Sax on the Web Forum banner
41 - 45 of 45 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,793 Posts
I actually play tested the neck for 2 hours then purchased it. I was very impressed with the sound & feel of the product. The issue I had was that I could not keep it in tune. The intonation would change + & - on any give note, at any given time.
The dimensions and taper of the neck are essential, model specific design parameters for any saxophone, just as tone hole size and tone hole placement are, the primary concern of which is to insure harmonicity of the tube resonances - to keep the harmonics in tune in order to obtain all of the following:

1. optimal tone quality at all dynamic levels
2. optimal dynamic range and response,
3. optimal intonation and stability at all dynamic levels

It's just a fact of wind instrument acoustics - The better the resonances are aligned, the better everything will be.

Throughout the history of the development of our conical wind instruments, various alterations to the basic conical bore (multiple tapers, sudden diameter changes) have been introduced. The applications of these bore irregularities which are still with us today, are all model/design specific and their primary purpose is to improve intonation.

Unquestionably, altering the diameter, shape, and taper of the first 1.5" of the neck is an extremely effective way to alter the tone quality and response characteristics of any horn. Unfortunately, it is equally effective at increasing the inharmonicity (the degree of harmonic misalignment) of it's overall acoustic design. If the horn specific, initial design parameters (volume/Frs) are not somehow restored by compensating changes in mouthpiece chamber size and design, then one can only expect the intonation to become unstable and uneven to some degree, as in the above case. Is the gain worth the pain?

Acousticians like Arthur Benade, would advise leaving the original neck design unaltered and exploring the other, less alignment altering means of tone/response shaping - mouthpiece design. For the player though, I think it can only be determined on an individual player/horn/mouthpiece basis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
The intonation would change + & - on any give note, at any given time.
That sounds really odd. I have the Warburton neck and use it on my Keilwerth and I've never had more solid pitch than I do now. Sounds like you could have another problem if notes are randomly changing pitch on you. I've been playing these necks for a while and won't switch back on any of my horns. The pitch is way better, the timbre is more even, and sound has more harmonics and complexity than ever before. I highly recommend this system to everybody.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
Discussion Starter · #43 ·
The dimensions and taper of the neck are essential, model specific design parameters for any saxophone, just as tone hole size and tone hole placement are, the primary concern of which is to insure harmonicity of the tube resonances - to keep the harmonics in tune in order to obtain all of the following:

1. optimal tone quality at all dynamic levels
2. optimal dynamic range and response,
3. optimal intonation and stability at all dynamic levels

It's just a fact of wind instrument acoustics - The better the resonances are aligned, the better everything will be.

Throughout the history of the development of our conical wind instruments, various alterations to the basic conical bore (multiple tapers, sudden diameter changes) have been introduced. The applications of these bore irregularities which are still with us today, are all model/design specific and their primary purpose is to improve intonation.

Unquestionably, altering the diameter, shape, and taper of the first 1.5" of the neck is an extremely effective way to alter the tone quality and response characteristics of any horn. Unfortunately, it is equally effective at increasing the inharmonicity (the degree of harmonic misalignment) of it's overall acoustic design. If the horn specific, initial design parameters (volume/Frs) are not somehow restored by compensating changes in mouthpiece chamber size and design, then one can only expect the intonation to become unstable and uneven to some degree, as in the above case. Is the gain worth the pain?

Acousticians like Arthur Benade, would advise leaving the original neck design unaltered and exploring the other, less alignment altering means of tone/response shaping - mouthpiece design. For the player though, I think it can only be determined on an individual player/horn/mouthpiece basis.
I know you're really into the science of necks but have you played these? When I first tried it I thought it would mess something up but every possible part of my horns have been improved. Pitch, timbre, resistance, and projection are all better than before.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,793 Posts
I know you're really into the science of necks but have you played these? When I first tried it I thought it would mess something up but every possible part of my horns have been improved. Pitch, timbre, resistance, and projection are all better than before.
Can you provide audio examples? I'd be interested in hearing an A/B demonstration.
 
41 - 45 of 45 Posts
Top