I have recently refaced two clarinet mps, my first and second. Except for a third one which I quite nicely botched, these two came out very successfully as far as the numbers are concerned but still very much lacking in what I had hoped for.  

The first was a very closed and unplayable no name mp onto which I copied the facing of a Hite Premier. I used 400 and 600 papers along with needle files on the tip and baffle. Using my Brand glass gauge for the facing and a micrometer and magnifier setup for tip measurement and with feeler gauges .0015, .01, .024 and .035 I got them to almost exactly match at all points. After that I checked with some other feeler blades, .005, .016 and .030 and found them to be a little off but I didn't want to mess with it further. 

I also thinned the tip rail to a bit less than 1/32 (the Hite's is a bit more than 1/32) and filed out the baffle some. In addition I sharpened the little baffle at the base of the window(not sure what you call that) which was previously quite blunt, and opened up an arc in the chamber behind(underneath) that same little baffle which was previously somewhat squared. 

The mp certainly plays better than it used to but there is still that same stuffiness that characterized it before, plus it blows considerably harder than the Hite. One possibly significant difference between the copy and original is that the space between the rails at the tip corners is about 1/2 mm less in the copy. I don't know if this is important or not. I am at a loss about what to do to get it to play easier and more freely and I don't want to mess it up and try other things without knowing what I'm doing so I'm wondering what suggestions people might have for improvement.

The second mp I refaced was a very hard blowing Belmonte onto which I copied the facing of a Yamaha Y-12. I particularly like the way this Yamaha plays with soft reeds, since I am trying to obtain a mp that will be an easy starter for beginning and young students. After very careful sanding I got all 7 feeler gauges to match up very closely, although in a few cases ½ to 1 glass gauge marking short. I also actually balanced the tip rails better in my copy than they were in the original. 

The Belmonte mp now plays a little easier but not a lot and it is also somewhat stuffy. The Yamaha has a very thin tip rail (1/64 in) but I have not touched the tip rail on the Belmonte which is thicker(a touch wider than 1/32). The rails near the tip of my copy are also somewhat wider and closer together (about 1.5mm) than in the original while the rails near the bottom of the window are narrower in the copy. The Yamaha also has that type of window where it forms an arc at the bottom which would seem almost impossible to copy, plus it is a shorter window by about 2mm. If anyone can give me some advice on what to do next with these two projects I would greatly appreciate it.

Are you using a spreadsheet to plot the shape of the facing curve?  The picture often illustrates where there are bumps and flats in the facing curve that make a mouthpiece play with resistance.  
 
I can not tell from afar why the duplicated facings play with more resistance than the originals.  But if you are looking for less resistance (not always desireable in a mouthpiece), I would look for clues on the facing curve plot.


      

I suggest also that you compare the baffle heights on your duplicated pieces
to the originals within the first cm of the tip rail.  I use a "Guto's
Gauge" modified with a pointed tip for this, and use a caliper to measure
and mark off equal distances from the tip rail on the baffle.

> From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...>
> Reply-To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] My first projects-need advice.
> 
> 
> Are you using a spreadsheet to plot the shape of the facing curve?  The
> picture often illustrates where there are bumps and flats in the facing curve
> that make a mouthpiece play with resistance.
>  
> I can not tell from afar why the duplicated facings play with more resistance
> than the originals.  But if you are looking for less resistance (not always
> desireable in a mouthpiece), I would look for clues on the facing curve plot.
> 
> 

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <stebinus@...> wrote:
>
(trimmed)

> I used 400 and 600 papers along with needle files on the tip and baffle. 

Steve, be careful, when working hard rubber and plastic mouthpieces, with 400 paper.  It is very easy to remove too much material too quickly.  In fact, unless a really huge amount of material has to be removed 400 should not be used at all.  320 and 400 are useful for metal mouthpieces, however.

Also, because clarinets generally have thinner side and tip rails, it is especially easy to remove too much with 400 paper.

It is entirely possible to use only 600 paper and obtain good results, though I use some of the finer grades, 800, 1000, 1200, up to 2000, for cosmetic reasons.


(trimmed)
> 
>> The mp certainly plays better than it used to but there is still that same stuffiness that characterized it before, plus it blows considerably harder than the Hite. 

(trimmed)

It is possible that you have introduced a "tip flip" right at the tip rail.  

Turn a piece of 600 or 800 paper over, paper side up.  Now make a few strokes on the table to put a fine polish on the table, followed by one or two strokes along the facing curve and tip.  You will see that from the fine silica dust in the paper it puts a high polish on the table and rails.  I do this as a final step in finishing a facing. 

Stop lifting the butt end of the mouthpiece when you feel you have gotten to the tip. 

Look closely at the tip rail.  Is the tip rail evenly polished all the way across?  Or is it still dull in the middle, toward the outer edge of the tip rail?  If so, the tip is "flipped up".

(You may want to switch to 800 paper for this correction.)

This can be corrected with just a stroke or two.  As you draw the mouthpiece across the cutting paper, just as soon as you see it stop making two lines (side rails) and begin to make one wide smear (tip rail) stop lifting the butt end.

Turn the paper over, grit side down, back side up, polish as described previously, and again examine the tip rail.

If it is polished evenly across the tip, you have removed the flip.  If not, continue work, very carefully, slowly. 

Paul Coats 

What is a "Guto's GAuge"?  I did a Google search & came up empty.

Thank you,


David




________________________________
From: Barry Isaac Levine <barrylevine@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:45:32 AM
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] My first projects-need advice.


I suggest also that you compare the baffle heights on your duplicated pieces to the originals within the first cm of the tip rail.  I use a "Guto's Gauge" modified with a pointed tip for this, and use a caliper to measure and mark off equal distances from the tip rail on the baffle.  


From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@yahoo. com>
Reply-To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] My first projects-need advice.



Are you using a spreadsheet to plot the shape of the facing curve?  The picture often illustrates where there are bumps and flats in the facing curve that make a mouthpiece play with resistance.  
 
I can not tell from afar why the duplicated facings play with more resistance than the originals.  But if you are looking for less resistance (not always desireable in a mouthpiece), I would look for clues on the facing curve plot.


 
   


      

Sorry, not meaning to be obscure, but it sure turned out that way.

It's just particular do-it-yourself design for facing gauge by a fellow
named Guto, and there's a picture of it somewhere in the mouthpiece group
archives. Guto mounted a dial gauge on an alumunim framing triangle.


Barry

> What is a "Guto's GAuge"?  I did a Google search & came up empty.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> 
> David
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Barry Isaac Levine <barrylevine@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:45:32 AM
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] My first projects-need advice.
> 
> 
> I suggest also that you compare the baffle heights on your duplicated pieces
> to the originals within the first cm of the tip rail.  I use a "Guto's Gauge"
> modified with a pointed tip for this, and use a caliper to measure and mark
> off equal distances from the tip rail on the baffle.
> 
> 
> From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@yahoo. com>
> Reply-To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
> Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
> To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] My first projects-need advice.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you using a spreadsheet to plot the shape of the facing curve?  The
> picture often illustrates where there are bumps and flats in the facing curve
> that make a mouthpiece play with resistance.
> 
> I can not tell from afar why the duplicated facings play with more resistance
> than the originals.  But if you are looking for less resistance (not always
> desireable in a mouthpiece), I would look for clues on the facing curve plot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

please unsubscribe. thanks

--- On Thu, 4/2/09, David Kulcinski <dkulcinski@...> wrote:

From: David Kulcinski <dkulcinski@...>
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] My first projects-need advice.
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, 2 April, 2009, 2:42 AM











    
            What is a "Guto's GAuge"?  I did a Google search & came up empty.

Thank you,

David

From: Barry Isaac Levine <barrylevine@ norwoodlight. com>
To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:45:32 AM
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] My first projects-need
 advice.











    
            


I suggest also that you compare the baffle heights on your duplicated pieces to the originals within the first cm of the tip rail.  I use a "Guto's Gauge" modified with a pointed tip for this, and use a caliper to measure and mark off equal distances from the tip rail on the baffle.  



From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@yahoo. com>

Reply-To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com

Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:07:13 -0700 (PDT)

To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com

Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] My first projects-need advice.





Are you using a spreadsheet to plot the shape of the facing curve?  The picture often illustrates where there are bumps and flats in the facing curve that make a mouthpiece play with resistance.  

 

I can not tell from afar why the duplicated facings play with more resistance than the originals.  But if you are looking for less resistance (not always desireable in a mouthpiece), I would look for clues on the facing curve plot.










 

      


	
	




      
 

      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      Get connected with chat on network profile, blog, or any personal website! Yahoo! allows you to IM with Pingbox. Check it out! http://ph.messenger.yahoo.com/pingbox

In well over 40 years of playing, I have never seen any clarinet 
mouthpiece that played its best with a reed that was adjusted for 
optimum performance on a different mouthpiece -- even with two brand new 
"identical" mouthpieces. For stuffy (even VERY stuffy) reeds, often a 
VERY slight adjustment of the reed with a reed knife can make the 
response go from very stuffy to wide-open/free. If you made a good 
(smooth - no bumps) facing, then try adjusting the reed tips and taper 
for the best response. Try to figure out exactly what reed it takes to 
make the mouthpiece sing. When you learn what kind of reed adjustments 
work well on it, that will suggest what kind of further adjustments will 
improve the mouthpiece to make it more reed-friendly. If you are not 
skilled at adjusting reeds, find a person that is and get them to help you.

- Brent

> When you learn what kind of reed adjustments
> work well on it, that will suggest what kind of further adjustments will
> improve the mouthpiece to make it more reed-friendly.

Sounds like a useful angle of attack.

What kinds of reed adjustments suggest what particular mouthpiece
adjustments?

What do people use to sand or file down the baffle? I'm trying to avoid messing up the tip rail. I've used a needle file and this has improved the playability considerably but I want to get another .010 or so more material out of there and I'm hoping there is a better way because I don't want the tip rail any thinner.
Thanks to all for the very helpful info.

BTW Brent where do you adjust a reed for stuffiness? Never really figured that out.

http://tinyurl.com/dn5egq

> What do people use to sand or file down the baffle? I'm trying to avoid
> messing up the tip rail. I've used a needle file and this has improved the
> playability considerably but I want to get another .010 or so more
> material out of there and I'm hoping there is a better way because I don't
> want the tip rail any thinner.

I hope I can make some photos this weekend to post re: reed adjustments. But to describe it in words ...

The key to getting a reed to play efficiently and freely on a mouthpiece is (1) BALANCE of the reed (and mpc) and (2) flexibility of the tip (compared to the mpc tip opening) and (3) taper of the reed to match the mouthpiece lay. ALL REED ADJUSTMENTS MUST BE DONE IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE BASIC TAPER IS MAINTAINED -- smooth blended adjustments - NO STEP functions. It's not a matter of digging out a spot to make it "softer" -- but rather to make a gentle adjustment that BLENDS IN with the rest of the taper. "SOFT" is a quite different property than FREE BLOWING, EFFICIENT and LIVELY sound. Typical successful adjustments are usually VERY small, even for reeds that are almost unplayable prior to adjustment. From the mouthpiece point of view, I'd say one key to making a mpc reed-friendly is ABSOLUTE SYMMETRY of the side rails. (I know there are a few unsymmetrical mpc's out there, but they require more extensive and delicate reed adjustments.)

If one side of the reed plays stiffer than the other or if there is a thick tip or mismatch of taper to lay, then the response will be STUFFY. This assumes that the mouthpiece is SYMMETRICAL and both side rails are identical. You can determine if one side of the reed is not vibrating by rotating the clarinet (and mouthpiece) to one side, then the other. When you do this, DO NOT move your head from side to side and DO NOT move the clarinet from side to side. ONLY ROTATE the instrument along its long axis so you are just about closing off one corner of the reed. It helps to play softly and listen for a clean "pp" response ... see how softly you can play and still hold the resonance of the sound. From the mpc point of view, try to make the mpc hold the highly resonant sound down to just a whisper. Most cane reeds will have one side different from the other due to the natural variance of the cane. In this regard, it might be useful to use a Legere synthetic reed for testing response. They are very consistent from side to side (but the sound is not acceptable for orchestral playing). If one side of the reed is stuffy and the other if OK, then it's likely that one side of the reed has a thick tip, or perhaps does not match the mouthpiece lay. A mismatch could be due to side to side variation in the cane of the reed, or it could be due to a minuscule mismatch between one of the side rails of the mouthpiece and the other side rail. Maybe some small bump in a place where you are not measuring. 

For example, I use Vandoren V12 3/12 reeds and I always have to thin out the tips to compensate for the fact that my Vandoren M13L mouthpiece has just a slightly more open tip than the reeds are designed for.

In terms of mouthpiece lay, if you find that you can get one side of reeds consistently playing well, but not the other, I'd CLOSELY inspect the mouthpiece side rail on the stuffy side for a defect. Even a small piece of debris (almost invisible) that gets on the side rail can make a mpc almost STOP playing.

As to the flexibility of the tip, you should find a reed that plays well on the mouthpiece and see how the tip flexes. This is done by GENTLY flexing the tip with your index finger -- not the body of the reed itself, but just the TIP of the tip - the last 1/8 inch. Once you know what flexibility the mpc takes, then use that as a model for adjusting the tips. The tip MUST flex smoothly and continuously into the body of the reed. If it bends with a "corner" in it, that's not going to be a good reed. 

I'll make some pictures when I am doing reed adjustments this weekend and post them on the site soon.

Seeing how your reeds have to be adjusted might let you know where your mouthpiece varies and needs adjustment.

- Brent




--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Barry Levine" <barrylevine@...> wrote:
>
> 
> > When you learn what kind of reed adjustments
> > work well on it, that will suggest what kind of further adjustments will
> > improve the mouthpiece to make it more reed-friendly.
> 
> Sounds like a useful angle of attack.
> 
> What kinds of reed adjustments suggest what particular mouthpiece
> adjustments?
>

Sounds like you've been reading Tom Ridenour.

:-)



--- On Fri, 4/3/09, Brent <brentsmith@...> wrote:
From: Brent <brentsmith@...>
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: My first projects-need advice.
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, April 3, 2009, 7:27 AM











    
            I hope I can make some photos this weekend to post re: reed adjustments. But to describe it in words ...



The key to getting a reed to play efficiently and freely on a mouthpiece is (1) BALANCE of the reed (and mpc) and (2) flexibility of the tip (compared to the mpc tip opening) and (3) taper of the reed to match the mouthpiece lay. ALL REED ADJUSTMENTS MUST BE DONE IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE BASIC TAPER IS MAINTAINED -- smooth blended adjustments - NO STEP functions. It's not a matter of digging out a spot to make it "softer" -- but rather to make a gentle adjustment that BLENDS IN with the rest of the taper. "SOFT" is a quite different property than FREE BLOWING, EFFICIENT and LIVELY sound. Typical successful adjustments are usually VERY small, even for reeds that are almost unplayable prior to adjustment. From the mouthpiece point of view, I'd say one key to making a mpc reed-friendly is ABSOLUTE SYMMETRY of the side rails. (I know there are a few unsymmetrical mpc's out there, but they require more extensive and delicate reed adjustments. )



If one side of the reed plays stiffer than the other or if there is a thick tip or mismatch of taper to lay, then the response will be STUFFY. This assumes that the mouthpiece is SYMMETRICAL and both side rails are identical. You can determine if one side of the reed is not vibrating by rotating the clarinet (and mouthpiece) to one side, then the other. When you do this, DO NOT move your head from side to side and DO NOT move the clarinet from side to side. ONLY ROTATE the instrument along its long axis so you are just about closing off one corner of the reed. It helps to play softly and listen for a clean "pp" response ... see how softly you can play and still hold the resonance of the sound. From the mpc point of view, try to make the mpc hold the highly resonant sound down to just a whisper. Most cane reeds will have one side different from the other due to the natural variance of the cane. In this regard, it might be useful to use a Legere synthetic
 reed for testing response. They are very consistent from side to side (but the sound is not acceptable for orchestral playing). If one side of the reed is stuffy and the other if OK, then it's likely that one side of the reed has a thick tip, or perhaps does not match the mouthpiece lay. A mismatch could be due to side to side variation in the cane of the reed, or it could be due to a minuscule mismatch between one of the side rails of the mouthpiece and the other side rail. Maybe some small bump in a place where you are not measuring. 



For example, I use Vandoren V12 3/12 reeds and I always have to thin out the tips to compensate for the fact that my Vandoren M13L mouthpiece has just a slightly more open tip than the reeds are designed for.



In terms of mouthpiece lay, if you find that you can get one side of reeds consistently playing well, but not the other, I'd CLOSELY inspect the mouthpiece side rail on the stuffy side for a defect. Even a small piece of debris (almost invisible) that gets on the side rail can make a mpc almost STOP playing.



As to the flexibility of the tip, you should find a reed that plays well on the mouthpiece and see how the tip flexes. This is done by GENTLY flexing the tip with your index finger -- not the body of the reed itself, but just the TIP of the tip - the last 1/8 inch. Once you know what flexibility the mpc takes, then use that as a model for adjusting the tips. The tip MUST flex smoothly and continuously into the body of the reed. If it bends with a "corner" in it, that's not going to be a good reed. 



I'll make some pictures when I am doing reed adjustments this weekend and post them on the site soon.



Seeing how your reeds have to be adjusted might let you know where your mouthpiece varies and needs adjustment.



- Brent



--- In MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com, "Barry Levine" <barrylevine@ ...> wrote:

>

> 

> > When you learn what kind of reed adjustments

> > work well on it, that will suggest what kind of further adjustments will

> > improve the mouthpiece to make it more reed-friendly.

> 

> Sounds like a useful angle of attack.

> 

> What kinds of reed adjustments suggest what particular mouthpiece

> adjustments?

>