True Tone Alto

In my case, the C* mouthpiece came from my first Selmer Mark VI alto, purchased new back in the early 1960's. Not a classic mouthpiece, but not of the modern era either.

I'm not one to accumulate large numbers of mouthpieces. I've got perhaps fifteen soprano clarinet mouthpieces (including two for German clarinets) to go with six soprano clarinets), about ten bass clarinet mouthpieces (to go with four bass clarinets), one Eb clarinet mouthpiece, one alto clarinet mouthpiece (a gift from Selmer, by the way), about ten baritone sax mouthpieces (to go with one horn), four alto sax mouthpieces (ditto), one (broken) soprano sax mouthpiece, a couple of stray tenor mouthpieces, one (very broken) bass sax mouthpiece, one single reed oboe mouthpiece, and one Runyon bassoon single reed mouthpiece.

All of these have trickled in over the past fifty years, and virtually none have been bought in search of a new "sound" - only the adoption of the metal (all Berg Larsen) sax mouthpieces fit this definition. I also tend to gravitate around the same style of reeds, having converted over to purple box Vandorens about twenty years ago.

I have modified mouthpieces here and there. Sawing off about a half inch of the barrel of the Berg Larsens was the only way that I could get them to play in tune with my current baritone, and I've had facings modified on soprano and bass clarinets mouthpieces as well.
 
I have an older/new Meyer 5 that was made right after they switched from the NY USA with a slightly larger chamber than today's present ones, and it works quite well on my old TrueTone alto, better than the original Buescher pieces of that area of which I have two. It works better than the stock white Buescher piece that came with my Buescher 140 Aristocrat alto as well so vintage isn't necessarily the best on an older horn or at least not for me. Some vintage pieces can be really good though while others are just old.
 
I do not hold myself out as a mouthpiece expert. All I know is what plays well for me.

When I find a piece that plays well for me it will also play well on any of my saxophones, regardless of their age. And all of those good-playing pieces are of modern manufacture - shall we say since the mid-1950's (I realize that sounds ancient to many of you - even 1980 may seem "old").

True, some good-playing mouthpieces sound better to my ears on certain horns than do others (mainly because the piece will enhance or detract from the tonal characteristics of the particular saxophone or clarinet) but except for the subtleties of tone (which may or may not be heard by listeners), if a piece plays well, I can put it on any of my instruments and play it.

I can't say the same for mouthpieces that were originals with vintage horns. And by vintage, I'm talking 1920's and early '30's. None of those original mouthpieces play worth a darn for me, regardless of what reed I use OR the horn on which I place it.

So, without expertise, I still have experiences - and I don't like the old mouthpieces and never found them to play well (like is often alleged) on any saxophone or clarinet, regardless of age.

I think this may come down to a definition of "vintage" vs. "modern." What those differences are, I'm not sure. I'm guessing that the vintage pieces had larger chambers and closer tip-openings, but beyond that, I don't know . . . only that the old ones do not play for me.

And, as I've written many times before, folks tend to throw around the terms "large chamber" and "large bore" (and all the variations) without really understanding the details. Without a specific measuring technique and the results of doing so, I'd be hesitant to call any mouthpiece by its chamber-size, even if the marketing gurus at Meyer stamped it on the side. DAVE
 
The way that I compared chamber volumes between my crystal C* from Selmer and a "bog standard" C* soprano clarinet mouthpieces was to seal the end of the crystal one with a piece of adhesive tape, and then filled the resultant "compartment" with water to a level fill with the mouthpiece table window opening. I then emptied the water into a graduated cylinder (I had to look up the name for the item - it's been a long time since the last organic chemistry class), noted the amount, and then repeated with the other mouthpiece. While I don't recall the exact volume at this remove (after all, it all went down over forty years ago), I do recall that there was less than 2% difference between the two.

(Had I to do it all over again, I would have used a pipette to fill the stopped mouthpiece chambers. A lot more accurate and less prone to spillage.)
 
Terry: Thanks for your reply. I recall reading somewhere that a water-test was a good way of comparing chamber volume, but honestly never thought about how to do it.

Taping off the window and then filling the piece with water seems credible, alright. I guess one problem is deciding what a universal level would be . . . where does one gauge where to stop filling the thing? I suppose we could stop when the water is level with the end of the barrel, but that would make the barrel part of the over-all volume; and part of the barrel has the horn's neck in it, thus rendering that part of the piece out of the realm, so to speak.

And, I'm guessing that a 2% difference may not be significant, but I recognize that ANY differences, no matter how small, MAY make a difference in overall mouthpiece performance. Whatever it matters, I find it interesting that one piece with 2% more volume may be universally called a "large" chamber, while others with less volume are called "medium" or "small" chambers. OR, that an old vintage piece would have that much effect on a vintage saxophone. DAVE
 
I'm reviving this thread because I finished the overhaul on the TT alto I described in an earlier post and to my great disappointment played badly out of tune with the #1 neck that came with the sax. The upper register was off the charts as well as the pitch being very flexible in the first place which I understand is typical of these early horns.

Since then I have done a good deal of research in the forums and other places and have read where some have good intonation with the TT and the #1 neck, and some have a experience similar to mine. The serial number is 213XXX putting the sax around 1926. If anyone has experience with the True Tones from this era, I would like to get some suggestions.

Some folks have mentioned Mark Aronson who adjusts necks and even makes necks for Bueschers. Does anyone know how to contact him? The phone number I found in early posts is no longer in service. The sax sold on eBay, but the buyer is returning it due to the sharpness in the upper register. I did a few things with the neck octave vent that helped a great deal, but apparently it wasn't enough to make the customer happy. Oh well, c'est la vie. I just hope I can find a solution since I have put so much time and money into it.

TrueToneAlto127.jpg
 
jbtsax said:
I'm reviving this thread because I finished the overhaul on the TT alto I described in an earlier post and to my great disappointment played badly out of tune with the #1 neck that came with the sax. The upper register was off the charts as well as the pitch being very flexible in the first place which I understand is typical of these early horns.

Since then I have done a good deal of research in the forums and other places and have read where some have good intonation with the TT and the #1 neck, and some have a experience similar to mine. The serial number is 213XXX putting the sax around 1926. If anyone has experience with the True Tones from this era, I would like to get some suggestions.

Some folks have mentioned Mark Aronson who adjusts necks and even makes necks for Bueschers. Does anyone know how to contact him? The phone number I found in early posts is no longer in service. The sax sold on eBay, but the buyer is returning it due to the sharpness in the upper register. I did a few things with the neck octave vent that helped a great deal, but apparently it wasn't enough to make the customer happy. Oh well, c'est la vie. I just hope I can find a solution since I have put so much time and money into it.

TrueToneAlto127.jpg
Click to expand...

As you are well aware, yet have not applied to this case (as far as we can tell), the mouthpiece/neck combination needs to match the horn, for the horn to play anywhere near "in tune". One can not expect a mouthpiece that plays well with the #1 neck to play the same with a #3 neck, of different taper and/or opening diameter. That does not necessarily mean that the #3 neck is a bad design, rather, that one did not take the time/trouble to combine it with a mouthpiece that complimented it acoustically, as regards the instruments requirements. There may not be a stock mouthpiece that works with it, but it might be worth checking out by doing some mouthpiece alterations non-the-less.

If the neck is longer, has a smaller opening and/or a less acute initial taper than the #1 neck, the mouthpiece will play at a lower pitch, at the same volume placement on the neck, which seems to be the case. Pushing in to tune F# to A=440 will then cause the chamber to be shorter, raising the short tubed upper register. The volume will then be reduced as well, throwing the octave relationships further off. The less integral the resonance peaks, the more squirrelly the pitch.

In this case, if you get D1/D2 to be a good octave (correct volume) and the upper register is still sharp, you need a narrower throat and/or chamber. Lowering the baffle will also lower the upper register, especially on a piece with a small tip opening.
 
saxismyaxe said:
Too bad about the intonation issues as it's a lovely horn.
Click to expand...

From the research I have done on the web it appears that a 01 numbered neck might have the correct taper to bring the octaves closer together. One thing for sure is that I won't give up on the sax until I do whatever it takes to get it to play in tune. I have this stubborn streak in case you haven't noticed.

Any idea how to get a hold of Mark Aronson? It seems all of the old numbers for him on the web are no longer in service, and he doesn't have a web site.
 
Is there anyone else on this forum who currently owns and plays a True Tone alto? I would like to hear others experience with the "flexibility" of the pitch on these horns.
 
How does "owned" sound?

What do you mean by "flexibility of pitch"? Makes me think of playing different styles of music, more than anything.
 
Flexibility of pitch is best explained by using an analogy with brass instruments. Trumpet players talk about how different instruments "slot" differently when played through the harmonics.

An instrument that slots well goes quickly and solidly to the desired harmonic when the player approaches the required airstream and lip buzz for that note. In other words, the resonant frequency of the tube length used cooperates with the vibrating source (player's lips) and locks in to the strongest frequency determined by the "regime of oscillation" of the note and its strongest overtones.

Another way to say it is that when the player gets close to the frequency with the air and the buzz, the trumpet jumps to that note. Instead of saying the trumpet jumps to the note, the player says that it "slots".

The same thing happens on a saxophone when the player fingers a certain note. The natural resonant frequency of the length of tubing to the first open tonehole tells the reed at which frequency to vibrate. The energy or strength of the "regime of oscillation" is determined by how close to whole number multiples the harmonics are to the fundamental. If the harmonics are not tuned well, the regime of oscillation is weaker and the reeds vibration is not locked in to a given pitch. This gives the player a lot of leeway to more easily "lip" the note up or down to where he wants the pitch.

Most trumpet players like their instruments to "slot" but not to "slot" too well. They say that those instruments deprive them of "flexibility" in their playing.

Saxes that don't slot very well have the advantage of being very easy to do scoops and falls on and smear between the notes. The disadvantage is that the player has to always be setting and adjusting the embouchure to "dial in" the pitch---especially in the upper register. My experience with the True Tone is that it is too flexible---especially in the upper register. Hopefully a neck with a taper that better matches the horn will help align the harmonics a bit better and take away some of the "kazoo-like" tendencies of the sax.
 
The true tone seems to be one of the easiest horns to play altissimo on so I think a pretty good argument could be made about it being flexible.
 
jbtsax said:
Any idea how to get a hold of Mark Aronson? It seems all of the old numbers for him on the web are no longer in service, and he doesn't have a web site.
Click to expand...
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
Hi John,

This contact info is no longer valid? It's what we have on record over on the other board:

Mark Aronson
Aronson Instrument Service
310 5th Ave
PO Box 167
Clarence IA 52216-0167
(319) 452-3082[/FONT]
 
Drakesaxprof gave me a current email for Mark and we have been in touch. I will get his current address and phone number to see if that information is correct.

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom