Hi,

I am a new member.  I have a question about Berg Larsen alto sax 
mouthpieces.  I was thinking about buying one from WWBW.  I was 
reading on mouthpieceplayerheaven.com that they run .05 thousands of 
an inch small.  So an 80 is really like a 75.  Now I am not sure what 
charts to go by.  I want a mouthpiece with an opening like my Meyer 7 
but with more edge.

Ross

I've rarely found a Berg Larsen that measured what it said. Bari pieces 
I've seen varied by as much as 25 thou...


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Ross" <ross2355@y...> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I am a new member.  I have a question about Berg Larsen alto sax 
> mouthpieces.  I was thinking about buying one from WWBW.  I was 
> reading on mouthpieceplayerheaven.com that they run .05 thousands of 
> an inch small.  So an 80 is really like a 75.  Now I am not sure what 
> charts to go by.  I want a mouthpiece with an opening like my Meyer 7 
> but with more edge.
> 
> Ross

I've seen a few vintage HRs on size.  .005"-.015" small is more typical. 
Like Merlin said, .025" small is not a rare event.

So when you hear that some pro plays a stock Berg 140, there is a good
chance that it will measure smaller.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Hi Kieth,
Speaking of Bergs...can anyone tell me what the "bronze" metal mouthpieces are actually made of and whether or not they are plated?
Thanks,
James

Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
I've seen a few vintage HRs on size.  .005"-.015" small is more typical. 
Like Merlin said, .025" small is not a rare event.

So when you hear that some pro plays a stock Berg 140, there is a good
chance that it will measure smaller.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.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 



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
  
   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 had a Berg bari on my bench last year that was marked 105 but 
measured 130! 



--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@y...> 
wrote:
> I've seen a few vintage HRs on size.  .005"-.015" small is more 
typical. 
> Like Merlin said, .025" small is not a rare event.
> 
> So when you hear that some pro plays a stock Berg 140, there is a good
> chance that it will measure smaller.
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, James Warburton 
<jameswarburton@y...> wrote:
> Hi Kieth,
> Speaking of Bergs...can anyone tell me what the "bronze" metal 
mouthpieces are actually made of and whether or not they are plated?

I have not seen a Bronze Berg up close.

Hi,
those I've seen seem to be plain, in a dark yellowish copper alloy, similar to the one used for certain coins (euros, swiss 5 cts). I don't think they are plated or coated, as they tend to tarnish, darkening slightly.
Greetings from sunny Switzerland             db

Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, James Warburton 
<jameswarburton@y...> wrote:
> Hi Kieth,
> Speaking of Bergs...can anyone tell me what the "bronze" metal 
mouthpieces are actually made of and whether or not they are plated?

I have not seen a Bronze Berg up close.






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 



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
  
   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. 


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Make Yahoo! your home page   

I've heard that what is often called "bronze" in Europe, the U.S. would
call "brass".  But that is just hearsay and may not be true.

A web search turned up that basic Bronze is 80% Copper/20% Tin.  Basic
brass is 60% Copper/40% Zinc.  Brass is softer and tarnishes easier.  It is
plated more often because of this.


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Make Yahoo! your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Hi Keith,
Thanks fo ryour input on this subject. The "bronze" mouthpieces that I have recently purchased are definitely not brass (unless they are plated) They are beautifully crafted, the machining is impeccable and they play great...so I have been trying to figure out why they are not made anymore. I thought perhaps that the material might be too expensive depending on what in fact it is.
Thanks again,
James  

Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
I've heard that what is often called "bronze" in Europe, the U.S. would
call "brass".  But that is just hearsay and may not be true.

A web search turned up that basic Bronze is 80% Copper/20% Tin.  Basic
brass is 60% Copper/40% Zinc.  Brass is softer and tarnishes easier.  It is
plated more often because of this.


            
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Make Yahoo! your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


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 



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
  
   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've got a Bronze Berg 105/1 SMS which I got about five years ago.  I
far as I can tell the material is genuine bronze.  It's slightly
harder than brass, and tarnishes a lot less (just darkens a bit). 
It's definitely softer than stainless steel.

I think the bronze sounds better than the stainless steel Bergs I
have, being slightly warmer in tone.

In other words, an ideal mouthpiece material!

Regards,
Andrew


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, James Warburton
<jameswarburton@y...> wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> Thanks fo ryour input on this subject. The "bronze" mouthpieces that
I have recently purchased are definitely not brass (unless they are
plated) They are beautifully crafted, the machining is impeccable and
they play great...so I have been trying to figure out why they are not
made anymore. I thought perhaps that the material might be too
expensive depending on what in fact it is.
> Thanks again,
> James  
> 
> Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@y...> wrote:
> I've heard that what is often called "bronze" in Europe, the U.S. would
> call "brass".  But that is just hearsay and may not be true.
> 
> A web search turned up that basic Bronze is 80% Copper/20% Tin.  Basic
> brass is 60% Copper/40% Zinc.  Brass is softer and tarnishes easier.
 It is
> plated more often because of this.
> 
> 
>             
> __________________________________ 
> Do you Yahoo!? 
> Make Yahoo! your home page 
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> 
> 
> 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 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
>    To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
>   
>    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.

Just to ignite the debate again: mouthpiece material doesn't make a difference: 

http://hal9000.ps.uci.edu/Does%20Saxophone%20Mouthpiece%20Material%20Matter.doc.pdf

Toby
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: andrewhdonaldson 
  To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 6:06 AM
  Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Berg Larsen MPc's



  I've got a Bronze Berg 105/1 SMS which I got about five years ago.  I
  far as I can tell the material is genuine bronze.  It's slightly
  harder than brass, and tarnishes a lot less (just darkens a bit). 
  It's definitely softer than stainless steel.

  I think the bronze sounds better than the stainless steel Bergs I
  have, being slightly warmer in tone.

  In other words, an ideal mouthpiece material!

  Regards,
  Andrew


  --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, James Warburton
  <jameswarburton@y...> wrote:
  > Hi Keith,
  > Thanks fo ryour input on this subject. The "bronze" mouthpieces that
  I have recently purchased are definitely not brass (unless they are
  plated) They are beautifully crafted, the machining is impeccable and
  they play great...so I have been trying to figure out why they are not
  made anymore. I thought perhaps that the material might be too
  expensive depending on what in fact it is.
  > Thanks again,
  > James  
  > 
  > Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@y...> wrote:
  > I've heard that what is often called "bronze" in Europe, the U.S. would
  > call "brass".  But that is just hearsay and may not be true.
  > 
  > A web search turned up that basic Bronze is 80% Copper/20% Tin.  Basic
  > brass is 60% Copper/40% Zinc.  Brass is softer and tarnishes easier.
  It is
  > plated more often because of this.
  > 
  > 
  >             
  > __________________________________ 
  > Do you Yahoo!? 
  > Make Yahoo! your home page 
  > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
  > 
  > 
  > 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 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > ---------------------------------
  > Yahoo! Groups Links
  > 
  >    To visit your group on the web, go to:
  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
  >   
  >    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.





  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 



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 

Toby...NO!!  Dont start that again!! LOL

That like asking "Does it matter what the Saxophone is made of?  Would a 
wooden Sax sound as good as a brass one?!?!"

Wooden trumpets have been made which, they say, sounded just like metal ones ;-)

Toby
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ytrac@... 
  To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 7:21 AM
  Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Berg Larsen MPc's


  Toby...NO!!  Dont start that again!! LOL

  That like asking "Does it matter what the Saxophone is made of?  Would a wooden Sax sound as good as a brass one?!?!" 

  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 



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 

Does anyone know the exact species of Lenny Pickett's conch shell?  
Mine just doesn't resonate like his does.

From a mechanical engineering perspective, the internal dimensions of 
the mouthpiece would make the greatest difference in terms of 
standing waves and resonating harmonics - with resonance of natural 
frequencies comprising the timbre.

Second to chamber dimensions (but how far behind?), the mass and 
material density surrounding the air chamber would have some effect 
on the absorption or transmission of different frequencies.  So if 
you scaled up the outside body of a hard rubber mouthpiece to have 
mass similar to a metal piece (assuming you could still fit in in 
your mouth), you would change the natural frequencies of the 
mouthpiece, and it would play more "metal-like".  Condider the mass 
adjustment would have to take place from tip to base.  (Can't just 
tape a weight to it, though that could be interesting - doesn't BARI 
have some mpc contraption that screws onto the base?).

Think of it this way - once the sound wave "energy" encounters the 
inside walls of the mouthpiece, it is the only the local absorption 
that will affect the reflectivity or transmission of the energy - 
with the local mass being what determines the absorption 
characteristics.  There is negligible sound transmitting through the 
walls of the mouthpiece (small surface area - small amplitude), 
though it vibrates enough to be picked up by a contact tuner.

To make a brass mpc sound like a pure copper one I SWAG that you 
would need to scale it up it's mass by 4%.  The difference between 
brass and bronze being a rather slight 1 to 2 percent.  A plastic or 
hard rubber piece would have to be about 3 times it's size.

Between bronze and brass, there could be some slight difference, but 
the difference is more pronounced when talking in terms of the 
saxophone body materials as now you are dealing with much more 
surface area (and mass) to affect the overall acoustic properties.

Considering how slight changes to a baffle can wildly change the 
overall tone of the mouthpiece, it would be extremely difficult for 
someone to prove (outside of acoustic simulation) that there is a 
noticeable difference between bronze and brass mouthpieces aside from 
how they tarnish.

> Second to chamber dimensions (but how far behind?), the mass and 
> material density surrounding the air chamber would have some effect 
> on the absorption or transmission of different frequencies. 

I seem to recall that Benade put a number like 2% or less on material 
effects.  This was a level that some musicians could barely tell/feel.  
Listeners can not distinguish the differences repeatably.

But this is based on my random firing beer-soaked brain cells.  I would 
need to crack open his book again to see if it is in there.

I've seen this experiment posted before.  The results seem to show
that there was almost no difference between plastic and Silverite.  I
thought I saw a slight difference in the harmonic series, but whether
this would translate to anything perceptable is hard to know.

I think the results of this experiment can be interpreted in at least
three different ways:

i) The fairly pronounced step baffle of the Dukoff overwhelmed any
more subtle differences in sound that may have been present, or;

ii) Plastic and Silverite sound identical; or

iii) All materials sound identical if the mouthpiece is exactly the
same shape.

Maybe further experiments with other mouthpiece/material combinations
would give a definite answer to this issue!  It would be interesting
to do this experiment with a metal and hard rubber Link for example.

Regards,
Andrew


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Toby" <kymarto123@y...> wrote:
> Just to ignite the debate again: mouthpiece material doesn't make a
difference: 
> 
>
http://hal9000.ps.uci.edu/Does%20Saxophone%20Mouthpiece%20Material%20Matter.doc.pdf
> 
> Toby
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: andrewhdonaldson 
>   To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 6:06 AM
>   Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Berg Larsen MPc's
> 
> 
> 
>   I've got a Bronze Berg 105/1 SMS which I got about five years ago.  I
>   far as I can tell the material is genuine bronze.  It's slightly
>   harder than brass, and tarnishes a lot less (just darkens a bit). 
>   It's definitely softer than stainless steel.
> 
>   I think the bronze sounds better than the stainless steel Bergs I
>   have, being slightly warmer in tone.
> 
>   In other words, an ideal mouthpiece material!
> 
>   Regards,
>   Andrew
> 
> 
>   --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, James Warburton
>   <jameswarburton@y...> wrote:
>   > Hi Keith,
>   > Thanks fo ryour input on this subject. The "bronze" mouthpieces that
>   I have recently purchased are definitely not brass (unless they are
>   plated) They are beautifully crafted, the machining is impeccable and
>   they play great...so I have been trying to figure out why they are not
>   made anymore. I thought perhaps that the material might be too
>   expensive depending on what in fact it is.
>   > Thanks again,
>   > James  
>   > 
>   > Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@y...> wrote:
>   > I've heard that what is often called "bronze" in Europe, the
U.S. would
>   > call "brass".  But that is just hearsay and may not be true.
>   > 
>   > A web search turned up that basic Bronze is 80% Copper/20% Tin.
 Basic
>   > brass is 60% Copper/40% Zinc.  Brass is softer and tarnishes easier.
>   It is
>   > plated more often because of this.
>   > 
>   > 
>   >             
>   > __________________________________ 
>   > Do you Yahoo!? 
>   > Make Yahoo! your home page 
>   > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>   > 
>   > 
>   > 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 
>   > 
>   > 
>   > 
>   > ---------------------------------
>   > Yahoo! Groups Links
>   > 
>   >    To visit your group on the web, go to:
>   > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
>   >   
>   >    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.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   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 
> 
> 
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>   Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
>     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
>       
>     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       
>     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.

Second to chamber dimensions (but how far behind?), the mass and 
material density surrounding the air chamber would have some effect 
on the absorption or transmission of different frequencies.  So if 
you scaled up the outside body of a hard rubber mouthpiece to have 
mass similar to a metal piece (assuming you could still fit in in 
your mouth), you would change the natural frequencies of the 
mouthpiece, and it would play more "metal-like".  Condider the mass 
adjustment would have to take place from tip to base.  (Can't just 
tape a weight to it, though that could be interesting - doesn't BARI 
have some mpc contraption that screws onto the base?).

Think of it this way - once the sound wave "energy" encounters the 
inside walls of the mouthpiece, it is the only the local absorption 
that will affect the reflectivity or transmission of the energy - 
with the local mass being what determines the absorption 
characteristics.  There is negligible sound transmitting through the 
walls of the mouthpiece (small surface area - small amplitude), 
though it vibrates enough to be picked up by a contact tuner.

Here's something to chew on from "The Physics of Musical Instruments" by Fletcher and 
Rossing:

"The tube walls influence the behavior of the vibrations of the air column 
because of the viscous and thermal losses across the boundary layer....These 
losses have qute significant effect on the Q-factors of the pipe resonances, 
and thus on the behavior of the instrument, and vary somewhat in magnifude 
depending on the smoothness of the surface. Wall materials all have thermal 
capacity so much greater than air, however, that there is virtually no 
difference between them on this score. Rougness effects become significant 
only when the roughness itself is significant on the scale of the bourndary 
layer thickness, or about 0.1mm. Most claims for difference in behavior 
bewteen different wall materials are based, however upon discussions of 
mechanical effects.

While the mechanical virtues and aesthetic appeal of different materials are 
easily evaluated, the same is not true of their acoustical properties. 
Makers and players claim to detect clear and consistent tonal differences 
between otherwise similar instruments made from different materials, but 
physical analysis suggests that these cliams may be illusory. This does not 
mean that wall material never has any effect, and indeed demonstrations by 
Miller (1909) long ago showed that the thin walls of metal pipes of squae 
cross section can vibrate with appereciable amplitude and have a very large 
effect on the stabiility and timbre of the sound. The sitiuation is, 
however, quite different for the relatively rigid walls of typical organ 
pipes and woodwind instruments.

It is easy to see why this is so. The physical quantity causing wall 
vibration is the acoustic pressure in the standing wave of the air column. 
This can couple to a vibration mode of the pipe walls only if there is 
reasonably close agreement between the resonance frequency of the wall mode 
and one of the harmonics of the air-column vibration and if the symmetry of 
the wall mode is siuch that the coupling coefficient does not vanish. It is 
quite easy to satisy these conditions for a pipe of rectangular cross 
section, for the local 'breathing' mode, in which the pipe corss section 
distorts successively from barrel to pincushion shape, can have a low 
freqenncy and very low impedance if the walls are thin.

The case of a pipe of circular cross-section is entirely different, for the 
breathing mode involves an actual increase in the local radius of the tube, 
rather than a simple shape deformation, and therefore has a very high 
resonance frequency. This is true even for thin metal tubes, and the audible 
modes that cam be excited by tapping the tube wall are in fact distortional 
mades in which the pipe cross section become elliptical. These could 
conceivably be excited in a thin metal tube in the vicinity of a finger 
hole, where the bore, and thus the pressure distribution, loses its circular 
symmetry, but for typical wooden instruments the excitation coupling is 
small and the mode frequency very high.

The discussion can be quantified for the strictly circular part of the bore 
by considering the relative compliances associated with expansion of the 
bore under pressure and with compression of the air in the tube. The ratio 
is about 0.001 for even a quite thin-walled tube, so that the compliance of 
the walls has virtually no effect upon the internal air modes and direct 
radiation form wall vibration is very small (Backus, 1964). Even rigid walls 
do, however, affect the damping of the air modes, and indeed this wall 
damping predominates over radiation damping except at very high frequencies. 
Details of wood grain and smoothness can affect the exact damping 
coefficient, but generally the difference between one material and another 
is small compared with the effects of sharp edges on finger holes, soft key 
pads, or even finger tips.

The outcome of this discussion is that we are led to the view that the 
choice of particular materials for the construction of wind materials is 
governed not really by acoustics, but rather by considerations of ease of 
fabrication, stability, feel and appearance..."

Phil Barone had this to say specifically about the effect of materials on his mpcs:

"This may not mean much but I have after all
made mouthpieces from brass, stainless, copper, bronze, solid sterling
silver, black ebony, hard rubber, and probably one more.  When the
dimensions are even close and considering that the mouthpiece is held
tight on the end of the cork and separated from the metal of the horn
by a cork, there's no difference.  You also have to consider that the
reeds vary so much that the difference between them eclipses the
difference in material.  But, the way a player experiences hard rubber
from metal is different due to bone conduction.


Toby

--- Toby <kymarto123@...> wrote:
> Wooden trumpets have been made which, they say,
> sounded just like metal ones ;-)
> 
> Toby
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Ytrac@... 
>   To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 7:21 AM
>   Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Berg Larsen
> MPc's
> 
> 
>   Toby...NO!!  Dont start that again!! LOL
> 
>   That like asking "Does it matter what the
> Saxophone is made of?  Would a wooden Sax sound as
> good as a brass one?!?!" 
> 
>   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 
> 
> 
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>   Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
>     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
>       
>     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an
> email to:
>     MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       
>     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo! Terms of Service. 
> 
> The first wooden trumpets were actually made in the
1600's.  I am sure they had a "round" sound.

BK


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/