Mouthpiece Work / Radial or elliptical curve???
FROM: r_griao (r_griao)
SUBJECT: Radial or elliptical curve???
Dear, Sorry my English! When defining a type of curve to be used what are the criteria for choosing a radial or elliptical curve? I do not know if I was clear! Thanks!
FROM: kwbradbury (Keith Bradbury)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
For a given tip opening and facing length, there is only one radial curve that will be tangent to the table. There will be many elliptical curves with each one have a different aspect ratio. The higher the aspect ration, the more elliptical the curve and the more resistance it will have. An aspect ratio of one gives a curve that is the same as a radial curve. This is the most free blowing curve I have found for a given tip opening and facing length. But a long facing elliptical curve can flay free-er than a short facing radial curve. So you need to get a feel for what works for the mouthpiece type and the type of playing a player does. From: r_griao <r_griao@...> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:33 PM Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Radial or elliptical curve??? Dear, Sorry my English! When defining a type of curve to be used what are the criteria for choosing a radial or elliptical curve? I do not know if I was clear! Thanks!
FROM: r_griao (r_griao)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
Ok! Keith Bradbury, Sorry my Inglês! Thank you for the response, I'm your fan, I watched all your videos on Youtube. Very good, excellent! Not only his work with the mouthpieces, but also playing the saxes. I'm learning a lot from your videos and answers on this forum! Then, as your answer, the question revolves around whether or not to apply resistance, which will define the resistance value of the ratio (> 1). What is the maximum amount that could reach the Elliptical Ratio? How to construct a curve that balances the entire length of the alto sax? What are the variables for this goal? Thank you, Stay with God! '************************************************************* --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote: > > > > For a given tip opening and facing length, there is only one radial curve that will be tangent to the table. There will be many elliptical curves with each one have a different aspect ratio.  The higher the aspect ration, the more elliptical the curve and the more resistance it will have. An aspect ratio of one gives a curve that is the same as a radial curve. This is the most free blowing curve I have found for a given tip opening and facing length. >  > But a long facing elliptical curve can flay free-er than a short facing radial curve. So you need to get a feel for what works for the mouthpiece type and the type of playing a player does. > > From: r_griao <r_griao@...> > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:33 PM > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Radial or elliptical curve??? > >  > Dear, > > Sorry my English! > > When defining a type of curve to be used what are the criteria for choosing a radial or elliptical curve? > > I do not know if I was clear! > > Thanks! >
FROM: kwbradbury (Keith Bradbury)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
The max ellipse I think is useful for a facing curve has an aspect ratio of 10. This would be useful for a close tip opening classical soprano sax mouthpiece. Medium resistance for medium tip openings for all saxes is in the 3 to 5 range. Large tip openings usually need to be paired with low resistance facing curves. The only rule is there are no rules. If find a mouthpiece you like, plot the facing curve measurements and compare them to a mathematical curve to find out why. On Oct 22, 2012, at 7:26 PM, "r_griao" <r_griao@...> wrote: > > Ok! Keith Bradbury, > > Sorry my Inglês! > > Thank you for the response, I'm your fan, I watched all your videos on Youtube. Very good, excellent! Not only his work with the mouthpieces, but also playing the saxes. I'm learning a lot from your videos and answers on this forum! > > Then, as your answer, the question revolves around whether or not to apply resistance, which will define the resistance value of the ratio (> 1). > > What is the maximum amount that could reach the Elliptical Ratio? > > How to construct a curve that balances the entire length of the alto sax? What are the variables for this goal? > > Thank you, > > Stay with God! > > '************************************************************* > > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > For a given tip opening and facing length, there is only one radial curve that will be tangent to the table. There will be many elliptical curves with each one have a different aspect ratio.  The higher the aspect ration, the more elliptical the curve and the more resistance it will have. An aspect ratio of one gives a curve that is the same as a radial curve. This is the most free blowing curve I have found for a given tip opening and facing length. > >  > > But a long facing elliptical curve can flay free-er than a short facing radial curve. So you need to get a feel for what works for the mouthpiece type and the type of playing a player does. > > > > From: r_griao <r_griao@...> > > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:33 PM > > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Radial or elliptical curve??? > > > >  > > Dear, > > > > Sorry my English! > > > > When defining a type of curve to be used what are the criteria for choosing a radial or elliptical curve? > > > > I do not know if I was clear! > > > > Thanks! > > > >
FROM: r_griao (r_griao)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
Thank you Keith for previous answers, to finish this theme of facing curves, I wonder what measures the length of curves that are considered: small, medium, large, and maximum length. What measures for each type mentioned in the feeler 0.0015 and feeler 0.0000 (absolute length) for the variable AVG L (mm), Radial (mm) and elliptical (mm)? How do you define these measures, there is some mathematical relationship for this? Would be a percentage ratio based on the length of the mouthpiece, for example? thank you very much for your attention! Ricardo --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote: > > The max ellipse I think is useful for a facing curve has an aspect ratio of 10. This would be useful for a close tip opening classical soprano sax mouthpiece. > > Medium resistance for medium tip openings for all saxes is in the 3 to 5 range. Large tip openings usually need to be paired with low resistance facing curves. > > The only rule is there are no rules. If find a mouthpiece you like, plot the facing curve measurements and compare them to a mathematical curve to find out why. > > On Oct 22, 2012, at 7:26 PM, "r_griao" <r_griao@...> wrote: > > > > > Ok! Keith Bradbury, > > > > Sorry my Inglês! > > > > Thank you for the response, I'm your fan, I watched all your videos on Youtube. Very good, excellent! Not only his work with the mouthpieces, but also playing the saxes. I'm learning a lot from your videos and answers on this forum! > > > > Then, as your answer, the question revolves around whether or not to apply resistance, which will define the resistance value of the ratio (> 1). > > > > What is the maximum amount that could reach the Elliptical Ratio? > > > > How to construct a curve that balances the entire length of the alto sax? What are the variables for this goal? > > > > Thank you, > > > > Stay with God! > > > > '************************************************************* > > > > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > For a given tip opening and facing length, there is only one radial curve that will be tangent to the table.à There will be many elliptical curves with each one have a different aspect ratio.à à The higher the aspect ration, the more elliptical the curve and the more resistance it will have.à An aspect ratio of one gives a curve that is the same as a radial curve.à This is the most free blowing curve I have found for a given tip opening and facing length. > > > à > > > But a long facing elliptical curve can flay free-er than a short facing radial curve.à So you need to get a feel for what works for the mouthpiece type and the type of playing a player does.à > > > > > > From: r_griao <r_griao@> > > > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:33 PM > > > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Radial or elliptical curve??? > > > > > > à > > > Dear, > > > > > > Sorry my English! > > > > > > When defining a type of curve to be used what are the criteria for choosing a radial or elliptical curve? > > > > > > I do not know if I was clear! > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > >
FROM: kwbradbury (Keith Bradbury)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
On my web site at Mojomouthpiecework.com, click on the Clinic menu and my Power Point presentation from Jan 2009. Slide 19 has the elliptical curve formulation. A/B is the aspect ratio I have been speaking about. Many years ago, Paul Coats posted ranges of facing lengths (to the .0015" feeler) that he has observed as working well: Sop 34-40 Alto 40-44 Tenor 44-48 Bari 48-52 I tend to use the longer side of these. Most refacing work is for jazz and rock tenor players. I find they prefer 48-52 facing lengths. From: r_griao <r_griao@yahoo.com> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 6:38 AM Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Radial or elliptical curve??? Thank you Keith for previous answers, to finish this theme of facing curves, I wonder what measures the length of curves that are considered: small, medium, large, and maximum length. What measures for each type mentioned in the feeler 0.0015 and feeler 0.0000 (absolute length) for the variable AVG L (mm), Radial (mm) and elliptical (mm)? How do you define these measures, there is some mathematical relationship for this? Would be a percentage ratio based on the length of the mouthpiece, for example? thank you very much for your attention! Ricardo --- In mailto:MouthpieceWork%40yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote: > > The max ellipse I think is useful for a facing curve has an aspect ratio of 10. This would be useful for a close tip opening classical soprano sax mouthpiece. > > Medium resistance for medium tip openings for all saxes is in the 3 to 5 range. Large tip openings usually need to be paired with low resistance facing curves. > > The only rule is there are no rules. If find a mouthpiece you like, plot the facing curve measurements and compare them to a mathematical curve to find out why. > > On Oct 22, 2012, at 7:26 PM, "r_griao" <r_griao@...> wrote: > > > > > Ok! Keith Bradbury, > > > > Sorry my Inglês! > > > > Thank you for the response, I'm your fan, I watched all your videos on Youtube. Very good, excellent! Not only his work with the mouthpieces, but also playing the saxes. I'm learning a lot from your videos and answers on this forum! > > > > Then, as your answer, the question revolves around whether or not to apply resistance, which will define the resistance value of the ratio (> 1). > > > > What is the maximum amount that could reach the Elliptical Ratio? > > > > How to construct a curve that balances the entire length of the alto sax? What are the variables for this goal? > > > > Thank you, > > > > Stay with God! > > > > '************************************************************* > > > > --- In mailto:MouthpieceWork%40yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > For a given tip opening and facing length, there is only one radial curve that will be tangent to the table. There will be many elliptical curves with each one have a different aspect ratio.  The higher the aspect ration, the more elliptical the curve and the more resistance it will have. An aspect ratio of one gives a curve that is the same as a radial curve. This is the most free blowing curve I have found for a given tip opening and facing length. > > >  > > > But a long facing elliptical curve can flay free-er than a short facing radial curve. So you need to get a feel for what works for the mouthpiece type and the type of playing a player does. > > > > > > From: r_griao <r_griao@> > > > To: mailto:MouthpieceWork%40yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:33 PM > > > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Radial or elliptical curve??? > > > > > >  > > > Dear, > > > > > > Sorry my English! > > > > > > When defining a type of curve to be used what are the criteria for choosing a radial or elliptical curve? > > > > > > I do not know if I was clear! > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > >
FROM: r_griao (r_griao)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
Dear Keith, thanks for the reply! So the next questions! Ricardo --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote: > > > > On my web site at Mojomouthpiecework.com, click on the Clinic menu and my Power Point presentation from Jan 2009. Slide 19 has the elliptical curve formulation. A/B is the aspect ratio I have been speaking about. >  > Many years ago, Paul Coats posted ranges of facing lengths (to the .0015" feeler) that he has observed as working well: >  > Sop 34-40 > Alto 40-44 > Tenor 44-48 > Bari 48-52 >  > I tend to use the longer side of these. Most refacing work is for jazz and rock tenor players. I find they prefer 48-52 facing lengths. > > From: r_griao <r_griao@...> > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 6:38 AM > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Radial or elliptical curve??? > >  > > Thank you Keith for previous answers, > > to finish this theme of facing curves, I wonder what measures the length of curves that are considered: small, medium, large, and maximum length. > > What measures for each type mentioned in the feeler 0.0015 and feeler 0.0000 (absolute length) for the variable AVG L (mm), Radial (mm) and elliptical (mm)? > > How do you define these measures, there is some mathematical relationship for this? Would be a percentage ratio based on the length of the mouthpiece, for example? > > thank you very much for your attention! > > Ricardo > > --- In mailto:MouthpieceWork%40yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote: > > > > The max ellipse I think is useful for a facing curve has an aspect ratio of 10. This would be useful for a close tip opening classical soprano sax mouthpiece. > > > > Medium resistance for medium tip openings for all saxes is in the 3 to 5 range. Large tip openings usually need to be paired with low resistance facing curves. > > > > The only rule is there are no rules. If find a mouthpiece you like, plot the facing curve measurements and compare them to a mathematical curve to find out why. > > > > On Oct 22, 2012, at 7:26 PM, "r_griao" <r_griao@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Ok! Keith Bradbury, > > > > > > Sorry my Inglês! > > > > > > Thank you for the response, I'm your fan, I watched all your videos on Youtube. Very good, excellent! Not only his work with the mouthpieces, but also playing the saxes. I'm learning a lot from your videos and answers on this forum! > > > > > > Then, as your answer, the question revolves around whether or not to apply resistance, which will define the resistance value of the ratio (> 1). > > > > > > What is the maximum amount that could reach the Elliptical Ratio? > > > > > > How to construct a curve that balances the entire length of the alto sax? What are the variables for this goal? > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > > > Stay with God! > > > > > > '************************************************************* > > > > > > --- In mailto:MouthpieceWork%40yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a given tip opening and facing length, there is only one radial curve that will be tangent to the table.Ãâ There will be many elliptical curves with each one have a different aspect ratio.Ãâ Ãâ The higher the aspect ration, the more elliptical the curve and the more resistance it will have.Ãâ An aspect ratio of one gives a curve that is the same as a radial curve.Ãâ This is the most free blowing curve I have found for a given tip opening and facing length. > > > > Ãâ > > > > But a long facing elliptical curve can flay free-er than a short facing radial curve.Ãâ So you need to get a feel for what works for the mouthpiece type and the type of playing a player does.Ãâ > > > > > > > > From: r_griao <r_griao@> > > > > To: mailto:MouthpieceWork%40yahoogroups.com > > > > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:33 PM > > > > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Radial or elliptical curve??? > > > > > > > > Ãâ > > > > Dear, > > > > > > > > Sorry my English! > > > > > > > > When defining a type of curve to be used what are the criteria for choosing a radial or elliptical curve? > > > > > > > > I do not know if I was clear! > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > >
FROM: lancelotburt (MartinMods)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
My mouthpiece material of choice, from playing and fabricating, has become stainless steel. Some picts of a Gale Hollywood + in stainless. No more corrosion or plating issues. http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari01.jpg http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari02.jpg http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari03.jpg http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari04.jpg http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari05.jpg http://www.martinmods.com/stainlessbari.mp3
FROM: frymorgan (Morgan)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
Nice work. You using anything special w/r/t files for stainless? One of the big drawbacks for me going down this route is the extra time the facing and tip work take. --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote: > > My mouthpiece material of choice, from playing and fabricating, has become stainless steel. Some picts of a Gale Hollywood + in stainless. No more corrosion or plating issues. > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari01.jpg > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari02.jpg > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari03.jpg > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari04.jpg > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari05.jpg > > http://www.martinmods.com/stainlessbari.mp3 >
FROM: gregwier (gregwier@...)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
This html message parsed with html2text ---------------------------Your cutting tools will have a shorter life span working stainless steel. Diamond dust coated tools can provide some longevity. You have to really love the results, because stainless makes any hand work harder and requires a more aggressive approach. \\--- frymorgan@yahoo.com wrote: From: "Morgan" To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Stainless Steel Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:05:50 -0000 Nice work. You using anything special w/r/t files for stainless? One of the big drawbacks for me going down this route is the extra time the facing and tip work take. \\--- In [MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com](mailto:MouthpieceWork%40yahoogroups.com), MartinMods wrote: > > My mouthpiece material of choice, from playing and fabricating, has become > stainless steel. Some picts of a Gale Hollywood + in stainless. No more > corrosion or plating issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > > * * * Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
FROM: tenorman1952 (tenorman1952)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
(trimmed)
> Many years ago, Paul Coats posted ranges of facing lengths (to the .0015" feeler) that he has observed as working well:
> Â
> Sop 34-40
> Alto 40-44
> Tenor 44-48
> Bari 48-52
Thank you, Keith, for stating that correctly, that those are observations, just as I observe most automobiles have four wheels. There are certainly particular samples which fall outside of these ranges.
It so happens that I face mouthpieces in those length ranges, which, are as read on an E. Brand type glass gauge. That is, a reading of 44 is 22 mm.
And as Keith and others have pointed out, a mouthpiece facing is more than simply a tip opening. Generally with a longer facing it will take a wider tip opening to play well. And then you are using a different portion of the reed. Reed strength and cut will have quite an impact.
Then you get into issues of wide tip, short facing, or vice versa.
Even with two mouthpieces that have identical measurements of facing, the contour of the baffle will have an effect. In one case, though I normally play about 0.100" tip opening (2.5 mm) with 23 mm facing length ("46") on tenor saxophone, for one particular mouthpiece mode that exact facing felt too small. I was able to easily play a larger tip opening 0.110" (2.8 mm) with the same 23 mm facing length ("46") with no fatigue. Due to the way the baffle interacted with the reed, this larger tip opening felt similar to the narrower tip on other mouthpieces.
After all of this, back to the reed. It is a mistake to use only one reed, or your favorite type and strength when experimenting with mouthpieces. You may very well find a different reed that really makes a new mouthpiece play.
Paul
FROM: lancelotburt (MartinMods)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
Thanks. No special files for tip work - just the $3.95 HF sets (coarse/fine) for rough cutting, diamond files for finer work, and lapidary grits on old files covered with leather to finish.
I don't have a problem with tools getting dull, anymore than with any other material. I think most people's experience with stainless steel is probably attempting to reface a Berg Larsen, which has become work-hardened. An annealed 304 rod cuts pretty easily (though still more slowly than HR or brass), being more gummy rather than hard. It sticks to the tools and will load up a file quickly. As the stainless professionals in industry say, "Stainless steel is not more difficult to work, it is just different, requiring a different technique." If you attack it as you would HR or brass, you will ruin your tools.
I love the results. While it cuts slower, the work is more precise and it stays that way. After making a few, I'm inclined to agree with Geoff Lawton, "Brass is a boy's material." :-)
--- On Thu, 10/25/12, Morgan <frymorgan@...> wrote:
From: Morgan <frymorgan@...>
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Stainless Steel
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, October 25, 2012, 11:05 AM
Nice work. You using anything special w/r/t files for stainless? One of the big drawbacks for me going down this route is the extra time the facing and tip work take.
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote:
>
> My mouthpiece material of choice, from playing and fabricating, has become stainless steel. Some picts of a Gale Hollywood + in stainless. No more corrosion or plating issues.
>
> http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari01.jpg
>
> http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari02.jpg
>
> http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari03.jpg
>
> http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari04.jpg
>
> http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari05.jpg
>
> http://www.martinmods.com/stainlessbari.mp3
>
FROM: frymorgan (Morgan)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
Work hardening on the Bergs we all know and love to work on is something I hadn't thought of. The additional cost in tool life and cycle time is somewhat offset by the savings in plating. If it's not going to take much longer to finish by hand I may have to look into this. --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote: > > Thanks. No special files for tip work - just the $3.95 HF sets (coarse/fine) for rough cutting, diamond files for finer work, and lapidary grits on old files covered with leather to finish. > > I don't have a problem with tools getting dull, anymore than with any other material. I think most people's experience with stainless steel is probably attempting to reface a Berg Larsen, which has become work-hardened. An annealed 304 rod cuts pretty easily (though still more slowly than HR or brass), being more gummy rather than hard. It sticks to the tools and will load up a file quickly. As the stainless professionals in industry say, "Stainless steel is not more difficult to work, it is just different, requiring a different technique." If you attack it as you would HR or brass, you will ruin your tools. > > I love the results. While it cuts slower, the work is more precise and it stays that way. After making a few, I'm inclined to agree with Geoff Lawton, "Brass is a boy's material." :-) > > > > --- On Thu, 10/25/12, Morgan <frymorgan@...> wrote: > > From: Morgan <frymorgan@...> > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Stainless Steel > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com > Date: Thursday, October 25, 2012, 11:05 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > Nice work. You using anything special w/r/t files for stainless? One of the big drawbacks for me going down this route is the extra time the facing and tip work take. > > > > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@> wrote: > > > > > > My mouthpiece material of choice, from playing and fabricating, has become stainless steel.  Some picts of a Gale Hollywood + in stainless. No more corrosion or plating issues. > > > > > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari01.jpg > > > > > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari02.jpg > > > > > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari03.jpg > > > > > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari04.jpg > > > > > > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari05.jpg > > > > > > http://www.martinmods.com/stainlessbari.mp3 > > > >
FROM: jdtoddjazz (jeff)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
Paul, and anyone else who wants to chime in,
It would be great to have some kind of table correlating reeds and reed cuts with various types of facings, something that would give recommendations on which reeds to try with which kinds of facings and tip openings, so that folks don't have to try every kind of reed out with each mouthpiece.
Does anyone have the know-how to put something like that together?
Jeff
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "tenorman1952" <tenorman1952@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
>
> (trimmed)
>
> > Many years ago, Paul Coats posted ranges of facing lengths (to the .0015" feeler) that he has observed as working well:
> > Â
> > Sop 34-40
> > Alto 40-44
> > Tenor 44-48
> > Bari 48-52
>
> Thank you, Keith, for stating that correctly, that those are observations, just as I observe most automobiles have four wheels. There are certainly particular samples which fall outside of these ranges.
>
> It so happens that I face mouthpieces in those length ranges, which, are as read on an E. Brand type glass gauge. That is, a reading of 44 is 22 mm.
>
> And as Keith and others have pointed out, a mouthpiece facing is more than simply a tip opening. Generally with a longer facing it will take a wider tip opening to play well. And then you are using a different portion of the reed. Reed strength and cut will have quite an impact.
>
> Then you get into issues of wide tip, short facing, or vice versa.
>
> Even with two mouthpieces that have identical measurements of facing, the contour of the baffle will have an effect. In one case, though I normally play about 0.100" tip opening (2.5 mm) with 23 mm facing length ("46") on tenor saxophone, for one particular mouthpiece mode that exact facing felt too small. I was able to easily play a larger tip opening 0.110" (2.8 mm) with the same 23 mm facing length ("46") with no fatigue. Due to the way the baffle interacted with the reed, this larger tip opening felt similar to the narrower tip on other mouthpieces.
>
> After all of this, back to the reed. It is a mistake to use only one reed, or your favorite type and strength when experimenting with mouthpieces. You may very well find a different reed that really makes a new mouthpiece play.
>
> Paul
>
FROM: kwbradbury (Keith Bradbury)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
A player's embouchure and sound concept and desired resistance plays a bigger role IMO. Guys use all kinds of different reeds on the same facing curve.
PayPal as "gift" to: sabradbury79@...
Checks and mail to:
Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC
2925 Crane St.
Vineland, NJ 08361
On Oct 26, 2012, at 10:17 AM, "jeff" <jdtoddjazz@...> wrote:
> Paul, and anyone else who wants to chime in,
>
> It would be great to have some kind of table correlating reeds and reed cuts with various types of facings, something that would give recommendations on which reeds to try with which kinds of facings and tip openings, so that folks don't have to try every kind of reed out with each mouthpiece.
>
> Does anyone have the know-how to put something like that together?
>
> Jeff
>
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "tenorman1952" <tenorman1952@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
> >
> > (trimmed)
> >
> > > Many years ago, Paul Coats posted ranges of facing lengths (to the .0015" feeler) that he has observed as working well:
> > > Â
> > > Sop 34-40
> > > Alto 40-44
> > > Tenor 44-48
> > > Bari 48-52
> >
> > Thank you, Keith, for stating that correctly, that those are observations, just as I observe most automobiles have four wheels. There are certainly particular samples which fall outside of these ranges.
> >
> > It so happens that I face mouthpieces in those length ranges, which, are as read on an E. Brand type glass gauge. That is, a reading of 44 is 22 mm.
> >
> > And as Keith and others have pointed out, a mouthpiece facing is more than simply a tip opening. Generally with a longer facing it will take a wider tip opening to play well. And then you are using a different portion of the reed. Reed strength and cut will have quite an impact.
> >
> > Then you get into issues of wide tip, short facing, or vice versa.
> >
> > Even with two mouthpieces that have identical measurements of facing, the contour of the baffle will have an effect. In one case, though I normally play about 0.100" tip opening (2.5 mm) with 23 mm facing length ("46") on tenor saxophone, for one particular mouthpiece mode that exact facing felt too small. I was able to easily play a larger tip opening 0.110" (2.8 mm) with the same 23 mm facing length ("46") with no fatigue. Due to the way the baffle interacted with the reed, this larger tip opening felt similar to the narrower tip on other mouthpieces.
> >
> > After all of this, back to the reed. It is a mistake to use only one reed, or your favorite type and strength when experimenting with mouthpieces. You may very well find a different reed that really makes a new mouthpiece play.
> >
> > Paul
> >
>
>
FROM: saxgourmet (Steve Goodson)
SUBJECT: Re: Radial or elliptical curve???
you would have to have on hand examples of the reeds and mouthpieces to be tested....the profile of the reed has a huge influence on the way a given reed performs on a given facing curve.....this relationship is often overlooked......it is also important that any reed being evaluated be balanced and adjusted.....the mouthpieces our company manufactures are optimized for LaVoz reeds, by design
Sent from my iPad
STEVE GOODSON
Saxophone Guru and Visionary
New Orleans
www.nationofmusic.com
On Oct 26, 2012, at 9:17 AM, "jeff" <jdtoddjazz@...> wrote:
> Paul, and anyone else who wants to chime in,
>
> It would be great to have some kind of table correlating reeds and reed cuts with various types of facings, something that would give recommendations on which reeds to try with which kinds of facings and tip openings, so that folks don't have to try every kind of reed out with each mouthpiece.
>
> Does anyone have the know-how to put something like that together?
>
> Jeff
>
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "tenorman1952" <tenorman1952@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
> >
> > (trimmed)
> >
> > > Many years ago, Paul Coats posted ranges of facing lengths (to the .0015" feeler) that he has observed as working well:
> > > Â
> > > Sop 34-40
> > > Alto 40-44
> > > Tenor 44-48
> > > Bari 48-52
> >
> > Thank you, Keith, for stating that correctly, that those are observations, just as I observe most automobiles have four wheels. There are certainly particular samples which fall outside of these ranges.
> >
> > It so happens that I face mouthpieces in those length ranges, which, are as read on an E. Brand type glass gauge. That is, a reading of 44 is 22 mm.
> >
> > And as Keith and others have pointed out, a mouthpiece facing is more than simply a tip opening. Generally with a longer facing it will take a wider tip opening to play well. And then you are using a different portion of the reed. Reed strength and cut will have quite an impact.
> >
> > Then you get into issues of wide tip, short facing, or vice versa.
> >
> > Even with two mouthpieces that have identical measurements of facing, the contour of the baffle will have an effect. In one case, though I normally play about 0.100" tip opening (2.5 mm) with 23 mm facing length ("46") on tenor saxophone, for one particular mouthpiece mode that exact facing felt too small. I was able to easily play a larger tip opening 0.110" (2.8 mm) with the same 23 mm facing length ("46") with no fatigue. Due to the way the baffle interacted with the reed, this larger tip opening felt similar to the narrower tip on other mouthpieces.
> >
> > After all of this, back to the reed. It is a mistake to use only one reed, or your favorite type and strength when experimenting with mouthpieces. You may very well find a different reed that really makes a new mouthpiece play.
> >
> > Paul
> >
>
>
FROM: lancelotburt (MartinMods)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
Longer it does take still, regardless. It is perhaps not the route for the impatient or the rushed. I'm not making 20 mouthpieces/week. On the handwork side, lighter, definite (no raking) file strokes will keep files from dulling prematurely. Trying to overcome the tough, gummyness with extra force doesn't work. You just have to accept that it is going to take longer and enjoy the process ..... and the results.
--- On Fri, 10/26/12, Morgan <frymorgan@...> wrote:
From: Morgan <frymorgan@yahoo.com>
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Stainless Steel
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, October 26, 2012, 1:22 PM
Work hardening on the Bergs we all know and love to work on is something I hadn't thought of. The additional cost in tool life and cycle time is somewhat offset by the savings in plating. If it's not going to take much longer to finish by hand I may have to look into this.
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks. No special files for tip work - just the $3.95 HF sets (coarse/fine) for rough cutting, diamond files for finer work, and lapidary grits on old files covered with leather to finish.Â
>
> I don't have a problem with tools getting dull, anymore than with any other material. I think most people's experience with stainless steel is probably attempting to reface a Berg Larsen, which has become work-hardened. An annealed 304 rod cuts pretty easily (though still more slowly than HR or brass), being more gummy rather than hard. It sticks to the tools and will load up a file quickly. As the stainless professionals in industry say, "Stainless steel is not more difficult to work, it is just different, requiring a different technique." If you attack it as you would HR or brass, you will ruin your tools.
>
> I love the results. While it cuts slower, the work is more precise and it stays that way. After making a few, I'm inclined to agree with Geoff Lawton, "Brass is a boy's material." :-)
>
>
>
> --- On Thu, 10/25/12, Morgan <frymorgan@...> wrote:
>
> From: Morgan <frymorgan@...>
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Stainless Steel
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Thursday, October 25, 2012, 11:05 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Nice work. You using anything special w/r/t files for stainless? One of the big drawbacks for me going down this route is the extra time the facing and tip work take.
>
>
>
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > My mouthpiece material of choice, from playing and fabricating, has become stainless steel.  Some picts of a Gale Hollywood + in stainless. No more corrosion or plating issues.
>
> >
>
> > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari01.jpg
>
> >
>
> > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari02.jpg
>
> >
>
> > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari03.jpg
>
> >
>
> > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari04.jpg
>
> >
>
> > http://www.martinmods.com/ssbari05.jpg
>
> >
>
> > http://www.martinmods.com/stainlessbari.mp3
>
> >
>
FROM: tenorman1952 (tenorman1952)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote: > > Longer it does take still, regardless. It is perhaps not the route for the impatient or the rushed. I'm not making 20 mouthpieces/week. On the handwork side, lighter, definite (no raking) file strokes will keep files from dulling prematurely. Trying to overcome the tough, gummyness with extra force doesn't work. You just have to accept that it is going to take longer and enjoy the process ..... and the results. > > I no longer accept Bergs for repair or refacing. I can do 15 or 20 other mouthpieces in the time it takes to reface one Berg. I don't have that much time left in my life. I'll be happy to send you any Berg customers I come across. ;-) Paul C.
FROM: lancelotburt (MartinMods)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
Thanks. I'm not that interested in refacing mass-produced mouthpieces of someone else's design (not enough time left in my life for that) but send them by and I'll be happy to sell them a custom hand-made stainless steel mouthpiece, of my design, that works :-)
--- On Sun, 10/28/12, tenorman1952 <tenorman1952@...> wrote:
From: tenorman1952 <tenorman1952@yahoo.com>
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Stainless Steel
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, October 28, 2012, 1:50 AM
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote:
>
> Longer it does take still, regardless. It is perhaps not the route for the impatient or the rushed. I'm not making 20 mouthpieces/week. On the handwork side, lighter, definite (no raking) file strokes will keep files from dulling prematurely. Trying to overcome the tough, gummyness with extra force doesn't work. You just have to accept that it is going to take longer and enjoy the process ..... and the results.
>
>
I no longer accept Bergs for repair or refacing.
I can do 15 or 20 other mouthpieces in the time it takes to reface one Berg. I don't have that much time left in my life.
I'll be happy to send you any Berg customers I come across. ;-)
Paul C.
FROM: saxgourmet (Steve Goodson)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
we also do not accept stainless steel mouthpieces for refacing.....we do manufacture a stainless steel model, our Yellow Moon tenor mouthpiece Sent from my iPad STEVE GOODSON Saxophone Guru and Visionary New Orleans www.nationofmusic.com On Oct 27, 2012, at 8:50 PM, "tenorman1952" <tenorman1952@...> wrote: > > > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote: > > > > Longer it does take still, regardless. It is perhaps not the route for the impatient or the rushed. I'm not making 20 mouthpieces/week. On the handwork side, lighter, definite (no raking) file strokes will keep files from dulling prematurely. Trying to overcome the tough, gummyness with extra force doesn't work. You just have to accept that it is going to take longer and enjoy the process ..... and the results. > > > > > > I no longer accept Bergs for repair or refacing. > > I can do 15 or 20 other mouthpieces in the time it takes to reface one Berg. I don't have that much time left in my life. > > I'll be happy to send you any Berg customers I come across. ;-) > > Paul C. > >
FROM: tenorman1952 (tenorman1952)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote: > > Thanks. I'm not that interested in refacing mass-produced mouthpieces of someone else's design (not enough time left in my life for that) but send them by and I'll be happy to sell them a custom hand-made stainless steel mouthpiece, of my design, that works :-)Â > > Hahahaha.... will do. Paul C.
FROM: saxgourmet (STEVE GOODSON)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
and it makes your hand hurt, too…… On Oct 27, 2012, at 8:50 PM, tenorman1952 wrote: > > > --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote: > > > > Longer it does take still, regardless. It is perhaps not the route for the impatient or the rushed. I'm not making 20 mouthpieces/week. On the handwork side, lighter, definite (no raking) file strokes will keep files from dulling prematurely. Trying to overcome the tough, gummyness with extra force doesn't work. You just have to accept that it is going to take longer and enjoy the process ..... and the results. > > > > > > I no longer accept Bergs for repair or refacing. > > I can do 15 or 20 other mouthpieces in the time it takes to reface one Berg. I don't have that much time left in my life. > > I'll be happy to send you any Berg customers I come across. ;-) > > Paul C. > >
FROM: kwbradbury (Keith Bradbury)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
I occasionally take on a SS Berg if I think I can make a significant improvement to it with less than 2 hours of work. Just a little table flattening for 45 min or so and the rest on side rail curve shape and tip rail work. No opening or closing the tip. On Oct 28, 2012, at 1:42 PM, STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@...> wrote: > and it makes your hand hurt, too…… > > > > > > On Oct 27, 2012, at 8:50 PM, tenorman1952 wrote: > >> >> >> >> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote: >> > >> > Longer it does take still, regardless. It is perhaps not the route for the impatient or the rushed. I'm not making 20 mouthpieces/week. On the handwork side, lighter, definite (no raking) file strokes will keep files from dulling prematurely. Trying to overcome the tough, gummyness with extra force doesn't work. You just have to accept that it is going to take longer and enjoy the process ..... and the results. >> > >> > >> >> I no longer accept Bergs for repair or refacing. >> >> I can do 15 or 20 other mouthpieces in the time it takes to reface one Berg. I don't have that much time left in my life. >> >> I'll be happy to send you any Berg customers I come across. ;-) >> >> Paul C. >> > >
FROM: lancelotburt (MartinMods)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
One nice thing about stainless cutting so slowly is that one slipped file stroke usually won't ruin anything:-)
--- On Mon, 10/29/12, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...>
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Stainless Steel
To: "MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com" <MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, October 29, 2012, 1:39 PM
I occasionally take on a SS Berg if I think I can make a significant improvement to it with less than 2 hours of work. Just a little table flattening for 45 min or so and the rest on side rail curve shape and tip rail work. No opening or closing the tip.
On Oct 28, 2012, at 1:42 PM, STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@...> wrote:
and it makes your hand hurt, too……
On Oct 27, 2012, at 8:50 PM, tenorman1952 wrote:
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote:
>
> Longer it does take still, regardless. It is perhaps not the route for the impatient or the rushed. I'm not making 20 mouthpieces/week. On the handwork side, lighter, definite (no raking) file strokes will keep files from dulling prematurely. Trying to overcome the tough, gummyness with extra force doesn't work. You just have to accept that it is going to take longer and enjoy the process ..... and the results.
>
>
I no longer accept Bergs for repair or refacing.
I can do 15 or 20 other mouthpieces in the time it takes to reface one Berg. I don't have that much time left in my life.
I'll be happy to send you any Berg customers I come across. ;-)
Paul C.
FROM: kwbradbury (Keith Bradbury)
SUBJECT: Re: Stainless Steel
Yes! I find I never overshoot when working on SS. On Oct 29, 2012, at 1:26 PM, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote: > One nice thing about stainless cutting so slowly is that one slipped file stroke usually won't ruin anything:-) > > --- On Mon, 10/29/12, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@yahoo.com> wrote: > > From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> > Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Stainless Steel > To: "MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com" <MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com> > Date: Monday, October 29, 2012, 1:39 PM > > > I occasionally take on a SS Berg if I think I can make a significant improvement to it with less than 2 hours of work. Just a little table flattening for 45 min or so and the rest on side rail curve shape and tip rail work. No opening or closing the tip. > > On Oct 28, 2012, at 1:42 PM, STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@...> wrote: > >> >> and it makes your hand hurt, too…… >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 27, 2012, at 8:50 PM, tenorman1952 wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, MartinMods <lancelotburt@...> wrote: >>> > >>> > Longer it does take still, regardless. It is perhaps not the route for the impatient or the rushed. I'm not making 20 mouthpieces/week. On the handwork side, lighter, definite (no raking) file strokes will keep files from dulling prematurely. Trying to overcome the tough, gummyness with extra force doesn't work. You just have to accept that it is going to take longer and enjoy the process ..... and the results. >>> > >>> > >>> >>> I no longer accept Bergs for repair or refacing. >>> >>> I can do 15 or 20 other mouthpieces in the time it takes to reface one Berg. I don't have that much time left in my life. >>> >>> I'll be happy to send you any Berg customers I come across. ;-) >>> >>> Paul C. >>> >> > >
FROM: lancelotburt (MartinMods)
SUBJECT: Re: More Stainless Steel
My new stainless steel soprano mouthpiece, for old, vintage sopranos. http://www.martinmods.com/sopranomp-01.jpg http://www.martinmods.com/sopranomp-02.jpg Disconnect the stupid C# gizmo, 'cause it's not needed. C#3 comes out of the C# tone hole, like it should. 1926 Martin Handcraft straight soprano with gizmo key linkage removed: http://www.martinmods.com/sopranodemo.mp3 Who says they play out of tune?