TubaForum.net

Mr. Jacobs had the throat drilled out a bit on the mouthpiece that was copied. Apparently, sometime after the original CB mouthpiece was made, Warburton found another example that had not been altered, and that is the TG2. I think the 3 and 4 are versions of the smaller one that was sent to Kelly and later caused the big stink over these pieces. (I neither know nor care about those.)

The "TG" in the name is a joke, standing for "The Grail".

The inner rim bite is quite sharp, and the rim is very flat. The cup is as deep as Hermione Granger's purse. The throat is too drilled out for my lungs; I can feel just about zero resistance compared to a Conn Helleberg 120. I think you could drive a Trabant through this thing!

In truth, it looks like a Doug Elliott "T" cup with the largest shank that he used to offer, a "T8A+" — only larger. I suspect that the original (Warburton's "TG2" with the tighter throat) might be more to my liking. Maybe not. But the sharp rim is not to my liking as it wears me out!

The leadpipe of the Yamaha is not oddly large (as are the silly hooters that the factory slaps on the 2165). However, this tuba makes less sound than my Holton. My Holton has what I consider to be a fairly tight leadpipe, so I will need to try this Warburton on that tuba before I sell it. I am interested to see how they work together.

I will also try to photograph the "Revelation 52" and the "TG1" to compare them more directly. (My memory for this sort of stuff is spotty at best; I am not *in* to mouthpieces and gear and such, having sold my trumpets decades ago, heh, heh…)

Also, if anyone wants a new Warburton big-ass TG1, I will have one for sale very soon. I bought the TG1L, which is a Euro shank. The Yamaha has a weird receiver, and I have not yet decided whether it wants Euro or American shank tapers. Both "fit" without wobble, but both fit into the extra-long receiver pretty far. I just dropped nearly $300 more to get the Am shank "TG1" and will play both, as both seem to fit and it comes down to the depth of insertion. Again, I have to try both to see which one seems to work "correctly" (whatever that might be).

Once I have used both a few times the winner stays and the loser goes up for sale here for a reasonable price as a mint *used* mouthpiece. I have about five other spendy pieces that I tried with this tuba, again, mostly trying to find things that fit well enough to give me usable information. Most did, and I just did not care for them for whatever reason. Some just did not fit, but they all fit my Miraphone and Adams receivers, so the mouthpieces are fine (and again - "mint") and will sell at used prices that are fair because I do not need $1,500 worth of barely used mouthpieces sitting on top of my piano gathering dust; I find one mouthpiece for a horn and never really switch again, and I have what I want for my other tubas.

The future owners of these babies are out there somewhere…

Mary Ann wrote: ↑Tue Apr 16, 2024 9:36 am What I see out there is a pattern that cup depth and throat size go hand in hand, and the bigger/deeper the cup, the larger the throat

Hm, not a real uniform pattern. Not Bach -- 8.84mm throat: 24AW, 18. 8.33mm: 12, 7.
Not Conn: 8.3mm: 7B. 7.3mm: 120S. Same difference with the mid century Precision 2 and 3 sizes, and I suppose 1 - but consider the "1" as a reductio absurdum of the proposition. Can some playing characteristic be independently related to throat size, if the cup shape can be whatever you want, like as deep as the Conn 1?

What I think we know fairly well, is that the really successful mouthpieces (meaning, work well to get good tuba sounds for many players on many tubas), are not produced by drilling out throats. (With the possible exception of the Schilke 69C4.) But successful mouthpieces come in a range of throat sizes that seem to have little rhyme or reason, they just apparently work out well, even pretty big ones. It may be a science, but it isn't a simple enough science for tuba players.

I used an extra-deep cup mouthpiece when (before acquiring FatBastard) playing the 5450 tuba...
That tuba was just a bit too eager to "take off" (low range), and that mouthpiece tempered the sound without muffling it.
The avoidance of muffling (at least, I'm convinced) was related to the avoidance of that to which Mary Ann observes (which is all to typical)...
"IF deep cup, THEN large throat."
The mouthpiece I was using was about 1/8" deeper than (familiar to many) a Helleberg 120, YET the throat size was only average, the "average" (in my view) being 8.2mm.

FatBastard (though not a Helleberg) is experiencing a c. Helleberg 120 deep mouthpiece yet a smaller-than-average throat...and (being "Miraphone") a standard shank exterior).

hey...Whatever works for whatever person...
(and Lord knows I've changed up mouthpieces almost as often as I've changed instruments.)

really a non-sequitur:
I have a friend (rarely see him...hilarious guy...trombone player) who refers to mouthpieces as "scopes"...
ie. "What type of scope are you sightin' through there, bud?"

Another long one that is overly detailed. Cope with it or go away.

Next chapter germane to this thread: Protection of the Tubas

The YamaYork and Adams were both used tubas when I got them. The Yamaha was sold "nekkid" (sans case or bag) and the Adams came with an Adams-branded gig bag that is terrible, and which I suspect is a fake, as it does not match the other Adams-branded bags I have come across. It also came with a decent enough Wessex-branded hard case made for a similarly-sized, but different model of tuba (so that the Adams fits *okay* at best and the outer shell is thin, with *okay* hardware.

Adams Gig Bag: I tossed the gig bag as it had plastic strap hardware, which is unacceptable. The plastic parts are stitched into the system so are not easily replaced with brass or stainless strap loops. I *only* carry gig bags using a single shoulder strap. If the hardware that connects the strap to the bag's body breaks, the tuba instantaneously hits the floor/street. The body was this thin, rubbery stuff with no real padding. But it fit the tuba much better than my expensive Cronkhite. Hmm…

Wessex Hard Case: This was a fantastic case for the drive home. I felt good about the tuba being in my backseat for four days in this case. However, It is not adequate for travel beneath a bus — where in the past one of the timpani hard cases came open and the timpani rolled out, smashing one of my tubas (in a similar Chinese-made MTS-knockoff case that shattered like an eggshell when the timpani hit it. (I lead such a varied and interesting life. Or so I've been told.)

As mentioned above, I bought an excellent Cronkhite gig bag for the little Adams, and I will replace the Wessex hard case. Both were adequate for an inexpensive tuba, but not for one that cost me this much.

The Yamaha came without a case or bag, but I ended up with a Cronkhite leather bag and a surprisingly nice Eastman hard case that is worlds apart from the original hard cases supplied with the 836 when it was introduced. (I have one and it is nearly identical to the Wessex case described above. It is tons better than the old cloth-covered styrofoam blocks of Jin Bao legacy. But it also has a thin, brittle shell. Both have awful wheels, and both have shed the solid "rubber" tires in large chunks so that none of the wheels can roll. it is like these Chinese cases used plastic core inline skate wheels of the lowest quality, with super-soft indoor rubber that the street simply tore to bits after a few uses. The Wessex and the old Eastman cases were made at the same plant using the same crappy hardware and wheels, and both fell apart after a few uses. Junk!

The new Eastman case looks like an attempt to supply something like a real hard case, with a shell that is about twice as thick as the older ones, possibly being fiberglass — it is HEAVY, as in Walt Johnson heavy. By this I mean the Walt Johnson 4/4 tuba case, not the huge one that would fit this tuba — it is nowhere near that heavy, but it is a huge improvement over the old days for Asian tuba cases. This will protect the horn in a low-speed vehicle accident… to a certain extent. It is far better than any gig bag or "cheapo" hard case.

The hardware has that awkward look that many Chinese knockoff products have, generally being sort of goofy-large. To me, this implies they are weaker than the higher quality, smaller fittings that cost a lot more. Frequently Chinese metal is of very poor quality, so to make it stronger it has to be bigger/more massive. This case fairly reeks of that ethos.

Despite this, the hardware all looks to be adequate for the job. I strongly suspect that the loose timpani would not have harmed my tuba had it been in this case. Maybe not, and I hope I never find out, but it does not look or feel junky or weak to me.

The wheels are an improvement over most tuba cases, as they are corner boxes that are riveted to the case shell, so the track is about four or five inches wider than you usually see, and that makes the case a lot less "tippy" when rolling it down the sidewalk. Nice. Also, the wheels are secured into the boxes, so if you smash one hard it destroys the cheap, plastic corner box and does not destroy the case shell. You can probably find direct replacements on Alibaba for cheap. Drill out the rivets and install the new corner housings, et voila!

More importantly to me, the garbagey plastic wheels are made to inline skate wheel standards and can be easily swapped out for *real* wheels that will last for years. I just spent about $40 on a set of four top-of-the-line outdoor hockey inline skate wheels with Swiss-made bearings that will be drop-in replacements. I will likely never have to replace these, but if I do, I have my initial two plus two more. (I had to do a couple of hours of research to find out how to measure the bearings, and the wheels, and to understand all the jargon used when ordering these.)

If you have one of these Eastman cases and want to perform this excellent upgrade, here are the specs.

Wheel OD — 90mm
Wheel Thickness — 24mm
Bearing Size — 608Z (uses an 8mm axle)
Bearing Quality — ABEC 9
Durometer — 86A
Core/Hub Material — Aluminum



Now, the internal padding of this case is only so-so. The shell is a snug fit. The body shell half at the bottom bow and bell ends has only 1.5" of padding that is VERY soft and that I do NOT trust, and the lid half has about a half of an inch of the same ridiculously soft stuff. I can compress both thicknesses of this padding with almost zero effort, which bodes very poorly in an external impact, being almost as bad as having the tuba in the bare shell without any padding at all.

I will look at DIY Road Cases for some much higher quality padding of that thickness. I like this site a lot as it is very educational. I do not always buy from them, but usually I do. They are also very kind and helpful on the phone. https://www.diyroadcasesstore.com

For a thin musical instrument, you need a combination of two or three elastomers of differing stiffness for different levels of impact resistance. I will only have one, so it needs to be good for medium hits. If I am in a car wreck, the seats will supply a lot of the impact resistance, the shell will prevent deformation, and the stiffer elastomer in the case will absorb most of what is left if the impact is low energy enough to prevent the case shell from shattering. It is not ideal, but for a tuba in a backseat, it will be better than anything I have now. And this tuba cost enough to merit all this fuss.

So, anyway, such thin padding must be very stiff or hard, but still compressible. Styrofoam (as used in nearly all bubble-shell, plastic tuba cases today) works in the same manner (it compresses at impact), but it does not spring back, so if there is a hit to the case the padding must be replaced because once compressed, styrofoam is ruined. ALL bike helmets (back in my NORBA days, at least) were lined with styrofoam and designed like a car's crush zones: absorb the energy of an impact through deformation, as cheaply as possible. But the result of this is the car's destruction. (Very small impacts will leave many cars today totaled out by insurance.) If you crashed your mountain bike and hit your head, your "brain box" was supposed to be replaced right away as it would no longer function to protect your head: one good impact with a tree or boulder, and it was structurally destroyed. It was a cheap, sacrificial way to prevent brain trauma if your moving head struck a stationary object.

The use of styrofoam has turned tuba hard cases into one-use impact protectors. I need my cases to survive MANY small impacts and still be able to take one that breaks the shell. So a very hard elastomer like that used in pre-hydraulic bike fork shocks (Manitou comes to mind) will make the case a lot more useful to me. The work is easy to do (only requiring a hot glue gun) even if it is a bit tedious, and the material is not all that costly.

I might opt to replace the latches, too, but these seem to be pretty decent. The valance and hinges likewise are good. The rubber feet and other bumper blocks, however, are solid plastic and mark up my floor. I will also replace them with solid rubber feet, which DIY Road Cases also have in stock.

So why has this suddenly come up?

Some butthole string picker at work put a ding in my YamaYork! Right in the bell flare. These are very thin and have been hardened in some way, so it is difficult to de-dent a sharp impact without marring the silver plating pretty badly. So the ding stays, and I am made grossly aware of how easy this tuba will be to dent at work while surrounded by idiot string players (who have damaged my tubas for the past 31 years). This means that I will be ditching my beloved gig bag for many services and (like Joe) will begin using this hard case, once I have pimped it out so that it does not fall apart due to a lot of use. If I get up to take a leak, the tuba goes into the case. If I have a tacet sheet: in the case. The case will live to the left of my chair at all times when we are not in the hall on our risers. After 31 years, none of our mindless 'cellists have figured out how to damage one of my horns when it is off the floor. So gig bag for all riser gigs, and my hard case for anything where the tuba will be on the floor.

These people drive me nuts. And NO, management has *never* been able to do anything about this. Only the physical intimidation of my bulk has had any inroads to these cud-chewers.

Observations About the Yamaha

I have a close friend who is an excellent band director and a fine trombonist. He beings many of his kids to our Masterworks Series concerts and knows my horns and my playing well.

In a direct comparison with the Holton 345…

a band director friend wrote:
Holton — Massive tone, but sometimes is too much when high, and not enough when low. Dense, opaque tone that can bury others in some situations. Makes a tone that is less *audible* and more *felt*. You sort of hear it indirectly. Fantastic floor to the orchestra. Blends with and supports basses super well. Works well with trumpets, but less well with trombones. Perfect for all Prokofiev, esp. Sym 5.

Yamaha — Lighter quality to the sound. More like the Alexander in that it works better with the trombones and as a floor to the brass section. Very loud but transparent. Always *audible* without being *pushy*. Tons of clarity, especially low, Less of a bass voice and more of a tuba voice. Does not make the orchestra sound louder overall like Holton, but is *always* clearly present in the overall sound of the ensemble. Works better with our bass trombonist than the Holton. A more versatile sound than the Holton.

It is interesting to read his two texts. I feel almost the same, so the feedback I get from both tubas is pretty accurate for what the audience is hearing, and I agree. I had nearly the same reactions. Both are excellent tubas, but they are very different. I almost prefer the Holton except that the Yamaha is much easier for me to play. It is also much more lightweight than the beastly Holton.

When I find a buyer for the Holton (a person searching for this horn's qualities) they will get a really great tuba (and after all that work, I would hope so!) and will likely keep it as long as I have, if not longer. I hate to see it go as I have played it for over half my career and watched it become better and better over time. I put a lot of myself into the thing. I love it. But it hurts my joints to lug it around. Even to hold it the way I do cuts off the blood to my legs after a while. For a younger player, it will rock the house. I am only sad that I finally got what I was looking for two years before I decided that it was harming my hips and knees to carry it around. I sincerely wish I had *this* version of the thing back in 2006 when I got it from Mark.

But I am very happy with what I now have. It is a little better in every way, and a lot better in one or two, and it weighs a lot less. I am thankful that my friend gave me this detailed comparison of these two BATs. He has now heard me play Shostakovich 5 on my Alexander 163, my Holton 345, and my YamaYork, and that is pretty cool if you ask me.

Okay, that is all for this thread. The Adams gets little comment as it "just works" and I like it a lot, but I did not have so much to consider when switching over from the Kurath as they are nothing alike. The two BATs, however, bear a close comparison since very few here know much (if anything at all) about the Yamaha and many consider the Holton tubas to be very interesting in how they differ from the sundry York-o-phones.

Cheers!

Dear @the elephant -- sometimes there is revenge. In my orchestra gig I got right after first acquiring the NStar, there was a cellist with a cello-on-wheels who wantonly plowed through on her way to her seat, and I had to snatch the tuba off the floor in milliseconds to prevent serious bell damage. I reported same to conductor, and he got rid of the cellist, who had admittedly created havoc in other ways.

Mary Ann wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 12:10 pm Dear @the elephant -- sometimes there is revenge. In my orchestra gig I got right after first acquiring the NStar, there was a cellist with a cello-on-wheels who wantonly plowed through on her way to her seat, and I had to snatch the tuba off the floor in milliseconds to prevent serious bell damage. I reported same to conductor, and he got rid of the cellist, who had admittedly created havoc in other ways.

Years ago, I was hired by one the snootier-pootier of the various local community bands (one that avoids the word "band") as a ringer for a concert. (I'm guessing - ?? - that their strongest players were not going to be available.)
Apparently there was some internal friction re: (rotating job) setting up/putting away chairs and stands...
At that time, I was playing the 6/4 that Wade borrowed for a while, and one of the band members stopped me to talk about something-or-other, which briefly stopped me from putting away my instrument.
One of the (obviously resentful...their turn) chairs/stands putters-away was super-hurrying past, a stand fell, and it missed by bell by angstroms.
...I never responded to any more phone messages/emails from that organization. (I just don't need to be around that sort of thing...neither the carelessness nor the anger.)

Un comentario más, con tu permiso…

As a follow-up: these wheels make a HUGE difference when transporting this large and heavy case. Considering the plastic wheel housings these go in, I have effectively put lipstick on a pig.

If anyone wants to do this to their Eastman hard case drop me a line and I will tell you what I used and all the relevant measurements and the alterations needed to make these work correctly.

That is all.

That looks slick, Wade!

"String Plucker"

That is great @the elephant ! To have someone that can listen (over time) and give such detailed and insightful commentary must be very useful.

Glad you're back!

The wheel boxes are pretty junky/thin parts, and they are affixed poorly. (The rest of the case seems to be acceptable after several gigs.) I might decide to reinforce these two plastic parts with some fiberglass and replace the Chinese rivets with stronger hardware. If the wheel boxes were not shaped so strangely I would use the excellent ones from DIY Road Cases, but I would have to hack up the case shell — which isn't worth the effort, IMHO.

If I do this I will probably resurrect this thread.

Someday…

the elephant wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2024 12:36 pm Un comentario más, con tu permiso…

As a follow-up: these wheels make a HUGE difference when transporting this large and heavy case. Considering the plastic wheel housings these go in, I have effectively put lipstick on a pig.

If anyone wants to do this to their Eastman hard case drop me a line and I will tell you what I used and all the relevant measurements and the alterations needed to make these work correctly.

I am very curious about these changes for my 836's hard case. I don't plan to make it my de facto transport method but it would useful to know for the times I roll out with the hard case.


Rob

@kingrob76

Wheel (You need two. Well, duh…)
Diameter 90 mm
Thickness 24 mm (standardized, so not important to know)
I bought a 4-pack of “Famous 900mm” aluminum core wheels designed for use on asphalt and cement.

Pick from the list linked here. I chose aluminum hubs, but cheaper, plastic ones would be fine. Wheels also need two bearings each and a spacer. These are all 8mm wheels with 8mm spacers, and the tuba case is set up with 6mm axles, so a bearing must be pulled from each wheel, and spacers that fit correctly (that step down the ID from 8mm to 6mm) are needed. (These are standardized, and are linked below.)

[Caveat emptor — I bought aluminum hubs, as they are "better". However, the bearings are a press fit worthy of specialized tools so that neither the bearing cage nor the aluminum hub gets damaged. I like what I have, but I would get the far-less-spendy plastic hubs in the future. The bearings can be pressed in or out of plastic hubs using a little hand tool that costs under $15 or a large screwdriver or a punch/drift. For these aluminum hubs I had to use an automotive bearing press to reinstall them… and I cringe to think of how I got them out. Live and learn…]

Screw (Axle) (Reuse the two that came with the case.)
Shoulder Outside Diameter - 7.9mm (8mm clearance fit)
Shoulder Length - 30mm
Thread - M6x.1
Full Length (with threads)- 40mm
If you get the spacers linked below you can retain these screws and not have to alter the wheel boxes. Recommended choice!

Bearings (fFour needed @ two per wheel…)
ABEC 5, 7, or 9 (“speed rating”)
“Swiss” (not origin but style of internal cage)
22mm OD x 7mm Thick x 8mm Bore
My wheels came with bearings installed. The thing to know is that inline skates usually use 8 mm axles, but they used to use 6 mm ones, which is what this tuba case uses, so the spacers linked below will fix that and nothing needs to be drilled out.

Spacers (Two needed, one per wheel.)
6mm to 8mm (standard) These are a drop-in solution to fit modern bearings to this tuba case. Something called a "spacer" is just a barrel. To get what you need, order two of the "long-sleeved spacers" I have linked here. (Note that the link is for ONE. You must bump the counter up to "2" or you will waste a lot of time and effort. GET TWO!

Super cool.

Side note: always a lot of “this is what I’m doing and this how it helped me” in “the elephants” posts. When I see these posts I know it’s worth the time to read and that I’ll probably learn some good stuff. He’s a gentleman and a scholar.

This is after a short run on my sidewalk and in the street before my house. These are made for use on asphalt while carrying a 200-pound load at high speeds. They are smooth and solid but do not pick up scratches or dirt from the pavement. The rubber is very hard but provides an excellent amount of "cush" for the tuba trapped inside the barely adequate case. Maybe I will beef the shell haves up next, but it is already too dang heavy for my girly-man arms…

Nice, wide track…

I was at an outdoor-stage run-out (a few years ago), and (after a rehearsal at a nearby university) parked near the venue, and set my folder on the corner of the (LARGE - one o' them DEE-lucks ones) outdoor stage...There were nightly concerts (one of those annual/town week-long festivals).

I came back by there, it had started barely sprinkling, there was a young lady there (pop-up tent right there as well protecting some sound equipment) with her cello, and that wiped my mind COMPLETELY clean of where my folder has been placed...

...nope, not the young lady's looks, but the presence of the cello. (I always assume that they are worth about a zillion dollars, and that someone would charge 3/4ths of a zillion to fix them, so [somewhat related point] I steer VERY clear of bowed stringed instruments.)
Anyway, it was just about time to play, I had to tell the music director that I had (even) gone back to the university...looked "everywhere" (no folder).
He laughed, and said, "no worries, bloke. All we're playing today is a big pile of $h!t."

Anyway...The genius (yeah...he actually is, but that day, as far as I was concerned - in particular...even though most everyone reading this will shrug their shoulders) bass trombonist got on his tablet, the 3rd trumpet player provided a hot-spot, the bass 'bone player downloaded all the parts from the musicians' website, and even flipped to the right pages during the show for me...so I had the music (and - of course - I found the folder on that corner of the stage after we were done).



Most 6/4 tubas (other than those made by the groß und stark wie ein deutscher panzerkampfwagen crowd) are quite thin/delicate...

Because we do tangents better than anyone on this forum, I did a similar replacement of wheels for my Eastman case and gave it a test run Monday night. The wheels were SUPER smooth over paved and indoor surfaces. HUGE upgrade. I didn't enjoy having to lift the entire case in and out of my car, nor did I enjoy lifting the nose of the case to roll it given the distance I had to go (with the rest of my gear). Hard case adoption of me will mean getting the case to roll just by pushing it, so either front wheels or adding a dolly of some sort would be required.

the elephant wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2024 6:21 pm Okay, testing mouthpieces in your home on big tubas can give you “garbage data”. I knew this, but became temporarily stupid in this case.

The Rose Solo would be a super choice if I needed to use the above-middle-C register on this tuba, or the pedal range when in a quintet or other chamber setting. It makes this tuba "fit" better into a more 4/4-esque environment.

However, using this mouthpiece that makes the tuba sing and play super-nicely at home — I was fairly disappointed with *my* results on Shosty 5 in the orchestra in our hall. It seems to put a hard cap on what I can get out of the tuba.
______________________________

EDIT:

Tonight I am using the Warburton TG1 and HOLY CRAP! My world has been rocked! I have to work on long tones to use this mouthpiece as it requires STRONG chops, which I have not currently got. I have strong chops, but this requires gorilla-strong chops. (Think: 25 years old and actively flogging the audition circuit.)

This is the original AJ mouthpiece that CB used to sell before all the ugliness. It is huge, and the mouthpiece that was copied had been drilled out at some point. I am not sure whether anyone alive knows the full details of this original, but I am pretty sure that Mr. Jacobs was the one who had it opened up, and that he actually did use it in the orchestra quite a bit. As to when in his career he used it… I don't know.

It is certainly different from anything I have ever used, and (initially) I hated it. It was this ridiculous paperweight that cost me close to 3 C-notes.

I know my playing quite well and understand some of my personal oddities that ought not to exist, but — honestly — they do. And they happen to dovetail nicely with this mouthpiece and tuba combo. It works VERY WELL for how I play. I could not get anything decent out of it at home, but it is fantastic in the hall. I won't say why, but after some reflection, it dawned on me that this might be the case, so I took it to the hall and gave it a go, fully expecting it to be a bad experience. Well, in this one case, I guessed correctly and it is probably the best mouthpiece I have used in the orchestra for how I play.

The tuba roars to life with this in the receiver — again, for ME and how *I* play — and I will not be fooling with other pieces save for the Rose Solo when I might need what it offers.

It is an air hog, though, so again… lots of long tones and loud, low playing are on the menu at my house for the next few months.

I've always wondered about those Warburton pieces. I think I'm super happy with what I have for the new to me 2155 (currently test driving some MAW valves in it again and really enjoying them). I'm using a normal depth Sellmansberger Symphony with the normal symphony (American) shank.

In case anyone is into some specs, here is the links to the Warburton TG pieces:

https://warburton-usa.com/collections/t ... outhpieces

the elephant wrote: ↑Tue Apr 16, 2024 10:27 am Mr. Jacobs had the throat drilled out a bit on the mouthpiece that was copied. Apparently, sometime after the original CB mouthpiece was made, Warburton found another example that had not been altered, and that is the TG2. I think the 3 and 4 are versions of the smaller one that was sent to Kelly and later caused the big stink over these pieces. (I neither know nor care about those.)

The "TG" in the name is a joke, standing for "The Grail".

The inner rim bite is quite sharp, and the rim is very flat. The cup is as deep as Hermione Granger's purse. The throat is too drilled out for my lungs; I can feel just about zero resistance compared to a Conn Helleberg 120. I think you could drive a Trabant through this thing!

In truth, it looks like a Doug Elliott "T" cup with the largest shank that he used to offer, a "T8A+" — only larger. I suspect that the original (Warburton's "TG2" with the tighter throat) might be more to my liking. Maybe not. But the sharp rim is not to my liking as it wears me out!

The leadpipe of the Yamaha is not oddly large (as are the silly hooters that the factory slaps on the 2165). However, this tuba makes less sound than my Holton. My Holton has what I consider to be a fairly tight leadpipe, so I will need to try this Warburton on that tuba before I sell it. I am interested to see how they work together.

I will also try to photograph the "Revelation 52" and the "TG1" to compare them more directly. (My memory for this sort of stuff is spotty at best; I am not *in* to mouthpieces and gear and such, having sold my trumpets decades ago, heh, heh…)

Also, if anyone wants a new Warburton big-ass TG1, I will have one for sale very soon. I bought the TG1L, which is a Euro shank. The Yamaha has a weird receiver, and I have not yet decided whether it wants Euro or American shank tapers. Both "fit" without wobble, but both fit into the extra-long receiver pretty far. I just dropped nearly $300 more to get the Am shank "TG1" and will play both, as both seem to fit and it comes down to the depth of insertion. Again, I have to try both to see which one seems to work "correctly" (whatever that might be).

Once I have used both a few times the winner stays and the loser goes up for sale here for a reasonable price as a mint *used* mouthpiece. I have about five other spendy pieces that I tried with this tuba, again, mostly trying to find things that fit well enough to give me usable information. Most did, and I just did not care for them for whatever reason. Some just did not fit, but they all fit my Miraphone and Adams receivers, so the mouthpieces are fine (and again - "mint") and will sell at used prices that are fair because I do not need $1,500 worth of barely used mouthpieces sitting on top of my piano gathering dust; I find one mouthpiece for a horn and never really switch again, and I have what I want for my other tubas.

The future owners of these babies are out there somewhere…

@the elephant I just looked over the chart on Terry's website. I wonder if the TG4 might actually be bigger than the TG2? It looks like the rim diameter and cup depth sit between the 1 and 2, but shares the same throat/bore. Don't know if that would be at all helpful, but might be worth an email to Warburton if you (or anyone else) were looking experiment.

https://warburton-usa.com/collections/t ... outhpieces