A long way to heaven

[tictactux]

So I've been "doing" that instrument, new pads, new silencers, new oil, regulating and whatnot. Horn's tight, everything is where it is supposed to be, key heights appear to be fine, the action is snappy and well-coordinated.

Now, out of habit I give a thusly "done" instrument the initiation rite in form of a realistic practice session. Just do what a musician does when not drinking or performing. Duh. This instrument sure is, uhm, new. I can basically smell the "new car trunk" odour. Still, it's a bit balky, the finger doesn't land where it should, the instrument is somewhat capricious. So, back to the bench, sand a bit here, replace a noisy cork with UltraSuede, look, test, impersonate the seasoned repair person.

Next day, in the den, aaah, things are better, however, it occasionally squeaks. Tweaked ring heights (my pet peeve), adjust a screw here and there, it's getting where I want it to be. But still, some notes hiss, and I feel I'm not quite there. Why the hiss, why today but not yesterday? Back to the kitchen table, take 2. I replace two (perfectly good and tight) pads with my home made tapered synthetics, soften a spring here, harden one there.

Day three - OMFG! This time I feel I haven't hit a wall but rather a cloud. I think "yes, this is how it should feel and behave."

Now, the obvious question (there's always one, isn't there?) - I assume a repair person doing hundreds of instruments every year probably has seen all, touched all, has the t-shirt and everything. Yet - while technically everything was okay, I did need that time to set it up the way I wanted it. Some things settle after two or three seconds, but some other issues only manifest themselves after an extended period of time, when you find out it's not you but the instrument. Just like a thorough car mechanic doesn't just drive round the block but goes for a half-hour trip which would include highways and bumpy country roads.

Or do you think there's a quick way past tedious stepwise refinement? Sheer experience? Or is it just an expensive and intense way of the "if you don't like it, then your reed's too hard" approach?

(FWIW I know that repairing instruments at 10PM with the impossibility to play-test them on the spot adds quite a bit of latency to the whole experience. But testing each single note is one thing ("static test"), but testing the performance under combat conditions is quite a different thing.)

Anyhow, I know why good repair people take their time to do it right, and why this is more expensive than an off-the-shelf repad.

 

[Gandalfe]

I select repair techs based on their willingness to have me sit in, when it makes sense, Paul Woltz was the first to allow this, and the ability to play test as the repair goes along. I have long suspected that different players have different needs, so being able to talk with the repairman as he finishes the job is the only way to go. Once you experience it, you'll never go back.

I new a repair tech who refused to talk to the customer; I'd heard he had a hard time with people. His work the two times I used him was unacceptable and I should have refused to pay him. His response is that he'd fix anything I'd find but the down time between iterative fixes was unacceptable to most musicians and may explain why I now have back up instruments for everything I play.

That said, I do think that time really is an issue in most national and state-level music stores. My brother the auto mechanic was as good as you appear to be about finding all the problems the first time he worked on the repair. His company, Chrysler at the time, wanted him to be faster to get the cars out the door so they eventually let him go.

I also suspect that most musicians that get their instruments repaired are not professionals so the quality provided is in some ways related to the ability of the owner to recognize the work. I know that sounds harsh, but I see it time and time again with many of the hobbyists I know.

 

[MartinMods]

An overhaul/repad is just a logical sequence of action/test steps. The degree of accuracy with which each action/test step is completed and the quality and familiarity of materials used determines the result.

Usually, if all action/test steps were performed optimally, and you have utmost confidence in your materials, it's just a matter of "feel" to find where minor adjustments are needed to get it right, and other minor alterations may be necessary to adapt that to the client's preferences. There should be no need for "settling" adjustments.

If you don't take the time to perform each action properly or to test the result of each step carefully, you will have mistakes that show up in your final play test. Then you can either start over and be more careful, or start guessing and changing things helter-skelter. The helter-skelter method sometimes works, but usually takes longer and can be more frustrating. "Settling" adjustments just mean things weren't done right to start with. IMO.

 

[SOTSDO]

I've had no end of trouble with getting ring heights on clarinets set to where I want them to be. Generally, I use this as a gauge for a usable repairman, and then I stick with him/her from that part forward.

 

[pete]

I'm a computer repair tech, not an instrument one, but some things are universal: it's really not fixed until you test it and it works the way you think it should.

I also think that some things are just fixed and that's final: say a user's got the "T" key broken off his laptop's keyboard. I replace the key (or keyboard, depending on warranty status) and that's it: just make sure the key is working. Virus ticket? I can de-virus the machine and then spend a couple hours tweaking settings to make it right. I think that can be the same for instrument techs. Hey, you've got a bend in the bell lip of your sax? No problem. Let's smooth that out. Complete overhaul? Let's tweak that for awhile.

It's another reason why I think technicians are artists, on some level -- and that troubleshooting is the greatest art.

 

[jbtsax]

I agree with MartinMods on this one. The only time a professional tech has to go back and do something again on a repad or overhaul is when it was not done correctly in the first place or one of the variables was overlooked. We call that chasing your tail. As a tech becomes more experienced this tends to happen less and less.

Without exception, every time I have been in a hurry and didn't take the time to address all of the variables, I have ended up going back and doing it correctly anyway. I have found it increases ones efficiency and speed to do each step to perfection before moving on to the next.

There are some adjustments that I will make after a thorough play test of an instrument such as key placement, spring tensions, and pad openings that can't be checked while the instrument is on the bench. I will also on saxophone double check the regulation at the "junction" (F-F#-G#-Bb) after a good technical workout to make sure nothing has changed.

John

 

[clarnibass]

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking. Are you asking why it wasn't right and after some more repairs it was? This can be one of two things, both are (slightly different) problems with the first repair.

First is that you simply missed a problem. This can be an adjustment, a small leak, etc. etc. For example if re-replacing a pad solved a problem, obviously the previous pad you put had a problem.

Second possibility is that although the repair seemed ok, you didn't bring it to a reliable condition. Maybe you aligned a key but not to a reliable state, so it easily bent back after playing, maybe an air pocket behind a pad, or one of the many other possiblities.

I completely agree with what MartinMods wrote here:

Usually, if all action/test steps were performed optimally, and you have utmost confidence in your materials, it's just a matter of "feel" to find where minor adjustments are needed to get it right, and other minor alterations may be necessary to adapt that to the client's preferences. There should be no need for "settling" adjustments.

perfection

perfectly

I don't like to use the word "perfect" for instrument repair. IMO it is actually the understanding that it can't be perfect, and instead aiming for the highest tolerance/compromise that IS possible, that will make the best possible repair. I'm guessing you used this word to really mean "best possible" or something like this, but I thought it was important to clarify.

UltraSuede

Just curious where you chose to put this material? I'm asking because I just haven't found any place on a woodwind instrument (clarinet, saxophone, sometimes flute, I don't repair double-reeds) that I don't like a different material better than ultrasuede.

I've had no end of trouble with getting ring heights on clarinets set to where I want them to be. Generally, I use this as a gauge for a usable repairman, and then I stick with him/her from that part forward.

Hmm... how can a repairer not be able to adjust ring height? Did you tell them you prefer the rings a bit higher or a bit lower and... what did they say? "Sorry I can't do this"?!?! This is a pretty fast repair and can be done with you when you pick up the instrument, or when the repair itself is done while you wait anyway. Or do you prefer a different than normal ring height and expect a repairer to read your mind and put the rings exactly where you want them without telling anything...?

 

[tictactux]

Hmm... how can a repairer not be able to adjust ring height? Did you tell them you prefer the rings a bit higher or a bit lower and... what did they say? "Sorry I can't do this"?!?! This is a pretty fast repair and can be done with you when you pick up the instrument, or when the repair itself is done while you wait anyway. Or do you prefer a different than normal ring height and expect a repairer to read your mind and put the rings exactly where you want them without telling anything...?

Define "normal". I've had it with normal and with equal treatment. :smile:
First of all, not all my fingers are equal and therefore I like my rings to be at slightly different heights. Most setups have the rings set at say 1/2 mm above the tone holes. With my ring finger, I want it slightly higher, with my middle finger I want it a bit lower. Not something I want a tech spend an expensive hour with, especially as such things don't manifest themselves after playing three notes.

What I'm after - even if one does everything to specs and religiously follows the book (whichever this may be), there are things that aren't detected when testing sub-components. You all know the sound of air rushing by the open F# pad (the one operated by the ring assy.). It's not equally bad with every instruments, some are more prone to rushing than others. It's not something you find out until you play-test the complete instrument. And it obviously isn't something every technician might find fixworthy.

Sometimes you have to go back quite a number of steps just because an instrument doesn't behave as expected, or maybe has a built-in idiosyncrasy that we'd like to correct.

 

[jbtsax]

I don't like to use the word "perfect" for instrument repair. IMO it is actually the understanding that it can't be perfect, and instead aiming for the highest tolerance/compromise that IS possible, that will make the best possible repair. I'm guessing you used this word to really mean "best possible" or something like this, but I thought it was important to clarify.

My use of the word means that it can't be done any better. This is the point at which I am satisfied with each step of a repair. A tonehole can be leveled to the point that a flat edge shows no light leaking whatsoever. Is it perfectly flat at a microscopic level? Probably not, but it does not need to be for the application it is being used for which is to form an airtight seal when closed by a pad. A key can be swedged to the point that there is no lateral movement seen or felt on its hinge, and no drag or friction felt when the key moves. In other words, it cannot be improved upon by further swedging or adjustment. Is there some movement at the microscopic level? Certainly, but that has no effect whatsoever on the performance of the key.

My point is that to debate semantics that wander off into the theory beyond the practical reality is hardly worth our time. To debate the meaning of "perfect" may be a fun mental exercise, but at the end of the day my newly installed neck cork that looks professional, fits the mouthpiece, doesn't show a seam, and will do its job for years to come is as good as it can be and just perfect for the job it was intended to do in the real world. A microbe may have a different view.

John

 

[MartinMods]

What I'm after - even if one does everything to specs and religiously follows the book (whichever this may be), there are things that aren't detected when testing sub-components. You all know the sound of air rushing by the open F# pad (the one operated by the ring assy.). It's not equally bad with every instruments, some are more prone to rushing than others. It's not something you find out until you play-test the complete instrument.

For a few years I found rebuilding the classic metal-framed HP laser printers profitable and interesting. I tore them completely apart and rebuilt them piece by piece, reconditioning or replacing rollers and other parts, and even customizing the cases. I had a couple of assistants helping me, and they were always getting stumped on any number of the seemingly zillions of things that can go wrong, and I'd always point out what it was immediately, to their irritation. They started betting one another, that they could find a problem that I couldn't solve right away, but it didn't happen. I ended up telling them, as amazing as it is, there is no mystery to the thing. If you understand the principles and the mechanics of how it works thoroughly, there is no problem that you can't solve. Your understanding pinpoints the area and if needed, a logical sequence of tests locates the problem - "When you eliminate the impossible, what remains, however improbable, must be the truth." As they say...

The same applies to music instruments. If you understand the acoustics and the mechanics, there is no mystery. They are marvelous, but not mysterious.

Hissing at the open F#: There is a pressure anti-node at or very close to the hole. The collision of energy waves traveling in opposite directions, which establishes the standing wave's compression anti-node, causes a great deal of transverse motion of the air molecules. The air is rushing out of the hole, and then back into the hole, at the frequency of that node's resonance (Fn). Sharp edges will cause excessive turbulence. Round the bore/chimney edges and the tone hole edges. Roughing up the bore of the chimney may help. Undercutting the tone hole in any variety of ways and degrees, may help shift the location enough to eliminate objectionable noise.

 

[tictactux]

Hissing at the open F#: There is a pressure anti-node at or very close to the hole. The collision of energy waves traveling in opposite directions, which establishes the standing wave's compression anti-node, causes a great deal of transverse motion of the air molecules. The air is rushing out of the hole, and then back into the hole, at the frequency of that node's resonance (Fn). Sharp edges will cause excessive turbulence.

That's exactly what I meant - you only find out stuff like that when "live" testing the instrument - pressure nodes aren't visible to the repairer's eye. (I ended up replacing those two pads with tapered ones, because I knew it'd be better that way.) I don't do "hard" and irreversible modifications to an instrument unless absolutely and irrefutably necessary.

Undercutting the tone hole in any variety of ways and degrees, may help shift the location enough to eliminate objectionable noise.

. Aha, that doesn't sound like the logical steps in a determinable sequence. Not if there's a "may" in the phrase. ;-)

 

[MartinMods]

. Aha, that doesn't sound like the logical steps in a determinable sequence. Not if there's a "may" in the phrase. ;-)

I say "May" here, as based upon your brief description alone, there are too many variables to outline a precise course of action, and further, even following a precise course of action, one does not always know the outcome of any particular step. It's a process of elimination - in more ways that one here. Lol. "May" is still a big part of it.

 

[tictactux]

one does not always know the outcome of any particular step. It's a process of elimination - in more ways that one here. Lol. "May" is still a big part of it.

Hence the thread title.

 

[jbtsax]

What I'm after - even if one does everything to specs and religiously follows the book (whichever this may be), there are things that aren't detected when testing sub-components. You all know the sound of air rushing by the open F# pad (the one operated by the ring assy.).

Let's see, the small F# pad would be open only on the notes G, Ab, A, and Bb. Since G is the only note that vents through that tonehole (in addition to the thumb hole), I suspect it is on that note that the "hiss" is noticeable. The solution, of course, is to bend the back bar of the F# key up slightly so that the key opens more, but I'm sure you know that already.

John

 

[pete]

For a few years I found rebuilding the classic metal-framed HP laser printers profitable and interesting. I tore them completely apart and rebuilt them piece by piece, reconditioning or replacing rollers and other parts, and even customizing the cases. I had a couple of assistants helping me, and they were always getting stumped on any number of the seemingly zillions of things that can go wrong, and I'd always point out what it was immediately, to their irritation. They started betting one another, that they could find a problem that I couldn't solve right away, but it didn't happen. I ended up telling them, as amazing as it is, there is no mystery to the thing. If you understand the principles and the mechanics of how it works thoroughly, there is no problem that you can't solve. Your understanding pinpoints the area and if needed, a logical sequence of tests locates the problem - "When you eliminate the impossible, what remains, however improbable, must be the truth." As they say...

It amuses and annoys other technicians that I can do essentially the same thing, i.e. tell you the fix to virtually any computer problem off the top of my head, but you're also not talking about very many combinations in your examples: you have a printer or a couple of printers that have a relatively small problem set and those problems can be solved in a very small set of ways. When you get to software troubleshooting, you have the OS as one problem level -- and there are several dozens of OS flavors out there, even for "just" Windows and they all work SLIGHTLY differently -- and, as a second level, several thousands of hardware configurations that are further complicated by the third level: any of the hundreds of thousands of other applications any user might have installed. That's why troubleshooting that leads to a successful repair is an art.

Hey, while I think you can successfully argue that removing the dent out of a bell lip on a 1975 Selmer Bundy is the same as on a 1975 Leblanc System, regulating the key heights will be considerably different and can easily be complicated by whatever other goodies the owner has/had installed, particularly one that you mentioned in the past, MM: resonators.

 

[MartinMods]

....but you're also not talking about very many combinations in your examples: you have a printer or a couple of printers that have a relatively small problem set and those problems can be solved in a very small set of ways. When you get to software troubleshooting, you have the OS as one problem level -- and there are several dozens of OS flavors out there....

You forget that a printer is a computer with an operating system, various languages, various memory configurations, a horde of real world sensor interfaces, various user interfaces, networking interfaces, communication protocols, all of which must integrate with that incredibly complex computer world that you describe. In that, printer problem solving is even more of an art. LOL.

 

[clarnibass]

My point is that to debate semantics that wander off into the theory beyond the practical reality is hardly worth our time

I agree with what you wrote here, but I disagree that what I said was a matter of semantics. IMO it is exactly this understanding of WHY it is not perfect that seperates one repairer from another. I'm not saying you don't do this, it's just that I think it's also important to consider it and explain it, for example when someone is going to read it and try to learn. Maybe this was obvious to you, but it might not be so obvious to whoever it is that is reading your posts.

 

[clarnibass]

Define "normal". I've had it with normal and with equal treatment. :smile:
First of all, not all my fingers are equal and therefore I like my rings to be at slightly different heights.

Normal is the way I would normally do it, which I find about 80%-90% (probably even more) of the people prefer also. It is less common for someone to ask a different ring height, even if I ask them to check if they want me to change any ring heights.

Having the rings at different heights is also not a problem, just tell a repairer what you want. In the rare situation that someone wants a different ring height I found that checking it for a little bit is usually enough. It's pretty rare that someone changes their mind after more time. Actually I'm not sure this ever happened.

You are saying this is something you want to do yourself to have time to feel, etc. I don't mind the player playing for a bit here to feel something and check if they want to change... sometimes more than a bit. But anyway my answer was to SOTSDO, and he was talking about a repairer doing this for a customer. Just doing it yourself isn't a solution for most/many people.

You all know the sound of air rushing by the open F# pad

Like John, I assume you are talking about the pad that is only open for the open G note (and rarely some altisimo notes). The venting of this hole is problematic because the tone hole is usually very low with high walls. A leather pad, or other pad that is completely inside the cup, can help. "Coning" the pad can help too. But this tone hole is usually big compared with the key cup so it can take a bit more work to get it to seal evenly, and at some point not possible (i.e. coning to smaller than the hole).

Then it might still be a bit problematic. You can bend the foot like John suggested (or instead use thinner linkage material if possible), but then maybe the ring won't be at a height you like either when open or pressed (since there's more travel). Maybe not a problem, but maybe now the throat A key is hitting the F# pad key. So you might add more cork there, so now A is not opening enough. So you bend the A key higher, but now maybe not so comfortable. etc. etc.

Just showing how a suppsedly simple adjustment can turn into a bunch of other not so simple adjustments.

 

[Gandalfe]

Just showing how a suppsedly simple adjustment can turn into a bunch of other not so simple adjustments.

And it's why I don't do complex repairs. If I was passionate about figuring that stuff out, and I'm not, then maybe I'd give it a go.

 

[SOTSDO]

Wow! Sorry that my comments may have misled some hereon.

My comments were directed at repair folks who did not do what they were requested to do. My "fat fingers" have always been problematic when getting my clarinets adjusted to the point where I could finger an F#/C# with my little finger right hand without having a lifted fingertip on RH 3 (the usual culprit) sending me into squeal land.

When I started playing soprano clarinet back as a youngster, the combination of finger length/finger structure on my right hand pretty much prevented me from playing any note using the F#/C# key on a typical soprano. (I should add that my first fingers on each hand are of significantly different lengths - the right hand first finger is about a quarter inch shorter than the corresponding one on the left.) Only by getting a good, solid seal between my ring finger and the tone hole chimney can I make it work consistently. On an A horn, it's not as critical as on the Bb, and on an Eb, it's the only way that I can use the offending key (the F#/C# key, not the ring).

But, after stumbling upon the problem and onto the fix back in the 1960's while working with a sympathetic repair person, I have had no end of trouble getting others to recognize what I want to have done. I have told any number of repair folk about the problem over the years since, specifically requested the fix (setting the ring lower than what they might think is the correct height. In a significant number of cases (say one in three when setting up a new clarinet), the horn came back with no change at all in the ring height, as they set it to what they had been told was the "school solution" during their training.

In all cases, I don't think that the decision on their part was malicious. Most likely, they forgot my verbal instructions and then went along in the "correct way" when they did their work. Only in one case (in Evansville IN back in the 1980's) did I feel that the repair person did what they did out of hubris, as opposed to neglect or forgetfulness. Only when I had to "confront" the fellow with the reason for the problem did he agree than maybe[/i] he might have been wrong in his knowledge that his way was the best way.

It's not much of a handicap, so I wasn't embarrassed about having to discuss it in public. However, the distance to and from the repair person (about 100 miles each way) made coming back for the horn a second time ("I can't get to it right now; you'll have to come back.") a major league and expensive experience. So, I felt that I was more than a little bit correct in my decision to get miffed.

The main problem there was it's hard to manage repair issues when you are an hour and a half from the repair shop. But, I didn't choose to live there, or (for that matter) to have a short finger. And, I was quite careful to alert said repair person to the problem up front. So, I saw no excuse for their conduct in that particular instance.

I only went back to the shop one other time, when they were the only place within two hundred miles that had a stock of Yamaha saxophone felt bumpers. (I bought out their whole supply.)