Re: [Harp-L] Re: Suzuki Pure Harp review (long)



Three examples is a pretty small sample, but if Richard, Winslow and I all found the 3D too tight on the new Suzukis, there may be a trend there.  After mulling mine some more, I would say that it's not quality control on the 3 hole, it's just where the result of Suzuki gapping the harp on the tight side overall is most noticeable--I'm pretty sure what Richard calls 'stiff' action is what I'm calling tight.  The thing is that I'm not calling that gapping wrong, just disagreeing with it for my playing purposes/habits.  I think Suzuki deserves applause for having the confidence to gap a production diatonic tight *on purpose,* instead of gapping it widely so that (allegedly) novices can slam away clumsily without blanking out.  The Suzuki is gapped somewhat tightly (by production harp standards) to have precise, easy half-step bends and bring in overbends, and that seems like a much better harp to start out on, or keep going on.
 
If you look at my Pure Harp's draw plate, the 1-3 draw reeds are gapped at a height above the reedplate that is only about 20-25% of the thickness of the weight pad on the end of the reed.  (This measurement isn't looking through the reed gap & slot, it's viewing the reedtip's height above the plate with a strong magnifier, so it can be done without taking the harp apart.)  I changed my 2D and 3D reeds' height to about 75% (roughly) of their pads' thickness to make them handle hard attacks the way I need.  That puts those two holes on the harp a little out of balance with the rest of the harmonica, but then my habitual playing down there may be a little out of balance:-).  The nice half-step bends are still there; everything just happens more at the amplitude I need.  It doesn't feel quite as precise but is still plenty precise enough.
 
If people want a reference point, new MB Deluxes I've seen tend to have their 1-3D reeds gapped around 100% of pad thickness, much, much wider than the stock Suzuki, while both the Suzuki and the MBD have the 1-3B reeds gapped around 100% of pad thickness.  If you gap an MBD's draw reeds as tight as the stock Suzuki reeds were on mine, that MBD'll play a lot like the stock Suzuki, I suspect (I've got a Bb SP20 here to try that on this week if I have time), and vice versa.  There's not any voodoo to it; the Suzuki just seems like a breakthrough to me because a. they're not afraid to gap it as tight as they did and b. it's so absolutely regularized by the standards of production gapping--it looks as though it's been carefully gone over by hand, which is where Hohner currently falls short on the MBD.  I've got a new G MBD here that plays pretty well out of the box, yet with the naked eye I can see about four or five reeds I'd definitely give a tweak to, to make a more even gap progression that should yield a more balanced playing feel.  You still have to play it to *confirm* that it's balanced, and may have to adjust it, but careful initial visual setup is what puts you in the ballpark and raises the odds that it'll work, and Suzuki's done that superbly, judging by my example.
 
Thus, if the stock Suzuki feels tight to you, you may wind up regapping the entire thing as Richard did with his.  That's not to say the stock Suzuki doesn't play <EXTREMELY well>; no need to shout, really, Chris, because Richard just disagreed with the overall setup for his purposes/habits--in particular, people who've been playing at a high level for a long time often play pretty hard, and may need something gapped wider.  There's anecdotal evidence of players regapping Filiskos wider in the archives (search Bonfiglio or Estrin, for example), to name just one form of polite disagreement about how tight gapping should be.  What I noticed was that Richard liked his Suzuki an awful lot once he was done--it's a good hop-up platform for those who know what they're doing, besides being so good (in its way) in stock form.
 
I just realized I'm flirting with equivocation above: Gapping that is tight may either be tight in the objective sense (relatively small gaps) or tight in the subjective sense (tight playing feel, closer to blanking out, doesn't handle hard attacks well).  Got that?  It's the crux of this matter: Suzuki has given this harmonica relatively small gaps, which may play too tightly for you, depending on your playing style & context.  But as I said in the earlier post, I think for an 'off-the-rack' setup, Suzuki made a good choice and it's going to fit a lot of people.  If I hadn't developed toward a lot of hard TB attacks (slaps/lifts/etc.) over the last few years, I wouldn't have regapped my Pure Harp at all.  The stock action/response is remarkably good and remarkably well balanced *within its overall parameters*, a whole order of magnitude better than I've encountered in a stock harp yet (though I'm Seydel-ignorant).   If there's a longslot version of the lower keys on the way, I'm definitely going to buy at least one more; it should be a little louder, if nothing else.
 
You know, just thinking about it, I can think of the harp players I know, some of whom I've built harps for, and easily make an educated guess about who'll like the Suzuki's action right out of the box; most are going to like it, and the exceptions all absolutely need something gapped relatively wide and are longtime traditional blues players who don't overbend.  That's pretty clear-cut.  The thing is, I don't find myself thinking I'd say to anyone that the new Suzuki's good if you get a good one--I think they're all going to be good ones, in their way, if the quality control stays at its present level.
 
Stephen Schneider
 
________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free.




This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.