1. 3/4" Dymo label tape - makes a durable patch with a hard surface.  I think a roll was about $17 w. shipping, and has to be good for a few hundred patches.
2. The scotch tape for gift wrapping - comes in a little block 3/4" x 2" - I cut each block in half and trim with a razor blade to shape and then peel off 2-3 layers at a time  for a softer mouthpiece patch.  
   

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "John" <john_w_price33@...> wrote:
>
>
> If you open or close a mouthpiece the rails do get wider but that is on the
outer side.  You can just narrow the rails from the outside with a file.  ie 
Closing the facing will not make the window narrower.
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@> wrote:
> >
> > Before you open/close a mouthpiece, you need to measure, measure, and
measure some more.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: xmichaelpartlowx <xmichaelpartlowx@>
> > To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wed, November 18, 2009 12:46:25 AM
> > Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Changing the Tip Opening?
> >
> >  
> > Pretty straight forward. I want to open a very closed piece to what feels
most comfortable to me. How do you open up a piece? Also, for interests sake,
how do you close a very open piece to a very small opening? My initial guess
would be to continually cut down and flatten the table but this would thicken
side rails, and when the side rails are thinned out again, you end up with a
bigger window.
> >
>

If you close a mouthpiece the rails do get wider but that is on the outer side. 
You can just narrow the rails from the outside with a file.  ie  Closing the
facing will not make the window narrower.
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> Before you open/close a mouthpiece, you need to measure, measure, and measure
some more.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: xmichaelpartlowx <xmichaelpartlowx@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, November 18, 2009 12:46:25 AM
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Changing the Tip Opening?
>
>  
> Pretty straight forward. I want to open a very closed piece to what feels most
comfortable to me. How do you open up a piece? Also, for interests sake, how do
you close a very open piece to a very small opening? My initial guess would be
to continually cut down and flatten the table but this would thicken side rails,
and when the side rails are thinned out again, you end up with a bigger window.
>

From jimmitch >>>You need a good refacing kit .Check the links for them.If you
are not going to measure then you will need to play test many times as you are
working on the piece.I never cared much about the look of a mouthpiece. I only
care that it plays great.

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "Morgan" <frymorgan@...> wrote:
>
> The problem is in the table and/or the facing curve.  You've gone as far as
you can go without measuring now.  Time to drop $50 on some tools.
>
> --- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "xmichaelpartlowx" <xmichaelpartlowx@>
wrote:
> >
> > I know this is a more (and by more I mean very) ignorant post, but I'll wing
it. ;)
> >
> > I have a Selmer Goldentone plastic mouthpiece I practiced for my first
reface. My goal was to get the mouthpiece down to the minimums. Essentially, I
wanted to make the chamber bigger, thin the rails, remove the baffle, basically
anything that required removing material. For my next piece I tried adding, and
this let me do quite a bit of practice.
> >
> > The Selmer Goldentone is a dud but it is finished beautifully in my opinion.
Now I hate to say this, but the finishing in terms of evenness looks much better
than not only some Babbit mouthpieces, but some mouthpieces hand made by people.
(did I mention I was humble?)
> >
> > To the point, I spent a lot of time on the piece and worked and undid and
worked and undid over a period of about a week or two to make sure it was
physically beautiful. When I look at it, the cleanliness to the work reminds me
of those Aizen mouthpieces every seems to love. I was proud, until I slapped the
reed on.
> >
> > When I buzz on just the mouthpiece I'll notice its very free blowing and
clean, but there seems to be some gaps. I'll play for 4 seconds and then it
stops, and then I reblow and similar results happen. I put it on the tenor and
it plays some notes but nothing in the extreme like very low notes. I understand
that this is no surprise because this piece was designed to, well, look good!
Does anyone know what aspects could likely cause these problems? The chamber is
medium by the way. Thin rails, no baffle, medium chamber, and unfortunately I
did not use any meausuring tools and I don't have any so I don't know the tip.
If it is the tip, would you guess to small or too big (I would guess small) and
how would I make it bigger?
> >
>

----- Original Message -----

From: Barry Levine

To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 6:18 PM

Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Undercutting the Base of the window "U"

 

With some trepidation, I rounded off the edge of the "U" on my Ponzol M1
tenor piece.

Definitely more free-blowing, glad I did it.
Either that or my reeds just somehow got a whole lot better.

Barry

> I experimented to some extent with altering the "U" or Ramp area on various
> mouthpieces, to the extent of even filling in the curved "U" window
> completely, with an abrupt wall the same thickness as the table. Here's a
> summary of my findings:
>
> 1. any sharp, exposed edges cause turbulence and resistance.
>
> 2. If the table wall is thick (HR mouthpiece with small chamber for example),
> then excessive rounding or angling of the ramp wall will dramatically reduce
> resistance but will also cause the intonation and feel of tonal character of
> the mouthpiece to become uncentered. It's better to just slightly round any
> sharp edge at the ramp wall/throat junction
>
> 3 If the table wall is thin (STM Link for example) then angling of the ramp
> has mostly beneficial results.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@yahoo.com>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, November 14, 2009 3:24:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Undercutting the Base of the window "U"
>
>
> I do this as a routine part of a refacing job on all mouthpieces. I do not do
> many classical mouthpiece. That is the case where I might be concerned with
> altering the resistance without discussing this with the client.
>
> I had a metal Yana tenor MP last year that had a nice facing on it. The only
> change I made was to undercut this area leading in to one side of the
> square-ish throat. The change was stunning in this case. Much more
> free-blowing and resonant. According to Ferron, sound can refect off the
> "wall" at the base of the window U. He has diagrams showing this effect.
> The sound eventually makes its way down the sax but it is better if a portion
> does not reflect back to the tip before finding its way.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: mdc5220 <chedoggy@earthlink. net>
> To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sat, November 14, 2009 1:26:02 PM
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Saxophone acoustics website
>
>
>
> In searching for an answer before posting I came across some discussions
> concerning undercutting a blunt floor at the base of the U -- take Guardalas
> as an example, which are undercut significantly. Has any one experimented with
> under cutting the floors of Vandoren Javas or V5s? if so, what results.
>
> tia
>
> mike
>
> --- In MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@ ...>
> wrote:
>>
>>> ...If memory serves well, Ernest Ferron addresses
>>> this matter in his book "The saxophone is my voice" in the mouthpiece
>>> section that ideally the baffle should reflect the wave back into the
>>> chamber. The spoiler that Paul mentions might serve this function.
>>> So ideally, How important is it that the baffle reflect to the
>>> chamber? And Why?
>>>
>>> -Greg
>>
>> I think the mouthpiece diagrams Ferron has in his book offer some good
>> insights not found in other references. I think they illustrate how the
>> path of the standing waves are bounced off the mouthpiece interior geometry
>> and the reed. There are actually many more 3D paths going on
>> simultaneously that would be too complex to show.
>>
>> I think if the paths make their way into the neck with fewer bounces, the
>> tone is clearer with fewer upper partials that are not harmonics of the
>> fundamental (less "noise" or edge). I'm not saying this is how it should
>> be. It is just an observation that might help with mouthpiece
>> understanding and design.
>>
>> I recently worked on a Yanagisawa metal tenor mouthpiece. It had a large
>> blunt "wall" at the base of the window "U". I usually undercut the wall
>> away but before I did I decided to play test it before and after. I had
>> been a while since I checked what this change does. It was very
>> significant and yielded a more projecting sound with less effort. One of
>> Ferron's diagrams shows where this wall reflects a portion of the wave back
>> towards the reed tip (where it must reflect some more before finding its
>> way down the sax). By undercutting this wall, more of the sound wave makes
>> it down the sax on the first pass. I think this is an example of how the
>> process understanding can guide changes and explain the effects of the
>> changes. It is no substitute for playing experience and practice. But it
>> can enrich the mouthpiece design process beyond what trial and error can do.
>>
>>
>> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
>> Be a better friend, newshound, and
>> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. yahoo.com/
>> ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

With some trepidation, I rounded off the edge of the "U" on my Ponzol M1
tenor piece.

Definitely more free-blowing, glad I did it.
Either that or my reeds just somehow got a whole lot better.

Barry


> I experimented to some extent with altering the "U" or Ramp area on various
> mouthpieces, to the extent of even filling in the curved "U" window
> completely, with an abrupt wall the same thickness as the table.  Here's a
> summary of my findings:
>
> 1. any sharp, exposed edges cause turbulence and resistance.
>
> 2. If the table wall is thick (HR mouthpiece with small chamber for example),
> then excessive rounding or angling of the ramp wall will dramatically reduce
> resistance but will also cause the intonation and feel of tonal character of
> the mouthpiece to become uncentered.  It's better to just slightly round any
> sharp edge at the ramp wall/throat junction
>
> 3 If the table wall is thin (STM Link for example) then angling of the ramp
> has mostly beneficial results.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, November 14, 2009 3:24:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Undercutting the Base of the window "U"
>
>
> I do this as a routine part of a refacing job on all mouthpieces.  I do not do
> many classical mouthpiece.  That is the case where I might be concerned with
> altering the resistance without discussing this with the client.
>
> I had a metal Yana tenor MP last year that had a nice facing on it.  The only
> change I made was to undercut this area leading in to one side of the
> square-ish throat.  The change was stunning in this case.  Much more
> free-blowing and resonant.  According to Ferron, sound can refect off the
> "wall" at the base of the window U.  He has diagrams showing this effect.
> The sound eventually makes its way down the sax but it is better if a portion
> does not reflect back to the tip before finding its way.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: mdc5220 <chedoggy@earthlink. net>
> To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sat, November 14, 2009 1:26:02 PM
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Saxophone acoustics website
>
>
>
> In searching for an answer before posting I came across some discussions
> concerning undercutting a blunt floor at the base of the U -- take Guardalas
> as an example, which are undercut significantly. Has any one experimented with
> under cutting the floors of Vandoren Javas or V5s? if so, what results.
>
> tia
>
> mike
>
> --- In MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@ ...>
> wrote:
>>
>>> ...If memory serves well, Ernest Ferron addresses
>>> this matter in his book "The saxophone is my voice" in the mouthpiece
>>> section that ideally the baffle should reflect the wave back into the
>>> chamber. The spoiler that Paul mentions might serve this function.
>>> So ideally, How important is it that the baffle reflect to the
>>> chamber? And Why?
>>>
>>> -Greg
>>
>> I think the mouthpiece diagrams Ferron has in his book offer some good
>> insights not found in other references. I think they illustrate how the
>> path of the standing waves are bounced off the mouthpiece interior geometry
>> and the reed. There are actually many more 3D paths going on
>> simultaneously that would be too complex to show.
>>
>> I think if the paths make their way into the neck with fewer bounces, the
>> tone is clearer with fewer upper partials that are not harmonics of the
>> fundamental (less "noise" or edge). I'm not saying this is how it should
>> be. It is just an observation that might help with mouthpiece
>> understanding and design.
>>
>> I recently worked on a Yanagisawa metal tenor mouthpiece. It had a large
>> blunt "wall" at the base of the window "U". I usually undercut the wall
>> away but before I did I decided to play test it before and after. I had
>> been a while since I checked what this change does. It was very
>> significant and yielded a more projecting sound with less effort. One of
>> Ferron's diagrams shows where this wall reflects a portion of the wave back
>> towards the reed tip (where it must reflect some more before finding its
>> way down the sax). By undercutting this wall, more of the sound wave makes
>> it down the sax on the first pass. I think this is an example of how the
>> process understanding can guide changes and explain the effects of the
>> changes. It is no substitute for playing experience and practice. But it
>> can enrich the mouthpiece design process beyond what trial and error can do.
>>
>>
>> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
>> Be a better friend, newshound, and
>> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. yahoo.com/
>> ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

The problem is in the table and/or the facing curve.  You've gone as far as you
can go without measuring now.  Time to drop $50 on some tools.

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "xmichaelpartlowx" <xmichaelpartlowx@...>
wrote:
>
> I know this is a more (and by more I mean very) ignorant post, but I'll wing
it. ;)
>
> I have a Selmer Goldentone plastic mouthpiece I practiced for my first reface.
My goal was to get the mouthpiece down to the minimums. Essentially, I wanted to
make the chamber bigger, thin the rails, remove the baffle, basically anything
that required removing material. For my next piece I tried adding, and this let
me do quite a bit of practice.
>
> The Selmer Goldentone is a dud but it is finished beautifully in my opinion.
Now I hate to say this, but the finishing in terms of evenness looks much better
than not only some Babbit mouthpieces, but some mouthpieces hand made by people.
(did I mention I was humble?)
>
> To the point, I spent a lot of time on the piece and worked and undid and
worked and undid over a period of about a week or two to make sure it was
physically beautiful. When I look at it, the cleanliness to the work reminds me
of those Aizen mouthpieces every seems to love. I was proud, until I slapped the
reed on.
>
> When I buzz on just the mouthpiece I'll notice its very free blowing and
clean, but there seems to be some gaps. I'll play for 4 seconds and then it
stops, and then I reblow and similar results happen. I put it on the tenor and
it plays some notes but nothing in the extreme like very low notes. I understand
that this is no surprise because this piece was designed to, well, look good!
Does anyone know what aspects could likely cause these problems? The chamber is
medium by the way. Thin rails, no baffle, medium chamber, and unfortunately I
did not use any meausuring tools and I don't have any so I don't know the tip.
If it is the tip, would you guess to small or too big (I would guess small) and
how would I make it bigger?
>

I know this is a more (and by more I mean very) ignorant post, but I'll wing it.
;)

I have a Selmer Goldentone plastic mouthpiece I practiced for my first reface.
My goal was to get the mouthpiece down to the minimums. Essentially, I wanted to
make the chamber bigger, thin the rails, remove the baffle, basically anything
that required removing material. For my next piece I tried adding, and this let
me do quite a bit of practice.

The Selmer Goldentone is a dud but it is finished beautifully in my opinion. Now
I hate to say this, but the finishing in terms of evenness looks much better
than not only some Babbit mouthpieces, but some mouthpieces hand made by people.
(did I mention I was humble?)

To the point, I spent a lot of time on the piece and worked and undid and worked
and undid over a period of about a week or two to make sure it was physically
beautiful. When I look at it, the cleanliness to the work reminds me of those
Aizen mouthpieces every seems to love. I was proud, until I slapped the reed on.

When I buzz on just the mouthpiece I'll notice its very free blowing and clean,
but there seems to be some gaps. I'll play for 4 seconds and then it stops, and
then I reblow and similar results happen. I put it on the tenor and it plays
some notes but nothing in the extreme like very low notes. I understand that
this is no surprise because this piece was designed to, well, look good! Does
anyone know what aspects could likely cause these problems? The chamber is
medium by the way. Thin rails, no baffle, medium chamber, and unfortunately I
did not use any meausuring tools and I don't have any so I don't know the tip.
If it is the tip, would you guess to small or too big (I would guess small) and
how would I make it bigger?

beautiful! I don't know why I'd want an extension but nice work!

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "MojoBari" <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> Some nice looking work.  Scroll to the bottom of the Link to see a screw-on
version.
>
> http://news.musicmedic.com/index.php?entry=entry090908-112054
>

Pretty straight forward. I want to open a very closed piece to what feels most
comfortable to me. How do you open up a piece? Also, for interests sake, how do
you close a very open piece to a very small opening? My initial guess would be
to continually cut down and flatten the table but this would thicken side rails,
and when the side rails are thinned out again, you end up with a bigger window.

Some nice looking work.  Scroll to the bottom of the Link to see a screw-on
version.

http://news.musicmedic.com/index.php?entry=entry090908-112054

 

I experimented to some extent with altering the "U" or Ramp area on various mouthpieces, to the extent of even filling in the curved "U" window completely, with an abrupt wall the same thickness as the table.  Here's a summary of my findings:

1. any sharp, exposed edges cause turbulence and resistance.

2. If the table wall is thick (HR mouthpiece with small chamber for example), then excessive rounding or angling of the ramp wall will dramatically reduce resistance but will also cause the intonation and feel of tonal character of the mouthpiece to become uncentered.  It's better to just slightly round any sharp edge at the ramp wall/throat junction

3 If the table wall is thin (STM Link for example) then angling of the ramp has mostly beneficial results.

---

From: Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@yahoo.com>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, November 14, 2009 3:24:34 PM
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Undercutting the Base of the window "U"

 

I do this as a routine part of a refacing job on all mouthpieces.  I do not do many classical mouthpiece.  That is the case where I might be concerned with altering the resistance without discussing this with the client.

 

I had a metal Yana tenor MP last year that had a nice facing on it.  The only change I made was to undercut this area leading in to one side of the square-ish throat.  The change was stunning in this case.  Much more free-blowing and resonant.  According to Ferron, sound can refect off the "wall" at the base of the window U.  He has diagrams showing this effect.   The sound eventually makes its way down the sax but it is better if a portion does not reflect back to the tip before finding its way. 

---

From: mdc5220 <chedoggy@earthlink. net>
To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
Sent: Sat, November 14, 2009 1:26:02 PM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Re: Saxophone acoustics website

 

In searching for an answer before posting I came across some discussions concerning undercutting a blunt floor at the base of the U -- take Guardalas as an example, which are undercut significantly. Has any one experimented with under cutting the floors of Vandoren Javas or V5s? if so, what results.

tia

mike

--- In MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@ ...> wrote:
>
> > ...If memory serves well, Ernest Ferron addresses
> > this matter in his book "The saxophone is my voice" in the mouthpiece
> > section that ideally the baffle should reflect the wave back into the
> > chamber. The spoiler that Paul mentions might serve this function.
> > So ideally, How important is it that the baffle reflect to the
> > chamber? And Why?
> >
> > -Greg
>
> I think the mouthpiece diagrams Ferron has in his book offer some good
> insights not found in other references. I think they illustrate how the
> path of the standing waves are bounced off the mouthpiece interior geometry
> and the reed. There are actually many more 3D paths going on
> simultaneously that would be too complex to show.
>
> I think if the paths make their way into the neck with fewer bounces, the
> tone is clearer with fewer upper partials that are not harmonics of the
> fundamental (less "noise" or edge). I'm not saying this is how it should
> be. It is just an observation that might help with mouthpiece
> understanding and design.
>
> I recently worked on a Yanagisawa metal tenor mouthpiece. It had a large
> blunt "wall" at the base of the window "U". I usually undercut the wall
> away but before I did I decided to play test it before and after. I had
> been a while since I checked what this change does. It was very
> significant and yielded a more projecting sound with less effort. One of
> Ferron's diagrams shows where this wall reflects a portion of the wave back
> towards the reed tip (where it must reflect some more before finding its
> way down the sax). By undercutting this wall, more of the sound wave makes
> it down the sax on the first pass. I think this is an example of how the
> process understanding can guide changes and explain the effects of the
> changes. It is no substitute for playing experience and practice. But it
> can enrich the mouthpiece design process beyond what trial and error can do.
>
>
> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. yahoo.com/ ;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR 8HDtDypao8Wcj9tA cJ
>

<efurre@...> sent me a private Email commenting on Oatey epoxy putty.  I
tried to repply but the Email bounced back.

In searching for an answer before posting I came across some discussions
concerning undercutting a blunt floor at the base of the U -- take Guardalas as
an example, which are undercut significantly.  Has any one experimented with
under cutting the floors of Vandoren Javas or V5s? if so, what results.

tia

mike


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> >  ...If memory serves well, Ernest Ferron addresses
> > this matter in his book "The saxophone is my voice" in the mouthpiece
> > section that ideally the baffle should reflect the wave back into the
> > chamber.  The spoiler that Paul mentions might serve this function.
> > So ideally, How important is it that the baffle reflect to the
> > chamber? And Why?
> >
> > -Greg
>
> I think the mouthpiece diagrams Ferron has in his book offer some good
> insights not found in other references.  I think they illustrate how the
> path of the standing waves are bounced off the mouthpiece interior geometry
> and the reed.  There are actually many more 3D paths going on
> simultaneously that would be too complex to show.
>
> I think if the paths make their way into the neck with fewer bounces, the
> tone is clearer with fewer upper partials that are not harmonics of the
> fundamental (less "noise" or edge).  I'm not saying this is how it should
> be.  It is just an observation that might help with mouthpiece
> understanding and design.
>
> I recently worked on a Yanagisawa metal tenor mouthpiece.  It had a large
> blunt "wall" at the base of the window "U".  I usually undercut the wall
> away but before I did I decided to play test it before and after.  I had
> been a while since I checked what this change does.  It was very
> significant and yielded a more projecting sound with less effort.  One of
> Ferron's diagrams shows where this wall reflects a portion of the wave back
> towards the reed tip (where it must reflect some more before finding its
> way down the sax).  By undercutting this wall, more of the sound wave makes
> it down the sax on the first pass.  I think this is an example of how the
> process understanding can guide changes and explain the effects of the
> changes.  It is no substitute for playing experience and practice.  But it
> can enrich the mouthpiece design process beyond what trial and error can do.
>
>
>      
________________________________________________________________________________\
____
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>

Wow this really sucks. I wrote responses 2x and the pop-up from Yahoo asking
about sharing/ rich text option comes up, I make my choice and preview my
message, try to go back to edit...I lose everything. What's the deal here?
--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "MojoBari" <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> I have found a radial facing curve with a long facing length to be the most
free-blowing.  Perhaps too free-blowing unless the tip opening is wide.
>

I have found a radial facing curve with a long facing length to be the most
free-blowing.  Perhaps too free-blowing unless the tip opening is wide.

----- Original Message -----

From: Keith Bradbury

To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 9:59 AM

Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] Alto Mpce Resistance

 

It is normal for the smaller saxes to play best with a firmer embouchure than the larger saxes.  One indication of these embouchures are the pitch targets for playing the mouthpiece alone:

 

Soprano C
Alto A
Tenor G
Baritone Eb

 

These are general guidelines attributed to Santy Runyon.  Jazz players often play looser and push in more to compensate.  But this requires more lipping to keep the sax in tune. 

 

Note that the alto and tenor targets are only a step apart.  So the difference in ideal embouchure support is not huge, but it is noticeable.

 

Blowing resistance has a lot to do with tip opening, reed choice and facing curve length, shape and quality.

 

I think it is possible to play alto with a tenor-like embouchure and resistance.  It can sound fatter like a tenor.  A Jackie McLean sound come to mind.
 

Mojo Mouthpiece Work LLC

2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361
Paypal to sabradbury79@yahoo.com 
Check out: http://www.mojomouthpiecework.com/

---

From: maddahorn <maddahorn@yahoo.com>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, November 12, 2009 7:51:30 AM
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Alto Mpce Resistance

 

Hello all,

I play Tenor but also own an alto, a '56 MKVI. I rarely play it since
the only mpce I had , Dukoff 7*, broke down. Since I buy and sell horns
I've acquired many alto pces left in the case. I messed with a few
vintage pces to get them to play reasonably well but not great - meaning
much more resistance than from my tenor. For the heck of it I put my
VanDoren HR - .110" tip opening -tenor pce on the alto and it fit nicely
but more than anything it blew freely, more than I have ever experienced
b4 with this horn. I think this was the 1st time I enjoyed playing this
horn since I got in '88. Obviously it was not in tune but the free
blowing experience of this setup was great. Is it normal to get
resistance blowing an alto with a good mpce comparitively to a tenor? or
should you be able to experience the same situation with a well finished
alto mpce?

Hello all,

I play Tenor but also own an alto, a '56 MKVI. I rarely play it since
the only mpce I had , Dukoff 7*, broke down. Since I buy and sell horns
I've acquired many alto pces left in the case. I messed with a few
vintage pces to get them to play reasonably well but not great - meaning
much more resistance than from my tenor. For the heck of it I put my
VanDoren HR - .110" tip opening -tenor pce on the alto and it fit nicely
but more than anything it blew freely, more than I have ever experienced
b4 with this horn. I think this was the 1st time I enjoyed playing this
horn since I got in '88. Obviously it was not in tune but the free
blowing experience of this setup was great. Is it normal to get
resistance blowing an alto with a good mpce comparitively to a tenor? or
should you be able to experience the same situation with a well finished
alto mpce?