Upgrading from the helleberg

[SenkerSwim]

I've been using the old reliable Conn helleberg on my Mirafone 186 for quiet some time now its been a pretty good piece. Being able to get a 4 octave range out of it and making first chair in my district on it however; with its narrow flat rim its just not that comfortable for playing long periods of time. I'd like to find a MP that is versatile like the helleberg and would be an easy switch. Any recommendations welcome!

[Donn]

Could be the Conn Helleberg would be an option. There's an old thread where Paul Sidey presented pictures of various Conn Helleberg rims, but unfortunately the pictures are invalid links now, and while he saw the current production as slightly more rounded than the older -- say, pre-1970? - some observers don't see that.

A key point is, how rounded do you like it?

[TheGoyWonder]

Longtime Helleberg player here. I might suggest a King 18 - way deeper than a Bach 18 and very similar to a Wick 2, it plays like a Bach 18/Helleberg hybrid. If you're playing auditions and stuff, it'll help a lot to put some life and clarity into solo playing on a fullsize tuba, compared to the Helleberg.

[Worth]

I have been playing 40 some years and don't have a 4 octave range - at least not one that is acceptable for public listening.

Thank you for this!

Unless I'm just speaking for myself, this statement should make many of us feel much better about ourselves. After perusing many threads of lowest note achievable, range, highest note, etc, it all seems like comparing "you-know-what" size. As an amateur, gymnastics aside, a functional range pleasing to the ear is what matters. IMO, this comment on public listening is right on! On CC my goal has been to develop a pleasant and workable C1 to the sometimes elusive G# in Bydlo, focusing especially on speed and attack down low.

For the OP, it sounds like you've already got things pretty well locked in and could be headed on a quest, although fun, with questionable returns. The advice of people here like Bloke and Doug Elliott who really know MPs should be your guide. Good luck!

[MrTubaChris]

I would recommend a Schilke Helleberg II, but it wouldn't be much more comfortable. It has a nice bite to it in the rim. But another mouthpiece that is similar but is said to be more comfortable is Chris Olka's mouthpiece. It's sold by Dillon Music and I don't think you can get it anywhere else. Chris Olka talks a bit about his mouthpiece here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=43203&p=569778&hili ... ka#p569778" target="_blank

Cheers!

[Three Valves]

Has anyone tried the stainless Kellyberg??

I play the Conn 120 and the Lexan Kellyberg now.

Not a Bach fan.

Me??

Two Octaves, between the Fs.

And three valves, naturally!!

[iiipopes]

First of all, "upgrading" from a Conn Helleberg 120S is not. the 120S is a very fine mouthpiece which serves many players in many different contexts. The only reason to change from a Conn Helleberg 120s is either because the rim is too sharp or the player is simply changing his/her tonal concept.

That said, I agree with bloke. Usually the issue is the inner rim. Over the years, some have been made rounded, but traditionally the rim is very flat and has a sharp inner lip. Soften the rim, and the mouthpiece takes on a completely different character.

In addition to all of the blokepiece offerings, for a 186 there are a couple of items I have tried that have worked well with a similar cup diameter to a 120S:

1) Miraphone's own Rose Symphony model, which is a hybrid deep cup - two acquaintences in community band use them with very good tone and intonation - one with the older 16 1/2 inch bell and one with the newer 17 3/4 inch bell.
2) Curry 128D, another hybrid cup, with the rim turned down from the stock almost 24W wide to 18 profile - it was my main mouthpiece for many years until I changed bells on my Bessophone;
3) Kelly 18, like above, deeper and hybrid in shape. Everybody should have a Kelly in their gig bag as a backup or inclement weather, just because.
4) And what I currently use: an Imperial with a cut down spacer so that the cup is @ .080 deeper than a standard blokepiece Imperial. See the thread about the Imperial and bloke's narrative on the suitability of a Profundo rim to increase cup depth. I just didn't want the entire extra 1/8 inch, so I used a shaved spacer instead.

Notice three of the four are what are considered "hybrid" cups, and bloke describes the Imperial as a "compressed" funnel.

What did not work for me on a Miraphone:
Wick 1, too dark and diffuse and took too much air in the wide throat;
Wick 2, to edgy;
Bach 18 and all facsimiles, too grainy in the low register;
LOUD 7 first generation "grenade," slotting was actually too tight and intonation always had a hard edge and had to "ride throttle" more than a person should have to;
Schilke 67, not as defined as I would like;
Griego, too "trombone-y," they now don't make tuba mouthpieces currently;
Several of the 32.5/1.28 cup size Perantucci offerings, all of which had either tone, consistency or intonation issues;
Old King 26, the cup was so deep that tone color did not develop.
And many others which in one aspect or another were not a good compromise between low register presence, intonation, and security in slotting.

These are my experiences. Your mileage will vary.

[Donn]

There are many mouthpieces. For every mouthpiece, there are players who like it.

In the present case ... the OP describes success with the Conn Helleberg, with the one complaint of an uncomfortable rim.

Is it true that the Conn Helleberg and its most rigorous copies are the most funnel shaped tuba mouthpieces one can get? (in otherwise normal dimensions, i.e. excluding anomalies like the Dr. Young.) And there's that rim. A "narrow flat" rim as the OP put it

While in the end the OP will have to decide what he or she wants, and that could be anything at all, the question seems to be a simple one: "what mouthpiece has the attributes of the Conn Helleberg, but with a different rim?"

[iiipopes]

Bach 18 and all facsimiles, too grainy in the low register;

For my Mirafone 184C &186 C, I played a Bach 18 for 35 years, but it was a MT VERNON Bach 18 - there IS a difference.

Yes, indeed!

[iiipopes]

"What mouthpiece has the attributes of the Conn Helleberg, but with a different rim?"

A Conn Helleberg with a modified rim.

[SenkerSwim]

Has anyone tried a Giddings and Webster Williwaw? how does it compare to a helleberg?

[thevillagetuba]

Has anyone tried a Giddings and Webster Williwaw? how does it compare to a helleberg?

The Williwaw is a good mouthpiece. I have not played a Helleberg in so long, because it was just way too painful of a rim, that I honestly can't compare them for you. However, I would contact Ivan and see which of his mouthpieces he recommends--Ivan is a great guy that can really lock you into something that will work. The same can be said of bloke with his mouthpieces.

[Donn]

I have not tried a Williwaw. I did have a Diablo for a while. I see G&W describes them both as having a "funnel cup", and since the Diablo doesn't, I assume the Williwaw also doesn't.

To be sure, the cup is wider at the top than it is at the bottom, as is commonly the case with funnels; and it must also be said that the Conn Helleberg isn't strictly conical in contour. But in my experience it didn't play with the lush, core-dominated sound of a Helleberg, but rather had the sort of hard edged sound that I associate with a more rounded cup. Which it has, particularly noting the very defined transition between the cup bottom and the throat.

The rim as I remember it was flat on top and somewhat narrow, but broadly rounded at the inside and outside edges.

If you don't have a Kellyberg and could imagine any use for one, that might be an interesting comparison. I can't be sure the rim would be different than what you have, but the way I remember it (I seem to have lost track of mine) it was slightly rounded and the inside edge was pretty mild. That might be just enough to address the problem, without losing the benefit of the well defined edge, which has something to do with playing facility.

[toobagrowl]

To be sure, the cup is wider at the top than it is at the bottom, as is commonly the case with funnels; and it must also be said that the Conn Helleberg isn't strictly conical in contour. But in my experience it didn't play with the lush, core-dominated sound of a Helleberg, but rather had the sort of hard edged sound that I associate with a more rounded cup. Which it has, particularly noting the very defined transition between the cup bottom and the throat.

I have an o-l-d PT-0 (yep, "0") that is a large funnel mpc. It makes a very BRIGHT projecting sound; not very round or lush. I also have a vintage Olds 14 funnel mpc that makes a very dark, yet clear focused sound. It is a much smaller mpc than the PT-0.

The cup/bowl mpcs (to me) offer a fatter/wider, more rounded sound with more overtones. And of course, there are hybrid funnel/bowl mpcs.

No two funnel mpcs are alike; no two bowl mpcs are alike

[J.c. Sherman]

1) The Faxx Helleberg. Wonderful mouthpiece, it's a Helleberg made from a Bach blank with a Bach rim. Plus, the rim is pure Bach, and the price is right.

2) If you can find one, the Yamaha CB (Canadian Brass) mouthpiece is a refined Helleberg with a slightly more wide and comfortable rim. I hesitate to recommend this, since I'm in love with them. Everyone! - email Yamaha to put these into production as their own "Helleberg Model!"

3) Kellybergs are a little more comfortable than Conns, IMHO.

[Donn]

1) The Faxx Helleberg. Wonderful mouthpiece, it's a Helleberg made from a Bach blank with a Bach rim. Plus, the rim is pure Bach, and the price is right.

Oh, now I'm sweating. Coincidentally, a Faxx Helleberg has been entrusted to the US Postal Service today and is on its way to me up the coast. Previous intelligence from this crowd was, from March of 2008, "the rim is flat, the inner edge is sharp", which from my minimal acquaintance with Bach mouthpieces is a rather different story from yours. Well, in a few days I shall know.

It seems to me I've suggested this before, that some more well to do university tuba studio should round up a gross or so of common tuba mouthpieces and saw them in half, to make the critical dimensions visible as Mike Finn has done with some of his. Or some measurement technique that would record the same details, even better, as then you'd need only borrow the mouthpieces.

[Three Valves]

1) The Faxx Helleberg. Wonderful mouthpiece, it's a Helleberg made from a Bach blank with a Bach rim. Plus, the rim is pure Bach, and the price is right.

2) If you can find one, the Yamaha CB (Canadian Brass) mouthpiece is a refined Helleberg with a slightly more wide and comfortable rim. I hesitate to recommend this, since I'm in love with them. Everyone! - email Yamaha to put these into production as their own "Helleberg Model!"

3) Kellybergs are a little more comfortable than Conns, IMHO.

Thanks!!

[WC8KCY]

Bach 18 and all facsimiles, too grainy in the low register;

For my Mirafone 184C &186 C, I played a Bach 18 for 35 years, but it was a MT VERNON Bach 18 - there IS a difference.

Yes, indeed, there is a big difference.

I started my tuba career on a New York, NY Bach 18. It was replaced in the mid '80s with a new Bach 18. Night and day difference. The New York 18 played with so much more precision and none of that gravelly sound that I loathed with the new 18.

This has been an interesting thread. I'm tempted to order a Kellyberg for the sousaphone just out of sheer curiosity...

[Donn]

Oh, now I'm sweating. Coincidentally, a Faxx Helleberg has been entrusted to the US Postal Service today and is on its way to me up the coast. Previous intelligence from this crowd was, from March of 2008, "the rim is flat, the inner edge is sharp", which from my minimal acquaintance with Bach mouthpieces is a rather different story from yours. Well, in a few days I shall know.

It seems to me I've suggested this before, that some more well to do university tuba studio should round up a gross or so of common tuba mouthpieces and saw them in half, to make the critical dimensions visible as Mike Finn has done with some of his. Or some measurement technique that would record the same details, even better, as then you'd need only borrow the mouthpieces.

My new Faxx Helleberg is here, and I'd call it a Conn rim - a little flatter, a little sharper at the inner edge than my Schilke and Denis Wick mouthpieces. But from what I can make out from pictures of other mouthpieces, not as fanatically flat as the SSH and evidently the Conn Helleberg it copies, as the "flat" surface here is really a little dished inwards. It's hard to really get a precise impression from the photo, but at least it may convey that while it's essentially a flat rim, it isn't severely flat or sharp.

I measure the throat a little bigger than advertised - they say 8.1mm, I say at least 8.3, but not a great difference. I'm delighted with the sound, first impression is very good.

[Donn]

I had a Bach 7 years ago, but it went with a tuba I sold, and I wouldn't bet my life I can remember the rim clearly. The only Bach tuba mouthpiece I've played (though I have a couple Bach trombone mouthpieces.) It's flat? If I had tilted it the right way, it would have looked pretty flat, and indeed it feels flatter than Schilke, as I mentioned. But flat in profile, with a very slight tilt, so in 3D it's actually a little dished - I don't recall this feature in any other descriptions, so maybe it's unique to Faxx? And not perfectly flat, just as the conical interior profile isn't perfectly conical, just more flat (and more conical) than Schilke et al. I guess I may have to saw it in half, then you'll see.