I'm about to fix up several Selmer alto pieces and I've noticed that a 
nice, efficient radial facing can make them too free-blowing and not 
resistant enough.  Anyone else find this to be true?  If so, would the 
solution be a short facing length? (certainly <40?), or maybe an 
elliptical facing?  Any other thoughts / recommendations?  Thanks.

Dan T

Hi Dan,
I find that leaving the hump in the roll over controls a lot of the resistance. If I flatten the baffle out, the piece , the piece becomes as free as a bird.
cheers
Ross

If you can not compensate to your liking by using a harder reed, then there are 
several things you can try adjusting.   A more open tip, shorter facing and/or a 
moderate or highly elliptical facing curve would all make it harder to blow 
which most players find more resistant. You could also try facing that are not 
in the family of radial or elliptical curves.   Some gradual bumps in the facing 
curve can add good resistance.  


For the needs of "classical" playing, I would suggest highly elliptical.  Like 
an aspect ratio of 7 to 12.  You can keep the tip opening small and you do not 
have to go short with the facing curve which would hurt low note response IMO.




________________________________
From: Dan Torosian <dtorosian@...>
To: Mouthpiece Work <MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, December 4, 2010 4:09:48 PM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Selmer classical mpcs

  
I'm about to fix up several Selmer alto pieces and I've noticed that a 
nice, efficient radial facing can make them too free-blowing and not 
resistant enough. Anyone else find this to be true? If so, would the 
solution be a short facing length? (certainly <40?), or maybe an 
elliptical facing? Any other thoughts / recommendations? Thanks.

Dan T




      

This html message parsed with html2text ---------------------------Thanks. I wasn't sure if the resistance would continue to increase in a useful
and reliable way as the elliptical aspect ratio increased. I haven't used a
ratio greater than 5.  
  
As for using gradual bumps, I notice some have a high spot between 5 & 20 on
the gauge (kind of towards the tip). Don't know if this is a flaw or a
feature, since so many C* facings seem to be way off the mark. Would you
recommend a bump near the tip like this, or more in the middle (or even in the
back end)?  
  
DT  
  
On 12/4/2010 7:29 PM, Keith Bradbury wrote:

> If you can not compensate to your liking by using a harder reed, then there
> are several things you can try adjusting. A more open tip, shorter facing
> and/or a moderate or highly elliptical facing curve would all make it harder
> to blow which most players find more resistant. You could also try facing
> that are not in the family of radial or elliptical curves. Some gradual
> bumps in the facing curve can add good resistance.
>
> For the needs of "classical" playing, I would suggest highly elliptical.
> Like an aspect ratio of 7 to 12. You can keep the tip opening small and you
> do not have to go short with the facing curve which would hurt low note
> response IMO.  
>
>
>  
>
>
> * * *
>
> **From:** Dan Torosian [](mailto:dtorosian@...)  
>  **To:** Mouthpiece Work [](mailto:MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com)  
>  **Sent:** Sat, December 4, 2010 4:09:48 PM  
>  **Subject:** [MouthpieceWork] Selmer classical mpcs  
>  
>
>
> I'm about to fix up several Selmer alto pieces and I've noticed that a  
>  nice, efficient radial facing can make them too free- blowing and not  
>  resistant enough. Anyone else find this to be true? If so, would the  
>  solution be a short facing length? (certainly <40?), or maybe an  
>  elliptical facing? Any other thoughts / recommendations? Thanks.  
>  
>  Dan T  
>
>
>  
>

An asymetrial facing would be a more conventional method for adding resistance to the response of your Selmer mouthpiece. It will look better also.

Keith would you please elaborate about what you mean by an aspect ratio of 7 to 12?  THANKS

This html message parsed with html2text ---------------------------Asymmetrical in what sense? Uneven left and right rails? or a deviation from
radial/elliptical at some part of the curve (like Keith's suggestion to add a
smooth-transitioned bump)?  
  
DT  
  
On 12/5/2010 9:31 AM, gregwier wrote:

>  
>  An asymetrial facing would be a more conventional method for adding
> resistance to the response of your Selmer mouthpiece. It will look better
> also.  
>  
>  Keith would you please elaborate about what you mean by an aspect ratio of
> 7 to 12? THANKS  
>  
>

Dan: Yes, intentionally facing one rail slightly shorter than the other would have this effect. 

I do not recommend bumps.  They are too hit and miss for my tastes.  I have 
played good and bad mouthpieces with gradual bumps at different locstions.
 
Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
Paypal to sabradbury79@... 
Check out: http://www.MojoMouthpieceWork.com




________________________________
From: Dan Torosian <dtorosian@sbcglobal.net>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, December 5, 2010 10:11:46 AM
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Selmer classical mpcs

  
Thanks.  I wasn't sure if the resistance would continue to increase in a useful 
and reliable way as the elliptical aspect ratio increased.  I haven't used a 
ratio greater than 5.

As for using gradual bumps, I notice some have a high spot between 5 & 20 on the 
gauge (kind of towards the tip).  Don't know if this is a flaw or a feature, 
since so many C* facings seem to be way off the mark.  Would you recommend a 
bump near the tip like this, or more in the middle (or even in the back end)?

DT


      

The aspect ration I was referring to is a/b where "a" is the length of the major 
axis and "b" is the length of the minor axis of the ellipse used as a target 
shape for the facing curve.  If you look at Power Point slide 19 in the Clinic 
area of my site, this illustrates the concept.  When a=b the ratio is "1" which 
is a radial facing.

 
Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
Paypal to sabradbury79@... 
Check out: http://www.MojoMouthpieceWork.com




________________________________
From: gregwier <gregwier@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, December 5, 2010 10:31:43 AM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Selmer classical mpcs

  

An asymetrial facing would be a more conventional method for adding resistance 
to the response of your Selmer mouthpiece. It will look better also.

Keith would you please elaborate about what you mean by an aspect ratio of 7 to 
12? THANKS






      

I'm not a fan of assymetrical facings.  You can just sand one side of you reed 
if want to experience a crooked set-up.  But some classical clarinet players 
have used crooked facings.

Greg, why do you think they "look better"?   

 



________________________________
From: gregwier <gregwier@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, December 5, 2010 10:31:43 AM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Selmer classical mpcs

  

An asymetrial facing would be a more conventional method for adding resistance 
to the response of your Selmer mouthpiece. It will look better also.






      

A bumpy facing give me the impression of amateur facing work, but I can understand the use of this technique if it achieves it's purpose.

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> I'm not a fan of assymetrical facings.  You can just sand one side of you reed 
> if want to experience a crooked set-up.  But some classical clarinet players 
> have used crooked facings.
> 
> Greg, why do you think they "look better"?   
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: gregwier <gregwier@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, December 5, 2010 10:31:43 AM
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Selmer classical mpcs
> 
>   
> 
> An asymetrial facing would be a more conventional method for adding resistance 
> to the response of your Selmer mouthpiece. It will look better also.
>

Yeah, a faceted bumpy facing is resistant (bad resistant) and looks bad.  But a 
gradual bump like I'm thinking of can not be seen.  Actually most facing curves 
have them to different degrees.  But nicely realized radial and elliptical 
facings do not.

 
Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
Paypal to sabradbury79@yahoo.com 
Check out: http://www.MojoMouthpieceWork.com




________________________________
From: gregwier <gregwier@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, December 5, 2010 4:01:40 PM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Selmer classical mpcs

  
A bumpy facing give me the impression of amateur facing work, but I can 
understand the use of this technique if it achieves it's purpose.

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> I'm not a fan of assymetrical facings.  You can just sand one side of you reed 

> if want to experience a crooked set-up.  But some classical clarinet players 
> have used crooked facings.
> 
> Greg, why do you think they "look better"?   
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: gregwier <gregwier@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, December 5, 2010 10:31:43 AM
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Selmer classical mpcs
> 
>   
> 
> An asymetrial facing would be a more conventional method for adding resistance 

> to the response of your Selmer mouthpiece. It will look better also.
>





      

Assymmetrical facings -

How many times has this happened to you?

You go through an entire box, or two, or three boxes of reeds, and can only find ONE reed out of all of them that plays.

That is because your old Linus Fontleroy mouthpiece's facing is as crooked as a Washington, DC politician.  You have managed to find the one reed that is cut as crookedly, and just happens to workk with that facing.

I'm not a fan of assymmetrical facings, or "bumps" in the facing.  I've evened the rails, or smoothed the facing curve of too many mouthpieces with excellent results for the players to think a crooked facing is better.

Resistance my be added by increasing the angle of the baffle just behind the tip rail (filing away material) or using a reed of the correct cut and strength for the mouthpiece.

A big mistake is to try out a new mouthpiece and limit yourself to your current reeds.  "I always play a Lavoz medium hard."  Well, maybe you do, but your mouthpiece would like a different grade of gasoline to run smoothly.

Well, that's all I have to say about that subject.  ;-)

Paul C.

This html message parsed with html2text ---------------------------Thanks for all the input, everyone. Not being a classical player by trade, I
don't usually have the right alto reed on hand to really test-drive a C*.  
  
I'm going to go with keeping the small tip on these pieces and using as high
an elliptical ratio as the existing facing curve will allow.  
  
DT  
  
On 12/6/2010 8:05 AM, tenorman1952 wrote:

>  
>  Assymmetrical facings -  
>  
>  How many times has this happened to you?  
>  
>  You go through an entire box, or two, or three boxes of reeds, and can only
> find ONE reed out of all of them that plays.  
>  
>  That is because your old Linus Fontleroy mouthpiece's facing is as crooked
> as a Washington, DC politician. You have managed to find the one reed that
> is cut as crookedly, and just happens to workk with that facing.  
>  
>  I'm not a fan of assymmetrical facings, or "bumps" in the facing. I've
> evened the rails, or smoothed the facing curve of too many mouthpieces with
> excellent results for the players to think a crooked facing is better.  
>  
>  Resistance my be added by increasing the angle of the baffle just behind
> the tip rail (filing away material) or using a reed of the correct cut and
> strength for the mouthpiece.  
>  
>  A big mistake is to try out a new mouthpiece and limit yourself to your
> current reeds. "I always play a Lavoz medium hard." Well, maybe you do, but
> your mouthpiece would like a different grade of gasoline to run smoothly.  
>  
>  Well, that's all I have to say about that subject. ;-)  
>  
>  Paul C.  
>  
>

You're the man Paul.  I'm Jason's friend who sent you that old Runyon 4 
step baffle and Bari Soprano pieces to work on.  You opened my C* up to 
a 68, evened out the rails and flattened the table which is now 
fabulous, because I also sand and mirror polish the tables of my reeds.  
It's gone from being a necessary evil to a pleasure to play.  And 
everyone agrees that it's a gorgeous "legit" sound as well.  So, tip o' 
the hat for properly "rationalized" mouthpieces.  I'm not good enough 
yet @ the craft to want to fool with (risk) my performance pieces, but 
one thing working on them does is help me know exactly what I want when 
I utilize the services of someone like Paul.



>>
>> Assymmetrical facings -
>>
>> How many times has this happened to you?
>>
>> You go through an entire box, or two, or three boxes of reeds, and 
>> can only find ONE reed out of all of them that plays.
>>
>> That is because your old Linus Fontleroy mouthpiece's facing is as 
>> crooked as a Washington, DC politician. You have managed to find the 
>> one reed that is cut as crookedly, and just happens to workk with 
>> that facing.
>>
>> I'm not a fan of assymmetrical facings, or "bumps" in the facing. 
>> I've evened the rails, or smoothed the facing curve of too many 
>> mouthpieces with excellent results for the players to think a crooked 
>> facing is better.
>>
>> Resistance my be added by increasing the angle of the baffle just 
>> behind the tip rail (filing away material) or using a reed of the 
>> correct cut and strength for the mouthpiece.
>>
>> A big mistake is to try out a new mouthpiece and limit yourself to 
>> your current reeds. "I always play a Lavoz medium hard." Well, maybe 
>> you do, but your mouthpiece would like a different grade of gasoline 
>> to run smoothly.
>>
>> Well, that's all I have to say about that subject. ;-)
>>
>> Paul C.
>>
> 

About the Selmer classical pieces being too free blowing - I'm not sure what type of reed you've been trying with your Selmer classical pieces, but as stated above, if you're not playing a classical-cut and class-strength reed on a Selmer classical piece, be it an S80 C* (the most popular nowadays), a Rousseau Classic 4R, or something similar, chances are it will feel this way. For example, even if you take a reed like a LaVoz med-hard or a Rico Select Jazz 3M that normally feels just-right on your Meyer #7 for alto and then put it on a classical piece, chances are it'll feel really strange and will not work well at all. Among other things, I've usually felt like it's too free-blwoing and you can't seem to get a nice core sound that way. 

For classical, I've found that either the Rico Grand Concert Select or the Vandoren Blue (or Purple, same thing) box reeds work well for a classical mouthpiece, and are totally different than jazz reeds. Usually a 3 1/2 will do it for me if memory serves, it's been a long time. But that's the size I'd shoot for.

Same thing applies to a jazz mouthpiece. If you put Vandoren blue-box or Rico Grand Concert Select 3 1/2's on your Meyer #7 alto mouthpiece, it most likely isn't going to feel near the same as a good jazz reed in the same 3 1/2 size will feel on that mouthpiece. That's not to say it can't be done - my friend Keith Anderson who plays sometimes in trumpeter Roy Hargrove's band must have some really naturally strong wind and embouchure muscles, because at one time he was playing a Link on his tenor with a very large tip opening (I wanna say at least a 10) with Vandoren blue-box reeds and he was sounding great on it, and it sounded totally natural when he played it. He let me try that tenor set-up of his once a few years ago, and I could barely, barely produce a fizzle of a sound on it haha. I guess everyone's just built so different, that certain things work best for certain folks. For me, I usually don't feel comfortable on anything more than medium-hard reeds on a medium tip opening, but for a lot of people this would feel way too soft I guess. 

One kind of sad thing about that mouthpiece of Keith's - it was actually originally one of Stanley Turrentine's mouthpieces that he gave to Keith, and the other day Keith was playing a gig and afterward some other guys at the venue he was playing at were getting into a scuffle. He was leaving in a hurry because it looked like the scene with these guys was getting a little more rough, and on the way to his car his mouthpiece bag fell out of his case and he lost a few mouthpieces including that one! When he called the venue back to see if someone had picked up the mouthpiece bag inside, they said they didn't have it. I haven't spoken to him in a while so maybe he found it, but if not, it's a major bummer. So, I'll try to keep in mind for the future, Step 1 of Mouthpiece Work: Don't lose the mouthpiece. 

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Robert W. Smith" <rwpsmith@...> wrote:
>
> You're the man Paul.  I'm Jason's friend who sent you that old Runyon 4 
> step baffle and Bari Soprano pieces to work on.  You opened my C* up to 
> a 68, evened out the rails and flattened the table which is now 
> fabulous, because I also sand and mirror polish the tables of my reeds.  
> It's gone from being a necessary evil to a pleasure to play.  And 
> everyone agrees that it's a gorgeous "legit" sound as well.  So, tip o' 
> the hat for properly "rationalized" mouthpieces.  I'm not good enough 
> yet @ the craft to want to fool with (risk) my performance pieces, but 
> one thing working on them does is help me know exactly what I want when 
> I utilize the services of someone like Paul.
> 
> 
> 
> >>
> >> Assymmetrical facings -
> >>
> >> How many times has this happened to you?
> >>
> >> You go through an entire box, or two, or three boxes of reeds, and 
> >> can only find ONE reed out of all of them that plays.
> >>
> >> That is because your old Linus Fontleroy mouthpiece's facing is as 
> >> crooked as a Washington, DC politician. You have managed to find the 
> >> one reed that is cut as crookedly, and just happens to workk with 
> >> that facing.
> >>
> >> I'm not a fan of assymmetrical facings, or "bumps" in the facing. 
> >> I've evened the rails, or smoothed the facing curve of too many 
> >> mouthpieces with excellent results for the players to think a crooked 
> >> facing is better.
> >>
> >> Resistance my be added by increasing the angle of the baffle just 
> >> behind the tip rail (filing away material) or using a reed of the 
> >> correct cut and strength for the mouthpiece.
> >>
> >> A big mistake is to try out a new mouthpiece and limit yourself to 
> >> your current reeds. "I always play a Lavoz medium hard." Well, maybe 
> >> you do, but your mouthpiece would like a different grade of gasoline 
> >> to run smoothly.
> >>
> >> Well, that's all I have to say about that subject. ;-)
> >>
> >> Paul C.
> >>
> >
>

Woops... Meant to say *classical strength reed* in that first paragraph, not *class-strength which doesn't make any sense... Sorry.

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Matt" <mattmarantz86@...> wrote:
>
> About the Selmer classical pieces being too free blowing - I'm not sure what type of reed you've been trying with your Selmer classical pieces, but as stated above, if you're not playing a classical-cut and class-strength reed on a Selmer classical piece, be it an S80 C* (the most popular nowadays), a Rousseau Classic 4R, or something similar, chances are it will feel this way. For example, even if you take a reed like a LaVoz med-hard or a Rico Select Jazz 3M that normally feels just-right on your Meyer #7 for alto and then put it on a classical piece, chances are it'll feel really strange and will not work well at all. Among other things, I've usually felt like it's too free-blwoing and you can't seem to get a nice core sound that way. 
> 
> For classical, I've found that either the Rico Grand Concert Select or the Vandoren Blue (or Purple, same thing) box reeds work well for a classical mouthpiece, and are totally different than jazz reeds. Usually a 3 1/2 will do it for me if memory serves, it's been a long time. But that's the size I'd shoot for.
> 
> Same thing applies to a jazz mouthpiece. If you put Vandoren blue-box or Rico Grand Concert Select 3 1/2's on your Meyer #7 alto mouthpiece, it most likely isn't going to feel near the same as a good jazz reed in the same 3 1/2 size will feel on that mouthpiece. That's not to say it can't be done - my friend Keith Anderson who plays sometimes in trumpeter Roy Hargrove's band must have some really naturally strong wind and embouchure muscles, because at one time he was playing a Link on his tenor with a very large tip opening (I wanna say at least a 10) with Vandoren blue-box reeds and he was sounding great on it, and it sounded totally natural when he played it. He let me try that tenor set-up of his once a few years ago, and I could barely, barely produce a fizzle of a sound on it haha. I guess everyone's just built so different, that certain things work best for certain folks. For me, I usually don't feel comfortable on anything more than medium-hard reeds on a medium tip opening, but for a lot of people this would feel way too soft I guess. 
> 
> One kind of sad thing about that mouthpiece of Keith's - it was actually originally one of Stanley Turrentine's mouthpieces that he gave to Keith, and the other day Keith was playing a gig and afterward some other guys at the venue he was playing at were getting into a scuffle. He was leaving in a hurry because it looked like the scene with these guys was getting a little more rough, and on the way to his car his mouthpiece bag fell out of his case and he lost a few mouthpieces including that one! When he called the venue back to see if someone had picked up the mouthpiece bag inside, they said they didn't have it. I haven't spoken to him in a while so maybe he found it, but if not, it's a major bummer. So, I'll try to keep in mind for the future, Step 1 of Mouthpiece Work: Don't lose the mouthpiece. 
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Robert W. Smith" <rwpsmith@> wrote:
> >
> > You're the man Paul.  I'm Jason's friend who sent you that old Runyon 4 
> > step baffle and Bari Soprano pieces to work on.  You opened my C* up to 
> > a 68, evened out the rails and flattened the table which is now 
> > fabulous, because I also sand and mirror polish the tables of my reeds.  
> > It's gone from being a necessary evil to a pleasure to play.  And 
> > everyone agrees that it's a gorgeous "legit" sound as well.  So, tip o' 
> > the hat for properly "rationalized" mouthpieces.  I'm not good enough 
> > yet @ the craft to want to fool with (risk) my performance pieces, but 
> > one thing working on them does is help me know exactly what I want when 
> > I utilize the services of someone like Paul.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >>
> > >> Assymmetrical facings -
> > >>
> > >> How many times has this happened to you?
> > >>
> > >> You go through an entire box, or two, or three boxes of reeds, and 
> > >> can only find ONE reed out of all of them that plays.
> > >>
> > >> That is because your old Linus Fontleroy mouthpiece's facing is as 
> > >> crooked as a Washington, DC politician. You have managed to find the 
> > >> one reed that is cut as crookedly, and just happens to workk with 
> > >> that facing.
> > >>
> > >> I'm not a fan of assymmetrical facings, or "bumps" in the facing. 
> > >> I've evened the rails, or smoothed the facing curve of too many 
> > >> mouthpieces with excellent results for the players to think a crooked 
> > >> facing is better.
> > >>
> > >> Resistance my be added by increasing the angle of the baffle just 
> > >> behind the tip rail (filing away material) or using a reed of the 
> > >> correct cut and strength for the mouthpiece.
> > >>
> > >> A big mistake is to try out a new mouthpiece and limit yourself to 
> > >> your current reeds. "I always play a Lavoz medium hard." Well, maybe 
> > >> you do, but your mouthpiece would like a different grade of gasoline 
> > >> to run smoothly.
> > >>
> > >> Well, that's all I have to say about that subject. ;-)
> > >>
> > >> Paul C.
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Word.

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "tenorman1952" <tenorman1952@...> wrote:
>
> 
> Assymmetrical facings -
> 
> How many times has this happened to you?
> 
> You go through an entire box, or two, or three boxes of reeds, and can only find ONE reed out of all of them that plays.
> 
> That is because your old Linus Fontleroy mouthpiece's facing is as crooked as a Washington, DC politician.  You have managed to find the one reed that is cut as crookedly, and just happens to workk with that facing.
> 
> I'm not a fan of assymmetrical facings, or "bumps" in the facing.  I've evened the rails, or smoothed the facing curve of too many mouthpieces with excellent results for the players to think a crooked facing is better.
> 
> Resistance my be added by increasing the angle of the baffle just behind the tip rail (filing away material) or using a reed of the correct cut and strength for the mouthpiece.
> 
> A big mistake is to try out a new mouthpiece and limit yourself to your current reeds.  "I always play a Lavoz medium hard."  Well, maybe you do, but your mouthpiece would like a different grade of gasoline to run smoothly.
> 
> Well, that's all I have to say about that subject.  ;-)
> 
> Paul C.
>