I'm not convinced that volume is the governing factor for pitch. My 
understanding is that the reason high notes are affected more than low notes 
by pulling out is simply that the length of the air column is shorter for 
high notes, so the same amount of pullout has a larger percentage effect on 
the pitch.

I also still wonder if anyone knows what it is about the 12M bari that makes 
it so touchy and if anyone has suggestions about mouthpieces with more 
projection that will play well on it.

Glenn


>Message: 2
>    Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:02:57 -0600
>    From: Paul Coats <tenorman@...>
>Subject: Re: volume of mpc chamber as related to intonation
>
>Actually both are correct... however in my experience, the volume, to
>tune correctly for the low register, must be of the correct volume...
>that is, when it tunes correctly in the low register, the volume past
>the end of the neck pipe equals the volume of the missing cone section.
>This includes the chamber and the part of the bore behind the chamber up
>to the end of the neckpipe.
>
>HOWEVER, in the upper register, length also comes into play.
>
>For example, if a mouthpiece with a very large chamber is placed on the
>sax, to tune the middle C to concert Bb, for example, the mouthpiece
>will have to be pushed on very far.  BUT, when press the octave key, the
>high C# and higher notes go sharp as the mouthpiece is now too short for
>those notes.
>
>If you go to the opposite extreme, and make a "peashooter" mouthpiece,
>filling in a lot of baffle, the mouthpiece must be pulled out very far.
>The mouthpiece was pulled out to allow the chamber to equal the missing
>part of the cone and tune to middle C.  You may think this is not so,
>but measure the volume.  Sometimes the shank is too short to allow
>this.  Some players solder more tubing to the end of the neck to attempt
>to make this work.  Or a manufacturer will make the shank longer.  Now
>what happens, the length is now too long, and high C and the palm key
>notes are flat, even though middle C is in tune.
>
>It is possible to get the correct volume, have a high baffle, and still
>get it all to play in tune in all registers.
>
>This experiment can easily be done with a single old mouthpiece.  Find
>one that plays reasonably in tune in all registers, esp the palm keys.
>Mark the cork where it plays in tune.
>
>Now, hog out the chamber with the Dremel tool.  Make it huge!
>
>Now you will notice you must push it on past the mark to make middle C
>tune to concert Bb.
>
>Fill the chamber back in with putty, clay, or wax.  Make it smaller than
>it was to begin with... go overboard on filling it.  Now, where does it
>tune up?  I will bet you pull out past the original mark.  What is the
>intonation like up high?  Yes, they will tend to be flat, unless you
>bite it up to pitch, and you run into problems with high notes choking
>off.
>
>Don't guess, don't conjecture, don't theorize.  You can do this
>experiment yourself.
>
>Paul
>
>Glenn Spiegel wrote:
>
> >  I don't understand why the volume of the mouthpiece chamber should
> > determine
> > pitch.  It would seem more reasonable to assume that pitch is
> > determined by
> > the effective length of the neck and mouthpiece.  I would guess that,
> > for a
> > given frequency of sound, the effective length of the mouthpiece would
> >
> > depend on some relationship between the wavelength of the sound and
> > the
> > dimensions of the chamber at that point.  At some point the cross
> > section of
> > the air path determined by the mouthpiece and reed becomes so small
> > compared
> > to the wavelength that the standing wave reflects at that point.
> >
> > Thisis mostly speculation on my part, but the real question that I
> > have is
> > why a small-chamber mouthpiece seems to be a problem on older horns
> > but not
> > on more modern ones.  Have there been substantial changes in neck
> > design
> > (such as a different amount of taper) that would cause a mouthpiece to
> >
> > couple differently?  Are the necks on new horns just made longer to
> > allow
> > for more pulling out?
> >
> > Glenn
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
> >
> >
> > 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.
>
>
>
>[This message contained attachments]
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Hello,

I have some metal blanks for sale on Ebay that are very reasonably priced.
Here's the link
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16234&item=2508230787
&rd=1

Thanks, Phil

                  For all your mouthpiece needs
                       WWW.PhilBarone.com
                          PH: (212) 686-9410
  Jazz photography at www.ViolaineLenoir.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com>
To: <MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 1:41 AM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Digest Number 177


> 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
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> There are 2 messages in this issue.
>
> Topics in this digest:
>
>       1. volume of mpc chamber as related to intonation
>            From: "Glenn Spiegel" <Effective_websites@...>
>       2. Re: volume of mpc chamber as related to intonation
>            From: Paul Coats <tenorman@...>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 1
>    Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 11:43:27 -0500
>    From: "Glenn Spiegel" <Effective_websites@...>
> Subject: volume of mpc chamber as related to intonation
>
> I don't understand why the volume of the mouthpiece chamber should
determine
> pitch.  It would seem more reasonable to assume that pitch is determined
by
> the effective length of the neck and mouthpiece.  I would guess that, for
a
> given frequency of sound, the effective length of the mouthpiece would
> depend on some relationship between the wavelength of the sound and the
> dimensions of the chamber at that point.  At some point the cross section
of
> the air path determined by the mouthpiece and reed becomes so small
compared
> to the wavelength that the standing wave reflects at that point.
>
> Thisis mostly speculation on my part, but the real question that I have is
> why a small-chamber mouthpiece seems to be a problem on older horns but
not
> on more modern ones.  Have there been substantial changes in neck design
> (such as a different amount of taper) that would cause a mouthpiece to
> couple differently?  Are the necks on new horns just made longer to allow
> for more pulling out?
>
> Glenn
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 2
>    Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:02:57 -0600
>    From: Paul Coats <tenorman@...>
> Subject: Re: volume of mpc chamber as related to intonation
>
> Actually both are correct... however in my experience, the volume, to
> tune correctly for the low register, must be of the correct volume...
> that is, when it tunes correctly in the low register, the volume past
> the end of the neck pipe equals the volume of the missing cone section.
> This includes the chamber and the part of the bore behind the chamber up
> to the end of the neckpipe.
>
> HOWEVER, in the upper register, length also comes into play.
>
> For example, if a mouthpiece with a very large chamber is placed on the
> sax, to tune the middle C to concert Bb, for example, the mouthpiece
> will have to be pushed on very far.  BUT, when press the octave key, the
> high C# and higher notes go sharp as the mouthpiece is now too short for
> those notes.
>
> If you go to the opposite extreme, and make a "peashooter" mouthpiece,
> filling in a lot of baffle, the mouthpiece must be pulled out very far.
> The mouthpiece was pulled out to allow the chamber to equal the missing
> part of the cone and tune to middle C.  You may think this is not so,
> but measure the volume.  Sometimes the shank is too short to allow
> this.  Some players solder more tubing to the end of the neck to attempt
> to make this work.  Or a manufacturer will make the shank longer.  Now
> what happens, the length is now too long, and high C and the palm key
> notes are flat, even though middle C is in tune.
>
> It is possible to get the correct volume, have a high baffle, and still
> get it all to play in tune in all registers.
>
> This experiment can easily be done with a single old mouthpiece.  Find
> one that plays reasonably in tune in all registers, esp the palm keys.
> Mark the cork where it plays in tune.
>
> Now, hog out the chamber with the Dremel tool.  Make it huge!
>
> Now you will notice you must push it on past the mark to make middle C
> tune to concert Bb.
>
> Fill the chamber back in with putty, clay, or wax.  Make it smaller than
> it was to begin with... go overboard on filling it.  Now, where does it
> tune up?  I will bet you pull out past the original mark.  What is the
> intonation like up high?  Yes, they will tend to be flat, unless you
> bite it up to pitch, and you run into problems with high notes choking
> off.
>
> Don't guess, don't conjecture, don't theorize.  You can do this
> experiment yourself.
>
> Paul
>
> Glenn Spiegel wrote:
>
> >  I don't understand why the volume of the mouthpiece chamber should
> > determine
> > pitch.  It would seem more reasonable to assume that pitch is
> > determined by
> > the effective length of the neck and mouthpiece.  I would guess that,
> > for a
> > given frequency of sound, the effective length of the mouthpiece would
> >
> > depend on some relationship between the wavelength of the sound and
> > the
> > dimensions of the chamber at that point.  At some point the cross
> > section of
> > the air path determined by the mouthpiece and reed becomes so small
> > compared
> > to the wavelength that the standing wave reflects at that point.
> >
> > Thisis mostly speculation on my part, but the real question that I
> > have is
> > why a small-chamber mouthpiece seems to be a problem on older horns
> > but not
> > on more modern ones.  Have there been substantial changes in neck
> > design
> > (such as a different amount of taper) that would cause a mouthpiece to
> >
> > couple differently?  Are the necks on new horns just made longer to
> > allow
> > for more pulling out?
> >
> > Glenn
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
> >
> >
> > 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.
>
>
>
> [This message contained attachments]
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

On the other forums, 12Ms are not reported as having a lot of problems. 
10Ms have a problem with a lot of mouthpieces wanting to fall off the neck.
 It is somewhat player dependant too.  My 10Ms seem like the neck is a
little short.

Runyon Quantums have long shanks and great projection.  I use them on tenor
and bari.  A Lawton should also be good and I hear good things about
Lambersons on bari.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com

Glen,
Lamberson 8DD works very on my 12M Bari. The later 12M's can be more
fickle intonation wise than the Tranny models.

Later
God Bless
Bootman
Richard Booth
www.bootmanmusic.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Glenn Spiegel [mailto:Effective_websites@...] 
Sent: Friday, 14 February 2003 1:18 AM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Digest Number 177

I'm not convinced that volume is the governing factor for pitch. My 
understanding is that the reason high notes are affected more than low
notes 
by pulling out is simply that the length of the air column is shorter
for 
high notes, so the same amount of pullout has a larger percentage effect
on 
the pitch.

I also still wonder if anyone knows what it is about the 12M bari that
makes 
it so touchy and if anyone has suggestions about mouthpieces with more 
projection that will play well on it.

Glenn


>Message: 2
>    Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:02:57 -0600
>    From: Paul Coats <tenorman@...>
>Subject: Re: volume of mpc chamber as related to intonation
>
>Actually both are correct... however in my experience, the volume, to
>tune correctly for the low register, must be of the correct volume...
>that is, when it tunes correctly in the low register, the volume past
>the end of the neck pipe equals the volume of the missing cone section.
>This includes the chamber and the part of the bore behind the chamber
up
>to the end of the neckpipe.
>
>HOWEVER, in the upper register, length also comes into play.
>
>For example, if a mouthpiece with a very large chamber is placed on the
>sax, to tune the middle C to concert Bb, for example, the mouthpiece
>will have to be pushed on very far.  BUT, when press the octave key,
the
>high C# and higher notes go sharp as the mouthpiece is now too short
for
>those notes.
>
>If you go to the opposite extreme, and make a "peashooter" mouthpiece,
>filling in a lot of baffle, the mouthpiece must be pulled out very far.
>The mouthpiece was pulled out to allow the chamber to equal the missing
>part of the cone and tune to middle C.  You may think this is not so,
>but measure the volume.  Sometimes the shank is too short to allow
>this.  Some players solder more tubing to the end of the neck to
attempt
>to make this work.  Or a manufacturer will make the shank longer.  Now
>what happens, the length is now too long, and high C and the palm key
>notes are flat, even though middle C is in tune.
>
>It is possible to get the correct volume, have a high baffle, and still
>get it all to play in tune in all registers.
>
>This experiment can easily be done with a single old mouthpiece.  Find
>one that plays reasonably in tune in all registers, esp the palm keys.
>Mark the cork where it plays in tune.
>
>Now, hog out the chamber with the Dremel tool.  Make it huge!
>
>Now you will notice you must push it on past the mark to make middle C
>tune to concert Bb.
>
>Fill the chamber back in with putty, clay, or wax.  Make it smaller
than
>it was to begin with... go overboard on filling it.  Now, where does it
>tune up?  I will bet you pull out past the original mark.  What is the
>intonation like up high?  Yes, they will tend to be flat, unless you
>bite it up to pitch, and you run into problems with high notes choking
>off.
>
>Don't guess, don't conjecture, don't theorize.  You can do this
>experiment yourself.
>
>Paul
>
>Glenn Spiegel wrote:
>
> >  I don't understand why the volume of the mouthpiece chamber should
> > determine
> > pitch.  It would seem more reasonable to assume that pitch is
> > determined by
> > the effective length of the neck and mouthpiece.  I would guess
that,
> > for a
> > given frequency of sound, the effective length of the mouthpiece
would
> >
> > depend on some relationship between the wavelength of the sound and
> > the
> > dimensions of the chamber at that point.  At some point the cross
> > section of
> > the air path determined by the mouthpiece and reed becomes so small
> > compared
> > to the wavelength that the standing wave reflects at that point.
> >
> > Thisis mostly speculation on my part, but the real question that I
> > have is
> > why a small-chamber mouthpiece seems to be a problem on older horns
> > but not
> > on more modern ones.  Have there been substantial changes in neck
> > design
> > (such as a different amount of taper) that would cause a mouthpiece
to
> >
> > couple differently?  Are the necks on new horns just made longer to
> > allow
> > for more pulling out?
> >
> > Glenn
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
> >
> >
> > 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.
>
>
>
>[This message contained attachments]
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
_
>_______________________________________________________________________
_
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus



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
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

The Lawton has some interesting intonation quirks on a 12M Bari, it is
playable but you have to be very careful with intonation. The Quantum
has effortless intonation and a big sound on a 12M. They also play
exceptionally well on 10M's and Chu's too.

Later
God Bless
Bootman
Richard Booth
www.bootmanmusic.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Bradbury [mailto:kwbradbury@...] 
Sent: Friday, 14 February 2003 2:24 AM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] 12M

On the other forums, 12Ms are not reported as having a lot of problems. 
10Ms have a problem with a lot of mouthpieces wanting to fall off the
neck.
 It is somewhat player dependant too.  My 10Ms seem like the neck is a
little short.

Runyon Quantums have long shanks and great projection.  I use them on
tenor
and bari.  A Lawton should also be good and I hear good things about
Lambersons on bari.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.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
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Hi Glenn,

What you say is true--that when you pull out the mpc you change the length of the air column of the notes high on the tube more relative to those lower down. This is a linear relationship. But the relative effects of the a mpc/air column mismatch as related to the mpc replacing the missing apex of the cone only shows up when the wavelength of the note is equal to or exceeds one quarter the length of the truncation. That is an additional effect to further complicate our lives on top of the earlier consideration.

Toby
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Glenn Spiegel 
  To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 11:18 PM
  Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Digest Number 177


  I'm not convinced that volume is the governing factor for pitch. My 
  understanding is that the reason high notes are affected more than low notes 
  by pulling out is simply that the length of the air column is shorter for 
  high notes, so the same amount of pullout has a larger percentage effect on 
  the pitch.

  I also still wonder if anyone knows what it is about the 12M bari that makes 
  it so touchy and if anyone has suggestions about mouthpieces with more 
  projection that will play well on it.

  Glenn


  >Message: 2
  >    Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:02:57 -0600
  >    From: Paul Coats <tenorman@teche.net>
  >Subject: Re: volume of mpc chamber as related to intonation
  >
  >Actually both are correct... however in my experience, the volume, to
  >tune correctly for the low register, must be of the correct volume...
  >that is, when it tunes correctly in the low register, the volume past
  >the end of the neck pipe equals the volume of the missing cone section.
  >This includes the chamber and the part of the bore behind the chamber up
  >to the end of the neckpipe.
  >
  >HOWEVER, in the upper register, length also comes into play.
  >
  >For example, if a mouthpiece with a very large chamber is placed on the
  >sax, to tune the middle C to concert Bb, for example, the mouthpiece
  >will have to be pushed on very far.  BUT, when press the octave key, the
  >high C# and higher notes go sharp as the mouthpiece is now too short for
  >those notes.
  >
  >If you go to the opposite extreme, and make a "peashooter" mouthpiece,
  >filling in a lot of baffle, the mouthpiece must be pulled out very far.
  >The mouthpiece was pulled out to allow the chamber to equal the missing
  >part of the cone and tune to middle C.  You may think this is not so,
  >but measure the volume.  Sometimes the shank is too short to allow
  >this.  Some players solder more tubing to the end of the neck to attempt
  >to make this work.  Or a manufacturer will make the shank longer.  Now
  >what happens, the length is now too long, and high C and the palm key
  >notes are flat, even though middle C is in tune.
  >
  >It is possible to get the correct volume, have a high baffle, and still
  >get it all to play in tune in all registers.
  >
  >This experiment can easily be done with a single old mouthpiece.  Find
  >one that plays reasonably in tune in all registers, esp the palm keys.
  >Mark the cork where it plays in tune.
  >
  >Now, hog out the chamber with the Dremel tool.  Make it huge!
  >
  >Now you will notice you must push it on past the mark to make middle C
  >tune to concert Bb.
  >
  >Fill the chamber back in with putty, clay, or wax.  Make it smaller than
  >it was to begin with... go overboard on filling it.  Now, where does it
  >tune up?  I will bet you pull out past the original mark.  What is the
  >intonation like up high?  Yes, they will tend to be flat, unless you
  >bite it up to pitch, and you run into problems with high notes choking
  >off.
  >
  >Don't guess, don't conjecture, don't theorize.  You can do this
  >experiment yourself.
  >
  >Paul
  >
  >Glenn Spiegel wrote:
  >
  > >  I don't understand why the volume of the mouthpiece chamber should
  > > determine
  > > pitch.  It would seem more reasonable to assume that pitch is
  > > determined by
  > > the effective length of the neck and mouthpiece.  I would guess that,
  > > for a
  > > given frequency of sound, the effective length of the mouthpiece would
  > >
  > > depend on some relationship between the wavelength of the sound and
  > > the
  > > dimensions of the chamber at that point.  At some point the cross
  > > section of
  > > the air path determined by the mouthpiece and reed becomes so small
  > > compared
  > > to the wavelength that the standing wave reflects at that point.
  > >
  > > Thisis mostly speculation on my part, but the real question that I
  > > have is
  > > why a small-chamber mouthpiece seems to be a problem on older horns
  > > but not
  > > on more modern ones.  Have there been substantial changes in neck
  > > design
  > > (such as a different amount of taper) that would cause a mouthpiece to
  > >
  > > couple differently?  Are the necks on new horns just made longer to
  > > allow
  > > for more pulling out?
  > >
  > > Glenn
  > >
  > > _________________________________________________________________
  > > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
  > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
  > >
  > >
  > > 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.
  >
  >
  >
  >[This message contained attachments]
  >
  >
  >
  >________________________________________________________________________
  >________________________________________________________________________
  >
  >
  >
  >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


  _________________________________________________________________
  MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
  http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  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. 

Thank you for the suggestion. (Also to Keith for his suggestions.) I 
do have a later 12M, probably just barely before production was moved 
to Mexico. Thanks also to all the others who've contributed comments.

Glenn


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Bootman" <rbooth@b...> wrote:
> Glen,
> Lamberson 8DD works very on my 12M Bari. The later 12M's can be more
> fickle intonation wise than the Tranny models.
> 
> Later
> God Bless
> Bootman
> Richard Booth
> www.bootmanmusic.com
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glenn Spiegel [mailto:Effective_websites@h...] 
> Sent: Friday, 14 February 2003 1:18 AM
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Digest Number 177
> 
> I'm not convinced that volume is the governing factor for pitch. My 
> understanding is that the reason high notes are affected more than 
low
> notes 
> by pulling out is simply that the length of the air column is 
shorter
> for 
> high notes, so the same amount of pullout has a larger percentage 
effect
> on 
> the pitch.
> 
> I also still wonder if anyone knows what it is about the 12M bari 
that
> makes 
> it so touchy and if anyone has suggestions about mouthpieces with 
more 
> projection that will play well on it.
> 
> Glenn
> 
> 
> >Message: 2
> >    Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:02:57 -0600
> >    From: Paul Coats <tenorman@t...>
> >Subject: Re: volume of mpc chamber as related to intonation
> >
> >Actually both are correct... however in my experience, the volume, 
to
> >tune correctly for the low register, must be of the correct 
volume...
> >that is, when it tunes correctly in the low register, the volume 
past
> >the end of the neck pipe equals the volume of the missing cone 
section.
> >This includes the chamber and the part of the bore behind the 
chamber
> up
> >to the end of the neckpipe.
> >
> >HOWEVER, in the upper register, length also comes into play.
> >
> >For example, if a mouthpiece with a very large chamber is placed 
on the
> >sax, to tune the middle C to concert Bb, for example, the 
mouthpiece
> >will have to be pushed on very far.  BUT, when press the octave 
key,
> the
> >high C# and higher notes go sharp as the mouthpiece is now too 
short
> for
> >those notes.
> >
> >If you go to the opposite extreme, and make a "peashooter" 
mouthpiece,
> >filling in a lot of baffle, the mouthpiece must be pulled out very 
far.
> >The mouthpiece was pulled out to allow the chamber to equal the 
missing
> >part of the cone and tune to middle C.  You may think this is not 
so,
> >but measure the volume.  Sometimes the shank is too short to allow
> >this.  Some players solder more tubing to the end of the neck to
> attempt
> >to make this work.  Or a manufacturer will make the shank longer.  
Now
> >what happens, the length is now too long, and high C and the palm 
key
> >notes are flat, even though middle C is in tune.
> >
> >It is possible to get the correct volume, have a high baffle, and 
still
> >get it all to play in tune in all registers.
> >
> >This experiment can easily be done with a single old mouthpiece.  
Find
> >one that plays reasonably in tune in all registers, esp the palm 
keys.
> >Mark the cork where it plays in tune.
> >
> >Now, hog out the chamber with the Dremel tool.  Make it huge!
> >
> >Now you will notice you must push it on past the mark to make 
middle C
> >tune to concert Bb.
> >
> >Fill the chamber back in with putty, clay, or wax.  Make it smaller
> than
> >it was to begin with... go overboard on filling it.  Now, where 
does it
> >tune up?  I will bet you pull out past the original mark.  What is 
the
> >intonation like up high?  Yes, they will tend to be flat, unless 
you
> >bite it up to pitch, and you run into problems with high notes 
choking
> >off.
> >
> >Don't guess, don't conjecture, don't theorize.  You can do this
> >experiment yourself.
> >
> >Paul
> >
> >Glenn Spiegel wrote:
> >
> > >  I don't understand why the volume of the mouthpiece chamber 
should
> > > determine
> > > pitch.  It would seem more reasonable to assume that pitch is
> > > determined by
> > > the effective length of the neck and mouthpiece.  I would guess
> that,
> > > for a
> > > given frequency of sound, the effective length of the mouthpiece
> would
> > >
> > > depend on some relationship between the wavelength of the sound 
and
> > > the
> > > dimensions of the chamber at that point.  At some point the 
cross
> > > section of
> > > the air path determined by the mouthpiece and reed becomes so 
small
> > > compared
> > > to the wavelength that the standing wave reflects at that point.
> > >
> > > Thisis mostly speculation on my part, but the real question 
that I
> > > have is
> > > why a small-chamber mouthpiece seems to be a problem on older 
horns
> > > but not
> > > on more modern ones.  Have there been substantial changes in 
neck
> > > design
> > > (such as a different amount of taper) that would cause a 
mouthpiece
> to
> > >
> > > couple differently?  Are the necks on new horns just made 
longer to
> > > allow
> > > for more pulling out?
> > >
> > > Glenn
> > >
> > > 
_________________________________________________________________
> > > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
> > >
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> >
> >
> >[This message contained attachments]
> >
> >
> >
> 
>_____________________________________________________________________
__
> _
> 
>_____________________________________________________________________
__
> _
> >
> >
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/