Sax on the Web Forum banner

Question about Barone mouthpieces

10K views 96 replies 16 participants last post by  craigmultireedguy 
#1 ·
Hey everyone,

I recently acquired a Barone Precision Crafted in a trade with another SotW member, and I sent it to Sebastian Knox for a tune-up. But before I have him do anything to it, I want to be sure I have a clear understanding of the way Barone mouthpieces typically play, both as their own thing and as variations of Links.

I've played a few Barone mouthpieces in the past for no more than an hour or so each, as well as a great original Florida Link (Which my Precision Crafted was made from) which was my main piece for more than five years. The Barones (A Hollywood, a NY and this Precision Crafted of mine that had the baffle insert removed) all played with very colorful sounds that, while beautiful, were so spread that it was next to impossible to get the sounds to center. They all had HUGE chambers, compared to the original Florida Link, which was a much easier piece to focus. Strangely, they all had small tips, between .090" and .105", which for me have always provided the most focused sounds in my experiece. At least when compared to larger tips.

To those of you who have played on Barones before: What are/were your experiences with them? Is this simply a matter of getting used to them, akin to developing "Link chops?" Is it a matter of reed cut/strength? Is it the fact that I've been playing a Berg full-time for the last year or so? Really, anything you can tell me about this would help me out greatly.

Thanks,

Craig
 
See less See more
#21 ·
Okay, then why not have him take out the dent.

And then you have a choice: 1) have him send it back to you so you can try it without the dent; at that point you can decide if you want to do something more with it or not. You could try putting in various temporary baffles to see what you would like. Or: 2) Ask your mouthpiece guy to put in a baffle using his judgment and your input as to what you want. I don't know Mr. Knox, but presumably you like/respect his work (and maybe he knows your tastes), so he would probably be a better one to ask.
 
#4 ·
To those of you who have played on Barones before: What are/were your experiences with them?
I bought one once and felt it didn't suit me. I could only describe it as having a sort of fizzy or fuzzy sound. This is not to say that mouthpiece wouldn't have been ideal for someone else and that, I think, is the whole point.

Don't blame a brand of mouthpiece just because it isn't right for you, your setup or the even the genre of music you play.

In regard to your opening question, how do they typically play, the answer is they don't.
 
#5 ·
In regard to your opening question, how do they typically play, the answer is they don't.
With all due respect and without intended hostility, that is complete crap. All mouthpiece makes have innate characteristics that separate them from the herd, no matter how small. Unless you were talking about your own experience with Barones, in which case I can't argue with that but that also does not help me in the slightest.

FYI, I am a professional player with a lot of experience with different mouthpiece designs. I fully acknowledge the fact that there is an adjustment period when changing to a new design. If the piece was in perfect playing condition to begin with, there wouldn't have been any problem and I would have just gotten used to it as is.
 
#6 ·
If you are playing a Barone without its baffle, then it does not represent the balance that Phil builds into his mouthpieces. The NY and Hollywood models both play - to varying degree - like hot-rodded Links. I can understand how you might not like their focus if a Berg is your reference point. I played Links and Barones (NY, Hollywood, and Jazz models) in 7* and 8 openings for a long time (decades) and cannot get my sound out of a Berg. The Barones certainly blow sufficiently different than Bergs, so if you only played them for a short time rather than adjusting to them, I can understand that they may not respond to your liking.

I'd suggest that you send the "Precision Crafted" piece back to Phil and ask that he restore it - if you want to know how he intended it to play.

I'm thrown by your comment that the chambers are HUGE - mine were not. Are the chambers on your pieces substantially larger than the shank ID?
 
#10 ·
Thank you George for your detailed and helpful response! Actually the first person I contacted about it was Phil, but he told me that he injured his back and is no longer able to do that type of work. Which is a real shame for someone so talented and accomplished at their craft... But yes, you're right - I want Sebastian to put a new baffle in it. The question is, what kind?

As for the Berg sound thing, I completely hear you. I'm a little lucky in that I play professionally in both rock and jazz settings and I know exactly what I want to sound like in both settings. The unfortunate thing for me right now is that those two sounds are completely different, and my Berg just doesn't give me the sound I want for jazz stuff. If the Precision Crafted sounded just like my Berg, what use would I have for it?

Edit: I just realized you asked about the chamber size. And the answer is an unquestionable yes - They've had by far the largest chambers I've ever seen on a tenor mouthpiece. The Precision Crafted chamber radius had to be almost a full millimeter larger than that of the shank. I don't think the Hollywood or NY were quite as extreme, but they were still much bigger than just about anything I've seen.
 
#13 ·
Also, in my experience there are huge differences between the Barone models. You can't just say Barones play like........... Beyond that, I have even noticed big difference between pieces of the same model. i personally think that is because Phil would tweak mouthpieces for people right there in NY from what I have heard so each person would want something a little bit different. I have a SNY, a NY, a Hollywood and two Jazz models. All completely different blowing and sounding pieces..........
 
#18 ·
Is it the fact that I've been playing a Berg full-time for the last year or so?
I'd say yes it's probably the fact that you've been playing a Berg full-time. It definitely takes some adjustment to move from a high baffle to a low baffle piece. Of course, as a "professional player with a lot of experience with different mouthpiece designs" you probably already know that, so it may not be that helpful. Just something I've always noticed regarding mpcs of highly different design.
 
#19 ·
Well, I can tell why you'd be concerned that it wouldn't be helpful, but it was. In general, I know enough about mouthpieces that being told that two different designs won't sound the same or being told not to blame the mouthpiece for my sound (And I'm at a place where I LOVE my natural sound regardless of mouthpiece, which I'm grateful for) gets on my nerves. But since you said neither of those things, you're good. Thanks, really, for your input. In the past I have only ever gone through the full transition from low baffle to high baffle, not the other way around.
 
#20 ·
Don't know if this would help you at all....but you could check out Steven Neff's mouthpiece review archive, seeing as he reviewed at least a few Barone 'pieces ( www.neffmusic.com/blog/ ): an original NY model, Jazz, Hollywood (I think), Super New York, and maybe a Barone-modified Link. Doesn't tell you how a Barone would play for YOU (but then, no one really can), but let's you hear how they played for Neff, compared to each other and a bunch of mouthpieces by other makers in the same general "Link-like" category. Steve tries to keep the recording conditions as consistent as he can, given that he's been reviewing mouthpieces for us for several years now. With every review he shows photos of the baffle and chamber to give you an idea of the configuration that goes with the sound.

I had a Jazz 8, and to this day wonder why I ever let it go. It liked slightly softer reeds, and though not what I'd call a focused sound compared to a Berg, was deliciously warm and rich, with some punch when pushed.

Good luck.
 
#25 ·
Oh yeah, I'm a huge fan of Steve's reviews. I've probably seen every last one of them, they're great. And he always sounds great regardless of the design. But that's still just one man's opinion. I'm trying to get more of a broad consensus of sorts, if you catch my drift.

And thanks for sharing your experience!
 
#26 ·
I'll chime in as this piece is on my workbench right now. This was a Florida era STM that has been machined to have no rings on the shank, no ridge on top, has enlarged sidewalls (further rounded) and previously some other material added inside. I hesitate to call it an added baffle because that's not where the material was. There are dots where Phil drilled tiny holes to make for good adhesion for a layer of something (I don't know what was there before, it came to me removed) on the floor of this mouthpiece.

Aesthetically, this was really nice looking work, and the facing measured more or less true and more importantly, felt really good. The baffle was on the lower side I expect to accommodate the artificial raising of the floor. Even with the ding at the tip, it played pretty nicely although maybe lacked a bit. I'm fixing the table which was worn and will adjust the curve accordingly. Right now I'm adjusting the tip shape to remove the dent which means sanding and filing to create a new and better shape. It's my hope to not add anything and let it be, essentially still a really good FL era Super Tone Master. I think it measures around .113".

When everything is balanced on a STM, these things really come to life. This piece has no relation to his later machined models that he designed and made from scratch which were with much larger chambers and way more baffle.
 
#27 ·
I think Phil used some kind of white hot glue gun stuff for these early baffles. In spite of the drilled anchor holes, they tend to fall out over time. I replace them with plumbers epoxy putty which I have never heard of falling out from my clients.

Beyond that, I like to adjust the facing curve and reshape the tip rail to be more responsive. You can get the original facing to play by using a soft enough reed and taking in a lot of mouthpiece. But most players, IMO, do not like to play this way.
 
#28 ·
I'm thinking the .113" tip - which was incredibly deceptive, it felt and responded as if it was much smaller than that - may have been the cause of the lack of focus in the sound.

Mojo, I think you're right about the baffle material - The ones that I was able to find photos of had baffles that were white-ish, and not a single one looked like it was in good shape (outwardly). Apparently they all played well, though.
 
#53 ·
Craig, I've been following this thread, and if you want an objective opinion, I thought your initial response to Pete was unjustifiably rude. I think the tone of several of your other posts in the thread comes off as condescending and just a shade aggressive. And that's the tone I read into the trailer at the bottom of your posts (the self-important 'I can't stand . . .' and the aggressive 'Do you know what I call people . . .').

Just my opinion, but I've got some background with the written word.
 
#55 ·
You're not a fan of hybrid comedy-documentary shows like "The Office" or "Parks and Recreation," are you? That's how my signature was intended. Picture a quirky, colorful office in the background, and a comedic, fast zoom-in to my face before I say "classical musicians." Not that that's at all relevant.

I'm sorry if you don't like my intensity and my level of passion. But having strong beliefs doesn't mean that I think I'm better than everyone else or that no one else's thoughts matter. Hell, if I felt that way, what use would there be for asking questions in the first place?
 
#63 ·
I want flexibility in my mouthpiece. The school of playing that I come from gives you tremendous control of the timbre, so I don't want a mouthpiece that is really set in its sound, like some high baffle small chamber mouthpieces can be. I don't need lots of baffle to have some edge to the sound, so Links and Link inspired mouthpieces are what I play on tenor. I do have a Barone, but it is a Hollywood Limited that has a larger chamber (hence the "Limited") which has been my main mouthpiece, but it probably isn't a very typical of Phil Barone mouthpiece (it was produced in limited mumbers). I studied with the same guy that Phil Barone did, so his mouthpieces tend to work well for me and I like them a lot.
 
#68 ·
Craig, it sounds like you weren't playing the right reeds on my mouthpieces. While they might be spread sounding, they're also quite focused. They have a lot of sound. You have to put a Rico Jazz Select 2H or 3S on them or something like that. I think the Hollywood would fit the bill for you, the newer ones. I'll add that it sounds like you don't use your diaphragm a lot since you're so used to playing that small chamber. Also, you don't say what the tip opening is on your Berg. Phil Barone
 
#69 ·
Craig, it sounds like you weren't playing the right reeds on my mouthpieces. While they might be spread sounding, they're also quite focused. They have a lot of sound. You have to put a Rico Jazz Select 2H or 3S on them or something like that. I think the Hollywood would fit the bill for you, the newer ones. Also, you don't say what the tip opening is on your Berg. Phil Barone
Phil Can i add to this ? I do play a Rico Jazz Select (Daddario Now) 2H on my SNY .

Craig - With this set up and a Selmer 2 Screw Ligature (Silver Plated Metal Made in France) I find the sound extremely focused with great projection. It was interesting to re read your comment about not being able to get focus or centre ?
 
#78 ·
Sage advice. This cannot be stressed enough. Different mouthpieces like different reeds and it's important to experiment a little. If the manufacturer recommends something, try that first and you'll see how at least it was intended to be played.

Adam Niewood taught me to start with the reed you like and then find a mouthpiece that matches it. Best advice I ever got.
 
#93 ·
I wish I had a quick answer for you on that one... The Robusto 9 was the biggest-tipped mouthpiece I've ever played. It was great, it took all my air, I could use a ton of different reeds on it, and yet there was something missing. What I came to realize was that while my sound on that piece was great, it wasn't MY sound. It lacked the focus, the intensity, the pathos, that for years before that I had worked so hard for. The Robusto is great if you want to be a chameleon in many different genres. But when it comes to music, I'm an artist, not a craftsman. A craftsman does what he has to do to get the job done well. An artist does what he does because he has the intrinsic, deep-seated need to preach his inner truth. The Robusto is probably the best tool on the market for a craftsman. But that's just not who I am.
 
#94 ·
So, I just got the piece back from Sebastian today, and it is great. He closed the tip to a .103", and the facing, rails and table look gorgeous. You can't even tell there was damage!

I'd like to take a moment to thank you all whole-heartedly for you input, and to sincerely apologize to Pete Thomas. I did mean what I said at the time, but that's only because I was in efficiency mode. But now that the problem is solved and I'm back to normal, I don't like hurting peoples' feelings. There is certainly more to life than efficiency, and even though I usually am one of the most empathetic people you will ever meet, that sort of conduct (from me) is unacceptable to me. So, Pete, I'm truly sorry. And genuinely, thanks for trying to help.

This piece is VERY different from my Berg, in just about every way. And I love it! Nothing worse than trying to play creatively with a sound that is stale. And I can only assume it will get better and better with daily practice and tone exercises. And maybe deep breathing, as well. As it is, it's got that center that I've been looking for in a Link-type piece, but it's still a little more spread than I would like. With the reed I'm using right now it's putting me into the Jerry Bergonzi zone, which is cool but different than what I'm used to. But Sebastian's work made it 1000x better than it was, so this issue is on me and my chops, and I'm feeling confident about fixing it.
 
#97 ·
Nope! The existing baffle was reworked to what looks like a flat baffle instead of the typical rollover (Or maybe it was always a flat baffle and I just didn't look carefully enough to notice, but either way it is definitely more refined looking now), and the table was flattened. Other than that, I can't tell what was tweaked, but whatever he did made a huge difference!

Office supplies Writing implement Wood Ammunition Gun accessory
Wood Finger Household hardware Auto part Metal
Wood Finger Thumb Nail Button
Hand Wood Finger Nail Thumb


By the way, I LOVE the look of the "floor holes" past the baffle... Not sure how they can be there without causing excess turbulence, but somehow it works. The inside of the mouthpiece looks like a piece of ornate jewelry!
 
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