Mouthpiece Full Circle

[iiipopes]

Over the last few months I have sold a significant number of my low brass instruments I knew I would never play again. Of course, I kept the Jupiter JTU1110 tuba for concert band and my ancient sousaphone for outdoor concerts. Here's the deal: like many on the forum, over the course of the decades I have had at times a whole shelf full of mouthpieces, inexpensive to expensive and many makes and models. Most have come and gone. They are now all gone except for the Conn 120S Helleberg I use with the Jupiter and a Kanstul modified by Jim New 18 derivative I use for the souzy. (plus a Kelly for outdoors as may be required). Has anybody else come full circle on mouthpieces?

[arpthark]

I've found that full circles are the best for mouthpieces, because otherwise the air will escape.

[MShores]

Yes. I started on a Conn 15j with a Conn-Helleberg. 5 CC tubas, an F tuba and 2 BBb tubas with at least twice as many mouthpieces later, I own a Conn 15j with a Conn-Helleberg. And actually, someone gave me my current 15j with a newer Helleberg that’s not stamped Conn-Helleberg and I didn’t like it. So I went and dug up the old one with the Conn-Helleberg stamp and it was just right.

[arpthark]

I gave my dumb joke response, but I'll provide a real one:

I started playing tuba using a Schilke 66. I was in 6th grade at the time and used that until high school. I'd like to revisit that just to see what it is actually like now.

I've come "full circle" in that I have moved away from huge mouthpieces and am playing on more conservative ones now (but I don't think they had Sellmansberger Symphonies back then, eh?). This is largely a part of my effort to combat dystonia-ish symptoms that still crop up from time to time, but they are much less pronounced now than they were when I was blowing my chops out on enormous toilet bowls.

[bloke]

Symphony (unless an extra-tall rim is screwed on) is only "regular-deep", and the cup width totally depends on which rim is chosen (ranging from medium to wide - admittedly: no "narrow" choices).
Further, the throat is "average" (at it's choke point) other than the unusual place at which the choke point is located.

If the Schilke 66 does your thing, you should use it !

[windshieldbug]

I've found that full circles are the best for mouthpieces, because otherwise the air will escape.

As far as I know, air is intended to escape from the small end!

[arpthark]

Symphony (unless an extra-tall rim is screwed on) is only "regular-deep", and the cup width totally depends on which rim is chosen (ranging from medium to wide - admittedly: no "narrow" choices).
Further, the throat is "average" (at it's choke point) other than the unusual place at which the choke point is located.

If the Schilke 66 does your thing, you should use it !

Yup, I should've been more clear:

I use a blokepiece right now as a part of my effort to play smaller/more conservative mouthpieces. I love the Symphony.

I USED to honk my chops out on a PT-50, PT-88, Deck 3, etc etc trying to find something bigger and get a bigger sound. Not productive.

I haven't played a Schilke 66 since I was 14 or so and I'd like try to one again if it came along as it conforms to that smaller philosophy.

[2nd tenor]

On mouthpieces no, I’ve not yet come full circle, perhaps I’m still on the developmental journey. I don’t tend to swop about much and do seem to find that some pieces work better with some instruments than others. So there’s what the instrument needs to work well and what I need to work well.
I’ve recently progressed (?) to using a Wick 2 in a Sovereign EEb; I tried a similar sized (cup diameter) Bach 18 a few years ago but sold it because my chops weren’t quite ready for a piece of that larger size. The Wick 3 that I used for a few years seemed to hit the sweet spot for most things but not quite well enough through the fourth valve / low range on my Sovereign … but maybe the Wick 3 would do the low stuff better if my technique was better.

On other things I have gone full circle or discovered that what I was looking for was either under my nose and sometimes used before rather than something ‘better’ and in the distance. For lots of items we go through the decision and purchase making loop (some sort of logical iteration or just trial and error) several times before we either find ‘the best’ or just get exhausted by the process.

Sometimes what we’ve already got either happens to or can work reasonably well for lots of folks - which is why folk before us bought those (popular) items and others successfully sold them. We make slight changes here and there as needed but mostly we need to learn to both work well and without conscious thought with what we either have or can easily have; once that skill is mastered we may never be particularly troubled by the absolute limits of what an item can deliver. Of course a small percentage of highly skilled players might eventually find those limits but the bulk of players won’t. Maybe those concepts are obvious, but if so I’m puzzled by why it took me so long to grasp them and I appear to be far from the only person with such impaired ‘vision’.

Each time we make an informed decision we expend effort to make a good choice. When we want to improve on that earlier choice we have to expend the same level of effort again (as we did before) plus a bit more for the additional refinement. Sometimes it turns out that one of our earlier choices was near enough the mark, or within tolerable error, and we later return to it. Professional players might find and think differently, but the vast bulk of us aren’t professional players and we have neither their judgement or need to replace good equipment with (what they personally find to be) superb equipment. As an amateur my focus is to fix what’s possible, practical and clearly an issue but perfection, if it exists, is illusive and rarely worth even half the effort that we go to to find it.

Full circle, it’s just back to a good decision that - whether by good luck or good judgement - we made in the past (some earlier result in the decision loop(s) that I mentioned above), well that and maybe a changed ability to work with what we have or had.

EDIT. As things turned out I ended up shifting back to the the Wick 3. On the Sovereign I used only the Wick 2 for a few months and I certainly improved my lower range using it, but I lost some security within the stave and when tired had the occasional ragged note too - fighting the instrument is never good. Eventually I sat down with the Wick 2 and the 3 and did some comparison exercises to see which of them now played better for me. The low range results gave the edge to the Wick 2 but they were only marginally different from the 3 and barely repeatable. Within the stave I felt more comfortable with the Wick 3 - more in control - and maybe produced a better tone too. Even an occasional ragged tone is not really acceptable so why unnecessarily continue to use the Wick 2 and risk one? I don’t think that I’d have played so well through the 4th valve low range if I hadn’t had the experience of using the Wick 2 for a while but, having changed/improved my technique, returning to the Wick 3 seems sensible. Perhaps things will shift again over time, perhaps my chops will strengthen further, but at the moment things seem pretty much stable and optimised.

EDIT. I checked valve alignment, valve depressed and released, to check whether or not all was in good order. I did that by sight, through adjoining valve casing ports, using a small torch and a small plastic disk mirror bonded to and set at 135 / 45 degrees to a length of wire. The first three (main) valves - port alignment actually only allows the second and third to be examined - were not visibly wrong (only valve port and no valve body showing) but the fourth valve was slightly out when depressed, that’s been corrected now. As there are some routes that a cleaning snake can’t fully negotiate I also pulled a chord and small cleaning wad through as many valve section pipes as possible, I found very minimal crud on the wad and now know that those tubes are as clear as I can get them to be - muck did come out in earlier cleaning sessions. To my ears the low range now sounds slightly fuller, but my technique through the fourth valve continues to improve too so perhaps it’s a combination of factors.

[tubaing]

I've really been liking my 24AW lately.

[Sousaswag]

I think I’ve found that it took a longer time to find a tuba/mouthpiece combo that worked for me rather than just a mouthpiece.

I, like many, started on a Helleberg. I still own that mouthpiece but I rarely if ever use it anymore. Through 4 CC tubas my mouthpiece choice has changed. I’ve had Giddings stuff, PT’s, MRP’s, the Wick AT’s, and more. I switched around on my 5450 the most, but eventually settled with a MRP 5.0HD.

Then when I bought my MRP-C I decided I was working too hard. Big mouthpiece and big tuba wasn’t for me, so I went with a Sellmansberger Orchestra Grand and put a Symphony shank on it and I love the ease that mouthpiece grants a big tuba.

I’ll bet in the future I’ll decide I want to try something else. That’s how this goes, right?

[bloke]

I own a few (several?) different instruments that I use for work, which I bought (or built) over time, and which - after selling instruments I previously owned - judge to be better than those previously owned, and I’ve done this over a lifetime. The reason I have several instruments is to do a better job (and do it more easily) when hired to do specific things and perform specific types of music; I’m certainly not interested at all in any sort of tuba collection. I don’t think I quite use the same mouthpiece with any of them. Though the rim profiles are the same, I use three different tuba mouthpiece rims (which vary in interior opening/embouchure width up to a millimeter), and I don’t try to use a tuba mouthpiece rim on a euphonium. I just don’t think that really works. With a thick enough neck cork, I could imagine someone getting some sounds out of an alto sax with a tenor sax or baritone sax mouthpiece, but I just don’t think they would get the best sound.
———————-
I realize that I’m wandering off into a different subject, but having encountered so many remarkable woodwind “septuplers” (way more than “doublers” - a couple of whom also play trumpet and trombone quite well), the brass players “single rim“ myth needs to be shouted down.

[bort2.0]

I bought a Bach 18 Megatone when I first started playing in 10th grade. The description said "sonorous," and I had no idea what that meant, but it seemed like a good thing, so I decided to be sonorous. I was about 14 years old, and it was probably 10 years before I bought or seriously even tried another mouthpiece. (Yes, that includes all through college... "gear" was not of any real concern then. We had stuff to use, and we're too broke to do anything about it, anyway)

It's not something I use very often right now, but it pretty much always works on any tuba. Worked perfectly on the Conn 20J, no surprise there. If I had to keep only one mouthpiece, that would be it.

[bloke]

... "gear" was not of any real concern then.

When I was 20, I had a mouthpiece made for me to my specifications. As much of an ignoramus as I was (not that I “know” all that much more now, as I really only know of things to TRY), somehow I figured out something, and it turned out to be good - and with almost the rim that I use today, but not quite. This was a shallow mouthpiece that I used with a 184, as I did not own an F tuba at that time.
That mouthpiece – other than interchangeable shanks/throats/backboards/rims – became the “Solo” cup mouthpiece.

For decades, I played on BAD (for me) contrabass mouthpieces, I knew they were bad, but I had no idea what might be good. I tried all sorts of things, and some of them were less bad. I also went through several BAD larger C instruments.
These combinations really discouraged me from practicing very much on contrabass instruments, which is one reason that I only owned an F tuba for several years. I guess it’s been a number of years now, but I finally got sick of playing on crap mouthpieces on contrabass tubas (as my current C instrument ended up being quite nice), and decided to figure something out. I enlisted my wife’s help (critical ears), and what I came up with was what is now the Symphony cup (again: with various options - the most useful to me being with the Symphony (reverse taper) throat/back-bore (and a rim profile that finally allowed me to eliminate an embouchure shift).

I came up with two other cup shapes that have been useful to me, but personally currently only use one of those other two (on one of my instruments all the time, and on another one of my instruments occasionally).

Later, I discovered that making some of these cups 1/8 of an inch deeper with taller screw-on rims or cup extender ring inserts (yet WITHOUT ruining them by NOT boring out the throats – as with many of the very deep cup - and ruinously “bored out” mouthpieces), I could alter the type of resonance they would produce yet WITHOUT making them any more work to play them.

stainless steel:
Having grown weary of multiple replatings of that mouthpiece - that I had made when I was 20 years old (each time slightly distorting it a little bit more), and growing more and more weary of how short a time gold plating lasts on a rim - I had that mouthpiece duplicated in stainless steel.
I don’t particularly care about stainless steel cups or shanks (though it is nice that the shanks are nice and durable), but the main thing that interested me was the fact that a stainless steel RIM remains as smooth-feeling as a newly polished and plated mouthpiece for a lifetime – as long as it’s not dropped too many times.

I didn’t mean for this to become an advertisement, but just an explanation of how many years I spent playing on bad mouthpieces – which hindered and stunted my contrabass tuba playing, as well as discouraging me from being particularly interested in it. I’m just a blue collar tuba player, but - these days - I might flip through excerpt books, look at stuff that - years ago - would just cause me to raise my eyebrows, and actually enjoy playing through them…and with relative ease. (It’s interesting how music sounds so much nicer when it’s not so hard.)

[2nd tenor]

I've really been liking my 24AW lately.

Yes, a classic piece and much copied by other companies - Bach’s original design? Lots of folk like and use 24AW’s so the design must be good for a large percentage of Tuba players. Enjoy a classic piece.

One size suits all? Maybe not, I tried a 24W clone but the rim was too wide a diameter for me - it was uncomfortable for me to use - so it got resold. That’s a personal physical thing just like size 7 and size 12 shoes simply not fitting my feet, they could be great shoes but they still wouldn’t be right for me.

[bloke]

re: 24AW

I can’t know this, but I suspect (??) that more people would like this size of Bach mouthpiece without the W (crazy wide rim) and the A (oversize throat). Further, I suspect (??) that those who use it - and who do well with it - might do even better than they do (and this would include those who do remarkably and extraordinarily well with it) without those two features.

[iiipopes]

re: 24AW

I can’t know this, but I suspect (??) that more people would like this size of Bach mouthpiece without the W (crazy wide rim) and the A (oversize throat). Further, I suspect (??) that those who use it - and who do well with it - might do even better than they do (and this would include those who do remarkably and extraordinarily well with it) without those two features.

Sounds like you are describing a Bach 22, which has the regular rim, not wide, the .328 throat instead of the larger throat stock on an 18 and 24AW, and the cup is deep enough to get good tone on contrabass, but not too deep. I have several friends who are euph/bone/tuba "doublers" and they all use a 22. When I sold my Bessophone, the person who bought it was a euph player in the Canadian Army. Of course, he sounded magnificient on my B&H 3-valve comp euph when he tried it out. I ended up sending my 22 home with him and the tuba because, well, it fit him perfectly also. He had a Bach 18 and a Wick 3L, and sounded grainy on both, but great on the 22.

[bort2.0]

I didn’t mean for this to become an advertisement

And I didn't think it sounded like one. Just the opposite, super interesting to learn how these things came to be.

My only point was, for a guy who (in the last 10 years) changes instruments so much, I don't change mouthpieces very often at all:

Roughly speaking:

1996-2004(?) -- Bach 18 Megatone
2005-2011 -- G&W Baer MMVI
2012-2015 -- a bit of experimentation, actually don't remember much about what I used
2016-present -- Thein RCC

[iiipopes]

I didn’t mean for this to become an advertisement

And I didn't think it sounded like one. Just the opposite, super interesting to learn how these things came to be.

My only point was, for a guy who (in the last 10 years) changes instruments so much, I don't change mouthpieces very often at all:

Roughly speaking:

1996-2004(?) -- Bach 18 Megatone
2005-2011 -- G&W Baer MMVI
2012-2015 -- a bit of experimentation, actually don't remember much about what I used
2016-present -- Thein RCC

Chronologies are most useful, as they can help a person on safari see trends and issues. I'm not going to waste too much bandwidth, but one of my historical combinations comes to mind. After borrowing a couple of instruments coming back to brass over twenty years ago, my first purchase was a Besson BBb 3-valve comp. Wonderful instrument, even if it did sequentially need almost all the joints re-soldered as each in turn deteriorated. Intonation was superlative. I purchased the Wick 1 (old British shank and receiver) for it. I really, really liked the tone, and that was the inspiration for putting a Besson bell on my Bessophone. The Wick 1 was perfect for the Besson tuba, especially since those beasts can be stuffy here and there. But the deep cup and large throat caused me to need a third lung to play it when I sold the Besson and bought the Miraphone 186 that I later put the Besson bell on and it became the Bessophone. At that point, the mouthpiece safari began and only ended when I got the Jupiter tuba after trying many, many mouthpieces on the market that had, or could be adapted to, a @1.28 inch cup diameter.

[cjk]

... "gear" was not of any real concern then.

When I was 20, I had a mouthpiece made for me to my specifications. As much of an ignoramus as I was (not that I “know” all that much more now, as I really only know of things to TRY), somehow I figured out something, and it turned out to be good - and with almost the rim that I use today, but not quite. This was a shallow mouthpiece that I used with a 184, as I did not own an F tuba at that time.
That mouthpiece – other than interchangeable shanks/throats/backboards/rims – became the “Solo” cup mouthpiece.

For decades, I played on BAD (for me) contrabass mouthpieces, I knew they were bad, but I had no idea what might be good. I tried all sorts of things, and some of them were less bad.
....

I'd be interested in what contrabass mouthpieces younger bloke had decided to play for any amount of time, mainly just out of curiosity

IIRC, there was the
Bach 7 or 12 ??
Marcinkiewitz H1
Schilke Helleberg II
LOUD LM7 ?

[bloke]

yeah...I struggled with those, and also the Laskey 30H version of one of them, as well as a couple of mouthpiece (0 and 1 - probably Tilz) which were included with Rudolf Meinl tubas back in three decades ago. Nothing worked very well for me - out of any of those...and neither did (certainly not in comparison to what I've owned - now - for quite some time) any of the C tubas that I owned. I also learned that "drilling out throats" was a horrible idea (again: at least, for me).

long list of past C tubas owned:
I will not list/denigrate them. As Matt Walters is quoted as saying, "Every tuba has someone's name on it."

I'm quite happy with

(though - recently - I've spent most of my time revisiting my childhood - aka: "the world of B-flat tubas" - in particular: a couple of amazing B-flat tubas)

the C tuba I currently own, which is a first-batch-shipped-to-the-USA (remarkably well put together, and easily tunable) 5450 - with a few things I've done to it - to make it even easier to play. I'm not-at-all interested in offering for sale, even though it hasn't been to any gigs in several months. I've even built a couple of main slide extensions for it (mostly: out of boredom) and experimented with playing it in ¹open B-natural...It plays GREAT in B-natural as well (messed around with "Fountains" and "Valkyries" as a B-natural tuba).
______________________________
¹Having been a somewhat "serious" (gigged at cocktail parties, and was hired to play in pits at Broadway shows) teenaged guitarist, the "barre-chord mental concept" works pretty well for me (in regards to "a way of thinking"), which probably is why I can play things (that are fairly secure in my head) in most any key. This is not some "amazing ability"...but (again: probably) from being accustomed to playing barred guitar solos in most any key (as long as I avoided first position)...I'm no longer much of a guitarist. My guitar playing demoted itself to bass playing (mo' money/mo' gigs) and then demoted itself to nothing.