Hi
Many many thanks for your reply.
I am not quite sure what you are saying. I can only speak from personal experience and of course that experience is not entirely from trial and error but more from following advice of teachers. I am intrigued by what you are saying and am completely open to trying this out and delving deeper into this.
I am by no means a player that thinks the higher reed strength the better I am. I personally think it's whatever feels more comfortable. With a softer reed I couldn't get the volumes and dynamics I could with a harder reed. I admit the jump from 3's to 3.5 was unnecessary but that was only to fix my problem with the buzz. Now that I have realised the buzz was mechanical (which I am not sure you know as you never mentioned it), I feel the reed strength I am on now is still giving me the response I am looking for so therefore I will stick to it.
And now to speak about embouchure. I think I understand what you are saying. Developing an embouchure through strengthening muscles in throat cheeks or diaphragm comes before anything. I know this and I have not at all skipped over this. I spend at leas an hour on Overtones and long tones. High notes going from no sound to the loudest sound and back again. For me I feel this is exercising my embouchure in a very good way. However when using a softer reed, this isn't exercising or strengthening my embouchure at all because the ease of playing is so much smoother and doesn't give me the space to go loud and soft. How will reducing the strength help my embouchure? Perhaps my logic of exercising the muscles through being challenged is false? I don't know.
Anyway I could go on challenging everything you say for hours. Let me make one thing clear above all of this. I am in no position whatsoever to undermine anyone in this forum. You are all smarter, more experienced and better players than I am. However I am a firm believer of challenging opinions. This doesn't matter if you are Trane or a beginner. This is my way of learning. This strips everyone of their ego's and forces everyone to question themselves and their opinions. It may seem like I have an ego but let it be clear; I don't know what I'm talking about. I don't know that you know what you are talking about. This is the beauty of learning. I am open to anything at all, if it means going back to a strength I feel painfully uncomfortable on then lets do it. If I was speaking from a position of more experience then I'd be open to trying as well.
So far, before your recommendation, I tried a lower strength, however this was in order to fix my problem. Now I am being faced with a new challenge to develop perhaps a better embouchure. Please guide me with what I could do next. I am excited. Let us learn together.
Sorry for the length and perhaps annoyance of this. I am here to learn. I have nothing to lose so lets discuss.
Thank you
Everything you say is valid of course, and I'm pleased you sorted out your rattle!
Have you read Eugen Herrigel 's 'Zen and the Art of Archery'? I mention it because - to my mind - he explains that the traditional route of study of this art in Japan is/was based on the philosophy that its pedagogy was immutable. By which I mean that the student of Archery does not start with a light bow, but with a full strength one and trains the body to be able to draw it correctly through many years of toil and frustration, culminating hopefully in an acceptance of the reality oneself in relation to the bow and arrow.
Now I apologise if this seems a tad over dramatic in relation to the sax, but what I mean to say is that in the long run any method of study is OK if your heart is in it.
However in regards to archery, that discipline uses muscles that we use in everyday life, not to the extent required to draw a full sized bow, but nonetheless we do use the hands, wrists, arms, shoulders, back muscles etc regularly and strongly. Conversely, the embouchure muscles are not used to anywhere near the extent involved in playing the sax (or trumpet, clarinet etc etc) in normal daily life.
The famous American teacher Joe Allard made the statement that even a small child has the musculature to blow the saxophone correctly, and although I am not entirely a fan of the Allard school of players, I am very aware that he was correct. The mere act of making a sound on a saxophone mouthpiece and reed combination can be done with a fraction of the effort most people involve.
I was recently practising on my 7* mouthpiece (made by Ed Pillinger) with a #2 Vandoren Java reed. Now I would not use a reed as soft as that professionally - I'm simply not used enough to such a soft reed - but the occasional bout of practice on a #2 makes playing a 2.5 or 3 an entirely different experience. When returning to a 2.5 or 3 reed, I find my tone much more open and full because the #2 prohibits me from biting and demands better breath support.
So in sax playing although there is a comparison to a sporting discipline such as Zen Archery, there is also a fundamental difference, mainly in the way the body is used.