TubeNet

So... I've posted enough at this point that I bet most of you know my current situation... Played a long time, semi-pro, tuba stolen, getting back into it now, tuba shopping for the first time in nearly 20 years.

The tuba part of it is going pretty well for me - I seem to have options, which I wasn't necessarily expecting, and I'm very close to getting something. Yay.

I've also been using either a Conn Helleberg or a Miraphone Rose Orchestral mouthpiece for all this time. Used to play on a Bach 7, and I played around with a Marcienkewicz for a long time when it was trendy (and I wrapped it in duct tape when THAT was trendy...).

Not mouthpiece shopping until I have a tuba to match it to, of course... but I totally missed out on the whole stainless steel thing. I'm still back from the days of bell collars and mouthpiece weights, and I like what's been happening with the move back to pistons and American designs and sounds. So these G&W mouthpieces are curious to me, but I'd love to hear some feedback. And what else has come out in the last 15 years or so that's worth looking at in the world of mouthpieces? This thread, if it heads in the way I fantasize, is really just a general discussion for my own edification, and not so much for specific recommendations yet - like I said, I'll get the tuba first. And I do like my Helleberg, so I don't even know if I'm going to go shopping yet. But at $100 a pop, it's a lot cheaper to experiment with mouthpieces than with tubas, so I just want to know what's out there and why, as it were.

Hi

I just recently bought a G&W mouthpiece and have to say I love it! To make things better, the people at G&W recently redesigned their original line of mouthpieces and removed a lot of the excess weight from the outside. Depending on what size horn you buy, you might really like the Bayamo model...escpecially if you like your conn helleberg. You might also look at the Mike Finns...they aren't stainless steel...but they are great mouthpieces too.

What I recommend is getting your new horn first and just spending some time playing with your helleberg. This will give you time to decide what more you want out of your sound and point you in the right direction.

Hope this helps!

Kerry

kmshimfe wrote: What I recommend is getting your new horn first and just spending some time playing with your helleberg. This will give you time to decide what more you want out of your sound and point you in the right direction.

Agreed -- the Helleberg is still one of our "reference" mouthpieces. If you still have the Bach 7, it could be useful as well (I keep one in my "bag-o-tricks", along with a 30E, a Marcinkiewicz ST4, and the lexan Kellyberg that became my "default" mouthpiece about 4 years ago).

ginnboonmiller wrote: (and I wrapped it in duct tape when THAT was trendy...).

Please say more about this! Where does the duct tape go?

From just following Tubenet, I believe we're in between trends these days. There are more stainless steel mouthpieces than there used to be (and some interesting new surface treatments for them), but I think the time has more or less passed when people felt they just needed to get on board the stainless train (except for allergies, those who need a mouthpiece for utensil or weapon, etc.)

Donn wrote:

ginnboonmiller wrote: (and I wrapped it in duct tape when THAT was trendy...).

Please say more about this! Where does the duct tape go?

Heh.

It goes in the garbage after a while, honestly. Back in college (Oberlin, with J.c. who posts here frequently), early 1990s, when people were adding as much mass as possible to mouthpiece and bell, we all started messing with duct tape around the cup of the mouthpiece to dampen vibrations. At 20 years old, looking for every advantage we could muster, we could swear it worked and wrapped our mouthpieces for greater projection. I'm pretty much completely convinced that it's total hooey, but if you want to bring it back, go for it and post a full report!

ginnboonmiller wrote:It goes in the garbage after a while, honestly. Back in college (Oberlin, with J.c. who posts here frequently), early 1990s, when people were adding as much mass as possible to mouthpiece and bell, we all started messing with duct tape around the cup of the mouthpiece to dampen vibrations. At 20 years old, looking for every advantage we could muster, we could swear it worked and wrapped our mouthpieces for greater projection. I'm pretty much completely convinced that it's total hooey, but if you want to bring it back, go for it and post a full report!

I'm persuaded that damping vibrations has little effect, unless it's damping a resonance that could cause problems. I can't identify any resonance in the metal that starts with the mouthpiece. Plus, the mouthpiece is already effectively damped by being pressed up against that gooey face. I've never, ever heard a mouthpiece make a sound during play.

For an experiment, I have just held a Mike FInn 4 up by the end of the shank, and rung it like a bell. The frequency it rings is very high, perhaps 8-10 kHz. It's almost beyond the range of my aging ears.

Then, I held the mouthpiece up to my mouth, and tried to ring it again. All I get is a dead "thunk". I conclude that my lips provide near-total damping.

Whether that high-pitch ring, even if it wasn't damped, could affect sound is already hard for me to swallow. Tuba sound just has no important overtones within octaves of that frequency. But I can only conclude that any perception of difference from adding additional damping is purely psychological. I think that's where you guys ended up, too, given that the tape eventually went in the trash.

Adding mass to the mouthpiece does affect its resonant metallic frequency. But if it's fully damped anyway, then it won't resonate. I cannot understand how it could affect the vibration of the air within it.

I do have some heavy mouthpieces, and I like them, but not because they are heavy.

I like stainless steel because it's durable and it has the same smooth feeling as gold plating.

To answer your question, the only substantive trend I see in mouthpieces is back towards more cup-shaped mouthpieces, especially for big, potentially woofy tubas. For example, various Geib shapes have come back into popularity, and that trend seems to track the increased popularity of wide, squat piston tubas, especially the big ones. But no trend is without it's promoters and detractors.

Heavier and lighter mouthpieces seem to me to have no more physical significance the skirt hemlines. I like short skirts on some ladies but prefer longer skirts on others. My preference has nothing to do with the qualities of the ladies involved beyond the extremely superficial.

Rick "recognizing that some notice differences but at a loss to explain them" Denney

choice 0: cup, bowl, or in-between

choice 1: slippery (gold, stainless) or not

choice 2: sharp or rounded rim

choice 3: small/medium/large volume

choice 4: small/medium/large backbore

[beware of small-large and large-small]

...

choice 98: weight

choice 99: color

The current big trend is that the people who brought you heavyweight mouthpieces 4 years ago are now touting lightweight mouthpieces as the "in" thing.

Note that if you restict yourself to 3 possibilities for each of 7 choices, there are 3^7 possible mouthpieces to try out before you find the one you (and your tuba) love.

Happy hunting

[for the innumerate, 3^7 is 2187 - I propose that we label them TMP-0 .... TMP-2186]