Does anyone have any historical information or real scientific background
on how we ended up
with the standard reed/mouthpiece sizes we use today?
 

 <http://www.nationofmusic.com/ecommerce/> 

PLEASE VISIT MY WEB SITES

http://www.orpheusmusic.com <http://www.orpheusmusic.com/> 

http://www.nationofmusic.com <http://www.nationofmusic.com/> 

http://www.saxgourmet.com <http://www.saxgourmet.com/> 

 <http://saxophonethoughts.blogspot.com/>
http://saxophonethoughts.blogspot.com/

The Music Business is a cruel and  shallow money trench, a long plastic
hallway where thieves and  pimps run free and good men die like dogs.
There's also a negative side."    Hunter S. Thompson



 Steve  Goodson 
see our TERMS OF SERVICE  at: 
http://saxgourmet.com/business.html 

Confidentiality Statement "The information contained in this electronic
message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use
of the owner of the email address listed as the recipient of this message.
If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible
for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution,  forwarding, or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited." 


 

Funny you should ask that...  I had the same question once and asked Santy Runyon.  Who else would have known?
   
  Actually a given instrument will work with a mouthpiece/reed setup of different widths.  He did not know of any scientific basis, a formula, etc, or how the reed and mouthpiece manufacturers determined that, for example, an alto sax reed will be this particular width and have that particular tip contour.
   
  He did relate this interesting tidbit... and I am sure you are aware of some of this.  Some years ago he was contacted by Leblanc, for whom Runyon Products makes bass and contrabass clarinet mouthpieces.  They told him he needed to redesign the contrabass clarinet mouthpiece to accept a narrower reed and gave him the specifications.
   
  Cane for woodwind reeds is best harvested as two year old cane.  In that amount of time only a very small percentage grows large enough to be able to make reeds wide enough for contrabass clarinet.  Contra reeds (and the identical bass saxophone) used to be wider then they are now.  You will often hear players ask for "the old wide reeds".
   
  Reed manufacturers said due to the then present demand of reeds worldwide they just could not supply enough of the then standard wide reeds.  A narrower reed was produced, hardly wider than today's baritone sax reeds.  If you put such a reed on the older mouthpieces it is very difficult to cover the side rails.  This is a source of squeeks and chirps for young contrabass clarinet players struggling with school owned instruments, having the old wide facing, but only narrow reeds available in the music stores.  They don't understand that it is not their fault and that a new mouthpiece is needed.
   
  I make a bass saxophone mouthpiece that uses a baritone sax blank, and thus can use ordinary bari sax reeds.  This works quite well and is certainly an advantage for the player buying reeds for his instrument.
   
  Even though the reed may be narrower, the facing LENGTH, and therefore the scrape of the reed, must still be adequate for the instrument.  Also, the mouthpiece must still have the correct chamber volume even with the narrower facing.
   
  Paul
  

STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@...> wrote:
              Does anyone have any historical information or real scientific background on how we ended up
  with the standard reed/mouthpiece sizes we use today?
   
  
  
  PLEASE VISIT MY WEB SITES
  http://www.orpheusmusic.com
  http://www.nationofmusic.com
  http://www.saxgourmet.com
  http://saxophonethoughts.blogspot.com/
  The Music Business is a cruel and  shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and  pimps run free and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side."    Hunter S. Thompson
  
  
   Steve  Goodson 
see our TERMS OF SERVICE  at: 
http://saxgourmet.com/business.html 
  Confidentiality Statement "The information contained in this electronic message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the owner of the email address listed as the recipient of this message. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution,  forwarding, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited." 

   
  

         


Link to Paul's articles from Main page of "Saxgourmet":
		http://www.saxgourmet.com
Listen to Paul's MP3's and view saxophone photos at:
           http://briefcase.yahoo.com/tenorman1952

Paul Coats is the sole US importer of SAXRAX products from 
http://www.saxrax.com 
For SAXRAX products, email Paul at saxraxus@...
       
---------------------------------
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story.
 Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. 

[ Attachment content not displayed ]

I can see where a reed that is a slight bit narrower, but not so narrow that there is no contact with the rails, would play OK.  I am wondering how much wider that the table can a reed be & still play OK.  I suppose that it might depend upon how tight the ligature was tightened as to how much bow is put on the reed for a given over-width.  Any ideas?

Thanks,

David

----- Original Message ----
From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@yahoo..com>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 9:13:27 AM
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] How was the standard width of reeds determined?









  


    
            Someone posted recently on SOTW that they have what looks like a factory

made HR Berg Bari MP that takes Tenor reeds.  It is marked with a "T"..  The

story told is bari reeds were hard to come by in the 40's (I think). So,

this gave birth to this type of mouthpiece.



I have noticed that Vandoren bari sax reeds are wider than most, if not

all, bari sax reeds.  (Did they not get the memo?)  They come in handy if a

bari sax MP has a wide window.



____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _

Shape Yahoo! in your own image.  Join our Network Research Panel today!   http://surveylink. yahoo.com/ gmrs/yahoo_ panel_invite. asp?a=7 





    
  

    
    




<!--

#ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
#ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
#ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
#ygrp-text{
font-family:Georgia;
}
#ygrp-text p{
margin:0 0 1em 0;}
#ygrp-tpmsgs{
font-family:Arial;
clear:both;}
#ygrp-vitnav{
padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}
#ygrp-vitnav a{
padding:0 1px;}
#ygrp-actbar{
clear:both;margin:25px 0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}
#ygrp-actbar .left{
float:left;white-space:nowrap;}
.bld{font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-grft{
font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}
#ygrp-ft{
font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;
padding:5px 0;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
padding-bottom:10px;}

#ygrp-vital{
background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}
#ygrp-vital #vithd{
font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-transform:uppercase;}
#ygrp-vital ul{
padding:0;margin:2px 0;}
#ygrp-vital ul li{
list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;float:right;width:2em;text-align:right;padding-right:.5em;}
#ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-vital a {
text-decoration:none;}

#ygrp-vital a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}

#ygrp-sponsor #hd{
color:#999;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov{
padding:6px 13px;background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
padding:0 0 0 8px;margin:0;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
text-decoration:none;font-size:130%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #nc {
background-color:#eee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:0 8px;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad{
padding:8px 0;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#628c2a;font-size:100%;line-height:122%;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
text-decoration:none;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
margin:0;}
o {font-size:0;}
.MsoNormal {
margin:0 0 0 0;}
#ygrp-text tt{
font-size:120%;}
blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
.replbq {margin:4;}
-->








       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC

Of course, there is hardly as much standardization as would be desireable.  Reed strengths vary by brand.  Mouthpiece facings, and the designations used to describe them, are all over the chart.  The general sizes of sax mouthpieces may very well have been determined by Adolph Sax himself.

STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@...> wrote:        Does anyone have any historical information or real scientific background on how we ended up
  with the standard reed/mouthpiece sizes we use today?


Bill Hausmann

If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the band is TOO LOUD!
       
---------------------------------
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story.
 Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. 

I was making reference to reed size, not strength. Mouthpiece configuration
was obviously determined by the need to produce a given pitch as the natural
sound of the mouthpiece. Of course, several different configurations would
yield the desired pitch. How did we manage to come to the standard we use
today?

  _____  

From: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Hausmann
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 7:31 PM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] How was the standard width of reeds
determined?



Of course, there is hardly as much standardization as would be desireable.
Reed strengths vary by brand.  Mouthpiece facings, and the designations used
to describe them, are all over the chart.  The general sizes of sax
mouthpieces may very well have been determined by Adolph Sax himself.

STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@...> wrote: 


  Does anyone have any historical information or real scientific background
on how we ended up
with the standard reed/mouthpiece sizes we use today?



Bill Hausmann

If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the band is TOO LOUD! 


  _____  

Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story.
Play Sims  <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evtH224/*http://sims.yahoo.com/>
Stories at Yahoo! Games. 

 

Thanks.  When my Dad bought mine for me in ~'57 / '58, it came with a Van Doren.  It played beautifully for me all through HS, but when I got the sax back & started to re-learn a few years ago, the mpc had to be pulled out far enough on the cork that it wobbled  and caused a squawk if I got excited & bent the horn a little.  I guess my technique changed over the many years..  I would like to get one of what came with it originally 7 see how it plays with that one.

Thank you,

David

----- Original Message ----
From: Bill Hausmann <zoot51@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 6:31:20 PM
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] How was the standard width of reeds determined?









  


    
            Of course, there is hardly as much standardization as would be desireable.  Reed strengths vary by brand.  Mouthpiece facings, and the designations used to describe them, are all over the chart.  The general sizes of sax mouthpieces may very well have been determined by Adolph Sax himself.

STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@cox. net> wrote:  
      Does anyone have any historical information or real scientific background on how we ended up
  with the standard reed/mouthpiece sizes we use today?


Bill Hausmann

If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the
 band is TOO LOUD! 
      
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story.
 Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. 

    
  

    
    




<!--

#ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
#ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
#ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
#ygrp-text{
font-family:Georgia;
}
#ygrp-text p{
margin:0 0 1em 0;}
#ygrp-tpmsgs{
font-family:Arial;
clear:both;}
#ygrp-vitnav{
padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}
#ygrp-vitnav a{
padding:0 1px;}
#ygrp-actbar{
clear:both;margin:25px 0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}
#ygrp-actbar .left{
float:left;white-space:nowrap;}
.bld{font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-grft{
font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}
#ygrp-ft{
font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;
padding:5px 0;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
padding-bottom:10px;}

#ygrp-vital{
background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}
#ygrp-vital #vithd{
font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-transform:uppercase;}
#ygrp-vital ul{
padding:0;margin:2px 0;}
#ygrp-vital ul li{
list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;float:right;width:2em;text-align:right;padding-right:.5em;}
#ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-vital a {
text-decoration:none;}

#ygrp-vital a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}

#ygrp-sponsor #hd{
color:#999;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov{
padding:6px 13px;background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
padding:0 0 0 8px;margin:0;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
text-decoration:none;font-size:130%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #nc {
background-color:#eee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:0 8px;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad{
padding:8px 0;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#628c2a;font-size:100%;line-height:122%;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
text-decoration:none;}
#ygrp-sponsor ..ad a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
margin:0;}
o {font-size:0;}
.MsoNormal {
margin:0 0 0 0;}
#ygrp-text tt{
font-size:120%;}
blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
.replbq {margin:4;}
-->








       
____________________________________________________________________________________Ready for the edge of your seat? 
Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. 
http://tv.yahoo..com/

Steve - In his "Classical Period" book, Al Rice, on pgs 19-20, gives a  
review of [Clar] reed-mp history, and likely  "more contemporary"  authors , 
Rendall, Brymer, Lawson etc will have some comments re: sizing  standardization.  
Playing saxes and the lower cl's [reeds are somewhat  interchangable], I usually 
just want my reeds to cover [or nearly so] the  rails of the mps. Some 
refaced mps may have wider rails, so some experimentation  may be needed, IMVHO.  Don



************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

I don't have any historical information, though reed standards (and 
mouthpiece standards to some extent) were probably initiated much in 
the same way that Thomas Edison sorted out that tungsten made a good 
light bulb filament - through considerable trial and error.

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "zed_saxmaniax" 
<edzentera@...> wrote:
>
  
> Reed and mouthpiece standards to some extent were probably 
initiated much in the same way that Thomas Edison sorted out that 
tungsten made a good light bulb filament - through considerable trial 
and error.
>

I agree with this statement and think that any researcher is going to 
have a very difficult time finding any scientific recorded data for 
reed sizes. It would be more feasible to measure the table length and 
width of mouthpieces made from 1841 to 1920. Mouthpieces have been 
standardized to the best of my knowledge since the "saxophone craze" 
period of the 1920's. 

The logical conclusion is that saxophone tables and reed sizes 
evolved from the proportions of the already existing clarinet 
mouthpieces and reeds. The ratio of reed to mouthpiece size of the 
clarinet would be the most intelligent starting point for determining 
what would work on the saxophone. 

But remember, way back when a reed player bought a reed blank and carved his own.
   
  Paul

Greg Wier <gregwier@...> wrote:
          --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "zed_saxmaniax" 
<edzentera@...> wrote:
>

> Reed and mouthpiece standards to some extent were probably 
initiated much in the same way that Thomas Edison sorted out that 
tungsten made a good light bulb filament - through considerable trial 
and error.
>

I agree with this statement and think that any researcher is going to 
have a very difficult time finding any scientific recorded data for 
reed sizes. It would be more feasible to measure the table length and 
width of mouthpieces made from 1841 to 1920. Mouthpieces have been 
standardized to the best of my knowledge since the "saxophone craze" 
period of the 1920's. 

The logical conclusion is that saxophone tables and reed sizes 
evolved from the proportions of the already existing clarinet 
mouthpieces and reeds. The ratio of reed to mouthpiece size of the 
clarinet would be the most intelligent starting point for determining 
what would work on the saxophone. 



                         


Link to Paul's articles from Main page of "Saxgourmet":
		http://www.saxgourmet.com
Listen to Paul's MP3's and view saxophone photos at:
           http://briefcase.yahoo.com/tenorman1952

Paul Coats is the sole US importer of SAXRAX products from 
http://www.saxrax.com 
For SAXRAX products, email Paul at saxraxus@...
       
---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

Hei Ed,
you make a questions long time in my mind, so because I've no answer
or info I will wait the historic folks to learn.

There are not sources on the books. As an old chinese product you are
especting it was on bambu but I read probably the first was built in
metal, a kind of bitting reed inside a pipe that create the vibration.
Sure the read should have been worked on his width for the pipe, if is
true this theory.

I can see an Edison with almond cut eyes taking a green tea at the top
of the mountain and sometimes give a cut to the reeds until "god" show
up to give him the right size!
Sure not yet a Leonardo da Vinci was out with so big brain!

... but who can confirm this is true? 

Gian


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "zed_saxmaniax" <edzentera@...>
wrote:
>
> I don't have any historical information, though reed standards (and 
> mouthpiece standards to some extent) were probably initiated much in 
> the same way that Thomas Edison sorted out that tungsten made a good 
> light bulb filament - through considerable trial and error.
>

Hahahahah!!!  Some things are not lost in translation, and Gian is certainly the comic here!
   
  Paul

Gian Luca Corino <cubismofree@...> wrote:
          Hei Ed,
you make a questions long time in my mind, so because I've no answer
or info I will wait the historic folks to learn.

There are not sources on the books. As an old chinese product you are
especting it was on bambu but I read probably the first was built in
metal, a kind of bitting reed inside a pipe that create the vibration.
Sure the read should have been worked on his width for the pipe, if is
true this theory.

I can see an Edison with almond cut eyes taking a green tea at the top
of the mountain and sometimes give a cut to the reeds until "god" show
up to give him the right size!
Sure not yet a Leonardo da Vinci was out with so big brain!

... but who can confirm this is true? 

Gian

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "zed_saxmaniax" <edzentera@...>
wrote:
>
> I don't have any historical information, though reed standards (and 
> mouthpiece standards to some extent) were probably initiated much in 
> the same way that Thomas Edison sorted out that tungsten made a good 
> light bulb filament - through considerable trial and error.
>



                         


Link to Paul's articles from Main page of "Saxgourmet":
		http://www.saxgourmet.com
Listen to Paul's MP3's and view saxophone photos at:
           http://briefcase.yahoo.com/tenorman1952

Paul Coats is the sole US importer of SAXRAX products from 
http://www.saxrax.com 
For SAXRAX products, email Paul at saxraxus@...
       
---------------------------------
Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. 

I do not have my original references at hand right now, but I have run
across information along these lines several times for CLARINET
mouthpieces. I think that SAX mouthpieces were standardized from the
outset, whereas calrinet mouthpieces sort of evolved. One refeerence
is Jack Brymer's book "Clarinet", which has relevant text and photos.
Also, I saw some information in clarinet method books from the
mid-to-late 1800's. When (if) I can re-locate locate them I'll scan
and post.

As I recall (FOR CLARINET) from my reading of late 1800's clarinet
method books, from Brymer's book, and from collected papers of William
Thompson (especially the Baltimore lecutres) ...

Before 1700: Basset horn and other precursors of the clarinet used the
mouthpiece and reed were one piece. They were cut from a single piece
of wood and when the reed was damaged or spent, you made another
mouthpiece and reed from another piece of wood. Each was hand made and
undoubtedly varied in size. These were probably a lot like "free reed"
set-ups from older instruments.

1700's: As the clarinet came into use (1700s) it was played with the
reed on top and the reed width was a lot wider (and no doubt less
resistant) than commonly used today. You can see that in photos of old
reed-on-top set-ups. I have seen actual mouthpieces as well as
pictures in books. I have seen it in method books from the 1800's.
(I'll scan and post them when/if I can find them.) During the 1700's
also, I have read that reeds evolved into a detatchable form so that
you could keep the mouthpiece and just put on another reed when one
was damaged (can not remember the referende for this - I have seen it
somewhere). In those days, I recall reading that reeds and mouthpieces
were made of bamboo, pine and certain hardwoods.

1800's: The style changed to playing with the reed on the bottom. In
method books from the late 1800's, I have seen arguements/explanations
of why it's better to play with the reed on the bottom. It was about
that time I think that reed widths started to narrow. All of the older
reed-on-top set-ups I have seen have wide reeds, whereas and all of
the more modern reed-on-bottom set-ups I have seen have narrower
reeds. I have never read any reference that discusses standardization
of reed or moutpiece sizes in the 1800's. By the time the sax was
invented (1840) I'll bet the reed-on bottom was in common use for
clarinet as well as sax. 
 
1900's: With the industrial evolution, mechanical mass production
methods of the late 1800's and early 1900's changed everything. In the
1920's, synthetic thermosetting plastic resins and synthetic
rubber-elastic polymer materials became available to make mouthpieces
etc very durable and standardized in terms of dimensions. Likewise
reeds could be manufactured using industrial methods to exact
dimensions, as they are today. 

See Vandored website for a neat slide show telling how they maintain
tolerences of 0.001 mm! Also, look under the "History" tab on the
Vandoren website at slides 4-5-6 to see old Vanbdoren factories.
Judging from clothing and hairstyles, lack of lighting fixtures, type
of electrical switchgear, and the overhead belt power system, I'll bet
slide 6 was from maybe around 1920's or so. You can see several
technicians are all using standardized machines. That means that the
reed width was standardized by that time.

1900's: The study of rubber elastic materials and the transmission of
sound waves through elastic media are referred to by the great
physicists of the 1800's William Thompson (Lord Kelvin) and James
Joule. But they were at a loss to physically explain the behavior of
solid rubber elastic materials. (for example see Thompson's "Baltimore
Lectures" republihed and widely available - of course it's a physics
book, that has nothing to do specifically with music or mouthpieces).

I assume (but never saw it published) that by the 1930's, mouthpieces
were produced from nautral and synthetic materials to standardized
sizes using modern industrial methods. Ditto for reeds. I have read
dozens (maybe hundreds of patents on mouthpieces and reeds, but never
saw anything about standardization).

I have no idea why the existing standard sizes were adopted, or when
or by who. But if anybody wants to search for it, I am sure the answer
is in trade literature, patents, etc between 1800 and 1850. I'd start
by contacting Vandoren. If anybody knows, they do.

When (if) I have time to find my info, I'll post.

- Brent -



 




--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, " STEVE GOODSON"
<saxgourmet@...> wrote:
>
>   Does anyone have any historical information or real scientific
background
> on how we ended up
> with the standard reed/mouthpiece sizes we use today?
>  
> 
>  <http://www.nationofmusic.com/ecommerce/> 
> 
> PLEASE VISIT MY WEB SITES
> 
> http://www.orpheusmusic.com <http://www.orpheusmusic.com/> 
> 
> http://www.nationofmusic.com <http://www.nationofmusic.com/> 
> 
> http://www.saxgourmet.com <http://www.saxgourmet.com/> 
> 
>  <http://saxophonethoughts.blogspot.com/>
> http://saxophonethoughts.blogspot.com/
> 
> The Music Business is a cruel and  shallow money trench, a long plastic
> hallway where thieves and  pimps run free and good men die like dogs.
> There's also a negative side."    Hunter S. Thompson
> 
> 
> 
>  Steve  Goodson 
> see our TERMS OF SERVICE  at: 


> http://saxgourmet.com/business.html 
> 
> Confidentiality Statement "The information contained in this electronic
> message is privileged and confidential information intended only for
the use
> of the owner of the email address listed as the recipient of this
message.
> If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent
responsible
> for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, 
forwarding, or
> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited."
>

Hi  Brent, this sure is a tough question to answer, rite?  I'm  much 
impressed with your "write-up" below, Many TKS.  I have spent several  hours trying to 
find patents [US] by USPTO and Google/Patents  searching which mention key 
words such as "standard[ization],  dimensions, sizing, size" etc. Retrievals 
include cane-plastics, mps and  reed-duplication methods, but no refs to [FR?] 
"industry-cooperative"  mentions. Recent patents to John Backun and Legere are 
impressive [IMHO],  perhaps some "standards" info might be found via direct 
contact,  as their pats indicate appreciation of prior art.  Colin Lawson's cl 
book  and Shackleton's [Groves] writings may also help, as would Al Rice's  
extensive research.  What a [re]search !!  Regards to all  contributors, Don



************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour