Hi Guys

I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?

The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 

Thanks!
 

I would aim for 23.5 to 24mm, depending on how "long" you like your facing.  25mm would be fairly long for a 6* tip opening.

Regards,
Andrew




















--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "soruyoavila" <soruyoavila@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Guys
> 
> I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> 
> The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> 
> Thanks!
>

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "crunchie_nuts" <andrewhdonaldson@...> wrote:
>
> I would aim for 23.5 to 24mm, depending on how "long" you like your facing.  25mm would be fairly long for a 6* tip opening.
> 
> Regards,
> Andrew
> 
> 
> Thank you Andrew. So, after all, it´s a matter of taste, but still following some rules as you say, 25 mm would be too much for a 0.095 tip opening.

Well, I don´t like when the sound comes out too "airy", so, I can guess I gotta aim for a shorter facing curve. Am I right?

Thanks again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "soruyoavila" <soruyoavila@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Guys
> > 
> > I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> > 
> > The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> > 
> > Thanks!
> >
>

Hi guy
 
Good mouthpiece yours.

I always thought that the curve starts where it begins to support the reed as it is not always perfectly straight, but rather at an angle inside the nozzle, it is reasonable to assume that this boot is not as accurate as we would like. In addition, once well wetting the reed, (not plastic reed logically :)>) begins some expansion of it to fill the alveoli or tubules of wet and saliva, changing the parameters of approach to the curve that goes towards the tip.

It is best to control these variables is to have at least 4 to 7 good reeds, one by day of week and rotate them day by day. Non-fatigued. As far as possible from time to flatten very careful not to sand too much.

I try to tune a bit more on the top rail to 0.027 inch. (0.7 of milimeter)

luck
Silverio from Argentina

 

________________________________

De: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@yahoo.com>
Para: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Enviado: jueves, 27 de octubre de 2011 19:59
Asunto: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
Hi Guys

I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?

The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 

Thanks!

For me, a longer facing gives a reedier sound with more ability to flex the pitch, whereas a shorter facing gives an airier sound with a more focused pitch centre.  Which is why a "medium" length facing is often a good compromise.

Also, another rough rule of thumb is that low baffle prices such as Links tend to work better with a shorter facing compared to high baffle pieces like Dukoffs which like a longer facing.

Have a look in the files section on this site.  Keith B posted a spreadsheet with "standard" facing schedules for all the different tenor Otto Link tip openings.  I would start with that as a "medium" and then if it feels to long or short you can adjust from there.

Good luck!


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "soruyoavila" <soruyoavila@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@...m, "crunchie_nuts" <andrewhdonaldson@> wrote:
> >
> > I would aim for 23.5 to 24mm, depending on how "long" you like your facing.  25mm would be fairly long for a 6* tip opening.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Andrew
> > 
> > 
> > Thank you Andrew. So, after all, it´s a matter of taste, but still following some rules as you say, 25 mm would be too much for a 0.095 tip opening.
> 
> Well, I don´t like when the sound comes out too "airy", so, I can guess I gotta aim for a shorter facing curve. Am I right?
> 
> Thanks again
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "soruyoavila" <soruyoavila@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Guys
> > > 
> > > I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> > > 
> > > The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> > > 
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> >
>

I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so.  But this depends on the reed cut too.  Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48.  Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44.  These are observations, not recommendations.
 
Longer facings have better low note response and subtones.  Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes.  But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing.  Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
 
I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range.  It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table.  
 
Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target.  I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back.  The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.

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


________________________________
From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)


  
Hi Guys

I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?

The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 

Thanks!

Just to add to all the great info that's already been shared on this subject - I recently got a Bobby Dukoff Hollywood tenor mpc in for a reface and bite-plate replacement and it was an original .086" tip opening (roughly Link 5* sized). It's original facing length measured out at 50 on my glass gauge (25mm). I also thought that was pretty long for a tip that size, however it played great with its original facing work already. The owner just wanted it opened up, but it played really well with that original facing length of 50 even at the small tip size of .086". I think that facing lengths correlate a lot with what reed strength you like to use. To clarify, I think that the harder the reed that you like to use, the longer the facing length that you will like. This is, of course, not the only determining factor in facing length selection, but I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings. I usually like a reed in the 3 1/2 range on my rollover baffle pieces, and they usually play well with longer facings for me too. However, if you like a really bright screamer-type of high-baffle set-up with an extremely soft reed like a LaVoz "soft" or a Rico 2, I could see where the shorter facing length could be better matched to a set-up like that because with really soft reeds, the low end gets easier to play anyway so you don't necessarily need all the low-note help from the facing length that you'd need for a harder reed set-up. Just a thought.

But yes, in short (no pun intended), anything within the 46-50 (or 23mm-25mm) range can work very well on tenor. Best,

Matt

--- In MouthpieceWork@...m, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so.  But this depends on the reed cut too.  Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48.  Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44.  These are observations, not recommendations.
>  
> Longer facings have better low note response and subtones.  Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes.  But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing.  Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
>  
> I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range.  It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table.  
>  
> Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target.  I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back.  The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.
> 
> Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
> 2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
> Paypal to sabradbury79@... 
> Check out: http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> 
> 
>   
> Hi Guys
> 
> I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> 
> The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> 
> Thanks!
>

Reed strength is far from the only significant factor which must be considered. The profile of the reed cut is very important as well. A LaVoz will vary considerably from a Vandoren Classic of equal strength and will play in an entirely different manner.

Sent from my iPad

STEVE  GOODSON
Saxophone Guru and Visionary
New Orleans
www.nationofmusic.com



On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:31 PM, "Matt" <mattmarantz86@...> wrote:

> Just to add to all the great info that's already been shared on this subject - I recently got a Bobby Dukoff Hollywood tenor mpc in for a reface and bite-plate replacement and it was an original .086" tip opening (roughly Link 5* sized). It's original facing length measured out at 50 on my glass gauge (25mm). I also thought that was pretty long for a tip that size, however it played great with its original facing work already. The owner just wanted it opened up, but it played really well with that original facing length of 50 even at the small tip size of .086". I think that facing lengths correlate a lot with what reed strength you like to use. To clarify, I think that the harder the reed that you like to use, the longer the facing length that you will like. This is, of course, not the only determining factor in facing length selection, but I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings. I usually like a reed in the 3 1/2 range on my rollover baffle pieces, and they usually play well with longer facings for me too. However, if you like a really bright screamer-type of high-baffle set-up with an extremely soft reed like a LaVoz "soft" or a Rico 2, I could see where the shorter facing length could be better matched to a set-up like that because with really soft reeds, the low end gets easier to play anyway so you don't necessarily need all the low-note help from the facing length that you'd need for a harder reed set-up. Just a thought.
> 
> But yes, in short (no pun intended), anything within the 46-50 (or 23mm-25mm) range can work very well on tenor. Best,
> 
> Matt
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
> >
> > I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so.  But this depends on the reed cut too.  Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48.  Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44.  These are observations, not recommendations.
> > Â 
> > Longer facings have better low note response and subtones.  Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes.  But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing.  Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
> > Â 
> > I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range.  It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table.  
> > Â 
> > Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target.  I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back.  The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.
> > 
> > Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
> > 2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
> > Paypal to sabradbury79@... 
> > Check out:Â http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/
> > 
> > 
> > ________________________________
> > From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@...>
> > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
> > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> > 
> > 
> > Â  
> > Hi Guys
> > 
> > I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> > 
> > The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> > 
> > Thanks!
> >
> 
> 

Very true.  And of course, barometric pressure should also be taken into account.

Sent from my PC

Andrew

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Steve Goodson <saxgourmet@...> wrote:
>
> Reed strength is far from the only significant factor which must be considered. The profile of the reed cut is very important as well. A LaVoz will vary considerably from a Vandoren Classic of equal strength and will play in an entirely different manner.
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> STEVE  GOODSON
> Saxophone Guru and Visionary
> New Orleans
> www.nationofmusic.com
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:31 PM, "Matt" <mattmarantz86@...> wrote:
> 
> > Just to add to all the great info that's already been shared on this subject - I recently got a Bobby Dukoff Hollywood tenor mpc in for a reface and bite-plate replacement and it was an original .086" tip opening (roughly Link 5* sized). It's original facing length measured out at 50 on my glass gauge (25mm). I also thought that was pretty long for a tip that size, however it played great with its original facing work already. The owner just wanted it opened up, but it played really well with that original facing length of 50 even at the small tip size of .086". I think that facing lengths correlate a lot with what reed strength you like to use. To clarify, I think that the harder the reed that you like to use, the longer the facing length that you will like. This is, of course, not the only determining factor in facing length selection, but I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings. I usually like a reed in the 3 1/2 range on my rollover baffle pieces, and they usually play well with longer facings for me too. However, if you like a really bright screamer-type of high-baffle set-up with an extremely soft reed like a LaVoz "soft" or a Rico 2, I could see where the shorter facing length could be better matched to a set-up like that because with really soft reeds, the low end gets easier to play anyway so you don't necessarily need all the low-note help from the facing length that you'd need for a harder reed set-up. Just a thought.
> > 
> > But yes, in short (no pun intended), anything within the 46-50 (or 23mm-25mm) range can work very well on tenor. Best,
> > 
> > Matt
> > 
> > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so.  But this depends on the reed cut too.  Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48.  Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44.  These are observations, not recommendations.
> > > Â 
> > > Longer facings have better low note response and subtones.  Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes.  But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing.  Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
> > > Â 
> > > I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range.  It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table.  
> > > Â 
> > > Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target.  I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back.  The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.
> > > 
> > > Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
> > > 2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
> > > Paypal to sabradbury79@Â 
> > > Check out:Â http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@>
> > > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
> > > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Â  
> > > Hi Guys
> > > 
> > > I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> > > 
> > > The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> > > 
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > 
> >
>

Hahaha, Andrew that is good.

And just to clarify - I wasn't saying reed strength is the main factor, just one of the possible variables that determines what might work well for a specific individual. The main things that the facing length affect are the sound quality (i.e. short = more focused & long = more spread) and the note response (i.e. short = nice back pressure in the high range & long = easier subtones and better low note response). 

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "crunchie_nuts" <andrewhdonaldson@...> wrote:
>
> Very true.  And of course, barometric pressure should also be taken into account.
> 
> Sent from my PC
> 
> Andrew
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Steve Goodson <saxgourmet@> wrote:
> >
> > Reed strength is far from the only significant factor which must be considered. The profile of the reed cut is very important as well. A LaVoz will vary considerably from a Vandoren Classic of equal strength and will play in an entirely different manner.
> > 
> > Sent from my iPad
> > 
> > STEVE  GOODSON
> > Saxophone Guru and Visionary
> > New Orleans
> > www.nationofmusic.com
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:31 PM, "Matt" <mattmarantz86@> wrote:
> > 
> > > Just to add to all the great info that's already been shared on this subject - I recently got a Bobby Dukoff Hollywood tenor mpc in for a reface and bite-plate replacement and it was an original .086" tip opening (roughly Link 5* sized). It's original facing length measured out at 50 on my glass gauge (25mm). I also thought that was pretty long for a tip that size, however it played great with its original facing work already. The owner just wanted it opened up, but it played really well with that original facing length of 50 even at the small tip size of .086". I think that facing lengths correlate a lot with what reed strength you like to use. To clarify, I think that the harder the reed that you like to use, the longer the facing length that you will like. This is, of course, not the only determining factor in facing length selection, but I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings. I usually like a reed in the 3 1/2 range on my rollover baffle pieces, and they usually play well with longer facings for me too. However, if you like a really bright screamer-type of high-baffle set-up with an extremely soft reed like a LaVoz "soft" or a Rico 2, I could see where the shorter facing length could be better matched to a set-up like that because with really soft reeds, the low end gets easier to play anyway so you don't necessarily need all the low-note help from the facing length that you'd need for a harder reed set-up. Just a thought.
> > > 
> > > But yes, in short (no pun intended), anything within the 46-50 (or 23mm-25mm) range can work very well on tenor. Best,
> > > 
> > > Matt
> > > 
> > > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so.  But this depends on the reed cut too.  Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48.  Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44.  These are observations, not recommendations.
> > > > Â 
> > > > Longer facings have better low note response and subtones.  Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes.  But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing.  Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
> > > > Â 
> > > > I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range.  It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table.  
> > > > Â 
> > > > Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target.  I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back.  The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.
> > > > 
> > > > Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
> > > > 2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
> > > > Paypal to sabradbury79@Â 
> > > > Check out:Â http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@>
> > > > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
> > > > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Â  
> > > > Hi Guys
> > > > 
> > > > I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> > > > 
> > > > The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > 
> > >
> >
>

Hi everybody,
 
first of all I find this all very interesting, and i'm happy that I can finally contribute(?)
A dutch mpc maker (http://sax.mpostma.nl/EN/index.html) I contacted with, is currently measuring reed curves, he found that how stronger the reed how longer the reed curve is.
 
so as said by Matt; "I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings" so as i see it there is a direct correlation between reed strength (reed curve) and facing curve and ease of playing. so you could craft a mouthpiece for one exact reed strength? 
 
I`m not following this group for a long time so excuse me if I stated the obvious or forementioned statements.
 
Koen
 



To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
From: mattmarantz86@yahoo.com
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:38:39 +0000
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)


  



Hahaha, Andrew that is good.

And just to clarify - I wasn't saying reed strength is the main factor, just one of the possible variables that determines what might work well for a specific individual. The main things that the facing length affect are the sound quality (i.e. short = more focused & long = more spread) and the note response (i.e. short = nice back pressure in the high range & long = easier subtones and better low note response). 

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "crunchie_nuts" <andrewhdonaldson@...> wrote:
>
> Very true. And of course, barometric pressure should also be taken into account.
> 
> Sent from my PC
> 
> Andrew
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Steve Goodson <saxgourmet@> wrote:
> >
> > Reed strength is far from the only significant factor which must be considered. The profile of the reed cut is very important as well. A LaVoz will vary considerably from a Vandoren Classic of equal strength and will play in an entirely different manner.
> > 
> > Sent from my iPad
> > 
> > STEVE GOODSON
> > Saxophone Guru and Visionary
> > New Orleans
> > www.nationofmusic.com
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:31 PM, "Matt" <mattmarantz86@> wrote:
> > 
> > > Just to add to all the great info that's already been shared on this subject - I recently got a Bobby Dukoff Hollywood tenor mpc in for a reface and bite-plate replacement and it was an original .086" tip opening (roughly Link 5* sized). It's original facing length measured out at 50 on my glass gauge (25mm). I also thought that was pretty long for a tip that size, however it played great with its original facing work already. The owner just wanted it opened up, but it played really well with that original facing length of 50 even at the small tip size of .086". I think that facing lengths correlate a lot with what reed strength you like to use. To clarify, I think that the harder the reed that you like to use, the longer the facing length that you will like. This is, of course, not the only determining factor in facing length selection, but I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings. I usually like a reed in the 3 1/2 range on my rollover baffle pieces, and they usually play well with longer facings for me too. However, if you like a really bright screamer-type of high-baffle set-up with an extremely soft reed like a LaVoz "soft" or a Rico 2, I could see where the shorter facing length could be better matched to a set-up like that because with really soft reeds, the low end gets easier to play anyway so you don't necessarily need all the low-note help from the facing length that you'd need for a harder reed set-up. Just a thought.
> > > 
> > > But yes, in short (no pun intended), anything within the 46-50 (or 23mm-25mm) range can work very well on tenor. Best,
> > > 
> > > Matt
> > > 
> > > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so. But this depends on the reed cut too. Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48. Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44. These are observations, not recommendations.
> > > > Â 
> > > > Longer facings have better low note response and subtones. Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes. But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing. Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
> > > > Â 
> > > > I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range. It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table. 
> > > > Â 
> > > > Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target. I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back. The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.
> > > > 
> > > > Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
> > > > 2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
> > > > Paypal to sabradbury79@Â 
> > > > Check out:Â http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@>
> > > > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
> > > > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Â 
> > > > Hi Guys
> > > > 
> > > > I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> > > > 
> > > > The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > 
> > >
> >
>




 		 	   		  

Koen,
Would you or your friend be able to post the results of the measurements?
Thanks
Ross McIntyre

I will ask him..
 

> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> From: mk6sax@bigpond.net.au
> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:19:30 +1000
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> 
> Koen,
> Would you or your friend be able to post the results of the measurements?
> Thanks
> Ross McIntyre
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
> 
> To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroupsYahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
 		 	   		  

A short facing requires the reed to bend the space to the tip of the mouthpiece over a shorter distance, therefore demanding a more flexible, i.e. softer, reed.  If the reed can spread out its flex over a longer distance, as on a longer facing, it can, and in fact must, be stiffer to operate effectively.  Just as large tip openings call for softer reeds and small openings call for harder ones, so too do short facings demand soft reeds and long facings harder ones.  As an example of how the parameters can be worked, take the Vandoren B45 clarinet mouthpiece.  It has a relatively large tip opening (soft reed), but a relatively long facing (hard reed).  Medium strength reeds work best on it.


Bill Hausmann


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


________________________________
From: Koen Bidlot <koenbidlot@hotmail.com>
To: mouthpiecework@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 3:52 AM
Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)


  



Hi everybody,
 
first of all I find this all very interesting, and i'm happy that I can finally contribute(?)
A dutch mpc maker (http://sax.mpostma.nl/EN/index.html) I contacted with, is currently measuring reed curves, he found that how stronger the reed how longer the reed curve is.
 
so as said by Matt; "I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings" so as i see it there is a direct correlation between reed strength (reed curve) and facing curve and ease of playing. so you could craft a mouthpiece for one exact reed strength? 
 
I`m not following this group for a long time so excuse me if I stated the obvious or forementioned statements.
 
Koen
 


________________________________

To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
From: mattmarantz86@...
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:38:39 +0000
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)

  
Hahaha, Andrew that is good.

And just to clarify - I wasn't saying reed strength is the main factor, just one of the possible variables that determines what might work well for a specific individual. The main things that the facing length affect are the sound quality (i.e. short = more focused & long = more spread) and the note response (i.e. short = nice back pressure in the high range & long = easier subtones and better low note response). 

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "crunchie_nuts" <andrewhdonaldson@...> wrote:
>
> Very true. And of course, barometric pressure should also be taken into account.
> 
> Sent from my PC
> 
> Andrew
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Steve Goodson <saxgourmet@> wrote:
> >
> > Reed strength is far from the only significant factor which must be considered. The profile of the reed cut is very important as well. A LaVoz will vary considerably from a Vandoren Classic of equal strength and will play in an entirely different manner.
> > 
> > Sent from my iPad
> > 
> > STEVE GOODSON
> > Saxophone Guru and Visionary
> > New Orleans
> > www.nationofmusic.com
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:31 PM, "Matt" <mattmarantz86@> wrote:
> > 
> > > Just to add to all the great info that's already been shared on this subject - I recently got a Bobby Dukoff Hollywood tenor mpc in for a reface and bite-plate replacement and it was an original .086" tip opening (roughly Link 5* sized). It's original facing length measured out at 50 on my glass gauge (25mm). I also thought that was pretty long for a tip that size, however it played great with its original facing work already. The owner just wanted it opened up, but it played really well with that original facing length of 50 even at the small tip size of .086". I think that facing lengths correlate a lot with what reed strength you like to use. To clarify, I think that the harder the reed that you like to use, the longer the facing length that you will like. This is, of course, not the only determining factor in facing length selection, but I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings. I usually like a reed in the 3
 1/2 range on my rollover baffle pieces, and they usually play well with longer facings for me too. However, if you like a really bright screamer-type of high-baffle set-up with an extremely soft reed like a LaVoz "soft" or a Rico 2, I could see where the shorter facing length could be better matched to a set-up like that because with really soft reeds, the low end gets easier to play anyway so you don't necessarily need all the low-note help from the facing length that you'd need for a harder reed set-up. Just a thought.
> > > 
> > > But yes, in short (no pun intended), anything within the 46-50 (or 23mm-25mm) range can work very well on tenor. Best,
> > > 
> > > Matt
> > > 
> > > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so. But this depends on the reed cut too. Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48. Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44. These are observations, not recommendations.
> > > > Â 
> > > > Longer facings have better low note response and subtones. Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes. But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing. Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
> > > > Â 
> > > > I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range. It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table. 
> > > > Â 
> > > > Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target. I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back. The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.
> > > > 
> > > > Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
> > > > 2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
> > > > Paypal to sabradbury79@Â 
> > > > Check out:Â http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@>
> > > > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
> > > > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Â 
> > > > Hi Guys
> > > > 
> > > > I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> > > > 
> > > > The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > 
> > >
> >
>


     


  

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Koen Bidlot <koenbidlot@...> wrote:
>
> 
> Hi everybody,
>  
> first of all I find this all very interesting, and i'm happy that I can finally contribute(?)
> A dutch mpc maker (http://sax.mpostma.nl/EN/index.html) I contacted with, is currently measuring reed curves, he found that how stronger the reed how longer the reed curve is.
>  
> so as said by Matt; "I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings" so as i see it there is a direct correlation between reed strength (reed curve) and facing curve and ease of playing. so you could craft a mouthpiece for one exact reed strength? 
>  
> I`m not following this group for a long time so excuse me if I stated the obvious or forementioned statements.
>  
> Koen
>  
> 
> 
> 
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> From: mattmarantz86@...
> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:38:39 +0000
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> Hahaha, Andrew that is good.
> 
> And just to clarify - I wasn't saying reed strength is the main factor, just one of the possible variables that determines what might work well for a specific individual. The main things that the facing length affect are the sound quality (i.e. short = more focused & long = more spread) and the note response (i.e. short = nice back pressure in the high range & long = easier subtones and better low note response). 
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "crunchie_nuts" <andrewhdonaldson@> wrote:
> >
> > Very true. And of course, barometric pressure should also be taken into account.
> > 
> > Sent from my PC
> > 
> > Andrew
> > 
> > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Steve Goodson <saxgourmet@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Reed strength is far from the only significant factor which must be considered. The profile of the reed cut is very important as well. A LaVoz will vary considerably from a Vandoren Classic of equal strength and will play in an entirely different manner.
> > > 
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > > 
> > > STEVE GOODSON
> > > Saxophone Guru and Visionary
> > > New Orleans
> > > www.nationofmusic.com
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:31 PM, "Matt" <mattmarantz86@> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Just to add to all the great info that's already been shared on this subject - I recently got a Bobby Dukoff Hollywood tenor mpc in for a reface and bite-plate replacement and it was an original .086" tip opening (roughly Link 5* sized). It's original facing length measured out at 50 on my glass gauge (25mm). I also thought that was pretty long for a tip that size, however it played great with its original facing work already. The owner just wanted it opened up, but it played really well with that original facing length of 50 even at the small tip size of .086". I think that facing lengths correlate a lot with what reed strength you like to use. To clarify, I think that the harder the reed that you like to use, the longer the facing length that you will like. This is, of course, not the only determining factor in facing length selection, but I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings. I usually like a reed in the 3 1/2 range on my rollover baffle pieces, and they usually play well with longer facings for me too. However, if you like a really bright screamer-type of high-baffle set-up with an extremely soft reed like a LaVoz "soft" or a Rico 2, I could see where the shorter facing length could be better matched to a set-up like that because with really soft reeds, the low end gets easier to play anyway so you don't necessarily need all the low-note help from the facing length that you'd need for a harder reed set-up. Just a thought.
> > > > 
> > > > But yes, in short (no pun intended), anything within the 46-50 (or 23mm-25mm) range can work very well on tenor. Best,
> > > > 
> > > > Matt
> > > > 
> > > > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so. But this depends on the reed cut too. Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48. Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44. These are observations, not recommendations.
> > > > > Â 
> > > > > Longer facings have better low note response and subtones. Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes. But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing. Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
> > > > > Â 
> > > > > I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range. It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table. 
> > > > > Â 
> > > > > Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target. I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back. The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
> > > > > 2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
> > > > > Paypal to sabradbury79@Â 
> > > > > Check out:Â http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@>
> > > > > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
> > > > > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Â 
> > > > > Hi Guys
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> > > > > 
> > > > > The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> >
>Koen,
       On my chart which dates from the 80's, The Link 95 tip has the length of the lay at 24mm.
       
       The increase in length with tip opening on the Link, automatically moves the break to a thicker (stiffer) part of the reed, therebye maintaining the stiffness ratio, as the tip is progressively opened up.
       
       The problem with reeds as I see it is, the taper of the cut (French vs American) seem to match different lay curves. As far as I know, this does not seem to be documented by either mouthpiece or reed makers.
       
       Very frustrating for players, as they try to match an unsuitable reed to their mouthpiece. The manufacturers of MPC's and reeds are only too happy with this situation, as they will sell more!
                                                           
                                                      Eddie

It is up to the player to find the reed/mouthpiece combination that best suits his embouchure, playing style, etc.  Thank God there are so many possibilities available, although better documentation would indeed be MOST helpful!

Bill Hausmann

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

 Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 2, 2011, at 6:18 AM, "Edward McLean" <ed@...> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Koen Bidlot <koenbidlot@...> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hi everybody,
>> 
>> first of all I find this all very interesting, and i'm happy that I can finally contribute(?)
>> A dutch mpc maker (http://sax.mpostma.nl/EN/index.html) I contacted with, is currently measuring reed curves, he found that how stronger the reed how longer the reed curve is.
>> 
>> so as said by Matt; "I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings" so as i see it there is a direct correlation between reed strength (reed curve) and facing curve and ease of playing. so you could craft a mouthpiece for one exact reed strength? 
>> 
>> I`m not following this group for a long time so excuse me if I stated the obvious or forementioned statements.
>> 
>> Koen
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
>> From: mattmarantz86@...
>> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:38:39 +0000
>> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hahaha, Andrew that is good.
>> 
>> And just to clarify - I wasn't saying reed strength is the main factor, just one of the possible variables that determines what might work well for a specific individual. The main things that the facing length affect are the sound quality (i.e. short = more focused & long = more spread) and the note response (i.e. short = nice back pressure in the high range & long = easier subtones and better low note response). 
>> 
>> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "crunchie_nuts" <andrewhdonaldson@> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Very true. And of course, barometric pressure should also be taken into account.
>>> 
>>> Sent from my PC
>>> 
>>> Andrew
>>> 
>>> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Steve Goodson <saxgourmet@> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Reed strength is far from the only significant factor which must be considered. The profile of the reed cut is very important as well. A LaVoz will vary considerably from a Vandoren Classic of equal strength and will play in an entirely different manner.
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>> 
>>>> STEVE GOODSON
>>>> Saxophone Guru and Visionary
>>>> New Orleans
>>>> www.nationofmusic.com
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:31 PM, "Matt" <mattmarantz86@> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Just to add to all the great info that's already been shared on this subject - I recently got a Bobby Dukoff Hollywood tenor mpc in for a reface and bite-plate replacement and it was an original .086" tip opening (roughly Link 5* sized). It's original facing length measured out at 50 on my glass gauge (25mm). I also thought that was pretty long for a tip that size, however it played great with its original facing work already. The owner just wanted it opened up, but it played really well with that original facing length of 50 even at the small tip size of .086". I think that facing lengths correlate a lot with what reed strength you like to use. To clarify, I think that the harder the reed that you like to use, the longer the facing length that you will like. This is, of course, not the only determining factor in facing length selection, but I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings. I usually like a reed in the 3 1/2 range on my rollover baffle pieces, and they usually play well with longer facings for me too. However, if you like a really bright screamer-type of high-baffle set-up with an extremely soft reed like a LaVoz "soft" or a Rico 2, I could see where the shorter facing length could be better matched to a set-up like that because with really soft reeds, the low end gets easier to play anyway so you don't necessarily need all the low-note help from the facing length that you'd need for a harder reed set-up. Just a thought.
>>>>> 
>>>>> But yes, in short (no pun intended), anything within the 46-50 (or 23mm-25mm) range can work very well on tenor. Best,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Matt
>>>>> 
>>>>> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so. But this depends on the reed cut too. Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48. Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44. These are observations, not recommendations.
>>>>>> Â 
>>>>>> Longer facings have better low note response and subtones. Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes. But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing. Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
>>>>>> Â 
>>>>>> I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range. It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table. 
>>>>>> Â 
>>>>>> Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target. I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back. The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
>>>>>> 2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
>>>>>> Paypal to sabradbury79@Â 
>>>>>> Check out:Â http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@>
>>>>>> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
>>>>>> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Â 
>>>>>> Hi Guys
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> Koen,
>       On my chart which dates from the 80's, The Link 95 tip has the length of the lay at 24mm.
> 
>       The increase in length with tip opening on the Link, automatically moves the break to a thicker (stiffer) part of the reed, therebye maintaining the stiffness ratio, as the tip is progressively opened up.
> 
>       The problem with reeds as I see it is, the taper of the cut (French vs American) seem to match different lay curves. As far as I know, this does not seem to be documented by either mouthpiece or reed makers.
> 
>       Very frustrating for players, as they try to match an unsuitable reed to their mouthpiece. The manufacturers of MPC's and reeds are only too happy with this situation, as they will sell more!
> 
>                                                      Eddie
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> Got a Mouthpiece Work question?  Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
> 
> To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroupsYahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

 You are right on Bill. Amen!   Peter Deley

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Bill Hauamann <zoot51@...> wrote:
>
> It is up to the player to find the reed/mouthpiece combination that best suits his embouchure, playing style, etc.  Thank God there are so many possibilities available, although better documentation would indeed be MOST helpful!
> 
> Bill Hausmann
> 
> If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the band is TOO LOUD!
> 
>  Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Nov 2, 2011, at 6:18 AM, "Edward McLean" <ed@...> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Koen Bidlot <koenbidlot@> wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Hi everybody,
> >> 
> >> first of all I find this all very interesting, and i'm happy that I can finally contribute(?)
> >> A dutch mpc maker (http://sax.mpostma.nl/EN/index.html) I contacted with, is currently measuring reed curves, he found that how stronger the reed how longer the reed curve is.
> >> 
> >> so as said by Matt; "I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings" so as i see it there is a direct correlation between reed strength (reed curve) and facing curve and ease of playing. so you could craft a mouthpiece for one exact reed strength? 
> >> 
> >> I`m not following this group for a long time so excuse me if I stated the obvious or forementioned statements.
> >> 
> >> Koen
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> >> From: mattmarantz86@
> >> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:38:39 +0000
> >> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Hahaha, Andrew that is good.
> >> 
> >> And just to clarify - I wasn't saying reed strength is the main factor, just one of the possible variables that determines what might work well for a specific individual. The main things that the facing length affect are the sound quality (i.e. short = more focused & long = more spread) and the note response (i.e. short = nice back pressure in the high range & long = easier subtones and better low note response). 
> >> 
> >> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "crunchie_nuts" <andrewhdonaldson@> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Very true. And of course, barometric pressure should also be taken into account.
> >>> 
> >>> Sent from my PC
> >>> 
> >>> Andrew
> >>> 
> >>> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Steve Goodson <saxgourmet@> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>> Reed strength is far from the only significant factor which must be considered. The profile of the reed cut is very important as well. A LaVoz will vary considerably from a Vandoren Classic of equal strength and will play in an entirely different manner.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Sent from my iPad
> >>>> 
> >>>> STEVE GOODSON
> >>>> Saxophone Guru and Visionary
> >>>> New Orleans
> >>>> www.nationofmusic.com
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:31 PM, "Matt" <mattmarantz86@> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Just to add to all the great info that's already been shared on this subject - I recently got a Bobby Dukoff Hollywood tenor mpc in for a reface and bite-plate replacement and it was an original .086" tip opening (roughly Link 5* sized). It's original facing length measured out at 50 on my glass gauge (25mm). I also thought that was pretty long for a tip that size, however it played great with its original facing work already. The owner just wanted it opened up, but it played really well with that original facing length of 50 even at the small tip size of .086". I think that facing lengths correlate a lot with what reed strength you like to use. To clarify, I think that the harder the reed that you like to use, the longer the facing length that you will like. This is, of course, not the only determining factor in facing length selection, but I am pretty sure that harder reeds are easier to play with longer facings. I usually like a reed in the 3 1/2 range on my rollover baffle pieces, and they usually play well with longer facings for me too. However, if you like a really bright screamer-type of high-baffle set-up with an extremely soft reed like a LaVoz "soft" or a Rico 2, I could see where the shorter facing length could be better matched to a set-up like that because with really soft reeds, the low end gets easier to play anyway so you don't necessarily need all the low-note help from the facing length that you'd need for a harder reed set-up. Just a thought.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> But yes, in short (no pun intended), anything within the 46-50 (or 23mm-25mm) range can work very well on tenor. Best,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Matt
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> I do not think air will leak out the sides of the reed until the facing length is above 53 or so. But this depends on the reed cut too. Most Links, old and new, have lengths of 46-48. Some small tipped ones could be as short as 44. These are observations, not recommendations.
> >>>>>> Â 
> >>>>>> Longer facings have better low note response and subtones. Short facing are said to have better resistance for high notes. But a long elliptical facing can do almost the same thing. Smaller tip openings articulate faster for classical music challenges but usually do not have enough resistance unless a short elliptical facing is used.
> >>>>>> Â 
> >>>>>> I would target for something in the 48-50 range and a tip rail in the .024-.030 range. It is a bigger deal what you do between the tip and table. 
> >>>>>> Â 
> >>>>>> Also, it is very easy to overshoot a facing length target. I still do it and have to flatten the table a little to bring it back. The key is to not get into a vicious cycle back and forth that chews up the mouthpiece material.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
> >>>>>> 2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
> >>>>>> Paypal to sabradbury79@Â 
> >>>>>> Check out:Â http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>>> From: soruyoavila <soruyoavila@>
> >>>>>> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:59 PM
> >>>>>> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Â 
> >>>>>> Hi Guys
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> I have a typical Tenor Otto Link Metal 6* mp, which I´m working on. The thing is, better say, my doubt is, although I´ve seen some charts here where the facing curve for that piece should be around 45.5, (measuring with the 0.0015 feeler gage), isn´t it supposed to be around 50? I thought a tenor metal piece facing curve should be around that, isn´t it?
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> The tip opening remains on 0.095, the tip rail is 0.035, all I need to know is where to start the curve, I mean, where is the ideal point for this piece. 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >> Koen,
> >       On my chart which dates from the 80's, The Link 95 tip has the length of the lay at 24mm.
> > 
> >       The increase in length with tip opening on the Link, automatically moves the break to a thicker (stiffer) part of the reed, therebye maintaining the stiffness ratio, as the tip is progressively opened up.
> > 
> >       The problem with reeds as I see it is, the taper of the cut (French vs American) seem to match different lay curves. As far as I know, this does not seem to be documented by either mouthpiece or reed makers.
> > 
> >       Very frustrating for players, as they try to match an unsuitable reed to their mouthpiece. The manufacturers of MPC's and reeds are only too happy with this situation, as they will sell more!
> > 
> >                                                      Eddie
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------
> > 
> > Got a Mouthpiece Work question?  Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> > 
> > Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
> > 
> > To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroupsYahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> >
>

> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Koen Bidlot <koenbidlot@...> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hi everybody,
>> 
>> first of all I find this all very interesting, and i'm happy that I can
>> finally contribute(?)
>> A dutch mpc maker (http://sax.mpostma.nl/EN/index.html) I contacted with, is
>> currently measuring reed curves, he found that how stronger the reed how
>> longer the reed curve is.


An interesting website, thanks for posting the link.

Is the dutch mpc maker any relation to Tineke Postma, the Dutch alto player?

Barry

That is an interesting site.  I added it to the Links section of the MouthpieceWork Group site.  
 
Exotic two-piece mouthpiece design.  
 
Also, he has a different approach to facing curve shapes.  His 3rd parameter is angle at the tip rail (instead of, say, ellipse aspect ratio).  I did not study it enough to see if he mentions a mathematical facing curve shape or not.  It could just be using a spline from a CAD program.
 


________________________________
From: Barry Levine <barrylevine@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)


  

> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Koen Bidlot <koenbidlot@...> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hi everybody,
>> 
>> first of all I find this all very interesting, and i'm happy that I can
>> finally contribute(?)
>> A dutch mpc maker (http://sax.mpostma.nl/EN/index.html) I contacted with, is
>> currently measuring reed curves, he found that how stronger the reed how
>> longer the reed curve is.

An interesting website, thanks for posting the link.

Is the dutch mpc maker any relation to Tineke Postma, the Dutch alto player?

Barry

yes he has a lot of information on the site, even more than you would say on a first glance, if you search well you can find a few appendices with calculations, statements, and various patents he researched.
 
I think he uses a mathematical facing curve. He doesn`t believe the facing is radial (cirkel segment). but he does think an elliptical curve will work in practice.

 



To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
From: kwbradbury@...
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 17:19:24 -0700
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Marten Postma's Web Site


  





That is an interesting site.  I added it to the Links section of the MouthpieceWork Group site.  
 
Exotic two-piece mouthpiece design.  
 
Also, he has a different approach to facing curve shapes.  His 3rd parameter is angle at the tip rail (instead of, say, ellipse aspect ratio).  I did not study it enough to see if he mentions a mathematical facing curve shape or not.  It could just be using a spline from a CAD program.
 




From: Barry Levine <barrylevine@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Otto Link Facing Curve (doubt)



  


> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Koen Bidlot <koenbidlot@...> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hi everybody,
>> 
>> first of all I find this all very interesting, and i'm happy that I can
>> finally contribute(?)
>> A dutch mpc maker (http://sax.mpostma.nl/EN/index.html) I contacted with, is
>> currently measuring reed curves, he found that how stronger the reed how
>> longer the reed curve is.

An interesting website, thanks for posting the link.

Is the dutch mpc maker any relation to Tineke Postma, the Dutch alto player?

Barry