I have another Rafael Navarro tenor mouthpiece up for review today. This is a marble Maestra 8. I used a Rigotti Gold 2 1/2 strong reed on it with a Francois Louis Ultimate ligature.
Like all of Rafael’s mouthpieces I have tried so far, this one is a work of art. The mouthpiece looks so nice when you take it out of the tube it comes in that you don’t want to play it. I love the look of these marble mouthpieces! The table, facing, rails and tip look perfect. Rafael does amazing work!
Rafael Navarro Maestra Marble Tenor Mouthpiece
The Maestra tenor saxophone mouthpiece has a nice rollover baffle in it that reminds me of a nice slant link style of baffle. When I compare this mouthpiece by eye to my Early Babbit Link that was made from the slant signature mold it looks almost identical on the inside. The baffle shape and chamber look very very close in size and shape.
Rafael Navarro Maestra Marble Tenor Mouthpiece
The Maestra was so easy to play! I first tried a Rigotti Gold 2 1/2 medium reed which was ok but felt a little soft. I tried the 2 1/2 strong size and that did the trick. It seemed to give the tone a little bit more character and thickness.
Rafael Navarro Maestra Marble Tenor Mouthpiece
I loved the tone on the Maestra. You can form your own opinion by listening to the sound clip. I felt like it had a brighter sound than I thought it would. The tone was thick and rich. I love the first few notes of the clip and how pact with overtones they sound. The tone was even through the range of the horn and the intonation was great.
At 1:35-1:45 in the clip I blow a bit harder and you can hear how the mouthpiece changes color and gets a bit brighter. The altissimo was also very clear and easy to get on this mouthpiece for me.
I really loved playing this mouthpiece. I would love to compare this mouthpiece side by side with a marble Bebop Special and Bahia just so I could get a clear picture and perspective on how each of these models is different and unique. I haven’t been able to try the Bebop Special or the marble Bahia yet but I hope to soon.
Rafael Navarro Maestra Marble Tenor Mouthpiece
I really enjoyed playing the Rafael Navarro Maestra Marble Tenor Saxophone Mouthpiece. If you like the sound and look of this mouthpiece contact Rafael Navarro through his website . The photos and testimonials on his site will really make you want to buy one of these mouthpieces! It’s a great looking website and the mouthpieces are top quality. I’d like to thank Rafael for sending me this Maestra to review. I’ve spoken to Rafael a number of times on the phone and he really knows his stuff when it comes to mouthpieces.
Let me know what you think in the comments below. Thanks, Steve
I have another Rafael Navarro mouthpiece up for review today. This is a hard rubber Maestra 6* soprano saxophone mouthpiece. I used a Vandoren Java 2 1/2 reed on it with a Vandoren Optimum metal ligature. My soprano sax is a Yamaha YSS-62.
Like all of Rafael’s mouthpieces I have tried so far, this one is a work of art. The table, facing, rails and tip look perfect. Rafael does amazing work!
Rafael Navarro Maestra Soprano Saxophone Mouthpiece
The Maestra soprano saxophone mouthpiece has a nice rollover baffle in it that slopes down into a large chamber. Rafael told me that the design of the soprano Maestra is very similar to the old Otto Link Slant Signature mouthpieces. The chamber is much larger than the chamber of a Selmer Soloist mouthpiece if you compare them side by side although it isn’t as big as my Theo Wanne Gaia soprano mouthpiece.
Rafael Navarro Maestra Soprano Saxophone Mouthpiece
The Maestra was very easy to play! I first tried a Vandoren Java 3 reed which was ok but felt a little stiff for this mouthpiece. The Java 2 1/2 was much easier to play.
Rafael Navarro Maestra Soprano Saxophone Mouthpiece
The Maestra soprano saxophone mouthpiece was even throughout the range of the horn and the intonation was very good. The tone had a sweet sound to it. Very pure and clean sounding. The larger chamber gives it a different tone than many of the soprano mouthpieces out there today with the “pea shooter” chambers in them. I think the larger chamber gives it a slightly bigger more spread sound to the tone.
Rafael Navarro Maestra Soprano Saxophone Mouthpiece
I really enjoyed playing the Rafael Navarro Maestra Hard Rubber Soprano Saxophone Mouthpiece. If you like the sound and look of this mouthpiece contact Rafael Navarro through his website. I believe the Maestra soprano mouthpiece is brand new so it might not be up on the website yet. I’d like to thank Rafael for sending me this Maestra to review. I’ve spoken to Rafael a number of times on the phone and he really knows his stuff when it comes to mouthpieces.
Let me know what you think in the comments below. Thanks, Steve
Rafael Navarro Maestra Soprano Saxophone Mouthpiece
I recently had a member on my site (Walter Ruckdeschel) post an in-depth review of 8 different stand mounted microphones that can be used for live gigs. I was so fascinated that I asked him if I could post his finding here for everyone to see. If I didn’t have my hands full teaching and trying mouthpieces I might be venturing down this mic review road myself. As of right now though, I’m happy to let Walt do all the work………. Thanks Walt!
(Walter Ruckdeschel is a physician by profession for the last 20 years. As a young man, he played violin cello and bass. Walt started playing the saxophone 25 years ago but had a long pause (job, family,etc……..). Over the last few years, he has picked up the saxophone again as well as investing some time and energy into recording and audio gear along the way………..)
Hi folks,
I’ve written a little post concerning thoughts about microphones for live sax playing including a head-to-head audio-shootout. I‘ve invested some time and money to learn more about that issue in the recent years and hopefully acquired some profound knowledge I can share with others.
1) INTRODUCTION
Most semipro or pro-level singers will own their personal vocal mic (if not some mics), that they will always bring to live concerts. They would never allow just any random mic to disturb their performance and do any harm to the sound of their beloved voice as their instrument (besides some hygienic aspects). So what about us sax players? Should we bring a mic with us when it comes to live performances? Or should we hope that the sound technician will offer us a nice collection of fine mics to choose from? But if so, which one might be good or bad? Often on bigger stages/events there should be hope for a really good audio tech who will do a good job for us concerning mic and sound. But nasty disappointments will happen, we could face some disgusting universal “instrument“ type of mic in front of us to share two hours of playing (and listening) with it.
While playing sax live with quite a few different bands over lots of years, the mic-thing has been an ongoing question for me. When you search the net for the most typical mic-choices for sax-players, You’ll find a lot of discussion and hints, but hardly any real direct audio comparisons. So most of the time, we have to make a decision by reading reviews rather than hearing sound clips….. (e.g. the very good mic-test done by Marc Mommaas, which you’ll find at recordinghacks.com, where Marc Mommaas finally ended with a Royer Labs high end ribbon mic as the best choice for him). We could also talk to other musicians and soundmen and see what advice they offer. After that, we would have to buy one or more mics to try, use them for a while, get a feel for them, listen while playing live and then record with them to see how they sound and compare. With time, a personal thought will build up and often after a while the curtain will open for the next trials.
While once again involved in some personal mic trials, I got the idea to do a direct mic-shootout, recorded simultaneous (which is of utmost importance to ensure the exactly identical playing) – primarily for myself to learn more about some of my mics. But before we get to discussing the results, the following preliminary considerations are important.
2) TYPE OF MICS FOR SAX PLAYING
2.1) General thoughts You’ll in our days quite often see large diaphragm condenser microphones (there are lots of fine choices in rugged housings and different price regions like e.g. AKG 414/214, Neumann TLM 102/103, Audio Technica 4040/4050, Sennheiser MK4, Shure Beta 27, Mojave MA-201fet, and lots of other models by Blue Mics, Røde, SE Electronics etc.) or ribbon mics (among the very finest are the models made by Royer Labs) not only for studio recording, but as well on live stages, especially when it’s about acoustical music and maybe live recording is taking place. The reasons for this is obvious – to capture that velvety larger-than-live-sound as known from studio-recordings. That works, if it doesn’t get too loud on stage and everybody is handling these mics with love and care. With rising monitor sound levels on stage in “electrical” settings bleed and feedback issues will arise with these large diaphragm studio-type condenser mics. You would also be worried that your very expensive and tender ribbon mics would get abused in these rough live settings. And there are two other points to mention: 1) cost (if You will – and You definitely should – avoid these cheep asia-built mics and go for a mid- or upper-class mic, You’ll have to spent some money) and 2) in hard live-settings You’d have some troublesome thoughts about durability of these mics (You really would hate to see them being smashed down in the heat of any live performance).
The preferably used mics in many live settings still are rugged dynamic mics and for special issues (like drum overheads, flutes, small percussions, piano or sometimes vocals) small diaphragm condenser mics, all of them with a strong directional pickup pattern to minimize bleed and feedback issues (e.g. cardioid or hypercardioid) and rugged housings. The review today, will be on only micing sax for live sound reinforcement – not studio recording where some (quite) different aspects will come up. For some commercial gigs on larger stages, where moving around is an essential part of the show, clip-on mics with a wireless system are a big deal (like the dpa d:vote 4099 is a very fine mic). Such a system will get much more expensive compared to any good stand-mounted mic and there are still some good reasons why many players prefer to use stand-mounted mics: most of all the options which arise with varying distance to the mic – as the sax-players volume control. So I excluded clip-on mics in this review and we will only be dealing with wired and stand-mounted mics here.
2.2) The ideal sax mic for playing live Most aspects in life won‘t match our imagination so compromises will have to be made in most cases. This is true when it comes to microphones also. If we could produce the ideal sax mic from our imagination it would: – sound natural with an even and full frequency response – minimize bleed and really avoid feedback – not be prone to off-axis coloration – be rugged to stay alive for a long time with live use(abuse) – be small enough to go with us as a good friend in our sax case (!) – be affordable (but of course we‘d like to pay a little or maybe much more for better results) – withstand high sound pressure levels without distortion – hopefully look cool especially when it‘s a larger mic – be versatile – hold it’s value so as to ensure our investment
3) TO COLOR OR NOT TO COLOR YOUR SOUND BY MIC
3.1) Mics will color any sound more ore less Often the question will come up, “Should a mic color the sound of any audio source in a special way?” There are lots of good examples and reasons for this in distinct situations. (E.g. when it comes to kick-drum micing, where strong “built-in” EQ is a common feature of typical mics (e.g. AKG D-112): that helps to get a plug-and-play-approach in live situations without too much EQ-ing.) The Shure SM57 is used often on snare drums or guitar amps because this mic has some strong boost around 6kHz and bass roll-off below 200Hz, which helps these instruments find their place in the mix. But would you like to have your sax-sound somehow colored or driven a certain direction by the mic? Or would You prefer the most natural sounding mic (a mic without any “coloration” or “sound” of its own)?
3.2) To apply equalizing for the Sax or not For the front speakers of any live sound reinforcement system there will often be EQ applied to most channels and instruments, e.g. for the sax some bass-rolloff (low cut) and maybe a little high frequency boost (besides hallroom and compression) to fit the things in the mix and match the sound to the concert room‘s audio properties. So if there is any EQ-option available, some people might think concerning mics: nothing what couldn‘t be fixed with a little EQ (think of all these fancy full-parametric built-in-EQs in the contemporary digital mixing consoles). So could or should any mic of good build-quality and sound just be adjusted for sax by EQ? Of course, the miced sax-sound can be strongly shaped by applying EQ, BUT: correcting unwanted sound-coloration generated by any mic (with sometimes very complex details in frequency response) will in most circumstances not be what you (or the sound tech) will want to do – and often you just won‘t get the sound you would like even by tweaking the EQ.
So for ensuring an easy plug-and-play-approach but also to avoid much (EQ) work: it‘s in many cases (and especially for Sax) much easier to start with a neutral sound without any special limitations and inhomogeneities at the mic-level – and maybe just add very small amounts of EQ to even improve what is already a good natural sound. (And don’t forget: on most smaller and mid-sized stages, you’ll get your monitor-sound without any special channel-EQ (maybe with a bass-rolloff and some frequency corrections to avoid feedback – to that aux-send/monitor channel in general but not for your special sax demands), so what You‘ll hear is mostly just what your mic will give you.
3.3) Your sound and (hopefully positive) biofeedback All advanced sax-players work hard for (lots of) years to develop their own personal sound, trying to attain their perfect sound. On that way down that path, many players will try what seems to be a never ending line of mouthpieces, which in many cases will alter the individuals sound only in detail. When it comes to playing through a mic on any live stage, you’re prone to loose quite a lot of all that work, if that mic won’t cover your own well-developed sound as you hope for. On the contrary, sometimes, the mic used will alter the sound heard in a sometimes strong, unwanted and unpleasant (and in the worst moments……..really annoying) manner.
In many cases, the audience won’t notice the details of the sax channel’s frequency response as long as your playing is nice. But don’t forget that very important biofeedback-thing: moderate (and of course major) unexpected changes in sound and frequency response, as you hear them coming out of the monitors and front speakers, will disturb your unconscious and conscious feelings about playing, blowing and phrasing. In cases of major mic sound problems, you’ll just be really limited while playing and in the worst moments you‘ll loose the confidence and joy you need while playing(and here we definitely are not alone as sax-players, just talk to all that singers, guitar players etc.). Good sound is a major inspiration in the very moment of playing.
So you‘ll want to use a mic, that will give you a sound very close to what you developed in all those years of practicing and growing. I n the best case, the sound coming off the floor monitor speakers should sound like yourself playing in front of a very even surface like a mirror or window, where Your natural sax sound is reflected with all it’s harmonics and overtones in a naturally sounding way. But of course the mic should be 1) directional enough to minimize bleed and feedback issues (without having to stay glued to the mic to not loose your sound) and 2) rugged to have a long life when used a lot.
4) THE MIC-SHOOTOUT SETUP First, all these mics (see below) were mounted in stands as near to each other as possible, pointing to a virtual spot where I would play the sax. To minimize off-axis issues with that setup, I stayed away from the mics about 50cm (which is not always the way you’d use your mic in louder live situations, but for this test the best way to do it – when playing more close to the mic, you‘d get the proximity effect = better low frequency response in most cases).
Signal flow was directly from the mics into my Presonus Studiolive 16.4.2 digital mixing console, where the gain settings were carefully balanced to ensure matching audio levels for all channels as possible. Directly after the (more than ok) on-board mic preamps and A/D-conversion signal flow was without any further processing via firewire into Cubase 6.5 (Mac OS). In Cubase there was a different track for each mic, after recording the audio files some tracks were normalized to correct for small gain differences. No EQ was applied to any sax-track.
In one part (audio-files labeled “dry”-only sax) of the shootout I played some mostly unrelated short phrases with Tenor/darker hr-sound and Tenor/brighter metal-sound, Alto and Baritone Sax, recorded at the same time with all mics placed very close to each other as written. Don’t let the absence of flowing sax playing disturb you – that’s not the point here (and of course I’ve got to apologize for my amateur-level playing). For the very best comparison conditions, load the files to different tracks into any DAW, loop one single phrase and switch between the tracks. Be sure to use good speakers (e.g. studio monitors) or good headphones. That’s how you’ll get the best listening conditions to compare the differences (often big!) in detail.
In another part I loaded two playbacks and played – again simultaneously recorded as above – Tenor Sax with a darker hr-type of sound on a rhythm changes tune (labeled “RC”) and Alto Sax on a more funky tune to get a feeling of the differences between these mics in a “band“ type context of playing. For these playback-recordings, some tube-type compression and hallroom was applied (of course in exactly the same way) to all Sax-tracks – as it would happen in real life.
5) THE CONTENDERS As said earlier, I tested only stand-mounted mics and in addition restricted the microphone selection to only models of highly appreciated manufacturers (otherwise 2.2j would be lost in the moment of buying the mic).
At first I have to apologize – some of the most interesting mics are not included in my small test because I do not have access to them at this moment. The famous Electro Voice RE-20, the Electro Voice N/D 468, the Shure SM-7B and the Sennheiser MD-441 are missing, and of course there are some other nice mics not even mentioned here. I excluded (because I don’t have one) some fine condenser vocal mics (like the Neumann KMS 104/105), which give a very detailed and fine vocal sound without too much of high-end-hype – and I don’t know how they would perform with sax.
I also excluded many of these instrumental-mics for “general use” (substitutes for Shure‘s SM57 like AKG D-40, Sennheiser E906 etc.), which in real life are mostly used only for snare drum, toms, percussion instruments as well as for guitar cabinets. Most of them are not a good choice for sax in my opinion. They give you a high-mid-hyped shrill and maybe thin (in other words annoying) sound with lack of detail and high end frequencies. There are of course positive exceptions – the here reviewed Beyerdynamic M201TG is among them. The (here not reviewed) Electro Voice N/D 468 and in the past, I remember trying the Beyerdynamic TG i50D with positive results on sax and trumpet.
When preparing this review, I threw my more than 25 years old AKG C-1000 (as a representative of the small-diaphragm condenser mics) in to the round. But it fell behind the better ones in the competition (while being clearly superior to the losers of the group) with lack of detail and missing transparent high end – maybe because it‘s age (I don‘t know), and would only be an acceptable choice for maybe softening a very bright “contemporary“ sax sound (but you‘d clearly prefer a natural sounding mic with full frequency response and good detail retrieval also in such a setting).
So my shootout is not a balanced, fair and comprehensive review but more a sample from real life and a look into my current mic cases. Here are the microphones I tested:
5.1) Shure SM58 Maybe the most-used live vocal mic in mankind. Rugged and not expensive, and available on nearly all live stages. Quite often, sax players will face a SM58 in front of them (think of some small jazz clubs where it’s the only mic at all – talking to the audience and playing will happen with that only mic). But is this a good choice for sax players? When looking at the specs of the mic: apart from a quite steep bass roll-off starting a little above 100Hz there is a marked, early starting boost of around +5dB at 3,5-6kHz – to help the human voice cut-through on loud stages (but you’ll hopefully never use that mic to record some soulful jazz vocals in a studio session). Some people might state: tenor sax is close to the human voice concerning sound and frequencies so shouldn’t that SM58 work fine for sax as for a live voice?
5.2) Shure SM57 Maybe the most used live “instrumental” mic in mankind. Not as rugged as I‘d like it (metal body but this somehow flimsy rotating head) and not expensive. It’s available on nearly all live stages. Most sax players could easily face a SM57 put in front of him by a stage tech. Is this a good choice for sax players? When looking at the specs of the mic: apart from a quite steep bass roll-off (starting at 200Hz even higher compared to the SM 58) there is a marked, uneven boost of +6dB at 5-8kHz. These characteristics helped the SM57 to become and stay the most used snare mic all over the world not only on live stages, but as well in many recording studios. But will that clearly colored frequency response help the sax-player to shine?
5.3) Beyerdynamic M 99 A large diaphragm dynamic mic with neodym-technology, two-way EQ-switches, extremely well built and rugged and not too expensive. As the RE-20 it’s a mic directed to broadcast-use for speakers, but with it‘s built-in EQ and high sound pressure level tolerance easy to use for kickdrum and a lot of different sound sources. It has quite a flat frequency response with a slight (4dB) boost from 5 to above 10kHz. It will give a rich sound with fine detail retrieval and for maybe 2 years I liked it a lot for sax, trumpet and especially flugelhorn when playing live and also for live recording (and live vocals in acoustic settings). One day it gave a very unpleasant sound with a muted trumpet directly held to the mic (as often done live) with some annoying high frequency peak (the trumpet player just couldn’t continue playing and switched to my mic). You won’t find the reason for that problem while looking to the frequency curve, you’ll have to listen.
5.4) Electro Voice RE-320 It’s older brother (or is it a sister?) RE-20 is a very well known large diaphragm dynamic mic with a very well built and rugged steel housing, fine detail retrieval and full while quite linear frequency response (not to mention that special Variable-D technology to minimize proximity effect and off-axis issues). The RE-20 is a very often in broadcast settings used mic in the U.S., much liked for brass and sax on live stages all over the world and will deliver fine results with a lot of audio sources live and as well with studio-recording. A short time ago EV released the RE-320 with a similar steel housing and that large diaphragm technology with Variable-D. Both of them will take high sound pressure levels (e.g. trumpets or guitar amps) without distortion. What is different (besides the stylish black color) in the RE-320 is: a neodym magnet with higher output, a contour- instead of a high-pass-switch for easy-to-go kickdrum-micing and a different frequency response with a more pronounced high-boost between 5 and 10kHz (where there is only a small boost in the RE-20). The RE-320’s advantages are the higher output, the ease of use for kickdrum-micing and the lower price. And this really big and stylish mic looks cool (may-the-force-be-with-you) – while hardly fitting in any but really big sax-cases. But how in fact will it sound with sax (and will that pronounced high-boost do well for sax)?
5.5) Sennheiser MD-421 One of the highest rated dynamic mics ever with that special razor-look. A very first choice for many people on toms, but also for brass, guitar cabinets, speech and woodwinds. The mic itself is made in Germany and is of outstanding built-quality with a very rugged all-metal construction. It has 5-step bass-rolloff-switch as a nice feature. It is medium-big and as a clear downside has that strange proprietary stand mounting, that will wear off with the years and become unstable. The MD-421 won‘t fit any standard-type of stand mounting. When looking at the data-sheet: full bass response down to 80Hz, very even response from 100 to 1000Hz, followed by a marked and wide high-frequency boost slowly staring early at 1,5kHz with a more steep rising at 3-4kHz approaching a peak of +8dB around 4,5-5kHz, above that a smaller boost of 4-5dB until nearly 15kHz – looks like a strongly coloring and bright sounding mic. What will that do to our beloved Sax-sound?
5.6) Beyerdynamic M201TG A pencil-style mic with a very even frequency response between 100Hz and 6-7kHz and a only a slight boost (maximum 4dB) in the top region (10kHz). – looks like no strong coloring and hopefully a naturally sounding mic. Very compact, rugged and well built, small enough to fit in virtually any sax case and not too expensive. For audio technicians it is a well-known all round dynamic mic with very good results on a wide range of (nearly all?) instruments like snare drum, overheads, percussion, piano, string instruments, woodwinds, amps and quite a number of other applications. Some audio techs would choose a Beyer 201 to use for virtually any audio source when only one type of mic would be allowed. But I‘m puzzled – never found any sax player using it live. After buying and trying one I think that‘s just because most of them don’t know about this mic and it‘s behavior with the sax. Will that quite even frequency response translate in a natural sax sound?
5.7) Røde NT5 A small diaphragm condenser mic. For many users, this is thought of as a very good midclass-choice (some high-end sisters like Neumann or Schoeps will go a step further concerning detail retrieval and even frequency response). Rugged (Røde will give 10 years of warranty), good detail retrieval, slightly hyped but not too harsh sounding high end. Good for drum overheads and lots of sound sources like percussion, piano, flute etc. – a versatile and affordable while professional mic and kind of an affordable prototype of that “pencil-style“ small condenser mics. I used this mic live in the past and it gave me a quite natural sax sound (without feedback problems).
5.8) AKG Perception Tube 820 A nice mid-class or upper mid-class large diaphragm tube type condenser mic (designed in Austria and built in China with Austrian quality-control) for studio use with a nice and full open sound and a very even frequency response from bottom until high midrange and just a slight boost in the top frequencies around and above 10 kHz (for this test used with pad to avoid the stronger tube type coloration of sound what will happen otherwise). Differences to high end tube studio mics would be found concerning detail retrieval. I included the mic just as my personal reference because it’s what I use at present for recording sax & vocals at my home-studio. When comparing all these mics the PC 820 will give a good reference of sound as a quite natural sounding mic with only a very small brightening-up at the top end.
I have just added the round of 8 clips concerning proximity-effect above:
The proximity-effect can really matter: putting the source of sound close to any mic will boost low frequencies – with some mics quite a lot (an effect often used by singers while “eating” their mics on stage). To minimize off-axis-issues while recording with all mics at the same time in the first rounds of the shootout I stayed with the sax more distant (50cm) as it would often be reality on any live stage. By doing that, a less full sound with all mics will be the result. To address that somewhat “unfair” aspect of the contest, I added the following little thing:
Here I recorded two short licks (one with Baritone Sax, one with Tenor Sax) played each two times – with 50 and 20cm distance to the mics. After recording both takes, I normalized the takes to correct for gain differences caused by distance. No EQ, no compression, no effects. This little add-on will allow you to get an idea of how the proximity-effect will alter the sound on these 8 mics (mainly concerning low frequency response). All mics show some proximity-effect, but there are differences: e.g. the Beyer M99 will gain more low frequency volume with proximity compared to the SM57…
6) THE RESULTS – by listening to the recordings Of course the following thoughts are my very personal thoughts – and maybe not exactly yours. As the quality criterion of utmost importance I concentrated on what could be rated as the most natural sound of the saxophone. If I‘d like to get a bright sound: I would play bright and use a setup with a bright sound – but never primarily a bright sounding mic as I stated above with good reasons. There are of course differences between the mics dependent of the kind of sax sound and playing: with more aggressive/brighter playing some annoying aspects of e.g. the Shure SM57 and Sennheiser MD421 will come out much stronger, but otherwise with much softer/darker playing some otherwise unnatural sounding mics (SM57) will give more pleasant results while “brightening up“ the sax sound.
6.1) Shure SM58 The mid-high boost and missing low frequencies, as you’d expect from looking at its data-sheet before playing one single tone – is exactly what it will sound like. Thin and shrill. Not that bad as it’s sister SM-57, but otherwise among the losers of the whole shootout. With more near-distance-playing you‘ll of course get more low-end response as with most mics, but the unnatural sound otherwise won‘t leave at all. It’s pure availability, low price, rugged construction and modest size are by far not enough to tolerate it’s unpleasant audio properties for sax.
6.2) Shure SM57 Similar to the SM58: the mid-high boost and missing low frequencies, as you’d expect from looking at its data-sheet before playing one single tone – is exactly what it will sound like. Thin and annoying shrill. Even worse than it’s sister SM58 with an even more unnatural peak in very high mids and low highs: also a loser in the shootout. It’s pure availability, low price, somehow rugged construction and modest size are never enough to tolerate it’s unpleasant audio properties for sax. Maybe when simply staying alive and crying in competition with all these other crying instruments on a very loud stage with any rock-band is the task and there is REALLY no better mic available, you could play through an SM57. But not a second time I hope. And really never in any setting, where musical detail matters. But to be honest: what did we expect – saxophone is in no way near any snare drum or guitar cabinet, where this mic is used mostly.
6.3) Beyerdynamic M99 A detailed, in the low frequencies – compared to the RE-320 – clearly less full sound (but not as thin as SM58/57) with wide frequency response upwards. It does not have that quite pronounced high-end hype of the RE-320 nor that annoying high-midrange boost of the SM57, but some emphasis a little deeper in the transition zone highmid to high frequencies – perceived as a little “metallic” or “cold” unnatural response and harmonics (as Marc Mommaas stated in his great review). It‘s size is medium-large and therefore it‘s not the most wanted one to fit in your sax case – and clearly not concerning sound as there are much better options. So the M99 for me is maybe the strongest disappointment in this review and no more my preferred sax mic, while staying in the mic-case for flugelhorn, trombone and other things.
6.4) Electro Voice RE-320 A detailed, in the low frequencies full sound with a strong sparkling high end – a clearly noticeable and unnatural high-boost. The midrange response is even and without that annoying type of coloration as seen with the SM57/58 and the M99. This type of coloration could be thought of more as a kind of adding some high-range EQ. The unnatural boosted high end is a little like some (or even more) pixie dust scattered over the sound. This could be a good thing when a “dark” sounding sax player would meet a funk/pop setting live (or any other instrument where some brightening up by mic would be wanted like percussion or the string attack of a double bass), especially maybe for a cutting baritone sound (the reason I bought it). I would not like it with alto or soprano sax, and not with any medium to bright sounding tenor sound. It is big (while looking cool) – too big for your sax case (if it‘s not baritone) as mentioned before. A special mic and not naturally sounding, but a good choice for many audio sources while definitely not the best mic for sax in general.
6.5) Sennheiser MD-421 I once played the Sennheiser MD-421 live with a loud band with good results on the tenor sax but I remember there was a noticeable high-mid to high-boost with a some harshness to the sound (giving me pain while blowing a beechler-type alto thing), what is far from natural for sax. So I wasn‘t sure how it would hold up in direct comparison to some alternative mics. And the results here confirm my aforementioned impressions. The sound is like you would anticipate when looking to the mic‘s data-sheet with it‘s strong boost of +8dB between 4000 and 6000Hz. That‘s really what it sounds like – a strong boost of high mids and low highs, what might be acceptable e.g. for a dark-sounding, softly played tenor sax and baritone sax. But: it will give a harsh and very unpleasant sound with more forced and brighter playing. And with the hyped area between 4 and 6kHz there is the feeling of a missing real high end. Now I understand my bad feeling while playing bright contemporary alto sax through a MD-421 on some stage in the past. The MD-421 is (surprisingly) opposed to it’s high reputation as one of the best dynamic mics ever – a big disappointment and clearly out of the race for sax for me now – strong unnatural coloration of sound with too early beginning and too strong boost in the transition zone high mids/low highs. The only thing would be; the MD421 would really help a Baritone sax to cut through on any loud stage. So, if you’re not mainly in that field of playing, you might leave it to the drummers for micing toms or guitar players for their amps…
6.6) Beyerdynamic M201TG The data-sheet shows a wide and quite even frequency response with a only slight – and for a dynamic mic quite high (round and above 10kHz in the pixie-dust-region) – boost. Compared to that high-end-hype of the RE320 the M201TG may seem to sound boring in the first second, but: it sounds very natural, with only a slightly emphasized high end without becoming shrill or unnatural. The word “warm“ could be applied to that overall sound. There‘s a little lack of fullness/low frequencies compared to the RE-320 or the Røde NT5, which doesn‘t matter for tenor, alto or soprano sax live (and which could easily get fixed with a little EQ for baritone). And: what wouldn‘t be the point at all with playing close to the mic. While sounding open and with a slight tendency to the bright side of things, the sound is smooth and silky in the top end – and stays like that even when playing with a sharp/bright sounding setup and aggressive style of playing. Trying it on some rehearsals and live, I liked the results a lot and had the feeling it sounded really good – without any EQin at all (just applying a low cut filter for Tenor/Alto). There were never any feedback issues, bleed is low and the overall-use is just plug and play without sorrows. It will give a very natural, smooth, detailed and pleasant sound while playing softly, but it will follow you easily without any shrillness when screaming high notes will come up. And its extremly well built, very small and not too expensive. Remembering the above mentioned wish-list for an ideal sax-mic for live playing (2.2), the M201TG will get nearly all points on it‘s side – it‘s a natural and fine sounding, small, versatile, rugged and affordable – in other words outstanding mic.
6.7) Røde NT5 A clear hyped high end (a look in the date sheet shows only +2dB 6-10kHz, but for my ears it sounds brighter as anticipated), but not in a too unpleasant way with a more “hifi”-type of sound – and with an amazing full low end. The high mid frequencies are somehow a little “colder“ sounding compared to the Perception 820 and the Beyer M201. In this line-up, the NT5 is clearly on the better side of things (my place two behind the M201, when thinking of the AKG Perception 820 as a not competing reference) and a serious choice for live sax in my opinion concerning sound (while being quite versatile as a nice and balanced small-diaphragm condenser mic). Bleed and feedback issues should be considered (I hadn‘t any problem using it live in the past), maybe here the M 201 will give a (clearly?) better performance. And I liked the high-mid and high frequency response of Beyer‘s M201 clearly more for it‘s “warm“ and for me more “natural“ sound. And not to forget – the NT5 is a condenser mic, so phantom power is needed, while not with the M201.
6.8) AKG Perception Tube 820 For this review the sound of the Perception 820 should be taken as a nearly uncolored reference and won‘t be rated itself. Using this mic for recording-purposes in any studio-setting with some nice outboard preamp and compressor or channel strip will give very nice results not only for the saxophone of course, but especially with vocals, and lots of other sources like flutes etc..
7) SUBJECTIVE IMPRESSIONS – while playing through any mic
At some moment I realized that the subjective feeling concerning the different mics might be different if listening to a record as opposed to the very moment while playing and listening to myself e.g. via headphones. So I played Tenor (with a balanced HR-/straight-ahead-sound) and after that Baritone through each of the mics concentrating on the hereby generated feeling of sound, playing and hearing myself. There were some important different perceptions as follows:
7.1) Shure SM58 What I already stated above applies here too: a little thin, high-midrange-heavy, but not annoyingly shrill as the SM57. Overall a tolerable feeling, and maybe one could think of it as “ok” without knowing about better alternatives.
7.2) Shure SM57 Thoughts in the first few seconds: no please not this mic, it’s as nasty here as when listening to most of the records.
7.3) Beyerdynamic M99 Here an important difference comes up: round and detailed sound up to a high top end, which gives a really nice feeling while playing – as I had while using it for sax on some stages in the past. I liked it clearly more here compared to the RE-320. Maybe with bright and aggressive playing it won’t be that nice…
7.4) Electro Voice RE-320 That quite strong hyped high-end felt a little annoying here especially with Tenor and I at once had thoughts about applying EQ and cutting down those too crisp high frequencies a little…with a bright Alto sound this would be really unpleasant……….
7.5) Sennheiser MD-421 Same thing here as written above: nasty and unnatural high midrange with missing real high end. Ok with Baritone but annoying with Tenor, especially while playing a little more aggressively. Ok, it’s better than the SM57, but if on stage I had to choose between th MD421 or simply any SM58 – I’m not sure, maybe I’d prefer the SM58…but I would clearly prefer to play live with the RE-320 or even better the M99.
7.6) Beyerdynamic M201TG Same thing here as when listening to records: I can just play and hear myself and there are no restrictions or unwanted colorations of sound coming up, and it stays like that with different style of playing and saxophones . These are exactly my experiences when playing live with it so far.
7.7) Røde NT5 Similar as above – transparent sound with fully covering the frequency spectrum of any Sax, but a little “colder” sound and for me just a little less pleasant feeling.
7.8) AKG Perception Tube 820 Really nice – as it should be. Detailed, full and natural sound with a somehow sparkling but not overly hyped top end. But it’s out of the competition of course…
8) Feedback Propensity
I added another issue here. Testing mics for live use not on any stage but in a silent “studio” type of environment is a major limitation of my review. The best sounding mic will be a no-go live when serious feedback problems come with it. To address that point I added a little test concerning feedback issues. An active speaker cabinet was placed a) in front of the mics in a 2m distance and b) in the typical floor-wedge-position on the floor a little behind and to the side of the mics (Yes I know, different directional patterns would imply different optimal positions of monitor speakers concerning angle to the mic, I didn’t address that here). Input gains of all mic-channels were carefully matched. The mic channel was activated and the master fader was pulled up with pink noise in the background until the first small spontaneous feedback would appear. That masterfader-level as an relative estimate of feedback propensity was noted.
Here the mics in order of ascending feedback propensity in position a) (“front” type of feedback):
M201TG (-5dB)
MD421 (-7dB)
NT5 (-8dB)
SM58, SM57, M99 (-9dB)
RE320 (-10dB)
And here the mics in order of ascending feedback propensity in position b) (“monitor/rear” type of feedback):
M201TG, M99 (-2dB)
NT5 (-3dB)
RE320 (-4dB)
MD421, SM58, SM57 (-6dB)
Maybe most surprisingly the NT5 didn’t do as bad as anticipated here. And the RE320 was bader compared to SM58/57 in that unrealistic “front” type of exposition, but had better feedback rejection in a (real-life) monitor-speaker-position. And the MD421 showed a superior behaviour in an (unrealistic) “front”-type of feedback-rejection, but with the test in wedge-monitor-position the backward rejection of feedback was superior with other mics. Of course there would be some more details that could be discussed: the type of feedback frequencies were different with different mics on so would be the options of reducing them by EQ (e.g. more deep-mid-feedbacks with the MD421 as compared to high-frequencies with the RE320).
But one point can be regarded as a clear result: the M201TG is (again) on the winner-side here with excellent feedback rejection regardless of the speaker-position.
9) Frequency response showed by audio-spectrum
I can’t show the data sheets of any mic here, these are available elsewhere. But I can give a visual impression of the strong differences mostly concerning high midrange and high frequencies. Pink noise was given on a KH120 active monitor speaker in front of the mics in 1m distance and recorded with all mics simultaneously. All audio-files were normalized to optimize gain matching. Spectrum analysis was generated by Presonus virtual studio live software and screenshots of every mic channel taken. Looking at that data (what isn‘t much different concerning contend compared to the mic‘s data sheets of course, but gives a nicer visual impression) helps understanding the different sonic characteristics of all these mics.
Some of my personal thoughts to that: the frequency-spectrum of both SM58/57 aren‘t that different, but sound clearly is – so there is nothing like hearing, when it‘s about sound…But I can better understand that somewhat unnatural sound of the otherwise nice M99 with it‘s clearly existing two peaks at 4/5 kHz and above 10kHz. The MD421 has a lot of high frequency response in the „air“-region 13-16kHz, what I didn‘t feel and hear while playing – maybe because of the strong emphasis in much lower regions. And when comparing e.g. the clearly uneven frequency response of the MD421 (with some different peaks and a hole near 6kHz) with the MD201‘s much more even spectrum it‘s easier to understand what I can hear. I think the point why the MD201 wins in my ears concerning sound is the very even response over the very most parts of the mid and high frequencies with a just small boost at the very top frequencies 13-16kHz (what will give the sound an „airy“ attitude, and that‘s for a dynamic mic surprisingly high situated and really nice).
10) MOST INTERESTING MISSING CONTENDERS As I mentioned above, the strongest weakness of this review is the absence of some other mics of real interest. What could be expected from the most interesting contenders missing here?
10.1) Sennheiser MD-441: I’m trying to get this one. Very flat and wide frequency response and thought of as one of the very best dynamic mics ever built – nearly unchanged in a long time and a real classic design. It’s really high price when bought new is a serious limit for broader use, otherwise it should be among the very best choices available. As a drawback it‘s quite big and it‘s proprietary mounting is a special and not always liked thing. It would be of great interest to hear how the MD441 would compare especially to the much cheaper and smaller Beyer M201TG.
10.2) Electro Voice RE-20: This is by many people thought of as one of the very best dynamic mics ever. More flat frequency response compared to the RE-320, more expensive, lower output. I think especially for brighter sounding tenor and alto sax players this will beat the RE-320 hands down, for some darker sax sound or baritone the RE-320 could have its own charm. The RE-20 will be the clearly better option for brighter instruments like hard blown trumpet. Some audio technicians would like to have both of them in their case. The downside is it‘s price and it‘s pure size as the RE-320.
10.3) Electro Voice N/D 468: Marc Mommaas found it to be a good choice in the class of dynamic mics and better/more natural sounding than the EV RE-320 and Beyer M-99. So this should be a really interesting mic. But: the data sheet shows a more uneven mid- to high frequency response compared to the Beyerdynamic M 201 TG, so I don’t think it would outpace the M 201 concerning sound. But of course you never know without comparing head-to-head. I have to mention it’s special design (made for drum use to allow easy angle adjustment) with a moving head and exposed cable. This maybe isn‘t everybody‘s darling – while the M201TG looks and feels nearly indestructible. It‘s size is clearly above the M201TG and so it might not be that best friend to stay always with you in your sax case.
10.4) Shure SM 7B: This mic should be thought of as sharing one class of mics with the RE-20, RE-320 and Beyer M-99. All of them are large diaphragm dynamic mics tailored to vocal/broadcast use, but also very good choices for a lot of different things at studio or live. Some famous vocal studio recordings (among them as it‘s stated vocal tracks of Michael Jackson and Stevie Wonder) were done with the SM 7B. The downside is its pure size (a no-go for your sax case) and that special mounting mechanism. Concerning sound this might be among the very best choices, but this has to be checked out before judging – I simply don’t know. Over all especially when looking at that big-size problem, I can‘t imagine this will outpace the M201TG overall.
11) LIMITATIONS OF MY SHOOTOUT
11.1) It‘s only me hereplaying some simple short licks. Some really good and outstanding sax-playing would give even better impressions to the distinct mic-differences.
11.2) I compared only a few mics. Sorry for that and see above.
11.3) I didn‘t show off-axis and close-distance behaviour. Moving round the mic in front of the sax (when doing intentional called “mic-work“, when done accidentally called “off-axis-issues“) will alter the sound – in a different way with different mics. Hard to examine with a simultaneous recording with fixed distance and angle as done here.
11.4) I didn‘t check feedback issues here. The best sounding mic will really let you down (and with that be useless for live applications) when it‘s prone to feedback even at low monitor sound levels. Feedback affinity will be of growing relevance with rising sound levels and powerful monitoring speaker systems (don‘t bring your large diaphragm condenser mic to a rock stage for sax playing). But: the M201TG was a great performer concerning that point in many live-experience until now (as were the EV-RE320 and the M99) and I think it holds easily a place at the top end.
11.5) I didn‘t check bleed propensity. The sound tech will hate you for using your special personal mic, when it‘s going to catch the drums and cymbals nearly as loud as the dedicated overhead mics do (especially when you‘ll do a step to the side talking to the piano player – leaving just a little air between your sax mic and the drum kit). So strong bleed might be a knock-out criterion for live use, when loud stages could be on the agenda. Dynamic mics are generally thought to be superior to condenser-type mics in that point. Again, mics like the M201TG, RE-320, RE-20, N/D468 and M99 should give good or superior results.
So it‘s obvious: there are at least 6 points, where the tested mics (and any other mic) could behave in a special – not always anticipated – way: there is really nothing, what could replace the ultimate measure when searching for “the best“ mic for sax live (as it is for all other scopes of mic-applications): take the mic and check it out yourself – at home AND in some different live settings. If you carefully considered pre-selection it will facilitate that by far, save a lot of money (I know what I‘m talking about) and clearly improve results.
12) FINAL VERDICT So now arriving at the end of the review, I can share my personal rating when searching for a stand-mounted mic for playing sax live (and large-diaphragm-condenser mics and ribbon mics won‘t be the choice (look above) and I had to ignore the Sennheiser MD441, the EV RE-20, the EV N/D468 and the Shure SM7B) and I had to choose only among the mics reviewed here:
Shure SM57: the loser – unnatural high-midrange-heavy sound, very annoying when playing with a bright sax sound. Shure SM58: a little less annoying compared to the SM57, but still bad. Sennheiser MD421: unnatural high-midrange heavy, overall superior to the Shure SM57/58, but inferior to the Beyer M99. Annoying response with bright (e.g. Alto-) Sax playing, ok for Baritone. Beyerdynamic M99: unnatural highmid-high transition but fine high frequency response and detail retrieval. With especially any darker sounding Tenor-sax clearly in the “ok”-zone, but not the best overall choice for sax at all. ElectroVoice RE-320: unnatural high-frequency boost, but fine detail retrieval and a good option for Baritone and probably darker sounding Tenor players. Not suited for bright Tenor or Alto players in my opinion. Not a good overall Sax-mic. Røde NT5: balanced and detailed sound with a full frequency response and a only slightly hyped top end. Good option for any Sax (and lots of other instruments). Beyerdynamic M201TG: the clear winner of that review in many points – foremost in the most important category of sound: natural, smooth, balanced. And besides that: rugged, small, well built, not expensive.
That’s it for now and I hope there are some points of use for some of you. Maybe someday in the future I can try to give an update here about the mics that are missing. Feel free to ask or comment on this old but never ending issue.
I just finished a brand new Neffmusic book that I am very excited about. The description is below:
An inside approach to outside playing using pentatonics, chromaticism, 3-tonic systems and intervallic patterns to produce modern lines in the style of Michael Brecker and Bob Berg. Devastating Minor Lines contains 100 16th note lines written out in all 12 keys that can be used over minor tonalities. These lines give the student functional ideas that weave in and out of the tonality to produce a modern and “outside” sound.
This PDF book is 162 pages long and is written out in all 12 minor keys.
Included with this book are:
13 tracks of me playing each line in the key of D minor- I am providing these mp3’s as a resource so that you can hear how each line sounds on the tenor sax. I play many of them at different speeds.
A Play-Along in C Minor Concert-this is good sounding play along I created to get you started. I suggest marking the ones you really like in D minor and then working on your favorites in the other keys……
A 34 Minute Video Lesson-a video lesson about the book and how to best practice from it. I demonstrate the concepts using the tenor saxophone………..
This book is an excellent resource for intermediate to advanced students of jazz improvisation and will help you to develop some great modern lines that will amaze you friends and make your competition shudder………..
The lines in this book are not for the faint of heart, it will take a lot of practice and hard work to get them down. Don’t give up, stay focused and you too can master these modern devastating lines to amaze your friends, family and fellow musicians…………..
Remember, use the power and knowledge these lines give you for good, not evil. In the wrong hands these could cause severe damage and even brain trauma. Overused, and other musicians might become jealous of your “awesomeness” and you might never get called for the gig again. Used to the right degree though, and your future will be bright.
Today, I am reviewing a product called the ReedJuvinate Woodwind Reed System. As a woodwind player, you are probably already aware of what a pain reeds can be to keep and store. How do you best store them?
I’m always curious about the different ways people store their reeds when not in use. I’ve seen countless methods used to store reeds including one guy who kept them fully submerged in a jar of some mysterious cloudy liquid. (I tried this when I was in college and my reeds got so waterlogged I couldn’t even play them……… ) I’ve also tried other self made methods when I was in high school that seemed like a good idea until I opened the container and saw that all my reeds had a black greenish mold on them………Gross! Since those days, I have collected quite a few different reed cases. I have a drawer full of Selmer, Protec, Vandoren and other miscellaneous cases next to me in my desk.
ReedJuvinate Woodwind Reed System
The ReedJuvinate system caught my attention in that the description of the system describes the reeds as never drying out or warping. It also claims to preserve your reeds so that they last much longer. I have long believed that the continual cycle of wetting, drying, warping, wetting, drying, warping………. of the reeds has a negative effect on their longevity and quality so I had to give this new system a try.
The ReedJuvinate Reed System comes in an orange leak proof container that screws together securely. Inside the container, are three reed clips that are red, blue and white. These clips fit together and then fit snuggly into the orange container. There is a space in the center of the reed clips that a long triangle shaped sponge can slide into. All the pieces of the ReedJuvinate System look like common items you might find at a dollar store or Staples but I am impressed by the ingenuity and creativity of the system.
ReedJuvinate Woodwind Reed System
The ReedJuvinate can be used in two ways according to the directions that come included:
Method #1-Immersion (reeds have higher water content)
With this method you fill the ReedJuvinate container with 1/2 water and 1/2 Listerine. You then slide your reeds into the clips with the tips facing downwards and some of the base of the reed showing at the top so you can grab them and slide them out again. The reeds are always submerged in water and the Listerine kills any bacteria or mold that might be tempted grow.
Method #2-Vapour Phase (reeds have lower water content)
Insert 3 reeds into the reed holder and then fill the ReedJuvinate container with Listerine. Soak the reeds for 10 minutes and then pour out the Listerine leaving the sponge moist. Screw the cap back on. The moist sponge has more than enough moisture to keep the reeds wet inside the enclosed container.
Method #3-Steve’s Method
As I experimented with the Reedjuvinate system, I realized that my own personal preference is to have the reeds moist so they don’t warp but not soaked. I feel like when a reed is soaked it can feel sluggish and lose some of the crisp attack and highs in the sound. What I did to keep the moisture at my desired level is to take the sponge out of the container and dip it in a glass of Listerine. I then took it out and let the excess Listerine drip off the sponge before placing it back in the ReedJuvinate container. I felt like this method worked great for me and my reeds were always moist and never dried out.
ReedJuvinate Woodwind Reed System
The ReedJuvinate directions say to replace the Listerine on the sponge about once a month but I have to admit that I have gone over two months with my same first soak of Listerine. I just checked the reeds and they are still moist, flat and there is no signs of mold at all after 2 1/2 months!
What were my results with the Reejuvinate System? Well usually, I go through a reed in about 3-4 days of practicing. Sometimes less, sometimes more but on average about 3-4 days I would say. With the ReedJuvinate System I used the same reed for about 3 weeks before I moved up to Vermont last month. I think that was a record for me. That original reed is still in the case and I took it out this morning and it played just as well as it did a month ago. I am sold on this system! If I can keep my great reeds working longer then I will use it that is for sure.
The only downside I see with the system is that I can only store 3 reeds in the container. The reality though is that if you have one mouthpiece you use and 3 great reeds stored in the ReedJuvinate then you should be all set.
ReedJuvinate Woodwind Reed System
The ReedJuvinate Woodwind Reed System is a simple yet great idea. You can find out more information and purchase the system at www.ReedJuvinate.com. I hope you enjoy the system as much as I have………….
Let me know what you think when you try it out for a little while. Thanks, Steve
Here’s a recently posted masterclass by the great jazz teacher and tenor saxophone player George Garzone. I studied with George for a semester or two while at Berklee back in the mid 80’s. I remember him messing up my whole musical worldview by telling me to not tongue and stop playing licks. ( I had just spent 2 semesters studying all these bebop licks with Bill Pierce and getting my bebop articulation mastered and now George was telling me to stop all that……….WHAT!!!) Although I still tongue much more than I think Mr. Garzone would like, the lessons with him were an important stage in my development. I learned the importance of being able to let go and to start exploring more outside ideas while improvising. He also taught me a lot about playing with confidence which was huge.
Besides being a great teacher, I remember going to see George play down at the Copley Mall in Boston. I forgot the name of the restaurant/bar but I remember sitting there while George blew my mind as he wailed on standard after standard. I’d go back to Berklee that night and lock myself in the practice room trying to imitate what I had just heard! He is not only a great teacher but a true inspiration and master of a player!
Check out this masterclass if you have an hour or so to dedicate to it. There is a lot of wisdom and sage advice here. Pick out what you can understand and use. Don’t worry if some concepts are too heavy or hard to understand you can always come back to them later……………
Also, do yourself a favor and check out some of George Garzone’s recordings. I’ve always thought he has one of the most beautiful tenor sounds out there…………..
Today, I am reviewing another great mouthpiece by Phil Engleman at Phil-Tone mouthpieces. Phil Engleman is the founder of Phil-Tone mouthpieces and I have reviewed a number of his excellent mouthpieces in the past. The Equinox,the Eclipse, the Solstice, the Tribute, the Sapphire, etc…………… Phil came out with this new alto sax mouthpiece a number of months ago and asked me if I would be willing to review it. I was more than happy to and Phil sent me one to try.
Phil-Tone Rift Alto Saxophone Mouthpiece
I was intrigued by the Rift as I opened the package and examined it as it looked to have a different and unique baffle design. I have reviewed hundreds of mouthpieces over the years and seen many different baffle designs but the Rift looked to be unique. It has a high rollover baffle that rolls down and then back up slightly and then down again into the medium chamber. The shape reminds me of those slides at the water park that we all love. I was curious what effect this type of baffle might have on the sound……….
Phil-Tone Rift Alto Saxophone Mouthpiece
The Rift I received had an .081 tip opening. I picked a random Rigotti Gold 2 1/2 strong reed I had laying around, wet it, put it on the mouthpiece and tried it with an Vandoren Optimum metal ligature. The mouthpiece just smoked for me with that very first reed. It had that combination of bright power and edge with a very fat tone. I always think of Cannonball when I get into a description of tone like this. When you listen to his recordings, he had an incredible balance of brightness and edge with a big fat full sound. This is how I felt about the Rift!
The other element of sound that I really loved about the Rift is the smoothness and evenness of the notes. Fast runs and lines are as smooth as butter on the Rift. A lot is said about how effectively a player can communicate with a mouthpiece, how well he can reproduce what he imagines as he plays his horn. For me, the Rift has that quality and connection. I really felt that as I played it that I could play almost anything I imagined as I was improvising. That’s an amazing feeling to have.
Phil-Tone Rift Alto Saxophone Mouthpiece
I liked the Rift so much, after that first week of playing it I emailed Phil and asked to purchase one for myself. This was a mouthpiece I had to have in my alto case. Unfortunately, right after I got the Rift, I started having some medical issues with pinched nerves in my upper back and for the past 5 months playing the sax has been very difficult and painful. Today has been the first day in 5 months that I felt like I could actually play and enjoy it.
Phil-Tone Rift Alto Saxophone Mouthpiece
I can gets loads of power out of the Rift and the intonation is excellent. On many alto mouthpieces my Selmer Reference Alto can be a bit sharp on the midrange notes (Middle D,Eb,E,F and F#) The Rift was much easier to play these notes in tune. The tone to me is very lively and strong. The palm keys have a nice round fatness to them that balances the brightness so it doesn’t sound thin.
In comparison to other mouthpieces, I would say the Rift has more power by far than the standard off the shelf Meyer mouthpieces I have played. I would also say it has a fatter and brighter sound than a typical Meyer mouthpiece. If you are playing a Meyer and think you need more power and volume then the Rift might be a good mouthpiece to try.
The Phil-Tone Rift was a complete joy to play and I’m glad I now have it in my collection of favorite mouthpieces. If you like the sound of the clip below and the mouthpiece catches your interest then give it a try. You can contact Phil on his website at www.phil-tone.com. Tell him Steve sent you………….Great work Phil!!
Let me know what you think in the comments below. Thanks, Steve
Walter Ruckdeschel wrote a great in-depth review of 8 different stand mounted microphones that can be used for live gigs a number of months ago. I was so fascinated that I asked him if I could post his finding here for everyone to see. Walt emailed me today and said that he had just completed part 2 of this comprehensive and detailed live mic review. I am very interested in his findings and know that many of you are also so here is Part 2……
(Walter Ruckdeschel is a physician by profession. As a young man, he played violin cello and bass. Walt started playing the saxophone 25 years ago. Walt has also invested much time and energy into recording, live sound engineering and audio gear along the way………..)
For those who weant even more info and reviews on microphones, make sure you check out Marc Mommas’ mic reviews at recordinghacks.com.
SUMMIT MEETING OF DYNAMIC MICROPHONES FOR THE SAXOPHONE
1) PREFACE
While searching for a stand-mounted microphone with a combination of ideal features for live-use with saxophone I recently did a head-to-head-comparison part 1 shootout of some of my current mics. The line-up was: Shure SM58, SM57, Electro Voice RE320, Beyerdynamic M99 & M 201 TG, Sennheiser MD 421, Røde NT5 and as a sort of a “studio“-reference an AKG Perception Tube 820 large diaphragm condenser microphone. Besides important properties like ruggedness, quality of craftsmanship, size, mounting, frequency response and feedback rejection I compared the different mics with emphasis on reproducing the sound of a saxophone in the most natural way (hence avoiding too strong – if any – coloring of sound). Part 1 Microphone Shootout
As could be anticipated, the Shure SM58 and even more the SM57 could not keep pace with the other (much more expensive) contenders concerning saxophone sound reproduction. The EV RE320 gave mixed results with its strong emphasis in the high frequencies (but otherwise good performance). The EV RE320 could be wanted for dark sounding instruments but it did not give a natural sax sound in my opinion. The Beyer M99 had a clearly more even frequency response without the RE320‘s top-end-hype, but with an uneven response in the high midrange and above, resulting in a colored and not natural sound. The famous Sennheiser MD421 showed strong coloration with a marked boost in a wide range of high mid to high frequencies, resulting in a “cut-through“ type of sound – what would help putting any (e.g. darker sounding) instrument in the front of a live mix, but was far from an unbiased reproduction of the saxophone’s natural sound. There is a long-lasting reputation of the MD 421 as one of the most legendary microphones of all times, and that mainly with use on guitar amps, toms, speech, but also brass and woodwinds. So it‘s obvious: the strong coloration provided by the MD 421 is one of the central aspects of its popularity and many users choose this microphone not despite, but due to its special and biased frequency response.
As an exception in this round, was the Røde NT5. The Røde NT5 is a microphone that is not frequently used for live saxophone. It performed well and showed a quite even frequency response. This would be desirable for such small-condenser-mics with intended usage for drum overheads, choir and others (by the way: like the NT5, clip-on-microphones for sax also are mostly small-condenser-mics with focus on even frequency response as opposed to strong coloring seen with some dynamic microphones). In the end I found the NT5 to give a good reproduction of the sax sound (and surprisingly low feedback propensity), but without the feeling it would be a first or second choice regarding alternative options and preference of dynamic microphones for live use.
The Beyerdynamic M 201 TG delivered in my opinion the best combination of the most natural sound and some other strongly wanted properties like ruggedness, feedback rejection, (small) size and (affordable) price and is my permanent companion on any stage now.
While I was working on that first round of microphone comparison, I knew it would leave a lot of questions open. The biggest limitation of trying and comparing microphones for live use in a “studio“ setting is exactly that – because such a test should be done live: only then specific properties of some mics would emerge. Unfortunately, such a head-to-head-live-on-stage comparison is impossible for me at the moment so I have to make the best of the studio comparison. In order to do that, I decided to reduce another limitation of my first shoot-out generated by the unsatisfactory representation of some of the most interesting microphones for live-use with saxophone. I was happy enough to have some nice guys around here (thank you all), who provided me with their mics for this test. Out of the contenders of my first round of mic-shootout (which of course has nothing to do with shooting any mic out) I allowed only a few mics to advance to stage 2 with distinct reasons:
Sennheiser MD 421: considering its outstanding and long lasting reputation and the chance of putting it head-to-head with the MD 441.
Electro Voice RE320: to take the chance of putting it head-to-head with the EV RE20, as there is lack of such a comparison for use with saxophone.
Beyerndynamic M201TG: my personal favorite of round 1. How would that quite tiny microphone perform compared to some of the most appreciated (and much more expensive) dynamic microphones of all times?
2) THE CONTENDERS
As in round 1, I tested only stand-mounted mics. This time some of the finest choices in that field could be put together. But of course there are other options, which were not included (like e.g. the Beyerdynamic M88TG or the Electro Voice N/D 468). All microphones here share some important common features: “dynamic“ (moving coil) type of construction eliminating need for phantom power, famous and highly distinguished brands, rugged construction, high quality of manufacturing, built in Germany or in the U.S., directivity patterns to reduce feedback propensity, constructed to tolerate high sound pressure levels. Regardless off all these similarities, there are distinct differences between the microphones.
2.1) Electro Voice RE20
This is by many people thought of as one of the very best dynamic mics ever and a well-known all-time-classic. The RE20 is a used often in broadcast settings in the U.S. This microphone is a favorite for brass and sax instruments on live stages all over the world and will deliver fine results. It will take high sound pressure levels (e.g. trumpets or guitar amps) without distortion. Very well built and rugged steel housing, quite flat frequency response with a little emphasis around 8-10kHz, cardioid pickup pattern, switchable low-cut filter and that special and unique “variable D“ technology to minimize off-axis-issues and the proximity effect. The low-cut was switched off for this review. The downside is it‘s medium-high price, it‘s big size and it’s heavy weight. (You need a really solid stand). I am lucky to know a nice guy (and awesome saxophone player) who lent me his RE20 for this review – many thanks to E.K.!!
2.2) Electro Voice RE320
A few years ago, Electro Voice released the RE320 as a younger sister of the RE20 with a similar steel housing and that large diaphragm technology with Variable-D and cardiod directivity. What is different (besides the stylish black color) compared to the RE20 is: the RE320 features a neodym magnet with higher output, a contour- instead of a high-pass-switch for easy-to-go kickdrum-micing (btw with great results) and a different frequency response with a more pronounced high-boost between 5 and 10kHz (while there is only a small boost in the RE20). The mic was switched to flat (contour off) for this review. The RE320′s advantages are the higher output, the ease of use for kickdrum-micing and the lower price. And this really big and stylish mic looks cool (may-the-force-be-with-you) – while hardly fitting in any but really big sax cases and demanding a really solid stand like the RE20.
2.3) Sennheiser MD 441
Another legendary mic in that “best microphones of all times“ class is the Sennheiser MD 441. It has a very flat and wide frequency response and is thought of as one of the very best dynamic mics ever built – nearly unchanged for a long time and a real classic design like the MD 421. The MD 441 could somehow be thought of as the MD 421‘s more linear sounding sister. There were (like it is with the MD 421) some slightly different versions over the years, the later ones (labeled “U“) with XLR- connector and 5-step-lowcut. The model tested here is a MD 441-U3, which is a unique version completely black and without lowcut (tailored to live/stage use). Opposed to the MD 421’s cardiod pickup-pattern the MD 441 provides a hypercardiod and with that more focused directivity. Another special feature is an option to switch from linear to bright (what will add 2-3dB at 4-13kHz while reducing lower frequencies), originally built in to compensate attenuation of high frequencies caused by wind shield use e.g. in reportage scenarios. When starting the review I had the MD 441 switched linear, but after a while I found the bright setting to be more compelling, and I assume most saxophone (and flute) players would choose that for live playing. All following audio and frequency data are labeled corresponding to the MD 441‘s setting. As a drawback this microphone is quite big and the older models proprietary mounting is a special and not always liked thing (the newer models come with a more sturdy and flexible black plastic mounting as opposed to the older translucent bracket). The MD 441‘s really high price when bought new is a serious limit for broader use, otherwise it should be among the very best choices available. This mic was a loan from a nice guy, great saxophone and outstanding flute player – many thanks to M.R.!!
2.4) Sennheiser MD 421 II
One of the highest rated dynamic mics ever with that special razor-look. A very first choice for many people on toms, but also for brass, guitar cabinets, speech and woodwinds. The mic itself is made in Germany and is of outstanding build quality with a very rugged construction. It has 5-step bass-rolloff-switch as a nice feature to attenuate the proximity-effect when used for speech/vocals in close distance. The switch was off for this review. The mic is medium-big and as a clear downside has that strange proprietary stand mounting, that will wear off with the years and become unstable. The MD 421 won‘t fit any standard-type of stand mounting. When looking at the data-sheet: cardiod directivity pattern, full bass response down to 80Hz, very even response from 100 to 1000Hz, followed by a marked and wide high-frequency boost slowly staring early at 1,5kHz with a more steep rising at 3-4kHz approaching a peak of +8dB around 4,5-5kHz, above that a smaller boost of 4-5dB until nearly 15kHz – looks like a strongly coloring and bright sounding mic – and that‘s exactly what it sounds like. I was allowed to borrow this microphone from a friend and great drummer – many thanks to E.R.!!
2.5) Beyerdynamic M 201 TG
A pencil-style microphone with a very even frequency response between 100Hz and 6-7kHz and an only a slight boost (maximum 4dB) in the top region (10kHz). Very compact (but a little bigger compared to most other pencil-style mics), rugged all-metal-construction, perfect manufacturing, small enough to fit in virtually any sax case and not too expensive. Over the years there was a change concerning design, and the current model (M 201 TG for “touring gear“) features an even more rugged housing compared to its predecessor 201 N/C. For audio technicians it is a well-known all round dynamic mic with very good results on a wide range of instruments like snare drum, overheads, percussion, piano, string instruments, woodwinds, amps and quite a number of other applications. This small microphone will excel in cramped conditions and when a decent setup is wanted. Some audio technicians would choose a Beyer 201 to use for virtually any audio source when only one type of microphone would be allowed. While I liked the M 201 TG most in my first shootout, I was eager to see (and hear), how this little microphone would perform in a round of the most serious contenders…………
3) THE MIC-SHOOTOUT SETUP
First, all these mics (see below) were mounted in stands as near to each other as possible, pointing to a virtual spot where I would play the sax. To minimize off axis issues with that setup, I stayed away from the mics about 20-25cm (which is not always the way you’d use your mic in louder live situations, but for this test the best way to do it. When playing “glued“ to the mic, you would get the proximity effect = better low frequency response in most cases).
Signal flow was directly from the mics into my Presonus Studiolive 16.4.2 digital mixing console, where the gain settings were carefully balanced to ensure matching audio levels for all channels as possible. Directly after the on- board mic preamps and A/D-conversion signal flow was without any further processing via firewire into Cubase 6.5 (Mac OS). In Cubase there was a different track for each mic, after recording the audio files some tracks were normalized to correct for small gain differences. No EQ was applied to any sax track.
4) FREQUENCY RESPONSE SHOWN BY AUDIO-SPECTRUM
I can’t show the data sheets of any mic here, these are available elsewhere. But I can give a visual impression of the sometimes strong differences mostly concerning high midrange and high frequencies. Pink noise was given on a KH120 active monitor speaker (with an of course not absolutely even, but close to that frequency response) in front of the mics in 50cm distance and recorded with all mics simultaneously. All audio-files were normalized to optimize gain matching. Spectrum analysis was generated by Presonus virtual studio live software and screenshots of every mic channel taken. Looking at these pictures helps to understand the different sonic characteristics of all these mics. Of course some minor coloring caused by the speaker system is included here, but in exactly the same fashion for all microphones.
Spectrum Analysis
Some of my personal thoughts to that:
EV RE20 shows a quite even frequency response all over the midrange (for a natural sax sound, this is important) with a little drop at 4-5kHz and a moderate emphasis at 8-10kHz – the mic data sheets shows an only subtle emphasis here with +1-2dB. So the RE20 should sound very even and natural with just a little “hifi“ type of brightening up.
EV RE320 is quite similar until 4kHz, but there is a much earlier starting, wider and stronger (+4-5dB as stated in the data sheet) high frequency boost, which should result in a more biting sound and will change important frequency regions of any saxophone‘s sound.
MD 441 switched to “neutral“ is just that: very close to a perfectly even frequency response up to 10kHz with a little lack of response 10-13kHz, but the strongest low end response of all mics here. When switched to “bright“ a significant (+2-3dB as stated in the data sheet) and even boost at 4-13kHz comes up with a small attenuation of low frequency response.
MD 421 has a strong (maximum +6-8dB as stated in the data sheet) boost at 4-5 and again at 7-8kHz. So it should give the most biting sound of all microphones here.
M 201 TG shows – very similar to the MD 441 – a quite even response up to 7kHz, while giving a little more midrange-focus at 2-4,5kHz, followed by a very subtle high frequency boost at 9-15kHz (+2dB as stated in the data sheet). The MD 441 switched to “bright“ won‘t give a similar response with a high frequency boost starting much earlier at 4kHz.
When looking to these frequency data and searching for a microphone with a natural reproduction of the saxophone‘s sound, the MD 441 switched to “neutral“ should give the most uncolored and natural sound. The RE20 and the M 201 TG both should give a very natural sound without any significant coloring in the sensitive high mid to high range 4-6,4kHz, while the RE20 will add some clear high frequency emphasis resulting in a brighter sound. The M 201 TG with it‘s slightly stronger midrange and much smaller and higher high frequency boost should sound “warmer“ and less bright – but still a little brighter compared to the MD 441 in neutral setting. Both the RE20 and the M 201 TG should – compared to the MD 441 switched to neutral – allow for just a little better assertiveness and definition on any live stage. The MD 441 switched to “bright“ will expand that moderate high frequency emphasis downwards to the (very) high midrange. The RE320 will give even more bite with its stronger boost in a very similar and wide frequency range, while the MD 421 with its marked and early starting boost will result in the most marked bite of all mics reviewed here and a strongly colored “cut-through“ type of sound. So with just thinking about this data, I would expect the RE20, the M 201 TG and the MD 441 switched to “bright“ to be my favorite mics for live saxophone……..
5) FREQUENCY SPECTRUM OF THE SAXOPHONE
When talking about the frequency response of any microphone – especially concerning really low or high frequencies – some interest in the frequency spectrum delivered by the audio source/instrument should come up. There are some suggestions and resources available (e.g. on the internet) on that issue.
I won‘t reproduce them here, as I decided for a more straightforward approach: I put some audio-clips with baritone, tenor and alto saxophone in my spectrum analyzer software (Presonus Virtual Studio live) and these are the results:
Two of my thoughts here:
1) the Baritone sax starting at around 65Hz could lack fullness with some microphones with a”low cut“ frequency response as e.g. Shure’s SM57 and SM58. Tenor and Alto Sax won’t need such deep frequency power.
2) with some minor differences between the different saxophones and of course type of playing there are high frequencies (harmonics) present up to more than 13kHz: detailed high frequency reproduction until far above 10kHz is urgently needed for any mic for saxophone.
6) LOW FREQUENCY RESPONSE – Baritone Sax special issue
The low frequency reproduction will be of special interest for baritone saxophone playing. So I added a special little analysis here. There was simply a low Bb (68Hz) on baritone recorded with all mics simultaneously and the audio-files put in some frequency analysis software (Steinberg Wavelab Elements).
The results: two of the five microphones had a clearly stronger reproduction of the basic frequency of 68Hz: RE20 and MD 441 (btw while switched to bright). The weakest low frequency reproduction was seen with the RE320 with a significant 5dB attenuation at the fundamental frequency. The MD 421 and M 201 TG both gave more low frequency reproduction, but didn‘t reach the RE20 and MD 441. These measurements were consistent with the subjective listening experience when playing through an active speaker cabinet. On a loud stage with maybe activated low cut filter in the mixing desk possibly that won‘t be of real importance. But: when the full and natural sound of a baritone saxophone would be wanted and e.g. live recording would take place with a direct-out (usually pre-eq directly after the mic-preamp), this could really matter and the clearly fuller sound of the RE20 and MD 441 could be superior for Baritone saxophone.
7) AUDIO FILES
In Round 1 Sax Dry of the shootout I played some mostly unrelated short phrases with Tenor and Baritone Sax, recorded at the same time with all mics placed very close to each other as written. Since the MD441 will sound really different when switched to “bright“, I decided to record two rounds – “sax dry 1“ with the MD441 normal, “sax dry 2“ with the MD441 switched to “bright“. Don’t let the absence of flowing sax playing disturb you – that’s not the point here. For the very best comparison conditions, load the files to different tracks into any DAW, loop one single phrase and switch between the tracks. Be sure to use good speakers (e.g. studio monitors) or high quality headphones. That’s how you’ll get the best listening conditions to compare the (sometimes big!) differences in detail.
In another part I played – again simultaneously recorded as above – Tenor and Baritone Sax on a rhythm changes tune (labeled “RC”) and Alto Sax on a more funky tune to listen to the differences between these mics in a “band“ type context of playing. For these playback-recordings, some tube-type compression and reverb was applied (of course in exactly the same way) to all Sax-tracks – as it would happen in real life (but again no EQ). (The M201TG in the “funky alto sax“ contest sounds a little dull to my ears and maybe I generated some off-axis problems while playing too close to the mics here.)
(*all clips by Walt Ruckdeschel)
Round 1 Sax Dry: (MD 441 on normal setting) *all clips by Walt Ruckdeschel
1. Electro Voice RE-20 Sax Dry
2. Electro Voice RE-320 Sax Dry
3. Sennheiser MD-421 Sax Dry
4. Sennheiser MD-441 Sax Dry (Normal)
5. BeyerDynamic M201TG Sax Dry
Round 2 Sax Dry: (MD 441 on “Bright” setting) *all clips by Walt Ruckdeschel
1. Electro Voice RE-20 Sax Dry 2
2. Electro Voice RE-320 Sax Dry 2
3. Sennheiser MD-421 Sax Dry 2
4. Sennheiser MD-441 Sax Dry 2 (Bright)
5. BeyerDynamic M201TG Sax Dry 2
Round 2 Funky Alto Sax: *all clips by Walt Ruckdeschel
1. Electro Voice RE-20 Funky Alto
2. Electro Voice RE-320 Funky Alto
3. Sennheiser MD-421 Funky Alto
4. Sennheiser MD-441 Funky Alto
5. BeyerDynamic M201TG Funky Alto
Round 3 Tenor Sax on Rhythm Changes: *all clips by Walt Ruckdeschel
1. Electro Voice RE-20 Tenor Sax on Rhythm Changes
2. Electro Voice RE-320 Tenor Sax on Rhythm Changes
3. Sennheiser MD-421 Tenor Sax on Rhythm Changes
4. Sennheiser MD-441 Tenor Sax on Rhythm Changes
5. BeyerDynamic M201TG Tenor Sax on Rhythm Changes
Round 4 Baritone Sax on Rhythm Changes: *all clips by Walt Ruckdeschel
1. Electro Voice RE20 Baritone Sax on Rhythm Changes
2. EV RE-320 Baritone Sax on Rhythm Changes
3. Sennheiser MD-421 Baritone Sax on Rhythm Changes
4. Sennheiser MD-441 Baritone Sax on Rhythm Changes
5. BeyerDynamic M201TG Baritone Sax on Rhythm Changes
*all clips by Walt Ruckdeschel
8) THE RESULTS – by listening to the recordings
Of course the following thoughts are my very personal thoughts – You might have quite different impressions and thoughts (and that’s what it’s all about here: Please listen and build your own thoughts and opinions). As the criterion of utmost importance I concentrated on what I would rate as the most natural sound of the saxophone.
8.1) Electro Voice RE20
A full and detailed sound with a noticeable high range emphasis – but while delivering some “brightening up“ the core of sound stays neutral and the overall impression is a quite natural sound with some nice and airy brightness without annoying “cut“ or shrillness.
8.2) Electro Voice RE320
A detailed sound with a strong sparkling high end – a clearly noticeable and unnatural high-boost. Compared to the RE20, the RE320 has some lack of low frequency response and a more cutting high end and with that a clearly less natural sound. I had the word “metallic“ in my mind when thinking about it’s character of sound.
8.3) Sennheiser MD 441
In neutral setting, the sound is all about that – neutral. I think especially it’s fullness – while giving detailed mid and high range without any coloration or high range hype – is very nice. Compared to the M201TG, more the RE20 and even more the RE320 and MD421, there is no high frequency emphasis at all. Switched to “bright“ things change quite a bit with a little thinner and clearly brighter sound, but without getting in the “bite“ zone.
8.4) Sennheiser MD 421
Among all contenders, the MD421 was the least neutral sounding microphone, and from that point of view I didn’t like it overall. There were some aspects where I could imagine to produce fine results with some EQ. But if I had to choose only one of the mics reviewed here for recording saxophone – I wouldn’t use the MD421 considering the other much more neutral sounding mics. Of course that won’t cut down it’s well known applications for studio-recording (e.g. toms, guitar cabs) and live applications (e.g. toms, guitar cabs, trombone).
8.5) Beyerdynamic M 201 TG
The data-sheet shows a wide and quite even frequency response with a only slight – and for a dynamic mic quite high (round and above 10kHz in the pixie-dust-region) – boost. And that’s what it sounds like – very natural, with a slightly emphasized high end but never becoming shrill or unnatural. There’s some lack of fullness/low frequencies compared to the RE20 and even more the MD441 switched neutral, but on the other side the M201TG is a little brighter as the MD441 switched neutral with a somewhat “airy“ sound and I like it’s high end more compared to the MD441 switched to “bright“.
9) SUBJECTIVE IMPRESSIONS – while playing through any mic!
The subjective feeling concerning the different microphones might be different when listening to a record as opposed to the very moment while playing and listening to oneself via headphones or an active speaker cabinet. So I played tenor and baritone sax through each of the mics concentrating on the hereby generated feeling of sound, playing and hearing myself. There were some important different perceptions as follows:
9.1) Electro Voice RE20
Full, balanced, well defined sound with a moderate and pleasant high frequency emphasis. It gave me a very confident feeling of a natural, full and well defined sax sound with a nice “airy“ high end.
9.2) Electro Voice RE320
Compared to the RE20: a clearly thinner sound with some lack of fullness while giving more (and lower starting) high frequency emphasis. I didn‘t like that with tenor sax, but with baritone it gave a nice cutting sound. But: in the end and overall I liked the RE20 more for its fullness, balanced sound and more pleasant character of high frequencies. I don‘t know how it would be on any loud stage. I recognized a little more tendency to high frequency feedback with the RE320 compared to the other mics.
9.3) Sennheiser MD 441
Switched to neutral, this mic was all about that: balanced, even response from a full bottom to the top. In a silent setting with only me playing sax I liked that a lot, but I think the “bright“ setting would give more definition in a live-setting especially on louder stages and many players would prefer that. Switched to bright, a little low frequency punch was lost and a wide range of high frequencies emphasized, while staying balanced. Compared to the RE20, I couldn‘t rate one of the two as a winner: both sounded great and gave a balanced, detailed and natural sax-sound with some differences concerning high range emphasis.
9.4) Sennheiser MD 421
As it was anticipated, the MD421 was the brightest sounding of all mics here. It gave clearly more bite than every other mic with a focus in the lower high frequencies, and it sounded clearly less full compared to the RE20 and MD441. In my silent “studio“ setting, I liked it clearly less compared to all other mics with tenor (especially with bright/contemporary style of playing) and also with baritone, but on a loud stage this could change and its strong cut-through properties might be wanted – but I would prefer the RE20, MD441 and M201TG for settings, where a more natural sax sound would be wanted. Compared to the RE320, the type of bite is a little different – the MD421 gives more emphasis starting in the high midrange into lower high frequencies with a really “biting“ sound, while the RE320 has a more neutral midrange and high midrange with a high range emphasis I would describe as “crisp“ or “sharp“. Both are bright sounding mics, comparing and rating them is a matter of taste.
9.5) Beyerdynamic M 201 TG
It gave a nice feeling of a natural sax sound, but there were some distinct differences compared to the RE20 and MD441: the M201TG has some less fullness and a little more midrange emphasis, resulting in a “warm“ – but a little thinner – type of sound, compared to the RE20 (and the MD441 switched to bright) with less high frequency emphasis. The MD441 switched to neutral gave a fuller, more “solid“ sound. I liked the M201TG here as I do when I use it live, but if I could choose I would prefer the RE20 and MD441.
10) LIMITATIONS OF MY SHOOTOUT
10.1) It‘s a test (only) in a “studio“-setting with microphones that will be used live in many (but not all) cases. Some details of performance and distinct differences will emerge in a different way only in a live-setting on any stage, and in that case even more aspects will matter: style of music, loudness‚ monitor system, individual saxophone-sound and personal taste.
10.2) It‘s only me here playing some simple short licks. Some really good and outstanding sax-playing would give even better impressions to the distinct mic differences.
10.3) I didn‘t show off-axis behavior. Moving round the mic in front of the sax (when doing intentional called “mic-work“, when done accidentally called “off-axis-issues“) will alter the sound – in a different way with different mics. Hard to examine with a simultaneous recording with fixed distance and angle as done here.
10.4) I didn‘t check feedback issues here under “stage“-conditions. The best sounding mic will really let you down (and with that be useless for live applications) when it‘s prone to feedback even at low monitor sound levels. Feedback affinity will be of growing relevance with rising sound levels and powerful monitor speaker systems (don‘t bring your large diaphragm condenser mic to a rock stage for sax playing……). But: all the mics reviewed here should perform quite well concerning feedback issues. The MD441’s and M201TG tight pickup patterns could give extra advantages in some situations. And especially the MD441 has a high reputation concerning very low feedback propensity.
10.5) I didn‘t check bleed propensity. The sound tech will hate you for using your special personal mic, when it‘s going to catch the drums and cymbals nearly as loud as the dedicated overhead mics do (especially when you‘ll do a step to the side talking to the piano player – leaving just a little air between your sax mic and the drum kit). So strong bleed might be a knock-out criterion for live use, when loud stages could be on the agenda. Dynamic mics are generally thought to be superior to condenser-type mics in that point and all mics tested here should give good or superior results.
So it‘s obvious: there are at least 5 points, where the tested mics (and any other mic) could behave in a special – not always anticipated – way: there is really nothing, what could replace the ultimate measure when searching for “the best“ mic for live sax (as it is for all other scopes of mic-applications): take the mic and check it out yourself – at home AND in some different live settings. A carefully considered pre-selection could facilitate that by far, save a lot of money and improve results.
11) FINAL VERDICT
Well before starting this review, there was no doubt about the superior quality and reputation of all the microphones tested here. So this review was more about looking for differences and special properties of the different contenders, not an assessment of quality-aspects. Versatility is one of the major features of quality of all these microphones included here. All of them will perform fine in various situations and could be used for many different settings and instruments. But of course, there are special characteristics and differences, which could result in preferential use of any microphone for distinct conditions: all of them are good, but some are even better for special purposes. And sometimes – or always – it will be a matter of personal taste…
My personal thoughts after finishing that comparison:
Sennheiser MD 421: unnatural high-mid- and high range heavy. The cutting sound of the MD421 will be well appreciated live for many instruments, and it holds it’s well-earned place in studios as a first choice for recording toms and guitar-amps – and on any live stage for placing lots of instruments in front of the mix, when a cutting type of sound is wanted. But reproducing a natural sound of the saxophone is by far not the mission here. I would not want to play some acoustic/jazz type of gig using the MD421. I could imagine nice results not only live for darker instruments like trombone, but there are much better choices for recording saxophone in studio-settings.
Sennheiser MD 441: balanced, full and natural sound – the most neutral of all mics here. Switched to “bright“ some wide and nice high range emphasis, what might be loved e.g. by flute-players. With the “bright“ switch it’s like two microphones in one package. Understandably it holds it’s well-earned place as a first choice when it comes to sax and flutes on any live-stage, but it might be used for lots of other purposes and recording as well (while of course there are lots of alternative options in studio settings). And there are musicians loving it’s unique retro-design…
Electro Voice RE20: balanced, full and natural sound with a nice sparkling high end. Compared to the MD441 neutral it’s clearly brighter (in a kind way), and I liked it’s high range more compared to the MD441 switched to “bright“ (a matter of taste of course). The RE20 has it all: full bottom, natural body of sound and a crisp but not too sharp high end. Understandably it holds it’s well earned place as a first choice when it comes to sax on any live-stage, but it might be used for lots of other purposes and recording as well (while of course there are lots of alternative options in studio settings).
ElectroVoice RE320: unnatural high-frequency boost, and with that delivering a sound far from neutral, but with strong “brightening-up“. This could be wanted for instruments like e.g. baritone saxophone or trombones. The EQ- switch allows plug-and-play kickdrum-micing with great results. Considering some alternative options, I wouldn’t rate the RE320 as a first choice for an every-day saxophone microphone. But it’s a great microphone for many purposes and among them some special saxophone-applications on live stages.
Beyerdynamic M 201 TG: my personal winner of part one of my shootout of stand mounted microphones for saxophone live could hold up quite well in this hard competition with much bigger and more expensive contenders. It delivers a natural, smooth and balanced sound with just a little amount of nice and airy high range emphasis. Compared to the RE20 and MD441 it sounds like it looks – thinner with some lack of low frequencies. The MD441 is clearly fuller when switched neutral, but a little more biting when switched to “bright“.
Not surprisingly, the M201TG won’t be number one on the winner’s podium in such a competition, but considering it’s fairly moderate price, smallness, ruggedness and great versatility – it keeps it’s place in my sax-case as my number one mic-to-go. When there would be the option to have a RE20 or MD441 in front of me, I would love to compare them side-by-side with the M201TG and probably prefer one of them on that stage. When playing baritone sax in a funk/soul-band on a loud stage, I’d love to give the MD421 or RE320 a try.
12) LAST WORDS
After writing this review: when I would go shopping for only one microphone for playing saxophone live and size and weight won’t be the problem: I’d choose between the RE20 and the MD441. Considering the RE20’s much lower price when bought new and it’s very good plug-and-play (while the MD441 has these two different options of sound…) sound for sax, this would be my personal first choice among all the mics I reviewed in part one and two. Considering all these aforementioned points, I would – if I should – rate the RE20 as “the best“ dynamic microphone for saxophone so far. But a rating like “the best“ should be avoided, because all these mics here are great for different purposes, situations and musicians.
Considering the RE20’s size and weight, the M201TG stays in my sax-case… and the best thing to have would be a mic case with all the microphones tested here, and preferably more than one M201TG considering it’s versatility.
That’s it so far, and I‘m deeply grateful that I had the chance to get all these microphones simultaneously on my desk (again many thanks to some friends). I hope some points will be of use for somebody. And it would be terrific to add a stage 3 comparison concerning clip-on-microphones for saxophone playing sometimes in the future….
Today, I am reviewing my third hard rubber tenor saxophone mouthpiece from Ken Okutsu in Japan. It is the Traditional model and has a 7 tip opening which is .104. ( I call it a 7* tip in the recordings below because .104 is close to the traditional 7* size). I already reviewed my first two Okutsu mouthpiece which were the High Baffle Model and the Tradition II Model.
Ken Okutsu Traditional Tenor Sax Mouthpiece
Here is the description and features from the Okutsu website:
Features
Medium rollover baffle and large chamber
The beautiful vintage sound.
All mouthpieces are crafted by CNC machinery for incredible accuracy and finished by hand carefully.
Concave Table. It makes the tone full and rich. The practical life span of reeds is lengthened.
Material is the highest quality(hard rubber).
Ken Okutsu Traditional Tenor Sax Mouthpiece
The Okutsu mouthpieces are hard rubber and come in a protective plastic case. Within the case they are wrapped in a black velvet bag. I received three tenor mouthpieces and one alto mouthpiece from Mr. Okutsu. The tenor mouthpieces are the Traditional model, the Traditional II model and the High Baffle model. I kind of like how simplistic and straight forward the model names are. The Traditional model looks to the darkest, then the Traditional II looks to have a slightly higher rollover baffle. Finally, the High Baffle model has the highest baffle as the name implies.
The mouthpieces look good to my eye. The hard rubber is shiny and without any imperfections. The gold engraving is neat and clean. The rails, tip rail, table and baffle look very well crafted and even.
Ken Okutsu Traditional Tenor Sax Mouthpiece
The Traditional model was very reed friendly to me. I had no trouble trying different reeds on it and all the reeds passed the suction test when first put on and then later after playing awhile. The Okutsu mouthpieces have a concave table which many player’s and mouthpiece manufactures have preferred over the years. In recent years, it seems like I am getting a lot of mouthpiece with flat tables instead of concave. Now that I’m writing this review, I am curious as to what the differences are between the two table in regard to playability, response and sound……….In the Okutsu bullet points above, the Concave table is listed as making the tone full and rich and increasing the life of reeds………….Interesting!
Ken Okutsu Traditional Tenor Mouthpiece
I thought the Ken Okutsu Traditional tenor sax mouthpiece played great although after playing the Traditional II all day yesterday, the Traditional didn’t at first feel powerful to me. That happens a lot to players that are used to a higher baffle mouthpiece, they try a lower baffled piece and it seems like it isn’t powerful or is dead. Many times the issue is that the player is used to a weaker and smaller airstream. They didn’t have to blow as hard and as much with the higher baffle and became used to that air stream. The solution is to spend time on the new mouthpiece to readajust to the air requirements of the new mouthpiece. The Traditional mouthpiece became very powerful and full sounding as I played it for about half an hour. (In fact, I just took a break from typing and played my tenor with the mouthpiece still on it and the sound is huge and powerful……now I can’t believe my first impression was that it had no power!) I’m now used to the Traditional model and going back to the Traditional II or the High Baffle Model will be an adjustment for me probably.
Although this Tradition Model has a lower roll over baffle than the Traditional II I would still consider it a medium baffled mouthpiece. You can see in the picture below how it still has a pretty substantial baffle to it.
The Okutsu Traditional model had a nice focused core to the sound like the Traditional II but it is slightly darker and more spread to my ears. The low notes are fatter I think and high notes have less of that brassy ring I noticed in the Traditional II and High Baffle models. I would say the tone was still in the middle of the dark to bright spectrum like the Traditional II but this mouthpiece leaned a little further to the dark side. That being said, if I blew harder and made my bottom lip flatter and harder against the reed, I could still get a nice bright edge from this mouthpiece when I wanted. Lay back a tad and soften up the bottom lip and it has a great vintage hard rubber Otto Link vibe to it.
One aspect I loved about all three Okutsu saxophone mouthpieces is their smooth buttery sound. Even though each mouthpiece could get brighter to varying degrees, I felt like the tone still had a soft edge to it that I really liked. All three mouthpiece felt as smooth as “butter” when playing fast throughout the range of the horn.
Ken Okutsu Traditional Tenor Sax Mouthpiece
The Ken Okutsu Traditional Tenor Saxophone Mouthpiece was great to play. This is another great mouthpiece for players who want the best of both worlds. It’s not as bright as the Okutsu High Baffle and Traditional II mouthpieces I reviewed earlier but it still has plenty of power when you blow hard. I would suggest this mouthpiece to guys who love hard rubber and love playing jazz but maybe have to delve into the more pop stuff once in awhile. If you play and even balance of pop and jazz you could go with the Traditional II and if you play mostly pop with not much jazz maybe the High Baffle model. That is just my opinion though, if you like a brighter kind of jazz sound like Brecker playing a standard then I think the High Baffle model could get you in that ballpark also………….
Every time I review a bunch of mouthpiece from the same maker I always have some readers email me and ask “…..but which one is the best, or which is your favorite of the three?” In this case I really can’t answer that question. Seriously, when I first received the mouthpieces I played all three and immediately loved the High Baffle model. When I was reviewing it I thought, this is my favorite of the three. Then when I was reviewing the Traditional II model I thought the same thing. Now today I played the Traditional and thought the exact same thing. I would hate to be in a store trying to decide which of these to buy!! I’d be in there for hours!!
If you like the sound of the clip below and the mouthpiece catches your interest then please contact Ken Okutsu and give it a try. You can contact Mr. Okutsu at his website at Okutsumouthpieces.com. Tell him Steve sent you………….Great work Mr. Okutsu!!
Let me know what you think in the comments below. Thanks, Steve
I decided to offer a free video lesson on my book “Approach Note Velocity Volume 1 & 2” for everyone. I have sold many of these books over the years and really want to make sure that everyone is getting the most out of them that they can. You can consider this an “overview” lesson on the book. (This is a new lesson and different than the Overview lesson found in the member’s area) I cover topics such as:
What approach notes are
Why they sound good
How to practice them
How to use them
Demonstrating different lines over a standard
How to get the most out of the book
When I started recording the lesson I had the intention to make it a quick lesson………but wouldn’t you know that once I got into it and started teaching it turned into a 27 minute lesson…………….You will need my Approach Note Velocity Volume 1 & 2 to get the most out of this video lesson. (PDF Versions to download or the printed version)
I demonstrate using the material over “There is No Greater Love” and a standard ii7-V7-I-VI7 progression so you can hear how to use the lines in context……….
Approach Note Velocity Overview Lesson Part 1
Approach Note Velocity Overview Lesson Part 2
And here’s a live clip where I’m using some of the Approach Note Patterns on a pop solo:
Approach Note Solo on Pop Tune
I hope you enjoy the lesson and find it useful. There are 550+ more lessons in my Neffmusic store on a variety of subjects to check out. If this lesson stirs your curiosity in the Approach Note Books you can get them below:
Today I am sharing a transposed part to a solo transcription done by Joey Lieber (pianist). Joey shared this tenor saxophone transcription on Facebook in C last week and I wanted to transpose it to Bb for tenor saxophone ASAP as this was a very cool solo……..
This transcription is of a solo that Chad Lefkowitz-Brown played over the changes to Dexterity. Here is the original video of the solo Lefkowitz-Brown Dexterity Solo. There is a group on Facebook called “Jam of the Week” and Chad posts a lot of acapella solos on there over common jazz standards. I have discovered some great young players around the world on many instruments by checking out some of the videos in this group. It is very cool!!
There is even a young women who walks back and forth during the video and Chad’s lines just keep flowing………very focused player!
Chad Lefkowitz-Brown
Chad Lefkowitz-Brown is one of the new young lions out there leading the way with his unique style and versatility. You can checkout his website for more information about him as well as some great recordings and videos. Thanks again to Joey Lieber for doing the original transcription and sharing it with all of us. Enjoy!
This is a great video of Mark Russo demonstrating different concepts on a Cannonball alto and tenor saxophone. Mark was one of the first professional saxophone players I ever heard in concert. I was in high school and went to the Syracuse Jazz Festival and a group called the Yellowjackets started playing. I had never heard of them but the alto sax player immediately caught my attention. That was Mark Russo. I thought “Wow, this guy is good!” He then went into a solo and my jaw hit the ground. I could not believe what I was hearing. This guy was playing up in the altissimo range like no one I had ever heard before. If you don’t believe me check out this video he made a few days ago………….
Besides the Yellowjackets, Mark Russo has played with Aretha Franklin, Whitney Houston, Steve Winwood, Tower of Power, Huey Lewis and the News, Richard Marx, Dan Fogelberg, Michael Bolton, Lionel Richie, Kenny Loggins and the Doobie Brothers among many others……..Talk about a resume!
Thanks to Mark Russo and Cannonball saxophones for making this great video for us. Now go practice your altissimo range………..
Here’s another great solo transcription from a Youtube video that I started working on a few days ago. My tenor was getting overhauled so I thought I would take a stab at an alto solo while it was in the shop. This is from the great sax player, Danny Walsh and is a solo he played with the Ball State Jazz Ensemble. The tune is “One for Rich” but the chord changes are based off of “How Deep is the Ocean”.
Danny went to Berklee College of Music and left shorty before I got there in the mid 80’s. I’m not sure I have ever heard him live although the summer before I went to Berklee I remember hearing an ensemble behind a closed door and the tenor player was playing a killing solo which sounded like Michael Brecker to me. I always wondered if that was Danny playing………
I haven’t heard too much from Danny since the 80’s but when I heard he had released a recording called “Entering In” I was one of the first to buy it. This is a great CD! Danny’s sound on both tenor and alto saxophone is beautiful. One of the aspects I love the most about Danny’s playing is his ability to take a solo “outside”. It seems effortless to him and his lines just flow whether they are “inside” bebop lines or “outside” Brecker type lines. It is obvious that Danny Walsh is very talented and has spent his time in the woodshed that is for sure. You can hear the Coltrane and Brecker influence on his lines that is for sure!
If you have never heard of Danny Walsh before, check out his CD and any future projects he plays on!
Solo starts at :12
This was a harder solo to transcribe and once I got into it I thought “Oh Crap!” but the lines are so killin’ that I thought it was worth the time! Enjoy!
If you like these types of modern lines like I do, be sure to check out my jazz video lessons and books for some great resources! Here are just a few on a variety of modern improvisation topics. I have 11 jazz improvisation books out now and over 500 30 minute+ video and audio lessons to choose from…….. Steve
I’ve been downloading your lessons for 4 months now (20 lesson) and I have noticed tremendous growth in my playing thus far! I’m so happy that I stumbled upon your site!
I have been shedding your materials for quite a while now and I love them! They are extremely well organized and presented and there are tons of ‘em! I really appreciate your methodical approach and find myself referring students to your resources often. Thanks so much!
I’ve been a member of Steve’s site for about six months now and the difference it has made to my playing is immeasurable. The (many) benefits of this membership are that you can have lessons at time convenient to you, they work out A LOT cheaper than face-to-face lessons with a teacher of the same calibre and you can replay them ad infinitum. I don’t know how many times have I had lessons in the past where I’ve ended up covering the same concepts when really a ‘replay’ of the last lesson would have been fine! I’m not on commission here – just wanted to write a review to encourage people to do this. Without doubt the most time and cost effective investment I’ve made in taking my playing to where it should be…Cheers Steve.
Derek Brown has a Youtube channel called “Beatbox Sax”. While most of us mere mortals are just trying to figure out how to play the sax the normal way (or should I say the way that is most “common”), Derek is one of those rare individuals that is breaking new ground with the saxophone. Check out the two videos below and you will quickly realize that this guy is not your average sax player.
It is obvious that Derek Brown is a master of what we call extended techniques for the saxophone. When I was a young student at Ithaca College studying classical saxophone I heard some of these classical techniques used in more modern classical saxophone pieces. I thought they were strange sounding and wasn’t sure what to make of them. Derek is taking many of those same techniques and using them for a very different result though. I have to give the guy props, the amount of time and practice he must have used to master these different elements and techniques just boggles my mind. Many of these are not techniques that I would use but I thought Derek Brown and his individual approach to the saxophone is well worth posting on here that is for sure.
Derek has been kind enough to post a multitude of tutorials on Youtube teaching these different techniques. I counted 30 tutorials so far of which I posted 10 below. If you dig his playing above and what he can do on the sax be sure to check out the tutorials below as well as the many other videos he has on his Youtube channel. Well done Derek Brown! The Beatbox Sax Master!!
Here’s a new interview with the sax player John Isley. I loved listening to this. Tons of great mature humble insights and observations to take note of. Kind of guy I would love to talk to for a couple of hours…………
John’s been a staple of the New York music scene for around 30 years. Originally hailing from North Carolina, he relocated to the Big Apple to go to school. Loving the diversity, energy and music making opportunities that NYC offered, John decided to make New York home. As a traveler and wanderer, he’s been a lot of places in the world that are wonderful, beautiful and probably would be nice to live. But there’s NO place like NYC!
For the past four years, John’s been holding down the saxophone chair in Southside Johnny & the Asbury Jukes, one of the rockinest and most fun, havin-a-good-time bands you’re likely to find. He’s also been touring regularly with the inimitable legendary diva, Diana Ross. John is also part of New York Horns, a horn section and band he co-founded in 1997.
You can find out more about John Isley at his website at johnisley.com
Today, I am reviewing a product that I never ever thought I would review. The product is a synthetic reed. (*Before you read further, I need to state in all honesty, that I have always hated, detested and scorned every synthetic reed I have ever tried. Over the last 20 years I have at times tried different brands and makes and always been disappointed and also angry that I had just wasted another 20-25 dollars on a piece of useless plastic……….I wanted to disclose that immediately-Steve)
Now, I am well aware that some of you out there play and have played synthetic reeds for many years and love them. I have even met some of you during Skype lessons and you might have seen my face frown when you told me you play a synthetic reed and love them. I guess the reason for these negative feelings is based on the fact that throughout the years, I have read the usual promotional claims and quotes from endorsing artists, I get my hopes up that maybe “this reed” will work for me and I can save the 700-900 dollars a year I spend on reeds………so, I order a reed with high hopes. Even though I have been burned so many times before. The reed comes, I open it up, I try playing it, and my dreams and hopes are crushed yet again.
“It’s way too soft! It’s way to hard! The tone sucks! It’s too edgy! What’s with the squeaking! There is no evenness in tone from note to note! The tone reminds me of a chainsaw tearing a parakeet to shreds while it screams!” I could go on and on……..These are all real and true thoughts I have had……….
Forestone Hinoki Synthetic Reeds
So, a few months ago Tobias Haecker from Forestone reeds contacted me and asked if I would be interested in trying their new Hinoki synthetic reeds because he thought I would like them. The response that was in my head was “Look, I’m not really a synthetic reed guy. I’ve hated every synthetic reed that I’ve ever tried and I think this would be a huge waste of your product and my time”……..instead I emailed back “Sure, I’ll give them a try” (I’ve learned to not always go with my gut response on emails which has proven very wise over the years)
Forestone sent me some reed samples to try. The truth is that once they arrived I put them on the back corner of my desk thinking “I’ll get to them later when I have time” but the truth is I think I was scared to try them. Scared of the disappointment, the heartbreak, the loneliness, the utter despair and hopelessness that comes with trying a bad synthetic reed………Finally, one day, I summoned the courage and opened the package.
Forestone sent me a medium and medium hard reed for tenor and alto sax. From past experience with synthetic reeds, I assumed that the MH reed would be like playing a 2×4 so I went with the M reed. I put it on my 7* mouthpiece and blew………It played! Not only that but it played easily! I played up and down the horn for a few minutes and at one point a squeak popped out. “There it is! I knew it!” As I continued to play expecting more squeaks and chirps I was surprised when there were no more.
Forestone Hinoki Synthetic Reeds
After a little while, I decided to try the MH reed. To my surprise, this reed also played easily and felt great. It did feel slightly stiffer, as if I went from a 2 1/2 cane reed to a 3 but there was no stuffiness and it still blew easily.
I decided I liked the MH reed the best on the mouthpiece I was playing so I stuck with that for the sound clip below although I could have just as easily played the sound clip using the M reed as well.
This is what Tobia says about the Hinoki material and cut:
“ The Hinoki reed suits more the jazz and intermediate players which need a bit resistance but like it a little bit more free blowing than our traditional black and brown synthetic reeds with the strong heart. Also the unfiled cut which we used at the Hinoki is a better match up for all the American style faced mouthpieces.”
In the sound clip below, I decided to make two recordings of myself playing similar lines. One was on the Hinoki MH reed and one was on a Rico Select Jazz 3S Unfiled reed. I then mixed the two recordings together so that I say the name of the reed, play a line, then say the name of the other reed and play a similar line. I try to do this throughout the recording. Keep in mind that the clip wasn’t recorded in this way as I would have had to change reeds after every line which would have been a pain. Not to mention that placing the reed in different spots would have effected the sound and response and I didn’t want to mess with that variable also.
Forestone Hinoki Synthetic Reeds
What were my thoughts and impressions of the Forestone Hinoki reeds? Well, first off I have to give the Forestone company credit for actually producing a reed that I could play! This is huge for me and the first time I could even play a synthetic reed! I actually played it all week long on Skype lessons and it played great. The side benefit of a synthetic is that during one lesson I picked up my tenor to demonstrate something and even though I hadn’t played all day the Hinoki just played immediately without having to take it off the mouthpiece, wet it and flatten the warpage of a cane reed.
I found the tone of the Hinoki reed to be a bit different than a good cane reed. The high notes seemed more prone to getting edgy with my normal bottom lip embouchure but I noticed that if I made my bottom lip a little fatter and more “pillowy” it took much of the edge away. On a cane reed, I can make my bottom lip a bit harder and flatter and can brighten the sound and give the tone some more edge. This was also true on the Hinoki but I felt like the edge could easily get to be too much so for me I had to balance that out with my embouchure to keep the tone where I wanted it.
I also found that the reed responded to my embouchure in slightly different ways than a cane reed. Usually, when I am playing, my bottom jaw and lip are moving quite a bit to add variation and expression to the tone. There was a number of times where my normal movement didn’t quite produce the effect I was going for. I take this not as a deficiency of the reed but more as a fact that there is a learning curve with playing these new reeds. I’ve been playing cane reeds for 35+ years. A synthetic reed for a couple of hours! I have a strong feeling that if I play these Hinoki synthetic reeds more I will learn how to get the most out of them…….
The tone of varied notes on the sax was subtly different than with my cane reeds also. Some notes were brighter than usual and some notes seemed darker and more subdued than on a cane reed. I found that this also could be manipulated by taking more and less mouthpiece in my mouth for the different ranges of the horn to get closer to the sound in my head. Even though I found the notes a bit different in tone at times, I still felt the evenness of the notes was excellent throughout the range of the horn.
I do think the cane reed in the comparison clip has a deeper richer sound to it. A bit sweeter and rounder sounding perhaps. The Hinoki sounded a little bit edgier to me in the clips. I do think the Hinoki is in the ballpark though. I’d have trouble telling it was a synthetic if I wasn’t announcing it on the clip like I did. (I was tempted to post the clip as a blind test but I know all of you hate those tests so I refrained.)
Just a few added notes: The Medium Hinoki reed felt little harder than a Vandoren Java 2 1/2 reed. I have a few 7* mouthpieces with 48 facing lengths that love 2 1/2 Javas but the Hinoki medium felt a bit harder than the Java on those pieces. On my 7* tenor pieces with a 50 facing length the medium and medium hard played much easier so if you have a 48 facing length on your piece I might go with a MS reed. I haven’t tried the MS reed so this is just a guess on my part. On a 50 facing length 7* the medium plays great but it felt a little soft when I tried to wail on it. I preferred the MH because of that on the 7* mouthpiece I tried them on.
Also, I think that cane reeds will naturally soak up excess saliva that might make it’s way to the mouthpiece. With a synthetic reed there is no where for this saliva to get soaked up so a side affect can be that you get a “spitty” or “bubbly” sound in the tone from the saliva on the reed. I didn’t have this problem all week but this morning I had a coffee while playing and I think I was salivating like crazy. I kept noticing this “bubblie” effect on the synthetic reed but not the cane reed at all so I thought I would add that tidbit of info to the review…………
Forestone Hinoki Synthetic Reeds
I’m told by Tobias at Forestone that he changes his reed every 3 to 4 months of heavy professional playing which sounds like heaven to me as I change my reed every 2-3 days usually. (although he has said he has heard from people that have used one Hinoki reed for more than 2 years!) He says that at the end of the reeds life they start to lose reactivity and become a little bit flabby like a cane reed can, but these last much longer.
If you read this review, listen to the clip and want to try the Forestone Hinoki reed they are easily available at many retailers such as Sax Alley, Thomann in the UK, or you can use the Forestone store locator on the Forestone website. In my opinion, whether you are like me and detest synthetic reeds or you are a synthetic reed player and want to try something new, these new Hinoki reeds are worth checking out and trying. Maybe later I will add a blind test to see how well you guys hear a difference…………… Let me know what you think in the comment section below. Well done Forestone!!
I wanted to share this great saxophone Overtone exercise that Dr. David Demsey wrote out a number of years ago. Dr. Demsey studied with Joe Allard from 1977-1980 and is the Coordinator of Jazz Studies and Professor of Music at William Paterson University. There is a great interview with Dr. Demsey about Joe Allard that any of you interested in the saxophone and Joe Allard’s teachings should read (correction: MUST read!). These overtone exercises are based off of and adapted from the teachings of Joe Allard.
For those of you who don’t know who Joe Allard was or the impact he has had on the saxophone world as a teacher, here are some other Neffmusic articles on Joe Allard.
Back to the saxophone Overtone exercises. I found these particular exercises referred to on the internet somewhere and after searching for them, found them on Dave Liebman’s website. I printed them out, took a cursory look at them and then put them on a big pile of papers on my desk thinking they were the same old Sigurd Rascher type saxophone exercises I had studied while in college.
Months later, I came across them again as I was cleaning my desk and decided to try to play through them. No problem I thought, I tried the first line and immediately hit a roadblock. I couldn’t perform the first two notes! You see, the 3 pages of this exercise all have the student play an overtone and then slur down to an overtone below the first overtone. Although I had spent a ton of time on saxophone overtones with “Top Tones for the saxophone” by Sigurd Rasher in college, I don’t think I had ever tried to slur between overtones. The Rascher book doesn’t have any slurs in it that I remember so I put a tiny space between each note as I prepared to voice the next note. Adjusting my voicing while playing the note was something brand new to me.
As I tried to perform this new exercise, I thought to myself “What the heck? This is hard!”
I found that I could somewhat accomplish the task at hand if I dropped my jaw a ton but then I had this huge drop in pitch before the overtone finally dropped lower. At this point, I decided to get some advice from someone who knew what was up so I emailed Dr. Demsey himself to make sure I was doing this correctly. Was it really supposed to be this hard?
Here is a quote from the email response from Dr. Demsey:
“Hi Steve,
The exercise is:
– With a breath attack (no tonguing), pick off the highest note of that group. This forces you to pre-hear the pitch. The tongue needs to be higher in your oral cavity, saying a “ee” shape. The larynx is an involuntary muscle so it’s not able to be intentionally positioned; it’s more that you are pre-hearing that pitch, causing your larynx/throat to position themselves in the same shape they would be to sing that note.
– Drop down to the lower pitches in the series with little or no embouchure movement. It’s all in the tongue and throat positioning. You can even feel the “click” in your mouth as the overtones descend. Note: in particular, the jaw does not move! No jaw drop; it’s all in the tongue/throat.
– Keep the whole thing at a SLOW tempo, perhaps 5-7 seconds per pitch. Listen carefully to get the most resonant, centered sound on each pitch. When that center is found, one can almost hear a very high ringing sound as the overtones all line up. Some people describe that sound as filling their head, resonating their head, filling the room, etc.
– Repeat the whole sequence several times on each exercise, limiting this work to 10-15 minutes per session so as not to strain or overuse any of the muscles involved.
I hope this is helpful! Let me know if you have questions –
Dr. David Demsey
I added the underline in the above quote. Notice what it says: No Jaw Drop! It does not move! So although I was accomplishing the task, I was doing it wrong. I went back to practicing.
As I kept practicing, I noticed that I was starting to have some success with the exercise without lowering my jaw. Some overtones are easier to drop than others but I started to feel that “click” that Dr. Demsey is talking about above. The frustrating thing for me is that many times it seems like the change happens in it’s own stubborn time. I’ll be playing and thinking “down, down,down,down”. I try to voice the lower overtone and then it finally drops almost of it’s own free will…….
So, as I have been working through these exercises the past month, I have noticed that my facility and focus with the overtones is getting much better. Sigurd Rascher writes about imagining the note before you try to play it in “Top Tones for the saxophone” and that really is the key. When I was a kid, I didn’t really understand that and thought it was just mumbo jumbo but when I started actually being able to get the overtones I realized how right on that was.
I relate it to singing a note. You have to have an idea of the note you are going to sing in order to cleanly sing it. You subconsciously start to voice the note before you produce any sound. Try it right now, sing any high note. You will notice that there is movement with your tongue and throat before you even produce a sound. You are getting ready to produce that high note. It’s the same way with the saxophone, you have to learn to voice each of the notes before you play them to get the note sounding the best and in tune. It’s not just pushing keys and blowing air. There should be an interaction between the body and the instrument when a sax players plays. It’s as if they are one!
The truth is that I am posting this post as much for me as for all of you. My selfish goals are to gather some more information from some of the Joe Allard saxophone family out there. If any of you have any more insight into what Joe Allard taught you on these exercises, overtones and voicings in particular I would love to hear it. Among the questions that have come up for me:
Why no tongue? Why must the notes be started with a breath attack?
What is the benefit of slurring down to a lower overtone?
Do you ever practice slurring up the overtone series?
Up high when I start to drop to the lower overtone by voicing lower I get a slide in pitch. My jaw and embouchure are not moving. Is this allowed or expected or should I work to get rid of this slide if it’s possible?
If the larynx is an involuntary muscle, How involved is it in this whole process? When I’m voicing different notes, I feel my Adam’s Apple moving up and down. It feels intentional on my part. Is this the larynx or something else moving?
What are the long term affects from mastery of this exercise? What benefits do you see in your every day playing?
Enjoy the exercises and thanks again to Dr. David Demsey for writing them out and sharing them and Joe Allard for his incredible contribution to saxophone pedagogy.
Addition: There are some great thoughts below in the comments section as well as a couple responses to my questions above. One of the responses is from Dr. David Demsey who wrote out the exercise so make sure you read that as well. Steve
A friend of mine emailed me a link to the youtube video below and I have been listening to it all week long. I love the way Wes Montgomery plays the melody on Round Midnight by Thelonious Monk. It’s got a great bluesy feel to it that I don’t hear with any of the sax versions I have. Check it out!
Wes Montgomery-Round Midnight
I found a transcription online of the whole Round Midnight solo in C on this jazz guitar site. (you have to sign in to the site to download it……..) The transcriber isn’t mentioned on the transcription but he did a great job on it. I liked what Wes Montgomery did with the melody so much that I decided to transpose it for Bb instruments. I did end up making a few changes as I worked on the transcription and played along with the recording. Mostly just minor changes and a couple octave adjustments so the lines would work for the saxophone.
Working on transcriptions from other instruments can be really cool because of the stylistic differences between instruments. Using this transcription as an example, I found my self playing many lines and ideas that I never would have discovered while listening to sax players.
The other cool thing is that while working on a melody like this you can pick up a ton of cool ideas to use for yourself over Round Midnight. I love how bluesy Wes makes this version and the video is so cool to watch because Wes looks so laid back and relaxed.
Take a listen and try to play along………I think you’ll like it! I know I do! Next time I play Round Midnight, I intend to blues it up Wes Montgomery style………..
Today, I am reviewing the Westcoast Sax “MoFo” tenor saxophone mouthpiece. Now, not being hip to the newest slang and terminology, I had to ask my teenagers what MoFo meant. My daughters told me “Mofo” stood for mother-f*****, someone who is bad-a** or hard core. My first thought was “Why would someone name a saxophone mouthpiece MoFo? That is just strange unless………..perhaps this mouthpiece is hard core and bad-a**!” When I think of someone with those qualities, I think of people who are not shy. They are in your face and bold about it. They don’t care what you think or ask anyone for permission. Messing around with them is no joke and you might seriously get hurt or lose your life. They can have an edge or toughness about them…….
I had to wonder “Could all of these qualities be contained within a mouthpiece?”
Westcoast Sax MoFo Tenor Saxophone Mouthpiece
As I ponder these questions, I sit looking at the MoFo sax mouthpiece sitting on my desk. The mouthpiece is designed and sold by Matt Wickam at Westcoast sax and Theo Wanne. If you don’t know Theo’s work, it is amazing. I have reviewed a ton of mouthpieces by Theo Wanne over the years and they were all great. Not a defect, scratch, bad finish, uneven rail or tip in all of them. His attention to detail is striking. Even when it comes down to the leather mouthpiece case and packing material, he is attentive to every detail.
The MoFo tenor saxophone mouthpiece is no different. The 24K gold finish is perfect in every way. The engraving is bold and beautiful. The table, rails, tip and baffle look precise and perfect also.
The baffle is unique in that I haven’t seen a baffle configuration like this before in all the mouthpieces I have reviewed. It has a very high straight baffle that angles slightly as it travels away from the tip. Then it hits a straight edge where it then descends at a greater angle down into the chamber. The bottom of the baffle has a “scooped” baffle shape to it that is also referred to as a “bullet” baffle. I would consider the chamber to be large in my opinion. The sidewalls are scooped out starting after the straight line edge of the baffle.
An interesting aspect of the MoFo tenor sax mouthpiece is that the window travels quite a bit further than most other mouthpieces. When I compare the MoFo to a typical Otto Link window it is longer and has a square shape to it as you can see in the picture below. My theory is that this has the added affect of opening up the chamber even more as this open window is right over the chamber area.
Westcoast Sax MoFo Tenor Saxophone Mouthpiece
Before I even played the MoFo, I already had a preconceived idea of how this mouthpiece would play. It would be in your face loud. I would play it and bird’s around the neighborhood would just drop out of the sky dead. Dog’s would howl, bark and perhaps cower in fear at the sheer force and power of the MoFo. My children, wife and I would all go deaf within minutes of playing such a beast of a mouthpiece……….you get where I’m going with this. This mouthpiece was not a toy to be played with carelessly………
The first time I played the MoFo I was afraid of the worst but I was quickly surprised. Although it could be bright and edgy, it was nowhere as bright and edgy as I thought it would be. Actually, at low to normal blowing levels it was actually quite pleasant to listen to and play. I thought it had a fat thick quality to the sound that I hope I demonstrated in the clips below.
Here’s a description of the MoFo mouthpiece from the Westcoast Sax website:
“After years of frustration and trying to find the right mouthpiece for myself… I finally gave up and collaborated my ideas with Theo Wanne. The MoFo is a Powerful, Pure, and Edgy Tenor Saxophone Mouthpiece and plays like a Real MoFo…If you know what I mean… Hahaha! I am able to play Loud and Edgy…or I can play Soft and Smooth not sacrificing Warmth and Color. I have found that you usually sacrifice one for the other…not here my friends! Our mouthpieces are Proudly Made In The USA
The MoFo Mouthpiece allows me to Express my True Voice… No Tubbyness… No Hollowness… and No Thinness! Really Easy To Play,Effortless Upper and Lower Register, and a Focused Core! — Matt. W”
Westcoast Sax MoFo Tenor Saxophone Mouthpiece
Where the MoFo mouthpiece earns it’s MoFo name is when you put more air through it. This mouthpiece has some serious no joke power to it. Honestly, I think it is one of the most powerful mouthpieces I have played.
The first clip that I recorded earlier in the week was at a slightly higher mic level than I usually record with due a mistake on my part and the recording was clipping and distorted. I had to then record it again at my normal levels but it was still clipping at points in the recording. In the end, I turned down the mic as far as I could and still get a sound out of it and that is what you hear.
The MoFo sax mouthpiece can also get some serious edge and brightness out of it. The altissimo is effortless and I found that I could get more split tones up there than I usually get. I demonstrate these on the clip at different times. These can be a great affect on a loud funk, R&B or rock gig. Throw a couple of these into your solos and the crowd will be chanting your name……….
The intonation in excellent also. Sometimes on my old Selmer SBA tenor sax the intonation can get a bit out of whack with extreme baffles but Matt Wickam at Westcoast Sax and Theo Wanne did a great job producing a crankin’ mouthpiece that is also very much in tune.
Westcoast Sax MoFo Tenor Saxophone Mouthpiece
Right now, the MoFo is only made in two tip openings (.110 and .115). I opted for the .115 after seeing the picture of what the baffle looked like as the bigger tip openings are usually easier to play with higher baffle. I had a feeling this would be the case here also and I was right. The MoFo was super easy to play and felt as comfortable as my normal .105 tip openings that I usually play on.
I tried a number of Rigotti Gold reeds on the MoFo but was most comfortable with the 2 1/2 Light size. I used a generic metal ligature that I had in a drawer that fit perfectly. I have also used the same ligature on Guardala sized mouthpieces to give you an idea of how big it is.
Westcoast Sax MoFo Tenor Saxophone Mouthpiece
I’ve provided two samples of the same clip below. One is a clip with added reverb and the other is a dry clip in a moderate sized room. I think it’s important to add the reverb clip just so people can get a sense of what the sound is like with a little bit of that added affect since the added reverb tend to soften the edge a bit. Here’s a clip of Jason Webber playing the MoFo with affects on a gig so you can hear how it sounds with affects. He sounds fabulous on the MoFo.
The MoFo tenor saxophone mouthpiece by Westcoast Sax is a great example of a well crafted high baffle mouthpiece. If you have been on the search for a mouthpiece that will finally end your war with the guitar player this might be the right choice for you. Yes, when you push it it gets loud, bright and sometimes edgy but those are the weapons we sax players need sometimes.
Ideally, we all want a mouthpiece that can perform in many genres. You can judge the MoFo from the clip as you listen to it. I thought it performed well in all the styles and various examples I played.
Congratulations to Matt Wickam and Westcoast Sax for creating a MoFo of a mouthpiece! If you are interested in the MoFo you can call Matt at: 951-805-5611 or Email: WestCoastSax@Yahoo.Com. You can also order directly from the Westcost Sax Facebook page or the WestCoast Sax Website.
Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and if you get a MoFo saxophone mouthpiece be sure to come back and let us know what you think below……..Thanks!!
Today’s review is about a great transcription book by Petter Wettre entitled “The Lighthouse Omnibook”. This book has been sitting on my shelf for a few years but I was reminded of it the other day when John Greiner (a great tenor player that I played with at Berklee in different ensembles) mentioned the recording Elvin Jones “Live at the Lighthouse” on the SOTW forum. I immediately thought of this great book sitting on my shelf so I thought I would do a review of it.
In 1987, I decided I wanted to transfer from my college in Ithaca NY and go to Boston to study at Berklee. Two things sparked this need for me to transfer.
1.) We had started a little combo in Ithaca and were playing jazz in a local club when a guy asked to sit in with our little group. I don’t remember his name and have no idea who he was but I know he said he had gone to school or was going to school in Boston. This tenor player played over the standards like nothing I had ever heard before. I had no idea what his lines were or how the heck he was navigating through the chords. Half the time he didn’t even sound like he was playing the changes but just playing crazy lines as he soared high above them. It sounded amazing to me……..I thought “Maybe I should go to Boston!”
2.) Later that next summer, I came out to stay my high school girlfriend who was living in Boston and going to Berklee as a singer. While there for the summer, I went to a bunch of recitals and student concerts. I was blown away! I remember seeing a young Donny McCaslin playing in the performance center with Warren Hill and I was hooked. These guys were a few years older than me but they were playing stuff I just had to learn. I also saw George Garzone and Jerry Bergonzi playing a few times that summer which totally blew my mind even more. I had to come to Boston!
The Lighthouse Omnibook-Dave Liebman & Steve Grossman
After arriving at Berklee that fall, I got down to business. What I wanted to learn, what I needed to learn wasn’t anything I could learn in the classroom. What I had to figure out was what were these lines and sounds I was hearing that made no sense to me. One day I was talking to a burnin’ guitar player friend who was talking about Elvin Jones’s album “Live at the Lighthouse” like it was the holy grail. I asked what it was and he just looked at me as if I had asked the dumbest question ever asked. “Dude, you really need to get your act together and listen to that album! Where have you been?” I went to Tower records the next day and got it.
What makes “Live at the Lighthouse” so great is that it is an intense post-Coltrane example of where Coltrane lines and harmonic ideas could go next. This record was recorded in the early 70’s and the energy and intensity is just ridiculous. I had never heard a recording like that before and the energy was a new experience for me. The album features Dave Liebman and Steve Grossman on saxophones. What I heard in this recording were the sounds and type of lines that I heard when that sax player sat in with our group in Ithaca, NY. They were the type of lines I heard in Boston when I would hear Bergonzi or Garzone playing. I had to figure out what these lines were!
Up to this point in my life, I had studied a lot of Charlie Parker, Phil Woods and Dave Sanborn as I was mainly an alto player at the time. Listening to these new types of lines and harmonic ideas opened the doors to a new direction in improvisation for me.
I played “Live at the Lighthouse” over and over for months. I cranked it on my stereo and played along as best I could. Many times not knowing what Steve Grossman or Dave Liebman were playing or why but nonetheless trying to imitate the sound and intensity of what they were playing.
Years later, when I heard that there was a transcription book of the whole “Live at the Lighthouse” album, I freaked out. “WHAT!” “ARE YOU KIDDING ME?” I had to have it and ordered it immediately.
This book is awesome. All the crazy lines from Steve Grossman and Dave Liebman are written out note for note. (although actually playing these lines is another matter) Looking at the book for the first time you start to realize the depth of knowledge used to create these lines. Even though they are all written out, understanding what Liebman or Grossman was actually thinking can be challenging to say the least. The chords changes are also written out which is a huge help also.
As soon as I received the book, I listened to the whole album and marked every line that stuck out to my ears. There are pencil marks all over my book. There are so many great lines made up of altered fingering, overtones, chromaticism, 3 tonic lines, tritone substitutions, and then just sheer craziness that I can’t begin to figure out!
