Shortening the shank of a mouthpiece

[Tubaryan12]

I have a Denis Wick, Alliance, and Giddings mouthpiece. The Wick fits perfectly in my horn (JP-274) but the are noticeably longer and do not fit as well. They are all large shank. What is the best way to trim these if I wanted to do this myself? If anyone has had someone else do this, what was the approximate cost?

[Dan Schultz]

The rate of taper should be the same for all. So should the diameter of the small end. So just 'trimming the length' should not change how the MP fits in the receiver.

Your Marzan probably takes a 'regular' shank MP.

[Tubaryan12]

Thanks Dan, but this is for my euphonium. I should have made that clearer.

The problem is that the mouthpiece doesn't seat well...it seems to get bouund up iwhere the receiver / lead pipe meet.

[PMeuph]

Thanks Dan, but this is for my euphonium. I should have made that clearer.

The problem is that the mouthpiece doesn't seat well...it seems to get bouund up iwhere the receiver / lead pipe meet.

Is the mouthpiece loose or wobbly? Is that what you mean by doesn't seat well?

For some reason the Dennis Wick mouthpieces seem to go in about 3/16" further into the receiver than the other makes.

Are you getting about 1 inch of insertion with the two other mouthpieces?

[Tubaryan12]

The wick fits perfect. The other 2 i have to push in and twist to get it to seat.

[Dan Schultz]

Thanks Dan, but this is for my euphonium. I should have made that clearer.

The problem is that the mouthpiece doesn't seat well...it seems to get bouund up iwhere the receiver / lead pipe meet.

AHA! I should have noticed that the horn in question is a JP-274.

Actually... the MP that's causing trouble must have a smaller shank. It should not seat all the way into the beginning of the leadpipe.

Your issue falls under the discussions about 'the gap'.... a short distance between the end of the MP shank and the beginning of the leadpipe on horns where there is actually a separate receiver soldered over the end of the leapipe. That short distance is what allows mouthpiece shanks that are a little longer or shorter but still within the limits of manufacturing tolerances.

There have been many discussions. But... in my humble opinion... I think the style of European leadpipes where the taper of the leadpipe is reversed at the end so it also acts as the receiver is the perfect way to eliminate the problem. I don't think changing the perceived 'gap' does much other than just create turbulence. The flow from the MP into the leadpipe should be without any sharp edges.

[Tubaryan12]

I believe all of the moutpieces in question are large shank. Could 2 of the 3 mouthpieces I have be tapered incorrectly?

[thevillagetuba]

I believe all of the moutpieces in question are large shank. Could 2 of the 3 mouthpieces I have be tapered incorrectly?

The taper varies by manufacturer and I have noticed Ivan's shanks tend to be smaller on some of his mouthpieces than other brands (for instance, the two Szentpali mouthpieces I have are noticeably smaller tapers and seat significantly deeper into the receiver than any other mouthpiece I have tried). I had an interesting discussion with Alan Baer about this where he and a horn maker in Europe went through a bunch of mouthpieces measuring their tapers with calipers and found them all to be different (much to the amazement of the maker who didn't believe it to be so).

So, none are probably "wrong," but they are all probably different and you would either need a sleeve or new receiver that would be slightly smaller in order to have them all seat well.

[Dan Schultz]

I believe all of the moutpieces in question are large shank. Could 2 of the 3 mouthpieces I have be tapered incorrectly?

You COULD have an MP with a bad taper but I'm betting you are dealing with two different shank sizes. The following is information shared by Matt Walters. He gets full credit for it and I'm sure he won't mind me sharing it again. With this information should be able to 'do the math' and figure out what's going on. The rate of taper is EXACTLY .050" per inch:

TUBA SHANK SIZES

In the world of tuba mouthpieces, it seems there are five (5) general shank sizes and that, can lead to confusion. The Standard American and European Shank sizes, followed by the Large Shank, are the most common sizes that fit modern production tubas. From smallest to largest, we offer the following information to shed a little light on the subject.

EUROPEAN SHANK: This is an increasingly popular shank size of about .530" diameter at the small end of the shank. It is found in mouthpieces like the JK Exclusive, Perantucci, Laskey "E" shank, and of course our wonderful Sheridan Series of mouthpieces. Most every European and American tuba built these days, will accept this shank size.

STANDARD AMERICAN: The reference point for this size of about .520" at the small end of the shank. A good example would be the Bach, and Conn Helleberg tuba mouthpieces. This is the most common size here in the United States. In the Dennis Wick line, you need to make sure it has the "L" in the model number to get this standard size. Our regular size shank Dillon Mouthpieces are also of this size. Besides American built horns, many European horns like Miraphone can use this size.

LARGE SHANK: This is a larger size that measures about .550" diameter at the small end of the shank. It works well on the larger European tubas. Especially horns with large diameter leadpipes like the "York" copies and most Alexander model 163 CC tubas. This is the size of our Dillon Music "L" shank mouthpiece and the new Wick 2XL.

SMALL EUROPEAN: Having a diameter of .490" at small end of shank, this size is offered by Dennis Wick in the sizes 1 through 5. Just make sure you order the one without the "L" in the model number. This size is most commonly used on old Besson tubas and old American Eb tubas. I hear this referred to as the Eb tuba size. Some old German, etc. 3/4 size BBb tubas have also shown up with that receiver size. If you are having trouble figuring out what small size shank your old tuba needs, it is about the same size as a large shank trombone mouthpiece. Borrow one from a trombonist and see for yourself. You can order a Denis Wick mouthpiece, or to have a wider variety of mouthpieces to choose from, consider replacing the receiver for about the price of a mouthpiece.

KAISER SHANK: With a measurement of about .585" in diameter at the small end of the shank, this truly is a "Kaiser" size. It fits the largest Alexander model 164, a few ‘one off’ model 163's, and some original York receivers we've come across. Anyone needing this size shank will need to get a custom built mouthpiece, or have an adapter made.

[Tubaryan12]

Without typing paragraphs here...
- What are the overall lengths of various mouthpieces?
- What are the o.d.'s of the various mouthpieces at the exit bore?

Brand--------Length-------O.D. shank end
Giddings - 82.71 mm / 12.75 mm
Alliance - 82.47 mm / 12.63 mm
Wick - 80.00 mm / 12.80 mm

[Tubaryan12]

The others (assuming a consistent taper from one make to the next) seem to extend the taper farther along than does the Wick.
I wonder if they go so far into the instrument that they are reaching the choke point (beginning of the mouthpipe tube).

This is what I believe is happening.

Perhaps (??) you could determine that next, by measuring from the end of the receiver down to the choke point, and then measuring how far the G mpc. and the A. mpc. insert into the receiver.

End of receiver to choke point - 21.72 mm
Alliance goes into receiver - 24.44 mm - This is where it finally seats with no movement.
Giddings goes into receiver - 21.90 mm
Wick goes in 19.88 mm

*fun fact - a mag light Solitaire has approx. the same diameter as the end a large shank euphonium mouthpiece. (12.78 mm)

[Tubaryan12]

End of receiver to choke point - 21.72 mm
Alliance goes into receiver - 24.44 mm - This is where it finally seats with no movement.
Giddings goes into receiver - 21.90 mm
Wick goes in 19.88 mm

well there it is, then.
My question would probably be, "Do you LIKE the Alliance mouthpiece enough for it to be worth fitting to this instrument?

That's the rub. I like it...and maybe with a better fit I could possibly like the response better. I bought it used so if I ruin it, I'm not out of a lot of money.
The Giddings mouthpiece I love. To trim it back a little in hopes that it will fit better is no big deal. I will do that one. It's extremely thin at the tip anyway so it shouldn't be too hard to grind it down a bit.

About the Alliance DC2: If it was 27.00 mm inside diameter, It would be my go to euphonium mouthpiece. I love the tone I have with it.

[Tubaryan12]

One question I forgot to ask: Is the distance between the end of the receiver to the leadpipe too short? (21.72 mm)

[Tubaryan12]

One question I forgot to ask: Is the distance between the end of the receiver to the leadpipe too short? (21.72 mm)

LOL...not according to Wick.

True. but is all seriousness, should I have the leadpipe trimmed or only purchase mouthpieces with shorter shanks? I like the horn, but I have no idea what is considered "normal". (or even if there is a normal)....lol.

[Dan Schultz]

One question I forgot to ask: Is the distance between the end of the receiver to the leadpipe too short? (21.72 mm)

LOL...not according to Wick.

True. but is all seriousness, should I have the leadpipe trimmed or only purchase mouthpieces with shorter shanks? I like the horn, but I have no idea what is considered "normal". (or even if there is a normal)....lol.

It's a shame that manufacturers have not developed a set of 'standards' that work. It's totally impossible to make parts with perfect dimensions so reasonable tolerances sometimes do not work. I would have no qualms about simply trimming the end of a MP shank so it does not come in contact with the end of the leadpipe. You are likely only talking about taking off a couple of thousanths of an inch..... off the end.... NOT the diameter.

[Tubaryan12]

Thanks Dan. That's what I thought.....there is no hard and fast rule. I have no problem trimming the mouthpieces. Since I like them all, I'm not worried about resale value.

[Tubaryan12]

Update: I altered the Giddings mouthpiece first because it had the least to trim. I took it down about 0.75 mm. The fit is perfect! No longer is it going past the beginning of the leadpipe in the receiver.

[Dan Schultz]

Update: I altered the Giddings mouthpiece first because it had the least to trim. I took it down about 0.75 mm. The fit is perfect! No longer is it going past the beginning of the leadpipe in the receiver.

Problem solved!