Sax on the Web Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello there,
I had both a supersession I and J for a while, and sold them because I couldn't really control the intonation on these mpcs. After about 6 months, I decided to give them a try again but still have the same problem.
In order to get my playing better on soprano, I have been playing some aria lately, and these SS's are still giving me fits. E.g. My #7 JJ HR*and Yani metal #9 get me within 10 cents of each note on "O mio babbino caro", while on the SS, I have to lip up to a high Bb (from 20 cents flat), and then try to lip down to the middle F ( from 20 cents sharp). The profiles of the SS are different compared to the JJ and Yani, and that may be the problem. But the SS's sound so sweet.
Are there any recommendations for mouthpieces that are as sweet sounding as the SS, but have a more stable intonation.I'll really appreciate any help.

Thank you
OO
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
I am surprised you are using such wide pieces when trying to get precise intonation. Wouldn't these aria play better with an opening of .053 or less?

I use a SS F and find the highest notes (E3 to G3) tend to go very sharp. My Runyon 6 (compared to your JJ) playes them exactly on making it easy to sound good up there.

My S-80 E is also not very good up there. I understand the C* is better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Tom,
I believe I can control most of the wide pieces, as I can get the JJ and Yani within 10 cents even up to altissimo A. And the smaller pieces I have just sound really small to my ears. Please also note that JJ HR* is not the JJ derivative of the Runyon,if that was implied in your statement. I also own a Runyon #7, and it sounds small, compared to aforementioned mouthpieces.
The exception for me, so far, is the Supersessions. But I love their sound, and I am looking for something similar sounding, but more in tune.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member/Technician
Joined
·
21,116 Posts
I use an E on soprano and find it about as open as I can use. One thing to check is the length of the facing, not just the opening. Most SS have a long facing and you may want to experiment taking in more mouthpiece. You may be having the lower lip too close to the tip as the reed will touch the table too far away. Tilting the horn down clarinet style can help but is not my choice. I notice that a SS Alto facing is as long as a standard tenor. I really like the SS on Alto and Soprano and they are the only thing I use. The chambers are also rather large so you may also need to rethink where the placement on the cork is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
Well, for me the SS is the best-tuning mouthpiece I've tried but evidently not for you or your horn. I use an H.

I "third" the opinion that the I and J are awfully open for legit playing. You may want to try an F-G or so.

As a teacher once told me, you need to play in tune and in time before worrying about anything else, and that goes double for classical. So I'd say to keep the piece(s) that play in tune and try to alter to tone quality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Well,
I think I am not compatible with the SS mpcs, and the probable cause is the profile. I have dug out all my other soprano mpcs, and they play, for me, in tune much better than the Super sessions.
Aluta continua...
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
1,594 Posts
ss in a Vintage Sop?

hi !

do works a SS MP with a american Vintage sop like a Buescher or Martin , CONN ? is the chamber large enough to play in tune??:?
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,302 Posts
I use a Super Session J on my '28 Buescher TT's and on my modern Yanagisawas. No intonation issues.

I also have Morgan Vintage 6 and 7's (and many other pieces) for use on the TT's and Yanagisawas. No intonation issues with the Morgans, either.

The closest to the SS-J's in playability are the Morgans but the Morgans are a bit warmer and more spread. The next closest to the SS-J's are a pair of Selmer S-80 G and J's I have. DAVE
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Dave,
How does the Morgan Vintage profile compare to that of the Super Session? I think I may have to try the Morgan out if the profile is not as steep.
Thanks
OO
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,302 Posts
OOlufoks: I'm not sure what you mean by "profile". Both pieces look like soprano saxophone mouthpieces to me - meaning that they resemble the bulk of the HR pieces one comes across. They are NOT shaped like HR Runyons (which have a very small bite).

The pieces actually look similar from the barrel to the beak, with the same general slope and width of the beak. The windows are similar in length and width, too. The tables are of equal length.

The barrel interiors are NOT similar - the Morgans require a thicker cork (or a paper shim). I had my sopranos re-corked to fit the Morgans but can shove the SS-J on with grease. THAT thins down the new cork and the end result is that the Morgans are just a bit loose on the cork while the SS-J's are tight. That does not present a problem to me, though because I shove all pieces on a considerable distance and at that point, both are tight enough.

Overall length goes to the Morgan. In fact, I had both of my Morgan pieces cut down so they match the length of my Super Sessions (and cut-down S-80's). This is because I wanted to try them on my Buescher and longish mouthpieces (like the stock Morgan, S-80's, Beechlers, Yanagisawas, etc.) are just too long for me to come to pitch on vintage sopranos. STM Links can play to pitch for me - they are just a little too harsh for my tastes.

Inside, the Morgan has a slightly bigger opening from the chamber to the barrel (both the Morgan and SS have round openings) than does the SS-J, and the baffle area has a very slight roll to it - hardly noticeable - more felt than seen.

For me, the SS-J could use a slightly softer reed, but all of my prepped reeds will play on either piece. I use Java 2 (have some Superials, too, at 2 1/2) mostly and shave them down. I just shave the Morgan reeds a bit less.

Published tip-openings are . . . SS-J .069, Morgan Vintage 6 .065, and the Morgan Vintage 7 .070. I swap them out regularly depending on the room's acoustics, the reed in use, and other subjective factors. I prefer the MV 7 on my S992, the SS-J on my TT. DAVE
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
To MM:
I currently play a Conn New Wonder II and a P Mauriat SS 64. I used to own an Antigua A590LQ, and I have/had SS intonation problems on these sopranos.

To Dave Dolson:
My apologies for not being specific enough. By profile, I meant the external incline from the top of the mouthpiece tip to the top of the barrel. E.g I noticed the SS have a steeper incline than a Yani or a Link Tone Edge, when placing the mouthpieces on a table and doing a side view comparison. I can also comfortably take more of the Yani or Tone Edge in my mouth, than the SS, because of this external incline. I haven't paid much attention to the interior of my soprano mpcs.
I think I'll give the MV 7 a try, as it's tip opening is similar to the pieces I currently play.

Thank you both
OO
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,302 Posts
OOlufoks: After reading your last post, I got out my soprano mouthpiece box and compared a bunch . . . SS-J, Morgan Vintage, E. Rousseau, Bari Esprit, Claude Lakey, STM Link, Selmer Scroll-shank (Soloist), Beechler, Selmer S-80, Yanagisawa, and a few no-name stock pieces I've acquired over the years, just to name some.

I recently sold a HR Link, but I recall nothing unusual about its profile - same as all the ones I have in front of me now.

There isn't a difference among them in the size of the outside beak profiles. If anything, the SS has a teeny weeny smaller (shorter) beak than do most of the others. All have about the same angle of drop from the top to the tip, including the Yanagisawa vs. SS-J which I sat on my desk and eyeballed their beaks next to each other. I've got 'em all sitting in front of me as I write this.

If there ARE any differences, I seriously doubt if anyone here would recognize the difference as they played the piece. I know we are all different but I swear I see no significant differences among all of these soprano pieces. DAVE
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
There goes my hypothesis.:x
It really has to do with the height of where my top teeth ends on top of the mouthpiece, for the same amount of mouthpiece I take in lenghtwise. I end up playing closer to the tip on the SS than I do on the other mouthpieces, as I would require to open my mouth more (less control) if I had to play it like the others.
That is probably a better direct explanation than the profile/ incline stuff I mentioned earlier, but the effect still remains for me. It may seem like a minute detail, but its effect is more like a tip opening change, or someone going from a regular soprano HR mouthpiece to the Runyon custom.
Dave, your experience over the years, primarily on soprano, may have negated noticing this.

Thanks again
OO

Dave Dolson said:
OOlufoks: After reading your last post, I got out my soprano mouthpiece box and compared a bunch . . . SS-J, Morgan Vintage, E. Rousseau, Bari Esprit, Claude Lakey, STM Link, Selmer Scroll-shank (Soloist), Beechler, Selmer S-80, Yanagisawa, and a few no-name stock pieces I've acquired over the years, just to name some.

I recently sold a HR Link, but I recall nothing unusual about its profile - same as all the ones I have in front of me now.

There isn't a difference among them in the size of the outside beak profiles. If anything, the SS has a teeny weeny smaller (shorter) beak than do most of the others. All have about the same angle of drop from the top to the tip, including the Yanagisawa vs. SS-J which I sat on my desk and eyeballed their beaks next to each other. I've got 'em all sitting in front of me as I write this.

If there ARE any differences, I seriously doubt if anyone here would recognize the difference as they played the piece. I know we are all different but I swear I see no significant differences among all of these soprano pieces. DAVE
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member/Technician
Joined
·
21,116 Posts
That is why I mentiioned tilting the horn down. The SS has a longer facing thus requiring more beak in the mouth.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,302 Posts
Bruce: Did you mean to write SHORTER facing on the SS?

I hate to appear obsessive about this, but MY soprano Super Sessions (three J facings) have facings that are equal or if anything, a milimeter shorter when compared back-to-back to all of the other HR and metal soprano pieces in my collection.

Right now I'm playing my S992 with a Morgan Vintage 7 and an SS-J. Same bite. DAVE
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,302 Posts
Bruce: Maybe that's what they claim, but in actual comparisons, the SS soprano pieces are overall the shortest soprano pieces I own (except for the several others that I've had shortened in the barrel area).

AND, when placing the mouthpieces against each other, the facing of the SS-J is equal to or shorter than the others. DAVE
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top