Recording of two saxophones, playing the same lick. (first part of Sonny Rollins solo on Tenor Madness).
Same mouthpiece and reed.
What differences do you hear?
two_saxophones_comparison_saxophone_tribe
(mp3 file, right click and save)
One of these saxophones in the next recording is the same from the previous recording. The other saxophone is different.
How do these two sound different?
another_two_saxophones_comparison_saxophone_tribe
(mp3 file, right click and save)
And just for kicks, or possibly useful, here are all three together.
these_three_saxophones_comparison_saxophone_tribe
(mp3 file, right click and save)
Visually, here is the spectrum. The order is that in which they are played in the ‘these three saxophones’ recording.
If you click the images you can get to an enlarged view (you may have to click through twice).
Calvin Comer says
The first saxophone sound it brighter and loud where the second saxophone sounded darker. The third saxophone sounded similar to the first one
Ted says
Hey Neal, if you overlay those graphs and make each a different colour then the differences would be more apparent I think.
Neal says
haha, all right, might be able to do that without too much trouble.
KT says
Well, I may have used the wrong label. I can enlarge on iPad, but still cannot read labels on graphs. I noticed the far right (1000 hg? ) has lighter coloring which I interpreted to mean less sound…volume seemed the same, so I think it is thickness, that full dark sound, that varies in a few places. The lines on the wavelength graph are often lighter but sometimes a bit longer, except the middle section where the second graph is darker.
You were playing all, so player does not explain the differences…unless one horn is harder to use than another
Ted says
Yeah, I can’t read the axes either so not sure what the graphs represent…
Neal says
If you click the images you can get to an enlarged view (you may have to click through twice). Just added a note about that.
The axes are intensity (level of sound at a particular frequency) on the y-axis and frequency (in Hertz) on the x-axis.
Each note played on the saxophone is a combination of a number of frequencies.
The graphs represent a couple of notes in a phrase and what frequencies they contain.
Neal says
Far right? At 1000 Hz? Seems like 5000 Hz is about the far right on what I see. Sorry I didn’t clarify that you have to click on the images to see a more clear and larger version. Added a note about that now though.
x-axis: frequency in Hz (Hertz)
y-axis: numbers representing sound level (no units)
For the lighter coloring…. you mean below the graph?
The horns do vary in how difficult they are to play, what effect do you think that would have on the sound?
KT says
Visual images you provided make it look like the first is more pealing to me because it handles the full spectrum. It shows more peaks and a full set of lower notes, while the others (2) has fewer visible wavelengths. The last one (3) is not missing sound as indicated by wavelengths, but has much shorter wavelengths.
What causes these seemingly subtle differences that effect sound making many of us prefer different saxes?
Thickness of brass? Use Nickel? Length of neck?
Neal says
In which range of frequencies do you see that #1 has more lower frequencies than #2?
I don’t think I’m seeing/interpreting in the same way as you.
The peaks aren’t the only thing that makes a difference. I didn’t normalize the data, though that might be a good idea.
It would be useful to have the area under the curves in different ranges using integration. Or to think about that anyway.
KT says
I think the earphones/headset may well have influenced the sound. I used iPad with my high quality headset for the first sample. …I used ipad with high quality headset for first one. Simple earpiece as you would use with mp3 or similar condensed music. For recording with three saxes, I used iPad with no headset or earpiece. The sounds are different depending upon how I listen via tech.
All I can be sure is, is I like the sounds that are lower, deeper, fuller. That boils down to I do not prefer my own sax! Wow!
Ted says
Unfortunately several variables aren’t being accounted for, such as the amplifiers and speakers the listener is using. My opinion of the differences in sounds changes with the system I use to play the recordings.
Neal says
That’s a good point. What different speakers did you use and what differences did you hear with them?
Ted says
When I listened to the first comparison of the two horns the first one sounded brassy, bright, even a bit harsh while the second one sounded smoother, mellower, softer. Hard to say which would be the vintage horn though and which would be the modern one, as I suppose these days a horn can be manufactured to produce whatever sound the designer wants, but I’d guess the second one is the vintage horn. That was my impression using Quicktime through an Nvidia sound card output to an old Fisher amp connected to 180 W JVC speakers. When I read the wide variety of impressions from others here though, I listened again, but without the amp on. The differences were much more subtle and the brassy sound was gone. If I listen through my smart phone connected to an external speaker I don’t hear any differences. It might be interesting to see a graphical comparison of the outputs of the various horns recorded at a high sampling rate.
Neal says
The differences will probably be much less apparent depending on what you use to hear the recordings. Sounds like the first setup you described has the best differentiation.
I’ll put up the graphics taken from uncompressed recordings.
Ted says
A graphical comparison of reeds and mouthpieces with no horns attached might also be interesting.
Neal says
Thanks for the suggestion Ted, might do that. I don’t have a huge collection of mouthpieces, but I have a few.
Could at least see some of the differences between metal and rubber I think.
Terry S. says
The first Sax sounds deep smooth and rich, almost too perfect. The second was almost tinny, as if I could hear the vibration of the Sax rather than just air blowing through it. I preferred the second.
In the second recording the tone of the second sax was a lot lower, more bass for lack of a better term and my limited knowledge.
Neal says
hmm, too perfect, eh?
That’s interesting. Part of it is definitely preference.
I think I hear that too with more lower harmonics in the second on the second recording.
Thanks
Bengt says
The differences are much smaller than I had expected. Both sound excellent.
My choice would be the second one because I felt that it, maybe, is more sensitive – offers more opportunities for interpretation – on high as well as low notes. Less “fat”. My guess is that the first one is the vintage – what we are used to listen to when we play songs by Lester Young et concortes. Another question: Which one is the easiest to learn to handle? Is not the second one a better choice for tribalists?
KT says
The second two sax comparisons sound a bit more different than first two. First sounds like it might be the vintage and second, the newer one. I prefer the first on this comparison because it is meatier, fuller, sounds almost visceral. The second is pure tone but seems more suited to an orchestra than blues or jazz.
Neal says
hmm, maybe check out the recording I just added that has all three together. The first is the first saxophone from the first recording. The second is the second saxophone from the second recording. The third is the second saxophone from the first recording.
The second comparison isn’t necessarily of one vintage and one modern saxophone. They could be both vintage or both modern.
Thanks for the input.
Gil Ross says
Now I cant tell the difference, they both sound
good.
Gil Ross says
Thought first sax was fuller and bright and
strong sounding. The second similar but not
as strong, honestly I couldn’t tell difference
between vintage and modern sax. Thus the con-
clussion that mouthpiece and reed make the
biggest difference when it comes to sound
and tone, along with building your embrochure
with lots of practice, especially long tones.
Neal says
That makes me think that I should do a similar test with different mouthpieces. And/or reeds.
KT says
First one sounds sexier, a bit darker. Second sounds a bit lighter, brighter. Not as different as I expected. Is it the same mouthpiece and reed?
Neal says
Thanks, and yes, same mouthpiece/reed.
KT says
I meant, is the subtlety in difference due to the same mouthpiece and reed?
KT says
I prefer the first. Wish my sax had that sound. High notes sound too high on my sax….and I have an alto.
Sam Golden says
First sax, rich ,full, tone, and sound. Second sax, faded sound or more air as in lean tone, consequenly weak sound.
Neal says
Thanks Sam, interesting response. Good to get different opinions on things.