I just measured one up for a client who wants me to use it as a blank for a custom job.  I have measured them before but it has been a while. 

The facing curve struck me as being very nice... for an alto mouthpiece!.  It has a .060" tip and a 40 facing length.  Has a medium elliptical facing curve with a major/minor ratio of 3.6 by my curve fitting.  It was very even left to right.

I guess a lot of kids are learning on these.

Actually, it is closer to a nice soprano facing.


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "MojoBari" <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> I just measured one up for a client who wants me to use it as a blank for a custom job.  I have measured them before but it has been a while. 
> 
> The facing curve struck me as being very nice... for an alto mouthpiece!.  It has a .060" tip and a 40 facing length.  Has a medium elliptical facing curve with a major/minor ratio of 3.6 by my curve fitting.  It was very even left to right.
> 
> I guess a lot of kids are learning on these.
>

Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?
What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.

I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.

Any ideas?
Long time lurker.
Ross 

  

I think a rounder radius means more thin tip means softer. Not a question of weight, but of mechanical stiffness and the gradient of mechanical stiffness.

Toby
--- ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?
> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.
> 
> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.
> 
> Any ideas?
> Long time lurker.
> Ross 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

...perhaps, but maybe that isn't the most useful comparison we could make.  What correctly fashioned, rounded tip corners mean importantly, is a longer tip rail and more tip baffle area, so for the same stiffness and blowing pressure, the changing mouthpiece pressure more efficiently enslaves the reed, i.e.,the reed is more responsive especially just before closure. 



--- On Tue, 5/22/12, kymarto123@... <kymarto123@...> wrote:

From: kymarto123@... <kymarto123@...>
Subject: Re:[MouthpieceWork] Tip radius
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 3:02 AM








 



  


    
      
      
      I think a rounder radius means more thin tip means softer. Not a question of weight, but of mechanical stiffness and the gradient of mechanical stiffness.



Toby

--- ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:

> 

> 

> 

> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?

> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.

> 

> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.

> 

> Any ideas?

> Long time lurker.

> Ross 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 



    
     

    
    






  

More mouthpiece air pressure efficiency means the reed makes positional changes easier and  faster.  Faster and shorter (compared to the overall cycle duration) reed motions mean more high frequencies.

--- On Tue, 5/22/12, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote:

From: MartinMods <lancelotburt@...>
Subject: Re:[MouthpieceWork] Tip radius
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 7:54 PM








 



  


    
      
      
      ...perhaps, but maybe that isn't the most useful comparison we could make.  What correctly fashioned, rounded tip corners mean importantly, is a longer tip rail and more tip baffle area, so for the same stiffness and blowing pressure, the changing mouthpiece pressure more efficiently enslaves the reed, i.e.,the reed is more responsive especially just before closure. 



--- On Tue, 5/22/12, kymarto123@... <kymarto123@...> wrote:

From: kymarto123@... <kymarto123@ybb.ne.jp>
Subject: Re:[MouthpieceWork] Tip radius
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 3:02 AM








 



    
      
      
      I think a rounder radius means more thin tip means softer. Not a question of weight, but of mechanical stiffness and the gradient of mechanical stiffness.



Toby

--- ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:

> 

> 

> 

> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?

> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.

> 

> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.

> 

> Any ideas?

> Long time lurker.

> Ross 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 



    
     








    
     

    
    






  

I do not understand the original question.  Are you asking about the same of the tip rail as compared to the reed tip?  Or, the facing cuve at the tip or the baffle at the tip?  Or what?

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?
> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.
> 
> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.
> 
> Any ideas?
> Long time lurker.
> Ross
>

I was thinking the tip radius from side to side... The width of the reed, as well as the rads. on each corner of the tip.
The changes I tried were small, and simply varied "where" on the rails, the reed actually landed.
Increasing the roundness of those areas didn't produce the results I was expecting.

The "effectively lengthening the tip rail" suggestion sounds logical though. Something else to think about.






--- On Tue, 5/22/12, MojoBari <kwbradbury@...> wrote:

From: MojoBari <kwbradbury@...>
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 9:49 PM
















 



  


    
      
      
      I do not understand the original question.  Are you asking about the same of the tip rail as compared to the reed tip?  Or, the facing cuve at the tip or the baffle at the tip?  Or what?



--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:

>

> 

> 

> 

> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?

> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.

> 

> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.

> 

> Any ideas?

> Long time lurker.

> Ross

>





    
     

    
    






  

Widening the tip end of the reed channel increases the air flow into the mouthpiece and increases the reed surface that mouthpiece pressure can act on.

Changing a straight-across tip rail/reed tip profile to a rounded tip rail/reed tip profile just increases the tip rail length and the amount of reed surface in the tip area.  It wouldn't increase input air flow as long as the channel remained the same width.

I'm inclined to think that the amount of radius on the corners is significantly less important and noticeable than having the optimal baffle shape/height directly under the reed in those corners, whatever radius is used.  







--- On Tue, 5/22/12, ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:

From: ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 10:17 PM
















 



  


    
      
      
      I was thinking the tip radius from side to side... The width of the reed, as well as the rads. on each corner of the tip.

The changes I tried were small, and simply varied "where" on the rails, the reed actually landed.

Increasing the roundness of those areas didn't produce the results I was expecting.



The "effectively lengthening the tip rail" suggestion sounds logical though. Something else to think about.



--- On Tue, 5/22/12, MojoBari <kwbradbury@...> wrote:



From: MojoBari <kwbradbury@...>

Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius

To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com

Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 9:49 PM



 



I do not understand the original question.  Are you asking about the same of the tip rail as compared to the reed tip?  Or, the facing cuve at the tip or the baffle at the tip?  Or what?



--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:



>



> 



> 



> 



> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?



> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.



> 



> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.



> 



> Any ideas?



> Long time lurker.



> Ross



>





    
     

    
    






  

Interesting question. There must be a point with decreasing radius where things start to get weird. Also, I wonder about Bernoulli forces when the direction of air flow gets farther and farther from perpendicular to the reed tip edge.

--- On Wed, 2012/5/23, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote:















 
 



  


    
      
      
      ...perhaps, but maybe that isn't the most useful comparison we could make.  What correctly fashioned, rounded tip corners mean importantly, is a longer tip rail and more tip baffle area, so for the same stiffness and blowing pressure, the changing mouthpiece pressure more efficiently enslaves the reed, i.e.,the reed is more responsive especially just before closure. 



--- On Tue, 5/22/12, kymarto123@... <kymarto123@...> wrote:

From: kymarto123@....jp <kymarto123@...>
Subject: Re:[MouthpieceWork] Tip radius
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 3:02 AM








 



    
      
      
      I think a rounder radius means more thin tip means softer. Not a question of weight, but of mechanical stiffness and the gradient of mechanical stiffness.



Toby

--- ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...m> wrote:

> 

> 

> 

> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?

> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.

> 

> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.

> 

> Any ideas?

> Long time lurker.

> Ross 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 



    
     








    
     

    
    


 



  

________________________________
 From: "kymarto123@..." <kymarto123@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 7:52 AM
Subject: Re:[MouthpieceWork] Tip radius
 

  
Interesting question. There must be a point with decreasing radius where things start to get weird. Also, I wonder about Bernoulli forces when the direction of air flow gets farther and farther from perpendicular to the reed tip edge.

--- On Wed, 2012/5/23, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote:


>
>  
>...perhaps, but maybe that isn't the most useful comparison we could make.  What correctly fashioned, rounded tip corners mean importantly, is a longer tip rail and more tip baffle area, so for the same stiffness and blowing pressure, the changing mouthpiece pressure more efficiently enslaves the reed, i.e.,the reed is more responsive especially just before closure. 
>
>
>
>--- On Tue, 5/22/12, kymarto123@... <kymarto123@....jp> wrote:
>
>
>>From: kymarto123@... <kymarto123@...>
>>Subject: Re:[MouthpieceWork] Tip radius
>>To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
>>Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 3:02 AM
>>
>>
>>  
>>I think a rounder radius means more thin tip means softer. Not a question of weight, but of mechanical stiffness and the gradient of mechanical stiffness.
>>
>>Toby
>>--- ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?
>>> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.
>>> 
>>> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.
>>> 
>>> Any ideas?
>>> Long time lurker.
>>> Ross 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>  
 

To me the issue is whether the shape of the mouthpiece tip matches the reed shape or not, and then how thick is the tip rail.  Also what is the baffle shape near the tip rail and the shape of the facing curve from the corners through the tip (flat, or curved to the tip, and how much curve).
 
If the mouthpiece tip is not shaped like the reed, you need to make a choice of overhanging the reed in spots or having some of the mouthpiece tip rail exposed past the reed (which is what I think most players do).  If the tip rail is very thin and not shaped like the reed, then you might need to overhang the reed some to get a good tip seal for good response.
 
I think having a lot of tip rail past the end of the reed can hurt response and articulation.  But maybe it is non-issue if you have all the other aspects of the tip rail and baffle dialed in.  

From: ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius


  
I was thinking the tip radius from side to side... The width of the reed, as well as the rads. on each corner of the tip.
The changes I tried were small, and simply varied "where" on the rails, the reed actually landed.
Increasing the roundness of those areas didn't produce the results I was expecting.

The "effectively lengthening the tip rail" suggestion sounds logical though. Something else to think about.

--- On Tue, 5/22/12, MojoBari <kwbradbury@...> wrote:

From: MojoBari <kwbradbury@...>
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 9:49 PM

 

I do not understand the original question. Are you asking about the same of the tip rail as compared to the reed tip? Or, the facing cuve at the tip or the baffle at the tip? Or what?

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:

>

> 

> 

> 

> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?

> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.

> 

> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.

> 

> Any ideas?

> Long time lurker.

> Ross

>

This seems like one of those parameters that, taken to an extreme
(straight-across reed tip or long, almost "pointy" ellipse shape), would
make a big difference.  But within a certain middle-range of shapes, this
factor would be overshadowed by other factors - e.g., how well the
mouthpiece tip shape matches the reed tip shape, or what's going on with
the facing curve (esp. near the tip).

DT

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> To me the issue is whether the shape of the mouthpiece tip matches the
> reed shape or not, and then how thick is the tip rail.  Also what is the
> baffle shape near the tip rail and the shape of the facing curve from the
> corners through the tip (flat, or curved to the tip, and how much curve).
>
> If the mouthpiece tip is not shaped like the reed, you need to make a
> choice of overhanging the reed in spots or having some of the mouthpiece
> tip rail exposed past the reed (which is what I think most players do).  If
> the tip rail is very thin and not shaped like the reed, then you might need
> to overhang the reed some to get a good tip seal for good response.
>
> I think having a lot of tip rail past the end of the reed can hurt
> response and articulation.  But maybe it is non-issue if you have all the
> other aspects of the tip rail and baffle dialed in.
>
>   *From:* ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...>
> *To:* MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2012 6:17 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
>
>
> I was thinking the tip radius from side to side... The width of the reed,
> as well as the rads. on each corner of the tip.
> The changes I tried were small, and simply varied "where" on the rails,
> the reed actually landed.
> Increasing the roundness of those areas didn't produce the results I was
> expecting.
>
> The "effectively lengthening the tip rail" suggestion sounds logical
> though. Something else to think about.
>
> --- On Tue, 5/22/12, MojoBari <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> From: MojoBari <kwbradbury@...>
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 9:49 PM
>
>
>
> I do not understand the original question. Are you asking about the same
> of the tip rail as compared to the reed tip? Or, the facing cuve at the
> tip or the baffle at the tip? Or what?
>
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?
>
> > What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one
> that was a bit rounder.
>
> >
>
> > I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the
> tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to
> be pointing in the other direction.
>
> >
>
> > Any ideas?
>
> > Long time lurker.
>
> > Ross
>
> >
>
>
>
>  
>

Overhanging the reed--or a thick tip rail is something like clipping the tip--the reed can only respond from the point where it touches the back edge of the tip rail, because that is where the forces are generated that cause and govern the closing cycle. Any part of the reed in front of that is wasted, and probably detrimental.

Toby
--- Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...m> wrote:
> To me the issue is whether the shape of the mouthpiece tip matches the reed shape or not, and then how thick is the tip rail.  Also what is the baffle shape near the tip rail and the shape of the facing curve from the corners through the tip (flat, or curved to the tip, and how much curve).
>  
> If the mouthpiece tip is not shaped like the reed, you need to make a choice of overhanging the reed in spots or having some of the mouthpiece tip rail exposed past the reed (which is what I think most players do).  If the tip rail is very thin and not shaped like the reed, then you might need to overhang the reed some to get a good tip seal for good response.
>  
> I think having a lot of tip rail past the end of the reed can hurt response and articulation.  But maybe it is non-issue if you have all the other aspects of the tip rail and baffle dialed in.  
> 
> From: ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 6:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
> 
> 
>   
> I was thinking the tip radius from side to side... The width of the reed, as well as the rads. on each corner of the tip.
> The changes I tried were small, and simply varied "where" on the rails, the reed actually landed.
> Increasing the roundness of those areas didn't produce the results I was expecting.
> 
> The "effectively lengthening the tip rail" suggestion sounds logical though. Something else to think about.
> 
> --- On Tue, 5/22/12, MojoBari <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
> 
> From: MojoBari <kwbradbury@...>
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 9:49 PM
> 
>  
> 
> I do not understand the original question. Are you asking about the same of the tip rail as compared to the reed tip? Or, the facing cuve at the tip or the baffle at the tip? Or what?
> 
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:
> 
> >
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?
> 
> > What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.
> 
> > 
> 
> > I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.
> 
> > 
> 
> > Any ideas?
> 
> > Long time lurker.
> 
> > Ross
> 
> >
> 
> 
> 

And hurts your tongue!

Sent from my iPad

On May 23, 2012, at 10:48 PM, kymarto123@... wrote:

> Overhanging the reed--or a thick tip rail is something like clipping the tip--the reed can only respond from the point where it touches the back edge of the tip rail, because that is where the forces are generated that cause and govern the closing cycle. Any part of the reed in front of that is wasted, and probably detrimental.
> 
> Toby
> --- Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>> To me the issue is whether the shape of the mouthpiece tip matches the reed shape or not, and then how thick is the tip rail.  Also what is the baffle shape near the tip rail and the shape of the facing curve from the corners through the tip (flat, or curved to the tip, and how much curve).
>>  
>> If the mouthpiece tip is not shaped like the reed, you need to make a choice of overhanging the reed in spots or having some of the mouthpiece tip rail exposed past the reed (which is what I think most players do).  If the tip rail is very thin and not shaped like the reed, then you might need to overhang the reed some to get a good tip seal for good response.
>>  
>> I think having a lot of tip rail past the end of the reed can hurt response and articulation.  But maybe it is non-issue if you have all the other aspects of the tip rail and baffle dialed in.  
>> 
>> From: ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...>
>> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 6:17 PM
>> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
>> 
>> 
>>   
>> I was thinking the tip radius from side to side... The width of the reed, as well as the rads. on each corner of the tip.
>> The changes I tried were small, and simply varied "where" on the rails, the reed actually landed.
>> Increasing the roundness of those areas didn't produce the results I was expecting.
>> 
>> The "effectively lengthening the tip rail" suggestion sounds logical though. Something else to think about.
>> 
>> --- On Tue, 5/22/12, MojoBari <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>> 
>> From: MojoBari <kwbradbury@...>
>> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
>> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
>> Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 9:49 PM
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I do not understand the original question. Are you asking about the same of the tip rail as compared to the reed tip? Or, the facing cuve at the tip or the baffle at the tip? Or what?
>> 
>> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, ROSS SMITH <ross.smith@...> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?
>> 
>>> What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> Any ideas?
>> 
>>> Long time lurker.
>> 
>>> Ross
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 

kymarto123@ybb.ne.jp schrieb:

>Overhanging the reed--or a thick tip rail is something like clipping the tip--the reed can only respond from the point where it touches the back edge of the tip rail, because that is where the forces are generated that cause and govern the closing cycle. Any part of the reed in front of that is wasted, and probably detrimental.
>
>Toby
>--- Keith Bradbury  wrote:
>> To me the issue is whether the shape of the mouthpiece tip matches the reed shape or not, and then how thick is the tip rail.  Also what is the baffle shape near the tip rail and the shape of the facing curve from the corners through the tip (flat, or curved to the tip, and how much curve).
>>  
>> If the mouthpiece tip is not shaped like the reed, you need to make a choice of overhanging the reed in spots or having some of the mouthpiece tip rail exposed past the reed (which is what I think most players do).  If the tip rail is very thin and not shaped like the reed, then you might need to overhang the reed some to get a good tip seal for good response.
>>  
>> I think having a lot of tip rail past the end of the reed can hurt response and articulation.  But maybe it is non-issue if you have all the other aspects of the tip rail and baffle dialed in.  
>> 
>> From: ROSS SMITH 
>> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 6:17 PM
>> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
>> 
>> 
>>   
>> I was thinking the tip radius from side to side... The width of the reed, as well as the rads. on each corner of the tip.
>> The changes I tried were small, and simply varied "where" on the rails, the reed actually landed.
>> Increasing the roundness of those areas didn't produce the results I was expecting.
>> 
>> The "effectively lengthening the tip rail" suggestion sounds logical though. Something else to think about.
>> 
>> --- On Tue, 5/22/12, MojoBari  wrote:
>> 
>> From: MojoBari 
>> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Tip radius
>> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
>> Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 9:49 PM
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I do not understand the original question. Are you asking about the same of the tip rail as compared to the reed tip? Or, the facing cuve at the tip or the baffle at the tip? Or what?
>> 
>> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, ROSS SMITH  wrote:
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > 
>> 
>> > 
>> 
>> > 
>> 
>> > Any thoughts about the actual tip radius out there...?
>> 
>> > What would you expect the change to be, between a flatter radius and one that was a bit rounder.
>> 
>> > 
>> 
>> > I've been experimenting with the reed radius and the roundness at the tip corners, thinking that less weight would be better, but results seem to be pointing in the other direction.
>> 
>> > 
>> 
>> > Any ideas?
>> 
>> > Long time lurker.
>> 
>> > Ross
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> 

This html message parsed with html2text ---------------------------A hard rubber alto blank just arrived which looks identical to the late 6
digit serialized Brilhart mouthpieces. The only stampings on the piece are
France to the left of the table and 3* to the right. If it had the Brilhart
trademark on top with hard rubber below it would be worth much more. Does
anyone know the origin of these blanks? My guess is Riffault. @yahoogroups.com
Visit the site at  to see the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to
Mouthpiece Work. To see and modify your groups, go to  [![Yahoo!
Groups](http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/yg/logo/us.gif)](http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkYzB0NXNvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzYyODI5MDAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDMyMTk4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzM3ODY4NzA4)
Switch to: [Text-Only](mailto:MouthpieceWork-
traditional@yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional),
[Daily Digest](mailto:MouthpieceWork-digest@yahoogroups.com?subject=Email
Delivery: Digest) • [Unsubscribe](mailto:MouthpieceWork-
unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe) • [Terms of
Use](http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/) .
![](http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=6282900/grpspId=1705032198/msgId=10801/stime=1337868708/nc1=4025291/nc2=5028928/nc3=5758223)
* * * Netscape. Just the Net You Need.