TubeNet

Other than shank issues, what makes this an "Eb mouthpiece"?

So, like a Bach 18 with (maybe!) some throat jazz?
After bouncing around between period mouthpieces, modern mouthpieces, big mouthpieces, small mouthpieces,... I still have not found anything that works better on any Eb tuba I've played than a Bach 18.

Perhaps this is some sort of new wheel?

Bloke,

I'm very interested in this for my Yamaha YEB321 (with added fifth valve).

FWIW, I'm liking the Mirophone TU21 (old C3, I believe) very much on this horn. Very good balance between low and high range with a big, open sound.

How might your new mouthpiece compare to the TU21?

Bob

bloke wrote:Likely, I'll (at least with the first prototypes) try out my "reverse taper" (quick/crisp low register response) throat design with this cup. Comp.-Eb's, in particular, seem as though they could benefit from little bit of help in this dept.

Indeed. That's why a Wick 3 has a larger open backbore than a Wick 1 or 2.

Bob Kolada wrote:So, like a Bach 18 with (maybe!) some throat jazz?
After bouncing around between period mouthpieces, modern mouthpieces, big mouthpieces, small mouthpieces,... I still have not found anything that works better on any Eb tuba I've played than a Bach 18.

Gotta ditto this, though I use a Kelly 18. Primarily being an Eb player, I find the Bach/Kelly/Faxx 18 the best "overall" mouthpieces for vintage Eb tubas (small bore, large bell, "chunky" bows). I do think a Bach or Kelly 18-style mouthpiece with a *slightly* wider cup diameter/ *slightly* shallower bowl cup would also be very good with Eb tubas. Basically a medium-wide/ medium-shallow cup = works very well on Eb tubas for me.

bloke wrote:

iiipopes wrote:

bloke wrote:Likely, I'll (at least with the first prototypes) try out my "reverse taper" (quick/crisp low register response) throat design with this cup. Comp.-Eb's, in particular, seem as though they could benefit from little bit of help in this dept.

Indeed. That's why a Wick 3 has a larger open backbore than a Wick 1 or 2.

' not really thinking of exploring any ultimate throat venturi larger than 8-1/4mm. Should I ?

Well, you might. A Wick 1 has a 8.43mm throat, a Wick 2 has a 8.45mm throat and a Wick 3, has, well:
Diameter: 47.35 mm
Cup Diameter: 31.25 mm
Rim Width: 8.11 mm
Bore Size: 8.78 mm
Back Bore: Large Barrel

Then again, a lot of guys also like a 24AW with a Besson 4-valve comp eefer. And the MF4 had really consistent intonation from top to bottom on the eefers I've played it on.

The PT-50 for some years was my favourite for my large Eb basses as well as for my BBb basses. The sore point for me was the lack of an inner edge, so that clean attacks took too much attention. My small 1870 Besson Eb (0.632"bore) was played through a DW4, without me being really happy about the sound. When the Boosey F comper (changed to large receiver) arrived in 2008, I had to rethink the situation. Experiments with DW4 and DW5 also in the L versions gave no happy results.

The original blokepiece #1 proved itself the right thing for the Boosey and the old Besson, which accepts the American shank, even if it sits a bit far out, but then I have had to do a HP to LP jury rigging of the tuning slide anyway.

That bloke #1 didn’t give happy results on the larger tubas, none of which are BAT’s. I ordered the MF 3H for the BBb flats, where it was too restrictive. However it was a revelation on my Besson 981 Eb. A Sidey Helleberg worked OK on the BBb basses, but I wasn’t happy about having 3 different rims. I tended to stay with the BBb basses when playing.

Then I got the bloke #2 for the Eb basses and the bloke Symphony for the BBb’s. The latter took adjustment to fill. The #2 plays well over the full range on the 981, but it hasn’t that overwhelming warmth of the MF 3H. So I am really considering the cup extender for #2. Only I right now am sick and tired of the red tape costs of importing smaller orders. Just imported an item, where the handling cost more than the import VAT itself.

Klaus

The shank diameter is the thing for me. I have Wick 3 and it works o.k. I have taken a Bach 18 and turned the shank down. The 18 is easier to play for me but the sound is not as good as the Wick. My horn is old and large for an Eb. I have few choices in mouth pieces and none that I can find in stainless. I like the full sound if the Wick, but I like the slightly larger inside diameter of of the Bach.

opus37 wrote:The shank diameter is the thing for me. I have Wick 3 and it works o.k. I have taken a Bach 18 and turned the shank down. The 18 is easier to play for me but the sound is not as good as the Wick. My horn is old and large for an Eb. I have few choices in mouth pieces and none that I can find in stainless. I like the full sound if the Wick, but I like the slightly larger inside diameter of of the Bach.

Isn’t the Denis Wick 3 based on the Bach 24AW cup only with the flatter Wick rim?

If you like the Wick 3 sound, but prefer a wider cup, it might be worthwhile trying the DW2 or especially the DW1.

Klaus

imperialbari wrote:Isn’t the Denis Wick 3 based on the Bach 24AW cup only with the flatter Wick rim?

No. The reason this is an urban myth is because Wick uses the same sized frame for the 1, 2 and 3, so the smaller cup diameter of the 3 means the rim is a little wider than on the 1 or the 2. The cup, throat and backbore geometry are completely different to a 24AW.

imperialbari wrote:If you like the Wick 3 sound, but prefer a wider cup, it might be worthwhile trying the DW2 or especially the DW1.

No. I have owned and played all three, both .520 and .490 shank, and I still own a 2L and a 1. The 3 is a really deep funnel cup, and huge backbore. The #2 has as its inspiration the old Kozy-Kup, and is a little bit rounded at the bottom. For my playing it gets really grainy, but my son sounds great on it. The #1 is a different contour funnel, throat and backbore altogether, specifically designed for the BBb comp, for which it makes the quintessential British tuba tone, that big, dark, broad English accent in the back of the tongue "ah" tone.

The 24AW is very popular for use with compensated Eb's in the UK both in bands and orchestras. It does produce a good warm tuba tone from Eb's (as you can hear on many recordings), but at the same time IMHO the sound is a bit woolly.

If you could produce an Eb mouthpiece with that characteristic warm tone without the woolliness, then I would think it the ideal for compensated Eb's.

I cannot see any reason why you could not change the rim, while maintaining tonal characteristics

Neptune wrote:The 24AW is very popular for use with compensated Eb's in the UK both in bands and orchestras. It does produce a good warm tuba tone from Eb's (as you can hear on many recordings), but at the same time IMHO the sound is a bit woolly.

If you could produce an Eb mouthpiece with that characteristic warm tone without the woolliness, then I would think it the ideal for compensated Eb's.

I cannot see any reason why you could not change the rim, while maintaining tonal characteristics

Forgive me, but you have contradicted yourself. If the tone is woolly, then it is not optimal, and therefore the mouthpiece is not optimal, and further design work is necessary to balance the cup, throat and backbore to maintain the warmth while getting rid of the woolliness. And the rim has nothing to do with maintaining tonal characteristics.

One reason the 24AW is popular is because its throat (at least according to spec, and that is taken with caution, because of the inconsistency of Bach mouthpieces) is 8.84mm, even wider than a Wick 3, so a player can push a lot of air through its reasonably deep cup. However, this may be part of what makes it woolley on a Sov eefer. So something like a 24AW cup, which is deep but not too deep, with a different throat and backbore, may have potential.

And I believe this is just what bloke is trying to accomplish. Hey bloke -- that is an idea: try grafting a 24AW cup with a shaved rim so it doesn't bang your nose onto your standard reverse throat and backbore and see what happens.

Oh, bloke, - BTW - I agree with you on the wide rim. When I first got my Curry 128D, it had a wide rim approaching 24AW, and it did the same thing to me, causing the mouthpeice to ride down and lose centering on my embouchure. I had to have Vladimir @ Dillon Music shave it down to 18 contour. Now it's just right.

iiipopes wrote:

Neptune wrote:The 24AW is very popular for use with compensated Eb's in the UK both in bands and orchestras. It does produce a good warm tuba tone from Eb's (as you can hear on many recordings), but at the same time IMHO the sound is a bit woolly.

If you could produce an Eb mouthpiece with that characteristic warm tone without the woolliness, then I would think it the ideal for compensated Eb's.

I cannot see any reason why you could not change the rim, while maintaining tonal characteristics

Forgive me, but you have contradicted yourself. If the tone is woolly, then it is not optimal, and therefore the mouthpiece is not optimal, and further design work is necessary to balance the cup, throat and backbore to maintain the warmth while getting rid of the woolliness. And the rim has nothing to do with maintaining tonal characteristics.

One reason the 24AW is popular is because its throat (at least according to spec, and that is taken with caution, because of the inconsistency of Bach mouthpieces) is 8.84mm, even wider than a Wick 3, so a player can push a lot of air through its reasonably deep cup. However, this may be part of what makes it woolley on a Sov eefer. So something like a 24AW cup, which is deep but not too deep, with a different throat and backbore, may have potential.

And I believe this is just what bloke is trying to accomplish. Hey bloke -- that is an idea: try grafting a 24AW cup with a shaved rim so it doesn't bang your nose onto your standard reverse throat and backbore and see what happens.

Oh, bloke, - BTW - I agree with you on the wide rim. When I first got my Curry 128D, it had a wide rim approaching 24AW, and it did the same thing to me, causing the mouthpeice to ride down and lose centering on my embouchure. I had to have Vladimir @ Dillon Music shave it down to 18 contour. Now it's just right.

So iiipopes, what mouthpiece do you play on your EEb ?

Right now, I don't have an eefer. When I did play eefer for a season some years ago for a couple of pieces that needed tubas in octaves in the local community band, I played an MF4 (one of a special run that had a .500 shank) and a Wick 3 after trying Wick 1, 2, 3, 24AW, MF4, Bach 18 and several other mouthpieces. A friend of mine has a Martin eefer that I play occasionally which has a great tone, great intonation for an old 3-valve, but it has an interesting quirk: once you hit false pedal Ab, anything from there on down is more embouchure dependent than valve dependent, to the point that valves are almost optional. It sounds fantastic with a Wick 3.

So I confess I don't do eefer that much, being mostly a BBb guy (see my signature). But for cash issues in this economy, I would really like to get an older B&H or Besson 3-valve comp eefer with its small bell to match my BBb 3-valve comp, and a St Pete eefer to match my 186 detachable with the retrofit St Pete upright bell.

I switched over to Eb a year and a half ago. Courtesy of Lee Stofer, I'm getting pretty good mileage from a Rudy Meinl 9 with a .78 backbore on my 1914 Conn Monster Eb (they also make a .80 backbore). It has an inner diameter fairly close to a Bach 18, but a shallower bowl. It's pretty versatile tonally, sounds good in all registers, and slots better on Eb than the Bach 18 does. Lee has said that it's a favorite of his for Eb and F tubas.

Kanstul has made its Eb-F mouthpiece with a reasonably similar diameter but a very shallow cup, and it slots and articulates VERY nicely but is very bright.

I have a couple of other mouthpieces I use on teensy-receiver antique tubas, but I really prefer the RM9. It's just not offered in a small Euro shank.