Ligatures Another new "Innovative" Ligature from JLV

[Adrian63]

Alexandra : calm yourself dear...😉

 

[nigeld]

But of course it would be the best! It produces a "Harmonically richer sound" and "requires little maintenance". I'm "seduced"...😉

I agree. Anything that would eliminate the time I spend on ligature maintenance would be a tremendous boon!

 

[Jimmymack]

I’m a bit puzzled by the need to keep wiping down the brass one, does it cause you to drool do you suppose? Anyway Alexandra go buy one and I’ll take it off your hands for £50 in six months.

 

[Ivan]

requires little maintenance

....but since my ligatures need no maintenance, I maintain any maintenance is maintenance even if it is a little maintainance

 

[jazzdoh]

The terminology that ligature manufacturers use to try to sell their products really makes me smile, I would love a company to just say "this is made to hold a reed to a mouthpiece and it is excellent at achieving that", instead they come out with all this rubbish that none of them have scientifically proven to enable us as players to justify spending loads of money on their products.

 

[Ivan]

The terminology that ligature manufacturers use to try to sell their products really makes me smile, I would love a company to just say "this is made to hold a reed to a mouthpiece and it is excellent at achieving that", instead they come out with all this rubbish that none of them have scientifically proven to enable us as players to justify spending loads of money on their products.

I've not noticed the cryo-treatment guff that was a popular way to elevate the price a while back... small mercy

 

[spike]

instead they come out with all this rubbish that none of them have scientifically proven to enable us as players to justify spending loads of money on their products.

Not to mention the hours and hours that we waste talking about them.

 

[Pete Thomas]

The problem I have with Steves reviews, is that I believe that he only publishes reviews that are favourable. ie he doesn’t give a bad review.

Maybe not "bad" but mediocre. e.g. PPT got a 3.5 star

But my problem with any mouthpiece reviews (Sour grapes eh?) is that unless you just review tech aspects such as "breaks when you drop it" then how it plays is way too subjective for any realistic review, which is why I don't do them in spite of being able to get hold of plenty of free review samples.

I am very flexible, but some mouthpieces need a totally different embouchure to others and so can take a few weeks to get used to so you can get the best out of them.

So if I play a mouthpiece with a baffle and short lay, as soon as I get one with a low baffle and longer lay I cannot give it a fair crack of the whip. With my embouchure it will just sound tubby and dull unless I radically change (e.g. take more in my mouth)

So mouthpiece reviews (by anyone) are totally pointless.

 

[Colin the Bear]

What's the function of the extension onto the vamp?

 

[Pete Thomas]

What's the function of the extension onto the vamp?

This was my point about convex table. If the reed is not sealing with the table well at the front, that little bit of pressure might bend it downwards slightly to help seal.

But a flat table is the best fix!

 

[Colin the Bear]

Many vintage pieces have a concave table. Tightening the lig is supposed to vary the tip opening. I flattened mine.
I think this lig would get in the way of my embouchure. I like to vary the amount of lip on the vamp to adjust the tone to suit the feel of the tone to blend or contrast.
At this price I'll never know.

 

[Pete Thomas]

Many vintage pieces have a concave table. Tightening the lig is supposed to vary the tip opening.

I didn't that was the reason, I thought it was mor so that it might take up some swellage in the reed.

Using concave table it to vary tip doesn't seem right because (a) the difference would be infinitessimeal unless it's hugely concave and (b) when looser top get a more closed tip then it would be holding the reed very tight.

 

[Colin the Bear]

An old timer told me that. He's gone now so can't check.

 

[DavidUK]

I can't work out where it touches/holds the reed? Their ad doesn't help me understand (marketing drivel) and so I'm out.

 

[Jimmymack]

Maybe not "bad" but mediocre. e.g. PPT got a 3.5 star

But my problem with any mouthpiece reviews (Sour grapes eh?) is that unless you just review tech aspects such as "breaks when you drop it" then how it plays is way too subjective for any realistic review, which is why I don't do them in spite of being able to get hold of plenty of free review samples.

I am very flexible, but some mouthpieces need a totally different embouchure to others and so can take a few weeks to get used to so you can get the best out of them.

So if I play a mouthpiece with a baffle and short lay, as soon as I get one with a low baffle and longer lay I cannot give it a fair crack of the whip. With my embouchure it will just sound tubby and dull unless I radically change (e.g. take more in my mouth)

So mouthpiece reviews (by anyone) are totally pointless.

Steve gave your PPTs pretty good reviews, I didn’t think he gave star ratings. The only negative(ish) thing he said was that the resin one scared him to begin with. I’ve never been scared of a mouthpiece so that can only be good, and it wasn’t even the hooligan. Now that one does sound a bit scary.

 

[Neffmusic]

The problem I have with Steves reviews, is that I believe that he only publishes reviews that are favourable. ie he doesn’t give a bad review.

He also receives much of what he reviews as free gifts from the manufacturers of the item. (He acknowledges that he did with this ligature.)

He then sells this stuff of at a later date and pockets the funds.

It’s a nice little earner for him, and as such I don’t believe he is impartial in these reviews.

For example, his supply of folks willing to send him free stuff would slow down if negative reviews were to start.

I do enjoy many of his reviews, and the sounds he produces, but always take his comments with a pinch of salt.

I would disagree with the statement that "this is a nice little earner for me". Many times I spend 12+ hours working on a review and good portion of my week recording, writing, taking photos, editing, writing on social media, responding to people's comments and emails about the items I review. For the first 5 years I just did all this at a loss to me as I was either borrowing stuff or buying stuff and spending way too much time doing this.

At some point, I started asking mouthpiece makers to send me a sample or samples for free because that is what almost every other review site on the planet seemed to be doing (or they have ads or are affiliates) I am in know way getting rich off of reviews but just trying to get something to show for my work that will put some food on the table each month. (Also, my site is not a nickel in dime free website but costs a good amount of money every month to keep up)

I only review products I feel are good for other sax player's because these reviews are so subjective and my conscience doesn't feel right about giving a bad review to a mouthpiece maker or company and trashing his business when another sax player who plays the same mouthpiece might think it is the greatest mouthpiece in the world.

I have sent back many mouthpieces and products that I just didn't like or get on with to all the big name makers. I don't think I can exclude any of them. If this was all about money for me I would not do that as these are all mouthpieces I could have kept and sold. I see myself as an honest guy and the mouthpiece sound clips are a safety to keep me honest. I dread and abhor posting a sound clip that I hate or can't stand. Even one that is just mediocre is hard for me to post. This also makes it all the more harder and impossible for me to review mouthpieces I don't like. It is torture for me to play them. There isn't much worse for me in life to try to play a mouthpiece I really don't like and record something to post. I just can't do it!

My site is what it is, and when I started it, my goal was to share my passion for the saxophone but also encourage players, artists and craftsman that work so hard doing what they do because of the saxophone also. Posting subjective negative reviews and hurting someones lively hood that has a passion for the saxophone goes against that core mission statement in my mind. I always try to tell the truth and be authentic but I will not go down that road of destroying or hurting someone else's business who loves the saxophone. This whole saxophone thing is hard enough as a career as it is, we don't need to be tearing each other down but lifting each other up in my opinion......

 

[Neffmusic]

Maybe not "bad" but mediocre. e.g. PPT got a 3.5 star

But my problem with any mouthpiece reviews (Sour grapes eh?) is that unless you just review tech aspects such as "breaks when you drop it" then how it plays is way too subjective for any realistic review, which is why I don't do them in spite of being able to get hold of plenty of free review samples.

I am very flexible, but some mouthpieces need a totally different embouchure to others and so can take a few weeks to get used to so you can get the best out of them.

So if I play a mouthpiece with a baffle and short lay, as soon as I get one with a low baffle and longer lay I cannot give it a fair crack of the whip. With my embouchure it will just sound tubby and dull unless I radically change (e.g. take more in my mouth)

So mouthpiece reviews (by anyone) are totally pointless.

I got rid of the star reviews. That was an experiment that seems good but lead to all sorts of problems. This is just way too subjective to rate on a scale of any kind. My memory of the PPT review was that it was an awesome mouthpiece!

 

[Jimmymack]

I got rid of the star reviews. That was an experiment that seems good but lead to all sorts of problems. This is just way too subjective to rate on a scale of any kind. My memory of the PPT review was that it was an awesome mouthpiece!

Thanks for these posts Steve, it’s nice to see you here. This explains why it couldn’t find star ratings and you were right to drop them I think, they get corrupted very easily by unthinking or malicious individuals, or just by people who don’t know what they are talking about but feel the need to make a mark.

 

[Neffmusic]

Thanks for these posts Steve, it’s nice to see you here. This explains why it couldn’t find star ratings and you were right to drop them I think, they get corrupted very easily by unthinking or malicious individuals.

The other behind the scenes problem was I had people and mouthpiece makers contacting me and saying "Hey, you gave "no name" mouthpiece 3.7 stars and my mouthpiece 3.6 stars which is saying the other mouthpiece is better. In actuality there was so much more to it. I could have had an extra cup of coffee one day, or had a cold another day, or even had a serious medical issue (this has happened many times over the last 15 years unfortunately) I even sometimes have had medical issues with my hearing where about once a year everything sounds out of tune and timbres and tones change because of inner ear pressure. All these personal things can affect a review. Way better getting rid of any sort of rating scale!!!

 

[sax panther]

I like your reviews Steve. It's easy for the reader to make their own mind up from the recordings that you post. I certainly don't begrudge you getting some freebie mouthpieces (and you've been completely open about that for a long time) given the time you put into writing the reviews and recording the sound samples.

Having a great player posting so many mouthpiece reviews with such attention to detail (with/without reverb, different reed brands/strengths etc) is a valuable resource. Only problem is that it makes me feel a bit gassy sometimes...