|
Dirty-South Blues Harp forum: wail on! >
Comb construction and materials
Comb construction and materials
Page:
1
ElkRiverHarmonicas
879 posts
Apr 19, 2012
5:42 PM
|
Ok, I'm going there. I've been thinking about this for years and this is where I am in the thought process. I actually posted this on Harp-L and it kind of disappeared in the list. Everybody probably fell asleep halfway through. I was hoping somebody would tell me I'm full of crap or something. I saw a little bit of comb argument develop in another thread and it seems like we haven't had a good comb brawl in quite a while.
I posted this after talking about mechanical resonance making a one draw reed vibrate when stuff is played on the top of the harp. The example mentioned on the list didn't turn out to be mechanical resonance, but I hate to waste a good post.
Here it is:
I was at the SPAH comb test at the Minneapolis SPAH in 2010. It showed that tonal differences between materials weren't so obvious that even really good players could ID specific materials by sound. It it also demonstrated something very significant to me, the player is in no better condition to hear changes in tone than anybody else. As I remember, there were three types of comb materials involved, all were traditional tin sandwich design, with a set of reedplates being clamped to each of the three combs, except one, metal. As I sat in the audience, I tried to guess them too. Between wood and plastic, I was as wrong as everybody else. However, there was one comb that would "ZING!" - in my ears anyway - when it was played, the metal one. The vast majority of times when the metal comb was played, I could identify it correctly. There were a couple of times when the brass comb sounded like the others, I think that might have been some small variable in
the clamping (although I have no idea truly what happened) but the majority of times it sounded vastly different.
I should note, I don't play metal combs. Brass and aluminum are dissimilar metals and when I touch my tongue onto the harmonica, I get that taste like when you lick the poles of a 9 volt battery (that's how we tested 'em when I was a kid). When the metal comb (I think it was actually brass) popped up in that Spah test, it almost always hit me like "wow!"
While just before it started, it didn't look like he was taking it seriously, I did really trust Chris Michalek's ear. I knew the other testers and knew they were fantastic players, wonderful people, but I didn't know their ears. So I was paying a lot of attention to Chris. I think he was about as wrong as often as anybody else on guessing the materials. One interesting thing I noted: Chris wasn't noticing the brass comb as it popped up like I was and I honestly believe he had a better ear than mine. I was sitting there, shocked, thinking "how is nobody noticing this sweet brass comb? How is Chris not picking up on this?" That left me wondering if the player is actually in a WORSE position to notice tonal changes than somebody farther away from the instrument.
I've spent the last two years mulling this over. I've come to a conclusion that it isn't the tonal properties of a material that account for differences, it's the way in which vibrations travel across the harmonica, altered by variables in both material and construction.
I think it's obvious that the vast majority of tone comes from the player's acoustic resonance and the reed itself. The things I'm describing below would account for only a small change in that tone and I am talking ONLY about diatonics here - as that is all I have seriously experimented with.
A vibrating surface does emit sound energy. There's no more obvious place to look than a guitar. Now guitars have soundholes. Those aren't places for sound to come out, it's for air to come out. Early guitars, in fact, didn't have an open hole there at all, but usually some fancy wood mesh, intricately carved. The sound comes off the surface of the wood on the guitar's top. Same with violins, whose F hole slits are very small and you think "how does sound come out of this!?!" It doesn't really. It's primarily a vent for air pressure changes. When a string is played, that top vibrates in and out. If there is nowhere for the air to go, it's like trying to shut a car door with the windows up. But crack and window and it shuts easily. Yes, harmonicas are not guitars or fiddles. My point is simply - vibrating surfaces emit sound energy.
That's where the likenesses end, because there is nothing acoustically resonant about a harmonica. It's too way too small. Comb material has nothing to do with acoustic resonance. Maybe, on some theoretical level, it's resonant at some overtone, but it's a stretch and chamber sizes are pretty standard.
But there are other forces at work. On the occasional harmonica, you play a high-frequency note on the upper end, something can make a lower reed vibrate to the point it emits sound. The fact that a reed can be blown on one reedplate and there's enough energy transferred through the harmonica to make a reed vibrate on the other plate, indicates that there is a significant amount of such force at play inside a harmonica. It's interesting that it seems to happen usually happens to a low reed when a high note is played. I would think that points to when you remove the coverplates, you change that mechanical resonance in some way that makes the forces at work do something different, in these cases, not make that other reed vibrate.
If such vibrations are transferred through the harmonica and cause the other side to vibrate, then how the other side vibrates should alter, even if to a miniscule degree, the tone. We know that a vibrating surface emits sounds. Thus if it vibrates, it must sound.
This concept of vibrating harmonica surfaces altering tone isn't something I invented, exploration of this concept was the revolution of the 1890s that gave us our modern diatonic. Two people were working on this at the same time, Richard Seydel Sr. and Jacob Hohner. I can't find a copy of Seydel's patent, but he seems to understand air flow in tonal changes, with four vents to direct air from the corners - I think it was a better design (the original Bandmaster), but I don't have his patent to get that glimpse of what was going on inside his mind. Hohner was thinking only only of acoustic vibration, the sound energy going from the reedplate down, not coming up from the reedplate itself. I mention this because, 120 years ago, these guys at least basically understood the concept of vibrations in the instrument changing the tone. When you sit down and think about this for the modern player cupping the harmonica tightly, it doesn't quite make as much sense,
because you would think the hand would dampen vibration. What is significant here is that Jacob Hohner noticed that when you lifted the coverplates up from the reedplate, it changed the tone. The result was the 1896 Mouse Ear Marine Band.
Like I mentioned with the hand dampening the vibration on the coverplates, you would think it would even be more dampier for a reedplate, which is bolted to a comb. But sound energy can travel through different mediums. Take the table I'm typing on right now. It's a heavy table. It might as well be bolted to the floor. If somebody raps their knuckles on one end and I put my ear down on the other, I can hear that knock coming up from the table. Even if it were bolted to the floor, like a reedplate to a comb, the table would still transmit the sound energy of that knock. Even if I had people laying on it (to recreate the dampening effect of hands on coverplates), that sound energy from that knock would still be transmitted from one end of the table to the other. The table itself, despite the fact it cannot - same is true for a reedplate - move in a way we can see, it still transmits sound vibrations.
If you look at the total surface area of a harmonica, there is a significant amount of surfaces where vibrations can reach the air as sound energy. The reedplates, plus inside and outside surfaces of the coverplates to varying degrees, I suppose, based on what you are doing.
I think these instances of cross-harmonica reed soundings show us that a significant amount of energy is transmitted via vibrations through materials. Despite the fact the our hands are on them, the coverplates appear to play some, perhaps even a significant one, role in this transfer or energy. When Cathal took the coverplates off, that ghost reed vibration stopped. I've had the same findings with the ones I've come across.
I've never been able to notice a tonal difference between the 1847 Silver and 1847 Classic, despite the fact one is wood and one is plastic. They are the same harmonica, only one has a comb made of maple, the other a plastic designed to have the same "give" as wood - that little crushability that allows the comb to push out against the reedplate when the screws are tightened - there are little air spaces inside the plastic to mimic wood. So between these two, there appear to be no difference in the tone of these two vastly different materials, but they would seem to conduct vibrations very similarly.
But I do hear a difference with the Session steel, which has a recessed reedplate on a plastic comb with a lot of hollow chambers.
So, my contention is it is not the material itself, but how the material allows the transmission of this energy from one side to the other that accounts for tonal differences. Even, then, the reed itself and the player contribute so much to that tone, you have to be listening specifically for it to notice it.
If I ever get back to another SPAH or something, I would like to try a tone test. I suppose this could even be done with e-mailing recordings back and forth. Each sample would have an extended note played on each of two harmonicas set up identically and only one question. "are the combs different or the same." The plastic would be a recessed reedplate Seydel Session Steel and the wood would be an 1847 classic, both with 1847 classic coverplates (like the 1847 Silver Plus used to be). I'd want the three ears I trust most for the test, mine, Jason Ricci's and Wally Peterman's. Then repeat it with other ears and see what trends pop up in the data.
David
www.elkriverharmonicas.
----------
David
Elk River Harmonicas
Elk River Harmonicas on Facebook
"It's difficult to think anything but pleasant thoughts while eating a homegrown tomato." - Lewis Grizzard
"Also, drinking homemade beer." - David Payne
Last Edited by on Apr 19, 2012 5:45 PM
|
walterharp
862 posts
Apr 19, 2012
6:33 PM
|
that sounds great.. i would add a bit to the test,
1) make sure all the combs used are perfectly flat.. i think that was a criticism of the last test, they were variably leaky.
2) make a machine that can blow and suck notes and hold constant pressure between trials (i.e. all blows at same pressure, draws could be at slightly different pressure than blows but all same pressure as each other.
3) record the results from the listeners (not the players) point of view.
4) replicate (3 combs of each material, all else the same)
These are all issues that introduce bias.. this kind of thing is posted all the time.. i tried one of X brand of harp, it stunk, so all that type of harp stinks. or i think this tone of X harp is different because I opened up the covers (from the point of view of the player maybe, but what matters is what the listener hears). .
I think there is no doubt the vibration of the harmonica makes a difference. Two things make me think this. First, I can hear when playing with a loud band with earplugs better than without. The sound comes through my harp and jaw to my inner ear. Second, a really tight harp, like a buddha harp, held gently in the fingers while outside with the wind blowing, you can feel it vibrating
|
nacoran
5571 posts
Apr 19, 2012
9:23 PM
|
What follows is a random string of crazy ideas. Please do not have me committed!!!
First, a side note, sometimes when I'm lying in bed on my side, watching TV, I'll have a harp in my hand. If the end of my harp is touching the pillow I get a weird buzzing note in the ear facing the pillow.
I'd think that the vast majority of any tone differences would be right at the surface, and since reed plates are metal changing the comb much wouldn't change affect the sound. There is the small area inside the chambers that is exposed to the air flow. Maybe as a control you could use a composite comb, wood on the interior but metal on the area exposed to the air/noise (sort of like that old oddball Hohner harp with the wavy metal inside it to protect the insides from moisture.*) You might also test a harp without reed plates, with the reeds mounted directly to the comb. Of course, you'd have to made the reed slots more narrow to get a tight enough seal, which would probably change the tone enough to make the comparison invalid anyway. (It would be sort of neat to see a metal comb with such tight tolerances that you could mount the reeds directly to it, but that would be a milling nightmare!)
Another possible way to test the resonance in the comb is to try to figure out ways that might exaggerate the effect. Maybe if some of those gaps inside a plastic comb were opened up by carefully drilling holes in the back of the comb, making sure the holes only entered chambers that were sealed off from the air pressure you might be able to get a more pronounced effect. (On a wood comb that would be kind of insane- to get a similar effect you'd have to drill holes from the back of the harmonica comb up into the tines without cracking them. Metal would be less likely to crack but even harder to drill.)
You could recreate my pillow experience, only using a microphone that you'd somehow isolated acoustically where my pillow would be. I can sort of picture a vibration sensor hooked up to the end of the harp...
I get the ghost sounding of reeds in reverse, but when I'm doing it it's about air pressure. My Seydel (still loving it!) is airtight enough that if I cup it right I can blow or draw the bottom holes and get the top holes to sound in the opposite direction, but that involves making sure my cheek blocks the holes in between. Taking the covers off would of course put an end to that. I've wondered what would happen to the sound of a harp if you isolated the holes left to right with ridges coming down from the cover. The trick there would be to isolate them with small enough pressure so that the ridges didn't completely dampen any vibration you were looking for. There might be some other weird ways to amplify the effect. If, as Walter suggests, you used some sort of mechanical device to supply constant airflow you could reduce the point of contact with the harmonica as much as possible so that lips don't dampen any effect. Holding a harp by the very end in two fingers, or even drilling a hole threw the end of comb/cover so you could mount it by one point with a screw might also cut down on dampening, although it would have to be anchored to something that doesn't in turn make it's own sound.
Of course, maybe we are going about this from the wrong direction. Maybe we should be looking for what the comb sounds like without everything else going on. Maybe we need to get one of those hammers that you hit pitch forks with and test the combs in isolation to see what sounds they make using how much force and figure out if the forces involved in blowing into a harp can produce enough sound.
It's too bad covers are more difficult to make without (more) expensive machinery. I think that's were the real room for tone is. I'd like to see if lining the inside of a Piedmont cover with metal would brighten up their sound- I really do think the plastic is more comfortable than metal). I'd like to test a theory about lip glide over a dimpled surface too. I'm wondering if creating small spaces where the lip doesn't touch might reduce the overall friction. (I have a strange mind.)
If, as Walter says one of the criticisms of the last test was airtightness, it would be pretty easy to solve for a harmonica that you had no intention of taking back apart. Gluing plates onto the comb could make an insanely tight seal, in case you are considering taking the comb materials to extremes like Styrofoam.
*And my craziest idea for the night is completely off the topic but those crazy wavy metal inserts on that old Hohner gave me an idea for a two way harmonica. It would kind of be like a tremolo/octave harp, and kind of like those back to back harps, the only difference would be instead of being twice as deep from front to back the reeds would lay next to each other, and vertical dividers would keep the chambers separated left to right. You'd start with a 'comb' that was just one of those wavy pieces of metal, only folded to much more exacting measurements, and then weld a small long L piece along the front and back corners to keep it from flexing. A flipable set of covers and you have two harmonicas in one.
----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
|
hvyj
2340 posts
Apr 20, 2012
4:26 AM
|
A comb maker who subscribes to this vibration concept is Dick Sjoeberg. The "piping" he puts in the screw holes for the reedplate screws is supposedly to better conduct these vibrations which is supposed to have an effect on the sound.
I thought this was all nonsense. Then i compared one of his combs with brass piping to one of his combs with silver piping on the same harp and the timbre was subtlety different. So, I'm keeping an open mind about this vibration thing.
As far as covers are concerned, my experience is if you scratch up the insides of shiny covers, you will get a slightly smoother (less "edgy"/ less raspy) tone. Another way to produce a similar effect is to put Micropore tape on the inside of the covers.
Last Edited by on Apr 20, 2012 2:28 PM
|
walterharp
866 posts
Apr 20, 2012
6:46 AM
|
hmm... if comb vibrations do influence tone, you could "tune" combs to match the key of the harp and the dominant chords..
|
Bruce
6 posts
Apr 20, 2012
8:54 AM
|
Mass, as in weight, has a lot to do with sound travel and I think if you were to make a comb shaped like an obtuse triangle, the long side being where the reed plates sit, you will get some very interesting variables in sound. I am throwing my ideas out into the public as I think this can be accomplished. I would try it using brass and Ton Holz (sorry, I forgot what that is in english - I have been here too long dammit!)to see how this mass can create a richer sound. I suppose you could wedge the comb the front thinner and the back thicker. Chris Reynolds is the man for this job. He is always phartin around on something. Very interesting thread Dave.
|
nacoran
5577 posts
Apr 20, 2012
11:22 AM
|
Hmm, reading Bruce's idea... there are some string instruments with sympathetic strings. If you extended the back of the harmonica you could maybe put sympathetic reeds (or strings!) out there. Not so much in keeping with the idea of the experiment, but maybe for creating a whole new type of harp.
Crystal vibrates pretty well. Didn't Hohner have a limited edition harp with a crystal comb?
Again, on the crazy side, I've thought it would be cool to have a multi-mouth-hole ocarina laid out like a harmonica, maybe some finger holes to simulate bends. I wonder if you could make a hole with a sliding cover so you could bend notes... but that's got nothing to do with this. I think Bruce's idea of making the comb bigger is an interesting way to go.
----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
|
ElkRiverHarmonicas
884 posts
Apr 20, 2012
3:58 PM
|
Bruce, I already tried that wedge thing, my 1915 Seydel Bandmaster G sits on such a comb of 800-year-old American Chestnut wood. The comb is really thick and tapers down to the front. No noticeable difference. But of course, one test doesn't prove or disprove something. It's the repetition with similar results.
The one thing I have noticed a difference in is changing the mass of the reedplate. If you have a lot of free time, make a double-thick reedplate. I had one that was cool, somebody in England has it now - I sold it several years ago. Take the reeds off one reedplate and attach it on the non-reed side of the other. You'll need to use some longer screws probably and it's a pain in the ass to get right, sometimes the reed will hit the slot of the other plate, I wound up enlarging the slots of the passive plate to keep that from happening.
So it's a pain in the ass, but it makes a very, very loud harmonica.
In the past, I thought this loudness was due to a better seal with the comb. A thicker reedplate is stiffer and better distributes screw torque (the wider the area over which screw torque is distributed the better).
Now, if idea of the increased volume being because of improved screw-torque distribution were true, simply adding a brass strip between the screws would have a similar effect. The truth is, such a strip does make it louder. But not as much. That didn't really make sense to me until I started thinking of the reedplate in a sounding-board scenario.
But again, I don't know. I never devoted my life to this topic or anything. It's mostly conjecture based on stuff I've seen and heard.
I think a good test would be to make a comb out of Styrofoam and another out of brass. I would think Styrofoam would be a poor medium for vibration, but would still be airtight. Blow into them and see which is louder, or if they are the same.
Somebody was talking about reducing mass by drilling into the tines and stuff. I think God may have already made this for you... cork. You can get it in boards.
One possible test would be simple to do and I've done it, although I can't remember how exactly how it turned out. Take a comb and one reedplate and attach it to a thin piece of wood and see if there is a tone difference. I remember it being louder when I did this, but you don't have the air leakage you'd have with the opposing reed either. It seems some have access to some powerful math, with this powerful math, you might be able to calculate the air leakage of the opposing reed and duplicate that with a certain size hole in the wood. That might square things up.
We'll probably never have a good answer on this, the tone changes we're talking about are miniscule compared to the tone of the reed and the player.
----------
David
Elk River Harmonicas
Elk River Harmonicas on Facebook
"It's difficult to think anything but pleasant thoughts while eating a homegrown tomato." - Lewis Grizzard
"Also, drinking homemade beer." - David Payne
Last Edited by on Apr 20, 2012 4:17 PM
|
hvyj
2342 posts
Apr 20, 2012
5:52 PM
|
Dave,
How does the volume and tone one gets from a thicker comb compare to the volume and tone one gets from a double reedplate?
|
ElkRiverHarmonicas
886 posts
Apr 20, 2012
6:43 PM
|
I've actually done a lot of experimenting with comb thickness, from combs twice as thick to ones half as thin. I never noticed an improvement in tone or volume, if anything the exact opposite from thick combs. I have noticed improvement by going thinner, especially in response and volume by going thinner. The point at which the embouchure becomes difficult seems to be limit of thin that will work... My limit was thicker than I'd thought... Although with extremely thin combs, I noticed something weird. I gave my dad one and he loves it, says it plays better than a B-Radical -- I think that's complete bollocks.. I play and it plays like a piece of sh.. for me because the comb is so radically thin. Dad plays Dylan style in a rack. When I played dads thin comb harp in a rack, it played awesome for me, bends were way easier. I thought it weird that really thin combs played better in a rack like that. Bends were really easy, I could overblow it... I think it has something to do with the tilt.
----------
David
Elk River Harmonicas
Elk River Harmonicas on Facebook
"It's difficult to think anything but pleasant thoughts while eating a homegrown tomato." - Lewis Grizzard
"Also, drinking homemade beer." - David Payne
Last Edited by on Apr 20, 2012 6:45 PM
|
STME58
161 posts
Apr 21, 2012
3:34 AM
|
Hohner made a harp called the Duece and a Quarter with a 2.25mm thick reedplate. I saw it on a clearance from Guitar Center but they ran out before I got one. I have not seen one of these but I have read that they were loud but did not last long. This is third hand anectodla information though. This kind urban legends are made of. Does anyone have any direct experince with production thick reed plate harps like the 225?
I I understand what I read the the physics paper pointed to in the reed analysis thread. The reed does not sound until it bends all the way past the reed plate and allows a puff or air to escape. This means that with a thick reed plate the reed has to bend further before it sounds. This would suggest that a thick reed plate may also stress the reeds more.
@Walterharp is omn the right track with his suggestions. There is a process called "Design of experiments" for setting up tests like this and some of @Walterhapr's suggestions look like they came right out of the textbook. Threr are a lot ov variable in a harp and we are only looking at one, the comb, but are likely inadvertantly changing many. A good experimantal design will tell you if the variable causing the change is not one of the ones you are controlling. More than once I have set up an experiment to find that the largest factor in the performance difference came from just tearing down and reassembling the unit. None of the part mods made much difference even though there was a big change when the part was first swapped in.
The biggest most elaborate test like this became like a witch hunt. As a preliminary experiment would point to a part as the culprit in the performance problem, we would pick up our mnetaphorical torches and pithforks and head over to the designer of that part to tell them their part was the problem and they needed to figgure out why. AS the test progressed we would get results that showed something else and we would head over to the next designers desk. When we got done with as much testing as we could afford and had time for we, found out that whatever was causing the problem occured during teardown and reassembly.
|
7LimitJI
660 posts
Apr 21, 2012
5:22 AM
|
Dave, instead of making the comb thinner, how about a standard thickness comb with the tines being pyramid shaped, keeping the embouchure the standard size, but the tine getting wider making the slot opening smaller.
Or another like a top hat comb.
heres a couple of quick drawings.
Very rough,but should give you an idea of what I'm on about.
----------
The Pentatonics Reverbnation
Youtube
"Why don't you leave some holes when you play, and maybe some music will fall out".
"It's music,not just complicated noise".
Last Edited by on Apr 21, 2012 5:27 AM
|
Littoral
512 posts
Apr 21, 2012
6:49 AM
|
Create a tone test online and a survey for the participants. If you carefully control for the one variable you're measuring (comb material) then you can get some definitive results-with enough data. The survey could be useful for further analysis. Include plenty of demographics and information on how particants access/listen to the sample).
*The key here is that with a large enough sample size you can get some statistically relevant results -if they exist. 3 extra qualified listeners is interesting and fun but you can't counter the bias etc (like how well can JR really hear frequencies these days).
|
barbequebob
1865 posts
Apr 21, 2012
7:33 AM
|
STME58, whenever you play harmonicas of any kind with a reedplate thickness beyond 0.90mm, much like if you tighten the slot tolerances, the reed is getting considerably more air directed to it, but the other problem with thicknesses beyond that (in the case of diatonics, or past about 1.10mm with a chromatic) is that the reed has a much wider swing and it gets much more stress being put on the reed, and in the hands of the average player, ESPECIALLY those who play with too much breath force (which, unfortunately, is too often an accurate description of the way the average player plays), it becomes the perfect storm for a reed to get blown out incredibly fast.
When Winslow Yerxa allowed me to play a double thick reed plate custom MB (which also had very tightened slot tolerances), he warned me that because of both of those things, you CANNOT play them hard or they will get blown out quickly. I can tell you it played incredibly loud and a double thick reed plate, based on the standard thickness is 1.80mm and 2.25mm is something you don't EVER want in the hands of the average player because they lack good breath control and it can get blown out as quickly as 1-3 days and I'm not BS-ing anyone at all about that.
The biggest chief complaint about the Hering 1923 Vintage Harps were because they'd blow out fast, but the reed plate thickness on those 1.20mm, some 30% thicker than the standard and like I've said so many times before, the average plays WAAAAAAAAAAAAY too hard in terms of breath force and then they make things 100 times worse because on top of that, they bend past the floor of the band, putting so much stress on the reed that it gets blown out fastand I don't recommend the average player getting ANY harp with a plate thickness beyond 0.90mm-1.05mm because they don't have any real breath control to speak of and they'll blow them out within a couple of months and often times FAR sooner.
With any comb test, there's so many variables with the biggest X-factor being the person playing it that it is almost impossible to come up with a consensus of any accuracy at all and everyone's ears are different as some people hear highs better than lows and vice versa. Combs manufactured on an assembly line has so many variables alone and the only way any comb is going to be consistent at all is if done by custom comb maker who will watch all the parameters FAR more closely than anything that gets done on an assembly line and anything done in mass production has tons of imperfections and to do something to keep it consistent is often far too expensive just in terms of labor costs alone for any manufacturer to do it profitably regardless of the company and that's always gonna be the real deal on that at the end of the day, like it or not.
----------
Sincerely,
Barbeque Bob Maglinte
Boston, MA
http://www.barbequebob.com
CD available at http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/bbmaglinte
|
ElkRiverHarmonicas
892 posts
Apr 21, 2012
3:29 PM
|
Littoral, I did one of those with a side vent once a few years ago could people tell the difference in tone between blocked and unblocked side vent. It was 19/21 picked correctly. If a test is straightforward, it can work.
----------
David
Elk River Harmonicas
Elk River Harmonicas on Facebook
"It's difficult to think anything but pleasant thoughts while eating a homegrown tomato." - Lewis Grizzard
"Also, drinking homemade beer." - David Payne
|
K_Hungus
129 posts
Apr 21, 2012
4:12 PM
|
I once bought a brass comb marine band, with no further adjustments (just gapped). "builderof stuff' made it he posts on the forum too I believe.
The comb is a little bit thicker, than the standard comb. Anyway the sound diffence is huge. It way louder and much brighter. I'm sure everyone can hear it.
I don't really like it acutally, sure it looks amazing, but it plays different too. It's more sensetive, You might say that's a good thing but I can't get used to it, because I the standard MB's much more often.
I'll just stay with the standard
|
hvyj
2347 posts
Apr 21, 2012
5:44 PM
|
You know, no matter what MATERIAL a custom comb is made of, if it's FLATTER than the original comb. it will sound louder and the harp will respond better. That's the advantage of a good custom comb quite apart from whatever it's made of.
But, in general, I also think metal combs are brighter sounding, and I think brass usually sounds brighter than aluminum.
|
laurent2015
131 posts
Apr 21, 2012
7:46 PM
|
To test the intensities or the scales of the vibrations, and compare them regarding combs materiel, there's a simple way that consists in tightening the harp in your front teeth, just on the edges of the "mouthpiece"(where the covers join them) and blow a note.
The vibrations come into your mouth, which at that time amplify the vibes and the sound.
It's not possible to really play that way, just making tests.
The loudest sound comes without any doubt from metal combs, like my Hering Black Blues. Almost no differences though between wood and acryl combs.
Now, beyond the comb's material is this fact: the reeds
of the Hering are the thickest (1.07 mm) and those good vibrations maybe could be a result of that?
I have no doubt that my Herings were the best rate
quality/price compared to Hohner, Lee Oskar or Suzuki,
but that's only my opinion.
I claim that because I don't hear much speaking about them and I wonder why...
Last Edited by on Apr 21, 2012 8:48 PM
|
florida-trader
114 posts
Apr 22, 2012
4:30 PM
|
I've been wanting to weigh in on this thread for a couple of days but I wasn't quite sure where to go with my post. Dave's opening statement was so comprehensive that I just thought I would see which direction the comments went.
Just a little bit of background so you will know from whence I come. I have been making and selling combs for about the past 16 months. That, in and of itself, does not make me an "expert" in the dynamics of sound projection, frequency modulation or flux capacitor inversion ratios. My source of information is simply the people who have purchased and installed my combs on their harmonicas. To me, that truly is where the rubber meets the road.
I think in general, people like the custom/replacement combs - regardless of who makes them - for the following reasons:
1. As compared to stock combs, they tend to be flatter which helps create a tighter seal between the reed plates and comb.
2. Waterproofing. Regardless of how this is accomplished, waterproofing the comb makes it impervious to moisture meaning that it won't swell or warp. This again is a considerable improvement over stock wood combs.
3. Comfort. Custom combs tend to have more rounded tines, edges and corners making them more comfortable to play - on the lips and on the hands.
4. Looks. A lot of the combs offered by the custom guys (including mine) are really nice looking combs. They just make your instruments look nicer.
5. Key Coding System. I have received a lot of feedback from customers who have used different colored combs to help them easily identify their harps. A lot of us (including me) don't have the keen eyesight we had in our youth and it is difficult to see the letters stamped into the cover plates or even on stickers we might use to label our harps. Colors make it easier. That is also what prompted me to start offering powder coated cover plates. I figured if the combs helped, the cover plates would make it even easier. And they look cool. (refer to #4).
The one thing that has been mentioned is thickness. I make combs out of acrylic. Acrylic comes in sheets that are usually about .220" thick. I was concerned about that at first because most stock combs are .250" thick and I wanted to make combs that were consistent with the stock combs. I even put full disclosure statements on my eBay auctions so people would be aware of the thickness (or thinness) of the combs prior to making a purchase.
I have sold many 100's of acrylic combs and I get nothing but positive feedback. I get comment after comment from customers about the thinner combs making their harps play louder, play more responsively, bend easier, over-blow better, have better tone, etc.
I don't say that to be self-promoting but only to illustrate how popular the thinner acrylic combs are. And now I have people special ordering thinner wood combs.
If you think about this, it actually does make some sense (to me at least). Here's why. What is the most successful harmonica in the history of the world? Is it not the Marine Band 1896? Who could argue that? Do you know what the thickness of a stock comb on a Marine Band is? It is about .230" - on average. I have measured the thickness of dozens and dozens of Marine Band combs and it is all over the place. I have seen everything from .210" to .240" but have never seen even one as thick as .250" which is the stock thickness of the MS-Series, Golden Melody and Special 20's. I know that the Marine Band has it's detractors, but for those of us who like it, perhaps the thickness of the comb is one of the things that gives the Marine Band it's unique sound.
Apparently, Thin is In.
----------
  ">
Last Edited by on Apr 22, 2012 7:10 PM
|
walterharp
869 posts
Apr 22, 2012
5:17 PM
|
nice post tom and nice thread all.. i love this sh!t!
|
Post a Message
|
