A little help

Last week was quite busy. On Wednesday, I performed the Villa-Lobos Duo and Willard Elliot's Six French Songs from the 15th Century with Frank Rosenwein and Jerry Wong, piano. The day of the performance I had a double rehearsal of Schumann Symphony #3 with the Orchestra.

The weekend contained two concerts with heavy programs. In addition to the Schumann program, the other concert had Mozart Piano Concerto in c minor, No. 24 and Rachmaninov's Symphony #2.

In the weeks leading up to the performances, I was beginning to feel some pain in my left hand and thumb. I should note that we rehearsed and played the Villa-Lobos standing up, partly due to the lack of good places to turn pages. This added to the weight on my left hand.

Using a balance hanger when standing up is helpful to redistribute the weight because it relocates the fulcrum of balance so that the left hand carries less of it.

However, I was also looking for a way to take some of the weight off the left hand when sitting down. Using a neck strap in concert with a seat strap can work. The neck strap is tied to the back of the chair and hooked in the ring on the boot.

I wanted to show you something even better.

Chicago Symphony bassoonist, Dennis Michel gave this to me when we meet on our tour this January.

It consists of a clamp (available at any hardware store) with two holes drilled in it for an elastic band. The two holes are in addition to the factory drilled hole, which is in an inconvenient spot.The clamp fastens to the back of a chair.

Below is the clamp with the band itself with S-hook with snaps and a small cord lock on the other end.

The length/tension on the band can be adjusted by opening the lock and pulling or pushing the band through.

This is available from REI.

Profiler questions

Recently, a reader of this blog asked a few questions about my profile. Here are my answers and some further thoughts.

The reader asked what the measurements are that I use to set up a profiler, with specific requests for the thickness of the fold and the collar. I apologize in advance for the use of the English measurement system. The United States educational system tried to convert all of us to the metric system in the 1970's, but some stubbornness remains!

1. General thickness. I leave an average of about .03" of thickness on the profile at all points compared to a finished reed. It has been my experience that totally finishing a reed during the profile results in weaker and fewer usable reeds.

2. How to set the thickness. The thickness of the cut should be set so that the profile is thinnest (compared to measurements for a finished reed) at the intersection of the two tapers of the reed blade slope. Some call this the bump, some call it the beginning of the heart of the reed. See below where taper 1 meets taper 2.

My reed has two major tapers (I omit a small one at the very tip for simplicity's sake.) -- one that runs from the collar to about the 3/4 of the blade's length and another, sharper taper the starts there and finishes at the tip. Most German scrape reeds are similar.

Because I use a single-barrel profiler, I get only one slope for the entire length of the blade in my profile. Thus, as you can see in the diagram above, for a thin, but usable profile, it is necessary to balance the profile by bringing it as close in thickness to that of the point at which the two reed blade tapers meet.

This means that there will be some extraneous thickness at the ends (tip and collar). You can change the angle of the slope of the profile to favor a thinner collar or tip, but you must always be sure not to set the profile so that it is too thin at the crucial point in the diagram.

* Here is a clever way to avoid ruining the blade and scraping the cane barrel when adjusting the profiler thickness. Before profiling, with no cane on the cane barrel, put a shim -- made out of a piece of paper -- on the barrel , bring the blade down and pull the shim out from under the blade. If there is friction, you've probably set the profile too thin.

My profile thickness at this point is between .001-.002" greater than finished reed thickness.

2. What are my measurements for thickness at the collar and fold? I measure the collar thickness, but not the fold. Instead of the fold, I measure the thickness at the point where the tip would be cut. My shim test takes care of making sure the fold or center point of the profile is not too thin.

My collar thickness comes in at about .038" since my finished reeds end up anywhere between .032-.035" The tip profile measurement is around .015", finished being .008-.010".

To measure the profile thickness, I use my nearly endless supply of bad cane. After profiling, I remove the cane and cut it (without folding)in the two places where the two tips would be. Then I measure the thickness using a dial indicator. Measure the cane with the gouged side up for greater accuracy!

Further thoughts:

Ideally, to get a very thin tip profile, while maintaining proper thickness at the crucial point where the tapers meet, would result in an extremely thin fold, or the cutting through of the blade at the center point. That's why my profiled tip is rather heavy.

Ways around this:

• use a tip finisher after profiling.
• design a ramp for the profiler that slows or cancels the downward slope just before the center point or end of cut.

The latter is what K. David Van Hoesen did in his modification of the Pfeifer double barrel profiler. The same could be done with any single barrel profiler ramp. Simply level or reverse the downward slope for the last 1/4" of the cut. The result would be a nicely thin tip, but enough cane left on the fold so that it wouldn't fray or break apart when folding.
 
Profilers with a double taper ramp:

1. The MD Reed Products profiler has a double taper. MD will also make a profiler with my custom ramp dimensions.

2.  Ramp upgrade. The PCD Company makes replacement ramps that fit the Rieger, Pfeifer and Popkin profilers. These ramps are machined with the double taper. I'm not sure about how the Rieger replacement fits on, but to add the Pfeifer or Popkin, you just unscrew the current ramp and screw the new on in place.

* In my test, the replacement ramp required almost no shimming to adjust the profile thickness, but if you try this, I would use the shim test described above to be sure the new ramp doesn't result in a profile that is too thin.

Shims made of sheet brass in different thicknesses (.003", .005", .010", etc.) can be found at a hobby store or online.




 

No Coke -- (No) Pepsi!! -- No Brands of Cane?

This classic Saturday Night Live skit makes fun of the ubiquity and dominance of blockbuster brand names like Coke and Pepsi.

We have this in the world of cane dealers, as well.  There are bassoonists who are fiercely loyal to a particular brand of cane and will not try other types.

I believe brand loyalty in cane is vastly over-rated.

Here are some things to remember:

1. Cane growers and dealers are in business to make a profit like anyone else. These are not charities!
They try to sell as much cane as possible to keep in business.

3. Cane quality differs more from harvest to harvest than from brand to brand. Everyone who has purchased from one source year after year has experienced this, certainly. Like wine producers, weather plays a big role in quality.

4. The gouge plays as much of a role in whether or not you like the cane as does the brand.

5. Any performer facing the need to play many different kinds of music during a week or month of performances is smart to keep reeds made from several different sources in the reed box. Reliance upon one brand will narrow your expressive capability and hinder execution of the often disparate demands placed upon you!

Recently, Miller Marketing Co. began offering a selection of cane I've chosen based upon measurement for cane hardness and density.

If you've read my recent post announcing this new line, you may have wondered what kind of cane I'm measuring.

The answer is, I don't know! The large batches of cane I measure are generally unmarked. I'm not very concerned about this, either!

With this selection method we are trying something new. My selection of cane is not based upon where it is grown or how it is processed (although the gouge is mildly elliptical and of moderate thickness). Over the years, I have measured cane from France, Italy, Spain and California and found pieces to use from each region.

While it is hard to compare different brands of cane, given differences in gouge, length, and also in the general look and feel of the different types, measuring for hardness and density alone allows me to focus only on the objective physical characteristics of an individual piece of cane.

This is how I bridge any differences between brands and select pieces from any source which have the best chance for success on the bocal.

Buy Cane I Select

The Miller Marketing Company is now selling a line of cane that I've selected:   

Miller-Stees Gouged Bassoon Cane

This is gouged bassoon cane that I've tested in the following ways:

•  All pieces are straight (not warped in any direction). No cracked pieces.

•  All pieces fall within my personal acceptable range for hardness.

•  All pieces fall within my personal acceptable range for density.

I've used this method for over two years now. During this time, I've seen my yield of good reeds DOUBLE from previous!

The time taken to select out unacceptably hard/soft, dense/porous cane is more than made up for by the time saved later in the production process.

I now spend MUCH less time profiling, shaping, forming, wrapping, drying, and trying to finish reeds made from cane that wasn't destined to work anyway.

While my use of these methods will not identify a great piece of cane, they do help me select out most of the pieces in a batch that are marginal or poor in quality.

To purchase some of this cane, please visit Miller Marketing Company and order directly from them.

If you want to know more about my methods, please see this recent post and this one, too.

Combining Density and Hardness to Select Cane

Expanding My Zone


In this post, I'll explain why I use both measurements to select cane for use.

In two previous posts, I outlined my methods for finding the density and hardness of a piece of cane.

It is safe to generalize that most hard cane is also dense, and most soft cane is also more diffuse or porous.

However, in my years of trial combining these two methods, I've discovered that, from time to time, I'll select a piece of cane that is on the fringe of the "good zone" for hardness, but in the "good zone" for density or vice-versa, and I'll make a good reed out of that piece.

Thus, combining measurements using the two methods of selection allows a greater yield of good reeds from the same batch of cane.

Measuring Cane Density

How I Measure Cane Density

In a previous post, I outlined my method for measuring cane hardness. Although hardness and density are closely related (it makes sense that a hard piece of cane may be more dense compared to soft piece -- and my measurements mostly bear this out), I have found enough reason to measure both.

In this post, I'd like to describe my method and my findings for measuring cane density. I have been using this method in concert with measuring hardness for two years now. I feel I have amassed enough results to draw some solid conclusions from my efforts.

What I'm about to share with you is a way of selecting cane that has doubled my yield of good reeds made from blanks using this process.

Before this, I would average maybe 2 good reeds from 10 blanks. Pretty good, considering the standard I have to maintain given the musical crucible of The Cleveland Orchestra. Now I consistently get 4-5 out of 10!

First, I'd like to acknowledge the help I received in pursuing this idea from bassoonist, David Rachor and Jean-Marie Heinrich, a scientist who has devoted much of his research to the physics, botany and geometry of arundo donax (our cane).

Measuring Density

Density is commonly measured in relation to water, which is given a value of 1. Thus, something less dense than water (all cane in a dry state) will measure between 0 and 1.

D=   M 
        V (volume)

This is the equation used to determine the density of a substance.

A pycnometer is most commonly used in measuring density.

The density is measured by the amount of water displaced by a substance when it is immersed in a chamber filled with water. A more dense substance will displace a greater amount of water.

To determine the density of a piece of cane using this equation, you need a strictly constant volume of water and mass from trial to trial and piece of cane to piece of cane. Thus, the pieces of cane measured must be as close in mass to each other as possible (this would necessitate lots of minute trimming to the pieces of cane). Keeping a constant amount of water in a chamber while measuring many pieces of cane would probably prove too difficult for easy use. Just the act of taking a piece of wet cane out of the water when finished measuring would change the volume minutely, and, over time, skew the results a fair amount.

Measuring cane density this way is too fussy and time consuming.

The test I use does not directly measure the density of cane. What it measures is the specific gravity of a piece of cane and compares it with that of water.

I use a scale with a calibration of .01g. A tolerance this small is necessary to show the minute differences in density from piece to piece. A postal scale or a kitchen scale isn't accurate enough to detect differences in cane mass.


The Method

• First I weigh a dry piece of cane. It can be gouged, shaped, profiled, simply gouged or just a split piece of tube.

• I record the dry mass. (M1)

• Then I submerge the cane in a pan of water suspended over the scale by placing it under a rack that sits on the scale.

• I record the wet mass (M2) and remove the cane from the water. It spends just a few seconds in the water.

Next I use the following formula to ascertain the density of the piece of cane:

D= density, M1=dry mass, M2=wet mass

D =   M1   
      M1+M2

What I'm measuring is could also be described as buoyancy or porosity. Cane that exerts more upward force under water against the rack than that which doesn't is more buoyant. I'm measuring the mass of a piece of cane in two different media -- air and water.

Since dry, aged cane is composed of cellulose fiber and lots of air spaces, it is reasonable to assume therefore, that cane with more air spaces per square millimeter will be correspondingly less dense than cane with fewer spaces.

This indirect way of measuring cane density takes about 20 seconds

Measuring Cane Hardness

How I Measure Cane for Hardness


I have used a hardness tester for about 20 years. While this tool will not identify great pieces of cane, it will help you select out most of the ones that will never be made into good reeds.

For those of you not familiar with a hardness tester (or impact meter), this is how it works and how I use it.

The machine has a pin that is driven into the cane using a consistent amount of force for each test. The result is an extremely small indentation in the gouge of the cane.

The meter measures the pin's depth of penetration into the gouge. The deeper the penetration, the softer the cane.

This method of selection is simple and easy, but there are a few things to keep in mind.

Some Lack of Consistency

Anyone who has used one of these machines knows that no piece of cane yields the same hardness measurement throughout the length of the gouge. Thus, I do a few things to ensure I come up with a measurement that most accurately captures the degree of hardness for the WHOLE piece of gouged cane without spending an inordinate amount of time in measurement.

1. I could share with you the hardness numbers that fall within my "acceptable" range. Unfortunately, the number range I use may be useless to you!  Even users of two machines of the same brand may find that the two machines vary in their assessments of hardness for the same piece of cane.

Therefore, some trial and error is necessary in coming up with a number range that is useable.

2. Any piece of cane will vary in hardness throughout its gouge. There are a few ways to even out this inconsistency, though.

Sand the gouge before measuring. Many commercial gouges are rough and uneven. Places on the gouge that are thicker than the rest will yield a higher (softer) measurement than those that are thinner. If the pin drops on a low point in the gouge thickness it may give a reading that is lower (harder) than if it were to fall on a high point.

A light sanding with 400 grade sandpaper will smooth out the peaks and valleys inherent in the grain of the cane and help ensure a more accurate reading.

3. The tip is the most sensitive, reactive part of any reed. Therefore, the most critical part of the gouge for a hardness measurement is in the middle area where the two reed blade tips will be profiled. Since I do not want to place a divot in the gouge in either of these areas, I measure the point exactly midway between the ends of the gouged piece (where the fold will be). This point is close enough to the tip areas to give me an idea of how hard the cane is in these two regions.

4. If the fold measurement doesn't fall within range, I reject those pieces that are too hard. Softer pieces can either be stored for later evaluation -- a year or two of storage is sometimes sufficient for the cane to harden up -- or the cane can be gouged thinner to produce a harder measurement.

5. If the fold measurement falls within the useable range, I will measure the hardness at both ends and average the three numbers to come up with an average hardness for the whole piece.  Because some ends have "gouger bites" or other imperfections in the gouge, I always measure in from the end at least a quarter inch.

6. I then write the hardness number on the gouged piece with pencil. Later, I'll write the number on the blade of the finished reed for identification in the reed case.

This method, which takes takes less than a minute for each piece, has saved me a lot of time during the finishing stage as I now work on many fewer questionable blanks. I also worry less that I might be throwing out pieces of cane that I could have used. 

You can also use this method for measuring cane that is already shaped. If the cane is profiled as well, simply skip the fold measurement and measure the two ends and average.

lefreQue follow up

I wanted to write a follow-up to my first post about the lefreQue sound bridges.

In the first post, I mentioned that I use only the bridge for the bocal/wing joint connection. After some experimentation and trial, I've branched out significantly.

After hearing from other bassoonists about their experiences with these sound bridges I thought I'd give the larger 76mm bridges another try.

I had heard that attaching them to the bell/long joint juncture would add resonance and help response. Initially, I was skeptical because I didn't hear enough of an improvement to warrant a purchase.

That all changed when I took a friend into Severance Hall while it was empty to try them out again.

Trial with and without the bridges on my bell/long joint juncture with my friend at the podium and me in the bassoon section yielded no difference to his ears.

However, when trying them with him placed in the audience seats on the orchestra floor, the difference was quite noticeable. With the bridges, my sound had more power, depth and evenness throughout the range. With them, I could sustain a crescendo a bit farther than without.

I repeated this trial for two other people, both of whom noticed a difference.  I also tried with bridges on the bell/long and long/boot junctures (also 76mm size). The bridges on the long/boot juncture added less of an improvement, but it was noticeable -- especially in the low register. An added benefit was greater security when producing a "pp" attack in the low register.

I tried them out in our concerts last weekend. We played the Sibelius Violin Concerto. In this piece, along with much touchy writing for the second bassoonist, the first bassoon part has its share of delicate entrances and tough low note slurs. With  these bridges on I felt more secure making those tough entrances in the slow movement

At the end of the second movement, there is a very lonely slur from low F to low Bb for the first bassoonist.  Here was the method I used to make that slur secure:

1. Insert a small strip of note pad cardboard backing (about the size of a long match stick) under the low B key so that it fits between the low B and the low C touch. This will lower the low C and low D keys slightly. It will mute the F a little bit and make the slur a bit more secure.

Warning: make sure that the strip isn't so thick that the B pad will not close completely when the low Bb is fingered!

2. With the register lock on, play the low F with the low Bb key depressed.

3. Slur to low Bb. Make sure the left thumb contacts all four low register keys at once.

lefreQue Sound Bridge

What's that metal baffle doing on my bocal and wing joint?

It's a lefreQue Sound Bridge! 

For hundreds of years, instrument manufacturers have broken the bassoon into several parts to make it more compact for carrying and to keep it out of harm's way. I've certainly never thought about what acoustical trade-offs occur when you cut up the body of the instrument into several parts.

However, it stands to reason that some resonance must be lost when an integral piece of wood is sectioned off. Especially when the sections are joined by tenons with cork or string wrapping. 

In the chart below (from Maarten Vonk's bassoon website), you can see the relative speed of vibration for various materials. Cork is on the slow end. Thus, it is often used to insulate or dampen vibrations in a room, for instance. Cork is a great material for maintaining a secure, tight seal between joints, but not the ideal substance for the resonance of a musical instrument. 

Air                      330 m/s

Glue less than       50 m/s
Cork less than      500 m/s
Solder (lead)        1260 m/s
Wood soft/ hard   1500 / 4000 m/s
Brass                  3600 m/s
Gold                    4700 m/s

The concept behind the lefreQue Sound Bridge is to link the resonance in the individual joints of the body of the instrument by placing a bridge between them.

The bridges are easy to install and take off. They are not permanent and do not require a repair technician to modify your instrument.

Research:

Before purchasing, I did some investigating with other bassoonists, repair technicians and by viewing various Internet sources.

There is a lefreQue YouTube channel but no bassoon demos at this point.

West Virginia University Bassoon Professor, Lynn Hileman has written an informative blog about her trial of the sound bridges.

Photos of them in use on bassoons show various methods of deployment.

Trials:

I have only tried the bocal/wing bridge (known as the Double Reed model) and the bridge for the long/bell juncture. I tried the various materials available, too -- sterling silver, solid silver, red brass, etc.

I tried them on my students' bassoons and we probed them in our bassoon section. 

The results were surprisingly variable. While my tests were by no means scientific, I noticed a wide variety in result (ranging from no audible difference to near life-changing difference). 

What I've come away with from months of testing is that every bassoonist needs to decide for him/herself if these bridges do anything at all, and if so, which ones, and how best to deploy them on your instrument.

Ways to Try:

Here are some ways I tried. My conclusions are based upon what worked for me, so try them yourself. In trying yourself, be sure to investigate all the different materials and ways to deploy them.  I've heard from other bassoonists who use these very differently from me and are quite satisfied!

1. Which bridges?

Some bassoonists are "fully lefreQued"! They use the bridges as a system. However, these little baffles are very expensive, so I would suggest trying one bridge at a time to see if a particular bridge is really adding anything at all.

My trials show that the only bridge that added any resonance for me was the Double Reed bridge -- or the one that bridges the wing joint and bocal. The only other one that had even a hint of added resonance was the long/bell bridge -- but not enough to justify a purchase.

2. Which material?

I tried the various materials (a lot like shopping for bocals!) and found the solid silver added the most resonance and gave the best sound.

3. How to deploy?

This may be the area that needs the most investigation. There seems to be no standard way to apply these, and for me, some of the most recommended ways didn't work very well.

The bridges seem to be very finicky if not assembled and positioned just right. Some people notice a fuzziness or buzzing coming from them at times. Like what you may experience from a sympathetic vibration coming from the body lock.

If you experience this buzzing, before rejecting a lefreQue for your bassoon, try re-positioning the bridge on the joint and make sure the two bridges are perfectly aligned one on top of the other with no overlap.

Overlapping bridges

Tension from the silicon band may cause the bridges to slip apart slightly when you put them on. Keeping one exactly on top of the other will decrease damping caused by metal touching metal (which may also cause some of the buzzing).

Each lefreQue comes with a set of two bridges. They should be used together, with the smooth bridge on the bottom and the "bumpy" one on top.

Top side

Underside

These two photos show the top and underside of the two bridges.

These bridges are not interchangeable. My trial with the bridge with the bumps placed on top of the smooth bridge produced more resonance than vice versa.

In the photos you can see how the two differ. The bridge on the left side is the bridge that contacts the body of the bassoon. It helps the body resonance jump from joint to joint.

The bridge on the right has little bumps that act as feet. This is the bridge that goes on top. The feet keep the bridge from completely contacting the bottom bridge and dampening its resonance. Originally, lefreQues were sold as single bridges. However, it was discovered that pairing each bridge with another one allowed for more resonance, as the lower bridge was not dampened by the fastening bands.

The tapers of the bridges are purposeful, with a more sharp taper at one end for each. This sharper taper is made to help the fit against the bocal, whereas the taper at the bottom better fits the circumference of the wing top band.

Taper

Fit against bocal and wing

 
How to attach?

Photos I viewed showed a few different ways of attaching the bridges. Here are the two most common ways:

Bound at feet

Bound at middle

You should try each way to see which produces the best result. I found a pretty big difference between the two, with the fitting the silicon band over the middle yielding the best resonance and sound.

I've thought a little about the use of silicon (also an insulator, not a very good material for carrying vibration). I wonder if a metal coil spring or something that also transmits vibration well might be a better agent for attaching these bridges?

The lefreQue company offers a few different kinds of bands. Indeed the package includes a veritable smorgasbord of bands. It's not clear there is one recommended way to attach as well!

How much tension?

Along with how to attach, I've wondered about the amount of tension placed on the bridges by the attaching bands. Too much could dampen the bridges' resonance, too little could add a buzzing sound.

I found a good amount of tension by accident. I lost the original band sent with my bridges. Upon obtaining a new one, I noticed that it was wider and not as big in circumference as the old one. the fit was much more tight than the old one. An upgrade? 

After trying it, I thought the new band inhibited some of the resonance I was getting with the old one. To reduce the tension and, hopefully, free up some of the resonance, I cut the band's width in half. A more narrow band would be more elastic and free.

Original, cut

New width

This new width restored the resonance I was missing!

Where to position?

Another variable in deploying these things is exactly how to position them. Here again, different positioning yielded different results.

Here are the ways I tried with the bocal/wing bridges:

Under the post

By removing the whisper pad key, you can slip the band under the spring and mount it right up against the whisper key post. Putting the key back in place prevents the band from slipping out of position.

However, on my bassoon, this necessitated placing the band across the lower part of the bridge. This placed greater tension on the feet at the bottom of the bridges and very little on the top feet. There was a tendency for buzzing from the top and they were more prone to slipping out of place.

Moving the bridges down so the band could fit across the middle of them (near the trademark) caused the bottom bridge to contact the metal band at the top of the wing joint, resulting in a loss of resonance.

The best position for the band was fitting it around the very top of the wing joint metal band. It's best to put the band on before you insert the bocal. This makes it easier and safer to move or adjust the band if needed. The band is thin enough that it should fit between the wing and long joint without pushing the joints apart.

Best band position

Unfortunately, without the band locked in place under a key, it is necessary to keep an eye on the band so it doesn't slip out of place.

Where, exactly?

Front

Back

These photos show two possible locations for the bridges. Trying both, I found the front position to be the better of the two for sound and resonance. If you like this one, you must be careful to leave clearance space between the bridges and the swinging of the whisper pad key,so the whisper pad cup doesn't get caught up on the bridge!

The Bulge

One last thing I tried was putting the band on with the fat bulge over the bridges vs. rotating the band so the bulge is on the opposite side of the joint from the bridge. The sound was better with the bulge over the bridge. This is nice, because the bulge provides a nice, easy spot for your fingers to grab onto when removing the band. The bulge needs to be positioned exactly in the middle of the bridge's width for best resonance.

Bulge over bridge

Conclusions:

The lefreQue Sound Bridge provided a noticeable improvement in the resonance of my bassoon. It also helped some of the other instruments I tried it on, but not every bassoon showed improvement.

Attention to how the bridges are deployed, which ones are used, which material is best, how to attach them, tension of the band and where to place them on the body of the bassoon are important details you should explore when trying these bridges out.

Ultimate Reed Finishing Machine

I have a new reed making machine. It's called the "Ultimate Reed Finishing Machine". It works the same way a tip profiler does, only it processes the whole blade of the reed from collar to tip.

My machine is made by the German company, Rimpl, although there are other firms that make a similar machine. I purchased it from Miller Marketing. The machine I ordered came with a template and tongue custom designed to my specifications.  I sent them three finished reeds to use in copying my scrape to the template and fitting the tongue to my reed shape and contour.

With customizing the price is about $200 more than that listed on Miller's website ($1799).  This makes this machine very expensive.  However, a Rieger tip profiler is about the same cost and it only processes the tip of the reed.

In a previous post I registered a strong opinion about expensive profilers. However, I'm very convinced that this machine is worth the extra money.  I'll explain why in a minute, but first watch this demo I made. (Warning, I have no future as a videographer!  Keep the volume control handy.  Some of the clips are recorded at a lower level than others.)


A Demo

Here is a demo I made using the machine:

Advice on using the machine:

Before making this purchase a friend lent me his machine to try.  I also asked around to find out how satisfied others were with it.

Here was the feed back I received:

• A customized model is highly recommended over the stock model. The template and tongue need to be mated to the individual's reed for accurate reproduction of the scrape and for the machine to process the blades properly.
• The reed tip needs to be closed down a bit from normal playing aperture to make the underside of the top blade flush with the surface of the template.  Failure to do this can result in a heart area that is too thin.
• Always press the reed heart down against the template before cutting to take out air pockets between blade and tongue.  (See above.)
• Always start the cut with blade positioned just to the side of the corner of the tip and work your way towards the center. By starting at the center or spine of the reed you can chop off the corner of the tip.
• So start at one corner, work your way across the blade and stop just before you get to the other corner.  Rotate the template so the blade is off to the side of this corner and finish by working your way into the center again. (See demo.)
• When fitting the blades on the template it may feel like you need to push pretty hard to get the tip of the reed up to the stop line on the template.  It may feel like you'll split the blade open.  Don't worry!  If the reed is well soaked this will not happen.  I've profiled dozens of reeds on my machine and never cracked one.
• Additionally, you make be alarmed at how wide apart the blades are pushed by the girth of the tongue.  This is necessary in order to get the blades to conform exactly to the curvature of the template.
• The instructions manual tells you to turn the knob 180° for each cut.  Ignore this advice!  Doing so will result in a "corrugated" or ridged tip cut.  Turning the wheel gradually and making more cuts than turns of the wheel will insure a smoother cut.
• After profiling the tip opening will be way too large. You will need to manipulate the tip opening, closing it down. You may need to adjust the wires as well.

 Why I like this machine:

This machine gives me a reed that measures within .002-.003" of a finished reed at EVERY point along the blade. It accurately describes the sophisticated tip scrape necessary for a good reed and mimics the taper of a finished reed from collar to tip and from side to center to side.

I leave the cut a bit thick as mentioned above to allow for breaking in and adjusting for slight differences in hardness and response from reed to reed.

I like the fact that this machine is made to profile a blank with tip cut off and not a gouged piece of cane that's waiting to be processed for the drying rack.  I have explained my preference for starting with a simple profile that's even in thickness across the cane. I like to be able to choose how much collapse I want in the tip from sides to center, not having that programmed in before the drying stage.  I count on the forming and drying process to program in a certain shape to the inside of the blank.

Practicing examples

In a previous post I discussed the 10,000 hours theory.  I've also outlined my most recent practicing regimen involving scale work using Messiean's modes from the Lacour 28 Etudes and weekly practice of an etude from that book.

I thought it might be interesting to examine the practice methods I use when tackling these studies with a special focus on Study #6.

Here is the first page of #6:

After looking it over for the first time, I had to wait a few minutes for my eyes to uncross!  This one looked hard.  The metronome marking (quarter=120) looked nearly impossible.  Lots of jumping around and low tenor clef reading.

I took a deep breath and started by practicing the scale that is used in the study.

Yikes!  A nine-note scale!   Luckily, I found that it fit the Herzberg scale patterns I hoped to use to build my skill with this scale. By practicing this scale in the permutations used by Herzberg, I was ALREADY practicing the scalar parts of this study!

But how to figure out this scale?  It didn't fit any pattern I'd seen before.  Looking at it closely, I could see it was a symmetrical scale just like the octatonic scales I'd practiced a few weeks ago,but this one was based upon repeating one whole step and two half steps twice to get through the octave.

This didn't help me when trying to play it, so here's what I came up with:  1,2,3 of a minor scale three times.  That is, the first three notes of Ab minor, followed by the first three notes of a minor, then the first three of e minor.  That's the best I could do.

I found that after a few days of practicing the scale this way, I could manage even the top speed of the Herzberg patterns, so I gained some confidence.

By the way, I was tempted to write out the scale for the complete range of the instrument, but decided not to.  I wanted to engage my ear and my finger muscle memory to help when I read the real notes in the etude.  Technique involves three of your senses; sight, hearing and touch.  If one fails you, the other two should be able to compensate.  Developing all three when practicing builds consistency and strength.

Now I was ready to tackle the etude!

First I looked it over to see what special problems might be waiting for me.  I swallowed my pride and wrote in some accidentals I knew I would miss and wrote in the note names for the low tenor clef pitches that I rarely read (low Gb!!).

I then read the etude through at half tempo (quarter = 60) noticing where I felt the most challenged and where I felt the least challenged.

After the read through I spent some time practicing little spots that looked especially thorny.

Here is how I practiced this passage.  I chose a speed at which I could play the bracketed notes perfectly five times in a row.   For me, this was quarter=100.  I then moved the metronome up a notch and tried five times at that speed, until successfully reaching the performance tempo of quarter=120.

This is what I call "burst" practicing.  In every etude there are sections that the player can play near or at tempo from the start.  By identifying and practicing those places you discover two things:

1. The places that don't need to be practiced, thereby saving time.
2. The places like the one above that need attention, but improve quickly.

It is important to choose small enough sections for this method to work.

Here are a couple of other things to keep in mind.

Those that study expertise in musicians, athletes, etc., say that to achieve mastery a skill must be successfully repeatable.  Thus, the five times perfectly rule.  It's great to have a "mountain top experience" while performing sometimes, but really most performing is about repeating success already attained through deliberate practice.

Speaking of which, it's also important to emphasize that just putting in 10,000 hours at a skill doesn't get you to mastery.  Repeatability and several other elements make up the kind of practice that achieves success, so no flailing!  That's why it's important to identify sections of a piece that don't need practicing and save them for later when you're ready to run through. For me, it was the scale passages in this etude that didn't need the work.  The jumping lines were the ones that needed my attention.

This takes self-knowledge, and it may not be realistic to expect a younger person to choose so wisely.  I know I flailed around quite a bit when I was a young practicer.

Back to the etude!

After practicing little sections like the one above, in the same session I also spent time putting together segments to make a larger section.

 Using the same rule of five times perfectly, I inched up the speed until I felt the challenge was too great.

How do I know when to punt on the speed?

Colvin talks about three zones in "Talent Is Overrated".

First is the Comfort Zone.  This is the speed at which you could play a passage perfectly while watching TV.  No learning or advancement occurs here.  The Comfort Zone may be beneficial for building calmness and confidence, but it's easy to get stuck there. Some students who have trouble attaining performance tempo over a period of time with a piece are spending too much time in the Comfort Zone!

Next is the Stretch Zone or the Learning Zone.  This is the speed (or also the amount of music) at which your brain feels gently stretched or challenged, but not overwhelmed.  You've got to pay attention to a few things, but you're not going to crash and burn. This is the zone in which improvement occurs.  Finding and staying in this zone by choosing the right speed or right amount of notes/measures for a passage makes your practice session most effective.

The next zone is called the Panic Zone!  This zone can be a lot of fun - a white-knuckle ride through Marriage of Figaro, for instance! 

What will happen, will I get it?  For success, these are questions that shouldn't be on your mind during practicing.  Practicing should be about building confidence and gently stretching your abilities.

Life in the Panic Zone can be destructive.  A failed run-through can build frustration and make you want to try it again at top speed to "see what will happen".  Well, what do you think will happen?  Maybe you're successful once, but once isn't repeatable, and isn't acceptable in a professional world of repeat performances.

Don't practice mistakes!

Back to the etude.

In a few days, I started putting together larger sections of the etude.

And then, finally the last half of page one was complete.

After I was able to play this section five times perfectly at quarter = 100 and after having worked in a similar fashion on the rest of the etude, at the end of the week I felt confident about trying a run-through at quarter = 90.  This was successful, so I tried 100 which was less so.

Note:  I had not allowed myself a run-through since the initial reading!  If you need a run through during this time, do it without the music!  Run-throughs are overrated.

I worked on the etude for another week, using the same methods.  I wasn't able to achieve the printed marking of 120, but made it up to 110 at the end of that time.

There are many other methods of practicing, of course.  This is the one that's working best for me now.  It allows me to solve problems quickly, repeat success, stretch gradually until reaching a goal of performance at a respectable tempo.

A new shaper!

I have enjoyed using my new shaper, made for me by Paul Deegan of MD Reed Products.  He has expertly copied my old Berdon #6 fold over shaper, making its design in the form of a straight shaper.

This copy is much more exact than the one made earlier for me by the Fox Products Corporation.  The design of this shaper has a little wider throat compared to most other bassoon reed shapes.  This helps mitigate a slight narrowness in sound I notice with my 7000 series Heckel.  I think it helps broaden the sound and even the scale on most bassoons as well.

The flair from throat to tip is moderate.  A large increase in width from throat to tip would (assuming an already-wide throat) make the reed unwieldy and unstable.

There is a decent amount of back flair (the reverse flair from the narrowest point near where the second wire goes to the butt), meaning that a good amount of beveling is helpful for proper tip opening contour.

Cane fits in this shaper with the bark side facing up.  This is opposite from the Fox shapers, so those used to a Fox will have to flip the cane.  It's not easy to see which way the bed is contoured (concave or convex) so it's possible to crack the cane when screwing the shaper parts together if the cane is loaded upside down.

The shaper mates with the MD Profiler by indentations made in the gouged side of the cane near both ends.  The indentations are made by two sharp ferrules set in bottom side of the shaper.  When the two sides are screwed together the indentations are made.  These indentations help the reed maker center the cane on the cane barrel of the profiler for profiling. You can see the identical ferrules on the cane barrel in the photo below.

The shaper is easy to use, however, I noticed that it scratches easily under the knife.  I contacted Paul about this and he will hard anodize the surface of the metal in future batches for greater durability, making them scratch-proof.

Straight vs. fold over shapers

Bassoon reed shapers are made in two different ways:  straight and fold over.

 

Above is a photo of a Rieger fold over shaper.  The cane is first profiled and folded in half.  Then it is slipped over the metal tongue on the left in the middle.  One side on top, one on bottom of the tongue.  The desired shape of the reed is machined into the tongue.  The two arms are rotated over the cane and clamped down.  The excess cane that hangs over the sides of the tongue is cut away.  This is how the design of the tongue is copied onto a piece of cane.

Here is a photo of a straight shaper, showing the widest point (A), most narrow (B) and butt (C) of the design.  With a straight shaper, you start without profiling, using a gouged piece of cane. I have described how to load the shaper above. The overlapping cane is cut away, much in the same way as it is with a fold over shaper.

I have used a fold over shaper for years and am quite used to it. However, I must say the straight shaper is MUCH easier to use.  Since the cane is unprofiled, you don't have to deal with the very thin, delicate cane near the fold that is normal with a fold over shaper.  Unlike using a fold over shaper, there is no chance the cane is going to slip around the shaper while using it and virtually no chance you will ruin the cane with a slip of the knife and the cane won't come apart at the fold.  All of these are hazards with a fold over shaper.

Here are some tips on how to shape with a fold over shaper.  Scroll down to the "after profiling" section and read steps 3-5.  There is a short video of me shaping (snore!!)

Knife work is easier and somewhat safer with a straight shaper, too.

So why use a fold over shaper?  To begin with, many bassoonists shaped cane by hand, without use of a shaper.  When this technology became available, prominent teachers had machinists design shapers with the dimensions of these shapes in mind.

With a fold over shaper, the taper only needs to be duplicated once (right side and left side must be symmetrical), so that was the easier route for the machinist.  This was the predominate method of shaper manufacture for years.  Indeed, it is much easier to copy a fold over shape and manufacture it than it is to convert a fold over shape into a straight shape.

Conversion requires not only precise copying of the shape, but also must account for any contouring of the shaper surface from left to right.  Some makers leave this area perfectly flat, others contour to match the curvature of a piece of cane.  Any copy needs to take this into consideration.

Also, in making a straight shaper, the tapers of the shape must be reproduced three times (top right, top left, bottom right, bottom left). 

However, with computer programming, this can now be done easily.

A very thorough discussion of the two types of shapers is found on the Herzberg Projects website.  Take note: Herzberg uses the term "flat" when referring to a straight shaper.

A new profiler!

Happy New Year!  

This post marks the first anniversary of this blog.  I hope you readers have found it useful, revealing and entertaining.  I have enjoyed doing it.  I look forward to the next year of posts and have several topics ready for investigation.

I will devote this post to news about a new profiler made by Paul Deegan of MD Reed Products. My students and I have recently purchased these tools. 

The profiler is remarkable for two reasons: price and quality.

Price

The profiler sells for $599, making it one of the least expensive on the market.  MD also made a straight shaper for me that is a copy of the Berdon #6 that I regularly use.  More about the shaper in my next post.

Many college bassoon students have access to profilers owned by their schools or teachers while enrolled.  After graduation, in addition to paying off considerable debt, they often find themselves without access to a profiler.  While not as sophisticated, this profiler is much more affordable than the VanHoesen Hunt, Rieger, Herzberg profilers, for instance.

There are other profilers available at this price point, but this one is the best I've found for the money.

Quality

A wealth of information on the manufacture and adjustment of the profiler can be found at MD Reed Products

Perhaps the most unique feature of the profiler is the way you adjust the thickness of the cut.  This is done by rotating one or both of the adjustment wheels found at both ends under the ramp that the cutting arm wheel follows.

One wheel adjusts for the reed tip area, the other for the back of the blade. The wheels are rotated manually, without the need to loosen and re-tighten set screws or without the need to remove posts to shim.  However, the wheels lock in place and cannot be moved by accident. Thus, it is quick and easy to adjust the profile on this machine.

Other profilers I've tried at this price point do not offer some of the options that this one does:

Customized ramp design

I sent Paul Deegan a list of my ideal measurements for the spine of a profiled reed blade and he designed a ramp to my specifications.  While not exact, it came in very close to what I wanted.  We are now working on some refinements. I have not encountered another dealer who is this interested in getting thing so exactly right for a machine at this price.


Spine or no spine option

The tungsten carbide rods protruding from the cane barrel have a machined flat spot that makes a very slight spine on the profiled blank, giving a start to the thin sides/thick center "horizontal" profile necessary for a finished reed.  This can be removed simply by rotating the rod or ordering without the flat spot.

Scoring on the cane barrel

The cane barrel is scored at the midpoint for scoring the fold and at both ends for proper centering.  This can be done for cane of varying lengths.  Mine is scored for 120mm cane.

In the photo above you may notice what looks like two set screws set into the metal just before the end score marks.  These make indentations to the gouged sides of the cane that mate with identically placed screws in the shaper. If you shape first, the marks are made when setting the cane in the shaper and screwing it shut.  After shaping, the cane can be easily centered on the profiler's cane barrel (photo above) because the cane locks in place when indentations are set in over the screws in the barrel.

This is especially important if you use an eccentric gouge and put a spine in the profile.  With these indentations and screws, it's very easy to line up the cane on the barrel and get a symmetrical profile in relation to the gouge.

The way these tools are mated is similar to the Herzberg profiler and shaper.

The blade 

The profiler comes with a carbide blade and a spare.  MD Reed Products offers a sharpening service with postage paid by the company.  My blade is very sharp and cuts beautifully.  It is set to cut a thickness of .005" at a time.  

Product review time out

I'd like to take a short time out from this review to talk about how to profile effectively using any machine.  No, profiling is not dummy-proof!  Here are some tips:

• Use very little downward pressure on the cutting arm when profiling.  Excess pressure may rip the cane and can compress the cane fibers. If the blade doesn't cut well using this method, then it needs sharpening.
• Do not be in a hurry!  Flip the barrel several times and take your time finishing.  Don't finish one side all at once.  Again, haste can result in ripped cane and an inaccurate profile
• Watch for cane fibers in the forks, in the blade clearance or on the ramp.  Get these out of the way before starting the cut or you won't get the profile you want.
• Profile in one direction.  Don't return the cutting arm with the blade contacting the cane. This can dull the blade and "iron" the cane.  Instead, return the cutting arm with the blade slightly raised above the cane.  Make a very flat oval shape with your wrist instead of a simple left-right motion.
• If you notice the cane becoming so thin that it is transparent and you can clearly see the barrel through the cane, STOP!! The profiler may be out of adjustment and by stopping now, you will avoid scraping the barrel with the blade.
• When finished profiling you can score the collars and center marks by holding a knife point to the surface of the cane and rotating the barrel with your free hand.

Back to profiler review

Here is a demonstration of the MD profiler.

In short, I am very impressed with the quality and options available with this profiler for the price.  There are other profilers more sophisticated with more options, but this is the best one out there dollar-for-dollar.

Though it offers just a very simple spine and none of the tip detail of a Herzberg or VanHoesen profiler, it is extremely well-made, durable and reliable. I have my reasons for not owning one of these fancier profilers.  I'll discuss them in a future post.

I use this profiler in conjunction with a straight shaper that MD copied from my old Berdon #6 and a Rieger tip finisher.  This gives me what I need in a good reed blank.

My next post will investigate the shaper.