[lukasali]

So, we all know how the RH Eb pinky key tends to be "heavier" in feel (stronger resistance) than the other RH (main stack) keys. The spring has to have a certain amount of tension, of course; backing it off past a given point allows it to flutter open from air pressure.

Wouldn't it be possible, and desirable, to move the post that the key is attached to farther towards the back of the horn, thus making the key a longer (and more effective) lever? Seems like elementary design principles to me, and there aren't any real downsides I know of. Maybe the Eb and low C keys would need separate posts and rods but that'd still be worth it wouldn't it?

I know the Eb is always an area requiring special attention and allowances when playing - no matter how much I work on it, it's still slower and more difficult for my fingers than other keys in the heart of the normal range (low D to high D, say).

Thoughts? Counterpoints?

 

[turf3]

If you increase the lever arm length you'll also be increasing the amount of keytouch travel for a given amount of pad opening. This can affect the ease of sliding to and from Eb and C.

The larger saxophones often have separate rods for Eb and C.

There may also be implications for low C in that it's a normally open key so if you increase its keytouch lever arm the key travel will decrease for a given amount of pad opening. Even with separate mountings for the two keys you're going to have to deal with packaging considerations.

Take a look at the Buescher 400, the only model I'm aware of where something different was done with key pivots (especially the low C#). They may have re-jiggered the low C/Eb pair as well? That's just a guess. The Buffet S-1 does away with the slide altogether with its oddball tilting shared key, but at the cost of considerable added complexity.

 

[saxoclese]

Some random thoughts: Sometimes a better "feel" to a spring closed key can be attained by replacing the spring with a thinner one and giving it more curvature. A perfectly "seated" pad on a level tonehole requires less pressure to form an "airtight" seal. Something I haven't tried myself but Curt Altarac has mentioned is to lengthen the key ''cradle" "or "nipple" as the British call it" where the spring attaches to the hinge tube. This gives more mechanical "advantage" to the spring as it closes the key.

 

[lukasali]

Some random thoughts: Sometimes a better "feel" to a spring closed key can be attained by replacing the spring with a thinner one and giving it more curvature. A perfectly "seated" pad on a level tonehole requires less pressure to form an "airtight" seal. Something I haven't tried myself but Curt Altarac has mentioned is to lengthen the key ''cradle" "or "nipple" as the British call it" where the spring attaches to the hinge tube. This gives more mechanical "advantage" to the spring as it closes the key.

Do I understand correctly that by lengthening the nipple (lol) you could have a lighter spring but it would still close the Eb with (effectively) more force due to more leverage? That's interesting, thanks for sharing.