Saxophones A Test - How Lacquer Affects Sound

[PigSquealer]

All these subtle differences can be mitigated by a skilled Hatter. For a formal sound a Homburg or Bowler. For the old fashioned sound a Boater. For the Yorkshire sound, a flat cap and Whippet preceded by a meal of tripe. Ah yes tripe. We found a common theme.

I have a Fedora with 2-1/2” brim in 100% wool. Dark brown in color.
No Whippet, but a mini Doberman / Chihuahua mix. I hate tripe. I would rather eat cold Lengua.

Should I buy a new sax in bare brass ??? Maybe a HR, Metal, Plastic, ABS, or Wood MPC to cover my tonal issues. Any suggestions on reeds or Ligs is greatly valued.

Thanks in advance.
Sincerely,
A. Porker

 

[Colin the Bear]

Brown hats are for a select few. Few select them. 🤠

 

[turf3]

These questions relating to does finish change the sound have been around for decades, and there has never been a definitive answer, try 10 different saxes of the same brand, model and finish and they will be different, manufacturers make different finishes to appeal to different customers in the same way cars are made in different colours.
So which colour car is the fastest, its got to be Red. 🙂

No, the definitive answer was well known 100 years ago. It's just that marketeers cannot stop making unsupportable claims that they think will improve sales.

Silver gives it a brighter tone.
Silver gives it a darker tone.
Removing the lacquer frees up the sound.
Gold plate has a richer sound.

Etc.

Have you never wondered why the marketeers never promote the cheapest finish as sounding the best? Have you never wondered why any doohickey that's supposed to improve sound, always works better when made of more expensive material? I have NEVER seen claims like "well, actually, the plain mild steel version and the die cast pot metal one sound the best."

There is a definitive answer, but many musicians don't like it; and the advertising people sure don't like it.

 

[mizmar]

Have you never wondered why any doohickey that's supposed to improve sound, always works better when made of more expensive material?

A well known fix for the tin whistle is a bit of blue tack in the mouthpiece...
... I blame the market as much as the marketeers

 

[PiccoloPirate]

In the rehab room, at the Modesto hospital for the criminally insane, we were told to spray the lacquer, in a clockwise movement, around the tone holes.
That would correct for any intonation issues, if the holes were not sized properly, or in the wrong location. 🎶🏴‍☠️🎶

 

[jazzdoh]

the definitive answer was well known 100 years ago. It's just that marketeers cannot stop making unsupportable claims that they think will improve sales.

Yes i remember a Buescher flyer from way back when, introducing different finishes and it clearly said that the finishes did not alter the sound or tone, but it still keeps coming up on forums.

 

[Woodpad]

The most intriguing part of this test was that the classic embouchure masks differences in sound.

 

[JayeNM]

Nothing controlled or scientific about that vid.

Come one, we learned in science class as teenagers THIS:

To determine whether a single variable has an effect, you can do a comparison but must isolate that single variable ....IOW...EVERYTHING ELSE must remain constant.

In this instance, three DIFFERENT HORNS, same model. So already there are TWO VARIABLES, 1) finishes....and 2) the FACT that there are three DIFFERENT horns ....

...yet you wanna claim only ONE OF THOSE VARIABLES is having the illustrated effect.
And the other is doing nothing.

Only way these comparisons would ever work would be something like this:

SINGLE HORN, UNLACQUERED....record it, put whatever sorta sonic measuring tools you want on it afterward.

Take SAME HORN, disassemble it...lacquer or plate the body and neck, reassemble it...record it , same room, same player, same mouthpiece setup, same mixdown...and put your sonic measuring device to it.

Did anything discernibly change ?

Anything else...any other sorta comparison regarding finish vs. tone....is already adulterated by multiple variables....

 

[turf3]

Nothing controlled or scientific about that vid.

Come one, we learned in science class as teenagers THIS:

To determine whether a single variable has an effect, you can do a comparison but must isolate that single variable ....IOW...EVERYTHING ELSE must remain constant.

In this instance, three DIFFERENT HORNS, same model. So already there are TWO VARIABLES, 1) finishes....and 2) the FACT that there are three DIFFERENT horns ....

...yet you wanna claim only ONE OF THOSE VARIABLES is having the illustrated effect.
And the other is doing nothing.

Only way these comparisons would ever work would be something like this:

SINGLE HORN, UNLACQUERED....record it, put whatever sorta sonic measuring tools you want on it afterward.

Take SAME HORN, disassemble it...lacquer or plate the body and neck, reassemble it...record it , same room, same player, same mouthpiece setup, same mixdown...and put your sonic measuring device to it.

Did anything discernibly change ?

Anything else...any other sorta comparison regarding finish vs. tone....is already adulterated by multiple variables....

Actually, the disassy and reassy process introduces another variable. In real life experimentation you very often can't control all the variables but one. That's where statistics comes to your assistance. So, if you have (CAUTION MADE-UP NUMBERS HERE!!!) twelve horns of identical build specs and there's a 20% variation amongst these, for whatever the characteristic; and then you take twelve horns in three finishes, four each, and you get 20%, well, it's obvious that the finish isn't doing anything. Even if you get 22% for the different finishes, stat.anal. will certainly tell you that's not significantly different than 20% for those tiny sample sizes and the baseline 20% variation in the population.

The point is, the methods for doing this kind of experimentation and analysis are a hundred years old and well understood. For example, if you want to find out if a new medicine works, you cannot hold constant the variable of the person dosed with it. You can't give the person the med, wait till they die or heal, then turn back time and see what happens without it. Instead you compare two populations one with the med and one without, and you use stat.anal. to tell you if, despite the variability of each population, there's a significant difference.

If there were something there, it would be easy for any number of qualified people to show it. Pseudoscientific experimenty videos make people THINK there's something there, leading to sales revenue, but there isn't.

 

[mizmar]

So the baseline, which should have been done to start with, is to determine how much variation exists amongst supposedly identical individuals with the same finish applied.

This post and the one before are, by far, "the right answer"
Personally; I'd start with two "identical" horns (given we're making "is darker/lighter" comparison measurements) and make dozens of measurements till I had a good idea of the intrinsic variation and be able to say how many comparisons per pair of horns would give a useful measurement. Then test several pairs of some "identical" horns, that many times each, to see how they vary between each other... Depending on how those measurements vary, one would finally know what "a measurement" is.
At this time; we don't really know what a reliable measurement is.

 

[Dr G]

“Hey, Jude. Don’t be afraid. Take a good horn and make it better.”

Yeah, my horn tech’s name is Jude. It’s amazing to experience a horn after some judicious work to adjust the mechanism and get the leaks out. Not all horns are created equal - not even the same horn.

 

[PigSquealer]

What’s the best ? Hickory or Applewood smoked ? Would a brown sugar & honey glaze be a better alternative? Soooo many options of bacon.

 

[Woodpad]

What’s the best ? Hickory or Applewood smoked ? Would a brown sugar & honey glaze be a better alternative? Soooo many options of bacon.
View attachment 34560

I go for apple wood smoked with a hint of treacle glaze.

 

[Woodpad]

No, the definitive answer was well known 100 years ago. It's just that marketeers cannot stop making unsupportable claims that they think will improve sales.

Silver gives it a brighter tone.
Silver gives it a darker tone.
Removing the lacquer frees up the sound.
Gold plate has a richer sound.

Etc.

As etc. I would like to mention the time you could buy a pink Mark 6, other colors available, except for black as the black paint made the instrument sound too dark.

 

[PigSquealer]

I go for apple wood smoked with a hint of treacle glaze.

You sir have very refined tastes 😊
How’s your hearing 🤗

 

[mrblackbat]

Negligible difference with the first guy playing between all three. With the second one but first time through, there's an increase in noise in the recording for saxophones B & C compared to A, which is colouring the result of the recording. B and C have almost no determinable difference for me. Second player second time through, B sounds a little more muffled.

So: is the attribution of this down to the lacquer, or one of a myriad other factors?

 

[jazzdoh]

Negligible difference with the first guy playing between all three. With the second one but first time through, there's an increase in noise in the recording for saxophones B & C compared to A, which is colouring the result of the recording. B and C have almost no determinable difference for me. Second player second time through, B sounds a little more muffled.

So: is the attribution of this down to the lacquer, or one of a myriad other factors?

Your ears are probably better than mine, there is no proof its the finish.
Who is to say if he had played a second different horn with the same finish as the first that it wouldn't have been different.

 

[mrblackbat]

Your ears are probably better than mine, there is no proof its the finish.
Who is to say if he had played a second different horn with the same finish as the first that it wouldn't have been different.

Exactly. That's my point really. There's nothing to say that it's the finish of the horn that's the differentiator. Could be the mouthpiece position, the reed, the gain settings for recording (which were definitely different), the microphone position, the temperature in the room, how much coffee everyone had drunk, any fatigue in the player.

The only way to really do this test is with multiple horns in each finish. Law of averages would then suggest if the results across an entire cohort of saxes was similar, then the finish is what's making the difference.

 

[ellinas]

I’ve never quite understood why we should rely so heavily on a single factor like lacquer material or color, when the sound production of a saxophone is far more complex, and the variation between two instruments of the same model is undeniably noticeable.

For me, if:
-a saxophone is fully serviced
-small details and personal adjustments are made according to the player’s preferences
-a compatible mouthpiece and reed combination is found that truly helps the player achieve the sound they have in mind
-and the player has the experience to properly evaluate all of this

then the lacquer factor becomes so insignificant that it relates more to aesthetics than to sound.

 

[LostCircuits]

Ford heavily tests all their vehicles. Right up to the release of the next years model.

They have to if they want to avoid another Pinto disaster.