Gene Ammons Setup?
EPCarigo
lecture about personal setup!...Thanks in advance!
ASILANT57
I think Jug's more classic 50s records
have him playing on a Conn 10m w/ a
Brilhart hard rubber mpc.
After he got out of prison in the early
60s he was able to obtain a Mk VI , but
stayed w/ the rubber mpc.
A lot of players of note have played
10Ms : Harold Land , Dexter Gordon
Brew Moore , Sal Nistico , Willis
Jackson , to name the few that
readily come to mind ; and, w/ out
a doubt, countless players have used
Brilhart mpcs. w/ various results in timbre.
I hope you aren't aggravated by what
seems like a LECTURE , as I'm not trying
to trivialize your interest in players' setups
I think you could probably get his sound
on virtually any horn or mpc.if you could
internalize his concept of how to BLOW
into the horn .
Gene's thing was , IMO , mainly about
inflection . The way he attacked and re -
leased his notes( especially on ballads ) ,
his personal way w/ vibrato, and , among
other things, the way he played * time * ;
EXTREMELY personal , a very difficult
thing to cop ...... good luck trying .
I must say , though , that you have im-
peccable taste ; Jug is a CLASS ACT .
So, let me suggest that you contact
Gayle at www.vintagesax.com for a good
price on a good vintage 10m , and then
J. Clark over at www.4windsmusic.com
He has a variety of old Brilhart tenor
mpcs. and he'll hook ya' up ; jes' tell him
ya' want the Gene Ammons model <G>
Good Luck !!!!!
Dave Williams
--- I wonder what Trane would sound like
on a 10m and a Brilhart ???
Jive Dadson
Oops. Sorry. Wrong newsgroup.
J.
King of Kings
Trane played a 10M in the early part of his career. Even earlier, a
friend of mine was in the Navy Band with him in Hawaii--Trane was an
alto player then and not the greatest player on the instrument according
to his reports. Out of the times I heard Trane at the Half Note and
Birdland in the sixties, once I saw him with a rubber mouthpiece--a
Berg. And...he sounded like Trane!
I thought Jug played an Ebolin not a Hard Rubber but this is just from
pictures--never saw him live. My favorite tenor piece is my 7* 90xxx
Hard Rubber Bril.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
ASILANT57
>
>Oops. Sorry. Wrong newsgroup.
>
>J.
that was some serious jive , jive .....jive??
sa...@mindspring.com
early 60's and of course he was asked to do his version of Canadian Sunset ,
it was very well known from one of his current albums, after he blew the
house down doing it he came off for a smoke and a drink and did answer a few
questions from the crowd. I did ask him about his set up and he was playing
a Selmer sax with a
4* Ebonite numbered Brilhardt with a #3 Rico reed. you have to remember
that those old Ebonite pieces were much more open than today's facings ,
back then the standard open alto and tenor piece was the 3* Brilhardt so his
4* was a pretty open set up , back then realistically they were probably
around .110 tips for the tenor.
ASILANT57 wrote in message <19990704222157...@ng-cc1.aol.com>...
Mitch
(just try to find space for a nickel on any wall in my house) and though
you posted in jest to poke fun at all the "what setup does xx use"
questions, the brand of canvass, type, hardness and quality of brush and
paint, brand of thinner, humidity, etc. are all as important to an
artist as horn, mpc, reed are to a committed sax player.
Were I to try to re-produce a DaVinci pencil sketch, I would pick up a
pencil a piece of paper that most closely resembled the ones that were
available to him at the time.
Same goes for sound reproduction, no? To produce the sound of a favorite
player's light, open, airy sound, you might want to stay away from a
horn and setup that makes getting that sound a whole lot of work.
Even the brand and type of microphone used when recording makes a
difference.
I have tried to get Ben Webster's sound on my horn for months with seven
or eight different mpc, and all kinds of reeds on my Martin. I can come
pretty close. I put my (just purchased) old NY Meyer with a 2 Java on my
teacher's MK VI and went for it and got that sound I was looking for
with ZERO effort. The proper setup and horn helped a lot, in my case.
While questions that go..."what did so'n so play, and what mpc did he
use?" seem tiring, it all goes back to finding the right tool for the
right job - simple as that. You use a shovel and pick to dig ditches,
not canoe paddles, pencils for sketching, not crayons, and (for me) an
old NY Meyer 6M on a MK VI to emulate (not nes. duplicate) a sound I
admire.
Ask Mario Andretti if he thinks he could have won his first race if he
hadn't driven a properly tuned race car. Sure, he would have applied the
same basic skills and tactics, but Andretti driving a Buick station
wagon around a race track would have been like handing any great player
an out of tune horn with a poorly matched mpc and reed. Even 'trane
would find lipping a poor horn into tune tiring and a waste of effort if
a better horn was available.
Mitch
Jive Dadson wrote:
> I love Rembrandt paintings. Anyone know what brand of brushes he used? Oops. Sorry. Wrong newsgroup.
Piotr Michalowski
Mitch wrote:
> Actually, I come from a family of professional artists and paint myself,
> (just try to find space for a nickel on any wall in my house) and though
> you posted in jest to poke fun at all the "what setup does xx use"
> questions, the brand of canvass, type, hardness and quality of brush and
> paint, brand of thinner, humidity, etc. are all as important to an
> artist as horn, mpc, reed are to a committed sax player.
>
(snip)
>
> I have tried to get Ben Webster's sound on my horn for months with seven or eight different mpc, and all
> kinds of reeds on my Martin. I can come pretty close. I put my (just purchased) old NY Meyer with a 2 Java
> on my teacher's MK VI and went for it and got that sound I was looking for with ZERO effort. The proper
> setup and horn helped a lot, in my case.
I think that you may have unwittingly proven the point that you were trying to argue against. The setup that
you used to reproduce Webster's tone may have worked for you, but it has little to do with what he used, in
fact it is quite the opposite. He was famous for playing with an extremely hard reed; indeed there are
anecdotes about other tenor players not being able to get a sound out of his horn.
Equipment is undoubtedly important, but one of the beauties of the saxophone, especially the tenor, is the
fact that it seems to have almost infinite tonal possibilities and much of it dependes on the player--the
player's skill, but also the player's body.
Piotr
Mitch
>
> I think that you may have unwittingly proven the point that you were trying to argue against. The setup that
> you used to reproduce Webster's tone may have worked for you, but it has little to do with what he used, in
> fact it is quite the opposite. He was famous for playing with an extremely hard reed; indeed there are
> anecdotes about other tenor players not being able to get a sound out of his horn.
>
> Equipment is undoubtedly important, but one of the beauties of the saxophone, especially the tenor, is the
> fact that it seems to have almost infinite tonal possibilities and much of it dependes on the player--the
> player's skill, but also the player's body.
> Piotr
This is all true enough, but I didn't say I used his setup, I found one
that works for me.
Knowing that x used y is at best, a starting point - like knowing that
michaelangelo painted onto wet plaster. Not telling an art student that
important fact would make it impossible for the student to duplicate the
technique, unless by some fluke, the student stumbled upon the idea and
came up with the results he wanted. In this case, to come as close as
possible to a master's work.
Giving a medium skilled sax player a random horn, random mpc. and random
reed and a stack of 'Tain albums seems cruel to me. We all need as much
guidance as we can get to succeed, and learning the tools and techniques
of the masters is an important part of it. I'm pretty sure no-one on
this newsgroup is logging in on an old 286 computer with a 900 baud
modem. Would you advise someone shopping for a new computer to try one
for a few months, even if they are cheap and can get the job done? Of
course not. Same goes for saxes. I tell anyone who askes why I bought my
'48 Martin (and why I'm looking for a MK VI) instead of renting an El
cheapo for $20.00/month. The answer is that it work for me, may work for
them too. This is only helpful to those who, like me, are climbing the
same ladder.
An alto player in a community band I play with can play circles around
me. But he sounds like s**t. With a better setup, he would sound much
better, and he knows it and can afford the best. I have learned not to
bother playing a setup like his, just like I know that I would like to
*try* a setup like Getz's, Webster's, Bird's, etc. Knowing what they
played and hearing the sound THEY were able to produce on them is a good
starting point for setting myself up with equipment that will make me
happy, without stumbling around in the dark, playing everything in sight
just hoping to get the right combination.
Mitch
King of Kings
Piotr Michalowski <pio...@umich.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Mitch wrote:
>
> > Actually, I come from a family of professional artists and paint myself,
> > (just try to find space for a nickel on any wall in my house) and though
> > you posted in jest to poke fun at all the "what setup does xx use"
> > questions, the brand of canvass, type, hardness and quality of brush and
> > paint, brand of thinner, humidity, etc. are all as important to an
> > artist as horn, mpc, reed are to a committed sax player.
> >
>
> (snip)
>
> >
> > I have tried to get Ben Webster's sound on my horn for months with seven or eight different mpc, and all
> > kinds of reeds on my Martin. I can come pretty close. I put my (just purchased) old NY Meyer with a 2 Java
> > on my teacher's MK VI and went for it and got that sound I was looking for with ZERO effort. The proper
> > setup and horn helped a lot, in my case.
>
> you used to reproduce Webster's tone may have worked for you, but it has little to do with what he used, in
> fact it is quite the opposite. He was famous for playing with an extremely hard reed; indeed there are
> anecdotes about other tenor players not being able to get a sound out of his horn.
>
> Equipment is undoubtedly important, but one of the beauties of the saxophone, especially the tenor, is the
> fact that it seems to have almost infinite tonal possibilities and much of it dependes on the player--the
> player's skill, but also the player's body.
> Piotr
>
I would change that to say the player's CONCEPT and how hard he is
willing to work to implement that concept both by practice AND having
the proper equipment. The player's body is totally immaterial. Johnny
Griffin being just a little guy with one of the biggest sounds ever and
some well-known larger guys with sounds a bit light in the loafers. No
names mentioned since they are, after all, larger!
Jive Dadson
that made me a fanatic for rote copying as the best way to begin
developing a style -- as a painter or a musician.
I'm also a member of MJA. My name's Jive, and I'm a mouthpiece
junky. (Together: "Hi, Jive!")
I remember a decade or so ago when I decided Dextor Gordon had the
finest sound ever produced. So I poked around and asked questions,
and eventually I came across a horn player who knew Dextor Gordon.
What setup did he play, huh? huh? Answer: number 8 Otto Link with a 2
1/2 Rico. OKAY! I bought an 8 Otto Link and a bunch of those
horrible Rico reeds. At least (I figured), I would know that with
that setup, it was POSSIBLE to sound like that.
Wrong. I couldn't blow that thing worth squat. I sounded like a
constipated elephant trying to make poopoo. (Oh, grow up. You know
that sound.) I might be able to play that setup now, but it no longer
matters. I've got a piece that responds well, and that I can
control. That's what matters.
What matters more, is that I eventually learned to play a couple of
dozen choruses of Dextor Gordon solos EXACTLY like he played them.
That's how I learned about his "sound". That's how I learned that his
setup had about as much to do with his "sound" as how I adjusted the
treble control on the stereo. Twiddling that knob makes the sound
different, but it's still Dextor Gordon.
Jive
grego
well exporting my canoe paddles to the USA, hey,, I might be able to sue you
(smerk)
grego
Mitch wrote in message <3780A56F...@mitchellandrus.com>...
>Actually, I come from a family of professional artists and paint myself,
>(just try to find space for a nickel on any wall in my house) and though
>you posted in jest to poke fun at all the "what setup does xx use"
>questions, the brand of canvass, type, hardness and quality of brush and
>paint, brand of thinner, humidity, etc. are all as important to an
>artist as horn, mpc, reed are to a committed sax player.
>
>pencil a piece of paper that most closely resembled the ones that were
>available to him at the time.
>
>Same goes for sound reproduction, no? To produce the sound of a favorite
>player's light, open, airy sound, you might want to stay away from a
>horn and setup that makes getting that sound a whole lot of work.
>
>Even the brand and type of microphone used when recording makes a
>difference.
>
>or eight different mpc, and all kinds of reeds on my Martin. I can come
>pretty close. I put my (just purchased) old NY Meyer with a 2 Java on my
>teacher's MK VI and went for it and got that sound I was looking for
>with ZERO effort. The proper setup and horn helped a lot, in my case.
>