| Brought to you this hour by |  | Advertising and Web Hosting on Woodwind.Org! |
Klarinet Archive - Posting 000015.txt from 2007/08
From: Bill Hausmann <bhausmann1@-----.net>
Subj: RE: [kl] Acoustical Properties of Materials (was: Clarinet
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 21:43:56 -0400
At 05:17 PM 8/1/2007, you wrote:
This may or may not be relevant, but I have recently conducted a most
interesting experiment with two tenor saxophones of significantly
different design (a Conn 10M and a Martin Committee) and 6 different
(is some cases VERY different) tenor sax mouthpieces. Three samples
of playing on each sax (same pieces on each) with the same mouthpiece
setup were recorded with a digital recorder (CD sampling rate and
balanced for equal levels) and played back for several knowledgeable
individuals. Even with knowledge of which horns were involved and a
high likelihood of bias as a result of that knowledge, no clear
pattern of preference was displayed, nor of ability to determine
which was which. Most votes were 2-1, 1-2, or 1-1-tie.
The results of the mouthpiece test was essentially the same. The
recorder was approximately 5 feet from the player. Two metal Otto
Links, a Brilhart Tonalin, a hard rubber Link, an Acrylic Sugal
(extensively refaced) and a Wolfe Tayne metal were used, using the
same reed on nearly all (if it worked) and the same ligature when
possible were sampled playing the same lick. Almost no difference
could be detected between the various samples.
This is not to say that I, the PLAYER, did not sense differences when
I played. Differences in resistance were clearly present. The
sounds IN MY EARS when I played them were different. But the
recorder captured almost none of it.
My current theory to explain this phenomenon is bone
conduction. Just as we hear our own voice differently from the way
others hear it, we also hear the sound of our instruments differently
because they are directly coupled to our auditory system and not
entirely dependent upon air conduction. It may be that bone
conduction is MORE sensitive to the differences than air
conduction. These results do tend to support the notion that we
sound the way we sound pretty much irregardless of our equipment,
assuming it is functioning correctly. One instrument may have a more
pleasing sound to us AS THE PLAYER, but only a tiny percentage, if
any, of that difference is directly transmitted to the
audience. They may sense the confidence the performer feels when he
senses an instrument and/or setup that is in complete agreement with
his desires, which results in the performer "sounding" better in a
secondary way, but only the most golden-eared will really note a
significant timbral difference. And note that perceived loudness
will fool you every time, as any audio gear salesman knows, so louder
will be heard as "better." Given the results of this admittedly
informal test, that is to say, nearly imperceptible differences
between samples of GROSSLY different designs and materials, I wonder
if we do not obsess just a bit when discussing how one piece of
grenadilla wood, possibly from the same tree, can sound significantly
different from another to anyone other than the performer?
Bill Hausmann
If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the band is TOO LOUD!
------------------------------------------------------------------
