I've recently realized that I prefer a tenor mpc to have air resistance. This really helps me to play long lines without stopping to take a breath. I don't like what some people call "free blowing" tenor pieces. I used to think resistance had to do with chamber size and high baffles, but now I'm not sure at all.
What are the factors that make a mouthpiece have more resistance, and what are some tenor pieces that have resistance without being high-baffled Berg types (really bright sounding)?
I can never tell if people are on the same page when talking about resistance. It sounds like you think of it in a similar way than I do. I find it easier to control a piece that I can push on vs a piece that wants to go to 11 all the time.
In my mind, the baffle right at the tip has a lot to do with resistance. I'm not talking about the entire baffle in general but the area of the baffle right where it cuts away from the tip rail. I'm starting to suspect that a high baffle at the tip can speed up the air stream but also limit the amount of air that can enter creating the feeling of resistance or "something to push against". I think this high beginning-baffle does give the sound some upper frequency air and sparkle, but what happens after that in the mouthpiece shapes the core sound. If the baffle quickly drops into a medium/large chamber that will introduced warmth but if the baffle continues high into a high floor (like a high shelf type) then the piece generally has more highs and mids (cut). This is my hunch based on my experimentation with modifying blanks that I've been collecting. Even if there is any truth to my findings, you can take it with a grain of salt because it is almost surely an over-simplification. There is a lot of factors at play inside a mouthpiece (and outside - the curve), and everything effects everything else, and it can get very counter-intuitive. Sometimes changing something can yield the opposite effect than what you suspected leaving you scratching your head. And that is not even getting into all other variables like reeds, horns, players physiology, etc.
I tend to like pieces that don't get aggressive unless you feel aggressive. That way the sound more matches what I feel. Some pieces make too much too easily and make me feel like I'm trying to hold back all the time and I don't like that. That's what I perceive as free blowing.
To try to answer your last question, I think everything effects resistance (baffle, floor, throat, lay, etc). A combination that I find resistant but also warm and full is a high roll-ever dropping into a medium to large chamber. Basically a classic vintage design like a Link, Gregory, Brilhart hard rubber, etc). I'm sure there are many more design configurations that would fit the bill.
I've recently realized that I prefer a tenor mpc to have air resistance. This really helps me to play long lines without stopping to take a breath. I don't like what some people call "free blowing" tenor pieces. I used to think resistance had to do with chamber size and high baffles, but now I'm not sure at all.
What are the factors that make a mouthpiece have more resistance, and what are some tenor pieces that have resistance without being high-baffled Berg types (really bright sounding)?
There are a few things that influence the resistance of a mouthpiece--
Facing curve -- a tighter bend generally or in any spot along the facing will create resistance to the reed bending, requiring more pressure to close it. The longer or more nearly radial the facing, the less resistant. Asymmetry also causes resistance, but in a not-at-all useful way.
Baffle -- higher (and up to a point, longer) baffle means less resistance. It accelerates the air more, increasing the pressure differential on the reed, closing it with less mouth-side air pressure. If the baffle is such a height or shape that it creates turbulence under the tip of the reed, that will cause some resistance and instability (again, not useful).
Player feedback -- when a piece, for whatever reason, is missing some of the harmonic content that you want to hear, you'll instinctively blow harder to try to get it. It feels more resistant to get your sound, even though it's not technically so. Also, too-slow response can feel like resistance as well.
Chamber shape -- generally, larger and smaller don't matter w/r/t resistance (except when it introduces the above case of player feedback related resistance), but sometimes chamber features can matter. e.g. a squeeze at the end of the window (like a Meyer) introduces some resistance, I don't think it's because it also cuts some of the very high frequencies as well.
This is one of those things that is a matter of taste. Some players like minimal resistance, some like more. I prefer something to balance against and build a middling amount of resistance into my facings.
What pieces have more resistance? Any of them, in a larger tip opening. If you want more edge and more resistance, look for shorter facings.
Facing curve -- a tighter bend generally or in any spot along the facing will create resistance to the reed bending, requiring more pressure to close it. The longer or more nearly radial the facing, the less resistant.…
One generally does not want to use a high rollover near the tip. While it does make for resistance I don't think most would consider it good resistance. It makes for a stuffier piece and a lack of clarity through parts of the horn. Poorly adjusted baffles are about as guilty as crooked facings for poor performance in a piece. You get a double whammy when you have both.
I agree overall with Morgan. If you want more resistance get a bigger tip and or a shorter facing for more resistance. Some curves will offer a bit more but like he said...it's just inherent in some design s to get a little cushioned feedback. You will generally find it in my pieces as I would much rather lean into a piece than constantly hold back a piece that wants to run away fro you. Additionally, I've found pieces that are too free blowing will tend to start breaking up when pushed. To me it's more apparent in super free blowing round chambered pieces.
One generally does not want to use a high rollover near the tip. While it does make for resistance I don't think most would consider it good resistance. It makes for a stuffier piece and a lack of clarity through parts of the horn.
When I think of a high roll over, I think of most Brilharts as being high roll-over baffles. Is that how you would classify them (tonalin, ebolin, rubber, etc)? The old brass Dukoffs and maybe Link Double rings sometime resemble high rollovers to me also but maybe a lot of them have been opened up and baffles reshaped.?
I've recently realized that I prefer a tenor mpc to have air resistance. This really helps me to play long lines without stopping to take a breath. I don't like what some people call "free blowing" tenor pieces. I used to think resistance had to do with chamber size and high baffles, but now I'm not sure at all.
What are the factors that make a mouthpiece have more resistance, and what are some tenor pieces that have resistance without being high-baffled Berg types (really bright sounding)?
I think what Soybean may want is an acoustically responsive and efficient mouthpiece. This would allow the most sound to be produced with the least amount of air used. This is actually what many players consider a free blowing mouthpiece (if the tip opening is large enough that it does not close off when they play it loud). It gets a big sound while using a comfortable amount of air.
I think what Soybean may want is an acoustically responsive and efficient mouthpiece. This would allow the most sound to be produced with the least amount of air used. This is actually what many players consider a free blowing mouthpiece (if the tip opening is large enough that it does not close off when they play it loud). It gets a big sound while using a comfortable amount of air.
Yes, that sounds like what I'm looking for. What I call free blowing is a piece with low resistance and the player can put sudden gusts of air into if he/she wants. That can be great fun and expressive. But the problem with a piece like that is it is easy to run out of air without frequent stops to breath.
Can you give an example of an acoustically responsive and efficient mouthpiece?
If the table is not out of wack lig placement won't make much difference in resistance. The break away point shoul be further down the piece. That isn't to say it can't make a small difference in tone or response...but if the table is flat...not much
Isn't resistance the effect of a harder reed than anything else? And the mouthpiece inner design shapes the sound by speeding it up or slowing it down?
You have many types of mouthpieces with many types of design.
But you also have tons of different reeds you can choose from...
The fact that different reeds have different cuts... means the reed are different physically/dimensionally (and of course the cane can be different as well).
To get resistance, you use a stiffer reed (stiffer = higher in number = stiffer cane) and/or you can use a reed which has more material on the vamp (... with the different cut in general).
Most of the times is pointless (and expensive) to switch mouthpieces just to find a mouthpiece which fits good a specific brand/type/strenght of reed.
I can buy that. Was defining the easiest generation of sound for the OP. I'm OK with saying there is a better spot for playing (for most players) that has some resistance in the facing curve or the reed choice.
I prefer to call a rollover baffle as one the has a small radius near the tip rail. Like in a Link Tone Edge. But many consider what I call (longer) arched baffles as rollovers too. Like in a Meyer. I think it leads to confusion to call them both the same.
I prefer to call a rollover baffle as one the has a small radius near the tip rail. Like in a Link Tone Edge. But many consider what I call (longer) arched baffles as rollovers too. Like in a Meyer. I think it leads to confusion to call them both the same.
I agree it leads to confusion. What often gets called a long rollover I think is more properly considered a straight baffle, although when there is a slight radius behind the tip a case can be made for calling them also rollovers. The reason I consider them different is because (as you surely know) they behave differently. Even with a tiny rollover the short straight baffle blended into the floor (e.g. late 'no USA' Florida Link STM's and all later STM's) plays differently from a true rollover (e.g. earlier Links, heck almost all jazz mouthpieces before them).
Yes, and the reason there are so many issues with links and other rollovers is that it's literally an gnats rear ends difference in the height of a true rollover that makes the difference between a piece that plays well and sings with a sweet buzz and a piece that is stuffy, overly resistant with spittle sounds. This is why pieces that are not actually play tested tend to have a fail rate.
Most CNC pieces that work well tend to have more forgiving designs. There is an absurdly small margin for error on a true rollover. It's beyond machine tolerances and is only discovered when played. You can get away with a slightly crooked facing in certain curve regions...though it's not good. However, a rollover that is not precise is simply the death of tone and response. Literally a couple of passes with a fine file can make a world of difference.
I don't mean to go off topic but it is related to response, resistance, and overall tonal quality of a piece. It's more important than perfectly even rail thickness and other factors...of course they all add up and the more off each is creates increasing issues. Conversely, the more accurate the entire picture, the increased advantage to the player.
This post is a real education, with all the talk recently about the quality of the posts in question. We are very fortunate to have Morgan, Phil, Mojo etc. Who give up their time. Thanks to the screen capture on the iPad also, this worth keeping as a great future reference.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Sax on the Web Forum
3.3M posts
75.4K members
Since 2003
A forum community dedicated to saxophone players and enthusiasts originally founded by Harri Rautiainen. Come join the discussion about collections, care, displays, models, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!