Stainless steel mouthpieces

[octavelower]

I have seen some talk about these mouthpieces and was wondering of those of you who have tried them and who are using them, what do you think? I have looked at the LOUD mthpcs and the new SSH mthpc, but are there others?

Thank you all for your time!

Corey Rom
www.thebrassco.com
www.kingsbrass.org

[Paul S]

Corey,

Giddings & Webster - G&W Mouthpieces make an excellent full line of Stainless Steel and Titanium Tuba mouthpieces that many tubists have found success with. I myself really find a lot to like with design elements in their Alan Baer model and it cetainly is a very nice model for those who prefer a more cushioned rim.

http://www.gwmouthpieces.com/

I also really like the LOUD LM-15 double-cup on my F tuba and use a LOUD LM-5 with an SSH screw rim when I need a really, really dark and massive sound. For everything else I use my SSH.

http://www.loudmouthpieces.com/
http://www.angus1.com/ssh

We are fortunate to have many excellent makers working in stainless so that we have such a wide selection of models and types to select from in order to match the best one to our horns and playing need.

[tubatooter1940]

I also am interested in a stainless steel mouthpiece but am concerned that,like some other stainless steel applications,one might find rust spots forming in the mouthpiece.

[Kevin Hendrick]

There are many different alloys that are grouped under the name "stainless steel" ... check this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stainless_steel

Not sure which alloy(s) the mouthpiece manufacturers are using (I think I remember seeing a reference to 304 on one web site).

[THE TUBA]

I also have a LM-5. In comparison to my PT-50, I find that it produces a darker, more "German" sound (I think I am using this term correctly...). The articulation is great on the rim I have, although I am interested in getting a rounder rim for it. Interestingly, I am able to play louder on my PT-50 than on my LOUD mouthpiece. Hmmm... What about a stainless steel PT-50?

[Paul S]

.........Interestingly, I am able to play louder on my PT-50 than on my LOUD mouthpiece. Hmmm... ........

My explanation would be that more harmonics and the fuller colour in a lighter weight mouthpiece allow the sound produced to be perceived as jumping out more. I do believe that on mouthpeices of equal weight the stainless puts more of your buzz into and thus more end output from your horn than brass mouthpieces.

[JTJ]

Euphonium players have fewer choices in stainless than do tubists. I've tried both the Loud and a custom stainless from Dave Houser which is very close to a Loud. So far, I've always gone back to my Wick SM3.

I love the feel of stainless and its longevity. But I have never been able to get the same richness of sound I get from the SM3. I think, and this is subjective and thus suspect, that the problem is too much mass. The ones I have tried seem to suck some of the overtones out of the sound. I find this to be true of the heavyweight brass designs as well, so this may be ideosyncratic of me as a player.

I know that G&W are planning to come out with a stainless piece for euphonium soon. I'm looking forward to that, and hope it is a less massive design. And I also hope the pros who are helping design it are not all from the American small diameter school of euphonium mouthpiece preference (all those folks playing Willsons with BB1s & 51ds), so that there is something for that not insignificant group of players who like the larger Wick designs.

John

[Chriss2760]

Yeah, the thought of stainless steel takes one aback a little. But having recently taken the plunge (with Paul Sidey's SSH) I can tell you that this material makes a fine mp. Close your eyes, play, and see what you think. Smoother? I don't know. It seems to me that if it is smoother on the lips that this might make a difference only if I had shaved within the previous hour or two. After that I don't think so. It does seem to feel a bit "livlier", that is, it seems to give a bit more sensation of vibration than a silver or brass plated mp.
I haven't dropped mine, yet (knock) but I think it might be a bit more resistant to dings, too.
One other thing: The guys that are posting that SS is not a specific material with a given set of properties are 100% correct. There are about two dozen common blends of metals that are referred to as "stainless steel", and a whole lot more special purpose materials. The properties associated with each of these blends is unique to that blend.
Hey Paul, if you're following this, what is the stainless that the SSH is made of?

[Carroll]

Joe Murphy has a "Wick" style SM3-ish copy in the LM 20.

[JTJ]

Just a couple of notes:

Jim -- I don't see euph pieces up on G&W's website, unless you are counting trombone pieces. As a dealer, have you already seen them?

Carroll -- I know about the LM-20, but I am looking for SM3ish piece with less mass.

John

[Leland]

So which of the LOUD and G&W lineups should I be checking out for a Helleberg-like piece in stainless?

Haven't tried the LOUD line, but for G&W, I'd suggest something like the Caver or Bayamo.

Ivan Giddings knows his products really well -- he'd give a good recommendation if you ask.

[tubacdk]

I've been using the G&W Baer F mpc on my B&S Symphonie F for a couple months now. I was using the Monette 94F on the B&S for a year or so and found that the G&W was more comfortable on my face and much easier to play. My tone is clearer and my horn plays more in tune with the G&W also. Everyone who has heard me on the G&W likes my sound better than they did with the Monette.

I have only ever tried the Baer F and CC mpcs in stainless steel. I didn't like the CC mpc. I've heard great things about the Loud Mpcs, but I haven't had a chance to try them yet. I don't know if my feelings about the Baer F have anything at all to do with it being stainless steel or not, but it feels great and I love the sound.

-ck

[Bill Troiano]

As a response to Chriss 2760, I was walking on a sidewalk toward a bandstand this Aug., when my Baer G&W fell out of my 52J and bounced on the sidewalk. Not a scratch on it, but what a sound it made hitting cement!

[Donn]

...I am looking for SM3ish piece with less mass.

With the "funnel" (as opposed to "bowl") exterior design, I never thought of the SM3 as a mouthpiece with excessive mass. Sure, it could easily be further "skeletonized", but it seems "average" or "below" in mass to me...

I don't think you'll find any of the "LOUD" mpcs. to be low in "mass".

I took him to mean, "with less mass [than the LM-20]. Like the SM3. But stainless."

So does everyone really believe that mouthpiece mass plays a role in the sound? It seems like this would be really bad news for Lexan.

[JTJ]

Donn is right. I meant less mass than the Loud. And I agree with bloke that the mass of the SM3 is average to below average.

It's not just about how much sound is transferred, it's the makeup of the sound which is transferred in which lies the magic.

I'm no engineer and can only support this argument with logic. So, while I agree that SS is more dense than brass, I have found that, in brass, heavyweight designs have the same effect on my sound as does the thick, heavyweight design of the Loud. So it seems to me that it would be worth trying a less massive, thinner piece in SS before concluding that SS is not for me. If it were simply the properties of the metal, I would not find a difference between a heavyweight brass piece and a lighter brass piece, but I do.

It's mostly an art rather than a science, anyway, with the user being the biggest variable. Despite what we think we know about mouthpiece design, it's mostly trial and error and accumulated wisdom passed down through multiple generations of mouthpiece makers who are tweaking a small number of proven designs.

I like the feel of stainless on the chops and the durability of stainless. I just want to tweak a few variables myself and see if I can get it to work for me.

John

[Donn]

Mass doesn't really matter, it's more of a concetration of mass issue, it has to do with the resonant signature of the body in question (the mouthpiece).

This is interesting. Don't recall hearing "resonant signature" before, is it something like a tuning fork's ability to form a stable vibrating mass? In the range of human hearing?

If I were to propose a poll, so far there are three options: 1) mass matters, 2) distribution of mass matters, 3) only size and contours of the inside matters. Any more?

[tubeast]

If mass / density is that important, why not make hollow MP bodies and fill them with mercury, lead, uranium or something? (realising that most of these materials aren´t exactly beneficial to your health, and one even is a liquid at normal temperatures, so that mouthpiece body better be sturdy and tight).
After all, brass, silver, and gold aren´t that nutritious, either.

[Paul S]

Okay......here's my question. I currently play on a Dillon M1C on my CC and a Bobo Solo on my F. Now I hate the rim of the Bobo because it is so freakin' sharp (I bought it because it was cheap and there when I needed it). Now how do the rims compare to the Baer CC and F mouthpieces??

As far as I can figure from my exhaustive ( ) research the M1C, the Mira C4, and the Baer CC have the same rim diameter. How does the contour compare? I also noted that the Baer CC has the same rim as the C4, however I have never played on a C4 myself.

Now does the Baer mouthpieces give the same boat anchor against you face feeling a la Bach Megatones?

No answers but a few photo comparisons for you.

[Paul S]

As a response to Chriss 2760, I was walking on a sidewalk toward a bandstand this Aug., when my Baer G&W fell out of my 52J and bounced on the sidewalk. Not a scratch on it, but what a sound it made hitting cement!

One of the "problems" ran into with producing a mouthpiece in stainless is that the standard imprinting strike to put the mouthpiece name on the side of a brass piece sometimes "bounces" off SS at impact. I would not guarantee any mouthpiece to take a drop with no damage but SS does seem to take an impact well.

As an aside, in upcoming production runs the SSH will be using an etching system to imprint the stainless rather than by a strike.

[Ivan Giddings]

I will try to answer the questions that have come up recently

The Alan Baer mouthpieces are of similar weight to a standard Conn Helleberg. The size of the F tuba mouthpiece rim diameter is exactly the same as the CC tuba mouthpiece. This allows people to switch from one mouthpiece to the other, and not change the set up on their face. The F tuba and CC tuba mouthpieces appear to have very large open throats (very much so in the photos on this thread) This is because the small part of the throat is not at the bottom of the cup like a lot of mouthpieces. We have designed the F tuba and CC tuba mouthpieces to have the smallest diameter in the throat at the exact depth on each mouthpiece. This also makes switching from one to the other easier because the air focal point is same. Sometimes switching from the large CC tuba mouthpiece to a small F tuba mouthpiece means also changing how you blow, this is not the case with the Alan Baer signature models. The Alan Baer CC tuba mouthpiece has a .321 throat size, and the F tuba mouthpiece has a .295 throat size. The smallest diameter in the throat on each mouthpiece is at the same depth, and designed with similar contours.


As materials go Stainless steel is actually slightly less dense than brass, however SS has a very different grain structure, and it transfers vibration about three times faster than brass. The same is true of Titanium however titanium is even lighter than SS, and transfers vibration even faster than Stainless steel. We use 304, and 15-5 stainless steel and 6al4ev titanium for our mouthpieces. These materials are proven to be safe to use. Many stainless steel mouthpieces are made from 303 stainless steel which is great to machine but because 303 has Sulfur added to make it easy to machine it also gives off Nickel. Many people do not have nickel allergies, and if 303 is highly polished, your body chemistry is agreeable with 303, and you hours of contact with the materials are limited you should not experience a problem with nickel allergies. At Giddings and Webster we are the only company in the world making mouthpieces from 304 or 15-5 stainless steel, and Titanium alloys. We do this because your long term health and enjoyment of music is important to us.

If you have more questions please let me know.

Ivan