Mouthpieces

[TubaBeage]

Is there a short cut to finding what might be a better MP?
Obviously every individual and every tuba is slightly different, so how do you get to the perfect interface between the 2?
What should I be analysing as I play?

I realise I could just buy a bunch of stuff and try it, but is there a cheaper way that could work in lock down?

I am currently sculpting an old MP on my lathe, but the changes I make don't seem to produce the result I'd expect....

Tuba "what the fudge am I doing" Beage

[Donn]

what the fudge am I doing

Same as the rest of us. For me, I change favorite mouthpieces every once in a while. I seem to recall that some well known and well regarded tuba player stuck with his Bach 18 for the duration (or was it a Conn 2), others claim to use whatever the manufacturer supplied with the tuba. Others find satisfaction in playing something reasonably expensive that the others are playing.

[MikeS]

Vincent Cichowicz, former trumpet player with the Chicago Symphony once said (I’m guessing with tongue in cheek), “Changing mouthpieces solves all your problems for three weeks. That’s why I change every two weeks.”

Seriously, I would suggest starting with something that is middle of the road in all respects. After a fair trial period, evaluate what is not working for you. Maybe you would like your articulation to be crisper. Maybe you are having intonation issues in the high or low registers.

At that point you have a couple options. One is to find a mouthpiece with characteristics that address those issues; preferably changing only one characteristic at a time. The Bach Mouthpiece Manual does a pretty good job of explaining how different parts of a mouthpiece effect sound and intonation. Use a tuner and a friend or two with good ears. What other people hear in your playing is often very different than what you hear.

The second option is to work with a good teacher and make sure the problem comes from the mouthpiece and not from your technique. Ultimately, I think you can reach your potential on just about any mouthpiece whose design is not too extreme. It then becomes more a matter of which mouthpiece makes it easier for you to make it happen.

Finally, I believe Donn was referring to Abe Torchinsky, who used a Bach 18 his whole career.

[iiipopes]

It's a process. If you are going to go on safari, make sure you write notes to yourself about the characteristics of the mouthpiece you are currently using, both what you like and what you don't like. For example, on my first safari, I noted the rim i.d. that for me, Bach 18 1.26 was too small to get good resonance, and 1.3 was too large to get good center. So all my mouthpieces have a 1.28 i.d. or thereabouts to fit my embouchure. The same with other specs, for example, the Bach 18 and Wick 1 throats are now too large for me and I can't manage breath using them, but anything smaller than .323 or 8.2 mm, such as the Miraphone C4 or Perantucci F and Eb mouthpieces, and I go flat in the upper register because I can't get enough air through the horn. So, again, my mouthpieces have @ .323 throat, a machinist's "P" drill size, (which bloke recommends) and moderate backbore. A moderate funnel gives better tone for my Bessophone, (the deep Wick 1 worked great on the Besson comp BBb I used to have, but was too woolly on the Bessophone, and the Bach 18 too edgy), so I have bloke's Imperial with a shaved spacer for the Bessophone; but a bowl gives better tone for the souzy I play, so I have a Jim New modified Kanstul 18 for good projection as well as centering. And of course, a Kelly for anything outdoors.

By identifying criteria, making judicious reference to mouthpiece comparison charts to narrow the field, (not to make the final choice) (good luck narrowing the field if you prefer a 1.30 or 1.32 rim i.d.!) and watching the classifieds section of the forum, I have saved myself many dollars, and have been able to recoup passing along the ones that didn't work out.

[TubaBeage]

Thanks for your thoughts.
I have found this interesting https://sep.yimg.com/ty/cdn/yhst-582095 ... 1542744766&" target="_blank and the Bach Manual too, thank-you.

Tuba "off to the find the P drill" Beage

[iiipopes]

Thanks for your thoughts.
I have found this interesting https://sep.yimg.com/ty/cdn/yhst-582095 ... 1542744766&" target="_blank and the Bach Manual too, thank-you.

Tuba "off to the find the P drill" Beage

Unfortunately, the Bach manual is notoriously inaccurate, depending on when any particular mouthpiece was made. I believe the chart is derived from original "Mt. Vernon" specs, and Mr. Bach's own collection of exemplars from which mouthpieces were duplicated. For example, I have had several 18's over the years, and they measured out everywhere from 1.25 i.d. to 1.30 i.d., although the "spec" is 1.26. The rims on them were everything from the Mt. Vernon style rather wide slope to the Wick style thinner rim with flattened profile but rounded edges.

[MikeS]

When I mentioned the Bach Mouthpiece Manual I was thinking about the general discussion of mouthpiece characteristics before it gets to individual mouthpiece descriptions. Sorry to have not made that clearer.

[iiipopes]

Something I feel isn't brought up a lot is physiological changes in your face as you age in muscle tone and fat and adjusting mouthpieces that better fit the changing face.

Yes, the breath support issue is why I changed from a Wick 1 and a Bach 18, which both have relatively larger throats, to the Imperial with its moderate throat.

[TubaBeage]

When I mentioned the Bach Mouthpiece Manual I was thinking about the general discussion of mouthpiece characteristics before it gets to individual mouthpiece descriptions. Sorry to have not made that clearer.

That's what I read, I was not worried about their spec sizes as I can measure what I have.

[iiipopes]

what the fudge am I doing

Same as the rest of us. For me, I change favorite mouthpieces every once in a while. I seem to recall that some well known and well regarded tuba player stuck with his Bach 18 for the duration (or was it a Conn 2), others claim to use whatever the manufacturer supplied with the tuba. Others find satisfaction in playing something reasonably expensive that the others are playing.

Harvey Phillips - Conn 2 - after breaking a bakelite mouthpiece and having to borrow one; he went with the Conn 2 because any school would have one to borrow if he lost or damaged his. The coincidental statement is that it came with the horn, which it was the standard issue for Conn tubas of the day.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=62519" target="_blank

[GC]

You could always buy 1 of all of Doug Elliot's and Bloke's (also Houser's) mouthpiece parts and try all possible combinations of pieces . . . not saying that I expect Elliot's and Bloke/Houser's to work together. You'd probably need to win the lottery first, though.

[TubaBeage]

Thanks for all the replies. I'll continue to flounder about in the dark.

Seems it will be a while before the band reforms so plenty of time to seek/machine the holy grail.

[bort]

Thanks for all the replies. I'll continue to flounder about in the dark.

Seems it will be a while before the band reforms so plenty of time to seek/machine the holy grail.

Oh, it the Grail ye seek? Then look no further. Grails available in several sizes.

https://www.warburton-usa.com/index.php ... outhpieces" target="_blank

[TubaBeage]

If you'd prefer not to ask a pro like Matt Walters, post what kind of horn you're using, what kind of sound you're getting and/or want to get, and you'll get a wealth of suggestions. It's not the most deterministic path to success, but it can be entertaining/enlightening.

As I'm in the UK it does not seem right to ask Matt as there would be no chance of a sale.
I'm playing in a traditional British Brass Band using 3v and 4v compensated TA Besson Imperial BB instruments.
As there have been no rehearsals and the prospect of any in the near future seems remote, I have been playing more solo type pieces and studies as opposed to a lot of umpa type "backing".

The sound I want is the traditional brass band bass blending noise, which is mostly created by the heavy instrument to be fair.

The change in repertoire has prompted the want for a more "flexible" MP than my current go to Bach 24aw Megatone, which is deep, dark and steady (and powerful when required) in the bottom end.
It is an unlikely combination of 31.25mm dia with 40mm deep bowl and a large 8.84mm dia drill.

I am current experimenting with a now 32.75mm dia with 34mm deep bowl and 8.1mm dia drill (may change as the lathe whirs away) which has a much brighter sound and is more flexible in the low register, partly due to the slightly tapered lead into the drill from the bowl, which seems a more "normal" size in general tuba terms.

[tofu]

[

[Donn]

The change in repertoire has prompted the want for a more "flexible" MP than my current go to Bach 24aw Megatone, which is deep, dark and steady (and powerful when required) in the bottom end.
It is an unlikely combination of 31.25mm dia with 40mm deep bowl and a large 8.84mm dia drill.

Is that 8.84mm measured, or cited? My sources differ on that throat drill diameter - their catalogue says 9mm, Werden's table says 8.84. In any case, intuitively it does seem like one of the things that could be different in a more flexible mouthpiece, I think that isn't among the virtues commonly attributed to the Megatone line.

[bort]

^ 8.84 and 9.00 are the measurements given on page 9 of the Bach mouthpiece catalog. It says those are the same for the Megatone 18 as well, which I used for about the first 10 years of playing tuba.

That seems like a huge bore compared to what I know now. I'll have to pull it out and measure it.

[iiipopes]

Personally for my Besson New Standard I found both the old Wick 1 and 2 worked well. I had old man Schilke modify the original Schilke 67 and I used that for years as that worked exceptionally well. I still have the Besson although it's been a long time since it's been my main axe. Were I to start playing it today I'd seriously consider using a Blokepiece Imperial on it. Do your Bessons have the old small British receiver on them? If that is the case your options are a bit limited although the Wicks I believe are still available in small shank form and I believe that is an option for the Blokepiece.

Joe (bloke) does sell a shank that fits older British receivers. Wick and Alliance (I think) both offer British-shank mouthpieces. I'm not sure if anyone else does, although you can get a shank milled down. Were I playing a Besson, I'd recommend the Sellmansberger/blokepiece Imperial. I had one for a while, and it was a good mouthpiece.

Perantucci, or now Bob Tucci, offer their "S" shank, which is the small British-style shank. Of course, bloke offers the small shank for his Imperial, and, Elliott and others will make you one on special order.

I agree that the best mouthpiece for the Besson New Standard 3-valve comp I used to own was a Wick 1. I couldn't get a Wick 2 to center as well on it. The surprise was when I played it outdoors: a Kelly 18 gave the tuba kind of an "Our American Cousin" tone that projected well and was every bit as behaved on the intonation.

[TubaBeage]

Thanks again for your thoughts.

My VB24AWMT is just about 9.0 as measured, not 8.84 as I stated without measuring. Both horns have a large receiver. The 3v is actually a newer Besson 785 version of the 3v comp Imperial which has a large receiver as standard. The 4v "old" Boosey Imperial is now a large receiver as I bored it out with a homemade reamer, yes the taper is spot on and the MP goes in the correct distance.