Sax on the Web Forum banner
81 - 96 of 96 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,829 Posts
Yep, even Yamaha, a company full of high quality acoustic engineers who know it's total BS, has claimed that the plating ON THE KEYS of a clarinet affects tone.
 

·
TOTM administrator
Tenor: Eastman 52nd St, Alto: P. Mauriat 67RDK, Soprano: Eastern Music Curvy
Joined
·
6,477 Posts
New from Phil-Tone! Butter plated mouthpieces. Limited quantities, act now....
French Butter? We all know that stuff has a way better tone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
As a noob I'm hesitant to jump into this discussion, just want to mention that it is now easy to get spectrum frequency analyzer apps for your smartphone. I don't think they'd be precise enough to measure small differences, but large differences like that between the dark and bright mouthpieces (of different design) in the test posted earlier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,829 Posts
Unfortunately just visually comparing spectra doesn't tell you much without a background in acoustics.

What I have found useful in my professional life (and I've been dealing with noise in machinery for the last 30+ years) is to do an audible comparison (headphones of course, no cell phone files but real good quality recordings) of the sound with a notch filter applied at frequencies you suspect of causing an issue, vs. no filter. In recent years it's become much easier to do this at a high quality level using the simple Audacity program.

As far as I'm concerned, cell phone videos where one person plays one thing and then a different one and invites the viewer to draw conclusions, are no more than meaningless entertainment. The recording quality is too poor; the operator knows exactly what he's playing; the viewer of the video does too (usually); and most people are listening to the sound over 1/8" ear buds in a multi-compressed format.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2015-
Joined
·
34,756 Posts
When they're the sellers of what they're testing, the only thing you can assume is bias.
I do not accept that. There are a lot of people at a plethora of companies that test because they want to produce the best possible products.

And there are the others, too.

It is good to have a questioning attitude, but you don't have to paint everyone with the same negative brush. That's just another bias.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2016
Joined
·
19,007 Posts
When they're the sellers of what they're testing, the only thing you can assume is bias.
I do not accept that. There are a lot of people at a plethora of companies that test because they want to produce the best possible products.

And there are the others, too.

It is good to have a questioning attitude, but you don't have to paint everyone with the same negative brush. That's just another bias.
BOTH comments are valid, actually.

One perhaps should not automatically assume a bias based upon the fact they are selelrs of the product...because indeed, they may well have discovered something which supports their claims.
BUT....one should also keep in mind that, if they are a purveyor....and their 'discovery' supports their product....likely the only way to refute or confirm the reality is for someone ELSE to do the testing.

Likewise, IMHO I would not necessarily 'take' the claim of a purveyor of a product as anything 'proof positive' of one position/hypothesis or the other. Particularly when the claim is really written and presented in a very generalized fashion.

This thread is now on Page 5...and, FWIW, it's the same convo as past convos. Starting to go in circles. (this is not to dis' the OP in any way, btw...but this convo would not have started had someone NOT stumbled across a new claim by a seller of necks, in this instance...and I am not so sure the claim actually 're-opens' anything, particularly...it seems more to me to be a claim which has been repeated many times by many sellers before).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,905 Posts
I do not accept that. There are a lot of people at a plethora of companies that test because they want to produce the best possible products.

And there are the others, too.

It is good to have a questioning attitude, but you don't have to paint everyone with the same negative brush. That's just another bias.
There is testing and there is testing. Grumps has a point in that in a development environment, having the same group / team test the product that they are developing becomes a self fulfilling prophecy but it is not necessarily done out of bias but because of not seeing the forest for the tree.

On the other hand, nobody knows the product as well as the folks who are developing it. It's a catch 22 situation and I don't think MPCs fall outside that scenario.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2015-
Joined
·
34,756 Posts
This thread is now on Page 5...and, FWIW, it's the same convo as past convos.
Are we getting any better at reaching the same conclusion faster? :D
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2015-
Joined
·
34,756 Posts
Salted gives you more of a dry tone.
If you want a wet tone the obvious choice is Land-O-Lakes.
Duck fat, please, for modern classical applications - and lard for playing blues.
 
81 - 96 of 96 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top