MindApe
1 post
Apr 13, 2009
2:12 PM
|
So I'm still a relatively new player, and I've been especially fond of my MB in A to get all those nice "chucky" chords, which I love...I chuck more than a woodchuck. So I recently bought a SP20 in B-flat and have found the lower notes significantly tougher to draw, as well as the harp being much quieter in general. It also doesn't chuck as much as I would like when I'm jamming along with Sonny and Brownie.
So do y'all think it's a question of the brand, the key, or just this specific harp? Are plastic combed harps generally less sensitive?
|
snakes
179 posts
Apr 13, 2009
3:26 PM
|
Not sure I can answer your question per se - because I think it boils down to personal preference for your choice of comb material. That said I find plastic combs more responsive. I know I just contradicted myself a bit, but I am trying to illustrate that it kinda depends on the player and what his embrouchure, etc. are. On the other hand my experience with Hohners is that their quality is hit or miss. You may have just got a bad one...
|
jonsparrow
93 posts
Apr 13, 2009
5:35 PM
|
well my Bb is a little stiffer then say my A harp. an i think SP20 harps are very responsive an play wonderfull. though MB harps sound alot warmer but are much harder to play.
|
DaDoom
79 posts
Apr 13, 2009
11:38 PM
|
Hey MindApe
My experiences with SP20s are all very positive so far. The quality is very consistent and they play loud and clear in all keys I've tried (ranging from A to high F). They seem louder than other harps to me although I have noticed that it's hard to tell which harp is really louder. To know it for sure you'd have to measure it in db. Comb material is debatable. It depends on what you like best I guess. I find that harder materials (plastic, metal) sound clearer whereas wood sounds a bit warmer.
There's a test on the internet that measures the effects of a comb change and apparently it makes a real difference measurable in db and frequency spectrum:
http://www.bluestime.it/custom_italia/index.html
It's in Italian but the figures in the tables should be clear all the same.
|
MrVerylongusername
245 posts
Apr 15, 2009
4:18 AM
|
DaDoom, that's an interesting article. I have to say I used Google to translate, which obviously produces less than perfect translation, but I got the gist of it.
I'm less than convinced by the experiment as a piece of science. It is flawed in a number of respects:
First it compares two custom harps. One a Hering 1923 with aluminium comb, the other a custom Marine Band. Apples and oranges. There are too many other factors there (material/design/setup) which could account for the differences in volume and tone.
The Golden Melody results are a little more interesting, but again flawed. This time a comparison was made between a stock GM and one (I think stock - it wasn't very clear from Google's translation) fitted with a wood comb. In spite of what the author says, a difference of just over 1db in volume is actually very slight. He completely misunderstands a log scale. 1db is actually around the smallest difference which the human ear can distinguish. Since the harps were mouth blown, such a difference could easily be explained away. As for the spectral analysis - I'm no expert, but I think comparing a soundclip of 0.25secs with one 0.04secs is invalid. There is no mention of standardising the distance from harp to mic (proximity effect anyone?) and listening to the soundclips, there's too much vibrato in the notes and handcupping effects to ensure that the two isolated sounclips are comparable.
As a harp player, I'd say there's enough debate to warrant a more scientific investigation. As someone with a science degree I'd say this was a very flawed experiment and the conclusions drawn are far from objective.
|
