SBB 700 series tenor mpcs are here!

 We are really making quite some progress with baffle-free technology! Yes, our mouthpiece range is becoming brighter and brighter - but not at the expense of a big massive sound.

The tenor should be the "powerhouse" sound of the horn section - there should be ample (and extra) power and sound when required. The SBB 700 has ample power and response that does not come at the expense of intonation and response.

Be one of the few lucky individuals to try out this new masterpiece of engineering (only available in Golden Bronze finish).

Contact Us for more details and Online Purchase method/s etc.

The low-down on big tip openings:

 by David Zagar (Master Mouthpiece Maker at zagarsax)

It has been quite a while since I have written and I feel that at least one of my valued customers should read this article carefully. Tip opening plays a fundamental role on

•  how a mouthpiece reacts to a given airstream
• perceived back-pressure
• choice of reeds and reed suitability
• intonation; and
• timbre, or sound production

Notice that I have placed the list in order of significance, with timbre (or tone) last on this list.

A mouthpiece should allow the player to produce a musical note quickly and without any hesitation (without squealing, squeeking or honking) . Way too often a player selects a tip opening that is too large and the result is impaired musicality (Don't choose a tip opening just because another player that you like to listen to uses that size - obtain advice before you purchase)

As tip opening increases, a greater amount of back-pressure is perceived by the player - this is a direct result of a greater amount of two parameters: admittance and reactance. Admittance allows more air to be passed into the horn, but this requires that the player can actually support this volumetric amount of air. You will know if you can't support this amount of air if you cannot complete longer phrases and/or passages (without fainting or blacking out ). Reactance is a "good form of resistance" that only occurs if the requisite amount of air can actually be delivered - this is like a "feedback" mechanism to the player to assist in creating dynamic range control etc. Simply put, if you cannot deliver the correct amount of air for a given tip opening, the mouthpiece just won't feel right and you will have very little control (if any)

On the next discussion, I will talk about the most optimal reed selection and reed strengths that you should be focusing on to achieve the optimum tip opening setup - it basically is that simple.

I hope you find this article interesting and please stay tuned for more in the upcoming News article.  DZ

Controversy is the Affect - a higher scientific knowledge is the Cause . . .

As the old adage goes, "Sticks and Stones may break my bones . . ." Those are the exact sentiments when I receive comments that aim to contradict new technology. It would seem that our latest IRC technology is causing quite a stir within the sax playing community!

Over the last month I have personally responded to a number of emails that blatantly refute our claims that "Materials Science matters in mouthpiece design". Well, as the other old adage goes, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating . . . ."

Once again, thank you to all of our latest players who are currently using and enjoying our latest IRC technology and commiserations to the unfortunate players who choose to stay fixed in the past; hey you guys, there is a future out there, you just gotta try it out!

A personal note to all sax players: ZAGARSAX does not choose to create controversy within the sax community; Controversy is the Affect - a higher scientific knowledge is the Cause . . .

Sincerely,  Laura Dean (Overseas Sales Representative) 

No more orders are being taken for ZAGAR Bronze Tenor mouthpieces until mid November

I have had an incredible amount of traffic on our Online Store page over the last three weeks. Unfortunately this places me in a very difficult position where I am unable to accept any further orders until our current backlog is cleared.

Once again, my apologies to everyone who has tried to place an order in the last few days. All concurrent orders will be amended to our latest 2011 model - more details about this model (including name etc) in a couple week's time.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all my valued customers for their ongoing support.

More details about the new ZAGAR Bronze Tenor model in just a few more days . . .

Kindest regards,  Dave Zagar (Technical Director - zagarsax mouthpieces)

REFACERS - PLEASE STOP THE UNWARRANTED DAMAGE!

It has been quite some time since I wrote to one and all, since we have been extremely busy over the past few months.

However, I cannot remain silent any longer on the subject of mouthpiece refacing. I am very disappointed regarding the continuing damage being imposed onto our products by others who claim that they can "improve" our products.

The unwary player is being misled into believing that our products can be further improved by the removal of material . . .

REMOVAL OF MATERIAL IS ONLY ONE POSSIBILITY - ADDING IS ANOTHER

Sax players worldwide: Try to make logical decisions about what you are doing to your valuable mouthpiece investment - if you have two of the same mouthpieces (two of a kind, so to speak), then you have a "sporting chance" to discover whether a so-called "refacer" can assist to improve the performance of one mouthpiece since you now have one mouthpiece to act as a "control"

For any of you not familiar with the term "control", please feel welcome to Contact Us and I will personally attempt to explain the logical sequence required to evaluate whether improvements (if any) can be detected following METAL REMOVAL (oh the pain . . . )

On the same subject, I have recently received one "rogue" DEFACED mouthpiece that had been in circulation for what I believe to have been for a period of up to two (2) years. I believe that dozens of players were affected by this "anethema" that was circulated from player to player with our brand name and the so-called "refacer's" initials.

I can't say that I was too impressed with this ruined mouthpiece having been in circulation for such a long time; however, I thank the last person that finally stopped this mouthpiece from any further circulation. With this person's name (and the refacer's name) held in confidence, I will reprint what the last person had to say about this ruined mouthpiece:

A couple of weeks ago you told me that you intend to publish a story about the effects on modifying your pieces. I think this is a good idea, because even me I wouldn't have got the best opinion on them [zagar mouthpieces], if I wouldn't have had the possibility to compare the ruined brass piece [zagar]with the example of the V-series I bought from you [zagarsax]about a year ago on ebay. This piece went to a student of mine and I always saw him play it with mixed feelings: on one side it makes me happy that he has got good stuff, on the other side I was a little sad about the loss. That's why I'm glad to get the two pieces from you.
The brass piece I also bought on ebay a little more than one year ago. The seller's text was as follows:

From David Zagar, one of his highly regard solid brass mouthpieces. They play like good vintage links. This one has been opened to a 115 and signed by the great X. The combination of their work makes for a very powerful  piece with a rich classic jazz tone. Will handle as much air as you can put through it and still sounds really full and warm when you back off. This comes with a custom homemade lig that works very well with this piece.

But immediately I realized that it wasn't playable to me. It was more than edgy, even squeaking. Not at all "full and warm". Althought I thought I should be able to adjust my embouchure to different mouthpiece models, because I studied saxophone with the former student of Marcel Mule, Iwan Roth, in the 80s.
If you have further questions, please email me.
Im looking forward to your package.
Best regards,   Y

Please note that in order to maintain privacy, I have omitted using real names.  In the meantime I had sent out one of our original unmodified Bronze mouthpieces to Y for tryout and was awaiting feedback.

This is what Y had to say once Y had tried out the original (unmodified) Bronze mouthpiece:

[To] begin with the bronze piece: this one is fantastic, it's outstanding! I used a high quality reed from Australia, a Vintage 2 1/2 and the mouthpiece plays big and warm. Very open sound! But you can change the sound quality, i.e. to give more or less highs to the sound by changing the resonane chamber in your throat. It's a beautiful mouthpiece! I think I understand the concept of your mouthpieces. As an educated classical saxophonist (besides my experiences as a jazz player) I am also used to classical mouthpieces as the Selmer C* for example. On this piece you have to support a hard reed very much by your lower jaw to get a good core to the sound, that means you have to give a lot of power from your cheek muscles. On your mouthpiece you needn't do this. You can achieve your personal sound in an effortless way . . .

What can clearly be inferred from my happy customer's words is that if you don't like our mouthpieces in the first place, then don't have them modified; you will not improve our product through the removal of metal. ANY REMOVAL OF METAL WILL DESTROY A ZAGAR MOUTHPIECE - period.

On a lighter note, I just realized that it has been over five (5) years since the release of our first Bronze mouthpiece, the Vintage Bell Metal Bronze (VBMB).

I would like to thank all our highly valued customers for all the support through the years, through rain and shine (through busy periods and quiet times alike), and would like to wish the very best to all sax players globally!

Kindest regards,  Dave (Managing Director - zagarsax mouthpieces) 

(PS pictures of the damaged mouthpiece have been omitted in order to maintain privacy)

Are you tired of the b_ _dust?

 We have recently conducted a poll at zagarsax and the most hated thing about playing the sax is the dreaded chirp or squeek.

Apparantly, players are so frustrated with chirping that they ultimately relent to having their mouthpiece refaced. Statistically speaking, a reface has about as much probability to stop the dreaded 'squeak' as spraying the miscreant mouthpiece with WD40! (from our knowledge in mouthpiece construction and engineering, metal removal would actually have a higher probability to increase, rather than to decrease this phenomenon).

So what can one do? O.k, you've tried different reeds, different strengths, different brands; you've even resorted to refacing and the bloody thing still squeaks! Bloody hell!

O.k., you can now relax knowing that reeds, brands and strengths, and refacing ARE NOT THE SOLUTION!

So what is the answer? If I told you, zagarsax would not be in business, so you had better tryout a 'real' mouthpiece with a 'real' solution.

If you are having troubles with chirping and squeeking then take the ZAGAR 30 day challange - TOTAL SATISFACTION - or your money-back; it's that simple!

Good luck with your mouthpiece searches, and all the best for Easter to one and all! 

What the heck is "Q-factor"?

 As the title says, "... sometimes you've just got to say 'what the heck'. Every acoustical system can have these three variables that determine overall efficiency, namely:

• Capacitive Reactance (the ability to store the peak energy value within the resonant system);
• Inductive Reactance (the ability to return 'induced' acoustic energy back into the resonant system); and
• Resistance (plain ol' nasty energy-robbing, sound-stealing resistance that we all love to hate!).

Q-factor is a number between 0 and 1, where 1 would indicate a system where none of that nasty 'Resistance' is present. If you like, Q-factor determines the 'acoustical efficiency' of the overall system.

As most players are aware, there are a number of areas that determine just how good the overall setup is. As one would expect, the primary resonator (mouthpiece and reed) are of paramount importance. Equally important is the actual ligature that holds these two primary resonator components together.

If for instance a mouthpiece has been engineered to have a high Capacitive and Inductive reactance (though the use of a high IRC material), and the overall physical geometry has been engineered for a low resistance value (therefore a high Q factor), then it would follow that any external fixture such as a ligature must has some effect on the overall acoustical system - indeed it does!

The ligature can either increase or decrease the overall system efficiency by changing the Q-factor of the resonant system. The most obvious effect of utilizing a deficient or incorrect ligature design would be an overall reduction of volume, brilliance (brightness) and transient response time (slow response). This is why zagarsax supplies ligatures that are correctly engineered for the particular style and size of mouthpiece.

In summary: Q-factor can be described as a measure of the overall system (acoustic) efficiency, where an increase in resistance will have the general effect of lowering a perfect Q-factor of  "1" to a lower value. Therefore, anything that can result in a lowering of Q-factor should be avoided with Zagar mouthpieces (such as fitting non-standard ligatures, tartar buildup within the mouthpiece, adhesive labels on reeds, fitting other brands of tooth patches etc).

This list is by no means complete, and if you require further information in regards to how to maintain the highest Q-factor possible (Hi Q), please feel free to Contact Us for more information.  DZ

To reface or not to reface; that is the question . . .

I am but once again inundated with many enquiries from prospective Zagar buyers who are unsure whether they should be purchasing a refaced second-hand Zagar mouthpiece. My question is why was the particular Zagar mouthpiece refaced? This is the pertinent question (or perhaps the 'poignant' question).

When our Zagar mouthpiece products leave our factory, each and every mouthpiece receives the absolute best facing that matches both the acoustical chamber configuration, as well as matching the Internal Resonance Coefficient (IRC) of the particular mouthpiece material. Another very important parameter in this whole 'acoustic' equation is the Total Body Mass (TBM) of the mouthpiece. TBM has a direct correlation to the (IRC) of the particular mouthpiece - removing material will 'weaken' or reduce the overall response and projection of the affected mouthpiece. It could be said that Zagar mouthpieces are 'non-reverse' engineerable insofar as removal of material will only weaken (or perhaps destroy) a fully functional mouthpiece product.

In a previous News article, I posed a significant question, 'why don't refacers add material?’ It really amazes me that some very good people can make some very bad decisions when it comes down to their valuable mouthpiece purchase/investment. If you are absolutely convinced that a prospective refacer can improve your mouthpiece (and of course you have given the refacer this benefit of the doubt), then ask this same refacer to add material (whether it be treated as a temporary 'build', or a permanent modification), but be sure that this material can also be removed with solvents (in the highly likely event that you have not improved the configuration). Under no circumstances should you remove this 'build' with abrasives since any cutting or polishing of the original 'tamper-evident' surface effectively reduces the response and projection of the mouthpiece (see above).

It is imperative to understand that every Zagar mouthpiece has been individually adjusted to milli-micro meter (nM) tolerances over its entire three dimensional internal/external surface contouring. This monumental process cannot be done by hand alone, and is a by-product of super-precision numerical grinding machines that can grind to extremelly fine tolerances. Each individual mouthpiece is then also checked with a laboratory 'straight edge' to ensure that the table is absolutely flat! (This is without question!)

By all means experiment with your Zagar mouthpiece and if you really feel the need to do so, place a ‘temporary’ build that can be easily removed; however, make sure that you can actually remove this once you have discovered that this did not improve the configuration.

Remember: If you desire an improved and/or different mouthpiece, then you should consider exploring our 'Upgrade' and/or trade-in options.You can 'Upgrade' your existing bronze mouthpiece, or perhaps consider one of our used Upgraded trade-ins? Or you may want to trade-up to one of our latest Vibralloy™ mouthpiece products? 

With all these trade-up/Upgrade options, Zagarsax can send out your new mouthpiece (see: Trial Products) and then you can perform a direct comparison with your older setup. (In which other way can anyone really determine whether there has been any improvement in models, designs, facings etc?).

I hope that the above proves to be interesting reading, and remember: It's best to err on the side of caution: If you are absolutely 'hell-bent' in trying out refacing, add a temporary build - never remove any material. In this way you can experiment and see whether you can actually improve your mouthpiece (just in case you simply don't believe that we have already done the best possible job!).

In the longer term you are protecting your valuable mouthpiece investment, and we pay top dollar for trade-ins that are in original condition!

Happy experimenting, and please Contact Us if you would like further information on this and other assorted technical subjects.  DZ
 

Why Baffle-free? - Why would you want a baffled mouthpiece anyway?

Let's get down to answering this 'cosmic' question: Why Baffle-free?

As most of you already know, I had spent several years studying and learning the so-called 'secrets' of mouthpiece construction and design with the late great Mr Ralph Morgan. Mr Morgan, was one of the greatest mouthpiece makers who also knew that correct acoustic design would not allow any kind and/or form of wedge, constriction and/or baffle.

The baffle, or wedge has now become a cheap and fast way to produce loud and bright mouthpieces that 'appear' to play; in other words, the use (or misuse) of baffles will aid the uninformed manufacturer to create a loud and bright mouthpiece that will play a few notes loudly, brightly while the rest of the range is 'choked, impeded, muffled, strained, does not respond to light air streams and does not articulate well'.

So why do so many other manufacturers use baffles, if baffles are so bad?

Before I can begin to answer this question, let's take a journey down 'memory lane'. I would like to talk about the famous vintage Florida links of yesteryear: These mouthpieces can also be classified as 'baffle-free'. The reason that some of these are so highly sought-after is due to some of these 'random' mouthpieces having the perfect combination of constuction material and design geometry. This 'synergistically' creates an overall sound effect of amplification that then corresponds tonally as'brilliance', power, projection and volume; all these amazing attributes in a baffle-free package ie without a baffle and/or wedge.

I say 'some' Florida Links because not 'all' Floridas will play; on the contrary some Floridas can be quite stuffy and unresponsive.

So why do some of the Floridas play so well?

I previously mentioned that one of the critical design parameters was construction material. This single parameter played a vital role as to whether a 'Florida' was going to become a 'collectible' 30 years later - or not!

The 'grain modifier' that determined whether 'Internal Resonance' could occur in the case of Florida Links was the quantity of Lead (Pb) within the alloy. With laboratory analysis I have determined that the nominal amount of lead within the brass for the 'killer mouthpieces' is 3.5 to 4% (no pun intended). I also tested many 'Florida' mouthpieces that did not play. These ended up having anywhere around 1-1.8% Pb. It immediately became evident that Lead (Pb) was a valuable precursor to acoustical resonance (or natural acoustic amplification). It was not so much that the Lead was resonant (since Lead is a 'dead' material) but more to the point the 'grain modification' that results from the 'impeded grain growth' - Lead in such quantities is insoluble in Copper.

It is my assumption that this variation in Lead quantity within the alloy was purely unintentional, since so many Floridas deviated from this 'optimized' amount - nominally 3.7%. My scientific approach and analysis has determined that the Lead content is the main 'causal link' to great playing Florida links. Of course, finishing details are one other determining parameter (oftentimes refacers ruin a couple of 'hidden' parameters by removing valuable material that controls another very important parameter called Internal Resonance Coefficient (IRC) - why don't refacers add material?[that's another news story altogether for another time!] 

Synopsis: Curiously, most current makers/manufacturers are in the 'blind' belief that material has nothing to do with 'how a mouthpiece plays and/or functions'. As long as this 'narrow-minded' belief-system prevails in this rather small 'cottage industry', the possiblity of science improving the humble saxophone mouthpiece will strictly be limited to the 'believers' of 'baffle-free' mouthpiece technology.

Again, our SBB product is living proof that it is possible for a baffle-free design to have brilliance, projection and power, albeit without any compromise whatsoever to intonation, response and eveness of registers. I do not use Lead (Pb) in order to increase the Internal Resonance Coefficient (IRC) of our specialized bronze and Vibralloy™; instead, proprietary 'crystal growth techniques' and hi-tech metalurgical 'crystal seeding techniques' are utilized. (This latter technology is also used to manufacture jet engine turbine blades - more info on this subject will be added in a later article).

Remember: The original sax mouthpiece that was invented/created by Adolphe Sax (the original inventor/creator of the saxophone) was baffle-free, and as good acoustical design would dictate, the original equations do not permit that baffles be incorporated into a sax mouthpiece per se.  DZ.

Book now - don't miss out! 

Our official SBB Upgrade offer is now drawing to a close (Upgrade offer ends on Wednesday, 1 October 2008). Book in your mouthpiece prior to this date, and receive a free upgrade to your SBB 400 (SBB 300 mouthpieces will incur a $50.00 charge).

Following 1 October, all SBB upgrades will resume back to our normal outgoing rate of $140.00 plus shipping and handling. Book now - don't miss out!

Zagarsax is almost ready to launch their latest SBB version. . . . . the SBB 500 series! 

More technological breakthroughs here at zagarsax!. . . More innovations! . . . More finishing details discovered that will greatly improve the power, projection and response of our latest flagship mouthpiece, the ZAGAR SBB 500 series tenor mouthpiece!

For all current owners of this year's SBB 400 series, updating your 400 mouthpiece to the current 500 specs is easy, and the service is free to all original owners that purchased via our zagarsax.com website (shipping charges may apply for overseas customers).

For all original owners of SBB 300 series mouthpieces: upgrading to the current 500 specs is also possible. If you originally purchased via zagarsax.com, a small nominal fee of $50 plus shipping will apply. Please note that serial numbers/ID will remain the same following the upgrade to your SBB mouthpiece. The 500 upgrade will substantially improve the overall playing characteristics, and will add extra value to your original mouthpiece purchase.

If you are an original SBB owner, have purchased via our zagarsax.com website and would like to participate in any one of the above upgrade plans but you are unsure whether you would prefer the end results, please enquire about our SBB 500 Trial Products, for your testing convenience*. Trial Products are supplied Free of Charge to all existing Zagarsax customers (terms and conditions apply - Contact Us for availability)

Once again, I thank all our highly valued customers for supporting zagarsax in 2008, and would like to wish everyone much success and playing pleasure for the future. 

Kindest regards,

David Zagar (Managing Director - zagarsax)

* Trial Products are subject to availability

Dear saxophone friends and enthusiasts,

The current waiting list period for the SBB 400 is now early October.

I sincerely apologize to everyone for the prolonged delays to deliver the SBB 400 mouthpieces - demand for these is currently outstripping our ability to make these quickly enough.

The good news: For all Special Customer Orders via our SCOPP box, we are directly on schedule with everyone's orders, and your order will be delivered as per the estimated delivery period.

Once again, I thank everyone for your patience, and promise you all that its worth the wait!

Kindest regards,  Dave

This is a sticky topic!

I would personally like to ask all the people who are currently on-selling their used Florida Otto Links whether they would onsell these to fellow musicians if they overtly knew that these vintage mouthpieces may be harmful!

It would seem to me that 'almost anything goes' nowadays, in order to grab a quick buck from an unsuspecting fellow musician!

I have recently seen an advert on eBay that had sent shockwaves through everyone, here at zagarsax. This advert involved a reputable reseller onselling a vintage Florida Link. The reseller stated '...the gold plating is pretty much gone leaving the hard Rhodium plating mostly in tact...'.

To the saxophone community at large: The base electroplated layer on all vintage Florida Links is Nickel! Please be aware that Nickel is banned in the EU for use in any 'body contact' applications, such as jewellery or intra-oral applications such as saxophone mouthpieces. Nickel is classified as a carcinogen/teratogen under California's Proposition 65!

About Rhodium: Rhodium is one of the most expensive precious metals - over 9.5 times more expensive than gold per se - and it has not been used as a base electroplate on any mouthpiece products (both current and/or vintage) that I am aware of!

For more information on Rhodium, please follow this link: Testing for Rhodium, and other info...

To all sax players, have a happy and safe expeience with your mouthpiece, and if you are in doubt as to whether your mouthpiece is potentially harmful, please feel free to submit your mouthpiece to zagarsax for a NATA laboratory analysis - all findings will be published here on the zagarsax news-in-brief website.

Kindest regards,  Dave

G'day to one and all!

This is a pretty contentious issue. The main reason that I bring you this latest update is that the general mouthpiece public is not well informed, and sometimes good people will make bad decisions.

To begin with, I would like to briefly talk about different mouthpiece materials. 

For each excellent material currently being utilized in manufacture by my direct competitors, there are literally dozens of materials that:

1.   Don't resonate at a frequency which is conducive to a synergistic tonal enhancement of the saxophone;

2.   Are too soft, and therefore cannot hold the high tolerances that are so necessary for a long-life mouthpiece product;

3.   Are classified as potentially harmful, but nonetheless are still being used;

4.   Cannot be finished, plated or are not enough corrosion resistant to allow a saleable product.

Amongst the best hard rubber materials, the choice would have to be the Morgan Hard rubber.

And you guessed correctly if you already thought that the Zagar Bronzes are very special materials - all four negative criteria are successfully alleviated, and the Zagar Bronze metals are therefore able to be used in a saxophone mouthpiece - without compromise.

Now, here's the interesting part: Can the same finishing techniques that are relevant for Bronze, be applied to hard rubber, and vice versa? 

The answer is not a simple yes. Firstly, it must be clearly understood by the prospective refacer that the Internal Resonance Coefficient (IRC) is entirely different for both of these excellent materials, and therefore the facing curve will need to be different, in order to match each material.

The prospective refacer should also realize that various hard rubber compounds will each have their own unique IRC number. Therefore each compound/material variation will be required to be matched with the appropriate facing curve 'correction' inter alia, otherwise the mouthpiece simply will not work, period!

As the late great Mr Morgan had once told me, '... the facing curve must be accurate to within 1/10,000th of an inch!...'. Mr Morgan was not only correct about this, but also knew the importance of a relevant facing curve that matched his own world-famous rubber formula.

To this end, if you are in doubt as to whether you should entrust your valuable zagarsax mouthpiece investment to a prospective refacer, ask this same refacer whether he/she has had any experience with the material that he/she is undertaking to work on.

Internal Resonance Coefficient (IRC) is a major factor that must be fully examined, evaluated and understood prior to any refacing work, on any sax mouthpiece. I hope that the above has been of some help to one and all, and please feel welcome to submit your mouthpiece questions via this Contact Us link.

Kindest regards,  Dave

Please check back here for more of the latest News in mouthpiece designs and technology.