Page 1 of 1

Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 7:19 pm
by Kirley
Hey.
I've got a Marcinkiewicz H1 that I bought used from someone here on TubeNet a while back. It's an Oregon made one. I love it. But the shank size is just a bit smaller than I'd like. It fits my older King 2341 fine. But it bottoms out (doesn't seat) on Conn sousaphone bits. Even newer ones that aren't all stretched out yet. It also bottoms out on an old King tuba, maybe from the 20s, that I play at a weekly rehearsal.

I don't see any shank size options on their website. Is it possible they run a tad smaller than American? Do I have an anomaly? I really like it and wish I could use it on my sousaphones and that King but I can't unless I use some teflon tape or some other shimming material, which I'd really rather not have to do.

Anybody else have a similar experience? If I order a new one from them, any chance it'll be different (larger)?

Thanks!

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 8:26 pm
by Donn
I bought several H series a ways back, probably more than 10 years ago? The shanks are common American size, and there's plenty of shank sticking out from my Conn sousaphone. Schilkes and old Conns tend to be a hair larger, but you'd hardly notice. Someone at Marcinkiewicz could probably speak more definitively to this - if you hear anything interesting from them, let us know!

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 2:51 am
by TheGoyWonder
It's the conn bit. They don't hold a normal (any??) mouthpiece. They are junk.
You can use Olds bits instead. They work the same as Conn bits: they accept a mouthpiece, and they accept each other. If the gooseneck doesn't accept an Olds bit you can use one Conn bit and one Olds bit.

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 10:53 am
by Kirley
Huh. That’s an interesting idea.
I’ve used probably a dozen different types of mouthpieces with Conn bits. I agree that they’re not the best available but I haven’t had this particular problem.

I will look into an Olds bit, though. Thanks for the tip.

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 1:00 pm
by Dan Bradley
I know a lot of west coast players used Marcinkiewicz and also used Mirafones in the 70's. My 1974 Miraphone 186 has a receiver that is slightly smaller than the average American receiver, so regular American shanks stick out a bit farther than is preferable. Apparently, it only had this leadpipe for a year or two. I'm wondering if the Marcinkiewicz that you have might be geared towards that slightly smaller receiver. I have struggled to find mouthpieces that fit just right on this horn.

Dan B.

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 5:24 pm
by Donn
I just happened to have a good dial caliper next to a pile of mouthpieces, so I took the shank end diameter of a Marcinkiewicz H4. It was .520 inches - as we understand it, the standard American shank size.
Tuba mouthpiece shank sizes, a description.

However --- it developed after measuring a few more mouthpieces, that the way we understand it may be more of a myth, and Marcinkiewicz and my Kellyberg may be the only mouthpieces in my possession that actually meet that standard. Everything else was larger. Unfortunately, most of them weren't round enough to say with any accuracy. My Faxx fhb is .524, Denis Wick 2L .526, both old Dillon mouthpieces and a Schilke-Helleberg are .530. The other Schilkes appear to be around .530, Conns maybe a little less.

But like I say, it fits everything.

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2019 9:56 am
by bloke
A̶ ̶p̶e̶n̶n̶y̶ Two bits for your thoughts...

bloke "inflation"

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2019 5:22 pm
by iiipopes
.520 is the traditional "standard" American size (OK, the Bach manual says .519). It seems that over the last couple of decades that, just like bore sizes have increased on several brass instrument families, the tip size of tuba mouthpieces is migrating towards .530 as a new defacto "standard," so tuba manufacturers don't have to manufacture, or at least ream their receivers, two different shank sizes for their American and European markets.

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2019 5:36 pm
by Donn
I can't guess the dates for my Schilkes, but one of them is shaped like a Conn Improved Precision, if that tells you anything - not real recent, I suppose. I have a Conn 3 and Conn 1 Precision, before Improved Precision (no step in at the top of the shank), and they would both have to be .530. It's plausible that some manufacturers may have stepped up their shank sizes (and receiver sizes), but this has been going on with Conn and Schilke back to the '40s. Don't have any Bachs.

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2019 1:59 am
by Kirley
I just put the caliper to it. I get .5185 for my H1.

For reference I checked a few others I had laying around.
MF3 .528
Bloke Symphony $ .5235
Bloke Symphony P .5345
James New Conn 1 copy (from Donn) .530
Martin 33 .528

It's definitely the smallest one I've got laying around. And I could've told you that without the calipers but it's good to have numbers.

I guess I'll reach out to Marcinkiewicz and check with them. Thanks, guys.

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 2:53 pm
by the elephant
Okay, here are my observations on these, using a few different receivers and one "control" mouthpiece. This will be interesting, and will not confuse the issue with numbers, since every person will get different values for a given measurement in the thousandths of an inch when using inexpensive home measuring tools. Also, without a decent stabilization jig or platform for the tool and the mouthpiece you will get variances between measurers. (The calipers must be perfectly square to the shank to get an accurate reading since the shank is tapered and the calipers are not.) In the comparisons I am about to make a strictly visual approach is easier for everyone to "get".

Today I used a Sidey Stainless Steel Helleberg (SSH) that has seen mild use and that has a shank that still looks pristine. I then compared this with the two Marcinkiewicz pieces I am selling. One was made at the old Burbank plant and the other was made in Oregon.

I used a modern Miraphone receiver that is used on many of their contrabass tubas. I also used an original (NOS) Miraphone 186 leadpipe from about 1976 or so (rolled and seamed from sheet brass and bent into shape). It happens to feature the old school method of making the end of the leadpipe the mouthpiece receiver by hammering onto a mandrel into a nickel silver sleeve. The "receiver" is actually an extension of the leadpipe. And, finally, I have a very good condition Dillon AGR because you can take it apart and look at how the mouthpiece fits.

Here are some shots of the SSH and both the Marcinkiewicz H1 and N3 to compare the fit with a modern A shank using the same three receivers…

Miraphone Modern Receiver

SSH
Image
Image

Marcinkiewicz
Image
Image

Miraphone Old Style Receiver

SSH
Image

Marcinkiewicz
Image

Dillon AGR “A” Collet - Installed (Lock Barrel Removed)

SSH
Image

Marcinkiewicz
Image

Dillon AGR “A” Collet (Lock Barrel and Outer Body Removed)

SSH
Image
Image

Marcinkiewicz

Image
Image



Finally, I have heard a few people over the years say that these older Marcinkiewicz mouthpieces are not skinnier but longer, and that is why they have smaller openings and fit more deeply. This is not true. They are about the same length as any other mouthpiece. They use the same taper. It is that they were cut with a skinnier shank. Since the ends are of average thickness that means they are also a little smaller INSIDE the shank, which is something else to think about.

Here is one last photo showing these in a line of six so that you can see they are not really longer than the average…
Image

I generally like these. Some models play really well. And if you have a classic horn with a smaller American-tapered shank (or the funny Miraphone taper they used to use) these will fit your horn out of the box. The H1 in particular works well on old 186 and 188 tubas from about 1974 up to whenever Miraphone decided to abandon these "skinny" leadpipes. (The new leadpipes are much closer in opening size and expansion profile to the older ones used from about 1968—1973 (dates are quite vague, sorry).

I hope these photos will assist anyone looking at one of these classic mouthpieces from Marcinkiewicz. I do not know how the shanks measure out today, but they still only offer them in the American taper, regardless of how fat or skinny they might be.

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 12:22 am
by Donn
I suppose, since you don't mention Burbank vs Oregon, they're about the same. Good stuff, this is the kind of thing that should go in the special archives.

Re: Marcinkiewicz shank size

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:41 am
by the elephant
Yeah, Donn, they are a *little* different. The Burbank one is a tiny bit smaller and has a tiny bit of wobble in the Miraphone (modern) receiver, and it comes up to the internal step within 1/16" whereas the Oregon fits in the modern Miraphone receiver with zero wobble (that I could detect) and bottoms out almost exactly 1/16" from the internal step.

This difference could be solely due to wear/age/heavy use but it probably is simply that they were cut a bit differently. Both fit the Mirafone (old) receiver/leadpipe end perfectly.

Interesting stuff. I had not really ever noticed this, but I never used either very much. I may have purchased the H1 from bloke years ago, but it may have come from someone else. I don't know how much use either has seen.