If building materials don't matter in instruments.......

[Rick Denney]

Why do so many people swear by the new stainless steel mouthpieces? Does the metal actually make the difference, or is it merely the mouthpiece design? (probably a combination of the two IMO) Also, what about the added brightness in tone on a silver plated instrument? Personally, I prefer gold plated mouthpieces to silver ones. All these factors lead me to believe that materials do make a difference. Can anyone elaborate on this? Thanks in advance.

I'm told by people I believe that the difference between stainless mouthpieces and titanium mouthpieces is noticeable. I can't tell it myself. Nor can I explain it physically without a lot of guessing, but that suggest to me that I can't refute it without a lot of guessing, either.

But the stainless mouthpieces have a very nice, smooth feel, and they are strong and durable even with a very sharp edge on the end of the shank. I think they feel like a gold-plated mouthpiece.

Rick "who would buy a stainless mouthpiece just for the feel if the shape was perfect" Denney

[Charlie Goodman]

All these factors lead me to believe that materials do make a difference.

It depends on what you mean by "make a difference".

This isn't meant to sound flippant, but there are two basic issues at work here.

The first involves the production of sound from the player's perspective. This involves a ton of psychology and other aspects of playing that can't be readily measured.

The other involves the physics and mechanics of sound production. This is obviously quantifiable and measurable.

According to the second issue, the material doesn't matter.

According to the first issue, the jury is still out.

If you think it makes a difference, it makes a difference - but probably not one that can be measured.

But what about things like the polycarbonate bell on Chuck D.'s tuba (abbreviated to save me from Rick Denney or Bloke...)? He seems to think that there's a difference, and it doesn't seem like a musician of his caliber would be easily fooled into imagining a difference in playing characteristics when there isn't one. And what about, assuming that it could be built, a Styrofoam, ceramic, or wooden tuba? It doesn't seem possible to me that there would be no "quantifiable" difference whatsover between the sound produced by those materials.

[Chuck(G)]

Somehow, I don't think a tuba bell made of foam rubber would be very popular--or sound very good.

[Dan Schultz]

If someone told me that the hardest material would make the best tuba I would not argue. However, there is a limit to what materials can be economicaly used to fabricate a tuba. Generally, the softer the material, the more energy it will absorb. Rubber would not be a good candidate for a tuba.

[Chuck(G)]

If someone told me that the hardest material would make the best tuba I would not argue. However, there is a limit to what materials can be economicaly used to fabricate a tuba. Generally, the softer the material, the more energy it will absorb. Rubber would not be a good candidate for a tuba.

Merely putting forth an extreme example to illustrate a point. All materials will absorb vibrational energy to some extent. How soft can a material get before it matters?

Someone mentioned building a tuba of cheese, to which I ask "Brie or Parmesan?"

[Kevin Hendrick]

Someone mentioned building a tuba of cheese, to which I ask "Brie or Parmesan?"

'Atsa Gouda question ...

[Dan Schultz]

If someone told me that the hardest material would make the best tuba I would not argue. However, there is a limit to what materials can be economicaly used to fabricate a tuba. Generally, the softer the material, the more energy it will absorb. Rubber would not be a good candidate for a tuba.

Merely putting forth an extreme example to illustrate a point. All materials will absorb vibrational energy to some extent. How soft can a material get before it matters?

Someone mentioned building a tuba of cheese, to which I ask "Brie or Parmesan?"

I worked on a project a few years back to develop a plastic (totally non-corrosive) horn for automobiles. Some of the very best horns from years gone by had aluminum die-cast projectors or what we called 'seashells'. Trying various plastics, I experimented with just about every plastic compound from polycarbonate (fairly soft) to Fortran (very hard resembling characteristics similar to steel). We finally settled on a PVC/ABS alloy because it was the best material we could buy under our cost restraints. Fortran made an excellent horn but at a cost of well over $5 a pound was cost prohibitive and also not a good candidate because it does not do well in untrasonic welding applications. I would think Fortran would make a very nice tuba bell but who's gonna pay the $250,000 for an injection mold to make it!

I would think the performance characteristics would begin to diminish noticeably with each level of material 'softness'.

[Dan Schultz]

1.) How can a rubber tuba not sound different than a metal one? I don't know how to explain this. What I think may be happening is the initial sound waves will always vibrate in the same way, and then the material will vibrate in different ways, interfering with the initial sound waves.

It's not a matter of changing the sound waves as much as that rubber tuba is going to absorb quit a lot of the energy you induce into it. How much will affect the sound? Who knows?.... but I'll betcha you would be able to tell the difference.

For an experiment, maybe you can wrap your tuba in blankets and shove a truncated cone of carpet pad down your bell. I'm not trying to be silly here.... just looking to demonstrate a concept.

[Kevin Hendrick]

... I prefer the "air guitar" over all other types of guitar construction.

To "air" is human ...

[jacobg]

It seems that carbon fiber is cheap enough to be used by fledgling bike frame companies, who can't have operating expenses that much bigger than your average boutique tuba company.

[TexTuba]

Anybody ever try to make a carbon fiber mouthpiece just for kicks? How practical is it?









Ralph

[Chuck(G)]

It seems that carbon fiber is cheap enough to be used by fledgling bike frame companies, who can't have operating expenses that much bigger than your average boutique tuba company.

If I'm not mistaken, the reason for using carbon fiber in a resin composite is that carbon offers greater strength than, say, glass fiber.

If that's the case, why bother? I wasn't aware that a tuba needed to be awfully strong. Seems to me that a fiberglass tuba would be less expensive to build.

...and it seems that there's already someone doing just this:

http://www.musik-glassl.de/home.html

[Kevin Hendrick]

If I'm not mistaken, the reason for using carbon fiber in a resin composite is that carbon offers greater strength than, say, glass fiber.

If that's the case, why bother? I wasn't aware that a tuba needed to be awfully strong. Seems to me that a fiberglass tuba would be less expensive to build.

...and it seems that there's already someone doing just this:

http://www.musik-glassl.de/home.html

There are two possibilities when "material A" is stronger than "material B", but no heavier: (1) use the same amount (which makes the component stronger, but no heavier), or (2) use less (which can make the component either lighter-but-the-same-strength or a-little-lighter-and-a-little-stronger). Lighter-but-the-same-strength might be worth paying more for ...

[Rick Denney]

If I'm not mistaken, the reason for using carbon fiber in a resin composite is that carbon offers greater strength than, say, glass fiber.

Does FRP use the same binder plastic as carbon composites? I don't think so. It seems like fiberglass uses a polyester resin, while carbon composites are usually constructed with epoxy resins. You can tell us the difference, which I think matters here. I frankly don't know, but I figure you will, heh, heh.

I do know that you can dribble a carbon-composite tuba bell like a basketball and it won't break, while fiberglass sousaphones are not known to be indestructible. I have handled one that was made by the same fellow that made one for CD.

Rick "thinking that CF has more tensile strength, but the compressive strength is provided by the binder" Denney

[Chuck(G)]

Does FRP use the same binder plastic as carbon composites? I don't think so. It seems like fiberglass uses a polyester resin, while carbon composites are usually constructed with epoxy resins. You can tell us the difference, which I think matters here. I frankly don't know, but I figure you will, heh, heh.

First off, polyester is cheap compared to epoxy.

You can do carbon or fiberglass with either binder. Epoxy's more expensive and takes longer to reach full cure. But when I'm wrapping shovel handles, I'll use epoxy+fiberglass--if a handle bends under stress, no harm. Do the same thing with polyester and it'll start cracking.

Epoxy's also used when laminating up a wooden canoe--it's not nearly as brittle, so scraping a rock will not produce nearly the mess on an epoxy-bonded canoe that it will on one that's been made iwth polyester resin will.

Similarly, if I wanted a bulletproof flight case, I'd specify a layup of carbon, glass or kevlar in epoxy. That's not what Walt Johnson uses, however, and I imagine the reason is that polyester + glass is "good enough" and it's lighter.

http://winshipmodels.tripod.com/resins_ ... erials.htm

OTOH, it's simple enough to repair a polyester laminate--it's called "Bondo".