Gary 62
110 posts
Feb 23, 2016
8:11 PM
|
Title says it all guys so is it better to back the reeds out a bit more or have them closer for smooth bending?
One of the reasons i'm asking is because i'm sure i watched Adam in a video where he shows you how he adjusts reeds and he talked about backing some out for better bends.
What do you all think?
|
MindTheGap
1210 posts
Feb 24, 2016
12:05 AM
|
That's interesting. The only thing I've found like that is on the 3 draw bends on my higher key harps. I found that if I set the blow reed to be as close-as-can-be the 3D bends seemed very tight and twitchy compared to the neighbouring holes. Making that gap bit wider seemed to calm things down. But it could be my technique at fault. Maybe they should be set for maximum response and the player should work with that. Interested to hear about this.
----------
Favourite Threads
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 24, 2016 12:07 AM
|
Killa_Hertz
617 posts
Feb 24, 2016
2:34 AM
|
My meathod here. I set them Tight. Basically my starting point is to close them down until they choke. Then back em of a bit. Then work with that. If a certain hole seems to choke under attack, open it up a smidge.
Remember that both reeds in each hole are related. So if you adjust one, you should adjust the other. SMALL CORRECTIONS to both will sometimes go a long way.
The 3 hole i find to be the most picky. I have to really play with it sometimes to get all bends to hit easily.
I think once you get a better playing position (via open mouth/throat) it causes to open them slightly. Ive found I've been opening the 2 hole on some of my harps a bit lately because of this. My theory anyway.
But start with tight and work from there for a while is my advice.
Edit: if you breathe lightly thru the hole and get too much air before it sounds its no good. It should sound with very little air, immediately
----------
"Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
Last Edited by Killa_Hertz on Feb 24, 2016 2:40 AM
|
SuperBee
3437 posts
Feb 24, 2016
2:37 AM
|
It depends. You need balance in the chamber.
But the reed response is not all about the gap at the free end.
I suppose the real but not very helpful answer is that whatever works best for you is best. So experiment a little, but don't go crazy. Joe Spiers has suggested the ideal gap will be something similar to the thickness of the tip of the reed. So you can try up to twice as wide as that. I'd say anything more than that is unlikely to be good. And you wouldn't want to go too much closer.
When you adjust them, try to keep both reeds in the chamber fairly similar. By all means experiment with that though.
I think ideally, the gap is as wide as possible while still responding to your lightest normal breath pressure without hesitating.
If a reed is tough to bend...and you are skilled enough at bending to know the difference...it may be about the gaps but it may be about the reed shape. I'm in the middle of repairing some harps for a client right now, so let's not go there right now. Try gapping first because that's the easiest. If you don't get anywhere with that, then we'll talk
|
Killa_Hertz
618 posts
Feb 24, 2016
2:45 AM
|
Ok so somewhere in between the two is the right answer. Bee seems to prefer the open side. I prefer tighter, but either way , a space about as thick as the reed at the end is about right. I go a lil the than that usually. But you ll have to play with it N see
Also bee touched on reed shaping. This could be something to look into.
----------
"Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
Last Edited by Killa_Hertz on Feb 24, 2016 2:46 AM
|
SuperBee
3438 posts
Feb 24, 2016
2:54 AM
|
I'd rather err slightly on the wide side because better dynamic range. So when reed shaping I'm looking for the shape that lets me have a most open gap that still responds with lightest breath. This will give best dynamic range.
That's my current thinking. But as I said above..it's trite but what's best is how you find it..dick sjoeberg I think said 'every customiser has their own truth' and I've added that to my memory book of wise words from harp techs
|
Gary 62
111 posts
Feb 24, 2016
10:47 AM
|
Great responses guys that has provided a lot of food for thought. I got into this OB thing where i set the reeds ultra tight but i was so fed up with the reeds constantly sticking that i have given up the OB idea and just gone back to playing with normal and bent notes. This got me thinking about the reeds offsets and action for regular playing.
|
Killa_Hertz
623 posts
Feb 24, 2016
8:13 PM
|
Glad to be of help. If i was. Lol.
I hear u Bee. I think your probably right. When i first started i played with a mouth position that worked for this setting. But as ive been trying to learn to play deeper and more resonant, by breathing With the diaphragm and all that, i find that the notes tend to choke more often. So i have found that I've been opening gaps ( very slightly, but it don't take much).
I have also noticed that when playing this way the throat/mouth position can be touchy especially on 2 draw. If i dont have everything just right it almost chokes. If i twitch a throat muscle or tongue muscle the tone gets funky fast. Does anyone know what im talking about?
----------
"Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
|
MindTheGap
1214 posts
Feb 25, 2016
1:37 AM
|
kHz - Re your comment on 2 draw. I never had the 'beginners can't play the 2 draw' syndrome myself, but I do experience what you say as I make the 2D sound 'rounder' (more open throat, more like an 'Oh' sound). It tends towards choking, I guess there's a limit.
Old story I've trotted out before, but I went to see a teacher specifically to see what he did to get a big 2D sound (no hands). I recorded him and analysed the spectrum. Turns out, very clearly, he shaped his mouth to enhance the 3rd harmonic. It's more towards the sharp end of the timbre, but as well as objectively increasing the volume, subjectively it made the timbre more complex and interesting. Make of that what you will, but it is a repeatable fact. I went home and practised/recorded it and could make basically the same sound in the end.
The 'rounder' sound, I think, involves more of the 1st and 2nd harmonics but they are dull on their own. And the mouth shape required (as you observe) tends to lead to choking. My conclusion is that you have to do a bit of both.
----------
Favourite Threads
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 25, 2016 1:38 AM
|
Killa_Hertz
624 posts
Feb 25, 2016
2:56 AM
|
So mtg ... if i understand you correctly ... your saying kind of a big open throat/back of the mouth, with the front of the mouth having a touch of the EEE vowel sound to drag in a bit of high end?
The harmonics thing, I'm not sure what the means. 1st, 2nd, 3rd harmonic of the harp?
Im glad you know what im talking about tho.
----------
"Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
Last Edited by Killa_Hertz on Feb 25, 2016 2:57 AM
|
MindTheGap
1215 posts
Feb 25, 2016
3:10 AM
|
I believe I know what the end product should be, but that doesn't mean I can do it myself! Or indeed explain how to do it. We'd need a teacher like Winslow or Iceman to work that out. Or yourself, shortly, given the focus you are applying to this instrument.
The teacher I mentioned is into throat singing and all that, so very good with manipulating the sounds very precisely. What I did was to play around with mouth shapes til my spectrum looked like his, and (unsurprisingly, but satisfyingly) it sounded the same.
In practical terms though, making different vowel sounds changes the mix of harmonics. My experience is that the vowel sounds I need for harmonica for a bit more odd and extreme than the eee's and oh's in English. Well, my version of English anyway.
But what you said, my guess is yes, something along those lines. Try doing that, then taking the harp out of your mouth, and see what the noise is then. Eeeuueuow!
Harmonics:
1st harmonic = the fundamental tone e.g. A=440Hz
2nd harmonic = 2x1st, 880Hz (octave)
3rd harmonic = 3x1st, 1,320Hz (octave + a fifth)
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 25, 2016 3:25 AM
|
MindTheGap
1216 posts
Feb 25, 2016
3:30 AM
|
...btw re harmonics, if only you had a computer you could use Audacity to play around with those :) Generate a set of sine waves tones at those frequencies, then move the individual faders around to created different unearthly mouthy sounds. Actually you need a bit of 4th harmonic too for completeness.
I did mention my geek status didn't I?
When you do the hand-cupping thing, that supresses harmonics too which gives those other kinds of sounds. That's why to get a nice Wah you need a strong, harmonically rich tone going on behind, so that when you open up you hear a big difference in timbre.
And when you cup a mic hard, you get loads of 1st harmonic (the fundamental) and a bit of 2nd which is a dull sound, but the distorting mic/amp/speaker chain adds back in harmonics and non-harmonic partials to give all those rich textures. It's a non-linear system so can do that.
I thank you.
Now if I could put all this into practice, I'd be a happy man.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 25, 2016 5:47 AM
|
Killa_Hertz
625 posts
Feb 25, 2016
9:38 AM
|
Interesting.
Also Ive never heard the hand wah described lime that.
" That's why to get a nice Wah you need a strong, harmonically rich tone going on behind, so that when you open up you hear a big difference in timbre."
That is interesting aswell because i like to think i have a pretty good hand wah. Decent. But i never really worked on it. I just kinda used it lightly when i practiced, but it wasn't very effective so i didn't pay it much attention. But after a while of really working on my tone, one day it just sounded great outta nowhere. And now i use it a lot. I never put the two together. I never really thought about it. It just worked n that was good enough, but now i know why. Also the other key is getting your hands good n locked together, but i had been doing that before with less than great results. The tone definitely put it all together.
Ive been thinking for a while now that tone is so much more important than anything else. You can play super fast and articulate every note, but with a mediocre tone its just ok. But you can play mary had a little lamb with killer tone and it'll sound phenomenal.
Anyways. I'm rambling .... sorry for hijacking the thread.
----------
"Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
Last Edited by Killa_Hertz on Feb 25, 2016 9:41 AM
|
MindTheGap
1217 posts
Feb 25, 2016
10:06 AM
|
Yes, well that's how I rationalise the wah: you need the higher harmonics in there else you won't hear much difference between open and closed.
You are fortunate, I had to consciously learn a decent wah. When Ronnie was explaining it he didn't discuss in these physics/acoustics terms, but he did explain the key practical things, which are consistent with this:
1. Making a proper cup (various ways to do that)
2. Keeping a strong note going through the wah, i.e. not being tempted to enhance the cupping-muffle by playing weaker. Let the hands do the work.
Re tone - well everyone else says that's king so I guess they are right. But I think what they call 'tone' is lots of things compounded, not just the basic timbre: attack, vibrato/tremolo, hand shaping, dips and all that super stuff.
I'm just talking about basic timbre here, and it appears that there is something to be done to shape the balance of harmonics in that basic timbre. The things you are talking about I think. Maybe one of those things that some people just take to naturally, and others (like me) have to work at.
There are some more extreme examples, like Adam doing his Sonny Terry - wheeeee tone.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 25, 2016 10:19 AM
|
