On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 20:08:09 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Do you have any clips that illustrate the tone difference, perhaps?

A bar or two of Flamingo, put down while the rest of you were at
matins (or relaxing in your favourite Dorchester with the TLS)

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Musi...Comparison.wav

This comparison is between a black lacquer and gold lacquer version
of theYamaha Custom tenor saxophone 82Z.

There is just one first take segment of each, played slightly
differently to prove that they are not one and the same.

The same mouthpiece (Otto Link metal "Original Tone Master",
facing 7*) and reed (Legere Studio Cut #3) were used on both
saxes.

For the technocrats:
Mic: Neumann vintage M49 placed (closer than normal)
about 25cms above the LH keys. No EQ, no reverb.
Room: vocal (overdub) booth - fairly dead, area about
12 sq metres.

Iain


The first one has more rasp to it, and had you not used the same
mouthpiece for both I would have guessed that it made the difference.

d

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Could there
be a little of the idea that the appearance affects the player's mood,
which in turn affects the style and performance here?

It's probably more than that. I play a black tenor in
the big band but a lacquered brass saxophone, with
the same reed and mouthpiece in the classical ensemble,
as the sound of this, they tell me, blends better with the
other brass and copper saxes.

Nothing to do with them thinking you look a bit too flash then? ;-)

LOL. No I don't think so:-) The conductor is an academy clarinet
prof so I take his word on all matters especially those pertaining to
tone. Beside, I sit in the same row as the bass clnt, a long stick on
a spike with a silver ashtray fixed on the end. Now that *is* flash:-)

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Music/JHEB.mp3

Bostic is the second one, yes? Very distinctive - was the whole part
played with rapid flutter-tongue? It sounded like it.

I am told he used a fast vibrato on a reed the thickness of a
cricket bat, that most of us could even get a sound from:-)

Jonnny Hodges was renowned for his sweet vibrato,
a tone to die for, like liquid honey. Bostic really put the R+B
saxophone on the map.

You probably remember his huge hit "Flamingo" My
brother had it on a 10 inch LP.

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Music/Flamingo.mp3

Iain

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

OK. I added a little reverb called 'Bright Hall' to it and I also like
that (see below). Unfortunately SoudForge is a little kludgy when it
comes to this sort of thing but it seems to remain within the realms
of
good taste to me! (?)

Here they both are for a back to back for easy comparison:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...octurne%20.wav

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...ght%20Hall.wav

That sounds good.
At you request, I offer the following, slightly drier:

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Music/HN.wav

To keep the .wav file small, I took just eight bars, and
sweetened the last four, by setting the reverb time to
1.5s ( to equate to a smallish auditorium, a little smaller,
and maybe a tad less brightly lit than your bright hall:-)


Thanks for that, that is nice. Not too much sign of reverb but the sound
has good body; it flatters Moira's playing also, seeming to cool the
tempo
slightly. She has heard it and likes it.

I chose a slightly shorter reverb time, thinking that
one would perhaps listen to a solo player in a smaller
more intimate auditorium. The reverb is deliberately
not too prominent but you can certainly hear its rounding
effect, particularly at the ends of phrases.

I set the signal fader to 0dB gain, and the reverb send to unity.
The reverb return fader was at -10dB, which means a sig to
reverb ratio of 3:1.


OK, that's some way over my head but the final effect is very pleasant.

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Don Pearce
wrote:


It's quite difficult to see how the exterior finish could affect the
sound which is produced not by the metal, but by the air column. Of
course the metal interacts strongly, but all the same...

Well, I'd expect the amplitudes of the displacements of the vibrations of
the metalwork to be much smaller than those of the air in the column.
However the stiffness is also very different. And the shape, etc, of the
instrument presumably determine how effectively it acts as an 'antenna' to
couple the vibrations into the surroundings.

For a thin tube...

Ahem:-)
It's a long cone actually, Jim, and not very thin either.
10kgs is a typical weight for a tenor saxophone.

Do not juge the thickness of the brass by the edges of the
tone-holes. These are thinner rings that are soldered on afterwards.

it would not surprise me if a surface coating affected the
mechanical impedance, velocity, damping, etc.


That seems to be the general considered opinion.
The density not the colour of the lacquer is the factor.
Black is the thickest of all the lacquer options.

Iain

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Do you have any clips that illustrate the tone difference, perhaps?

A bar or two of Flamingo, put down while the rest of you were at
matins (or relaxing in your favourite Dorchester with the TLS)

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Musi...Comparison.wav

This comparison is between a black lacquer and gold lacquer version
of theYamaha Custom tenor saxophone 82Z.

There is just one first take segment of each, played slightly
differently to prove that they are not one and the same.

The same mouthpiece (Otto Link metal "Original Tone Master",
facing 7*) and reed (Legere Studio Cut #3) were used on both
saxes.

For the technocrats:
Mic: Neumann vintage M49 placed (closer than normal)
about 25cms above the LH keys. No EQ, no reverb.
Room: vocal (overdub) booth - fairly dead, area about
12 sq metres.


Second one gets the vote here but it's probably the playing - not a better
or worse on the sounds themselves which are very different.

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
I set the signal fader to 0dB gain, and the reverb send to unity.
The reverb return fader was at -10dB, which means a sig to
reverb ratio of 3:1.


OK, that's some way over my head but the final effect is very pleasant.

Just a long winded method of describing an echo mixture pot. ;-)

These were common on early BBC desks - they altered the relationship
between direct and reverb without changing the level. Quite useful in a
multi-mic balance - but expensive to implement.

--
*Everybody lies, but it doesn't matter since nobody listens*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Don
Pearce wrote:


It's quite difficult to see how the exterior finish could affect the
sound which is produced not by the metal, but by the air column. Of
course the metal interacts strongly, but all the same...

Well, I'd expect the amplitudes of the displacements of the vibrations
of the metalwork to be much smaller than those of the air in the
column. However the stiffness is also very different. And the shape,
etc, of the instrument presumably determine how effectively it acts as
an 'antenna' to couple the vibrations into the surroundings.

For a thin tube...

Ahem:-) It's a long cone actually, Jim,

Well, to a physicst, a 'cone' is just a tune whose cross-section varies
along the length. :-)

and not very thin either. 10kgs
is a typical weight for a tenor saxophone.

Do not juge the thickness of the brass by the edges of the tone-holes.
These are thinner rings that are soldered on afterwards.

Fair enough. So far as I can recall I've never picked up a saxophone, so
had no idea how heavy they are!

That does raise the question. Is the thickness for durability, etc, or to
get the desired sound?

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 11:51:04 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Could there
be a little of the idea that the appearance affects the player's mood,
which in turn affects the style and performance here?

It's probably more than that. I play a black tenor in
the big band but a lacquered brass saxophone, with
the same reed and mouthpiece in the classical ensemble,
as the sound of this, they tell me, blends better with the
other brass and copper saxes.

Nothing to do with them thinking you look a bit too flash then? ;-)

LOL. No I don't think so:-) The conductor is an academy clarinet
prof so I take his word on all matters especially those pertaining to
tone. Beside, I sit in the same row as the bass clnt, a long stick on
a spike with a silver ashtray fixed on the end. Now that *is* flash:-)

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Music/JHEB.mp3

Bostic is the second one, yes? Very distinctive - was the whole part
played with rapid flutter-tongue? It sounded like it.

I am told he used a fast vibrato on a reed the thickness of a
cricket bat, that most of us could even get a sound from:-)

Jonnny Hodges was renowned for his sweet vibrato,
a tone to die for, like liquid honey. Bostic really put the R+B
saxophone on the map.

You probably remember his huge hit "Flamingo" My
brother had it on a 10 inch LP.

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Music/Flamingo.mp3

Iain

Yup, I remember that. But that takes us right back to the thread. It
has the most awful echo plus reverb on it. That certainly is not the
natural acoustic of any room.

d

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 11:51:04 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Could there
be a little of the idea that the appearance affects the player's mood,
which in turn affects the style and performance here?

It's probably more than that. I play a black tenor in
the big band but a lacquered brass saxophone, with
the same reed and mouthpiece in the classical ensemble,
as the sound of this, they tell me, blends better with the
other brass and copper saxes.

Nothing to do with them thinking you look a bit too flash then? ;-)

LOL. No I don't think so:-) The conductor is an academy clarinet
prof so I take his word on all matters especially those pertaining to
tone. Beside, I sit in the same row as the bass clnt, a long stick on
a spike with a silver ashtray fixed on the end. Now that *is* flash:-)

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Music/JHEB.mp3

Bostic is the second one, yes? Very distinctive - was the whole part
played with rapid flutter-tongue? It sounded like it.

I am told he used a fast vibrato on a reed the thickness of a
cricket bat, that most of us could even get a sound from:-)

Jonnny Hodges was renowned for his sweet vibrato,
a tone to die for, like liquid honey. Bostic really put the R+B
saxophone on the map.

You probably remember his huge hit "Flamingo" My
brother had it on a 10 inch LP.

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Music/Flamingo.mp3


Iain

Yup, I remember that. But that takes us right back to the thread. It
has the most awful echo plus reverb on it. That certainly is not the
natural acoustic of any room.

No. It's not a room, but a *very* contrived tape repeat with
reverb added to it. This became part of the very distinctive
Bostic R+B sound. The record was recorded in early 1950s,
and the effect made, it seems, with an Ampex 300 and a
Hammond spring reverb Proper plate reverbs like the
EMT 140 didn't appear until later.

Iain

In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
No. It's not a room, but a *very* contrived tape repeat with
reverb added to it. This became part of the very distinctive
Bostic R+B sound.

Using a tape delay to feed a reverb plate was common practice in TV in the
'60s and '70s before digital reverb units become the norm. And pretty well
all of these offer the same effect.

It's not 'contrived' in any way. It's exactly what happens in real life in
some acoustics.

--
*Why doesn't Tarzan have a beard? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.