[tjontheroad]

While reading through past threads I've seen a few references stating post construction Yanis are more lively in tone and response over their ribbed counterparts. While I own a SC-992, I never took the time to A/B it with a 901/902 series. It's a lively sounding horn as is.

Now I'm looking into a Yani tenor. There's no specific thread I've looked at that discusses any advantages or disadvantages of construction in terms of tone and/or response. So I ask the question. I mean... Is it really worth the extra bucks for the ribs? Is it all such a small difference that there's little to think about?

It would seem to me the T-901 would be the lighter of the two and that could make for some noticeable difference. I plan on play testing some Yanis in the couple weeks. So, I'm interested in your thoughts.

Discuss...

btw... I never liked ribs 'cause they stick between my teeth

 

[Wind_Mill]

Perhaps someone has done some actual testing with reproducible results, but I'm skeptical. TJ, keep in mind that there are people who play horns and think they're livelier or more robust if the vibrations can be felt at their fingertips.

I'm not with them. I believe that's simply an indication of an inefficient horn. I *suspect* (meaning I haven't a clue but want to believe) ribbed tubing is more rigid and more efficient, meaning less vibration (less wasted energy or interference with the vibrating AIR column in the horn) and more sound/volume for the audience to enjoy.

But in the real world, with consistently made quality Yanis in particular, and mic-ed stages even more so, I doubt any of this matters.....

Ribbing isn't going to add much perceptible weight to the horn (T901 vs T991). There's an old thread in the Bb Tenors section on tenor weights....

 

[pc1234]

A few people (including Rispoli, I think) have posted that they are enjoying their T902's for their unique combination of the "lively" response of the non-ribbed construction with the more focused/warmer sound of the bronze alloy. It's made me curious about the T902 in particular - so like you, I'd be interested in what others have to say on this topic.

 

[DaveMac]

tj, call Dave Kessler, I just went though this with the Yani altos. I went with the 991. Dave said that the 901 would be brighter and would respond faster than the 991,s. The 991 does take (a little) more to get it to respond but it gets one cool tone.

 

[tjontheroad]

Perhaps someone has done some actual testing with reproducible results, but I'm skeptical. TJ, keep in mind that there are people who play horns and think they're livelier or more robust if the vibrations can be felt at their fingertips.

I'm not with them. I believe that's simply an indication of an inefficient horn. I *suspect* (meaning I haven't a clue but want to believe) ribbed tubing is more rigid and more efficient, meaning less vibration (less wasted energy or interference with the vibrating AIR column in the horn) and more sound/volume for the audience to enjoy.

But in the real world, with consistently made quality Yanis in particular, and mic-ed stages even more so, I doubt any of this matters.....

Ribbing isn't going to add much perceptible weight to the horn (T901 vs T991). There's an old thread in the Bb Tenors section on tenor weights....

Interesting thoughts. I can remember a few horns I've play tested that could have made my hands go numb due how much vibration came through the body. While they "felt" great, I couldn't say if tone was any better/worse for it. Also, I'd wonder if all the shaking would effect the durability long term.

There's some who seem to think ribbing = dampening. I guess that's a matter of opinion.

 

[Dave Dolson]

TJ: I think it is another myth. We can parse all this technical stuff to death, but it boils down to the individual horns and the players.

I mean . . . how do it know?!?!

It would take hundreds of side-by-sides to objectively conclude that posts vs. ribs made a difference and/or to isolate those factors from other factors that make a nice playing/responding saxophone.

This to me is like the finishes' debate or the resonators' debate, etc. I have saxophones of both designs (and have played many more of both designs) and there are those that play well and those that don't. How can anyone say it is because of the ribbing or the posts?

But if someone wants to believe it, so be it. DAVE

 

[Rick Adams]

TJ: I think it is another myth. We can parse all this technical stuff to death, but it boils down to the individual horns and the players.

I agree. I tested a 901/902/991/992 all together at sax.co.uk a month or so ago and they all sounded the same to me. Admittedly I'm no great shakes as a sax player and admittedly I only had one of each to test. TBH I can't see how it could make any difference - a sax made from lead is not going to provide better resonance than a plastic one, so why would ribs give more pleasure?

They didn't feel different in terms of vibrations etc either, but again I freely admit I'm a novice so YMMV.

 

[Pannonia]

I'm not with them. I believe that's simply an indication of an inefficient horn. I *suspect* (meaning I haven't a clue but want to believe) ribbed tubing is more rigid and more efficient, meaning less vibration (less wasted energy or interference with the vibrating AIR column in the horn) and more sound/volume for the audience to enjoy.
...

Bingo! It is all about standing waves and the boundary layer of air/metal.

On a different note: Why don't people just test play these instruments and pick the one they like?
It would actually support smaller shops instead of the online congla-nightmare-ates.
If you don't trust your own judgement on your own horn, I am really sorry for you...
I am not trying to rip on you TJ, just an overall observation.

 

[Wind_Mill]

As to ribbing = dampening, dampening of what? Of the body vibrations of course, which should be a good thing. It couldn't dampen anything else, and body vibrations probably hurt the sound output of the horn sooner than they'd help it (getting back to my own belief, here).

Even a tiny variation in the gauge of the sheet metal stock used to fabricate the horn tubing would negate any conclusions about whether ribbing has an effect or not. Though.... Yani may be more consistent now with that and other tolerances than anyone else.

On a different note: Why don't people just test play these instruments and pick the one they like?

There the question boils down to how the player test-plays. We all tend to be happy if the sample sounds good to our own ears, but we are not the audience..... I suppose to relieve my own doubts I'd test-play in a big living room with all sorts of sound-muffling materials (curtains, sofas, carpeting, etc.) and see how well the horn fills up the room with sound. In my own experience (based on that) my SML King Marigaux blows everything out the roof...... but I digress.

 

[tjontheroad]

TJ: I think it is another myth. We can parse all this technical stuff to death, but it boils down to the individual horns and the players.

I mean . . . how do it know?!?!

It would take hundreds of side-by-sides to objectively conclude that posts vs. ribs made a difference and/or to isolate those factors from other factors that make a nice playing/responding saxophone.

This to me is like the finishes' debate or the resonators' debate, etc. I have saxophones of both designs (and have played many more of both designs) and there are those that play well and those that don't. How can anyone say it is because of the ribbing or the posts?

But if someone wants to believe it, so be it. DAVE

Hmmm, I guess we need the mythbusters here Is it fact or just feel? The fact is, ribs cost more. That's why I'm leaning towards the T-901 as of now. I agree that sometimes what everyone feels is the one sax that they got in their hands on is better than the others they've tried and it's their lucky day. They're lucky to have found a good one. No matter how it was made. Still since Yanis are very consistant. I'd think any debate would be more meaningful with them for that reason.

 

[tjontheroad]

Bingo! It is all about standing waves and the boundary layer of air/metal.

On a different note: Why don't people just test play these instruments and pick the one they like?
It would actually support smaller shops instead of the online congla-nightmare-ates.
If you don't trust your own judgement on your own horn, I am really sorry for you...
I am not trying to rip on you TJ, just an overall observation.

No offence taken. No ripping here.. We're talking ribs remember

I do plan to play test both the T-901 & T-991 myself first. I'd much rather buy from that same shop as long the price isn't too far out of line.

 

[rispoli]

tj, call Dave Kessler, I just went though this with the Yani altos. I went with the 991. Dave said that the 901 would be brighter and would respond faster than the 991,s. The 991 does take (a little) more to get it to respond but it gets one cool tone.

If that is what indeed happens I am glad I have the T901 because the quick response is its best quality, in my personal perspective. I also prefer it to my Selmer III (also a very responsive tenor) in this area.
The tone that the 901 delivers is, again in my opinion, excellent, so I believe the 991 (which I never tried so far) would not get my preference even if money was no object.

PS. The T902 expert is Tryptykon, not me (I'd like to try one but it's so hard to come by those...)

 

[Wind_Mill]

All ribbing aside ..... just for the purposes of getting a bit closer to the same page with even one of you, anyone want to define "response" in the context you are using it here?

Disclaimers/biases: I've been playing a T902 for six years. A hairline leak in, say, the G# pad or high-F palm pad does wonders for (lack of) response (and I haven't even defined my own terms here.....).

I'm particularly excited about the T880 I'll be receiving next week. This alone influences how I sound on my T902 currently.

Other random observations.... A Ref36 neck on the T902 translates my breath into sound instantly. The stock neck and a Mark-VI neck need a split-millisec longer to do that (as if I measured!), but the energy (momentum) they produce is much easier to sustain. Maybe the Ref neck would be better for staccato passages, but that's about it. The stock and Mark-VI neck make for a much-more confident sounding horn, a horn that perhaps sustains its sound better despite variations in breath support from this player. Am I talking about response?

 

[pc1234]

PS. The T902 expert is Tryptykon, not me (I'd like to try one but it's so hard to come by those...)

Yes, sorry about that, Rispoli! I'm so mesmerized by your avatar that I wrongfully attributed the 902 comment to you. I am glad you are liking your 901. BTW, to anyone who is interested, Roberto's Winds had a lightly used T902 in stock, the last time I looked. Please buy it so that I don't.

 

[rispoli]

"response" for me is the ability to react to variations, in particular of air flow. Great response is for me clear perceived difference in sound when I intentionally want to do so.
If I try to blow softly and I don't get a reliable sound on one sax and I then switch the very same mouthpiece/reed combo into another one and things go definitely better than before, for me the second is more responsive.

Maybe I confuse response and resistance?

 

[tjontheroad]

"response" for me is the ability to react to variations, in particular of air flow. Great response is for me clear perceived difference in sound when I intentionally want to do so.
If I try to blow softly and I don't get a reliable sound on one sax and I then switch the very same mouthpiece/reed combo into another one and things go definitely better than before, for me the second is more responsive.

Maybe I confuse response and resistance?

In my thinking, response and resistance are at opposite ends of playability. A responsive sax needs but a puff of air the get every note going and speaking well. A resistant sax has back pressure to overcome in order to get the most out of it. Some people like that type of resistant setup. It helps to balance your air stream against the horn. Where as a very responsive or otherwise known as free blowing sax can be tricky to control due the horn working too fast (for lack of better explaining myself).

At the same time, I don't think the type of construction effects this in a measurable way. Since most here are saying they also can't hear any big difference in tone, It begs to question why would you bother with the more expensive sax?

 

[SpeckledLemon]

"At the same time, I don't think the type of construction effects this in a measurable way. Since most here are saying they also can't hear any big difference in tone, It begs to question why would you bother with the more expensive sax?"

Well, since I chose the A992 over the A902, I should probably answer this.

I don't know.

It might have been all of the little things it has over the 902. Part of it was that I wanted something different from everyone else in band, and the other part was that I wanted the best horn I could get. I liked the feel a little bit better too.

So...prestige?

 

[rispoli]

In my thinking, response and resistance are at opposite ends of playability.

That's what I mean too.
With the same mouthpiece (I generally play a Tenney STM) and reed my T901 is the one that requires the least air to produce a sound. On top of that, it's very sensitive to air flow and embouchure changes and in light of this I consider it the most responsive among my tenors.

However my 1953 Martin tenor I think remains the best sounding....