 
was 
>   OK at home but was hurting me when I took it out for some hard 
>   blowing over several sets.  I now sand the sides of the reed down 
to 
>   match the table and outside rail width.  One day I'll probably 
face 
>   it down farther so I can use the reeds "as is".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>              
>        
>        
> 
>   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@y...
> 
> 
> 
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service.

Mike R wrote:

> So my question #2 is, what is truly the most significant effect of 
a baffle in a mouthpiece?

I think the diagrams shown in the Ferron Book are really good at 
illustrating what is going on.  I do not think the laminar/turbulent 
discussions capture the basic physics.  Its sound waves bouncing off 
the surfaces in 3 dimensions!

I have some meatier texts and papers, but I can not get myself to 
wade through them all.  I have a MSME with an emphasis on fluid 
mechanics and heat transfer (but not accoustics).  15 years ago, I 
use to read technical papers on the beach to relax.  Now its Dilbert 
books.  They make me cry.

--- In MouthpieceWork@y..., pwillis791@a... wrote:
> How about:
> What tools would I need to effectively alter a mouthpiece tip, 
table, 
> chamber, baffle, etc?  And where would I find these tools?  Other 
than Ralph 
> Morgan's kit.
> 
> Peter
> http://www.geocities.com/pwillis791/saxophone.html

I listed the basic measurement tools back in Message post #9.  You 
will need these to track your work.

For table and rail work, you need a flat surface and grades of 
sandpaper.  I went to the local glass store and had a plate of glass 
cut that is 9" x 11" x 3/8" thick.  This is the size of a sheet of 
sandpaper.  It cost me $11.44 last year.  I beveled the edges myself 
since I had access to a wet belt sander.  They may charge $15 more 
for the beveling.

You'll mostly use 400 and 600 grit wet/dry sand paper (the black 
stuff).  I also have some 220, 320 and crocus cloth (1200?).  

The needle file I use the most is flat on one side, round on the 
other and tapered to a point.  Its about 1/4" wide and is medium 
coarse.  It is part of the 10 piece set #60526 from Micro-Mark 
($14.95).  You'll need a file card too to keep the files clean 
($5.50).

Small strips of sandpaper cn be folded around the files for finer 
chamber, baffle and rail work.  They get the scratches out from the 
file work.

"0000" steel wool is good for final cosmetic work in the chamber and 
the exterior.

I have a bunch of other stuff, but these are the basics.  All my 
stuff fits into a brief case for easy clean up and relocation.