I remember spending a day nerding out with a friend who plays sackbut, and being impressed by the sheer variety in mouthpieces he had (replicas, of course). It looked like a real "cambrian explosion" moment in mouthpiece design, with wildly differing features. One mouthpiece in particular stood out for its absolutely sharp transition from cup to throat - there was no radius there to speak of. This one had a very "breathy" sound, as if the turbulence of the air over that sharp edge was adding some noise - but we figured that would have worked really well for the context of accompanying singers, almost by becoming a singer itself. I guess that's what's Christan is referring to if you just bore out a modern mouthpiece - you lose that tangent, and "gain" turbulence.
What's also interesting is looking at bass trombone mouthpieces. Some makers even for bass trombone, start with rather tight throats, around .270" to +/- .300". others kind of start at .312" and go even bigger, up to .320" that I've seen. I understand the idea of a symbiotic relationship between all aspects of the mouthpiece, but if someone makes a good, free blowing piece with a .285" throat, does that mean, the backbore is wider? Or if the same maker makes .300" throats, are the backbores tighter? Some makers give info on the width of the throat, but give no info on the backbone. Others incrementally increase the width of the throat when the cup diameter get larger, but don't write anything about the depth of the cup or about the backbore. One offers the same two throat options for pieces with cup IDs of 106 to 114. And those cup IDs go in increments of 2, but while the 108 feels the best on the lips, the sound is a bit harsh and bright. The sound of the 110 is good, but the upper range is work. Neither of these work for me with the .285" throat, both work much better with the .300" throat. The amker is special-order sending me a 109 cup ID with .300" throat. Am curious how that will be. One maker flatly refused to make me either a .300" throat or a cup ID of +/- 109. there's literally no way a non-instrument maker, non-mouthpiece specialist can have a clue, what's "right" for oneself. Hit and miss and spinding big bucks for sure. Or as one maker was very candide: "We mouthpiece makers live and thrive from unsatisfied customers."
I bored out a small shank tenor throat at Schilke a long time ago. I couldn't blow pass the the bell at first. Playing r&b required more air flow. Eventually I acclimated to it , and found it easier to reach the upper register with less compression. However, I sound like a euphonium on a small bore horn. The Conn 8H is too pricey for me anyway.
I recently bored out some small shenk stock Schilke 53 mouthpieces. Only the cup depth to an E2 (their deepest size). I left the throats and backbore alone. It is a brighter sound, which I like, but when I have to blow hard, the compression becomes an issue. The cup is tapered at the throat to receive more volume. Nonetheless, it backs up on me. I am playing a small bore bone. I like the Curtis Fuller, Michael Dease, Slide Hamptom sound. I just don't wanna carry my .561/bore vintage cut-bell/straight tenor Holton ( 76' Jay Friedman) to a bar.
@@griegomouthpieces4760 Very cool. & Since you're entertaining my requests, a Cup shape comparison would be very cool as well. Thank you tremendously for what you're doing, finally someone *with great knowledge* is really going all out about the specs.
I am not sure what has happened with the more recent designs.. The tuning characteristics from model to model are just so similar. More importantly, the 6th partial is way less sharp-and my trigger C and low F are in tune in first-no adjustment. My high F is in tune in first! Crazy-all those years learning to adjust and now I have to unlearn. Your mouthpieces have always given a less out-of-tune 6th partial than other makers, but current models seem to require much less adjustment.
One of the best explanations of throat sizes and boring out a mouthpiece. You gave away a lot of trade secrets LOL. Great video.
The Griego-Taylor mouthpiece has a shorter throat (as mentioned in earlier vid.), very interesting!
I remember spending a day nerding out with a friend who plays sackbut, and being impressed by the sheer variety in mouthpieces he had (replicas, of course). It looked like a real "cambrian explosion" moment in mouthpiece design, with wildly differing features. One mouthpiece in particular stood out for its absolutely sharp transition from cup to throat - there was no radius there to speak of. This one had a very "breathy" sound, as if the turbulence of the air over that sharp edge was adding some noise - but we figured that would have worked really well for the context of accompanying singers, almost by becoming a singer itself. I guess that's what's Christan is referring to if you just bore out a modern mouthpiece - you lose that tangent, and "gain" turbulence.
What's also interesting is looking at bass trombone mouthpieces. Some makers even for bass trombone, start with rather tight throats, around .270" to +/- .300". others kind of start at .312" and go even bigger, up to .320" that I've seen. I understand the idea of a symbiotic relationship between all aspects of the mouthpiece, but if someone makes a good, free blowing piece with a .285" throat, does that mean, the backbore is wider? Or if the same maker makes .300" throats, are the backbores tighter? Some makers give info on the width of the throat, but give no info on the backbone. Others incrementally increase the width of the throat when the cup diameter get larger, but don't write anything about the depth of the cup or about the backbore. One offers the same two throat options for pieces with cup IDs of 106 to 114. And those cup IDs go in increments of 2, but while the 108 feels the best on the lips, the sound is a bit harsh and bright. The sound of the 110 is good, but the upper range is work. Neither of these work for me with the .285" throat, both work much better with the .300" throat. The amker is special-order sending me a 109 cup ID with .300" throat. Am curious how that will be. One maker flatly refused to make me either a .300" throat or a cup ID of +/- 109.
there's literally no way a non-instrument maker, non-mouthpiece specialist can have a clue, what's "right" for oneself. Hit and miss and spinding big bucks for sure. Or as one maker was very candide: "We mouthpiece makers live and thrive from unsatisfied customers."
I bored out a small shank tenor throat at Schilke a long time ago. I couldn't blow pass the the bell at first. Playing r&b required more air flow. Eventually I acclimated to it , and found it easier to reach the upper register with less compression. However, I sound like a euphonium on a small bore horn. The Conn 8H is too pricey for me anyway.
I recently bored out some small shenk stock Schilke 53 mouthpieces. Only the cup depth to an E2 (their deepest size). I left the throats and backbore alone. It is a brighter sound, which I like, but when I have to blow hard, the compression becomes an issue. The cup is tapered at the throat to receive more volume. Nonetheless, it backs up on me. I am playing a small bore bone.
I like the Curtis Fuller, Michael Dease, Slide Hamptom sound. I just don't wanna carry my .561/bore vintage cut-bell/straight tenor Holton ( 76' Jay Friedman) to a bar.
Thank you for this Christan. Will you make a video on shank length and how that effects everything?
Sure thing. That'll be a fun one. I'll probably make the same mouthpiece with different length shanks up to Remington style and play and compare.
@@griegomouthpieces4760 Very cool. & Since you're entertaining my requests, a Cup shape comparison would be very cool as well. Thank you tremendously for what you're doing, finally someone *with great knowledge* is really going all out about the specs.
I am not sure what has happened with the more recent designs.. The tuning characteristics from model to model are just so similar. More importantly, the 6th partial is way less sharp-and my trigger C and low F are in tune in first-no adjustment. My high F is in tune in first! Crazy-all those years learning to adjust and now I have to unlearn. Your mouthpieces have always given a less out-of-tune 6th partial than other makers, but current models seem to require much less adjustment.
I'm always working to make "workload" less and intonation is one of the things that causes us to work more to get partials in tune.
Hola yo toco com griego artist 7c podría hablarme un poco de ella