the materials and sound threads are not really a new thing, we have discussed , many times this thing before.

Please follow the links which I have been looking for you

this one, for example, followed pretty much your question ( was first published in 2013), nothing much has changed since then!

https://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?198295-Materials-Materials-Materials

this too

https://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?198110-Materials-and-sound

This is limited to Silver but makes much the same points

https://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?115239-Silver-Plate-or-Solid-Silver

This is about bronze

https://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?115239-Silver-Plate-or-Solid-Silver

 

It's possible material may make a teeny difference, but not because of any acoustic properties, merely that different metals may react differently to the way its is formed., e.g. when tone holes are extruded the geometry of the "corner" where the tone hole chimney comes out of the body could have a slight different angle/curve . This is a small difference but it only needs a small difference at such places in the body to affect the sound.

One other possibility is the roughness of the finish on the inside, but most metals would have a more or less identically smooth finish.

So these tiny differences in bore geometry may make a difference, but not the acoustic properties, or "resonance" of the metal as you would get with instruments such as drums or guitars.

I remember a late friend of mine who was a Professor of Acoustics and a fine tenor playing saying that 98, 99% of a saxophone's sound are determined by the standing wave in the instrument and about 1 or 2% by other factors such as material, coating or probably gimmicks like the Klangbogen, but these didn't exist at the time.

Did your friend explain why the material wouldn't make a difference? I'm asking that because people who think it does, seem to think it is because of the vibration or some kind of resonance (as with drums or guitars), yet these factors as far as I can tell are nothing to do with klangbogens which claim some other kind of theory.

 

It's possible material may make a teeny difference, but not because of any acoustic properties, merely that different metals may react differently to the way its is formed., e.g. when tone holes are extruded the geometry of the "corner" where the tone hole chimney comes out of the body could have a slight different angle/curve . This is a small difference but it only needs a small difference at such places in the body to affect the sound.

One other possibility is the roughness of the finish on the inside, but most metals would have a more or less identically smooth finish.

So these tiny differences in bore geometry may make a difference, but not the acoustic properties, or "resonance" of the metal as you would get with instruments such as drums or guitars.

Did your friend explain why the material wouldn't make a difference? I'm asking that because people who think it does, seem to think it is because of the vibration or some kind of resonance (as with drums or guitars), yet these factors as far as I can tell are nothing to do with klangbogens which claim some other kind of theory.

It seems that many of the snake oil salesmen want us to believe their Klangbogen or dense metal lyre screw affects and enhances air flow inside the instrument. The reality is there is very little air flow in a woodwind instrument. The air is essentially sitting there inside the instrument and the molecules that make up the air are set to vibrating by the reed. When you blow into a sax or any other woodwind you don't really blow much air. It's just enough to make the reed vibrate and probably not enough to make a strip of paper, or a feather, move if laid across the end of a sax, clarinet, flute or bassoon. I'm sure if you used sensitive enough instruments you could measure the volume of air moving through the instrument over a given period of time but the flowing air is not what is making sound. It's the vibrating air molecules knocking up against each other, transmitting energy from one to the next, and causing a wave to spread out like ripples on the surface of a pond.

 

Well.
Those two posts cover it all.

 

you wish

 

I'm of the opinion that material does make a difference beyond small differences incurred in manufacturing but the difference may be perceived by the player more than by the audience. IOW, if a Sterling silver neck makes it easier for a player to do what he wants, he perceives that he sounds better, so he plays better. If it were possible to have a brass neck exactly the same as the silver neck the artist might or might not be able to tell them apart by playing but almost certainly nobody else could. You can't verify perceptions with science but the artist will insist on certain things once he experiences them. There is certainly a non-scientific element to choices in musical instruments that is based for the most part on perception, but who can argue if it has a positive effect on performance?

 

I think some people may experience actual differences, but their perception has nothing to do with measured acoustics and everything to do with the player's thoughts and feelings. It would be too simplistic to say it "the only difference is in your head", but the only thing that has a profound effect on the sound of a saxophone is the player.

That being said, the way you interact with your horn can be profoundly effected by how you think and feel about it, and that can definitely effect your playing. We've all had experiences of being 'on' and being 'off'. If we think our horn is lacking in some way it can effect our confidence, which can effect our playing to varying degrees, but effects our own perception of our playing MUCH more. I know from listening to recordings of myself when I thought I was playing awesome (at the time) and comparing them to times I thought I was sucking (at the time) that the differences listening back later are tiny -if they're there at all- compared to what I thought at the time. Like a listener, at the time, couldn't have told the difference. Perception is huge. But that doesn't mean it has no importance whatsoever.

 

Can we get another thousand posts on this subject, do y'all think?

 

It's all in your lips, tongue, mouth and how you blow. That's the important material for your overall sound.

 

And......

They're OFF!

Quick prediction:

No one will be convinced to change their mind in the least, no matter how many electrons are sacrificed to this discussion.

 

"We are all individuals!" ?

 

Thanks for the links and for the answers.

Actually, I'm just looking for solid scientific studies on this subject, but they don't seem to exist.

Which is understandable because they would be very difficult to do.

 

John Coltman's studies aren't scientific enough for you? Or do flute physics not also apply to saxophone?
https://ccrma.stanford.edu/marl/Coltman/notebook.html

A quote summarizing some of Coltman's results from another study on tone quality:
https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/...nt.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=2422&context=theses

One scientifically controlled study by John Coltman showed that skilled players
and experienced listeners could not distinguish between flutes constructed
from silver, copper, and wood. In a subsequent anecdotal test, Coltman
played a flute constructed from cherry wood and then another constructed from
concrete, and produced tones that were indistinguishable to an audience.

A scientific study by Gregor Widholm used identical Muramatsu model flutes
constructed with different alloys including silver, gold, and platinum. Widholm
found that professional flutists and listeners could not detect differences in tone
quality. An article by Neville Fletcher cites experiments where listeners could
not distinguish between silver, copper, or cardboard.

In any case, the crux of the matter is this. Do the vibrations of the instrument itself reach an audible level? If you bashed a brass instrument with a hammer, it would indeed ring differently than an iron or wood or concrete instrument. But the vibrating air column doesn't have anywhere near the energy as someone wielding a hammer.

 

Briefly, there have been numerous studies done. Coltman's studies have been followed up by many others. You'll have to search and you can find many of those are referenced in threads on this very forum.

Usually when a particular specific question is raised, there are not studies in existence that answer that exact question. At that point, the commentariat typically divide into three camps:

Group 1 say that although there are no studies that answer this exact question, there are sufficient studies of similar questions that the conventional wisdom amongst acousticians about how the saxophone works, can generally be considered valid, i.e., that materials of construction have at most a trivial effect on sound.

Group 2 say that there are gaps, or even inadequacies of experimental technique, and the studies pointed to aren't studying the exact question of concern; therefore the evidence is insufficent to conclude that, in the particular situation being discussed, material is not significant.

Group 3 reject the use of the scientific method to answer this question altogether, preferring to rely on anecdotal reports of well-established experts and their own experiences; or alternately taking a more subjective and mystical approach to understanding the behavior of the saxophone.

Group 2 and 3 are often mingled.

You will probably be able to detect from textual evidence which group I belong to, but I have tried to screen my answer from implicit bias as much as possible.

 

Briefly, there have been numerous studies done. Coltman's studies have been followed up by many others. You'll have to search and you can find many of those are referenced in threads on this very forum.

Usually when a particular specific question is raised, there are not studies in existence that answer that exact question. At that point, the commentariat typically divide into three camps:

Group 1 say that although there are no studies that answer this exact question, there are sufficient studies of similar questions that the conventional wisdom amongst acousticians about how the saxophone works, can generally be considered valid, i.e., that materials of construction have at most a trivial effect on sound.

Group 2 say that there are gaps, or even inadequacies of experimental technique, and the studies pointed to aren't studying the exact question of concern; therefore the evidence is insufficent to conclude that, in the particular situation being discussed, material is not significant.

Group 3 reject the use of the scientific method to answer this question altogether, preferring to rely on anecdotal reports of well-established experts and their own experiences; or alternately taking a more subjective and mystical approach to understanding the behavior of the saxophone.

Group 2 and 3 are often mingled.

You will probably be able to detect from textual evidence which group I belong to, but I have tried to screen my answer from implicit bias as much as possible.

group 4?

 

Resonance aside, I suppose the thickness of the brass could theoretically make a minute difference in the rate at which a horn warms up and how much heat it radiates, which could--in theory, mind, since it'd likely be impossible to measure--affect intonation, condensation production, and perhaps other variables. Of course, any such effects would be negligible and easily corrected for by the player.

 

If you believe what you read, you can read what you believe. Its better to demonstrate by scientific method conducted by someone you trust: yourself.

To address the intuitive mass-stiffness contribution, simply clamp weights such as blocks, rods, plates to various places on your horn. Try lead, brass, Aluminum - what you can find. I think a tenor weighs around 3 lb without keys, I've used up to 1 lb weights.

Second, to address the reflective surfaces of the keys (resonator contribution), you can remove keys and replace with saran wrap. This not only removes a hard surface, it removes mass as well.

Finally, you can observe non-reversible factors like damping, by attaching materials of low structural stiffness, but high damping, such as cork, rubber, wood, etc. Attach with clamps or double stick tape (which doubles the damping btw).

The results will be surprising to some, who won't believe their eyes, ears or other senses.

 

@saxoclese: Thanks for the link to the study which answers one of my questions ("Influence of wall vibrations on the behavior of a simplified wind instrument"). It shows that in real instruments, "effects are unlikely to occur in real instruments except for some organ pipes".

 

Having made mouthpieces from seven different materials and necks from three I can attest to the material not making any difference whatsoever, it's all about dimensions. If this is something that interests you can cal also read Benade's book, Fundamentals of Musical Acoustics where he's determined the same thing. Phil Barone

 

try this

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...ic+saxophone&view=detail&mid=E9DFB58204A6795D96D2E9DFB58204A6795D96D2&FORM=VIRE

 

And yet that molecular energy in the bore also makes the instrument vibrate in your hands. The vibration of the brass may not have any acoustic impact, assuming Coltman or other acousticians are right, but it's easy to understand why some players feel that it does. It actually seems to me a reasonable, if inaccurate, assumption.

I wonder how many players who scoff at resonance as an unscientific notion still insist that the sax vibrates in their soul.

 

And yet that molecular energy in the bore also makes the instrument vibrate in your hands. The vibration of the brass may not have any acoustic impact, assuming Coltman or other acousticians are right, but it's easy to understand why some players feel that it does. It actually seems to me a reasonable, if inaccurate, assumption.

Sure, many inaccurate assumptions are reasonable at first glance. To a child, or an adult in a naive culture, it's reasonable to assume that the Sun flies around the Earth. But once our understanding has moved past that point, there's no reason to continue to handle the outmoded assumption with kid gloves.

 

I wonder if anyone has come up with an Aura transmitter to enhance and improve the energy in a saxophone?

 

I did have a soul, but traded it to the devil in exchange for mediocre musical skills.

 

Tripped over the curb at the Crossroads!

 

Plastic Saxophones sound exactly like wood Saxophones and wood Saxophones sounds exactly like brass Saxophones and brass Saxophones sound exactly like sterling silver Saxophones.

Saxophones sound the same no matter what it is made out of, that is why beginners always play plastic Saxophones.

 

Plastic Saxophones sound exactly like wood Saxophones and wood Saxophones sounds exactly like brass Saxophones and brass Saxophones sound exactly like sterling silver Saxophones.

Saxophones sound the same no matter what it is made out of, that is why beginners always play plastic Saxophones.

I like silver because it sounds shiny.

 

Sometimes I hear, or imagine I hear, a little “ring” in the sound of a saxophone.

 

Kidding...

 

Saxophones vibrate more based on how expensive it is. Plastic vibrates the least because it is the cheapest. Solid gold would vibrate the most because it is most expensive. But if a person pays the solid gold price for a plastic sax, it will vibrate equal to a solid gold sax.

Nothing else about an instrument’s material effects the sound. Anything you think you hear is simply brain freeze from eating too much ice cream as a child.

Just like in that vibrato sax video, plastic sounds exactly the same brass. Any differences heard are audio such as microphone placement or different reeds. It doesn’t matter if plastic *always* sounds a certain way. In those cases, the microphone was placed the exact same way every single time. Yes indeed, different players in different studios all place the microphone the same way for plastic Saxophones! That is the *only* difference since we know for a fact that material doesn’t effect sound at all

 

I will say that without a doubt material makes a difference to the sound of a saxophone. If there is no material, the saxophone will be very quiet.

 

from sax.co.uk

Does it make a difference? Part 1 – Saxophone Material -

Throughout our time here at Sax.co.uk, we get asked many different questions about many different products. One of the most common questions we get is “does it really make aContinue readingDoes it make a difference? Part 1 – Saxophone Material

www.sax.co.uk

"...What difference can material really make?

Well, in theory, a whole load. The type of material you use when producing a saxophone should influence the Timbre, Resonance, Resistance and ultimately, Cost. Let's break these down and explore these areas more:..."

I'd like to hear where is this theory ( as in a scientific theory not speculations )

 

how about an Orgone accumulator for saxophones?

A VERY LARGE BORE