interesting talk on high baffles

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

cool – now i understand how these high baffles work and why the sound gets thin, so its not the players fault after all?

[Lewis Pelham]

The player is mainly responsible for the sound….the mouthpiece is a relatively minor aspect.
Many can play high baffle pieces with a solid & thick top end.
I may be wrong, but I believe that Johnny Ferreira uses a high baffle piece.
Also Michael Brecker if any more proof is required.

[john]

Interestingly, I use a Guardala Michael Brecker model.

[Anonymous]

i can understand the physics side of
what Theo is saying in his video.
In theory his design should fatten the
sound more than conventional mouthpieces.

I would have thought the combination of the
player & the setup has a major bearing on
a players sound? Surely if Johnny changed
his setup to a cheap shoddy made mouthpiece
wouldn’t his sound be impacted?

[Lewis Pelham]

As I understand it, there are high baffle mouthpieces with small chambers, which have the capacity to open oysters at 7 paces…..& those with high baffles and large chambers, which retain much of the thick & solid low register.
I suspect that Johnny with a “cheap & shoddy” mouthpiece would still sound like Johnny to the general public.

[Anonymous]

i can understand what you are saying.
When i listen to someone singing i can tell straight away – who the singer is because their voice is unique,
when it comes to listening to sax playing – i find it harder to say exactly who the player is, probably because
i haven’t spent enough time listening to different sax players!
But what i do notice is that regardless of the singer.
The type of microphone, room accoustics, sound engineers/equipment does change the recorded/played performance.
for example there is a minority of people that would argue that the beatles recording success was a lot down to their sound engineers?
I’m just saying that the type of equipment may give you an edge?
i’m not an expert, but it is interesting the different views people have, nothing in life is set in stone,
like Einstein noticed everything is measured relative to something else.

[Lewis Pelham]

That video must be the most laboured attempt ever to explain Bernoulli’s principle and laminar flow.
I think also that Wunibald Kamm beat him to the design in the 1930s with the Kamm-tail on sports cars.
Serves to illustrate that nothing is new.

[Anonymous]

lol – 1st rule of public speaking – know your audience

[john]

@chipper… singers are, for most of us the easiest to identify because of the uniqueness of the human voice. we can’t say that about most instrumentalists… a piano layer hits the keys and the sound is the same (some can be unique with chordal voicings etc)… most guitar players will depend on their amplification for their “tone” but the saxophone, in my own personal honest opinion, is the closest instrument that resembles the human voice. it’s not always easy to identify the player, but I have many a time picked out sax players simply by their tone. at least much more so than any other instrumentalists….of course carlos santana, for one, is an exception!

[Author]

Posts