Little Geese: The Ocarina Forum is an on-line community for ocarina makers, musicians and enthusiasts, with a free resource depository containing sheet music and learning materials
Little Geese: The Ocarina Forum Little Geese: The Ocarina Forum
Internet Relay Chat Facebook page YouTube channel
Translation:

It is currently 06 Jul 2020, 09:53

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Some of methods described here could potentially be dangerous to your health or the health of others. Always be extremely careful when working with sharp tools, power tools, chemicals and/or high temperatures and make sure to follow the safety instructions for any tools or materials you use.

Little Geese: The Ocarina Forum cannot be held responsible for any damage caused by attempting to do anything described here. Remember, safety first!



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Baffles and Potential Patent Issues
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2013, 05:51 

Member

Member

 

Posts: 18

Joined:

07 Jan 2013, 22:43

 

Offline

Moderator edit: This topic is split from here: http://www.littlegeese.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=360

I would be careful about the baffles, because if I remember correctly his (Moderator edit: Spencer Register's) patents are VERY general. You may want to look into that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Spirit Wind Ocarina
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2013, 07:04 

User avatar

Member

Member

 

Posts: 225

Joined:

21 Nov 2012, 05:02

 

Offline

Yes I have looked into that, from what I have researched, baffle walls have been used in instruments for centuries. I do agree I need to be careful and need to avoid designing something that is too similar to his design, but I have also found that there are a few ocarina makers who also use baffle design. From what I have heard in some of there discussions, it would be very difficult for a person to patent a design that covers all forms of baffle walls inside an instrument when it has been done for years. While his patent can seem general, I think that he has a specific design that he uses for his walls. However, I have tested an ocarina I have made using his design to that of mine, which has some noticeable changes, and I personally like the differences. Thank you for the concern though :)


Please visit by Facebook page so that you can stay updated on my progress.
http://www.facebook.com/spiritwind.ocarinas

My website http://spiritwindocarina.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Spirit Wind Ocarina
PostPosted: 17 Jan 2013, 17:40 

Member

Member

 

Posts: 18

Joined:

07 Jan 2013, 22:43

 

Offline

http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/7799980.html
That is a link to the patent. So basically any baffles over half of the height.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Spirit Wind Ocarina
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2013, 12:32 

User avatar

Member

Member

 

Posts: 486

Joined:

02 Aug 2012, 00:49

Location:

Zagreb, Croatia

 

Offline

In my opinion, the patent in question is absolute nonsense. It's like someone attempting to patent fire or a wheel. I find such an action to be quite baffling... :mrgreen:


The fact that this patent was approved speaks only about how people at the patent office in question are ignorant, misinformed and lazy/sloppy in doing the research (since it took over a year for them to issue the patent - one would assume they would do the necessary research). I doubt this patent would ever stand up in court and I assume Spencer is intelligent enough to be aware of that and not take any legal actions against the supposed patent infringement - that patent is too valuable for advertising to risk losing it. The fact is several ocarina and xun makers utilized baffles that fit the description in Spencer Register's patent, years before that patent was registered and that can be easily proven in court. A notable case is Minsoo Kim, MapAram ocarinas, who started making ocarinas with baffles on 18th April 2007, which is 2 years before Spencer's patent was filed.


Personally, I have nothing against Spencer (nor any interest in him losing his patent) to justify spending time and money to challenge the patent in court, nor am I a citizen of USA, but should the need arise it is easily possible to point out to evidence that the patent in question is not an original invention.


It is my opinion that it is quite safe to utilize any baffle design in an ocarina, should one wish to do so. However, I found ocarinas that do not use baffles to be more responsive when playing quick passages, so I prefer not to have any obstacles to air inside the chamber. And, as far as I understand, clean high notes can be achieved (albeit with more difficulty) by making a well-aligned labium and windway.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Baffles and Potential Patent Issues
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2013, 16:11 

Member

Member

 

Posts: 18

Joined:

07 Jan 2013, 22:43

 

Offline

I have seen pictures of the inside of a Maparam ocarina, and I don't think that they fit the patent. It is really just holes on the inside of the ocarina where the finger holes are making the walls thinner around the finger holes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Baffles and Potential Patent Issues
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2013, 17:17 

Member

Member

 

Posts: 1

Joined:

18 Jan 2013, 03:04

 

Offline

Spencer does make a nice ocarina, but I'd wager on a 75-85% chance that it would be unenforceable if brought to court provided the defense produced any of the copious examples of baffles employed in ocarinas before the date of issue. There were also large discussions about baffling systems on several public email lists 10 years before Spencer filed, which could also disqualify its novelty.

Then again ~50% of patents brought to court are invalidated so that says something. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Baffles and Potential Patent Issues
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2013, 19:13 

User avatar

Member

Member

 

Posts: 152

Joined:

02 Aug 2012, 13:21

Location:

New York, USA

 

Offline

Baffles and their effectiveness when applied to the ocarina is a highly debatable subject.
Furthermore, what constitutes a 'baffle' seems to be ambiguous within the ocarina community but I would say that the closest thing to a baffle would be spencer's wall baffles as well as those used in xuns.
Typically, they're a sheet of material used to retard or divert the flow of air within the vessel but for some cases (ie- maparam, noble, most korean makers) I wouldnt say that the deep depressions and cuts in the clay are baffles in that respect, however they produce similar results.

I truly believe though that 'sheet baffles' are unnecessary in ocarina use. High note clarity can be achieved if one focuses on developing proper windway dynamics, voicing shape, alignment of the wind stream within the clay body's cross section and most importantly, understanding the ratio of voicing size to chamber volume.

Xun's benefit from such things because they are very globular in design and have an inaccurate wind stream trajectory, resulting in weaker tonal production (the ocarina has a 'guided' wind stream and is hence, more effective for tonal production). Thusly, the air needs to be slowed down as much as possible within the xun to allow the weak air stream to carry sound long enough within to project well. In some cases, this allows more finger holes to be use to increase the range or to increase the accuracy of said holes pitch.
With the ocarina though, and this is just my opinion so please dont take offense, I feel baffles are just a short cut on other construction aspects that could be improved through development.

Maparam and other korean manufacturers mostly utilized the recessed hole depressions to enable the use of smaller finger holes, fitting a wider variety of players hands. Its essentially the same as undercutting but it goes a step further by allowing the maker to gain predictable base chamber pitch upon assembly, rather than hoping that the undercutting would yield the same result each time. Undercutting both increases chamber volume (lowering pitch) and increases the finger hole's effective width internally (raising that particular notes pitch) so eliminating that factor during construction would provide more predictable and faster results, reducing overall construction time.


please visit my website and see what Im making! http://facebook.com/oberonocarinas


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Baffles and Potential Patent Issues
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2013, 19:38 

User avatar

Member

Member

 

Posts: 225

Joined:

21 Nov 2012, 05:02

 

Offline

I find what Ross said regarding the tonal quality to be for the most part correct. I do think that with proper construction of the wind way labium etc. you can develop a clean sound all the way throughout the range. With proper attention applied to this section of the ocarina, a good sound can definitely be achieved. However, I do think that baffles do play a role in how the ocarina reacts. I have found through experiments, some different effects can be achieved by using certain baffle walls. From my experience, while I can make ocarinas play clearly throughout its entire chamber, there is just something different about the clarity when using internal designs. Maybe it is that the notes just seem stronger, more independent almost as if they are just more powerful in general. I really do focus a lot of my time when making my ocarinas on the quality of the wind way. I never want to lose quality in one aspect by replacing it with another if you know what I mean. However, I believe that baffles indeed had potential.


Please visit by Facebook page so that you can stay updated on my progress.
http://www.facebook.com/spiritwind.ocarinas

My website http://spiritwindocarina.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Baffles and Potential Patent Issues
PostPosted: 19 Jan 2013, 06:41 

Member

Member

 

Posts: 18

Joined:

07 Jan 2013, 22:43

 

Offline

The patent isn't for baffles in general though, it is for ones the have an area over 50% the cross sectional area at that point. There is no way the patent would be overturned unless you could find ones that had baffles that big. No other ocarinas I know of would qualify, and baffles like that in other instruments still probably wouldn't be enough since the patent is for an ocarina. I don't know if it passed or not, but there was legislation being discussed in the US that would allow someone to patent someone else's work (even if the person whose idea it was had absolute proof it was theirs) if the person who did it couldn't apply for the patent (basically being unable to afford the application). I am not sure of those details on that legislation but if that is what they were and it passed it probably wouldn't matter if there were examples of those baffles in an ocarina if there were no other patents.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


Administration contact email:
Bulletin board software by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group