Sax on the Web Forum banner

Why not tune the sax by pulling out the neck?

12K views 43 replies 25 participants last post by  DetroitDave 
#1 ·
Hello,
why is the sax tuned by moving the mouthpiece on the cork and not by pulling out the neck? Wouldn't this be better for the acustics of a conical instrument?
Thank you for your thoughts and ideas!
 
#2 ·
Interesting question. My initial thought is that because the cross section area at the tenon is much large then at the mouthpiece interface, the neck displacement required for a given tuning change would be much smaller compared to done at the mouthpiece. this would likely require a much more complex neck attachment mechanism to enable a fine control of the distance so you can find the right tune position.
 
#4 ·
In my experience, anytime I don't get the neck all the way in, low notes have a greater tendency to warble.
 
#5 ·
I've been in some extreme situation where I had to pull out at the neck. I was using a Short Shank Selmer piece at the time and we playing outside in some REALLY hot mid-90's weather and I simply ran out of mouthpiece to pull out - so I adjusted the neck. I think it messes with the octave proportions so probably not advised but in a gig situation - all rules are off.
 
#6 ·
I suppose you could do it; after all, the Bb clarinet is tuned by adjusting the gap between the barrel and the upper joint, not between the mouthpiece and the barrel. However, with the neck-to-body joint on a saxophone, there is a mechanical connection for the operation of the octave key. Anytime keywork is involved, it's probably best to stay away from constantly pushing, pulling, and twisting. It's also possible that in an extreme case you might pull the neck out so far that the octave linkage wouldn't function.
 
#8 ·
Good point there, as well as because it most likely will leak and cause the bell key notes to motorboat. I would also think that if this was a reasonable way to tune the sax, someone would hae already made an adaptation for the tenon to be able to do that. It would be something like the tunable neck on the Conn New Wonders, which worked quite well with most mouthpieces, but was discontinued in lieu of just pushing or pulling the mouthpiece on the cork. I think the principle at work is called KISS, keep it simple stupid, because it works in most cases with no problems.
 
#9 ·
I've done it many times on many different horns for many different reasons. The most recent: The neck cork on my Martin bari is getting bad so I have to push the mouthpiece in to keep it from moving. This obviously makes the horn sharp, so I raise the neck about 1/16". Please, no suggestions on temporary fixes. I know more of them than you do. I don't carry Teflon tape with me. This is what I do.

hakukani; your problem with pulling the neck out probably is your neck tenon is tapered, so when you pull it out any amount, it will result in a leak which makes your low notes warble. It might be tapered because the clamp collar is tapered on the inside and a tech had to do it to make it seal. Or, the tenon or collar may be out of round.
 
#10 ·
I've done it many times on many different horns for many different reasons. The most recent: The neck cork on my Martin bari is getting bad so I have to push the mouthpiece in to keep it from moving. This obviously makes the horn sharp, so I raise the neck about 1/16". Please, no suggestions on temporary fixes. I know more of them than you do. I don't carry Teflon tape with me. This is what I do.
Here's that suggestion that you didn't want. The smallest thickness O-ring that's readily available is 1/16th inch thickness. If you had one with a diameter just smaller than the neck tenon, you could slip it on and get an air-tight seal and a 1/16th inch extension all in one. I've been meaning to try it on my Martin tenor, but keep forgetting about it when I'm at the hardware store. I was thinking of trying it to replace my use of Teflon tape, not for an extension.

Mark
 
#11 ·
Been there, done that. Works nicely if your neck tenon, receiver, and octave bow all cooperate. Obviously some saxes won't let you get away with this. I used to use a 1/8 inch O-ring; never had any problem with low notes or intonation. And it was a lot more secure than pulling out the pea-shooter mouthpiece I was using at the time.
 
#12 ·
You also change the shape of the instrument, with somewhat unpredictable results on the overall intonation of the instrument. This is because the tenon is cylindrical, where as the rest of the instrument is conical -- or at least several cones.

I might also add that you change the position of the neck octave vent relative to where the ideal location for it is. Another thought I had was that by reducing the amount of tenon in the receiver, you structurally weaken the joint there, so you increase the possibility of damaging the tenon joint.

Anyway, just a few thoughts. Can you get away with it? Sure -- read the posts above.
 
#13 ·
There's a consensus emerging that many of us have done it in a pinch. My experience has been that once Ive had to do because of running out of adjustment at the mp/cork interface, it invariably leads to intonation problems, especially if you tune to concert A on a tenor. The further down the horn you go the more out of tune it becomes.
 
#23 ·
[...] it invariably leads to intonation problems, especially if you tune to concert A on a tenor. The further down the horn you go the more out of tune it becomes.
You also change the shape of the instrument, with somewhat unpredictable results on the overall intonation of the instrument. This is because the tenon is cylindrical, where as the rest of the instrument is conical -- or at least several cones.
Interesting that the acoustics are that exacting; pulling the neck out 1/8" on a tenor is such a very small fraction of the total length of the horn - close to four feet from receiver to bell - and when you add in the conical factor the increase seems really negligible. You'd almost think that straight sopranos would play the most consistently in tune, considering that the conical bore is not interrupted by a cylindrical receiver. Alas...
 
#25 ·
Your last comment brings up a good point. Beyond accidental bending, even.

This is what many a tech would say: the tenon, as designed, isn't meant to be tightened by the receiver at a point 1/8", 1/4", whatever, BELOW the tenon ferrule. You will be fine if you do this in a pinch...but of done on a regular basis, the tenon would start getting misshapen (i.e. tenon strongest near the ferrule -tenon weakest and most maleable near the open end.

Also, just as an observation ~ old-school neck-slide and microtuners are always located at the mouthpiece end. We never see a telescoping element on a neck in the middle of the neck or toward the tenon end of the neck.
 
#31 ·
Interesting. Is it just Mark VI's or have you tried this on other saxophones?
 
#32 ·
I don't use an O ring. I use the smallest elastic bands. The little ring shaped ones. The neck compresses the rubber band almost into the receiver and you can barely see it. Neck stays snug and it doesn't pull the neck out of the receiver at all.

The metal on my neck tenon is very thin so after it got resized for my horn it still would slip without the rubber band.

I actually thought I was original...
 
#33 ·
I only used the O-ring to maintain a standard distance; there was no leakage around the tenon. I just wanted to have a consistent base while fine-tuning with the mouthpiece on the neck cork.
 
#34 ·
My inital reason to ask was this: If you move the mouthpiece on the cork, you change the cone at the very critical point at the very beginning of it. And you add a step in the mpc, where the neck ends. And you change the chamber of the mpc when tuning.
If you would change the lenght of the tube at the tenon, you wouldn't change the cone so drastically.
I don't opt for changing the running system saxophone; but would't the sound benefit from a mouthpiece, which has a defined endpoint and would not be moved for tuning. There would be no step at the end of the neck.
And the neck could be made stronger and the octave mechanism longer to solve the problems that could occur.
The problem, that you change the place for the octave vent is valid - but do some mm matter here?
 
#35 ·
I stopped by Lowe's on the way to practice last night and finally bought some o-rings. They were in the plumbing department. BrassCraft #0594 15/16" I.D. with a 1/16" thickness (for a Kohler single control push-pull faucent!) 79 cents for two. They stretch on to the neck, so the final thickness is less than 1/16".

Everyone else was late to practice, so I got a chance to use the tuner with and without the o-ring. Play a few notes then, leaving the mouthpiece in the same place, put the o-ring on. The o-ring might possibly have made 5 cents difference (lower) on the low notes. It was so subtle that I couldn't be certain. But probably the same as moving the mouthpiece less than 1/16th inch. The amount of additional body tube volume for low Bb when using an o-ring is likely inconsequential. But for the high palm keys it seemed to matter. My Martin plays increasingly sharper (for me) from 2nd G on up, becoming quite noticeable in the palm keys. This brought them down about 10 cents.

What isn't noticeable is that there is now an o-ring on the neck. It doesn't look different or feel different. Because Martins don't have a neck tenon split, once the neck is fitted tightly against the o-ring there is no possibility of a neck leak. I like it.

Mark
 
#37 ·
Dave,

It's on a Martin, which has a little different neck system than most. The o-ring slides over the male tenon to the point where the tenon is soldered in to the neck crook sliding up under the screw that holds the neck on shown in the second picture here). When the neck is inserted, instead of metal to metal as the stopping point, the neck slides in until it reaches the very thin o-ring. It's basically invisible and stays in place. The more common neck arrangement has a slit cut in the receiver (which could be called a "mortice") that is tightened by a finger screw. On the common arrangement, the o-ring wouldn't do anything unless that tension slit was packed as in the fourth picture in the blog.

Mark
 
#38 ·
Dave,

It's on a Martin, which has a little different neck system than most. The o-ring slides over the male tenon to the point where the tenon is soldered in to the neck crook sliding up under the screw that holds the neck on shown in the second picture here). When the neck is inserted, instead of metal to metal as the stopping point, the neck slides in until it reaches the very thin o-ring. It's basically invisible and stays in place. The more common neck arrangement has a slit cut in the receiver (which could be called a "mortice") that is tightened by a finger screw. On the common arrangement, the o-ring wouldn't do anything unless that tension slit was packed as in the fourth picture in the blog.
Mark
Mark,
Thanks... that makes sense now.
 
#39 ·
Has anyone done this on a double socket neck - like the Conn 6m or the King Zephyr? It seems like, as with the Martin Comm III, it would be perfect. Only I wonder how you get the thing out of there when it hardens with age and needs replacing.
 
#41 ·
I have been pulling out the neck on my 1964 Mark VI tenor for many years. I added a piece of tubing to the octave key lever the better engage the octave key ring. This was out of necessity because my metal Florida Link didn't push on the cork far enough to prevent the infamous Mark VI gurgling in the low register. By extending the neck I could push on enough that the gurgling stopped. There was no difference in tuning for me.

A perspective: My father-in-law was a hobbyist bar sax player. In 1964 he bought is Mark VI bari, Mark Vi tenor and 2 Mark VI altos for just over $900 total.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top