I wanted to chime in on recent dialogue regarding facing curve 
asymmetry.

As a general practice, I do not incorporate asymmetry into my 
facings.  Nor do I (despite my compulsive nature) obsess over slight 
asymmetry when developing a facing.  How much asymmetry 
is "acceptable" or how much is "too much" is something I can't/won't 
put a specific value to as I think any quantitative answer is 
contestable and subject to varying opinion.  In other words, one has 
to come to their own conclusions in this regard - or at least I don't 
want to bias the conventional wisdom because there are greater facets 
to the craft which I believe are of greater consideration.

In general, I think the theory and practice holds up that a 
symmetrical facing is best for creating a stable environment that is 
tolerant of reed and embouchure variation.  Most clients are well 
served by a symmetrical facing.

Most clients.

Others pushing the extremes of the horn or heavily biasing one side 
of the mouthpiece or the other might require an asymmetrical facing 
for their performance requirements to be met.  There are players who 
absolutely can not be served by a strictly symmetrical facing.

Just wanted to offer some general advice that while there is a 
certain amount of science to the craft, one must not lose sight of 
the art.  There are aspects to refacing that are better served by the 
stroke than by the numbers.  Not to say there is any fault in being 
precise or cataloguing data - just don't get too distracted by the 
numbers.  Don't be afraid to experiment with the paint before putting 
it on the canvas.

This html message parsed with html2text ---------------------------I've played some gigs with Greg Piccolo - great old-school R&B; honker who was
the tenor mainstay in Roomful of Blues for years - and we were talking about
mouthpiece issues. His Link has a very deep diagonal (i.e., not straight left-
to-right) tooth groove worn into most of the biteplate and even some of the
metal, so it's pretty clear there's some serious asymmetry involved in his
playing. He had tried a Doc Tenney refaced Link and didn't like it because it
had so little resistance. Having seen him play, and having seen the groove on
his biteplate, this wasn't a surprising revelation.  
  
Dan T  
  
zed_saxmaniax wrote:

> I wanted to chime in on recent dialogue regarding facing curve  
>  asymmetry.  
>  
>  As a general practice, I do not incorporate asymmetry into my  
>  facings. Nor do I (despite my compulsive nature) obsess over slight  
>  asymmetry when developing a facing. How much asymmetry  
>  is "acceptable" or how much is "too much" is something I can't/won't  
>  put a specific value to as I think any quantitative answer is  
>  contestable and subject to varying opinion. In other words, one has  
>  to come to their own conclusions in this regard - or at least I don't  
>  want to bias the conventional wisdom because there are greater facets  
>  to the craft which I believe are of greater consideration.  
>  
>  In general, I think the theory and practice holds up that a  
>  symmetrical facing is best for creating a stable environment that is  
>  tolerant of reed and embouchure variation. Most clients are well  
>  served by a symmetrical facing.  
>  
>  Most clients.  
>  
>  Others pushing the extremes of the horn or heavily biasing one side  
>  of the mouthpiece or the other might require an asymmetrical facing  
>  for their performance requirements to be met. There are players who  
>  absolutely can not be served by a strictly symmetrical facing.  
>  
>  Just wanted to offer some general advice that while there is a  
>  certain amount of science to the craft, one must not lose sight of  
>  the art. There are aspects to refacing that are better served by the  
>  stroke than by the numbers. Not to say there is any fault in being  
>  precise or cataloguing data - just don't get too distracted by the  
>  numbers. Don't be afraid to experiment with the paint before putting  
>  it on the canvas.  
>  
>