I bet the pyramid ones sound awesome. The Egyptians knew there stuff.

 

I ll wait till they come up with the cryogenically treated biological ones.

 

Yeah whatever. Why go cryogenital when you can have a friggin' pyramid? That's just a waste of money IMO.

 

Are they as good as changing the lyre screw? Phil Barone

 

I do not know the science behind it but I do know it does have some sort of affect on the way you perceive your sound weather or not it is a placebo affect.

When you have a reasonable theory as to the possible science behind it, that will probably help me decide "weather" I want to try it or not.

It does come with an option to engrave the weight but I thought that would be a waste of money.

Oh, sure -- engraving it would just be a waste of money. It would be stupid to waste money on that.

 

When you have a reasonable theory as to the possible science behind it, that will probably help me decide "weather" I want to try it or not.

Oh, sure -- engraving it would just be a waste of money. It would be stupid to waste money on that.

Engraving gives you more response. Phil

 

Where's the list of notable players?

 

These weights and stones - just imagine how great the 'Greats' would have been with them. Tell you what, after 60 years of gigging, I do not want to do anything that makes my horns heavier - my neck hurts now after a job. And my back. And my feet. I could make it easier on myself by not playing baritone and dual saxes but I'm not ready to let any part of my schtick go. I also hate harnesses, so I take what I get. Fortunately (I guess) I'm only working once or twice a month so I guess that's for the best. But while I haven't tried any of this stuff and consequently have no grounds to claim it doesn't work, I can assure you I will not be finding out.

 

There’s no hate in calling B.S. - but not a whole lotta love either.

 

I can see there are two camps here on this weighty issue concerning meridian winds:
The ante-meridians and the post-meridians.

This morning I started out on one side, but by afternoon was on the other.

 

I can see there are two camps here on this weighty issue concerning meridian winds:
The anti-meridians and the post-meridians.

This morning I started out on one side, but by afternoon was on the other.

I know they do good overhauls-they overhauled my Bass clarinet that I bought from them, which I very much like.
While I like the shop, I still think this (and that heavy screw) is basically snake oil.

 

I do not know the science behind it

...because there isn't any.

 

c'mon, for only $100, that's a bargain!

I'm surprised they don't offer a version made from recycled shell casings. I can't believe Selmer used all stock up on Mark VI's

 

Says it right after the explanation;

Notable saxophone players that use this are Otis Murphy, Timothy McAllister, Donald Sinta, and Joe Lulloff.

 

I noticed where you said it. I wanted to find it on the website. I was able to get to it with a Google search. Here's the complete list of endorsers if anyone is interested:
https://www.meridianwinds.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CBRW.pdf

 

DanielO.

Try to follow my reasoning here. There is absolutely nothing in the last hundred years of acoustic research that would support adding mass or weight to the outside of a saxophone having any effect upon the sound waves in the column of air inside the instrument which produce and disburse the sound to the listener. The vibrations of the walls of the saxophone may feel different with the added weight, but no "coupling" takes place between the wall vibrations and the vibrations in the column of air inside the instrument. In order to find a "coupling" acoustic researchers could actually measure the "tube" had to be made extremely thin .2 mm and it had to be slightly oval shaped---traits not found in musical instruments we use.

I don't discount the fact that you have the "perception" that the saxophone has more resonance with the added weight, as do the notable players mentioned on the Meridian Winds Website. My hypothesis is that when this or any device gives a player the impression or perception that there is an increase in the energy of the sound ie more "resonance" that the natural human tendency of that player is to not work as hard putting energy into the saxophone via air pressure and embouchure control since the "add on" device is doing part of that work for them. The net result to the listener across the room is a less intense and robust sound. Think about it. The "wetting your pants" wearing a dark suit analogy fits quite nicely. It gives you a warm feeling, but nobody else notices any difference.

You may want to put the "snake oil" to a valid test, before encouraging others to go out and spend their money like you did. A decent acoustic measurement microphone and a low cost software spectrum analyzer are all you need to get started. You can pick up a Behringer ECM8000 for $60 at Sweetwater.

Find a way to support the weight of your sax (sax stand on a table?) and put on a blindfold. Have a friend add or remove the device in random order between each playing trial so you don't know when it is on or off. Your friend can record your observations following each trial. You can also invite a group of other sax players to be subject listeners to the test. Of course you would need to put up some sort of screen so the listeners can't tell whether the device is on or off. Record their observations as well. Do your best to play the same example the same way each time so as not to skew the results.

This listening test, along with the spectrogram produced by playing long tones into the measurement mic. should provide some valuable information. I have had this discussion with Eric Satterlee at Meridian Winds about the weighted neck screw and I am still waiting for the results of the tests he said he would perform---not holding my breath.

 

Fallacious Arguments From Authority

 

I really don't like the branding of sceptics (skeptics in US and Canada) as haters.

 

There is already a thread open on this " matter" , did we need a second one?

https://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?336553-Bell-to-body-brace-quot-resonance-quot-weights

The fun thing is that this is not even a new idea!

It's an old idea from a few years since abandoned by its inventor

This new vibrationalist device is clearly derived ( by the kindness of my hart I didn't want to say it is a copy) from a Tino Schucht contraption called Klappenschutzblech (no longer for sale).

The "product" was one of a triad endorsed by the inventor of the P-Ligging in this " article" (for lack of a better word http://saxophonistisches.de/tag/klappenschutzblech/) but even him says that in his test of his Selmer series III he didn't hear anything.

the Klappenschutzblech (which is the disk to the left, designed to fit in the same ring of the bell to body brace) is no longer for sale because Schucht (who still sells sound enhancing thumbrests and the klangbogen ) came to his senses or perhaps because it was a flop.

But what one vibrationalist can't do another one can.

Take a piece of metal worth 50 cents and polish it up, charge an incredible amount of money for it and sell the weight without an ounce of theory by just saying that it makes vibrationalist wonders that anyone with good ears can hear (like the Emperor's new clothes which all descerning people could obviously see and the bad people couldn't).

How do people don't smell a rat it is incredible.

Anyway There must be an institute of physics somewhere not too far from where this thing is made?

Why don't they commission a research?

Still waiting for ANY of these sound enhancing device to come up with one.

 

There is already a thread open on this " matter" , did we need a second one?

https://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?336553-Bell-to-body-brace-quot-resonance-quot-weights

The original thread was perhaps too skeptical for the OP, who apparently felt than his enthusiastic endorsement deserved to be highlighted in its own thread.

 

Round three.
Fight!

 

I wonder what a horn equipped with all this with all this paraphernalia looks like. Perhaps some of the enthusiasts will care to show it.

Let's see: metal hook, stones, klangbogen, neck enhancer, resonanzring, P.Ligging, lyre and neck screws or heavy mass screws, shame there is only space for two of those, metal thumbrest, LeFreques , heavy mass ligatures ( shame that one can only use one at the time, there are so many!).

Of course we cannot forget all the swing-chips products (nano oil and sound enhancing magnets) which seem to have been discontinued.

of course how can we forget the timbre trainer (to teach your saxophone the tone that you want?

 

All this stuff should come with a shrink and a straight jacket. Phil

 

BREAKING NEWS!

Introducing (!) the TONE TABLET! ( which looks suspiciously as a broken off piece of lyre holder except it is solid silver, of course, as one does!)

(comes with spectrograms, played with the player knowing it was inserted? I think so)

http://www.corrybros.com/tone-tablet/4592259556

 

Again, I thought you made this one up, but unfortunately not. Hilarious! The folks at Riedl would never have imagined that more money can be made by selling just a (worthless) fraction of their product!

 

Any add-ons to a musical instrument may provide the user to perceive the change in tonality, timbre, color of the instrument, which is a very personal and individual experience. If it is nice, then just buy and use it. To the listener in the audience, it will still sound like a saxophone. If the musician has a distinct sound or style that is his attribute, then the listener may easily identify him. The use of any of such add-ons, one or many at the same time, does nothing to the listener.
It is like changing the steering wheel of your Toyota Corolla to a small race Momo branded one. If it's going to make you feel like you are driving as stable and as fast as a Ferrari, then buy it and enjoy yourself! Others will see it from the outside as a Toyota Corolla.

 

the problem with this thing is the way all these things are sold ( Only the P.Ligging is free!)

Nobody says " buy it because it is nice looking and will make you feel better by calming your anxiety " but they all claim sound improvements that they cannot support with ANY documented (serious) evidence.

And they are all rather expensive.

As it happens if they were sold as amulets there would be no problem. Buy them because they make you feel better about yourself.

Kadri Gopalanath has a number of amulets or perhaps religious symbols hanging from his saxophone, but he makes no attempt to sell or claim that they make him play better. Note the ligature screws being placed on the side :twisted:

 

Dont be a hater if you are just not good enough to hear the differences
Its usefulness is well attested by the best master players.
To find out if you are one of them you need to take the test.

I could not find a single photo online of the players listed using one of those.
And when i read the endorsements i get the strange feeling they are all written by the same person.

 

, yes, very true.

I should!

Incredible how the fact that those who claim any effect on anything have the burden of proof is completely void of significance . The law should make it compulsory to back up any claims with a meaningful test.

The sad reality is that the falsehood of an ad requires the plaintiff to prove a negative.

In the EU things might be slightly different in theory but enforcement is a different thing.

http://www.easa-alliance.org/sites/default/files/EASA_Best_Practice_on_Claims_Substantiation.pdf

What is the substantiation of claims?

One of the fundamental principles of advertising self-regulatory systems is the reversal of the burden of proof.

This requires the advertiser to prove that the claim he is making is truthful, rather than the complainant having to demonstrate that it is not.

Therefore, before offering an advertisement for publication, advertisers should be able to provide documentary evidence to substantiate their direct or implied claims, which can be objectively judged. If requested by the self- regulatory organisation, e.g. in case of a complaint, the advertiser should produce the necessary evidence without delay to the SRO.

What types of claims need to be substantiated?

Any advertising claim that the average consumer1 is likely to regard as objective, i.e. a claim that can be objectively judged to be true or false, should be capable of being substantiated, regardless of the product involved or the means of communication. This includes claims about the price, the terms and conditions, the performance of a product, its availability or its impact on the environment.

HOWEVER:twisted:

Claims expressing a subjective opinion do not have to be substantiated by the advertisers provided they do not imply that the expression of opinion are objective claims and provided they are not materially misleading. The same is valid for obvious exaggerations ("puffery") and claims that the average consumer who sees the advertisement is unlikely to take literally.

Examples: The claim that a car has 'the best fuel economy in its class' is a matter of objective fact. By contrast, the claim that a car is 'the most elegant in its class' is clearly a matter of subjective opinion, so the question of substantiation does not arise. Similarly, the claim that a car will provide 'the most wonderful driving experience of your life' is immediately recognisable as puffery.

When should SROs require substantiation of claims?

Substantiation may be required in various circumstances (e.g. copy advice, complaints investigation or during a monitoring exercise). An SRO will allow the use of claims, descriptions, statements,
1 The term "average consumer" means any person "who is reasonably well-informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, taking into account social, cultural and linguistic factors" (Directive 2005/29/EC).
SR CO 14/12 page 3
illustrations, testimonials, etc. whose truthfulness and accuracy the advertiser is able to demonstrate.

 

Nice!

" Device so and so, colors your sound and makes it more beautiful! " :twisted:

(my words, hyperbole alert!)" this training device will give your saxophone all the same vibrations as they were played by your hero, so, when you are going to play the, it already knows how you want it to respond"

Of course the EU law discussed above says:

"...By contrast, the claim that a car is 'the most elegant in its class' is clearly a matter of subjective opinion, so the question of substantiation does not arise..."

they could get away with telling you that you really can teach your saxophone to resonate as charlie parker's or indeed they can accelerate the play-in process (how do you even prove that?) :Rant:

TimbreTrainer was invented by a group of music lovers. We are sure this device will improve the sound of your instrument in an easy to use and efficient way.
Musicians always dream about owning a great instrument. In reality, only long term playing ages an instrument and generating better quality vibrations and resonance.
But, how many hours can you play your instrument each day? Professional players always complain about insufficient time to practice, let alone amateurs.
TimbreTrainer constantly plays when your instrument when you don't, accelerating the aging process.

It runs on your instrument even you are resting. Let TimbreTrainer help you to achieve a great sound on YOUR instrument!

 

Every time one of these devices is mentioned, a lot of people say they are snake oil, and I am inclined to agree with them. But unless the authors have taken the trouble to test the devices, their opinions are not worth a lot.

A couple of years ago I decided to do a very small experiment. I attached various weights to my mouthpiece using the hi-tech method of rubbber bands.
(I can’t remember why I chose to attach them to the mouthpiece!)
As the player, I couldn’t detect enough difference to make me bothered to continue. I recorded myself, but there didn’t seem to be much difference between the recordings either.

However plots of the frequency spectrum were noticeably different with/without the weights
When the weight was attached some of the harmonics were quite a bit stronger.

Of course a change in the strength of some harmonics does not mean that the sound is “better”, but it does mean that the weight was causing a measurable acoustical change.

 

But unless the authors have taken the trouble to test the devices, their opinions are not worth a lot.

That is false logic.
Read Milandros' posts above.

Have you tried that? Have you tried the bike with the square wheels? Dont say it doesnt work unless you try it.

 

I don’t know about this little do hicky but stones most certainly do add resonance.
When I had kidney stones the toilet bowl was certainly resonating.