Smaller mouthpiece on a bigger tuba - recommend me something

[ginnboonmiller]

Briefly, I play on a B&S PT-5 (about the same size as a PT-6), and I am coming off of a good five year layoff from playing. Having used huge mouthpieces my whole career - Miraphone Rose Orchestral, Conn Helleberg, PT-88, I'm finding I don't yet have the strong chops I used to, and since I really play more solo stuff and chamber music than orchestra stuff these days...

I suppose I am looking for a good smaller mouthpiece that will work on a bigger tuba. Right now I'm using the PT-88. I had noticed this before with time away from playing - I like cup mouthpieces until I'm strong again, then I go back to the Helleberg. But this time I'm thinking the Helleberg is a little boring sounding, and the PT-88 is a little rounder and fuller.

So basically, I'm open to just about any suggestion, and preparing to buy something smaller and more solo-y for my horn, and we should talk about it.

[NDSPTuba]

I really liked the way the my G&W Diablo worked with the bigger tubas at TMEA. The PT7, PT6, THOR, PCK, and 6450 all seemed to respond really favorably to it. I didn't have a tuner with me, but the scales all seemed to be fine. No notes or anything jumped out at me as being off. I really like the way my Diablo feels and plays. I have the new Lite design.

-James

[Mister JP]

I'm not sure of the specific model, but I use a Conn Helleberg on my PT-6 and I always thought that WAS a small mouthpiece. At least the tuba's leadpipe swallows almost the entire shank of the mouthpiece with about 1mm to spare.

I'm also a returning player, and of the mouthpieces I was able to find, (mostly Bachs) the Helleberg was the one that felt the best, and I could center a pitch easily. I know I have a few others in a drawer or box somewhere, but can't find them.

[ginnboonmiller]

Thanks, folks. I'll surely grab a Diablo soon - I'm pretty curious about these things, and I haven't given stainless a try yet, so two birds with one stone.

Would also like to try something a little less funnelly - C4 is WAY too shallow and the bore is too tiny for my liking (I think I still have one somewhere anyway...). Something like a PT-88 for the weaker-chopped and solo-minded. Any suggestions?

Truth is, these won't end up my main mouthpieces in all likelihood. I still move a LOT of air, I just tire easily and don't have the time I used to in order to get my chops stronger again. But for the time being, it's something I'm very curious to experiment with.

[Donn]

Thanks, folks. I'll surely grab a Diablo soon - I'm pretty curious about these things, and I haven't given stainless a try yet, so two birds with one stone.

Would also like to try something a little less funnelly - C4 is WAY too shallow and the bore is too tiny for my liking (I think I still have one somewhere anyway...). Something like a PT-88 for the weaker-chopped and solo-minded. Any suggestions?

Truth is, these won't end up my main mouthpieces in all likelihood. I still move a LOT of air, I just tire easily and don't have the time I used to in order to get my chops stronger again. But for the time being, it's something I'm very curious to experiment with.

I have a euro shank Diablo that I wouldn't miss. I liked it pretty well when I got it, but now have nothing that really fits the shank and perhaps more to the point, it's too "bowl shaped" for my taste. It has been described as a funnel shaped mouthpiece. It isn't. It isn't really what I would call small, either - maybe smaller than my Kellyberg, but just barely.

Small would be Schilke 66 or 62, both nice mouthpieces that are reasonably funnel shaped (though not as much so as the Hellebergs.) Or the nearly mythical Dillon S3, which though apparently rounded in contour doesn't sound like other bowl shaped mouthpieces to me. (Maybe it's the relatively gentle way the contour reverses into the throat?) That's the one I would suggest specifically, if only there were any way you could get one.

Maybe diameter isn't the only thing, though. I switched from a Conn 2 / 7b to a Marcinkiewicz H3 at nearly the last minute, after working fairly hard to get ready for a substitute gig last weekend, and it turned out fine. The H3 is not very deep, which seems to make up in a way for its wider diameter.

Hm, I see that whilst I was writing this, some bloke has proposed an H4 instead. There is little apparent difference between the H4 and H3, so start with whichever you can find, but I have been able to convince myself that I hear a difference - the H3 is a compromise between the H1 and H4 that's easier to manage than the former but with a hair less shallow mouthpiece edge than the latter, that's my very unqualified opinion (remember, I use the tuba to make fart noises. And I play saxophone.)

[ginnboonmiller]

Donn, when you get a chance to think about it, PM me with a price for your Diablo. Dead serious.

Maybe diameter isn't the only thing, though.

It is most certainly NOT. I found, when I was playing full time, that I responded better doing the opposite of conventional wisdom with different mouthpieces - I could comfortably change the rim diameter to suit my purpose as long as I had a very deep cup to work with. So I used Helleberg/Rose/Bach 7/Whatever on big Cs, and I had an old Perantucci... something... with a really narrow rim and very deep cup for F and some solo work. No teacher or colleague could ever make sense of it, but I would always much rather deal with a smaller rim than a too-shallow cup.

All that said, all bets are off after what I guess I should call semi-retirement (I got a book contract, took off playing to write it, decided I was a "writer" and stopped playing. Silly me.) - things just don't happen the way they used to on the tuba. It's been an interesting process.

[Mister JP]

You need to use a euro shank mouthpiece, such as a Laskey 30H euro. It greatly affected the pitch and centering on my Cerveny 603, which also has a euro shank.

AH HA! Straight from the "Why don't people TELL me these things?" files... European vs. American shanks. I never knew there was a difference. You'd think my instructor in college would have noticed the fact that my mouthpiece nearly disappeared and said something. Well, you learn something new everyday.

Thanks Big Dale, I think I'll have to look into finding a Laskey 30H euro or similar.

[poomshanka]

LOUD LM-10 for your PT-5. I wouldn't consider it "small", necessarily, but nor is it a bottomless, compressionless pit. As I've often stated, it's great on big, rotary horns, and will put some nice "point" into the sound. It's also a pretty efficient mouthpiece to play, so you don't have to muscle it to make it work.

...Dave

[Wyvern]

I use a PT-90 on my Neptune which is quite a bit smaller than the PT-88, although it has a deep cup and provides a tone with plenty of harmonics. It works well for me across all registers.

I tend to think smaller mouthpieces can help to better focus big tubas.

[pwhitaker]

Try a Mike Finn MF-3B. It's in the same size range as the others mentioned. I've used it successfully on a 5/4 Rudy BBb. It seems to play bigger than it really is - particularly at the extremes of the range, both high and low.

[iiipopes]

And now for something completely different: Blessing 18. It's the best mouthpiece Bach never made. True Mt. Vernon specs with a 1.26 cup, moderate bowl depth, moderate throat and backbore, comfy rim. The bowl gives good overtones for a larger instrument without being too shallow, and the cup is the slightly narrower cup which was specified in the initial post. Bonus: they are relatively inexpensive.

[Lew]

LOUD LM-10 for your PT-5. I wouldn't consider it "small", necessarily, but nor is it a bottomless, compressionless pit. As I've often stated, it's great on big, rotary horns, and will put some nice "point" into the sound. It's also a pretty efficient mouthpiece to play, so you don't have to muscle it to make it work.

...Dave

You beat me to it. I second this recommendation. I have been using an LM-15 on my EEb, and decided to try the LM-10 on my big rotary valve King BBb. It gives a nice balance of resistance and openness. I tried the LM-15 first, but it was a little too small and the sound suffered. The LM-10 is a nice in-between size.

[jeopardymaster]

Here is a vote for the Wick 3L. I've made it my 1st choice on all my horns. Tried going back to the Sear Helleberg for a while, but the Wick works better. And that ranges from a Kruspe F to a Neptune.

[iiipopes]

I do agree that if you want a smaller Helleberg type mouthpiece the 3L is a great choice. I didn't recommend it, because when you said "larger tuba" that it might need some boost in the response and presence factor. The 3L is a deep funnel.

Alliance, the new standard mouthpiece with a Besson, makes a version of a 3 which is not quite so deep that is getting great reviews on 4barsrest.com and can be ordered through Roger Webster's website: a little shallower, a little more clarity, but with great response from bottom to top.