Custom metal mouthpiece for alto - anyone know of a manufacturer

[bearnic]

Hello guys,

wondering if anyone knows anyone in Australia who will custom make a mouthpiece out of any material i want.

I would like:

surgical stainless steel, medium bore, medium-large round chamber, no baffle, no tooth plate (ill use tooth savers instead), medium sized beak, moderate facing curve and a .81 tip opening.

Thanks

[dogbert]

Is there a special reason why you want somebody from australia? I mean, shipping cost isn't really an argument, right? You'd have the choice between all the mp-guys all over the world, unless you'd like to play-test the piece and maybe have it tweaked.

[bearnic]

More so I can meet the person an have them work on it with me

[bariandyf]

you could try mark spencer http://www.sax.com.au/contact.html

[lhoffman]

I believe David Zagar is in Melbourne: http://www.zagarsaxmouthpieces.com/Home_Page.php

[kymarto]

You might have trouble with stainless. It is very hard--a real bitch to work with--and needs special tools.

[nuendosan]

And further more you don't gain anything from stainless steel except for the "very hard to do" factor.... Only materials that contribute to sound is: Bronze, silver, crystal and gold.

[Pete Thomas]

And further more you don't gain anything from stainless steel except for the "very hard to do" factor.... Only materials that contribute to sound is: Bronze, silver, crystal and gold.

Please explain more. Surely if materials contribute to sound, such as those you mention, than any material has some effect on the sound.

[nuendosan]

All right I will try. Mind that my knowledge comes from mouthpiece manufacture only, and sax body modifications, so I won't claim to be an expert, but this is my experience:

Hard Rubber, ebonite is as close to a neutral acoustic material as you can get. Meaning that the sound waves balance out. The anti waves (lets call them (minus –) and the carry waves (lets call them plus ?)) are almost even.

Materials as Gold, Silver and bronze has a larger + wave, witch our ear and brain percepts as clear and warm. Crystal has the largest + waves - witch is why you can make a crystal glass explode at a certain vibration. This means that + waves all on their own becomes destructive - hence the precens of anti waves - to keep the balance so to speak.
So Gold, silver and bronze are very good materials in terms of acoustics but crystal are the very best. A bit hard to make a saxophone from crystal right?

Iron or steel has more - waves than plus, witch means it kills sound, or you get a kind of retained sound that tends to choke it self..... hard to explain....:-)

Ever wondered why your metal mouthpiece sounds unpleasant in a small room compared to a large concert hall? I think its because the sondwaves are "designed" to carry further in a good mouthpiece.

My humble guess would be, that a stainless steel mouthpiece would sound fine in a small acoustic setting - but disappear in a modern band setting....

[warp x]

My humble guess would be, that a stainless steel mouthpiece would sound fine in a small acoustic setting - but disappear in a modern band setting....

So you're saying a SS Berg-Larsen would disapear in a modern band setting?

[nuendosan]

Just a bit more...

Old saxes and some new as well have more copper - witch are the main ingredient in bronze. Plain brass are just a notch above acoustic neutral to the positive side, so, yes that has a play in shaping the sound as well.

Just a foot note: The sound and its character comes mainly from the mouthpiece: 60% comes from the mouthpiece and its shape and materials, 10 % from the sax neck, 10 % from the reed and 20% from the sax body....

[nuendosan]

without a baffle, as the gentleman explained he wanted made... yes :-) I am familiar with the SS model if it has a medium or long baffle or short roll over - You can help me out here?

[Pete Thomas]

Just a foot note: The sound and its character comes mainly from the mouthpiece: 60% comes from the mouthpiece and its shape and materials, 10 % from the sax neck, 10 % from the reed and 20% from the sax body....

A reasonable assumption, though to be 10% accurate you might want to add that this is discounting possibly the one most important parameter: the player and their mouth/throat/lungs

[milandro]

So you're saying a SS Berg-Larsen would disapear in a modern band setting?

completely disappear...........inaudible ..........!!!

Indeed try a Berg or a Ponzol M2 SS which as a mouthpiece is identical in shape to the non stainless steel and according to this guess...... its sound would disappear!!! ( a guess? what’s to guess? Play a stainless steel piece like this (or the Berg) and you KNOW that the answer is that it is ridiculous to THINK that stainless steel, in itself , would be accounting for a sound that would “ disappear in a modern band setting!

Alexander Pope was indeed right..........

“A little learning is a dangerous thing
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.
Fired at first sight with what the muse imparts,
In fearless youth we tempt the heights of arts
While from the bounded level of our mind
Short views we take nor see the lengths behind
But more advanced behold with strange surprise,
New distant scenes of endless science rise!”

[warp x]

without a baffle, as the gentleman explained he wanted made... yes :-) I am familiar with the SS model if it has a medium or long baffle or short roll over - You can help me out here?

I don't follow you. So an SS Berg with a low baffle would disappear in a modern band, but a high baffled one would not?

[Koen88]

I don't follow you. So an SS Berg with a low baffle would disappear in a modern band, but a high baffled one would not?

an other example but with 2 mouthpieces; what would blend in better, a brass STM or a plastic composite Rico Metalite?

[nuendosan]

my point being that only the top is clear. Not a lot of deep and middle nuances... that all I am saying.