From: Bill Price  <billprice@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 7:12pm
Subject: RE: [HarpOn!] Coverplate Holes


   > From: Brendan Power
>
> In answer to your query Bill, I do think some appropriately sized and
placed
> holes in the covers can add a bit more zing to the sound. You mention the
> tremolo harps, but they are also used on the bottom end of the Silver
> Concerto covers - and of course most famously on the Marine Band. In fact,
> along with the shape and the lightness of the material the MB covers are
> made of, the holes are a big part of its bright tone.
>
I kinda thought you'd be the answer man on this topic.

> The holes probably make more difference to the player than the listener,
as
> they allow you to hear more of the direct reed sound rather than the sound
> you are projecting away from your ears at the other end of the covers and
> your hands. If a harp seems a bit dull or muffled to the player, they
really
> make a difference.

That would be true--particularly in raising your "musical attitude" while
playing. You know that if you don't like what you hear, you don't put as
much of your heart into it, and conversely too--the better you feel about
your sound, the better your "psyche"-- or whatever it is--lets you play.

If you want to experiment without destroying too many
> spare parts, you could just take one set of covers and start drilling,
small
> holes at first (maybe 2mm), and then use some gaffa tape to block them up
to
> test the effect. Trial and error is the only way, really.
>
Okay--I'm gonna give it a shot--maybe i can actually become organized and
make a before and after (or during) recording--perhaps convince myself of
something. maybe I'll bring an O-scope home from work and look for some
positive evidence too.

> The ones I put in my custom CX instruments are not strictly speaking pure
> holes in this sense, as I install metal resonator strips beneath the holes
> which are there to give more of a crisp metallic tone to the plastic
> housings of the CX. However, you can make the stock CX12 sound brighter
> simply by drilling some small holes at either end, and a few on the outer
> edge of the covers at the treble end will enhance the brightness in that
> range too.
>
> Get that drill out, and let us know what you discover.
>
I've got the Roper Whitney hand punch home, so holes will be a snap.
Ooops--shouldn't have said that. I guess if I like them on a 270, I'll try
them on my only cx12. It's not as if I'd tell you anything you don't
already know, but I'll let you--and the group--know what happens. If people
ask me about them, I'll tell them they're "Power Holes."

Maybe you could use that as a registered trademark

thanks again,

-bp

From: Brendan Power  <brend@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 6:11pm
Subject: Coverplate Holes


   In answer to your query Bill, I do think some appropriately sized and
placed
holes in the covers can add a bit more zing to the sound. You mention the
tremolo harps, but they are also used on the bottom end of the Silver
Concerto covers - and of course most famously on the Marine Band. In fact,
along with the shape and the lightness of the material the MB covers are
made of, the holes are a big part of its bright tone.

The holes probably make more difference to the player than the listener, as
they allow you to hear more of the direct reed sound rather than the sound
you are projecting away from your ears at the other end of the covers and
your hands. If a harp seems a bit dull or muffled to the player, they really
make a difference. If you want to experiment without destroying too many
spare parts, you could just take one set of covers and start drilling, small
holes at first (maybe 2mm), and then use some gaffa tape to block them up to
test the effect. Trial and error is the only way, really.

The ones I put in my custom CX instruments are not strictly speaking pure
holes in this sense, as I install metal resonator strips beneath the holes
which are there to give more of a crisp metallic tone to the plastic
housings of the CX. However, you can make the stock CX12 sound brighter
simply by drilling some small holes at either end, and a few on the outer
edge of the covers at the treble end will enhance the brightness in that
range too.

Get that drill out, and let us know what you discover.

Brendan
website: http://www.brendan-power.com

From: Mojo Red  <harplicks@...>
Date: Tue Mar 6, 2001 6:15am
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Re: Temolo Chromatics, and Harp Switching


   --- brend@n... wrote:
<<snip>>
> I've used diatonic harp switching a bit, not so
> much for chromatic
> ability but for key changes in a set of tunes.
> The only disadvantage
> (apart from the obvious ones of awkwardness of
> holding two harps at
> once, and getting the transition right) is that
> your tone isn't quite
> as easy to control when holding the two
> instruments, and changes in
> the transition while you shift hands. However, it
> does allow you to
> keep that funky diatonic sound while changing key
> as wildly as you
> like.
>
> It works, and it sounds good, so why not?

A fine example of this is Norton Buffalo's harp
solo on the Bonnie Rait version of "Runaround." He
used four diatonic harps in that solo and pulled it
off rather amazingly well.

He explained that the producers originally had him
playing a chromatic, but they couldn't seem to get
the sound they wanted (ie, 'funky diatonic')... at
the last minute Norton says, "Hey, let me try
something here," and the results, of course were
phenomenal.

Harpin' in Colorado,
--Ken M.

From:   <brend@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 6:46pm
Subject: Re: Temolo Chromatics, and Harp Switching


   I've been amazed also by the dexterity of the Asian harp switching
style, JR. As you say, it doesn't seem to have caught on amongst
US/European players, but you're dead right in that it is a very
viable option for playing a diatonic chromatically - which is largely
what the whole overblow technique is about.

I sense there is a perception amongst purist overblowers that it is
almost 'cheating' in a way to play two diatonics like this. I'd say
purist chrom players would be even more disapproving of someone who
had a couple of 270s in hand! However, to me it is the music that
comes out which matters, and how you get the notes is immaterial as
long as they sound good.

One good example of how it can be used effectively is in the Swiss
Country Music style. This is highly intricate and complex Swiss folk
music which often repeats the theme a fourth or fifth away from the
tonic, and uses plenty of ornamentation. The way they do it is to
have three chromatics in a rack, firmly held in a radially projecting
fashion, which is custom-made by a few of the Swiss players (who sell
them to their peers). The chroms would normally be in C, F and G, but
the keys can be different for other styles (eg. classical music).

This looks a bit bulky and odd when you first see it, but when you
hear the speed and fluidity of key changes the style gives them you
can understand why they do it.

I've used diatonic harp switching a bit, not so much for chromatic
ability but for key changes in a set of tunes. The only disadvantage
(apart from the obvious ones of awkwardness of holding two harps at
once, and getting the transition right) is that your tone isn't quite
as easy to control when holding the two instruments, and changes in
the transition while you shift hands. However, it does allow you to
keep that funky diatonic sound while changing key as wildly as you
like.

It works, and it sounds good, so why not?

Brendan
http://www.brendan-power.com

From: jrross  <jrross@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 6:00pm
Subject: tremolo chromatics


   At last year's SPAH, John infande had a much smaller tremolo chromatic,
made
from two 270s. This one had two wooden covers, one on each comb, thus
reducing overall size by allowing the two facing parts/reed-plates to be set
in close proximity. The acryllic mouthpiece was quite comfortable for me,
and I was sorely tempted to buy it. It was the last one he had, and I'm
sure it's gone by now. If it had been a tenor-tuned instrument, I would
have definitely have bought it.

Previously, I had seen and tried the 64-based tremolo, but it was just too
big for my tastes (I prefer 12-holers in any case, so this was just
overkill).

Still, the main feeling I had was that while this was a neat idea, it would
be far easier to simply learn the east Asian-style of stacked
harp-switching. The speed which can be achieved is quite impressive,
certainly giving the slider a much better run for its money than I would
have thought possible. This style of dual-harmonica playing is not very
well-known or practised in the west (America/Europe), but is quite advanced.
Huang sells both octave and tremolo sets in C and C# (with a common
variation of solo-tuning). Indeed, most east Asian tremolos and octaves
seem to be designed with this type of playing in mind, having smooth
slightly angled covers which can be moved against one another easily. For
me, this is one of the more interesting areas of playing which could be
developed in many styles--much like overbending and alternate tunings are
being explored.


.()(). J.R. "Bulldogge" Ross
() () And Snuffy, too:)

From: Paul van der Sijde  <p.sijde@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 5:51am
Subject: Re: "Tate ramps" - WAS: howdy


   Douglas Tate wrote:

> The ramps were to ~reduce~ the volume of
> air in the chamber, not to guide. The reason for the reduction was so that
> I could get a higher breath reversal rate by reducing the amount of air in
> the chamber. That was the basis of the design of my first 'stainless
> steel' 270.... it was a basic #270 shape... chambers cut front to back on
a
> vertical mill at maximum depth and the interior filled with... Yup, the
> ramps.

Doug,

There is a thing I do not quite understand about the ramps you discuss.
If I look at the chamber "floor" for the higher holes on a standard 270,
they are curved upward all the way. Even the low holes have this, being
cut out where the inside reed is supposed to swing inward
Hering is a bit more modest only slightly elevating the bottom surface,
but keeping them level from about halfway. The amount of elevation
increases with the pitch of the note supposed to be produced by the
hole.

Now I don't see any point - other than mechanical limitations in the
milling machine - to first mill out a full size chamber and later add a
ramp to reduce the size. What is the reason for this way of working?
Where in the chamber is the ramp: to the back, effectively the same way
a 270 comb is constructed, or somewhere further to the front? I think I
can grasp the concept of a smaller chamber enabling faster air stream
reversals, but I have trouble visualizing it.

Sorry for asking but I never had the opportunity to dissect a
Rennaissance, so there is no way for me to know. Grasping this concept
somehow seems crucial to be able to follow this discussion. Coming to
think of it; there may be more subjects that you and perhaps other
seasoned harmonica builders and customizers take for granted I or one of
the other "interested freshmen" may ask you to elaborate upon, simply
because the things are beyond me.

Happy harpin'
Doc
- featuring Thirsty, the groggy froggy

From: William Price  <billprice@...>
Date: Tue Mar 6, 2001 12:27pm
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Re: howdy


   At 10:57 PM 03/05/2001 +0000, Bill Price wrote:
>>
>>Why are the high note cuts smaller--just big enough for the reed? I have
>>come to understand that a larger chamber is more desirable as it yields
>>greater volume, and to some, perhaps a more pleasant tone (depending on
>>taste, of course).

And Pat Missin Wrote:

>Like so many things about the harmonica, this is a sweeping generalisation.
>Simply enlarging the chamber is not going to make a harmonica instantly
>sound wonderful. In fact, if you enlarged the chamber enough, you'd get it
>to the point where the reed won't sound at all. Chamber size is one of many
>variables. As Douglas has hinted, shape is also important.

You're right, and we all know that ALL generalizations are WRONG!.
Seriously, tho, I realize that there are limits, just as in the way an
electronic component--say a capacitor--with a higher voltage rating than
called for--may be used with no ill effect, but even that has a limit
(although I'd have to call a good friend to explain it to me once again).

I was truly under the misconception that the ramps were to guide air--Now
Doug has enlightened me yet again, giving me more things to ponder while
riding subways and commuter trains.

>>And...any knowledge or theories on reed shape variations? Shorter and
>>fatter, longer and thinner, tapered?
>
>There's no substitute for a lot of practical experience on this one. There
>is some literature on reed shapes for reed organs and the like, but I don't
>know how well this stuff applies directly to the harmonica, besides, if you
>are working on standard reedplates there are some limits imposed on the
>width and length of the reeds. However, the profile lends itself readily to
>home experimentation. You could probably learn more with a few hours of
>playing around than anyone could ever tell you in an email.

Yup, and I'm going to do it, even tho everything i do is "by hand" except
for the wonderful 1" belt sander and 5" disc sander I've bought. I know I
won't be the first to try strange shaped reeds, and to be truthful, the way
I remember my early "MAGNUS" brand plastic diatonic harmonicas (and even
the crazy all-plastic chromatic which Doug now has)--there is a
tone-quality (really) to plastic reeds that I like. I want to believe that
some material other than metal (gasp) might be viable. With the price of
things such as teflon, graphite, etc., it may take me a while to experiment
with these materials, but if I use my brains (and downright *chapeness,*
I'll find some scraps at the local hi-tech companies.

Rather than new design, I'd like even better to make headway in new
materials for harmonicas. I have no qualms about sharing what I find--hell,
one of you guys might like it so much you'd build me one of yours with my
materials.

How I wish I'd have studied Mechanical Engineering, materials and things
such as those instead of being a Teen Idol Rock Star (you should all hear
me laughing as I type this) with my Lake Placid Blue Fender Jaguar. No,
it's gone, and good riddance. It was a stupid purchase. Should have gone
with a Jazzmaster, but we live and learn. should have found a chro teacher
when I was going through three a year, assuming they were all bad because I
couldn't sound the low notes properly. If I'd have started in my teens,
rather than at almost 52, well, I might play a little better.

Pat--it's good to chat with you again--I hope for a long happy relationship
with everyone here in the "cutting edge of harmonica design and
manufacture."

Stay well,

-bp

From:   <patm@...>
Date: Tue Mar 6, 2001 11:57am
Subject: Re: howdy


   Bill Price wrote:
>
>Why are the high note cuts smaller--just big enough for the reed? I have
>come to understand that a larger chamber is more desirable as it yields
>greater volume, and to some, perhaps a more pleasant tone (depending on
>taste, of course).

Like so many things about the harmonica, this is a sweeping generalisation.
Simply enlarging the chamber is not going to make a harmonica instantly
sound wonderful. In fact, if you enlarged the chamber enough, you'd get it
to the point where the reed won't sound at all. Chamber size is one of many
variables. As Douglas has hinted, shape is also important.

>And...any knowledge or theories on reed shape variations? Shorter and
>fatter, longer and thinner, tapered?

There's no substitute for a lot of practical experience on this one. There
is some literature on reed shapes for reed organs and the like, but I don't
know how well this stuff applies directly to the harmonica, besides, if you
are working on standard reedplates there are some limits imposed on the
width and length of the reeds. However, the profile lends itself readily to
home experimentation. You could probably learn more with a few hours of
playing around than anyone could ever tell you in an email.

-- Pat.

From: Bill Price  <billprice@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 1:58pm
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] howdy


   > [Original Message]
> From: Douglas Tate
>
> At 01:29 AM 03/04/01 -0500, you wrote:
> The ramps were to ~reduce~ the volume of
> air in the chamber, not to guide. The reason for the reduction was so
that
> I could get a higher breath reversal rate by reducing the amount of air
in
> the chamber. That was the basis of the design of my first 'stainless
> steel' 270.... it was a basic #270 shape... chambers cut front to back on
a
> vertical mill at maximum depth and the interior filled with... Yup, the
> ramps.
>
Hmmm. Well, there goes that theory. Glad I didn't "machine" one by hand in
order to test it.

> The interesting point in all this is the received and deeply understood
> 'fact' that the tone improves the larger the chamber size. There were
two
> things people used to say about my playing on that instrument..."What
> power" and "What great tone"

Hmmm again. Even MORE glad I didn't hog one out by hand.
>
> Perhaps size doesn't matter, it's the shape... and what you do with it.
:))
>
I have always been forced to use that line. After a while, even I am
beginning to believe it.
> I could genuinely get more reversals a second with that configuration in
> the middle of the instrument (timed over several seconds playing the
'Dance
> of the Comedians' as fast as I could without regard to precision or
tone...
> just an all out speed fest. It took me 7.5 - 8 seconds to do the 80
notes
> of the first section with this configuration and nearly 9 on the standard
> instrument.

By reversal, you mean inhale/exhale transitions?

> DON'T ask about the speed on the Renny ... it is so blindingly fast that
> people don't even hear it. :)

Hmmm. This "renny" you speak of--does it have good tone?

> However, there is another apparent effect which is beneficial if you do
the
> ramps 'correctly'. This is something I DON'T wish to discuss on
> list.

I won't ask you to compromise what few "secrets" you still may have within
your grey cells, or to engage in the "plastic vs. wood" debate. Although, I
think that even if you *SHOWED* someone how to make Rennys, no one's going
to go through all that effort to take away your business. Not when the pay
is probably akin to night-clerking at 7-eleven when you consider the hours.

Like the 'materials' issue it is something which seems apparent to
> me as a player but others would cry rubbish. However, as a clue, I would
> be interested in what people have found happens to the life length of the
> reeds when the ramps are fitted, and what has happened to the tone and
> attack, and also what has happened to the hand resonance possibilities.
:)
>
To me, attack is what "makes" a performer's "voice," or a good portion of
it. I also don't subscribe to many commonly held views regarding tone, but
my reason for thinking that large chambers made for good (i.e., "mellow,"
"deep," "rich," etc.) tone is that it does so on guitars and on harp when I
open my mouth bigger when playing.

And a funny afterthought. I'm working on a "Czardasz" which many northern
Europeans might call a "Schottische." It has many fast reversals, and I've
learned, here at the Autodidactic University of Harmonicism, that it's the
way I can control my diaphragm which gives me the speed. Then again, you
may have developed that ability beyond the ability of a standard
reed/chamber to "handle" your reversal, hence the need for the ramp.
Interesting stuff, this.

I had come up with a method to enlarge chambers without disturbing
mouthpiece shape, but what you tell me here may chase me in other
directions looking for the Grail-14.

I've got my Whitney-Roper hand-punch sitting beside me, wondering about
holes in coverplates. Before I screw up some of my precious spare parts, do
you have any thoughts on this? I see them on two sided tremolo models,
which, in essence, have no "open backs," but I don't see them on any
manufactured single-sided harmonicas except for Brendan's CX line.
Brendan--are you here too? What have you found about the holes?

thanks, doug, and the rest of you in advance for what's going to be a great
forum.

-bp

From: Douglas Tate  <dougtate@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 4:30am
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] howdy


   Welcome Bill

At 01:29 AM 03/04/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Now a point of comb design theory, if you'll indulge me:
>
>I understand the idea of "Tate-ramps" to send the wind where it'll do the
>most good, but how about a larger chamber with a Tate-ramp?

Wrong!
That wasn't the idea at all! The ramps were to ~reduce~ the volume of
air in the chamber, not to guide. The reason for the reduction was so that
I could get a higher breath reversal rate by reducing the amount of air in
the chamber. That was the basis of the design of my first 'stainless
steel' 270.... it was a basic #270 shape... chambers cut front to back on a
vertical mill at maximum depth and the interior filled with... Yup, the
ramps.

The interesting point in all this is the received and deeply understood
'fact' that the tone improves the larger the chamber size. There were two
things people used to say about my playing on that instrument..."What
power" and "What great tone"

Perhaps size doesn't matter, it's the shape... and what you do with it. :))

I could genuinely get more reversals a second with that configuration in
the middle of the instrument (timed over several seconds playing the 'Dance
of the Comedians' as fast as I could without regard to precision or tone...
just an all out speed fest. It took me 7.5 - 8 seconds to do the 80 notes
of the first section with this configuration and nearly 9 on the standard
instrument.
DON'T ask about the speed on the Renny ... it is so blindingly fast that
people don't even hear it. :)

However, there is another apparent effect which is beneficial if you do the
ramps 'correctly'. This is something I DON'T wish to discuss on
list. Like the 'materials' issue it is something which seems apparent to
me as a player but others would cry rubbish. However, as a clue, I would
be interested in what people have found happens to the life length of the
reeds when the ramps are fitted, and what has happened to the tone and
attack, and also what has happened to the hand resonance possibilities. :)

Douglas

From: Bill Price  <billprice@...>
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 7:29pm
Subject: howdy


   Hi all! Don't know how many and just who are here, so if anyone wants my
profile, I'll turn sideways. But serially, folks--I somehow thought this
would happen. Who'da thunk it, that G would make one trip to the US and
become an international chro-maven. Congrats to G, and Hi to anyone I
haven't chatted with for a while.

Now a point of comb design theory, if you'll indulge me:

Why are the high note cuts smaller--just big enough for the reed? I have
come to understand that a larger chamber is more desirable as it yields
greater volume, and to some, perhaps a more pleasant tone (depending on
taste, of course).

I understand the idea of "Tate-ramps" to send the wind where it'll do the
most good, but how about a larger chamber with a Tate-ramp? Would a
"gullet" (of some radius to be determined) cut in the inclined surface of
the ramp help "guide" a worthwhile amt of air up the old honk-chute even if
the ramp were amid a (relatively) large chamber?

And...any knowledge or theories on reed shape variations? Shorter and
fatter, longer and thinner, tapered? I know that the tapered chamber shape
of a clarinet causes different nodal occurrences than in the straight
chamber of a flute--anyone know of any tests done on reed shape?

How about tapers in thickness--variations from a thin pivot point to a
thick tip, or vice-versa, or one that's fat in the middle (it'd be the "BP"
model) or thin at some point other than the pivot point?

That must be enough questions for now--for those of you earning money with
stuff such as this--I'm not looking for trade secrets, just those thoughts,
ideas, or facts anyone wants to share.

Best,

-bp

From: Douglas Tate  <dougtate@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 4:39am
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Re: Small Eureka Moment... It's Spring Time


   At 06:32 AM 03/04/01 +0100, Doc wrote:

>Okay. Point taken. I just wanted to be sure I would step on nobody's
>toes if I find something here that is useful. I'll probably be making a
>lousy job of it too at first, so I'll be careful not to credit anyone.
>;o)

There is a German expression which I believe translates as "the work at
the beginning" i.e. the stuff you do as you are learning and before you
get to the level where people recognise you as a towering genius... Another
way of putting it is...stuff I made in my early years and sold... and wish
I hadn't.
Or yet again.."Damn... back to the work bench" Everybody has stuff like
that, and you have to eat ... unfortunately there are some who never get
past that stage!!! :)

Douglas

From: Paul van der Sijde  <p.sijde@...>
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 6:32pm
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Re: Small Eureka Moment... It's Spring Time


   Douglas Tate wrote:

> Does that confuse the picture enough for you Doc?

er... huh?

Okay. Point taken. I just wanted to be sure I would step on nobody's
toes if I find something here that is useful. I'll probably be making a
lousy job of it too at first, so I'll be careful not to credit anyone.
;o)

Happy harpin'
Doc
- featuring Thirsty, the groggy froggy

From: Bill Price  <billprice@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 2:14pm
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Double Decker Chromatic Harmonica and other ideas...


   > I've played a 'double decker' chromatic made by John Infande from
Florida. It
> consisted of 2 'Super 64' bodies connected by the one mouthpiece
especially
> made by John. This particular instrument is actually a tremolo chromatic.
The
> reedplates on one comb are tuned slightly flatter than the other so that
when
> played you'll be blowing/drawing two reeds(one from each body)the same
pitch
> but slightly out of tune with each other giving a tremolo effect. I've
only
> ever seen this type of instrument used once, and that was by Jerry Murad
at the
> harmonica championships in Jersey in '87 when he did a rendition of Tommy
> Reilly's 'Valsentino' in a French musette style.

I too had a chance to play one of those, and I wish I had one. I like
tremolo where it belongs, but can't bother with the missing notes of a
diatonic tremolo. It does leak and it does have a huge mouthpiece, both of
which could be overcome with increased work. IMHO there is no reason a
mouthpiece shouldn't be made the way a player wants it to feel (so long as
he's willing to pay) but I understand that John made just one batch. I
doubt there was any money in this for him, and not much reason to make a
second batch with improvements, but I'm sure he (or anyone else who's good)
could make one with improved airtightness and a mouthpiece shaped in
whatever way a person wanted it. But not for $50.
>
> Two aspects of the one I tried a couple of years ago that didn't appeal
to me
> were the size of the mouthpiece assembly, and what seemed to me to be the
> rather cumbersome size of the whole instrument. I can't help but feel
that the
> larger the instrument, the harder it becomes to maneuver with great speed
and
> accuracy. Certainly players like Don Les could perform near miracles of
> manipulation with their bass harmonicas, but I can't help but feel that
the
> size of such beasties would have been an obstacle to overcome, and would
> ultimately cause restrictions on what could be achieved.
>
Yeah, and then I read of (and see video of) a guy with no arms playing
guitar (rather well) with his feet. I think it all reverts to the simple
question, "How badly do you want to do this?"

> >From a performance point of view another aspect is the appearance of
someone
> playing with such a large instrument stuck in their gob! I have videos of
> people playing the Millioniser 2000, and while the musical results are
> interesting I can't help but keep thinking how unusual it looks seeing
someone
> performing with what looks like a small electronic keyboard in their
mouth!
> This of course is just personal opinion.

Well, yes. A guy can sit with a young lass by a cozy fireplace, blowing a
soft ballad on an 8-hole chro--a dashing chap dressed to the nines. Now
give him a bassoon and watch the lady go and wash her hair.

I wouldn't want to play a lavender, sequined guitar in public, but if there
were an awkwardly shaped harmonica which could make me better (i.e., free
my abilities more) then I'd play it in Macy's window and give you an hour
to draw a crowd.

-bp

From:   <ozharp@...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 12:17pm
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Double Decker Chromatic Harmonica and other ideas...


   I've played a 'double decker' chromatic made by John Infande from Florida.
It
consisted of 2 'Super 64' bodies connected by the one mouthpiece especially
made by John. This particular instrument is actually a tremolo chromatic.
The
reedplates on one comb are tuned slightly flatter than the other so that
when
played you'll be blowing/drawing two reeds(one from each body)the same pitch
but slightly out of tune with each other giving a tremolo effect. I've only
ever seen this type of instrument used once, and that was by Jerry Murad at
the
harmonica championships in Jersey in '87 when he did a rendition of Tommy
Reilly's 'Valsentino' in a French musette style.

Two aspects of the one I tried a couple of years ago that didn't appeal to
me
were the size of the mouthpiece assembly, and what seemed to me to be the
rather cumbersome size of the whole instrument. I can't help but feel that
the
larger the instrument, the harder it becomes to maneuver with great speed
and
accuracy. Certainly players like Don Les could perform near miracles of
manipulation with their bass harmonicas, but I can't help but feel that the
size of such beasties would have been an obstacle to overcome, and would
ultimately cause restrictions on what could be achieved.

From a performance point of view another aspect is the appearance of someone
playing with such a large instrument stuck in their gob! I have videos of
people playing the Millioniser 2000, and while the musical results are
interesting I can't help but keep thinking how unusual it looks seeing
someone
performing with what looks like a small electronic keyboard in their mouth!
This of course is just personal opinion.

Cheers,

Paul

From:   <patm@...>
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 9:53am
Subject: Re: Double Decker Chromatic Harmonica and other ideas...


   G wrote:
>
>Because you have 96 reeds to play with, you end up with quite a large range
>of notes you can tune (and additional maintenance problems no doubt).

Unless you are going for a valveless approach, then the first problem will
be
those 96 valves, leading almost inevitably to 96 tears! Most players seem to
have more than enough problems with the 40 valves on a 270...

I would suggest that if you're building something with this many reed and
valves, then easy access to the guts of the harp would be an important part
of
the design. By easy access, I mean something a little easier than the
Harmonetta,
for example!

>To which I don't have any practical ideas yet... but learning the saxophone
>(& flute) is really making me wonder if we could get a way of shaping the
>tone more with ones mouth and tongue... I mean MUCH MORE.

Several experienced harmonica players have been impressed by my ability
(which I never considered to be a unique one) to sound different overtones
of
the note by selective resonance, in a way similar to Tuvan throat singers. I
find this invaluable when tuning and in combination with Douglas's tuned
hand resonance technique, then gives an amazing tonal range. All it requires
is spending soem time playing long notes and really listening to yourself.
I'll
no doubt come back to this topic again.

>I'm very interested in the slideless chromatic that was mentioned on
>Slidemeister... Pat you brought this up - could you share more on this
>please?

The Tombo S-50. Yamaha also used to make one. Essentially it is a C harp and
a
C# harp built into the same comb. Somewhere on another compueter, almost
4000
miles away, I have an article I wrote about them...

Richard Hunter once mentioned that the loudest way to play a 64 was without
the
mouthpiece. Of course, this works a lot better on a straight-tuned chrom
than on
a cross tuned one. Essentially, this is the same idea as the S-50, although
the
latter is specifically designed to be played like this. Also, the S-50 has a
seperate chamber for each reed, allowing additional dual-reed bends that are
not
possible in standard instruments. Again, I'll be happy to answer specific
questions about them.

Well, I think we're off to a good start with this list!

-- Pat.

From: G  <gigs@...>
Date: Sat Mar 3, 2001 9:12pm
Subject: Double Decker Chromatic Harmonica and other ideas...


   Earlier I mentioned that I've had some offlist musings about a chromatic
harmonica design with four reedplates.

The idea came when I picked up two hard boppers just to see if I could play
them both while holding them. I could - there was some difficulty getting a
decent embouchure around the mouthpieces - but the size and form are
practical.... which leads on to ... why ?

Well, my thinking lead me onto a number of past threads:
* A non key-biased tuning ~with~ enharmonics and therefore less slide/breath
changes for both legato AND appegios runs. Take the WT tuning and simply
duplicate all 12 notes on inverted reeds so every note is available on both
blow AND draw.
* A chord harmonica of practical size and with a wider range of chords....
however the layout will need to be considered.

Because you have 96 reeds to play with, you end up with quite a large range
of notes you can tune (and additional maintenance problems no doubt). This
could easily Brendan & Pat's altered tunings to a whole new level.

To make this into a single body instrument my thinking was to remove the top
& bottom cover plates of the two 12 hole chromatics respectively, and
replace it with a metal joining plate (there are possible issues with how
this would affect the sound of these two reedplates).

The mouthpieces would be replaced with a single mouthpiece that accomadates
the two slides over the front of the two bodies.

The instrument would be played by shifting one's embouchure up and down
between the two bodies, and using both slides for selecting notes on the two
bodies.

A solo tuned chromatic octave could fit over two holes using this design.

There are a number of practical issues not the least of which is airleaks
would be a real bugbear - but I can see potential here.

Pat has raised a number of considerations that can be applied here:
<<<
Is it possible to do without the slide in some way?
Is it possible to replace the slide with another way of blocking out
the unwanted notes?
Is it possible to use some sort of modular approach where different sets of
reeds are installed, depending on what you want to play?
>>>

To which I don't have any practical ideas yet... but learning the saxophone
(& flute) is really making me wonder if we could get a way of shaping the
tone more with ones mouth and tongue... I mean MUCH MORE.

I'm very interested in the slideless chromatic that was mentioned on
Slidemeister... Pat you brought this up - could you share more on this
please?

Brendan has pretty much hit it one way with the idea of making diatonic
bends, valved bends &/or overbends available on a chromatically setup
instrument with opposing reeds in each cell. But the practicalities need to
be considered.

The first thought that comes to mind here is follow what the asian harmonica
players do - they use two tremelo harmonicas (simply held in place) to play
chromatically - and they can do it very fast - and to a lesser extent so can
bass harmonica players who also contend with a double body instrument with
two seperate rows of reeds.
So I guess with two solo tuned twelve hole harmonica - e.g. one of C and one
of C# is a starting point... some thought about this will bring up various
ideas such as using half valving to achieve extra bends, retuning to allow
more bending range, etc.... ponder on that one too.

What ideas have people got on these ? Lets discuss!

All the best
G

From: G  <gigs@...>
Date: Sat Mar 3, 2001 2:49pm
Subject: CX12 high reeds


   Brendan also wrote:
> Thanks for the replies on that other list re. the top hole of the key C
CX12
> problem; I haven't had a chance to try any more ideas, but will take some
> time over it soon. I'll try the Tate Ramp concept, and your reed slot idea
> too Pat, if you could elaborate.

Let us know how that goes Brendan - I was very interested in Bobbie's
experiment with the straw & blutack and the comments related to that.
Perhaps by changing the shape of the comb cell this feature can be used.

It appears it seems to work very closely along the lines of another topic -
guitar strings and ... chimes.

My next door neighbour is a retired composer & music teacher, this morning I
bumped into him and asked him about the devices lined up in the boot of his
landrover - well - they were 2" diameter holo metal tubes - he was making
Just Intonation tuned chimes. And he went on at length about how he
calculated and tuned these tubes by using the Intonation ratios and deriving
the 3rd & 6th by using the 4th & 5th ratios - and how the length of the
tubes are inversely (!) proportional to the tone you are after.

He simply held the tube between two fingers and it rung so clear and loudly
and sustained amazingly - I couldn't understand how since he was holding it
between his fingers.

But he pointed out if you hold it at 1/4 marks - where the sinewave of the
tone meets in the middle you don't affect the ringing one little bit - and I
could see where he had drilled the holes at two 1/4 length marks from either
end where he was going to string them up. If he held it else where it had
varying deadening effects on the tone of the chime because it interfered
with the ringing.

IMHO perhaps the point being what Bobbie may have revealed and Doug has
further found is that the straw length represents the same sort of dynamics.

A similar analogy is found in guitar strings. there are only certain
points where you can touch the string as you strum it to find the harmonic
ring - other points deaden it. This is something worth taking a bit
further I think.

One other thing I've just discovered with the saxophone - its not the wind
going down it that makes the noise - its the vibrations the reed is making
that makes the noise, preferably 880Hz - the holes are what changes that
tone into the sounds we hear. Is there some correlation here ?

I know harmonica reeds need the air to move - but the physics... is there a
principal or similar relation ship?

Harp On!
http://www.angelfire.com/music/HarpOn

From: Paul van der Sijde  <p.sijde@...>
Date: Fri Mar 9, 2001 8:23am
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Re: Re: Small Eureka Moment


   patm@g... wrote:

> There are also a few ideas of mine which I will not share publicly, for
> whatever reason. Everything else I post is public domain as far as I am
> concerned - just don't go around claiming that you invented them! :)

Unduely claiming inventions is the last of my worries. In fact I wonder
if I would clame something even if I ~had~ invented it. I think I would
be so enthousiastic about it that I would have posted it somewhere
before I even had the idea of patenting and marketing it.

Besides, how big could my market be with you and several others already
firmly in place (and probably having had the idea I called my invention
so long ago that you already forgot about it....). In any case: thanks.

Happy harpin'
Doc
- featuring Thirsty, the groggy froggy

From:   <patm@...>
Date: Tue Mar 6, 2001 11:52am
Subject: Re: Re: Small Eureka Moment


   Doc wrote
>
>Yet guys like me, beginning and aspiring harmonica techs, listen in and
>pick up things. How are we supposed to handle things discussed here?
>There is such a thing as "intellectual ownership" and I highly value
>that. Yet stuff discussed here is in fact out in the open, so anyone who
>feels like it is free to copy the idea.

I can't speak for everyone, but feel free to use anything that I post to
this list, or any other. Because I have a head start with many things,
I'm quite happy to post most of my so-called secrets as it will be some
time before the "competition" catches up with me, so I don't feel that my
livelihood is going to be in any danger for a while! :)

Having said that, there will be times when I post an idea that I have had,
but which is relatively untested, or merely a bit of brain-storming. I'll
try to make it clear when that is the case.

There are also a few ideas of mine which I will not share publicly, for
whatever reason. Everything else I post is public domain as far as I am
concerned - just don't go around claiming that you invented them! :)

-- Pat.

From: Mojo Red  <harplicks@...>
Date: Tue Mar 6, 2001 5:54am
Subject: Reed Slot Chamfering and Reed Profile (was Small Eureka Moment)


   --- Pat Missin wrote:
> Essentially the idea is to direct
> as much of the airflow as possible to the tip of
> the reed. This is done by
> keeping the reed as flat as possible and
> chamfering the very end of the slot,
> just under the tip of the reed.
<<snip>>
> Eventually, with a bit of luck, you should find
> there is a point where the reed seems to
> respond much better than before. Once reach this,
> you should probably quit while
> you're ahead! Once done, this sort of alteration
> is pretty permanent.

Very interesting idea!!

I plan on attempting this trick on some of my
diatonic harps as a test ground before I mess with
any of my chroms. I'll post my results here as soon
as is practical.

I've been messing with another mod that I believe
to some degree achieves the same result, but seems
more effective with the lower reeds.

It has been discussed on other lists (heck, maybe
it's Pat's idea!) In order to help direct more air
to the tip of the reed I have given longer reeds a
bit of curved profile. I gently work the reed to an
upward profile making by holding the middle with a
finger tip and pushing the tip upward.

Then, I re-gap the reed to make it playable again.
Now part of the body of the reed is down in the
slot and the tip is gapped as per normal play. It
has helped improve responsiveness on longer reeds.
I've done this to the first six holes on several
harps.

Perhaps if one changes reed profile on lower holes
and uses Pat's reed slot chamfering idea on upper
holes you'll wind up with one helluva responsive
harp!

I may never come up with an original idea, but like
most parasites, I'm great at hitchiking.

Harpin' in Colorado,
--Ken M.



> I first started using this mod on diatonics for
> easier overblows, but I later
> found that it helped the response on the upper
> reeds of chroms, whilst trying to
> improve a rebuilt Koch of my own. I didn't find
> that it made a lot of difference
> to the lower reeds. I've used this modification
> for a few years on diatonics for
> my customers with a lot of success, but I've so
> far not done it to an of my
> customers' chroms. I suspect (and I have yet to
> test it) that the optimal angle
> will vary from player to player, so thus far, I
> have only done this tweak to my
> own chroms. It's not a miracle cure, but I've had
> some promising results with
> it.
>
> Please try it for yourself, but bear in mind the
> provisos I have made above. If
> anyone has some questions, I'd be happy to try to
> answer them.
>
> -- Pat.
>

From:   <patm@...>
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 9:47am
Subject: Re: Small Eureka Moment


   Brendan wrote:
>
>This list is shaping up well; good on ya for taking the initiative Greg.

I'd like to second that!

>Thanks for the replies on that other list re. the top hole of the key C
CX12
>problem; I haven't had a chance to try any more ideas, but will take some
>time over it soon. I'll try the Tate Ramp concept, and your reed slot idea
>too Pat, if you could elaborate.

I've mentioned this a couple of times on harp-l and slidemeister. There are
a couple of reasons why I am usually so vague about it. Fist of all, I've
only
been using it in this context for a year or two, so it is comparatively
untested. Secondly, it is somewhat hard to describe in text. Thirdly, it is
hard to give any hard and fast rules for how it should be done for maximum
effectiveness. Like accurate tuning and optimal gapping, you need to develop
a feel for it, rather than simply following my less-than-expert
instructions.

I have been reluctant to go into details, for the simple reason that I don't
want folks to try it, make a poor job of it, then go around saying "It
doesn't
work, Pat Missin doesn't know what the *&^% he's talking about and I'm going
to sue him for the cost of a new Silver Concerto!"

So, with that in mind, here are the basics. Essentially the idea is to
direct
as much of the airflow as possible to the tip of the reed. This is done by
keeping the reed as flat as possible and chamfering the very end of the
slot,
just under the tip of the reed. It only needs a slight amount of metal
removed
to do the trick, so take it a little bit at a time and check the action of
the
reed frequently. The precise angle required seems to vary from reed to reed.
The more metal you remove, the closer you will need to gap the reed.
Eventually,
with a bit of luck, you should find there is a point where the reed seems to
respond much better than before. Once reach this, you should probably quit
while
you're ahead! Once done, this sort of alteration is pretty permanent.

I first started using this mod on diatonics for easier overblows, but I
later
found that it helped the response on the upper reeds of chroms, whilst
trying to
improve a rebuilt Koch of my own. I didn't find that it made a lot of
difference
to the lower reeds. I've used this modification for a few years on diatonics
for
my customers with a lot of success, but I've so far not done it to an of my
customers' chroms. I suspect (and I have yet to test it) that the optimal
angle
will vary from player to player, so thus far, I have only done this tweak to
my
own chroms. It's not a miracle cure, but I've had some promising results
with
it.

Please try it for yourself, but bear in mind the provisos I have made above.
If
anyone has some questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them.

-- Pat.

From: Douglas Tate  <dougtate@...>
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 8:05am
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Re: Small Eureka Moment... It's Spring Time


   In answer to Doc and his suggestions about privacy.

This purely a personal statement.

If anyone wants to screw me out of "my" ideas or Bobbie's ideas then they
will do so whether we like it or not. All they have to do is to buy a Renny
and take it to bits and all will be revealed. Do you then think I will be
able to pursue them with the full authority of the law?? of course not, I
couldn't afford it... in any case the easiest thing is just to go away and
do something better and to hell with the schmuck.

I have had ideas taken all my life as have most people. There is one VERY
prominant (non Internet list) harmonica guru who was extremely annoyed when
one of our customers wouldn't allow him inside the instrument. A customiser
in England, also non list type, took, used and advetised as his own, one of
my ideas which nowadays has got my name attached just by others repeating
it. Is it in my interests to pursue him? No, I'm glad he doesn't
acknowledge me, he makes a pretty poor job of them.

Now we come to Pat Missin.

You will note above I said 'My' idea and Bobbie's idea. Oh Yeah? We are
not certain who thought of what sometimes in the things we have come up
with, genuinely, Sometimes an idea pops into your head and you have a new
invention... but, it was the result of a casual talk with someone else a
couple of months back... whose idea is it??? who has the rights?? You may
be the first person to 'make' the thing but do you have the moral right to
claim it? Well... stage and front Missin!!! I am sure he will tell you
that many of the things we 'discover' here have been discovered before. ( I
remember a particular idea I had for a compact full chord instrument with
only 48 reeds had been stolen from me nearly 50 years before i thought of
it!) The sad thing is that the inventor does not always get the credit or
the money. (If you want to read a hilarious book which contains a whole
chapter about inventors and the people who make money out of the ideas read
"Made in America" by Bill Bryson ... wonderful book)

It is honest of you to even suggest that stuff put on here should have
permission asked before being used... but unless covered by a patent what
the heck is to prevent someone using it? This is a public place and we are
shouting. You can bet your bottom dollar that the real doozy of a megabuck
invention I'm working on for the harmonica at the moment won't be mentioned
here.

A certain vanity on my part would like people to remember some of the
things I have done after I have gone (carefully SELECTED things :))) When
Bobbie and I send out a Renaissance Chromatic Harmonica (that's what a
Renny is BTW) we also send a presentation case, a toolkit and a 16 page
User's Manual. The back page of the manual is a list of ALL of the people
who are involved in the making... the suppliers of screws, the people who
do the engraving on the covers and button, etc, people who have made our
work easier by being professional and beyond. It is our way of
acknowledging the intangibles which money doesn't cover... a thank you. I
would hope that others would have the same sort of courtesy towards us.

The tapered spring idea... I didn't say that ILUS harmonicas (Doug or
Bobbie) had invented it, I said we had used it. I THOUGHT of the idea
before using it by thinking "I want a gradually lessening tension along the
valve... duh! taper. BUT.. the picture which sprang into my mind straight
away was of the tuning spring on the clarinet reed in an old 1850's
windblown church organ I re assembled in the 1970s and that led to a
picture in my mind of a diagram in a book "The Organ" and that..... Sure
... use the TATE TAPERED SPRING and the POWER TAPERED SPRING...
:) (Actually, the Power Tapered Spring SOUNDS better for advertising...
but I'll fight to the death anyone who SAYS Brendan's spring is better than
mine:))

Does that confuse the picture enough for you Doc?

Douglas

From: Paul van der Sijde  <p.sijde@...>
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 6:21am
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Re: Small Eureka Moment


   Guys,

I have been reading your ideas about wind savers, wind saver springs and
materials to use with more than casual interest from the first moment I
joined this group.

Am I correct in assuming that every experiment - especially the
succesful ones - you discuss here is to be considered public domain? I
mean Doug, you seemed to have conducted some experiment on springs on
windsavers that worked quite well. Am I free to copy that experiment and
possibly use it on harmonicas I get for customization? If not, please
let me know because I am tempted to try it out myself and possibly adopt
it as a standard way of working if I find it a good thing.
Yet on the other hand I do not wish to violate any rights you may have
on thinking out this method. In any case I will be more than happy to
include a small note with every harmonica I may equip with valves made
like this that the invention is yours and I gratefully use it.

I think I touched a certain string here. Most of the real "heavyweights"
in harmonica building and customizing in this group have very original
ideas from time to time and wish to test them by asking others. Ideas
that can involve true innovations to harmonicas in the widest sense of
the word. Most of the times those ideas are protected by patent laws and
other, similar legislation.

Yet guys like me, beginning and aspiring harmonica techs, listen in and
pick up things. How are we supposed to handle things discussed here?
There is such a thing as "intellectual ownership" and I highly value
that. Yet stuff discussed here is in fact out in the open, so anyone who
feels like it is free to copy the idea.

I'd say we state an agreement here and now. Any idea openly discussed
here is public domain (with the possible exception of your curved valve
spring Doug, that was introduced before this agreement and will be
treated by me as confidential if you desire so). The current list of
members knows eachother well enough to be able to discuss ideas
privately and off-list. Any ideas presented here for which the inventor
desires proper credit should be marked as such by the inventor and
otherwise the idea can be used by anyone at will. If the inventor
desires sole credit or exclusivity on the idea he/she should keep it
offlist entirely. Assurance of confidentiality of the idea is then
solely dependant on the person(s) contacted offlist (if any).

This is nothing but a proposition; I invite anyone to reflect his/her
views on that in reaction to this post. I am open to every suggestion;
all I am trying to establish is that I will not use someone's original
idea without permission or without giving due credit. It prevents
conflicts and possibly arguments about it. If we establish that rule
now, nothing has happened yet. If we have to establish it when certain
very valuable ideas have already been uttered here there will be a 'grey
area' that is too big to be covered.

Anyone?

Happy harpin'
Doc
- featuring Thirsty, the groggy froggy

From: Douglas Tate  <dougtate@...>
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 4:43am
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Re: Small Eureka Moment


   Yikes

At 01:47 PM 03/03/01 +0000,Brendan wrote:
>You said you use a tapered valve on the F#. I don't taper the valve,
>just taper the spring; how does tapering the valve help (except
>perhaps by reducing the contact area at the end?).

Crossed wires and sloppy English... only the spring tapered! I used the
loose term valve to include the spring... Sorry. 3/10 for communication


>It's funny you mention the F#, as I've found that problems most
>commonly occur on the holes where there is a semitone difference
>beteen the reeds (esp. hole 2 on the Tenor: E/F or F/F#). Don't know
>why this is.

That could actually make sense... I have to admit to not particularly
having noticed the semitone bit. How about the valve vibrating at the beat
frequency between the two notes... as a theory. With a tone difference the
beats would be too high, with a semitone the beat frequency could well be
within the flapability range of the valve. However.. if the valve is
properly fitted and sits FLAT on the plate there is no mechanism whereby
the second reed can vibrate or contribute except by sympathetic induced
vibration... hmm, that's a thought... if that happened then the pressure of
the vibration in the slot could bounce the flap up and start a vibration...
worth looking at perhaps???
I remember when you showed me the inside of your test Renny that the
>Teflon valves appeared to have some black surface ahereing to the
>lower surfaces. Is that like some kind of micropore tape to lower
>capillary attraction, or does it come with the Teflon?

Um.... ~I~ never showed you the test Renny did I ? I believe that you saw
an early version which Winslow took to Germany and you and Rick Epping
spent some time cackling over it :) We don't use a combination of Teflon
and anything. The Teflon valves are just that, a lump of teflon carved
from a sheet of Bakewear liner. The mylar ones I mentioned are Mylar
zebrastriped with Micropore. :)

Douglas

From:   <brend@...>
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 2:47am
Subject: Re: Small Eureka Moment


   Thanks for your comments Doug; I look forward to hearing about the
results of your recent valve experiments.

You said you use a tapered valve on the F#. I don't taper the valve,
just taper the spring; how does tapering the valve help (except
perhaps by reducing the contact area at the end?).

It's funny you mention the F#, as I've found that problems most
commonly occur on the holes where there is a semitone difference
beteen the reeds (esp. hole 2 on the Tenor: E/F or F/F#). Don't know
why this is.

I remember when you showed me the inside of your test Renny that the
Teflon valves appeared to have some black surface ahereing to the
lower surfaces. Is that like some kind of micropore tape to lower
capillary attraction, or does it come with the Teflon?

Cheers,

Brendan
http://brendan-power.com

From: Douglas Tate  <dougtate@...>
Date: Sat Mar 3, 2001 2:55pm
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Small Eureka Moment


   Hi Brendan

The tapered spring works well on Teflon too. We have/had a persistent prob
on F# on many different Rennys with valve resonance... cured by a tapered
valve. we have found a better way now but don't want to chuck it in the
pool just yet until we find if it is a dead end.

I wonder also, with the low reeds on quick, say, blow draw, whether it is
the reed (still vibrating) hitting the closing flap. (Talking Teflon...
maybe a different prob with Mylar combo. BTW, got a great mylar valve idea
which works much better than the standard mylar. It is a pig to make but
appears to work well. At one BHF or SPAH I put the Renny in a jug of water
on stage, talked for a bit, took it out and shook it a couple of times and
played 'La Fille aux cheveux du Lin,, a very soft and smooth piece... with
water still dripping out of the back... One note stuck... the only one with
a Hohner valve on it :)

douglas

From: G  <gigs@...>
Date: Sat Mar 3, 2001 2:48pm
Subject: Re: [HarpOn!] Small Eureka Moment


   ----- Original Message -----
From: Brendan Power <brend@n...>
To: <harpon@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2001 2:07 PM
Subject: [HarpOn!] Small Eureka Moment


> Hi Doug, Pat, Greg and everyone else,
>
> This list is shaping up well; good on ya for taking the initiative Greg.

Thankyou.
It takes the efforts of more than one man to make a community happen - thank
you all for your support. :-)

---8<---

> The reason I ain't had time for the 12 hole is because I've been valve
> obsessed for the past couple of days. I've found in the past that valves
on
> the higher chroms (F and up) are no trouble, and any fixes are pretty
> obvious. However, the bottom valves on something like a Tenor C have been
> giving me some trouble, and wanted to finally suss out the problems once
and
> for all and come up with a consistent fix.


AND HOW!

---8<--- investigation ----8<---
> I then cut some of Greg's Mylar into gently tapering strips (about 3mm
> tapering to 1.5mm over the length of the valve), carefully removed the
> factory spring (leaving the flat valve itself in place) and glued the
Mylar
> spring in its place with a drop of Superglue at the wide end. I cut the
> spring back to about 3mm from the end of the valve, then slipped a scalpel
> beneath the spring about 2mm from its free end, held the edge of the blade
> to the Mylar and pushed down with my thumb. This put a downward kink in
the
> Mylar. I did a couple more at about 2mm gaps back towards the root of the
> spring, and ended up with a gently curving spring with only its tip
resting
> on the end of the valve beneath.
>
> It works. You get an instant response on those big low reeds on a hard
> blow/draw, which I hadn't been able to consistently get before without
using
> the Hohner cupped valves. There is still a small but noticeable valve slap
> as the valve hits the reedplate on the change of breath, but I think that
> would happen in any big valve on these low reeds with a hard breath
change.
>
> I also tried the Mylar spring with a Mylar valve, but the Hohner valves
give
> less of the slap effect, so recommend the combo as the best option. These
> valves not only work, the look good too. It is very important to have your
> valves looking their best when trying to impress an audience, and these
are
> seriously sexy valves.

Excellent - sexy is good - someone of repute told me that generally a good
looking finished job is generally has a good working result. So there you
go! :-)

> You only really need these babies on the bottom 3 or 4 holes of a Tenor,
as
> standard valves are fine the rest of the range.

> I've been tearing my hair out over these low tenor or wholetone reeds,

Glad you've put an end to the source of your folical impedance!

> Regards,
> Brendan
> website: www.brendan-power.com

I'll add a personal note that over the past two months Brendan has been
working with me to build an instrument with a range & tunings that I will
enjoy - he has been very professional and pleasant to work with and has
endevoured to find a solution for me whilst making sure I'm being looked
after.

I commend Brendan for his efforts, and I look forward to the final result!

Thanks for sharing this Brendan - Perhaps if we can find a material of the
same nature used on the bottom half of Hohner vavles is we could make our
own from scratch.

All the best
G

From: Brendan Power  <brend@...>
Date: Sat Mar 3, 2001 2:07pm
Subject: Small Eureka Moment


   Hi Doug, Pat, Greg and everyone else,

This list is shaping up well; good on ya for taking the initiative Greg.

Thanks for the replies on that other list re. the top hole of the key C CX12
problem; I haven't had a chance to try any more ideas, but will take some
time over it soon. I'll try the Tate Ramp concept, and your reed slot idea
too Pat, if you could elaborate.

The reason I ain't had time for the 12 hole is because I've been valve
obsessed for the past couple of days. I've found in the past that valves on
the higher chroms (F and up) are no trouble, and any fixes are pretty
obvious. However, the bottom valves on something like a Tenor C have been
giving me some trouble, and wanted to finally suss out the problems once and
for all and come up with a consistent fix.

With the normal Hohner valves, Suzuki valves etc I've found that when you do
a hole shift on the same breath (eg. blow or draw hole 2 and shift to 3),
the reeds sound perfectly. However, when I do a fast strong blow/draw on say
hole 2, there is a cavitations effect where the valve will often rattle for
a bit before it sits down properly on the plate. I tried some
Mylar/Micropore valves Greg sent me, but they were no better in this aspect
than the stock Hohners or Suzukis on those big low reeds..

After a whole lot of fiddling, I've found a consistent fix which might be of
some interest. It's probably not even totally original, but if not no one
told me about it before. I noticed that the end of the valve is where the
rattling is worst on the quick blow/draw, and reasoned that if I could get
more pressure applied to the tip it might sort out the problem. Curling the
spring down on to the end of the valve seemed the obvious plan, so I tried
it with the Hohner springs. It showed signs of working, but the spring
seemed inadequate in strength.

I then cut some of Greg's Mylar into gently tapering strips (about 3mm
tapering to 1.5mm over the length of the valve), carefully removed the
factory spring (leaving the flat valve itself in place) and glued the Mylar
spring in its place with a drop of Superglue at the wide end. I cut the
spring back to about 3mm from the end of the valve, then slipped a scalpel
beneath the spring about 2mm from its free end, held the edge of the blade
to the Mylar and pushed down with my thumb. This put a downward kink in the
Mylar. I did a couple more at about 2mm gaps back towards the root of the
spring, and ended up with a gently curving spring with only its tip resting
on the end of the valve beneath.

It works. You get an instant response on those big low reeds on a hard
blow/draw, which I hadn't been able to consistently get before without using
the Hohner cupped valves. There is still a small but noticeable valve slap
as the valve hits the reedplate on the change of breath, but I think that
would happen in any big valve on these low reeds with a hard breath change.

I also tried the Mylar spring with a Mylar valve, but the Hohner valves give
less of the slap effect, so recommend the combo as the best option. These
valves not only work, the look good too. It is very important to have your
valves looking their best when trying to impress an audience, and these are
seriously sexy valves.

You only really need these babies on the bottom 3 or 4 holes of a Tenor, as
standard valves are fine the rest of the range. However, a quick fix for
higher end rattles can be obtained by kinking the Hohner spring in the same
way, and it also gives the advantage of stopping the spring and valve
sticking together.

I've been tearing my hair out over these low tenor or wholetone reeds, and
finding this bent spring valve works consistently was indeed a small Eureka
moment. For such small things they can use up a lot of work time, and
hopefully this will be useful to anyone else who has the same hassles.

Regards,

Brendan
website: www.brendan-power.com

Welcome to Harp On email group.

All suggestions, submissions, corrections and comments are welcome.

Harp On!
G
http://www.angelfire.com/music/HarpOn