Sax on the Web Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
I think it sounds great, and it suits the tune very well. The background to the tune isnt busy, so theres no need to fire up as they say....subtone all the way ! ( I listen to a lot of Ben Webster and love it.)
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Coffee Guru
Joined
·
38,812 Posts
just, perfect! hold the sound, don't change anything..........well, nothing about the playing........about the piece i would have liked some " elaboration " of the first few lines , but you know me.........I like a sense of linear direction in any story
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
TENOR, soprano, alto, baritone
Joined
·
7,409 Posts
Nice tone. I would explore that for awhile if I were you. Sub-tones also build embouchure/control. Pretty strange music. I thought the guitar was rushing some which detracted from the lush, dreamy quality of the clip. It could flow a little better, like melted butter and honey.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2015-
Joined
·
32,936 Posts
Please consider using a click track. I had a difficult time enjoying the composition because there seemed to be no consensus about the time - the guitar didn't even seem to agree with itself.

Why do you call that an "odd" tone??? I think having the control to "take it there" when appropriate should be in everybody's bag.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,315 Posts
Hello Wade,
Your tone is beautiful man! Rich and atmospheric.
True, the guitar has some minor rhythmic issues but that didn't make me deter from the piece.

Why would you consider the tone odd? (scratches head)
Far from odd. Tone, like the one you're exhibiting, has been around for many decades!
Although, I would have liked to have heard you, as in contrast, play higher in the register
to get a better idea how consistent your tone is. Just for added color to heighten the expression of the piece.

But then again, as in all opinions, that's just what they are. Another reality subjecting themselves to someone else's in the form of opinion.
From your point of view, I'm assuming, it was meant to stay exactly where it is and that's perfectly fine!

I'd take tone over technique any day
Do you mean the piece or your tone, as in dumping it?
And if you're referring to your tone I don't understand why you would dump it if some don't care for it. Is that what you're seeking? Geez Wade, what do you think about it???
 

·
SOTW Columnist, Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
23,006 Posts
I really like that tone. And I agree with the others; there's nothing odd about it at all. Sounds just the way a tenor sax should sound at a subtone level. I do think I hear some rrecording effects (a bit of reverb?) that help to enhance the sound. Does it sound about the same in live performance? But yeah, keep that tone. Don't dump it!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,397 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thanks all for the comments. I was just trying to see/hear what this particular set up with extreme sub-tone was like. The piece is a reject, simply a guitar bass string few bar loop that the guitarist couldn't keep in time with (as you all noticed). It goes nowhere and means nothing, was just an exercise.

Yea, has a Ben Webster sort of thing about it, but that's sort of part of the problem if one gets bagged as sounding like... but not exactly like them or a poor imitation. The mouthpiece has a huge baffle that barks like dog with heaps of high overtones, but can also do the sub-tone in the lower register that's quite distinctive. Just wasn't sure about it as it seemed almost like a parody rather than genuine.

Thanks again. Will try to do something again that's more of a "keeper" using this technique and see how much higher it can be played with the same sound/feeling.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,397 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Mike, I think we may always disagree on this point. Your detached and independent point of view (towards what you play or compose) is very admirable. You have confidence and don't care what anyone else thinks about what you put forward. I think some of this comes from having had lots of experience as a player and composer. I don't give myself that luxury as I don't have that much experience and have seen/heard many inexperienced players who operate off an ego base thinking that whatever they do is great.

I have a desire to communicate something to anyone who listens and don't think that reality checks are out of order. I'm not foolish enough to think that this will be 100% universal, but if it works for some then maybe that's OK. I don't know of any other way to gage this other than to ask and find out what's working. Lacking your experience I simply do not have the confidence to assume that everything I do is somehow good or communicative.

I don't think this means that I'm trying to please everyone, and it certainly doesn't mean that I'm trying to copy or sound like anyone either. I think I've got a distinctive voice, albeit technically crude. I have no desire to alter this in order to please anyone, but am doing "sound checks" (metaphor) in the same way that if you're on stage listening to your monitor you may have no idea what the audience is actually hearing. I think that if one is bothering to stand up in front of others to play you'd be interested to know if what they are hearing is the same as what you hear on stage, and you can't do this from your position. You'd be best served by listening to the judgement of others who you trust or admire.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,315 Posts
Sorry Wade. I sincerely apologize. I was merely trying to be constructive. I guess my point of view
has run it's course and I really shouldn't inflict it further being that it's been said and acknowledged.
Additionally, my way of perception is not at all exoteric and being that it's not it tends to bring about a certain intrusion. It will naturally become intrusive if it's reiterated from time to time.
It's just easy to sit here and jot something down without being overly concerned over the ramifications. My situation comes natural to me and so I assure you no ill will was in motive. I was simply contributing another perspective to the mix. I must gauge my contributions on this forum with more diligence. I certainly wouldn't want them to be counter-productive.

With all due respect Wade, If I did listen too closely to the judgment of others, and I could only speak for myself, I know I wouldn't have established the unimpeded imagination that I've accrued over the years if I paid attention to likes and dislikes. It's not that I didn't trust or admire them, which I did and still do. It's their voice not mine and I realized that at a very early age and so I cultivated my desire according to that thinking which I've never regretted. It's been incredibly fulfilling as well as enlightening.
I trust my own ears and what they've given me and in that trust I always saw a very personal impetus to write music the way I heard it.

However, you're 100% right, I really shouldn't inflict my own passion when everyone here has their own individual drive and desire to attain what's in their own heart as they should.
Consider this a wake up call for me Mr. Cornell.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,397 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Nothing to apologise for Mike. Your point of view is understood and actually appreciated. It's enlightening for me and probably others to know how you come to compose and improvise as yours is an extremely unique voice here. You are indeed a "natural" where many of us have to concentrate, push, relax and then find out how we did. Not your way, but it's often necessary for someone like me to have reality checks. I don't think this in any way interferes with creativity or necessarily affects my choices, just gives me feedback to see if there was some resonance with others. Another track I recently posted and shared with others I thought extremely interesting but hardly anyone else did http://www.soundclick.com/player/sin...ongID=11039824 . This didn't bother me at all and I'm certainly still happy with what I did and like it. There is value (for me) in knowing that this didn't touch others and (if possible) understanding why. Was the message too personal to communicate? Was the vocabulary confusing or unintelligible? That knowledge wouldn't stop me from doing something similar, but it would stop me from using it in a public performance. What would be the point? If I've got someone's attention, and their $$ why would I knowingly want to disengage from them by purposefully playing something that I know they won't understand or enjoy?

I just don't have the intuitive sense or experience to know what communicates to others. It would be a blessing to either have that sense or the confidence not to care.
 

·
Indistinguishable Resident Buescher Bigot and Foru
Joined
·
8,588 Posts
Nothing odd there at all. Reminded me of Ike Quebec.

Not playing a Buescher, by any chance?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,397 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Thanks Maddenma. Not playing a Buescher. It's a saxgourmet by that unmentionalble "Southern Gentleman". The mouthpiece is a Lamberson DD with a 2 1/2 firecell. If I didn't sub-tone the low Bb and instead played at full volume it would probably rupture several internal organs of anyone nearby.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,397 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
As promised here's another track with the same mouthpiece and tone being tried. A few more high notes here to be compared.

http://soundcloud.com/whampton-court/blind-dog-mash

For JL: I'm recording with a Zoom H4n and then editing using basic Audacity. The guitarist has all sorts of gizmos that give him a reverb. We are in a dead room, so I need to match up to his existing reverb that is plugged directly into the recorder. In Audacity they call it "Gverb". There isn't any other modification of the sound although I do some editing to make beginnings and endings or correct an obvious timing problem (where possible).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,466 Posts
As promised here's another track with the same mouthpiece and tone being tried. A few more high notes here to be compared.

http://soundcloud.com/whampton-court/blind-dog-mash

For JL: I'm recording with a Zoom H4n and then editing using basic Audacity. The guitarist has all sorts of gizmos that give him a reverb. We are in a dead room, so I need to match up to his existing reverb that is plugged directly into the recorder. In Audacity they call it "Gverb". There isn't any other modification of the sound although I do some editing to make beginnings and endings or correct an obvious timing problem (where possible).
May I ask what your Gverb settings are?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,397 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
May I ask what your Gverb settings are?
No problem, but I must admit that I don't generally look at the numerical level and only use the position of the slider, so these are not exact and I will change them if it's not quite the sound I think needed. So roughly this was the setting:
Roomsize (m) 75
Reverb time (s) 7.5
Damping .81
Input bandwidth .90
Dry signal level (dB) -7.7
Early reflection level (dB) -32
Tail level (dB) -32

I'm not a recording engineer so have no idea exactly what all of these parameters mean, but have used them simply on the basis of the sound being "right" for the circumstance.

Hope this helps.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,397 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Thanks Joe. Don't know if you noticed but I gave you a plug (on another forum topic) for the excellent work you did on my nino mouthpiece. Not sure that the questioner wanted to know the entire set up as they only asked for the instrument, but that nino piece you did for me is magic and I'm happy to give you credit.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top