What is the primary purpose of a euro shank mouthpiece?

[Mark Horne]

My Cerveny definitely prefers the euro-shank sized pieces, as it will nearly swallow an american shank piece.

Mark "glad that my Brucker is fine with either size" Horne

[Doug Elliott]

In 1981 when I first started making mouthpieces (possibly before Scott Laskey even worked for Schilke) I measured lots of receivers and lots of mouthpieces, and found about 9 different receiver sizes and tapers, and a few different mouthpiece shank sizes already in use for tubas.

I named the receiver sizes, for my own reference, in order from small to large:

British
American
Mirafone
Euro
Hirsbrunner
Meinl-Westin
Alex A
Alex A+
Alex A++

For my own mouthpiece series, I made shanks in ALL of those sizes, with the goal being some kind of consistency, which I decided should be going into the receiver a fixed distance of about 1"

A Euro shank, being near the middle of the range, will sort of fit most receivers. An American shank will be swallowed by anything from Hirsbruner on up. Mouthpieces that fit some M-W and Alex tubas pretty much don't fit anything else.

So blame it on me...

The purpose of a Euro shank mouthpiece is to fit a tuba with a Euro shank receiver, and quite possibly to allow a larger backbore.

[Dan Schultz]

Sort of flies in the face of all the hullaballoo about 'the gap', doesn't it?!

BTW, Doug.... where does the 'small shank' fall in your description of nine sizes? Is that the 'British' one?

Don'tcha just wish everyone would do it the same way? I guess that's just too much to ask.

[imperialbari]

What size is the receiving end of the VERY standard Conn sousaphone bits considered being?

My 2 blokepieces all have the same shank sizes, the smaller one called the American. It fits well with the Conn bits and with the 1999 UK-made Besson 981 receiver. Also with the definitely after market large receiver of my 1923 Boosey F 3+1 comper.

But then the same shanks also work well with the somewhat smaller receiver of the B&M made York Master large BBb and with the German Martin CC having a receiver of about the same size. And these shanks also work with the small British receivers of my Besson New Standard 3+1 BBb comper from 1970, and more surprisingly, also with the small receiver of the 0.632" bore Besson 3+1 non-comper Eb from 1870. Actually the original blokepiece #1 is what brings the best out of that old instrument.

Klaus

[imperialbari]

I actually have 3 blokepieces, the cypher 2 being an error.

I have 3 Conn sousaphones. Two from 1928-29, one from 1946. Only one neck is original as well as in perfect shape, the one that came with the 26K. Exactly that neck also is the one bringing the best out of the 40K. I have ascribed that to the heavier material especially in the male socket. But now I see differences in manufacture also being of potential influence.

Klaus

[Doug Elliott]

Perhaps it would be instructive for those with calipers to measure the ends of some mouthpieces and the openings of some receivers and report what they find. In thousandths of an inch, please.

The ends of most tuba mouthpieces range from .520 to .540, which is what I consider American to Eupopean, with a lot of mouthpieces measuring somewhere between those two.

[Dan Schultz]

It's just a lame attempt to devise a 'one size fits most' mouthpiece without being too small.... since the manufacturing tolerances of the American-shank receivers are 'all over the place'.

It's just a shame that they can't control the diametric and taper tolerances on the shanks and receivers.

I think I might vote for a round (un-tapered) shank with a pinch-screw on the receiver... sort of like the tuning pipe of a flugelhorn. That way, there would only be a diametric tolerance to control and an adjustable gap.

Or doesn't this just make too much sense to be practical?