TubeNet

schools might buy your amati... or take it on donation...

I've had good results from a Marcinkiewicz ST4, as well as a Bach 30E. With my horn (Sear-Cerveny CC, .835" bore), both work well in the mid-range, the Bach works better up high (the ST4 has a smaller throat & tends to go a bit flat above the staff), and the ST4 works better down low (cup I.D. = 1.28", versus 1.18" for the 30E -- cup depth for both is around 1.2"). The Loud LM-12 looks promising for this application also.

denis wick 4 or 5

if the horn has the older small euro/british receiver get a 4 or 5.

If it has a standard size receiver get a 4L or 5L.

ken k

ken k wrote:denis wick 4 or 5

That's odd, my Denis Wick 5 sure doesn't seem shallow to me? It isn't my biggest mouthpiece, but that's about width - it's a deep mouthpiece, proportionately.

The PT-65 works very well as a shallow cup mouthpiece with the MW 2040.

I used it to play the ophicleide part in Mendelssohn Elijah last year.

Donn wrote:

ken k wrote:denis wick 4 or 5

That's odd, my Denis Wick 5 sure doesn't seem shallow to me? It isn't my biggest mouthpiece, but that's about width - it's a deep mouthpiece, proportionately.

Well I must confess I never played a 5. I used a 4 for many years and it is quite small and really gives a great focused sound. I just assumed the 5 would be smaller still.

not sure of the specs. I will have to investigate. You now have piqued my curiosity.

FYI, I have an old Boosey & Hawkes Eb, which originally had the smaller leadpipe on it. I have since put a Besson 981 leadpipe on the horn with a full sized receiver, so i have been using larger mouthpieces (Denis Wick 2L, Helleberg, J&S Heavy Helleberg, and most recently a SSH Helleberg), but I do not have the scalpel like clarity I had when using the 4, I may go back to a smaller piece, at least for quintet work, and use the SSH for band and orch work. I have a Helleberg 7B I may try for a while to see how that works. i would be interested in any other suggestions.

ken k

When I clicked on this I thought that it would be about mouthpieces that were superficial...

ken k wrote:Well I must confess I never played a 5. I used a 4 for many years and it is quite small and really gives a great focused sound. I just assumed the 5 would be smaller still.

not sure of the specs. I will have to investigate. You now have piqued my curiosity.

First words of the description on deniswick.com are "Deep cup."

Which doesn't contradict anything you're saying, it's just that this started out as an inquiry about shallow mouthpieces, so just to avoid any confusion. And he does go on to describe the 4 as a scaled down 3, with "good projection with less effort", which sounds like we could be talking about a little shallower cup than the 5.