Martin Pads -- Thickness & Resonators

[Hornlip]

I've got two general questions about Martin & their pads:

1. First, I've heard that they used thinner pads than other makers, from the split-bell Handcraft days on. What's the skinny on that?

2. I know Martin used plain rivet pads without boosters in their early horns, but I understood that they started using flat metal boosters starting with the Committee horns. However, every eBay horn I've seen of late, including "The Martin" models of the 40's on, seem to be equipped with plain rivet pads. I suppose they could have been put in post-factory, but it seems unlikely that so many of them would get set up this way, unless they've been handled by techs who don't hold them in high esteem & think they're not worth adding the reso's.

What's the deal? :|

[Stencilman]

I had to get thin pads to repad my Martin Handcraft soprano. These pads are 0.160" thick and are B43 in the Ferree's catalog. I purchased mine from MusicMedic. A few of the pads were slightly thicker and I had to sand them down the tiniest bit on the back side.

[Jerry K.]

I used the Ferree's B52 thin "Selmer Style" pads with the domed plastic resonators on my Martin Indiana Stencil tenor when I overhauled it. I am completely satisfied with the results. Tone is strong yet warm and the thickness IMHO was a perfect match to the originals. I used domed metal resonators on a Handcraft alto a couple years ago and I was not happy with the results. The horn was loud and played well but lost the warmth and Martin character that I liked before the overhaul.

[bmartin8]

I have just started replacing the pads onb my daughter's Martin Indiana Alto. I am putting .160 pads on but it appears they are thinner than the ones that were previously on and require a lot of readjustment. She says it takes more wind now to get the same sound. Does it really matter what thickness the pads are as long as the are alligned properly?

[Hornlip]

Does it really matter what thickness the pads are as long as the are alligned properly?

Well, I guess if you're putting regular thickness pads on your horn & they had thin ones on before, you would have to do a lot of bending to get the pads to seat correctly -- and vice versa. I suppose I would avoid lots of bending, if I could!! :D

I was tinkering with my 20's Handcraft alto, which needs a full re-pad. It's a beautiful horn with absolutely no plating wear & bright gold wash in the bell. Current pads are pale (though not white) plain leather with a tiny rivet. If I do a little jury-rigging I can get it to play for a while. It really has a pretty tone the way it is -- very dark, of course, but also delicate. Very old-fashioned. I think Jerry's right about metal resonators -- on this horn they would just bum up a good thing. When I get it overhauled I'm just going to get a set of high-quality plain leather pads put on w/o any resos & preserve the horn's old-fashioned tonal quality.

This horn's from the the late-20's -- I guess Martin knew what the Handcraft's strength was, when it kept equipping the Handcraft with plain pads after the other makers had switched over to resos!!

But it seems odd that they would keep equipping their horns with plain pads all the way up into the 50's (if they in fact did).

[rrex54]

For what it's worth I'll weigh in with my experiences with various reso setups on my Martins. In the interest of disclosure, I favor a dark sound and play solo for my own enjoyment . . . .

1) Martin soprano stencil -- rivet pads, played with large chamber vintage mpcs, is sweet and warm. I can't imagine anything else for this horn!

2) Handcraft alto -- domed plastic resos do make the horn loud and harsh . . . and yet I can go dark and warm with a vintage Martin or Goldbeck mpc -- and tear the house down with a Brilhart.

3) Handcraft Committee tenor -- flat metal reos with a couple of Noyeks on the lower keys that yields a sound to die for (a sound for which to die for the grammarians out there!). Goldbeck and other large chamber mpcs produce that wonderful warm, sultry Martin sound. A Brilhart piece allows you to command some attention -- yet without losing that special sultry undercurrent in the sound.

4) Martin tenor stencil (mixes Handcraft [octave mech, bell] and H. Committee [LH bell key] features) -- currently in need of a repad, but equiped with nonreso, mostly nonrivet pads gets a great Martin sound with a Brilhart and similarly bright pieces, but sounds utterly dead with large chamber pieces.

I think my bottom line in the reso/no-reso debate would be: it depends on both the pitch of the instrument and mouthpiece preferences. I doubt I will ever use resos on the soprano -- but would not go without flat metal on the tenor given the flexibility it offers -- and my preference for large chamber pieces. I would not use domed boasters on the Handcraft alto again, but might go with flat metal as I do like the flexibility -- and playing on large chamber mpcs which might sound too dead to our ears given the predominance of brighter sax sounds.

[Hornlip]

I think my bottom line in the reso/no-reso debate would be: it depends on both the pitch of the instrument and mouthpiece preferences. I doubt I will ever use resos on the soprano -- but would not go without flat metal on the tenor given the flexibility it offers -- and my preference for large chamber pieces.

I was wondering about resos & the Handcraft tenors. Hmm. For a while I had a '20's Buescher stencil tenor with plain rivet pads & had a similar experience as you did with your Handcraft-hybrid: sounded good with a smaller-chambered piece but sounded like a cow with the barrel-chambered Buescher piece it came with (though it could have been too soft a reed/my inexperience).

I would not use domed boasters on the Handcraft alto again, but might go with flat metal as I do like the flexibility -- and playing on large chamber mpcs which might sound too dead to our ears given the predominance of brighter sax sounds.

I thought about that, but considering the 1/2-dozen resonator-equipped Buescher & Conn altos I've got lying around, I can afford for the Martin to be a little less flexible!! :twisted:

[Stencilman]

Wow. I went the total opposite direction on my Handcrafts and TrueTones. I found that I loved the combination of a darker horn that has been "suped-up" with resonators and mouthpiece and reed. I play mostly rock/pop/r&b/smooth jazz (studio work). Here is the breakdown of the horns I play regularly:

1) 1926 Martin Handcraft Soprano stencil: Prestini kid pads with homemade Noyek-like brass resonators. Dukoff D9 with Fibracell MH reeds. This is my #1 horn that gives me a unique sound. I can't put this horn down.

2) 1928 Martin Handcraft Alto stencil: MusicMedic RooPads with silver Noyek resos. Dukoff D9 with Fibracell Med reeds. Overall bright sound but can be as sweet as needed. Again, a unique sound. Tenor-ish sound in lower range. Low Bb does not speak very well even though there are no leaks.

3) Exactly the same as above (horns were manufactured the same week if not the same day). Kid pads with domed metal resos. Medium-bright sound and much more pure in tone than the one above. I use a custom vintage Lakey mouthpiece on this for traditional jazz situations.

4) 1924 Buescher TrueTone C-Soprano stencil: Prestini kid pads with plastic domed resos. Customized Rico Graftonite B7 mouthpiece (changed facing, baffle, chamber, throat to work well with this little baby of a horn). Awesome projection, good intonation, flexible sound. This horn gets more play time outside of the studio than all the others and goes everywhere with me (even to the office) because it is so much fun to play. And it's cute, too :-)

So, I guess my goals for my sound are probably different than many folks playing vintage horns.

[Hornlip]

Wow. I went the total opposite direction on my Handcrafts and TrueTones. I found that I loved the combination of a darker horn that has been "suped-up" with resonators and mouthpiece and reed.

Oh, great. Thanks for opening that can of worms. Now I'm going to have to pick up another Handcraft & pack it full of noyeks just to see what it's like!! :roll:

[rrex54]

Wow, Stencilman, that's potent stuff! The RooPad/Noyek combo sounds interesting. I've always heard the Roo pads tended to produce a bit darker sound, yet you've combined with the Noyeks known for brightness. Interesting.

I think I can almost hear Lakey-domed metal match up -- definitely a good clear sound, sort of like the clarity of a Buescher with the depth of tone of a Martin but, I think, lacking the sultry quality I love, but nonetheless a good sound.

The modified Graftonite I don't particularly want to imagine! I have the equivalent Metalite M7 which I've played on my Pan Am sopranos -- not more than once or twice -- definitely not my sound.

The variations in taste and sounds possible are indeed wonderful -- and a testiment to the quality and flexibility of vintage horns!

Of course Hornlip can trade some of the Conns on another Handcraft -- to great advantage! :twisted:

[Stencilman]

I've always heard the Roo pads tended to produce a bit darker sound, yet you've combined with the Noyeks known for brightness.
I think the pad material doesn't contribute much at all since the resos cover up most of the pad.

The modified Graftonite I don't particularly want to imagine!
The C-soprano didn't play well with any off-the-shelf soprano mouthpieces. The modifications make the Graftonite a totally different mouthpiece - it doesn't resemble the original in sound at all. I do like the Ricos since they make 3 different chambers and 3 facings and are very inexpensive. I use the Rico's as mouthpiece "blanks" for making custom mouthpieces. I got a batch of them from a music store closing for $8 a piece!

The variations in taste and sounds possible are indeed wonderful -- and a testiment to the quality and flexibility of vintage horns!
Yep, but it takes lots of experimentation to get where you want. The journey can be both fun and frustrating!

[rrex54]

Ah, drifting off topic a bit, but using the Rico pieces as blanks is a wonderful idea -- and I do know the problem with finding a suitable C sop piece. My favorite clarinet mpc is a Graftonite A5 which is more open than the typical .043 and .045 openings. Come to think of it, maybe I need to go for an A7 there . . . .

And, yes, fun an frustrating indeed!

[super20dan]

while we are on the subject of buescher c sops and mpcs .... i also have a rico metalite that i modified to work on the c -sop and a yamaha that i use for legit or softer stuff..... until i found a mpc that works perfectly right off the shelf .the runyon custom .it works like a charm . one must get used to the smaller size though but i assure you that it plays in tune and you can avoid mods or looking for a c mpc(next to impossible to find)

[Sigmund451]

I didnt design the setup but my The Martin Tenor has selmer type plastic dome resonators. I have played with the metal ones on other horns and I cant say I notice a huge dif. I DID notice the difference when I had an old martin with NO resonators. And yes you want the thin pads for a martin unless you want to have a glorious day releveling all the keys.

[Pinnman]

Two points on which I would welcome clarification:

1. Who supplies Noyeks at a reasonable price (and how much are they)? I did e-mail Steve Goodson once on this, but found his asking price out of my league.

2. Does the thickness of the pad affect the angle of the pad as it comes down on the tone hole? My thinking is not which leads me to believe that it is th corks which must be adjusted when new pads are installed rather than any tinkering with tone holes or bending of arms. I would expect corks to be replaced as a matter of course and this is necessarily a time-consuming operation on these old saxes which do not have the screw adjaustments of, say, a modern Selmer. Or do I have it all wrong?

[Dave dix]

The thickness of the pad does effect the angle.Too thick and the lower side of the pad will hit first,too thin and the high side will hit first unless you angle the pad in the cup which is rather difficult.Also if the pad is too thick the key may need to be opened a bit or the horn may sound a bit stuffy.
My The martin tenor came with dome reslo,s and it barks especially with a dukoff on but my martin typewriter has rivet pads with a really nice smooth mid-dark tone but will blow up a storm where-as my handcraft alto (standard special 1940) has rivets but sounds like reslo's.It is very tight and powerful.Im waiting for my true tone alto to arrive so i can re-pad it (snaps) and compare it to the martin alto
Dave

[rrex54]

To address your second point, the answer is YES, it affects the angle.

As you know the pad does not go straight up and down (perpendicular to) over the tone hole, but pivots on a fixed point. This means that the pad cup/pad's course of travel is an arc and the angle formed by a) the imaginary line drawn from the pivot to the tone hole and b) the arm and cup changes throughout the arm's range of motion. When adjusted properly, the pad cup is angled on the arm in such a way that it contacts the tone hole chimney at a point directly under the arm and directly across from that point at the same time.

When a thicker pad is used, the extra thickness causes the back of the pad (the side with the arm), to contact the tone hole chimney first resulting in a leak on the opposite side of the pad. To correct this, the angle of the pad cup on the end of the arm must be changed, i.e., the arm bent slightly so the pad contacts both the near and far edges of the chimney at the same time.

[Dave dix]

Yes rrex54,well put.I think i put it about the same but your explanation is better written technically than mine!!
The outcome is the same -too thick you bend the cup down too thin bend the cup up. Correct size and no bending (usually(
Dave

[Hornlip]

I recently picked up a Martin Centennial alto that was repadded in 1996. The pads to me looked suspiciously thick. I also noticed that some of the pads were pretty significantly angled in their key-cups.

It played very well (like Zowie! well), with one fault: the middle-finger C note was remarkably stuffy. Side-C blew very clearly. B, A & G play fine, too. I took it to my tech for a general going-over & though there are a few leaks, just looking at it he thought the pads on the upper stack were too close to the tone-holes. So it may be that it was re-padded with too-thick pads w/o a proper height adjustment. I'm waiting to hear his verdict.

My The martin tenor came with dome reslo,s and it barks especially with a dukoff on but my martin typewriter has rivet pads with a really nice smooth mid-dark tone but will blow up a storm where-as my handcraft alto (standard special 1940) has rivets but sounds like reslo's.It is very tight and powerful.Im waiting for my true tone alto to arrive so i can re-pad it (snaps) and compare it to the martin alto
Dave

The aformentioned Centennial has large plastic domed resos, and the sound really pops out of the horn. I've got a Handcraft Imperial tenor that I need to get re-padded -- and I can't decided which way to go. As it is it's got a mix of decayed plain rivet pads & pads with flat metal resonators (all the pads, btw, are quite thin).

I can't decide whether to go for flat metal or plastic domes, but I'm leaning towards plastic domes.

[Stencilman]

... the middle-finger C note was remarkably stuffy.
I've had trouble with a couple of horns with a stuffy C2. In both cases it was a key height/resonator problem. Noyek resonators can really cause trouble above small toneholes, especially when the Bis pad is too small for a resonator. It is very hard the adjust the stack so that the action is even. On one horn I removed the Noyek from the C key. On another horn, I made a tiny Noyek reso for the Bis key by mounting one in the a Dremel tool and grounding it down to a tiny little disc.