Enlarging Chamber does what?

[Bari Gordon]

What would be the effect(s) of taking a tenor mouthpiece with a medium chamber and opening it up? (and perhaps making the sidewalls more concave?)

Specifally, I have a Jody Jazz HR* 8 that I am considering sending away to have the chamber enlarged, but not changing the baffle or facing.

Any opinions or experiences?

[Peter Stevens]

My guess is that it would be specific to the overall design that you are considering.

I now know for a fact that the Zagar SBB (super big bore) is a punchier and edgier sound than their standard chambered bronze mpc - I have tried both. And the SBB has more meat in the sound, possibly due to the larger concave in the rounded sidewalls. Nevertheless, I think that it is the overall design and shape that really matters, and not just the chamber size. I hope this helps...

[Swingin' Cat]

Depending on who does the work and how much baffle they leave in int, it will make the sound somewhat darker, and I'd expect to lose some projection.

I think the mpc techs here will probably agree with me that reworking the chamber is even trickier than reworking the facing. Frankly, if if was me, I'd invest that money in a different mpc with a larger chamber.

Have a great weekend!

[Rackety Sax]

Depending on who does the work and how much baffle they leave in int, it will make the sound somewhat darker, and I'd expect to lose some projection.

I think the mpc techs here will probably agree with me that reworking the chamber is even trickier than reworking the facing. Frankly, if if was me, I'd invest that money in a different mpc with a larger chamber.

Have a great weekend!
I pretty much agree with the description and the advice. Get something that's in the ballpark with regards to chamber size and design and work from there. That said, enlarging the chamber, other things equal, should cause the sound to be "darker", "fatter", and "more spread" to list examples of descriptive terms typically cited.

[Bari Gordon]

Peter, Chitownjazz & Swingin' Cat

Thanks for you replies and advice. One of the reasons I asked the question is that the www.mouthpieceguys.com website price for a chamber rework was pretty reasonable.

Darker and more spread is kind of where I'm aiming, also more breathy subtone. The cut in projection is OK as well; I'm looking for a piece to play in more quiet situations.

[EZ]

Having the baffle lowered and the facing certified/modified will have a more significant impact on the tone than the chamber mod. A longer facing length and baffle tweak is how I might approach your objectives here. Brightness is generally a "baffle thing" moreso than a "chamber thing" as the higher partials are affected by changes closer to the tip - lower partials affected by changes closer to the shank. Facing length and curve are going to help you with that subtone. Yes, yes - practice, practice too...

Have you tried any hard rubber Links? They would promote a more open embouchure which also goes a long way to darken the tone.

Certainly I don't mean to detract from your sending a piece to the guys - just lending my opinion as to what modifications might better achieve the desired result. I'm sure they can help you out in that regard as well.

Good Luck!

[bfoster64]

I have an HR* and I've compared it with a Lamberson L. The HR* has way more bite than the L and it is obviously due to the baffle. Scooping the chamber of that HR might give a nice result, but probably not what you're after. If you want something for more subtone and soft sounds you might want to try Zagar's Cool School. That piece is incredibly easy to play in the low range, definitely easier than the HR*, and it subtones effortlessly. A very mellow, dark sounding piece that is very link-like but has a good facing and a low price. I think they're only $75 from Zagar's website.

[Bari Gordon]

Ed and bfoster64

Thanks for the comments.

When I bought the Jody HR* it was after trying a bunch of mouthpieces at Scimmonettis. (By the way, Jimmie tried to convince me not to buy any, but work with what I have. What a way to treat a guy with GAS! :scratch: ) After getting free tune-ups on my bari & clarinet, I couldn't walk out of there empty handed!

He didn't have Link HR, but I did compare the JJ HR* to Meyer HR, Vandoren HR, JJ DV NY (drool), a Zagar (not sure which model) and about 10 others I'm forgetting. What was very cool about the JJ DV NY was the way subtones came out with almost no lower lip pressure so that I could also let air escape for that extra-breathy tone I love. One of these days I may spend that much money on a mouthpiece, but not yet.

The Zagar did some of what I was looking for, but for me the JJ HR* was a better match.

So anyway, I like the JJ HR* a lot, but my brain keeps turning about the medium chamber, that maybe opening it up a bit might just be the little tweak I want.

Besides losing some projection and perhaps changing the intonation, could there be any other negative effects of opening the chamber?

Thanks all for your insights.

[EZ]

Send it to the mouthpiece guys like you planned and have them take a look at it. Maybe they will see something about the facing to improve - maybe not. Have them enlarge the chamber and see if it then floats your boat!

Sometimes you just gotta try stuff to find out what it does for you. Like trying those 10 pieces out.

[bfoster64]

That's funny about the DV NY. I am always amazed at how easy it is to subtone my DV, and people say high baffled pieces shouldn't do that! I think it is in large part b/c of the long facing curve, and maybe also b/c of the huge chamber.

The HR* is a great mpc in my opinion, so you did pretty well when you bought it. But it is a bit more resistant in the low end than some other pieces I have.

You might be able to get the results you want with the HR* by lengthening the facing curve in addition to opening up the chamber. Another possibility is to enlarge the window. But the more changes you make, the more you risk screwing up a good piece. At least the JJ HR* is not too expensive to replace.

Another guy who does custom chamber and facing work is David Jary. Check out his website, "Jary Custom."

[Stan]

By altering the internal volume you can have intonation problems in the sense that in order to obtain the same pitch your mouthpiece should be placed in a different position (more inside) on the cork to compensate. Mouthpieces with a small rounded chamber tend to have more punch and a focused big centered tone. Moreover as indicated above the overall design should be taken into account, a mouthpiece will play well only if all its components work together. The 3D baffle shape and tip rail play a very important rule (IMHO the most important rule).

All the best,

Stan

[MojoBari]

This is true but most tenor players can adjust to the change. After making the chamber larger you will need to push the MP on the cork a little farther to tune the midrange of the sax. Perhaps 1/16-1/8". This will make the palm keys sharper and/or the low notes flatter. It could cause a slight problem, or fix one. But if you dig the sound, you will adjust to compensate.

[brianpowell]

Below is an excerpted version of my email reply to Gordon of the same inquiry:
Hello Gordon,
Thanks for the inquiry, and I just read all the responses to your query on SOTW as well. Man, there's so many factors. Lush subtone, evenness of response and tone in all registers: a result of a correct length facing curve applied at a correct rate of curve to really let the reed work optimally. The JJ HR* pieces are made from Zinner (German) blanks, as well as [other brand]. I love Zinner tenor blanks, great rubber, in fact, I've got one more blank here to finish out to a medium or large chamber for the next person who inquires. Jody and [other maker], from those that I've seen, finish these out to a medium chamber (think like a Meyer M). Arnie Krakowsky brought me one of each, had me enlarge the chamber to like a Link HR piece, and fix the facing curves, elongating the curve to 25 mm. I've since done several chamber mods of these brands to the same dimensions, which is also my preferred template to use when finishing out my own blanks.
For a lot of tenor players, who are used to pushing alot of air through the mouthpiece, a medium chamber can tend to feel restrictive or resistant. But a lot of the projection and focus is controlled by the baffle behind the tip rail. So if you keep the same type baffle configuration, but enlarge the chamber into the throat some, you can keep about the same projection, but gain in terms of warmth, fullness, and body of the core sound. Think vintage Link sound compared to a Meyer M tenor piece. You might have to push the piece on the neck just a bit farther to get it to tune the same, but especially if you're playing on a Mark VI or older horn, the bore and taper of the horn is more designed for a larger chamber mouthpiece. Not to say a large chamber piece won't work on a modern horn, it certainly will.
So I think you might be on to something in wanting to get the chamber of that piece enlarged a bit. It will warm up and round out, enlarge the sound, maybe actually easier to blow through. Combined with a good curve and fine finish work (nice thin, even side and tip rails), you're going to have a piece that responds and articulates quickly, and is very even in all registers, and flexible from top to bottom. Frankly, some of the JJ curves I've seen tend to be shorter than what I like, and can lead to problems in the response of the bottom end of the horn.
I hope this has been helpful. Let me know if you'd like me to check out the piece, even if it's just to measure the curve. I'm contemplating how to answer this on SOTW, I tend to try not to be contrary, but wanted to let you know what I think about how this could affect your piece.

So, as Stan said above, I believe a combination of many components working together as a whole need to be considered. Just my $.02 (or in this case, $.03, sorry for the length!).