So, who is deciding what "quality", "good", "bad", "classical", "pro", or any other subjective descriptors entail, and what are the criteria that factor into this decision?
I did explore your website a couple of times, and maybe I missed it, but is there a list of the professional saxophonists that are used in the comparison function? If so, is this list final, or will you be constantly adding?
A little disclaimer: This was in no way intended to hijack the thread, but I think the discussion is relevant, especially since the OP is asking about "too bright to be classical."
Identifying an ideal sound is very subjective, because it varies based on location and changes over time. Speaking purely of their "sound" (not including style or inflection), there is significant difference a Dave Koz sound and a Lester Young sound. It's not really that one is better than the other, since they're clearly both great, but more that a certain sound is more appropriate in certain scenarios/orchestrations than others.
Me personally, I sought symphony musician/soloists who also taught at a university (because of the NASA/Acoustic research I'm conducting). I assume that at that level of musical accomplishment, they have the ability to create an ideal sound for their intended genre. And as a symphony player, others recognize their sound and technique as ideal for their genre as well. In this case, it is a classical sound.
And yes, more musicians will be added to Audi-Graph over time. I record new ones weekly.
The musician I currently include is
Dr Joe Eckert of Texas Christian University, one of the more accomplished local alto players I was able to meet. I have recorded others that verify consistency between his pattern and other classical alto musicians. I have others that demonstrate a more rock lead-alto type sound, which is much different than classical, but still somewhat consistent.
More information.
What is a better tone(which I know is subjective, but in a general case) and please say why
A very very clear tone with a medium bright to bright sound
A sort of muffled tone with a nice warm sound
Thank you so much
Trey Gunter (of TCU), playing with a "rock lead alto" sound
Dr. Joe Eckert (of TCU), playing with a "classical alto" sound
This is the best thing I can use to describe to you the answer to your question. Every peak you see is a different harmonic frequency. This is on one note, played at just about the same volume. You can see
how they sound different, and it should help clarify and confirm with others are saying when they are trying to describe sound... they are actually describing the harmonic frequency.
Kevin, I throw this all out there, not as a product plug, but to further agree with all the previous responders that explaining a good sound is very complicated. If you want to produce a classical alto sound, the Eckert example in Audi-Graph is an viable approach.
I'll refrain from calling it "dark" or "bright" because in acoustics/physics/engineering/math, it's a bit ambiguous. However, Dr. Eckert sounded significant better to me than other classical altos musicians I've recorded, and should be a good model to practice against to achieve a classical sound.
How is your device different from a spectrum analyser?
It is a spectrum analyzer, in the same way that a tuner is also a spectrum analyzer. Without getting into too many of the technical and NDA details Audi-Graph contains a patented approach to capture, analyze, and display instrumental sound different/better than a spectrum analyzer. You won't get these same accuracy, details or information with any spectrum analyzer. I tried to find one that did, so I wouldn't have to spend all the time developing the math models and code the whole thing myself. Nothing did anything close, so I had it make it.
EDIT:
I uploaded demonstration of the difference between Audi-Graph's output against what a regular spectrum analyzer would output. This is the exact same recorded file - Concert C# on an alto sax - as seen through a normal specturm analyzer:
And seen through Audi-Graph