Ponzol Passaround Results

[BariMelt]

The first thing you notice about the Ponzol M2 (.110) stainless and the stainless Vintage Ponzol (.105) is there beautiful appearance. They are not bright and shiny pieces, but have a very sophisticated look about them. The second thing you notice is their weight. They are substantially heavier than the gold plated Ponzol pieces.

Now to the important stuff: sound. First of all, I own a gold plated metal Ponzol M2+ .110. So I had something to A/B it with that was in the same family. The sound of the stainless M2 is very similar to the gold plated M2+.. It is a bright piece that has as much cut as you will ever need. Very focused and powerful, but still controllable enough to hit low notes at a respectable volume. For my type of playing (R&B), this piece would be great. The altissimo was clear, maybe a little easier on this than the gold plated for some reason. The slight difference that I could detect between the gold and the stainless was that the gold plated was a little harsher in the upper register. The stainless does not get thin at all when in the upper register. The power, the cut, the brightness, etc. felt the same to me.

The Vintage was a totally different mouthpiece of course. It still had power, but not as much cut, and certainly was darker. It had a little more heft to the body of the tone; a little bigger sound, but just as focused. I would not consider it a dark piece, kind of middle of the road. The high and low end of the horn spoke easily. Surprisingly, the altissimo spoke nicely on this piece as well. In my opinion, it is a more versatile piece than the M2+. It was more similar to my Guardala LT Studio than to the M2+.

I tested both pieces with several Vandoren ZZs size 2 ½ . I used the Rovner ligature that came with the mouthpieces.

Overall, depending on what sound you are looking for, either of these pieces are certainly worth trying. Not sure what the price difference is between the gold plated and the stainless steel.

[Nefertiti]

I can't wait to get these and put some clips up. They sound like they might be great.

[Morry]

I posted my results in the original thread:

http://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?t=86711

[wersax]

Who's got the Ponzols now? I believe I'm up soon........Daryl

[heath]

Randy should have them right now....your next....then me. Then we got three after me and it's on to Neff.....three more people after Neff then it's on to Keith Ridenhour.....two more than it's back home with Raphyel.

[Nefertiti]

From now on can we keep all the reviews in this thread. It a pain to jump to the other thread and back. I think it would be easier if they were all in this one sice this is what it was created for.

[wersax]

From now on can we keep all the reviews in this thread. It a pain to jump to the other thread and back. I think it would be easier if they were all in this one since this is what it was created for.

Agreed. I'll put mine here.

[wrb]

Heath is correct; I have them. I really was hoping this was going to be like musical chairs, and the last one holding them (and hoping that I was the last one) got to keep them!!

My first impression was that if they played as well as they looked this would be a great playing mouthpiece. I was correct. As stated above, the weight surprised me.

I played a little on the M2, but preferred the Vintage. Maybe because the tip was a little smaller. I used RJS 3S & V16 2.5 and personally preferred the Rico's. I read a post by Gary about bringing the reed out a little farther than one might normally place the reed, and that made the mouthpieces both respond better for me.

The sound from the Vintage was for me dark, but with the ability to acheive edge when needed. It was a little tough to get below low C quickly and quietly, but I believe it could be achieved with more familiarity with the mouthpiece. I did not thin out in the high register, and intonation was very good.

Comments received were all complimentary. My daughter came downstairs while I was practicing to specifically comment on tone. I played my RPC for the bass player, and he commented that was the sound he liked. His comment after putting on the Ponzol was "O wow!!"

I spent about 5 hours with the Vintage, both in practice and performance, only about an hour with the M2.

I really hate sending these away.

Randy

[Morry]

Who's got the Ponzols now? I believe I'm up soon........Daryl

I was in Atlanta last week. It would have been easier to jump over wrb in the order and just bring it to you while I was there, and let you send it to him. I stuck to the order like a good soldier, though.

[gary]

I was in Atlanta last week. It would have been easier to jump over wrb in the order and just bring it to you while I was there, and let you send it to him. I stuck to the order like a good soldier, though.

You could've really leapfrogged the process. I think Peter Ponzol lives in the Atlanta area.

[wersax]

I was in Atlanta last week. It would have been easier to jump over wrb in the order and just bring it to you while I was there, and let you send it to him. I stuck to the order like a good soldier, though.

Booyah! ;)

[wersax]

You could've really leapfrogged the process. I think Peter Ponzol lives in the Atlanta area.

Yeah, I think he's just a county north of me. It's a shame you can't go to his place and try stuff out, but I don't think Peter does that anymore. 'Can't say that I blame him really......

[heath]

I suspect a trip to Ponzols would be educational if he had the time. He's a beast of player from what I can tell.

[wersax]

Here's my review(s):

The first thing you notice with the new stainless steel Ponzol pieces is that they are attractive and are very well finished. They have that lazer-trimmed look on the table and baffle/chamber with the "squiggly" lines and the bite plate looks really cool with concentric squares showing through the clear material. The baffle, chamber, side and tip rails are very well done, even and consistent. The shape of the tip appears to be a little more duck-billed than the previous models, though I don't have any on hand to compare these to; they are very comfortable in the mouth.
The Ponzol M2 is a great small chambered, higher baffle piece with easy altissimo and very full tone for such a long baffle. The bottom end was a little "honky" at first, which I attribute to the facing being "medium-ish" as compared to the longer facings that I prefer, (especially on high baffled pieces), but I adjusted easily. And it's loud; this thing "goes to 11".....:D
The Vintage is a more "Link-like" piece with a much larger chamber than the M2; the side walls are flat all the way to the bottom of the window, not rounded out like a Link though. The baffle has a small step near the tip and a deep chamber.
This piece didn't do anything for me. Again the facing seemed shorter than I would prefer and the bottom end seemed a little stiff. Overall the tone was bright and full, but without the complexity of a STM Link and with only a little more projection. For my $, the hard rubber Vintage pieces that Peter makes are much better---a fuller tone with more projection, IMO--and much cheaper, with a wider range of available tip openings.
Which brings me to my final point: the fact that only one tip opening is available for either model, (.110 for the M2 and .105 for the Vintage), is very limiting for me personally, though I believe I understand the reasoning behind it. With years of experience in making mouthpieces under his belt, I assume Peter knows that most players will gravitate towards a .105 on the Vintage and a .110 on the M2. 'Doesn't work for me though. I would consider an M2 at a .120 tip and I do think the M2 is an improvement over the "old" M2's.
I also do wonder why there's no M1 available any longer; neither the vintage nor the M2 is a good substitute for the M1, IMO.
These are very high quality pieces, with remarkable finishing considering that they are made of stainless steel and are, apparently, fully CNC made pieces.
I believe the M2 will work for many people and that the Vintage will be a little more hit and miss, particularly with the hard rubber Vintage models available at around $125.
Heath!!!!! You're next!!!!!..............Daryl

[gary]

Thanks for the review, Daryl. Just one comment - Raphyel is passing around one of each but that's not necessarily to imply that there is only one tip opening for each. My M2 is a 105 opening.

[wersax]

Thanks for the review, Daryl. Just one comment - Raphyel is passing around one of each but that's not necessarily to imply that there is only one tip opening for each. My M2 is a 105 opening.
Thanks Gary, my bad.
Because I screwed up, I thought I'd post this from Peter's web-site:

"Available now are:

Alto Stainless Steel: 85

Tenor M2 Plus Stainless Steel: 105 110.

Tenor M2 Stainless Steel: 105 110

Tenor Vintage Stainless Steel: 105

Tenor M2 Black Anodized Aluminum: 110

Tenor Vintage Gold Anodized Aluminum: 105 "

[gary]

...still, no 120 opening for truly manly men like you Daryl. :twisted:

[themacintrasher]

...still, no 120 opening for truly manly men like you Daryl. :twisted:
.115 isn't manly? :(

[wersax]

.115 isn't manly? :(

Well, they do stop at .110 now, so, yeah, .115's manly....:TGNCHK:

[Saxhound]

You could always have EZ or Mojo open it up, but it might cost a small fortune on the stainless piece. Very hard work.

[Saxhound]

OK, it's been 10 days since Daryl posted his review. Who's holding out on us?

[heath]

I am.

I sent the pieces to Brasscane, he might have it by now.

Honestly I couldn't get these pieces to work for me.

The M2 was so bright and cutting that I only lasted about 2 minutes with it. I simply couldn't play it any longer.

The vintage, the one that I was interested, was obviously less bright, but even that had a hardness to the core that wouldn't fit my needs.

I'm pretty much a round chamber guy. I've had to face the facts on that. I can add a good size baffle to a metal Link and be happy, but for some reason I found the Ponzol pieces too bright for my needs.

I actually kept the pieces for about three hours and then took them back to the post office to ship them to Brasscane. I spent about two hours with the vintage and then it was time to realize these weren't for me.

I used them both on my Ref 54 with RJS reeds.

[brasscane]

Honestly I couldn't get these pieces to work for me.

The M2 was so bright and cutting that I only lasted about 2 minutes with it. I simply couldn't play it any longer.

The vintage, the one that I was interested, was obviously less bright, but even that had a hardness to the core that wouldn't fit my needs.

The point of this thread is obviously to provide feedback. Given Raphyel's kindness, I feel compelled to comply but part of me wishes I hadn't asked to be included. I have owned a Ponzol 110 in the past. This piece, which preceded the "Super" series, was superb for a brighter piece. It had loads of punch throughout the range and didn't sound shrill up high. I also owned a II-V-I and an ML, both in 110 opening. These were also great mouthpieces, although I preferred the ML because I already had a dark sound on my horn (back then exclusively a Palo Tung customized Super Action 80 series I tenor). I have also corresponded with Peter and he has been courteous and prompt with replies. I only let go of my Ponzols after entering a phase where I solely have played hard rubber. I definitely regret selling the Ponzol 110 as they are hard to come by. From all of this, I hope you get the sense that I really have liked Peter Ponzol's work in the past and therefore hesitate to admit that I basically agree 100% with Heath regarding these stainless steel pieces that are included in this trial.

[Mike F]

From all of this, I hope you get the sense that I really have liked Peter Ponzol's work in the past and therefore hesitate to admit that I basically agree 100% with Heath regarding these stainless steel pieces that are included in this trial.

Thanks for adding your thoughts, Brasscane. I wonder though whether Peters new mouthpieces really are worse, especially considering that as a player and mouthpiece maker of many years experience he himself regards them as the best yet, or whether in fact, given that you play HR exclusively now and that you seem to be using a different horn from the time that you had good experiences with his older pieces, your tastes may have changed?
Either that, or mouthpiece material does make a difference, and you just don't like SS! ;)

[heath]

In this case it's not the material. I'm using the same horn I've been using since I last tried out some of Ponzols brass pieces the ML and M+ and M+2.

Those SS pieces for whatever reason that Ponzol is making, now have a very hard core to the sound.

I've got a fatboy older berg 100/2 that is SS of course and it's warm and fat, has some nice roundness to the tone. I couldn't get close to that with the Vintage SS Ponzol.

They might work on a JK horn however. I think Ponzol plays JK horns, but I'm certain he'd want them to work on a VI or like horn just as easily or else he's limiting his market.

The problem for me is that even the older M2+ brass pieces had more bottom end then the vintage SS. The M2 SS was so top heavy I couldn't even belch out a anything lower than D1 without hurting my ears.

Ponzol has the right idea making these out of SS, they are well crafted, but they need some tweaking. I would suggest he scoop out the thoat.... increasing the size of the chamber. That sharp drop off chamber into the throat might be the problem, he needs to grind some of that material out, so the pieces have some bottom end. The facings might need some tweaking as well. Somethining about the curve makes it more resistant.

[whaler]

More re-inventing the wheel. I would imagine that there are a lot of us that can tell what a mouthpiece is going to play like just by looking at it. It doesn't surprise me that the Ponzol is a harsh sounding, they always have been. The only way to get rid of the harshness is using a soft reed and then you sound like, guess what, that your reed is too soft. As far as a bright, well-finished mouthpiece that you can make sound good, I don't think you can beat a Guardala.

[dave2sax]

Can anyone compare the results between the SS tenor and the SS alto? It seems in the other threads that reviewed the alto model, there was no mention of harshness. Just curious as to why the reviews between the tenor and alto models seem to differ as much as they do. I would think they would be similar, or is the alto model a different design altogether?

[brasscane]

Thanks for adding your thoughts, Brasscane. I wonder though whether Peters new mouthpieces really are worse, especially considering that as a player and mouthpiece maker of many years experience he himself regards them as the best yet, or whether in fact, given that you play HR exclusively now and that you seem to be using a different horn from the time that you had good experiences with his older pieces, your tastes may have changed?
Either that, or mouthpiece material does make a difference, and you just don't like SS! ;)
It isn't the horn. I tried them on my Jessen tenor, for which Peter (Jessen) used measurements from a great MKVI. It is a Selmerish horn with more punch and fatter bottom. I can flip back and forth between horns with my standard mouthpiece without any problems or adjustments (my Super 20 is a obviously a different beast but that is why I didn't use it for this test). And I really like the idea of stainless steel combined with Ponzol's craftsmanship, which was my reason for asking to be included in the trial. The M2 may simply be too bright for my taste but the vintage didn't work well for me, and, being an amateur, I tend to blame things on me, not the equipment. However, since you are sort of pushing me on this one, the baffle of the vintage doesn't appear to be particularly well crafted, likely because this has to be done solely by hand and is hard for a mass manufactured mouthpiece in steel. I don't understand why Ponzol did not simply recreate the II-V-I or the ML in stainless steel. I can only speculate that it is in order to create a more Link like piece because there is a big market. However, the ML did just a great job except that the flat baffle may have turned off the Link crowd for no good reason. And, no, my taste hasn't changed either and I would still recommend Ponzols in a heartbeat, just not the ones in stainless steel, or at least not the vintage to someone with my concept of preferred sound.

[heath]

I would still recommend Ponzols in a heartbeat, just not the ones in stainless steel, or at least not the vintage for someone with with my concept of preferred sound.

The problem is he's gone to nothing but SS. His older brass pieces if I'm not mistaken are being phased out.

This has got to be a design issue and not one of material.

You could create a round chamber the same dimensions as a Link out of SS and you'd probably have a killer piece.

When I looked at the M2 in person I was shocked out how little the chamber was and what a sharp drop off there was behind the chamber leading into the throat. I can't imagine producing a beautiful tone with such a design, maybe it can be done, but I don't think I could.

It was mentioned that Ponzol thought his concepts of mouthpiece making were getting darker. These pieces aren't moving in that direction.

[gary]

Just an observation, not everyone is having the same experience with these mpcs, so I wonder about speculation about the effects of the design of this or that. No offense meant to anyone, but I've noticed in the past comments from some forum members that you have to be a little careful about generalisations that apply to some mpcs carrying over to others. For example, I believe it was either Mojo or Ed Z who said that some of the Ponzol mpcs do not play as brightly as the eye (looking at the baffle) would imply. And whaler, (sigh :D). I'm always a bit interested at how you can pass judgement on mouthpieces and horns that you never played - eyeballing them as it were. My hat's off to you, LOL.

[Nefertiti]

I think I'm coming up in the rotation. I'll try to get a review and sound clip up ASAP. Steve

[DanF]

I think I'm coming up in the rotation. I'll try to get a review and sound clip up ASAP. Steve

Yep, Steve, you're after me. I'll be sure to send them all slobbered up with onions, beer, and morning breath.:D:D

[heath]

I'd like to keep it civilized. Ponzol has my respect just off the fact that he's a great player. I would trust his judgement.

Of course the pieces need to be reviewed and the lack of reviews so far suggest to me the standard luke warm PC reaction to anything negative.

I prefer open and honest debate. I can be a negative bastard. I can live with that.

[tenorblack]

Although I am not a part of the passaround I need to make some observations. I own a SS M2 .110 and really like it. I use it on a black nickel JK Tenor with a V16 vandoren optimum lig. Just so you know where I am coming from.

Some in this thread have mentioned that the SS M2 has a 'hard core' to the sound. I have to agree with this statement. However, it is important to note that the mere design of the piece lends itself the that type of sound production but I believe you have to choose a reed to either enhance the hardness or tone it down according to your personal taste in sound.
For example I have been using a .105 jodyjazz esp mouthpiece for the last two years. Those who are familiar with the esp will note that it is a mellow, full, sounding piece that does not get too loud. However if I want to make it sound bright and rich and lively I have to use a bright reed like a rico select jazz or even a la voz. If I however use a regular orange box rico reed, to me it just sounds too dead. That is because the rico reed design lends itself to naturally woody and mellow sound.

I find that you can get a real harsh sound on the M2 if you use rjs reeds or la voz reeds. It tends to like flexible reeds like vandoren javas and orange box ricos and they also help to tone down the hardness some may find annoying. Right now I am using java 2.5 on mine and it produces a tight compact, brilliant, flexible sound that I really like. I have used regular rico 2.5 on it as well and a good one will give you that fat, thick, linkish sound. Those two reeds are my choice for a great balanced sound on the M2.

Also be aware that the SS M2 is particular to a specific reed strength as well. 2.5s work really well with it. Anything stronger than that and the bottom articulation and voicing starts to suffer. I think the facing is very specific to that 2.5 strength.

So for those of you trying out the piece on the passaround line just note that it is very difficult to really judge a piece by just using it for a few hours or even a few days. It took me 2 weeks to figure out what setup works best for this piece (ie. reed, reed strength, ligature) and I am still learning all of its quirks.(NOte: you need a very disciplined and rigid embouchure to get this piece to sing at its best-and thats how a good mpc should be.) So be careful how you pass judgement on the piece and its maker because it is not fair to them that you can't give it a thorough workout because of time constraints.

Hopefully you guys that are next on the list can learn from the experience that I have had playing it for the last month.--Good Luck to you because I love mine and think its great.

P.S I still use my ESP for real quiet restaurant gigs. It just mellows the room out. But for medium volume settings to party time and high energy concerts, the m2 is upfront and center. For those of you hoping to find a "mouthpiece for anything and everything" in the M2, (I think thats the problem with most mpc searches!:twisted:) look elsewhere.

[DanF]

I recieved the Ponzols yesterday morning and have had a hard time putting them both down. My main piece is a gold plated brass M2+ so I am very familiar with how the M2s play. I love my M2+ because of it's freeblowing and centered sound and flexability and easy altissimo. I played them on a Serie III. Physically the pieces are very close with the ss being a little fatter. I tried my FL ligature and couldn't get it over the ss ones. The ss M2 was everything the old piece was except a little warmer. It's a fairly bright piece (not Dukoff D bright but on the bright side). Still had great projection and I found the lower register was a little easier to control. The higher register didn't thin out when pushed. Just a nice resonating sound. I tried several reeds: (all 2.5 strength) Javas, V16's, LaVoz, orange box Rico's and Rico Royal and a Plastic covered Rico. The best response was obtained with either the Java or the V16. I was very surprized by the Vintage piece. I expected a lot darker sound but I could adapt very well to this piece too. Same characteristics as the M2 mostly.
For me this is a great mouthpiece and I think I'll be buying one. I'm bascially an R&B player and love this type of sound. For you guys who play Links and compare every other mouthpiece to a Link---------you ain't gonna like these pieces. Period! There's no other way of saying this. You're wasting your time like I would be wasting mine comparing M2's to Selmer C*s. It's a matter of taste. For me both pieces are great. Great job Mr. Ponzol:cheers:
I'll be packing these up in the morning and sending them on. I hope I can pack them as good as Brasscane did.;) And finally thank you Raphyel for doing this.

[DanF]

Looking over my last post it may look like I really slighted the Vintage piece. I spent a lot of time playing this piece and really liked it but with the price of these being what they are I concentrated on the one I would most likely buy which would be the M2. But the Vintage is an outstanding mouthpiece too and I felt totally in control of it in all ranges including altissimo. As I said, I would have no problem playing this great piece as it was a close second for my preferences.

[Nefertiti]

Hey guys,
I got the pieces today , played them, put some clips up and am sending them out to Eric tomorrow. The vintage was OK for me but I was really surprised by the M2. I've owned 3 M2 before and found them to be pretty bright for my tastes. This one wasn't like that at all. It had a huge powerful sound that was more husky than bright. It sounds similar to my HR Berg I like. I'm not sure which I would prefer in the long run but I really liked it. i think I might have to pick one of these up sometime. thanks Raphyel for letting me try them.

[Nefertiti]

Here's a link to the clips if you want to hear them (http://www.neffmusic.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=88888892&Itemid=88888904).

[Mike F]

Thanks for the review and sounds clips Steve. Great playing as always.

Isn't it amazing how some people find the SS M2 way too bright, thin, and cutting, and others (at least you, Gary, and Dan) have found it to be much darker and fuller sounding than it's appearance would imply. Of course there are some people on this forum who will probably never try it, because they can tell how it will play by just looking at that horrible high baffle! ;)
I would certainly have said that in my personal perception of what is bright and what is dark, the M2 sounded fairly dark, although it could sound quite focused, and had some power and a nice amount of edge when you pushed it. A very flexible and useful piece it would seem.

As a matter of interest, what reeds were you using on the M2?

Thanks again!

[Nefertiti]

I put up a new clip of the M2. I was about to send it off at the PO and then had an impulse to play it again so I brought it home and played it for a few hours and then did the recording. I think the first one was kind of lame. I did this one in my garage because that's where I practice a lot and I was diggin' the sound in there so I recorded it. It's kind of long(3:20). I was liking it so much I got carried away. Steve

[Nefertiti]

I'm so surprised that this mouthpiece is not wicked brighter. I'm looking at it now, it has a high long baffle and the chamber looks tiny. I would think this thing would be like other pea shooter and have that bright loud obnoxious sound which I hate. It's a mystery. I'll send it off to Eric now. Steve

[Brian]

I had my first opportunity to play a gig last evening using the Ponzol M2 110 SS. I was impressed with this piece before, in practice, to no end ... but now even more so. It was a very 'live' room, acoustically, and the drone of conversation from customers was very loud. Even at that, there was no way to get lost in acoustics. I had to play softer and softer to balance until I finally put on a softer reed and was content to play very low volume (this was vocals, Bass, and Piano). I did not use a mic and the projection was good all the way to the back of the room ... playing as soft as I could.

The ability to play full and vibrant at that sound level ... and carry over the drone of the room. was rewarding. The low end response of the horn was rich and BIG. When we pushed a blues ... the set up let me go wherever I wanted with volume, intensity, etc. (although the reed strength I was using limited altissimo somewhat, it was still there for the occasional effect). When you push this piece ... it rips strong. Intonation was centered, and the focus of this piece is exactly what I desire in a set up. I was using Java reeds (2 1/2).

I also want to mention that Nefertiti's sound clip of this piece is a great recording that very accurately portrays the sound of this mouthpiece and what a player can expect (of course, its the player and NOT the mouthpiece ... but assuming you can blow it, it's a GREAT demo).

When I first got this piece I was thrilled with the potential of this being a piece I had been looking for for a long time in my head. I put it in my case as my "go to" mouthpiece. Now I know thats where its going to stay. I'll keep another piece in there as backup with less edge... just in case the need arises, acoustically. If you like a full and focused tenor sound, with enough edge and color to be called 'modern' ... do yourself a favor and try this mouthpiece for tenor.

[gary]

What I found interesting with Steve's clips (Vintage and the second M2 clips) was how quickly you could hear the same concept of sonority in the two mpcs even though they were also different from one another. Of course if what Ponzol hears in his head is not what you do, that's one thing, but it seems to me to confirm that here is a mpc maker who has a clear-cut idea of what he wants and the chops to bring it off even in mpcs of differing musical characteristics.

[Raphyel]

haven't heard anything in a while.....Just checking to see where the mouthpieces are now..

[HonkBopSax]

Go them - will post my thoughts tomorrow.

[HonkBopSax]

Sorry, been a bit swamped here with life, but the pieces have gone out.

My impressions. First off, I've played several M2's (a 120 and 110) that I loved. They always had a lot of body, a lot of volume, and yet they still played dark to me. Or maybe thick is the word. They didn't get thin and they didn't go off the charts intonation wise in the upper registers. But hey, I'm a neurotic saxophonist, so I sold each one of them at various points. I'm playing something about as opposite as you can get from the M2 120 - an old stubbie Dukoff that Brian Powell opened up to a 7** for me.

And here's where it gets weird. The Dukoff outplays both Ponzols in terms of projection, subtoning, edge, and comfort. I liked the vintage piece for a few minutes but then started to feel like it would never sit well with me. It had a pretty sound, very straight ahead, but with nowhere near the character of an old link. There was nothing wrong with it, I just couldn't get a real lively sound out of it. So I switched over to the M2, knowing that I'd had a lot of luck with them before.

This one was nice, but it was a bit too brash for me. I was using Alexander DC 3.5's on both pieces, btw. THe M2 projected very well, had a nice thick sound, but it started to get a bit too bright for my tastes the more I played it. I recorded some tracks on my macbook pro with it, and really didn't like the tone I was getting out of it. Just a bit too gritty right out of the gates. That being said, I know a guy here in PGH that plays one and sounds like Branford, so who knows.

I like my stubbie because it can be smooth or gritty, depending on how I focus my airstream, the type of reed, etc. It's flexible enough to allow me to do both. The Vintage piece played smoothly but I couldn't really rock out, and the M2 played gritty and I couldn't get it to play more relaxed. Oh well, I guess that means I'll just have to stick with what has worked.

THe pieces look beautiful. Maybe if he made an M2 in a 120. But at this opening, it was just a bit brash for me.

[Raphyel]

Just checking to see the progress. I know several people are waiting. ;);)

[gary]

I'm playing something about as opposite as you can get from the M2 120 - an old stubbie Dukoff that Brian Powell opened up to a 7** for me.

Not that you wouldn't prefer the Dukoff anyway, but when a mpc is refaced and opened by someone like Brian Powell, at what point is it no longer a "Dukoff"?

[HonkBopSax]

It's still a Dukoff. I told him that I just wanted a more comfortable tip opening. It actually plays very similarly to how it did when I first got it and it measured a .86. It's now a .106.

[gary]

It's still a Dukoff. I told him that I just wanted a more comfortable tip opening. It actually plays very similarly to how it did when I first got it and it measured a .86. It's now a .106.

So . . . is bigger really better? :twisted:

[Raphyel]

Any word as far as where the pieces are at this time?

[Briguy]

They have not hit Los Angeles yet. Still waiting.

[mangojango]

I'm two spots after HonkBopSax and I haven't got them yet.

[Nefertiti]

I guess the question is who got them after Honkbopsax?

[DanF]

I guess the question is who got them after Honkbopsax?

Ok, now for some fine detective work. Honkbopsax, who did you send the Ponzols to? There, that should get us to the bottom of this.;)

[Raphyel]

They are moving again....Ian Nevins just received them today.

[ian nevins]

Hello everyone,

I just received the pieces today from Pittsburgh. I've been playing them for the last half-hour or so and I'll give my initial impressions.

First of all, they are beautiful and obviously well made. I played on a Ponzol M2 120 from approximately 1998-2003. I then made the transition to Links and Link-styled pieces (lower baffle, bigger chamber etc) which I still play on now.

The Vintage Ponzol is the one I like as the M2's baffle is way too high for me. A few players have said these mouthpieces have a "hard" core to the sound, and I did experience this with the M2. However I really liked the Vintage. The striking thing about both mouthpieces is the lack of "buzz" associated with Link-type pieces. I think this is the source of the "hard core" comments. The M2 is very powerful but it is only bright up to a point. It does not have the "sizzle" or buzz that many mouthpieces have. So it seems bright and dark at the same time, if that makes sense. Think tons of midrange and upper mids but no extreme high frequencies like a modern Dukoff or equivalent.

I liked the Vintage. It's difficult to believe a mouthpiece that plays so dark can also be so loud and free-blowing. The lack of "buzz" or "sizzle" seems to be from the lack tip baffle -- the baffle area immediately behind the tip rail to about a quarter of an inch in. I could use just a tiny bit more of a rollover here on the Vintage. And this is coming from someone who likes to gently file away excess tip baffle on some mouthpieces. (I'm playing a Link-style mouthpiece now where I carefully filed away some of the tip baffle until I got the sound that I wanted). Just a little more "buzz" on the Vintage would give it the presence I'm looking for. So the Vintage is just a little too dark for me. However, as I mentioned before, it's surprisingly loud and free-blowing. Dark, but absolutely no stuffiness. I think this will appeal to many players out there. Maybe a brighter reed would liven it up a bit. I'm using Ponzol and Java reeds. If the Vintage someday gets a little more roll-over baffle then I might have to buy one. It truly would be like a Link on steroids then.

Anyway, I'll keep the pieces for a day or two before sending them off. If my impressions about the mouthpieces change then I'll post again. Thank you to Raphyel for the opportunity to try these fine mouthpieces. This pass-around thing is really great, especially for more expensive or hard to find mouthpieces. I believe these Ponzol mouthpieces will appeal to many players out there.

[RandyJ]

Question for you guys that have or had an M2+ gold over brass.

I played on several Ponzols a few days ago looking to pick up a screamer to use on an up coming tour with and old rocker friend of mine.

I liked all the qualities of the M2+ gold over brass above all the other newer models and regular M2.

Now I'm in search of a ligature I might like to use with it. I have a FL that fits properly and ordered a Brancher Leggerio to try.

What other ligatures have you found that fit the Ponzols well? Not necessarily the ones you preferred but the ones you found that fit properly.

Thanks,
JR

[Nitetimer]

RandyJ, I wrote Peter a couple of years ago and asked the same question about ligs. This was his reply:
"The only ligatures that fit my mouthpieces are the Ligaphone, Brancher and Francois Louis. I have them all and prefer the Ligaphone."

His new SS mouthpieces are not as tapered as the brass ones and can use a Selmer metal lig.

[HonkBopSax]

Randy,

I love the M2 120 I had that was gold over brass...the new ones lack flexibility IMHO. I found a FL to be the best ligature for that particular piece. If I could find another M2 120 for tenor, I'd be a VERY happy man.

[Saxhound]

I really like this one:

http://www7.mailordercentral.com/frederichweinerinc/prodinfo.asp?number=LBGTRJ

Easy to use like the included Rovner, but a lot more responsive. It seems like anything that fits a modern Dukoff will fit these.

[RandyJ]

Hey guys,
Thanks for the input. I played the M2+ on 2 tunes in last night's performance using the FL, it's ok but I'll be looking to see if the Leggerio gives something better. I'll have to get a Ligaphone and try it to. Any and all of the fabric wrap a rounds (like the Rovner provided) do not do anything for me.

I've been enjoying reading everyones review of the new peices from Peter.

JR

[RandyJ]

For those who helped with ligature fits I've got to tell you I received the Brancher Leggerio on Wednesday and man what a great lig for the M2+. It's a superb fit and the sound out of the mouthpiece is heads above the FL. I did a session last night and in some off time played on the Ponzol with the Brancher and it confirmed my feelings of the combination.
I will try out a Ligaphone as well but this Brancher is sweet!

[RandyJ]

For those who helped with ligature fits I've got to tell you I received the Brancher Leggerio on Wednesday and man what a great lig for the M2+. It's a superb fit and the sound out of the mouthpiece is heads above the FL. I did a session last night and in some off time played on the Ponzol with the Brancher and it confirmed my feelings of the combination.
I will try out a Ligaphone as well but this Brancher is sweet!
JR

[gary]

Randy - I noticed on the wwbw site that there are two ligs for tenor metal mpcs: "metal" and "Link". Which did you get? I'm interested in trying one out. Thanks.

[RandyJ]

Gary,
I had to look to several sites trying to figure out the sizing, and the Brancher France site was no help. I ended up talking with Weiner Music, they stock two of them one for HR and one for metal. Their on line listing is the LBRTMG (Leggerio Brancher Tenor Metal Gold) it was 33.00 the box had on it TMG and Tenor Metal Gold on a Brancher sticker. After a couple of tightening of the screw with a high arched reed on the M2+ it "formed" itself great, and like I mentioned...what a sound the combination makes!

[gary]

Hey, thanks for such a detailed answer, Randy. I'll give one a try. Gary

[DanF]

Randy - I noticed on the wwbw site that there are two ligs for tenor metal mpcs: "metal" and "Link". Which did you get? I'm interested in trying one out. Thanks.

Gary, I talked to WWBW and they said the Link one would fit a metal Ponzol. I order one for about 27 bucks.

[gary]

Gary, I talked to WWBW and they said the Link one would fit a metal Ponzol. I order one for about 27 bucks.

Hey, thanks Dan. Question, though. As we all have read, advice from wwbw sales reps these days can be spotty. Would you happen to know if that sales person had the new SS models in mind, which are a bit larger than the former brass models, or the brass models which they have been carrying for years?

[RandyJ]

Gary,
This is the best listing I've found for fit.
http://www.saxforte.com/accessories/play/ligatures/ligatures.html

JR

[gary]

Gary,
This is the best listing I've found for fit.
http://www.saxforte.com/accessories/play/ligatures/ligatures.html

JR

Oh, that's funny. Am I reading that right? One"s listed as for a Ponzol (perhaps the former, slimmer models) and the other for a Link, which is the size wwbw told Dan to use.

If anyone's interested, I've sent an email to saxforte (the chart in JR's link) asking them which is which and for the new SS or the older brass models. I'll post their response.

[gary]

Wow, how's this for a quick zippy response. Already got a response. Here's what Mathew wrote:

"I would suggest the TLG ligature for your mouthpiece if you are certain that it is larger than the previous brass models for which the TMG will fit perfectly."

[Raphyel]

Any word as to who has the pieces now? I am trying to keep track of where they are. Thanks

[CONN-hunter]

Hi guys. I see you have bee talking about the best lig. for the Ponzol SS.

After listen to the clip by Nefertiti´s Homepage I was so impressed from the Ponzol M2 SS that I intended to purchase one.

I made however a unhappy experience with modern custom made MPC´s and my big bore horns (NW1 and Aristocrate).

I read the M2 SS has a small chamber and I´m afraid it could make problems with the intonation.

Has somebody here tried the M2 SS with a Vintage sax and could tell me the results!

[mangojango]

I've got them at the moment...I'll be sending them on their way tomorrow. Haven't had a lot of time to play them enough to write up a real good review, but I like them both for different reasons. I'll post more tomorrow.

Thanks for the opportunity to play them!

[CONN-hunter]

Justo got an Email from Peter Ponzol. He said both MPC´s are going to work well with my old horns.

Also, now I must test one.

[gary]

Justo got an Email from Peter Ponzol. He said both MPC´s are going to work well with my old horns.

Connhunter, while not a new Ponzol, I played a Jody Jazz ESP on my Lady Face tenor for a couple of years with excellent results. I think the chambre sizes are similar.

[marc]

Hi guys. I see you have bee talking about the best lig. for the Ponzol SS.

After listen to the clip by Nefertiti´s Homepage I was so impressed from the Ponzol M2 SS that I intended to purchase one.

I made however a unhappy experience with modern custom made MPC´s and my big bore horns (NW1 and Aristocrate).

I read the M2 SS has a small chamber and I´m afraid it could make problems with the intonation.

Has somebody here tried the M2 SS with a Vintage sax and could tell me the results!

Watch out, Steve Neff (aka Nefertiti) sounds incredible on any mouthpiece. I think he plays a Selmer SBA, so ... at least the Ponzol works well on vintage horns.:D

I am not in the passaround but I received my ponzol M2 SS .110 and indeed, it is a killer piece with a nice full sound in the low register and a very nice well balanced high register. Altissimo is incredibly easy. But the most important for me is that this piece is so easy to play that it allows me to concentrate on all other important aspects of playing instead of just struggling to keep my sound full and resonant. Concerning the lig, I agree with the comments made above. The Rovner is IMHO restricting the potential of this piece. I tried a FL and it is definitively an improvement. Last but not least, any reed a put on the M2 works ... my current impression is that reeds like Lavoz and RJS with give you a focused and compact sound, while Java or Gonzales (best choice for me in 2 1/2 strength) give me a rich Jazz/R&B type of sound. In any case, I need to experiment more ... but I want to make this piece my main one.

[CONN-hunter]

lass uns probieren Gary.

let us make a try. :D

are you in Texas now? what a lucky guy.

[gary]

lass uns probieren Gary.

let us make a try. :D

are you in Texas now? what a lucky guy.

Yes. I wouldn't trade Texas for Germany any day. Who wants three symphony orchestras, a resident opera company with a resident corp de ballet, a big band, a monthly jazz jam session, regular concerts from name musicians, in one medium sized German town as opposed to the one in Texas I'm now in - where there is practically none of the above. :yikes!:

[DanF]

Hey, thanks Dan. Question, though. As we all have read, advice from wwbw sales reps these days can be spotty. Would you happen to know if that sales person had the new SS models in mind, which are a bit larger than the former brass models, or the brass models which they have been carrying for years?
Hey Gary, I got the lig today and I highly recommend anyone going to the racetrack to check with you first. You were right on! The lig they sent me was for a stainless model I assume because it takes all of the screw to hold the reed in place. During the passaround I noticed the ss models were just slightly fatter than the original brass models. The guy must have been having a bad day because the neck strap I ordered was not even close to what they shipped. Looks like I'll send the whole box back and start over. Mind if I give the guy your name in case he has any questions and needs some good advice;)?
For now I'll withhold judgement on how the new Brancher plays versus the Ultimate lig. Didn't get to play it that much. Kind of hard to play while expecting your reed to fall off any second.

[gary]

Thanks Dan. I've got a Brancher on the way, also. I'll let everyone know how that pans out, too.

[CONN-hunter]

Has somebody tried the RICO oleg or a Selmer metal ligature with the M2 ???

Rovner darks are absolutelly out for me the worst lig. these days.

[Nefertiti]

My Selmer 2 screw lig(404?) fits fine on the M2. I prefer the Vandoren leather lig for it though.

[CONN-hunter]

good! I have one.:D

[Brian]

Having really enjoyed the M2 SS for a while now .... in the end I reverted back to my brass M2 120. It seems as though the 120 tip with a softer reed is just the right combination for me.

So ..... I just sent a SS M2 110 to EZ to have opened up to .120. I'm looking forward to this and hope it's all I anticipate. I'll report results in about a mount when I get it back.
Brian

[CONN-hunter]

I´ve been playing today the M2 SS 110. Great contemporary piece, easy to play, easy response.
In the room I had my STM Link 7* customized with a enlarged chamber and an added bafle and my Link was more complex and fuller than the M2. Also,I´ve already the best match for my Vintages.
The M2 ss however has impressed me positively, the intonation with my mint NW 1 was great, nice control through the range.

I´ll wait until somebody sells a second hand one for a affordable price, it can take years!! :D nice piece but not better sounding than my custom Link STM.
I also tested an older M2 which had less stuff, also thinner and didn´t sound as good as the new model.

I used a Selmer 404 Lig.

[gary]

Thanks Dan. I've got a Brancher on the way, also. I'll let everyone know how that pans out, too.

It came today - a "Tenor, Metal, TMG". Haven't played it yet but as far as fit goes, it fits my older brass Super and M1 perfectly; like it was made for them.

It does not fit the new SS mpcs (unless, perhaps stretched), so I assume that the ligs for Links are going to be the ones that fit the SS mpcs.

(I'm not going to research it now - anyone who's interested can - but the box my lig came in implied that there were available both gold and silver-grey ligs, so the latter, if available in the Link size, might look better on the SS.)

hmmm. wonder how it might work on my Berg.

[Scottysax73]

WW&BW mssed up my order and sent me the 105 as opposed to the 110 i ordered. I didnt like the 105 and was wondering how big of a difference in sound the 110 was?

[DanF]

WW&BW mssed up my order and sent me the 105 as opposed to the 110 i ordered. I didnt like the 105 and was wondering how big of a difference in sound the 110 was?

Man! What's up with those guys? They completely screwed up my last order and then after I returned it they sent it again.:? Anyway.............Did you order the Vintage or the M2?

[Scottysax73]

I ordered the M2+

[DanF]

I ordered the M2+

I love my 110 and prefer a larger tip opening somewhere between 110 and 125. The only 105 Ponzol I have ever played was the vintage ss model. It was OK but I believe you'd like the 110 better than the 105. Just my opinion.

[gary]

Thanks Dan. I've got a Brancher on the way, also. I'll let everyone know how that pans out, too.

Follow-up. The Brancher really opens up the sound. Depends on what your taste is, whether or not that's the sound you're looking for, but it does open up the sound.

[DanF]

Hi guys, I have had a Brancher TMG ligature ordered from "weiner" music for several weeks now and was awaiting one from backorder. Today I got an email from them telling me that ligauture was being discontinued and my order was being cancelled. Guess I'll try to make contact with WWBW again and see if I can get them to send the right one unless anyone knows of another company that sells them. Just wondering of Brancher discontinued them or weiner just quit handeling them. Thanks.

[Briguy]

Any update on where the pass around mouthpieces are? It's been 2 weeks since we have had an update.

[Saxhound]

Hi guys, I have had a Brancher TMG ligature ordered from "weiner" music for several weeks now and was awaiting one from backorder. Today I got an email from them telling me that ligauture was being discontinued and my order was being cancelled. Guess I'll try to make contact with WWBW again and see if I can get them to send the right one unless anyone knows of another company that sells them. Just wondering of Brancher discontinued them or weiner just quit handeling them. Thanks.

That's strange. I ordered one a couple weeks ago, and got a notice that it was on backorder. Today, I got an e-mail from Sharon confirming my order was ready for shipment. Hopefully, it's the right one. Must have snuck in just ahead of Dan!

+1 on where the next review is. I'm on the second pass around list and have been waiting with baited breath to try the SS M2 +.

[Raphyel]

Any word on where the Ponzol's are now? I want to start putting another passaround together.

[Briguy]

Any word on where the Ponzol's are now? I want to start putting another passaround together.

Raphyel,

When you find out where they are at can you let those of us still waiting know as well? The pass around seems to really have slowed down.

Thanks

[DanF]

Raphyel,

When you find out where they are at can you let those of us still waiting know as well? The pass around seems to really have slowed down.

Thanks

This seems like the right time and place for a rant:x------but I ain't gonna do it. I've had my turn at these pieces and passed them on like I was supposed to do. Cleaned and insured and notified the next guy when I mailed them and left a review. But somebody..........................has decided that the rules don't apply to them. They'll just let them lay until..............whoops, I almost forgot that I will not do that. You know mention that an inconsiderate person could have these and not give a rat's @ss who gets them next. Not to mention worrying Raphyel that he may loose these expensive pieces. Sure glad I didn't say any of that.;)

[Brian]

This seems like the right time and place for a rant:x------but I ain't gonna do it. I've had my turn at these pieces and passed them on like I was supposed to do. Cleaned and insured and notified the next guy when I mailed them and left a review. But somebody..........................has decided that the rules don't apply to them. They'll just let them lay until..............whoops, I almost forgot that I will not do that. You know mention that an inconsiderate person could have these and not give a rat's @ss who gets them next. Not to mention worrying Raphyel that he may loose these expensive pieces. Sure glad I didn't say any of that.;)

Than again, embarrassing / belittling the person who is responsible without understanding circumstances (or even with understanding them) is a sure way to keep him/her in hiding.

[gary]

Than again, embarrassing / belittling the person who is responsible without understanding circumstances (or even with understanding them) is a sure way to keep him/her in hiding.

Can't stay in hiding for long. The person who sent them to the present testor certainly knows to whom he sent them. Now - who are the testees? :twisted:

[DanF]

Than again, embarrassing / belittling the person who is responsible without understanding circumstances (or even with understanding them) is a sure way to keep him/her in hiding.

Come on, what kind of circumstance would prevent someone from dropping Raphyel a line explaining the holdup. (Other than hospitalization). Seems like a poor excuse for irresponsibility to me.

[Nefertiti]

Well, Mangojango posted on 10/16 that he had them and would post more on 10/17. I don't see any other post after that.

[marc]

So Steve,

Do you finally keep the Ponzol SS M2 after your MPC poll?

I am very satisfied with mine. Nice clear, dark and compact sound with easy altissimo.

[Nefertiti]

Yes, I still have it. I play all the piece decide what I'm going to sell, put them aside but then think......let's not be hasty. A week later I play them all again and then decide to keep different ones. I've been doing that for the last 6 months! The Ponzol is really a great mouthpiec in my opinion. It's got it's own sound to it.

[gary]

I play all the piece decide what I'm going to sell, put them aside but then think......let's not be hasty. A week later I play them all again and then decide to keep different ones.

Boy, did I hear that!

I had been playing a Ponzol brass M1 for several years on tenor. Then I picked up an older Super. I couldn't decide which to concentrate on. Almost the same week I got the Super I got a new Ponzol SS Vintage and then a M2. Now I am sooo confused. :shock:

[Raphyel]

Well I found them, and they have 2 people left before they are on the way back. If there are others interested in participating in a passaround, let me know. I will put them back into circulation. I ask that you have been a member for at least 2 years, and that they are shipped insured. I am hoping to get 20 more people so I can try this again. If interested,

please send me a PM with your SOTW ID, mailing information, and your email address, and I will get a new list started. Thanks to everyone who participated and has helped this be successful so far.

[Morry]

Raphyel,

You might want to put a GPS tracker in the box. :-)

[Briguy]

Well Raphyel tracked down the mouthpieces and they arrived at my door on Friday afternoon. Thanks again to Rapheyel for making this happen. I was excited to open the box and give them a test drive.

I played the M2 first and was very happy with the full focused tone that it produced. It is a powerful piece and it has a very centered sound. Like most others have stated it is surprisingly darker than one would expect upon looking at the mouthpiece. Very even throughout the entire range of the horn. Altissimo jumped out easily and the contol on the lower register spoke easily. Ideal for a funk or rock gig.

I popped the vintage on next and was also happy with the results. I expected it to be stuffier than it was after reading previous reviews. The tip opening is a .105 and it felt like it had great response. Seemed to be more flexible and suitable for different settings.

Both mouthpieces are beautiful and easy to play. I have to say that the character of the mouthpieces is not as flexible as I would like. I feel that they are very specific to a playing style rather than being a well rounded piece that one can shape and adapt. I play in a lot of different settings and prefer a versatile mouthpiece. I am happy I got to test them and would consider an M2 if I played more rock and R&B gigs.

Thanks Raphyel.

[avaljazz]

Well it was a long wait but finally received the mpcs last week and they are now on their way back to Raphyel.
I found them to be pro level quality pieces both in workmanship and playability.I seem to be the only one using synthetic reeds,fibracell,legere studio cut, and bari,all modified except for the fibracells from soft to med.strengths.My usual setup is a '46 Vintage conn 10m purchased in the '50s in New York,my current mpcs are a GW HR8*,A Dave Jary 8*modified NY Link and a HR Berg 120/2.
I used both ponzol on rehearsals and a couple of big band gigs and if I could afford it Iwould buy 1 of each.Great projection and very easy to blow,they were both great on the low end with easy sub tone.The Vintage was less bright on the high end which would be expected.
Had a friend try it on his selmer and he liked it better than his DG k.whalem that he ordered on from wwbw.
All in all a very interesting and informative experience and was happy to be a part it,Thanks to Raphyel for the opportunity to participate in tis review.
Happy holidays to all.

[magical pig]

Well, I got those pieces in the mail and gave them a try against my STM 8. I had confusing feelings about those pieces. I still don't have a fully developed sound production mechanism so take my opinion for what it's worth.

Overall, the two Ponzol mpcs were way louder and easier to play than the Link. Fuller sound, easier dynamics and articulation etc. Though it has a step baffle in it, I wouldn't consider the M2 to be a fusion / pop piece, it is too dark for that. In that respect, it reminded me of the darker Berg mouthpieces.

Bothe pieces have a very focused tone. The vintage was a little bit darker and softer than the M2 but nothing I couldn't live with. One thing is it was very fat throughout the range. That's what confused me.

I have to work really hard to get a good sound on the STM that's full, resonant and not whiny in the upper register. Most of the time, I can't reach the sound I'm looking for, but when it sounds good, it sounds great. The two Ponzol somewhat felt more restrictive, more "locked in" than the Link as they seemed to be dialed in with a very particular character.

I'm not experienced enough to figure out if it's just me, if it might be a good thing or not.

Here are some - modest - samples of how I sound on each piece.

Vintage .105 (http://louisianapig.googlepages.com/Vintage.wav)
STM .110 (http://louisianapig.googlepages.com/STM.wav)
M2 .110 (http://louisianapig.googlepages.com/M2110.wav)

All played on a Rico Royal 3 and my Martin tenor.

Anyway, I think they are great mouthpieces that are very well made. If you're looking for an easy piece to play that responds instantly to tonguing and articulation, this is it. If you're used to work hard to achieve a good sound, those pieces may very well make you wonder if it's worth it...

The pieces will be out in the mail tomorrow to the next in line.

Thanks to Raphyel for making this happen,
Victor.

[Brian]

I thought the M2 sounded the most complex and deepest/richest. Thanks for the sound samples.

[cjmdsax]

Here are some - modest - samples of how I sound on each piece.

Vintage .105 (http://louisianapig.googlepages.com/Vintage.wav)
STM .110 (http://louisianapig.googlepages.com/STM.wav)
M2 .110 (http://louisianapig.googlepages.com/M2110.wav)

All played on a Rico Royal 3 and my Martin tenor.


Interesting to me how similar they are on the recordings. Just a little brighter on the M2. I can hardly tell a difference between the Vintage and the STM. I have a feeling there is more difference between all these than is captured there.

I used an M2 90 on alto for a while and it was definitely bright. I trialed an M2 120 once an thought it was bright too, and a great sounding and playing piece but not what I was looking for and that's when I got my STM. Maybe your sound concept is darker and you're blowing the M2 darker. Blow it like the Link and see what happens. When I bought my DV I also trialed an M2 110 (among others). The M2 110 was definitely bright for me and not much depth either.

If the differences are as little as what comes across in the clips, I'd say keep working on the Link. It sounds as good as the others on the clips, if barely less bright than the M2.

[magical pig]

I thought the M2 sounded the most complex and deepest/richest. Thanks for the sound samples.No problem. I'm surprised you liked the M2 better though. It was not my favorite but I'm biased towards high baffle pieces as I find them a bit restrictive. The lower baffle type mouthpieces are IMO like a blank you create your sound from. It's just like the difference between customizing a website template as opposed to coding the whole thing in html. One's faster and easier but you don't have full control over it. Of course with the harder route, it won't be any good as long as you don't have the right knowledge. The template option gives instant gratification you can build knowledge on. Two different and personal concepts.

Interesting to me how similar they are on the recordings. Just a little brighter on the M2. I can hardly tell a difference between the Vintage and the STM. I have a feeling there is more difference between all these than is captured there.

I used an M2 90 on alto for a while and it was definitely bright. I trialed an M2 120 once an thought it was bright too, and a great sounding and playing piece but not what I was looking for and that's when I got my STM. Maybe your sound concept is darker and you're blowing the M2 darker. Blow it like the Link and see what happens. When I bought my DV I also trialed an M2 110 (among others). The M2 110 was definitely bright for me and not much depth either.

If the differences are as little as what comes across in the clips, I'd say keep working on the Link. It sounds as good as the others on the clips, if barely less bright than the M2. Well, I hear just slightly more difference between the pieces when I play them than on the recording - especially the volume that bounces back to me - but I think it would reasonable to think I will hear every subtle details that change from one sound clip to another too as I'm so used to my sound.

I did not alter anything consciously to "adapt" to a piece when I was recording. So I was playing them like the Link. My thoughts on how those pieces are all different come from the time I spent on them during my regular practice time.

It's funny you talk about a "darker concept" because I'm definitely into that vibe except I don't hear that at all when I listen to recordings of my playing. I guess I'm biased towards myself.

Victor.

[saxphil]

I'd say keep working on the Link.

A more pleasing tone for your style of playing Pig,imo
and you already have one.

[magical pig]

A more pleasing tone for your style of playing Pig,imo
and you already have one.Thanks man, that's good to hear! :) I know I don't really need another mouthpiece. I like how my Link kicks my butt. :D

Victor.

[Honeyboy]

Thanks man, that's good to hear! :) I know I don't really need another mouthpiece. I like how my Link kicks my butt. :D

Victor.

I may be a bit late in responding. I agree, nobody "needs" another mouthpiece. I will give my opinions, anyways, and you certainly may disregard them. After hearing all three sound samples I have may favorites. I can definately hear the difference between all three.

What I hear is you have the most trouble getting a good core tone on the Link. At times it sounds a bit out of tune and as you stated, a bit weak up on top. It is less dark in places than the Vintage Ponzol. The Links seems to have different qualities depending on where you are playing on the horn. One might consider this flexibility.

The Vintage Ponzol seems to be right there with a nice thick core tone all the way through and plays easily in tune all the way through as well. Also the tone is richer than the Link. You sound more polished and professional, if you will, on the Vintage Ponzol.

The M2 has a less dark tone but also seems to be easier for you to play than the Link, but since you seem to like the darker side of sound, it's not quite for you. I own an M2 and I mostly play r&b, blues and rock stuff, so the Vintage wouldn't work for me as sometime I feel even the M2 isn't bright enough for me. I guess we all get a different response from the same kind of mouthpiece.

Anyways, if you weren't reluctant to spend the money, would you get the Vintage Ponzol? In my opinion, why would you want to struggle with the Link when you can get a really great sound immediately on the Vintage Ponzol?

[magical pig]

Anyways, if you weren't reluctant to spend the money, would you get the Vintage Ponzol? In my opinion, why would you want to struggle with the Link when you can get a really great sound immediately on the Vintage Ponzol?Well, I've started playing sax in December 2006 and I still have a lot to learn especially in regard to sound producing. If I had the money, I would probably buy a Ponzol Vintage although I'd get one with a wider tip opening than the passaround sample just because it's a nice sounding mouthpiece and I wouldn't care about shelling out a lot of $$$.

The Link is definitely harder to play but in a way, like I said earlier, there's this sound quality that's already set in the Ponzols. I'm not used to that and maybe I could get used to it if I wanted to. The difference is similar to driving an automatic or a manual. I've driven both and I prefer manual. It takes more effort to drive one but you really feel like driving. You can choose to push each stage to a certain level and if you know what you're doing, it offers a better, safer and more efficient way of driving.

Finally, and I know it's not a good reason to decide on a mouthpiece design, I have found that most of my favorite players for sound, from the Greats to the guys I've personally known, have played on large chamber, low baffle profiles.

I'm well aware of the fact that I tend to lose core tone on the Link but, believe me, there are those few moments when I manage to get it going on - for some reason - and then it goes away - and I know that's the direction I need to take.

Finally, MartinMods sent me an email letting me know I need to kick my horn's *** instead of following its intonation tendencies. Practicing against a drone tone is one of the exercises he suggested. I've started doing it and find it REALLY hard to be in tune with it. Another reason for me to think my tone can and will be much better than it is now - we need a "warrior" smiley - :D.

What a complicated subject...

Victor.

[Honeyboy]

Well, I've started playing sax in December 2006 and I still have a lot to learn especially in regard to sound producing. If I had the money, I would probably buy a Ponzol Vintage although I'd get one with a wider tip opening than the passaround sample just because it's a nice sounding mouthpiece and I wouldn't care about shelling out a lot of $$$.

The Link is definitely harder to play but in a way, like I said earlier, there's this sound quality that's already set in the Ponzols. I'm not used to that and maybe I could get used to it if I wanted to. The difference is similar to driving an automatic or a manual. I've driven both and I prefer manual. It takes more effort to drive one but you really feel like driving. You can choose to push each stage to a certain level and if you know what you're doing, it offers a better, safer and more efficient way of driving.

Finally, and I know it's not a good reason to decide on a mouthpiece design, I have found that most of my favorite players for sound, from the Greats to the guys I've personally known, have played on large chamber, low baffle profiles.

I'm well aware of the fact that I tend to lose core tone on the Link but, believe me, there are those few moments when I manage to get it going on - for some reason - and then it goes away - and I know that's the direction I need to take.

Finally, Martinmods sent me an email letting me know I need to kick my horn's *** instead of following its intonation tendencies. Practicing against a drone tone is one of the exercises he suggested. I've started doing it and find it REALLY hard to be in tune with it. Another reason for me to think my tone can and will be much better than it is now - we need a "warrior" smiley - :D.

What a complicated subject...

Victor.

For a guy who's only been playing for a few years, you sound great! Go with your gut! I know what you mean about the Ponzol wanting to have it's own sound (set) and I find that certain reed choices help with the flexibility of the Ponzol. I just thought you sounded better on the Vintage Ponzol, that's all. I guess for you it kind of takes the fun out of growing and developing you own tonal concept. I can understand that. After playing my Ponzol, I went to my Link 7* NY, dug the differences on that mouthpiece, then my Jody Jazz ESP and was digging on that for awhile and later to my Berg 130/2 and was digging that as well. It's all about the enjoyment. Keep up the good work, you're making great progress.

[gary]

Victor, if I could jump in....

I read a lot on SOTW about Links allowing people to "shape" their sounds but that has never had a real resonance with me if a mpc delivers the sound you want anyway. In other words, why should one buy a Link that allegedly lets you "shape" your sound if, for example, a Ponzol M1 already delivers it. That was my situation for several years.

So really, my question would be, "what is it about the Ponzol Vintage sound that you´don't like?", because, like Honeyboy, I think for the kind of sound you seem to be gravitating to, the Vintage sounds better than the Link. For that matter, I (again like Honeyboy) thought that you actually had a better core to your sound even with the M2 than with the Link.

[cjmdsax]

I think MP is on the right road for now, not because he's using a Link, but because he's still searching for a sound, still developing his sound.

Why does he need to use what you think he should be using, especially when you prefer that brand yourself?? If that's the sound he wants, he'll get there eventually. He doesn't need chiding from others right now, just encouragement to keep working on it.

Anyway, your questions are already answered by him above I'm not sure why you're even going over it again.

[magical pig]

Honeyboy, thanks for the nice words.

@both of you, there are two things about the Ponzol that I don't feel comfortable with. The first is its price. I just can't afford or justify spending this much on a mouthpiece. If that was not an issue there's also the fact I'm still growing as a player and the Link forces me to stay aware of how I need to blow in order to sound good. Call me a masochist if you want to but I think that's very good for me that the STM is unforgiving. I started out with a real bad biting habit and Links or similar mpcs have helped me be aware of and overcome this problem. I think that's the thing with Link-like mpcs : if you don't do it just right, it doesn't sound right. That's good for me.

Maybe later will I settle on a different mouthpiece but not until I know how to fill that big old pipe. But on the other hand, it may be possible, when I'm a better player, that I sound way better on the Link than on the Ponzol just because I will have learned exactly what it takes to sound like I want to?

Victor.

[Datsaxguy]

Got a chance to check out these peices. Played them on a Selmer Ref. 54 tenor. Reeds tried: V16, Rigotti gold, Hemke, Vandoren (blu), Java.

Vintage: Lot's of character in the sound but it lacks the power. This peice with a little itty bitty more baffle and the tip a little larger would have probably got my attention. 110 to 115 in the tip would have been more to my liking.

M2: Higher baffle designs usually don't work for me. This peice was very surprising. If you like higher baffle designs and don't want something that is super bright you may want to check this thing out. Very fun to play not to edgy. Way more body than those Guardala like peices and not as buzzy.

Thanks for the Pass Around Raphayel

Datsaxguy

[gary]

I think MP is on the right road for now, not because he's using a Link, but because he's still searching for a sound, still developing his sound.

Why does he need to use what you think he should be using, especially when you prefer that brand yourself?? If that's the sound he wants, he'll get there eventually. He doesn't need chiding from others right now, just encouragement to keep working on it.

Anyway, your questions are already answered by him above I'm not sure why you're even going over it again.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but it seems rather condescending to me. I am not telling him what he should play. I'm raising questions that he might consider to help him find the right answers for himself. And, frankly, the way he is playing, it seems to me, like I posted, that he is gravitating towards a different sound than he is getting from the Link.

Additionally though, I'm raising a question for thought/discussion on that oft-repeated adage here on SOTW that somehow Links are one of the very few, if not the only mpcs, which allow you to "shape your sound". I just don't buy that but I'm sure willing to listen to comments to the contrary from experienced players.

[magical pig]

I'll post sound samples of the progress I made on the Link later this week. The way I see it, based on my experience, is that considering how much my sound improved since I've been playing STMs, 1. I feel there is still a lot of room for improvement as I can get a very good sound on good days for short periods of time - I guess I'm doing everything right when that happens 2. I'd rather keep playing on it because it reminds me when I'm doing something wrong.

Hey Gary, have you considered the possibility that if I don't get that sound on the Link it's probably because I'm doing something wrong? I strongly think my core sound is what I want to change - among other things - and I definitely had the same on every mouthpiece. The rest is just "icing on the cake".

Hey by the way, what kind of sound do you think I'm gravitating towards? :? :D

Victor.

[Birdman]

Here's my review:

Vintage: Upon playing the vintage I didn't really like it the sound was drier than I thought it would be but, after a few minutes I changed my reed and the sound was a lot better than it had been originally, it was bigger than I expected too. It played a shade brighter than my old STM and had twice as much power. I also liked the look of it too. My only complaint is I wish the tip opening had been bigger but aside from that, it was a great piece.

M2: The M2 from the start was an amazing mouthpiece. As soon as I took it out and played it the sound was big and as bright as my LAW. The only difference was control, I seemed to have a little less control over this one in the lower range but, it didn't pose too much of a problem.

Because I liked it so much I used it the next night with my jazz ensemble to see how it performed. It was great. I played all the parts with greater ease than before, even my conductor thought it sounded good. The high notes came out easily, however, the low end suffered a little bit as I mentioned earlier. I enjoyed this piece a lot and am thinking about getting one in the future. I think I need harder reeds though, because the tip on this one felt small too. Overall a great piece.

-Birdman

[gary]

I think I need harder reeds though, because the tip on this one felt small too.
Birdman, if you still have it, try moving the reed just a little further forward than you usually place it. Others around the country have noticed that a slight adjustment in reed placement helped.

[maestroelite]

I received these fine mouthpieces on Monday. I played them both but the M2 was more my kind of piece so I spent the vast majority of time playing that. They are quite a nice pair - similar core sounds but the M2 is obviously louder and brighter. I felt like the M2's sound was similar to what a good Berg should be - thick, muscular and bright. I could see myself playing it in virtually any setting. I had the opportunity to play it in a big band rehearsal and playing duets with a piano along with the tiny practice room playing and it worked well in both situations, especially the big band. If I ever want to tweak my sound more toward the muscular end of the tenor spectrum this would be the piece I would try, as it still had the response and tone colors that I like to get out of my mouthpieces(I play a Saxscape Downtown Studio). A couple of my friends tried out the pieces and one said they were the best tenor pieces he had played. My other friend commented that they were nice pieces just not something he would use.

I think Peter is really onto something with this line, I've played several of the brass pieces and there was always something holding me back from buying one but the stainless M2 is quite a piece. If I ever decide to buy another mouthpiece that will be it.

[Honeyboy]

I agree with your review of the M2. I do use mine in every situation. Reed choice can alter the darkness and brightness dramatically as well as using a different lig- I've been using the Bois ring shaped lig for more brightness when I use Legere reeds which tend to darken it up too much and the Rovner Lite when I use cane reeds. I'm still learning all about the mouthpiece- definately my #1 mouthpiece. I've never enjoyed my tone more!:D

[Saxhound]

I just received these yesterday, and the timing was perfect – I had my silver Series III tenor in the shop for a tune-up with Paul Maslin, and when I got home, there they were.

First impressions / appearance – these are both very aesthetically pleasing pieces. I like the clear / silver bite plate better than the black ones used on the brass & gold pieces. The M2 looked very clean inside & out. The Vintage had some file or tool marks on the baffle – I’m not used to seeing that on Peter’s pieces, but I don’t think it has any real effect on the playability. The tip curve on both pieces also seemed to conform better to my reeds (Fibracell Premier) than on my .110 S M2+. The rails and table are immaculate. I’m not a big fan of the Rovner ligs, so I thought I would try my Brancher Leggerio TMG, but it wouldn’t fit – the body of these pieces is slightly thicker than the old models.

I tried them first on my Selmer, after playing my M2+ for a while for reference. I like the sound of the new M2. It is pretty similar to my main piece, but a little meatier down low. It whispered easily on the low notes, just like my piece. It seemed a trifle thinner sounding in the palm keys, but the altissimo popped out effortlessly, and it seemed better intonation-wise than my M2+. I usually have a little trouble with Bb4 and B4 being sharp, and F4 being flat. These notes were right on. I had a little trouble getting F#4 to speak at first, so I played a few overtone series exercises, and then I was able to nail it consistently.

On to the .105 Vintage. This piece was much darker than I was expecting – I was thinking it would be like the old M1. Instead, it was much more like a STM Link, although not quite as resistant. It was very easy blowing in the lower register, but the resistance seemed to increase as you moved up the horn. When I tried to play altissimo – aaack! - I couldn’t get anything but squeaks & squawks for a couple minutes. Back to the overtone exercises, and eventually I was able to play up to E4. I couldn’t get the F, F# or G to come out at all. I tried going up a half size on my reed, and that helped a little, but made the lower notes more of an effort. Overall, this piece just didn’t do it for me. I tend to like a brighter sound, and this one was just too fat & tubby sounding for me. I even tried to push it really hard to brighten it up, but with little success. Back in the box with this one, and I’ll focus on the M2.

After a little break, I went back to the M2. I played some long tones, a couple of the JL Small etudes, and then cranked up Dennis Taylor’s Blues Saxophone. I really like this piece! It was very easy to articulate on the etudes, and I liked the flexibility playing the blues. It was really easy to bend notes, growl & flutter. When I played Memphis Soul Stew, I popped all the altissimo, even the B4 toG#4 screech.

Next up, my YTS-62. This is a nice older 62 – no purple logo. It’s not as bright sounding as my Selmer, and a little more resistant. For some reason, the M2 didn’t wow me as much on this horn. I found it a little more difficult to get the low notes to whisper. The upper register including palm keys sounded good, but the altissimo seemed a little thin. I also didn’t seem to have the flexibility of tone that I did on my Selmer. I’m still getting used to this horn – I just picked it up last summer, and don’t play it as much, so that may be part of the issue. When I put my M2+ on though, I felt much more comfortable. I think the little bit of extra edge I get with that piece works better on this horn.

That’s enough for today – maybe tomorrow I will try the Yamaha first, and take the Vintage for one more spin.

Thanks to Raphyel for a great pass around experience.

[tdewinter]

With great hesitation I sent these mp's to the next on the list.

For reference, I've been playing alto & tenor for three years now after a 38 year hiatus. I'm playing mostly tenor in two community bands and in a 13 piece big band, gigging a couple times a month. I've been using a Rico Royal Graftonite B5 mouthpiece, with Rico Royal & Fibracell 2.5's on a Yamaha YTS62II. These are the first "high end" mouthpieces I've played. I've tried a boxfull of STM's and others, but none compare. I'm not real big on the terms many throw around: spread, focused, dark, resistant, etc., nor am I into altissimo. The first thing that hit me was the great workmanship and looks.

I tried the M2 first with the Fibracell 2.5. Looking at the high baffle I expected the sound to be bright and thin. But it doesn't play like it looks. No where near as loud as I expected. I used it in a small community concert band where I am the tenor section. It fit well and I got good feedback from others. The intonation was on and it allowed me to start low notes at pp, something I've had trouble with using my regular mp's. It plays almost without effort and I felt at home with it from the start.

The Vintage piece played equally well. I did have a little trouble playing softly down low, but that went away after an hour or so. The tone is more mellow and laid back than the M2, and I couldn't push it as loud. I played it on a big band gig and on one solo I had trouble getting over the blasting trumpets. (What else is new?) I love the husky laid-back tenor tone I get with this piece.

The downside of playing these two is that I realize how hard I'm working with the Rico Royal to get an inferior result. Now if I could just find a mouthpiece that played like these that didn't carry such a hefty price tag...

Tom

[sinkdraiN]

Victor, you sound great on your STM.

[gary]

Now if I could just find a mouthpiece that played like these that didn't carry such a hefty price tag... Tom, if you could get one of the brass "S"-series brass Ponzol M1s, that might do the trick for you.

[jrsopsax]

I received the Stainless Steel Ponzol M2 and Vintage mouthpieces a week ago last Thursday. I have been playing both over the past week and played the M2 on my gig last Wednesday. Thursday night I had a practice with my church praise band and played the M2 as well. For once I was able to hold my own against the drums, bass, piano, guitar and trumpet. I played both services on church morning and was able to easily able to switch from soft to powerful without any compromise in sound.

I have been playing Ponzol mouthpieces for about 5 years. My main mouthpiece is a ML that MOJO refaced to a .105 and my HR is a Mouthpiece Guys House Blend. I also have a Super and a M1 for my soprano. When comparing the ML, Vintage, Super and M2, there is no doubt that the M2 has the full, thick sound that I have been looking for. The Vintage has a nice Link vibe to it with a bit more power but for me lacked the punch I need.

Thanks Raphyel for the opportunity to tryout out the M2 and Vintage mouthpieces.

[gsaxman100]

Just got the pass-around pieces. It's funny because I had just bought a stainless M2 and sent Raphyel a message saying to take me off the list, but looks like it was too late, here they came. Well, I got to try the Vintage. I tried both pieces with my Yanagisawa T880 and various reeds, mainly Rico Royal and Plasticover 2.5 and 3.

I've been using an RPC 115B for blues gigs with occasional fallback to my Berg 105/2 offset m. I really like the tone of the Berg but wanted something with a bit more ease of play, less resistance and quicker response on the low notes. Based on the reviews and sound clips here I thought the m2 might be it. I was right, and it does sound so very much like my Berg, but with more ease of play, less resistance, more volume, thicker. It's that hard core that I really like, it doesn't have the buzz of the RPC or most other high baffle pieces and that's what's cool about it. I've used it on one gig and it sounded great, really cut through, lush is the word. It is also versatile and I can get soft and sultry with it, though retaining a bit of the harder core sound. Whoever described it as being like a really good Berg was quite accurate. I've found I need to live with a piece for a while to know for sure how I feel about it, but this one really has me smitten so far. If you're looking for a big bold sound, versatility, low buzz factor, this is one to try. Can't wait to gig with it again this weekend. It's displaced the Berg and time will tell if it unseats the RPC for blues gigs, but it sure looks like it might.

The vintage model I found to be super easy to play, with a nice middle dark/bright tone. I hit altissimo notes with no problem, low notes were super easy. The thing that struck me was how even in volume and tone it sounded throughout the range of the horn, it almost played itself. BUT I had trouble getting much dynamic range out of it. When I tried to do low and soft and sultry it got real weak for me, the tone wasn't big anymore. I felt like if I wanted to play medium volume jazz tunes all night this piece would do it and I wouldn't break a sweat, it would be super easy to have a nice even tone from low Bb to altissimo. The problem with it was I couldn't push it very loud, and when I backed off to get soft the tone seemed to get puny. I compared it with my RPC 105R and my Phil Tone Link Tone Edge. Those two pieces still sound pretty huge even when sub-toning, (talking about fatness and presence, not volume) unlike the vintage Ponzol. I'm just talking about how it works for me, your mileage may vary. It's a fine piece and if you want a jazz piece that's easy to control and sounds pleasant with little effort, it might be great for you. I liked it a lot at first but got a little bored with it after a half hour or so.

[SMF]

Well, I just finished playing the two ponzol mpcs, the stainless Vintage 105, and the Stainless M2 110. As a point of reference, my main mpc in a RPC 115 wih a baffle. I switched between two tenors, a '65 King Silversonic ss20 and a 1950 SBA. I play in several bands, the primary is a rock, but I also play with a big band and a Jazz band.

So, Both mouthpieces were easy to play, and felt comfortable. Some mouthpieces have two small of a bite for me, but these were good. Both played in tune and and have a very centered sound. The vintage did have what I would call a vintage sound, that of an open chambered mpc. It was dark, and I did like it with the sba tenor. It would be good for a small group, but it didn't have as much sound or volumne as I like. The vintage is not the type of sound I like, so I didn't play it as much. Both mpcs were easy to play through out the range of the horn.

The M2 I liked. IT was bright, but not overly, and could be pushed easily. It had a more centered town that the RPC I play and was not as bright, but still very nice. I received the mpcs on a Tuesday and since I had a rock gig the next day, I took two horns and switched between the RPC on the silversonic and the M2 on the SBA. I liked both. Though I was more comfortable with the RPC, It would be easy to get used to the ponzol. Nice mpc, but pricey. I have played ponzol M1s before, and like the stainless M2 much better.


smf

[spellbound]

I won't do a full review, because Im not that talented nor do I want to give misleading feedback. Still Intermediate/beginner on Tenor (2 yrs.)


Heres my info:

Got the M2 and vintage last week. Played the vintage for a moment, and thought ok... nice, but nothing spectacular for me..

Picked up the M2 and thought holy cow! I usually don't play anything this open and this is a very easy blowing .110. It's got a sound that I prefer. I like a more focused (clean?) sound with less buzz. To acheieve that I've been playing Selmer soloists from around .90 (more often) to .105 (when im feeling courageous). I like the sound the vintage soloist style scroll shank HRs give me. The M2 (and v16 reed) gives me a similar sound, with a bit more edge I think... I'm pretty sure the projection is louder, which can be good... I'm impressed with how easy it is to play the entire dynamic range, softly and then loudly... not much effort

I'm seriously considering a change of mpc, or atleast adding one of these to my arsenal (not that I even have an "arsenal" yet)

Planning on taking it to a few garage band gigs this weekend, wondering if the guys I play with will notice a difference....

Thanks Peter and Raphyel...

[gary]

I usually don't play anything this open and this is a very easy blowing .110. It's got a sound that I prefer. I like a more focused (clean?) sound with less buzz. To acheieve that I've been playing Selmer soloists from around .90 (more often) to .105 (when im feeling courageous).

Spellbound, the M2s pass-around was .110 but that's not the only size available. It also come in .105 and that might be the "sweet spot" for you at the moment. My M1 and M2 are bóth .105s.

[spellbound]

Spellbound, the M2s pass-around was .110 but that's not the only size available. It also come in .105 and that might be the "sweet spot" for you at the moment. My M1 and M2 are bóth .105s.

Gary,
Thanks for the heads up. I definitely will be looking at the 105 when I order the M2 then. I'm not exactly sure when it will be, as I'll probably have to sell some of my existing pieces, but I will definitely be ordering the M2 in the future.

[DeanSilliman]

I had the Ponzol pieces a few people ago but I'm just getting around to a review because of vacation, etc.

Anyway, the pieces had quality construction - nice facing, nice materials. Neither piece, however, did much for me. The lower baffle piece had a solid basic Link-like quality but it did not compare to a nice Link or my Vandoren metal V16 in richness and response. The high baffle piece added the juice but did not have the sparkle or clarity of other available high-energy pieces like a JJ DV or a good Berg.

The trial was on my VI. I had intended to try them out on a Keilwerth Shadow at a local shop but I never got to it before I felt like I needed to move the pieces along.

Thanks for the opportunity to try the pieces.

Dean