Klarinet Archive - Posting 000018.txt from 2007/08
From: "Ted" <tedcasher@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Acoustical Properties of Materials (was: Clarinet Manufacture - Differences between French and German - Wood is a "Living" Material)
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 01:00:09 -0400
Hi, Bill & Kevin! I, too have tried this experiment w/tenors and clarinets,
and ultimately, you are going to sound like you! Differences in the gear
refer to your comfort level; also, one horn may play louder than the other,
but your sound will win out! Happy music making! Ted
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Hausmann" <bhausmann1@-----.net>
To: <klarinet@-----.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:43 PM
Subject: RE: [kl] Acoustical Properties of Materials (was: Clarinet
Manufacture - Differences between French and German - Wood is a "Living"
Material)
> 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!
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
