Hey guys, I have a quick question - There are a couple of different lists in the files section of standard Link (tenor) and Meyer (alto) facing schedules. I'm wondering, is that information that has been compiled and organized after measuring many different examples of those mouthpieces, or do those charts come from information that is widely regarded as the standard for Link/Meyer facing schedule measurements? The reason I ask is that I'm looking for some charts with the standard Link/Meyer facing schedule info to use for "blue-printing" current production Meyers and Links. This is just for fun - during the little bit of time I've spent trying to learn about this I've found that just evening out the facings of student model mouthpieces and making sure the tables are flat on them can make a big difference in their playability. I love Meyers and Links and the next step is that I want to try and flatten the tables/even out the facings on a couple of current production ones that have come from the factory with slightly concave tables and slightly uneven facings to see how they fare after (my best shot) at correction. I know that there are spreadsheets that'll give you nice radial/elliptical curves in the files section, but I'm also curious about what would be considered the "standard" data for Meyer/Link facing schedules. I'm interested in how each different curve (standard Link/Meyer vs. radial vs. slightly elliptical) might differ in terms of playability, and I figure one way to find out about this might just be to try them and see how they play. I'm aware of how to use the spreadsheets to calculate the radial/elliptical curves, but I just want to make sure I get the right info for what's considered standard Meyer/Link facings. Thanks for your help. 

The spreadsheets I have posted are not based on extensive measurements of mouthpieces.  Early on, I decided this would be difficult to do well.  A lot of what you would measure would contain defects from the maker or abuse/wear.  So I came up with a family of curves based on a few curves I found to work well.  The tip openings are based on the various charts that have been around.  However, I am starting to realize that more makers apparently specify their tip openings at the very tip than I previously thought.  My charts are all based on tip openings measured from inside the tip rail.

Ralph Morgan's Sax Journal article on Meyers has some detailed tip openings and facing lengths for Meyers.  However when I compare actual new or vintage Meyers to the chart, some come close but almost none are spot on.  Plus, the degree of ellipse varies.  But it only takes a shift in a couple of feeler readings to move the ellipse of best fit a full number or two.

I think Theo tried to fit his "Ring" curves to an extensive data base of vintage Link measurements.  From the plots on his site you can see some "noise" in his data set.  Theo has said that he deviates from these curves fits to get the results he wants from a facing curve.




________________________________
From: mattmarantz86 <mattmarantz86@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, April 29, 2010 4:40:01 AM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Question regarding standard Link/Meyer schedules

  
Hey guys, I have a quick question - There are a couple of different lists in the files section of standard Link (tenor) and Meyer (alto) facing schedules. I'm wondering, is that information that has been compiled and organized after measuring many different examples of those mouthpieces, or do those charts come from information that is widely regarded as the standard for Link/Meyer facing schedule measurements? The reason I ask is that I'm looking for some charts with the standard Link/Meyer facing schedule info to use for "blue-printing" current production Meyers and Links. This is just for fun - during the little bit of time I've spent trying to learn about this I've found that just evening out the facings of student model mouthpieces and making sure the tables are flat on them can make a big difference in their playability. I love Meyers and Links and the next step is that I want to try and flatten the tables/even out the facings on a couple of
 current production ones that have come from the factory with slightly concave tables and slightly uneven facings to see how they fare after (my best shot) at correction. I know that there are spreadsheets that'll give you nice radial/elliptical curves in the files section, but I'm also curious about what would be considered the "standard" data for Meyer/Link facing schedules. I'm interested in how each different curve (standard Link/Meyer vs. radial vs. slightly elliptical) might differ in terms of playability, and I figure one way to find out about this might just be to try them and see how they play. I'm aware of how to use the spreadsheets to calculate the radial/elliptical curves, but I just want to make sure I get the right info for what's considered standard Meyer/Link facings. Thanks for your help. 





      

Hey Keith,

Thanks for the information regarding the Link/Meyer curves. Really interesting stuff, I see what you're saying about how it'd be difficult to find some consistent readings from such old pieces. I'll definitely keep all that in mind.


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> The spreadsheets I have posted are not based on extensive measurements of mouthpieces.  Early on, I decided this would be difficult to do well.  A lot of what you would measure would contain defects from the maker or abuse/wear.  So I came up with a family of curves based on a few curves I found to work well.  The tip openings are based on the various charts that have been around.  However, I am starting to realize that more makers apparently specify their tip openings at the very tip than I previously thought.  My charts are all based on tip openings measured from inside the tip rail.
> 
> Ralph Morgan's Sax Journal article on Meyers has some detailed tip openings and facing lengths for Meyers.  However when I compare actual new or vintage Meyers to the chart, some come close but almost none are spot on.  Plus, the degree of ellipse varies.  But it only takes a shift in a couple of feeler readings to move the ellipse of best fit a full number or two.
> 
> I think Theo tried to fit his "Ring" curves to an extensive data base of vintage Link measurements.  From the plots on his site you can see some "noise" in his data set.  Theo has said that he deviates from these curves fits to get the results he wants from a facing curve.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: mattmarantz86 <mattmarantz86@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thu, April 29, 2010 4:40:01 AM
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Question regarding standard Link/Meyer schedules
> 
>   
> Hey guys, I have a quick question - There are a couple of different lists in the files section of standard Link (tenor) and Meyer (alto) facing schedules. I'm wondering, is that information that has been compiled and organized after measuring many different examples of those mouthpieces, or do those charts come from information that is widely regarded as the standard for Link/Meyer facing schedule measurements? The reason I ask is that I'm looking for some charts with the standard Link/Meyer facing schedule info to use for "blue-printing" current production Meyers and Links. This is just for fun - during the little bit of time I've spent trying to learn about this I've found that just evening out the facings of student model mouthpieces and making sure the tables are flat on them can make a big difference in their playability. I love Meyers and Links and the next step is that I want to try and flatten the tables/even out the facings on a couple of
>  current production ones that have come from the factory with slightly concave tables and slightly uneven facings to see how they fare after (my best shot) at correction. I know that there are spreadsheets that'll give you nice radial/elliptical curves in the files section, but I'm also curious about what would be considered the "standard" data for Meyer/Link facing schedules. I'm interested in how each different curve (standard Link/Meyer vs. radial vs. slightly elliptical) might differ in terms of playability, and I figure one way to find out about this might just be to try them and see how they play. I'm aware of how to use the spreadsheets to calculate the radial/elliptical curves, but I just want to make sure I get the right info for what's considered standard Meyer/Link facings. Thanks for your help.
>