TubeNet

This is just my two cents worth, but if I were the owner of an original Helleberg and getting it restored, I wouldn't want the satin plate on it. I think it looks sharp, but an antique collectible mouthpiece like this should be in its original condition.

Like I said, great work, but just my personal opinion.

harold wrote:Oberloh got an orginial Helleberg from someone that looked like it had been dropped in a garbage disposal. Actually, it appears that some idiot had lathed it so it would fit a smaller receiver - perhaps for an F or Eb tuba.

It's certainly nice, but why would you label someone an "idiot" for modifying something so that it works for what they want to do with it?
Peace.
ASG

harold wrote:Oberloh got an orginial Helleberg from someone that looked like it had been dropped in a garbage disposal. Actually, it appears that some idiot had lathed it so it would fit a smaller receiver - perhaps for an F or Eb tuba.

I'm sure when that change was made, it was just a plain-ole Helleberg mouthpiece and not something historically significant. We modify similar mouthpieces all the time these days without feeling guilty.

But I'm sorta with Andy. As a great admirer of Dan's craftsmanship, I'm a little uncomfortable with the choice of implanting an entirely different shank, with the knurled ring not present on the original. That would necessarily change the geometry of the throat and backbore, it seems to me. I would have thought it better to build up the outer surface of the shank with plating and then machine it to the proper taper.

If the point is to save an original, then it seems to me that originality is important. If the point was to save a useful mouthpiece, then complaining that a prior owner made it work for him seems inappropriate.

Rick "who would never hesitate to machine a mouthpiece to fit as needed" Denney

Rick Denney wrote:who would never hesitate to machine a mouthpiece to fit as needed

Agreed. These are tools, and tools are modified to work in their application. Besides, that just makes finding a pristine one all that more rare and exciting, and restoration that much more challenging. If all the Hellebergs ever made were still around unmolested, for instance, what fun would that be?

windshieldbug wrote:

Rick Denney wrote:who would never hesitate to machine a mouthpiece to fit as needed

Agreed. These are tools, and tools are modified to work in their application. Besides, that just makes finding a pristine one all that more rare and exciting, and restoration that much more challenging. If all the Hellebergs ever made were still around unmolested, for instance, what fun would that be?

From my understanding, due to the tooling wearing at different rates, that each one of the Hellebergs are "molested" in their own way, so no 2 are totally similar.

ASTuba wrote:From my understanding, due to the tooling wearing at different rates, that each one of the Hellebergs are "molested" in their own way, so no 2 are totally similar.

True, but nothing like the subject of this thread was "molested"!

Usually, I would agree with restoration rather than personalization. But in this case, the mouthpiece was mangled so badly that anything Dan did for it is an improvement.

iiipopes wrote:But in this case, the mouthpiece was mangled so badly that anything Dan did for it is an improvement.

Yep....going from something I wouldn't even keep in my gigbag as a back-up to something that I'd be proud to hang on my leadpipe. Reel-purdy.

Doesn't the ribbed ring indicate that it's a vintage Helleberg? Did they actually remove the ribbed ring? Or are there vintage Hellebergs without a ribbed ring? Or is it not quite so old as to have a ribbed ring?

J (who likes writing "ribbed ring")

Register one more vote for somebody who likes what Dan did to this one.

Original Conn-Helleberg mouthpieces aren't SO rare that "defiling" one would be on the same level as, say, messing with the CSO York.

When I look at what Dan did, I see a mouthpiece with a real historical touch and a touch of the modern, both in a useable finished product. In other words, I think it is a nice little piece of art, one that I would be proud to use. It isn't pretending to be an original, unrestored C-H - Dan just used one to create something else.

And what he created is nice - definitely worthy of the effort in my opinion.

harold wrote:The original backbore was saved. What you are looking at is a sleeve that fits over the original shank and then is silver soldered into place.

Perhaps idiot is too strong a word. However, I would say the same thing about someone taking a chainsaw to a Dusenberg so that it would fit in the garage.

How he restored the backbore was worthy of inclusion in the original posting. At least it interested me.

As to this being the equivalent of chopping an extremely rare and valuable car to fit in the garage, well, that analogy is about as much out of place as the original use of the word "idiot", don't you think? I mean, someone was able to get good use out of that mouthpiece because he made it fit. The alternative is to use the mouthpiece to weight down desk papers, which is what most of my mouthpieces do.

Of course, I would extend the garage to fit some rare and valuable car, but then some do-gooder of the future would call me an idiot for defiling the house, which is worth even more.

Rick "thinking a Conn Helleberg wouldn't get on the televised portion of an Antiques Roadshow episode" Denney

I'd be interested in what this cost. Say, more or less than a Sidey Helleberg? And, are you doing it hoping it will play a certain way, or were you pretty sure before you refurbished it?
Thanks.
Peace.
ASG

Beautiful work, Dan. ... but I STILL like my $30 Kelly!

ArnoldGottlieb wrote:I'd be interested in what this cost. Say, more or less than a Sidey Helleberg? And, are you doing it hoping it will play a certain way, or were you pretty sure before you refurbished it?

..or what it would have cost to have it duplicated.

ASTuba wrote:This is just my two cents worth, but if I were the owner of an original Helleberg and getting it restored, I wouldn't want the satin plate on it. I think it looks sharp, but an antique collectible mouthpiece like this should be in its original condition.

Hey Andy, Its okay, most folks don't know it, but the satin finish was used on the earl originals as was bright. I tend to use the satin because it helps completely diffuse or eliminate imperfections that would be impossible to hide in a bright finish. It is also a signature style I am known for that helps identify my work (not that a lot of Techs do this kind of stuff).

Rick Denney wrote: I'm a little uncomfortable with the choice of implanting an entirely different shank, with the knurled ring not present on the original.

As you should be Rick; I would be as well. Not entirely differant, only the outside. The before image harold posted is a little misleading. See the above image where it is shown next to my original. The mouthpiece did originally have the knurled section. It had been turned down and a piece of brass slipped over and lead soldered in place. The added on brass was poorly fitted and crudely tapered. At the time they removed about a half inch from the length of the shank so to fit an Eb or F. My job in restoring the mouthpiece required the removal of the old soldered on material as well as the old solder, I turned down the remaining original shank just enough to allow for the new material to be closely and properly fitted.



I did cut the little remaining of the waist back to the bowl in order to achieve a neat and clean fit with the new material. By doing so, I was able to hid the silver brazed joint completely.



I made no alteration to the existing internal dimensions of the shank, back-bore or cup. The new exterior material was then machined to the same dimensions as the original design called for. So, as you can see, the end result is a mouthpiece that you would be hard pressed to tell it was ever in such a poor state as it was.



The old "vintage" CONN-HELLEBERG mouthpieces have become so valuable and highly sought after that it is very important they be restored as close to original as possible. Doing so is a combination of technical skill with a bit of artistic flair. Its a lot of fun and a real challenge seeing how close you can hit the mark.

Daniel C. Oberloh

Oberloh Woodwind and Brass Works
Saving the world, one horn at a time...

Just wrapping up this loose end. The mouthpiece is completed as of last Friday. Turned out pretty nice. Feels good and will fit a proper receiver the way it did whem it was new.



Daniel C. Oberloh

Oberloh Woodwind and Brass Works
Saving the world, one horn at a time...

www.oberloh.com

-

tofu wrote:I went to take it apart to fix it and ...... it was a completely sealed plastic case that the only way to get inside was to break the plastic. It was as if the manufacturer was not even going to take the chance that someone might just try to repair instead of replace it.

YOU BROKE THE SEAL!? Now you've done it! Your whole house is now radioactive! RUN (don't walk) to the nearest HazMat station for decontamination!!!

You broke the seal?! Now this is going on your permanent record.

Next thing you know, he'll be tearing labels off mattresses!