TubeNet

Many of you know that Lee Stofer is selling a faithful replica of the original Geib mouthpiece. I bought one in January, and told people that I would take some months to test it.

Normally, when I try a mouthpiece like this, I test it for several months, and then go back to my previous mouthpiece. Usually, there is a feeling of "aaah! Back home again" and the experiment is over. That happened with a Laskey 30H and a couple of other mouthpieces, tested against my tried-and-true PT-48. When that happens, I usually don't write about it.

But, I'm writing about this one.

My first reaction to the Geib was that it provided more security and accuracy in the upper register. I also found that it provided more clarity and color. But I thought it took a bit of meat out of the sound in the lower register.

When I went back to the PT-48 three weeks ago (as part of the experiment), I found that my sound was rounder, but also a bit fuzzier, and less accurate. And the security in the upper register suffered.

While visiting Mike Lynch and playing several tubas in his stable, I played the Geib and the PT-48 one after the other (it was just how it went--I wasn't really comparing the mouthpieces), and the look on Mike's face suggested that my assumption that the 48 made a bigger sound was subject to some question.

This week, I went back to the Geib, and this time it was the Geib that got the "aaaah!" response.

So, I made some more precise measurements. The cup diameter of the Geib is actually a bit larger than on the PT-48, though it feels a bit smaller. The reason it feels smaller is that it has a sharper rim, so the part that applies pressure on the face is actually a bit narrower. The Geib is substantially more cup-shaped, and I would think it more in the Bach tradition than in the Helleberg tradition. Considering the age of the Geib design, it's entirely likely that the reverse is the truth--the Bach is more in the Geib tradition.

Bottom line: It's a great mouthpiece for keeping a big tuba from going woofy, and it is easy to play.

The only negative for me is that it is much pickier about how I trim my facial hair. Stubble in the wrong place will cause blood flow to a much greater extent than with the 48.

For those looking for a largish mouthpiece that will add a lot of sizzle to the sound, especially for a big tuba, it's worthy of consideration. It would probably not be my first choice for a Miraphone 186, but for the Holton it seems just right.

Rick "for whom this one's a keeper" Denney

I bought one within hours of Rick's purchase. It's the only thing I've used on my new-style King 2341 since then.
I haven't done any serious comparison testing, but i've felt ZERO need to switch back to last year's model (or, the one from 2 years ago that I went back to after a flirtation with last year's model).

I don't pretend that I can hear or feel large differences among the last 4 mouthpieces I've used on the King; I sound equally bad on all of them, and about all I feel qualified to say about them is that they are all competent mouthpieces. Perhaps my King is less mouthpiece sensitive than Rick's Holton; perhaps it's the nut behind the wheel.

I'm about to take an involuntary break from playing that will probably last until Fall. When I return, I'm likely to concentrate on my newly-acquired Eb (modified 1970s Besson compensating 3+1, MF4). After *that* I'll do a comprehensive taste test on the King BBb.

A word on trimming facial hair: don't. Clean-shaven works, and fully grown-in hair around the mouth works - but short, stiff, stubble leads to blood everywhere.

bloke wrote:The administer often accuses me of putting people down...This is no put-down. I know that people DO play with the situations outlined below. It is just a statement meant to be taken at "face" value:
I do not understand how people can play the tuba with...
- a mouthpiece with a rounded rim
- facial hair under their mouthpiece

I tend to agree with you. I have tried both, unsuccessfully. However, there is evidence to the contrary.

HI-
I own one and cannot say enough good things about this mouthpiece--Lee has a true winner here--highly recommended!
Regards-
mark
jonestuba@juno.com" target="_blank

Hi-
Here is a pic--'Stofer-Geib' on left, and an 'original' Conn-Helleberg on the right. Enjoy.
Regards-
mark
jonestuba@juno.com" target="_blank

i own one and it's great. that's all there is to say. as for the hair and rim, personally a round rim makes exchanges through the registers easier and i cant play with hair on my lip. simply doesn't work for ME.

-casey

How much do these cost?

Thanks for posting the pictures. Even though I don't have one, I do notice some design features about it that are common to mouthpieces that seem to work better for me: 1) it is of moderate dimensions, 2) the rim is a little bit lighter in profile, which a lighter rim profile, for me, at least, produces better articulation response, and 3) the "weight" of the mouthpiece is lower around the throat, which, again for me, produces more solidarity and security on range and dynamic issues.

But, as Rick said, it is larger in cup diameter, and it probably isn't the first choice for a 186, and I am very happy with the mouthpiece/horn combinations I currently play.

If I played a Holton, Martin, or other piston BAT, and had physically a larger embouchure, I'd definitely consider one.

Lee -- congrats on a winner!

Can anyone comment on how these might compare to a Laskey 30G?
I've been using one of those recently on a rotary Neptune, and have been pleased.
thoughts?

thanks-
Jim Gray

Rick Denney wrote:So, I made some more precise measurements. The cup diameter of the Geib is actually a bit larger than on the PT-48, though it feels a bit smaller. The reason it feels smaller is that it has a sharper rim, so the part that applies pressure on the face is actually a bit narrower. The Geib is substantially more cup-shaped, and I would think it more in the Bach tradition than in the Helleberg tradition. Considering the age of the Geib design, it's entirely likely that the reverse is the truth--the Bach is more in the Geib tradition.

So here's my question - have you tried to make a mold of the mouthpiece (or any mouthpiece) so you can truly see what the shape of the mouthpiece interior truly is as compared to a (insert any mouthpiece here)? These days, I'm more interested in this aspect of a mouthpiece than pretty much anything else. I don't know if wax would be suitable or not. Perhaps since your "Appalachia" you could just make it out of mud (kidding). I know Mike Finn has made molds of mouthpieces to study them, not sure if anyone else has done this or not.

kingrob76 wrote:So here's my question - have you tried to make a mold of the mouthpiece (or any mouthpiece) so you can truly see what the shape of the mouthpiece interior truly is as compared to a (insert any mouthpiece here)? These days, I'm more interested in this aspect of a mouthpiece than pretty much anything else. I don't know if wax would be suitable or not. Perhaps since your "Appalachia" you could just make it out of mud (kidding). I know Mike Finn has made molds of mouthpieces to study them, not sure if anyone else has done this or not.

Out here in Appalachia, we just cut them in half. I tell you what, you buy one, and I'll cut it in half for you.

Actually, I qualitatively measured the inside of the cup with my fingers. It's substantially more cup-shaped than the PT-48, which is more cup-shaped than a Helleberg. But I haven't compared it to something like a Bach 18.

Rick "who once made molds with tightly wadded paper--try it before you laugh" Denney