Slight variations on inner rim & the effects of playing

[BrianJohnston]

Hi all,

I've recently realized the rim i've been playing on for rim seems a little tight for me (I noticed my lip doesn't fully fit/vibrate inside the MP) & was wondering what the effect of the sound/feel is when you adjust the inner rim diameter by differences of .05mm or .10mm.

Thanks!

[LeTromboniste]

That seems like a much too subjective question to answer. The effect it will have on your sound and the feel you perceive will be different than it would have for someone else.

0.1 mm is a pretty substantial difference. Depending on how wide it is to start with, it might me enough to mess up the tuning and make your octaves narrow, and require to open up the throat or backbore as well to compensate.

[Posaunus]

Brian,

Have you contacted Doug Elliott?

[BrianJohnston]

Thank you Max, good points, and ones I haven't thought about.

Posaunus: I have not, but I figure he will jump in on the conversation;

To add to my initial post. I'm currently playing on a 25.65 rim that feels a bit too small, I also have a different brand mouthpiece that's 25.78 that is more difficult in the high range, and is maybe slightly too large. I'm planning on trying some in-between, I was just curious on people's experiences switching slightly larger or smaller on the inner rim diameter.

[ithinknot]

I'm currently playing on a 25.65 rim that feels a bit too small, I also have a different brand mouthpiece that's 25.78 that is more difficult in the high range, and is maybe slightly too large.

Unless the rim shapes are identical - which from different manufacturers they won't be - then measuring differences in the hundredths of millimeters isn't particularly meaningful; very slight differences in contour will change your perception of size far more significantly. And the high range difficulty may have as much to do with every other design feature as the rim.

0.1 mm is a pretty substantial difference. Depending on how wide it is to start with, it might me enough to mess up the tuning and make your octaves narrow, and require to open up the throat or backbore as well to compensate.

This might be a bit of an exaggeration, though. Look at Doug's system. Each of the cup series has suitable rims covering a roughly 1.5mm diameter range. If things were as sensitive as you suggest, this would be a disaster! (Instead, as we know, they're superb.)

[Doug Elliott]

This.

The differences you are suggesting are well within most makers' normal variance (not mine though).

A lot depends on your embouchures type and details of your face structure. I would need to see you play.

25.65 is my 101
25.78 is my 101.5
Very little difference. That might be important to some players but barely noticeable to most.

[Burgerbob]

There's also the rest of the mouthpiece. That one with a larger rim might fit your face better but be wrong in the cup, throat, backbore for your setup.

[BrianJohnston]

Unless the rim shapes are identical - which from different manufacturers they won't be - then measuring differences in the hundredths of millimeters isn't particularly meaningful; very slight differences in contour will change your perception of size far more significantly. And the high range difficulty may have as much to do with every other design feature as the rim.

Thanks!

to further explain; I think my main thoughts/concerns are that the rim I have that is 25.65, I often notice my lip(s) vibrations sometimes hindered by the not quite large enough rim size. Specifically, I sometimes feel/hear my lips not having that little extra bit of room they need to not get in the way of the sound. Does that make sense? It's a bit difficult to explain. (I have never been picky about my set-up until I won my first full-time job, it just feels like I need to be picky now to get to that next level...)

[spencercarran]

The differences you are suggesting are well within most makers' normal variance (not mine though).

Nice dig there Is it really true that other manufacturers have such sloppy QC standards, even in the modern CNC age?

[ithinknot]

The differences you are suggesting are well within most makers' normal variance (not mine though).

Nice dig there Is it really true that other manufacturers have such sloppy QC standards, even in the modern CNC age?

I think there are two points being made here - sloppiness, yes, but also that the specific differences in question (~0.1mm) are *relatively* minor.

But to the manufacturing point, CNC isn't the panacea sometimes assumed. The 'total repeatability' is only really true at the programming stage. It's true that tooling wear can be automatically compensated, so that the wildest anomalies and shape drifts over time can be avoided, but a CNC lathe can be just as poorly centered, or worn, or vibration-prone, etc etc as a manual machine. And that's before you get to any hand finishing or buffing stages.

When I try new stuff and notice something unexpected, I like to measure it, because I make and restore instruments, and because I'm sad. Not just relative to printed specs, but sample to sample, you'd be surprised what you'll find from some names big and small. In terms of overall diameter, easily more than the 0.1mm mentioned above. (Often without causing obvious problems, just significantly different.)

[Burgerbob]

The differences you are suggesting are well within most makers' normal variance (not mine though).

Nice dig there Is it really true that other manufacturers have such sloppy QC standards, even in the modern CNC age?

Just to give a real world example of ithinknot's post, I have 3 Laskey 93Ds, all CNC machined by 1 guy, that are all noticeably different on the face and in how they play. They're also different weights!

[BGuttman]

One problem, even with CNC, is that materials have a preferred machining speed (sometimes referred to as "chip load"). If you try to push the machining process faster than the material wants, you get variability in the output.

Also, the positioning of CNC machines is controlled by a scale that is read by a photo sensor. If the scale or the sensor gets dirty it can miss a "cog" and go to the wrong place.

Even CNC machining can have tolerance problems.

[harrisonreed]

Unless the rim shapes are identical - which from different manufacturers they won't be - then measuring differences in the hundredths of millimeters isn't particularly meaningful; very slight differences in contour will change your perception of size far more significantly. And the high range difficulty may have as much to do with every other design feature as the rim.

Thanks!

to further explain; I think my main thoughts/concerns are that the rim I have that is 25.65, I often notice my lip(s) vibrations sometimes hindered by the not quite large enough rim size. Specifically, I sometimes feel/hear my lips not having that little extra bit of room they need to not get in the way of the sound. Does that make sense? It's a bit difficult to explain. (I have never been picky about my set-up until I won my first full-time job, it just feels like I need to be picky now to get to that next level...)

First, let me say that you're a great player, and this info is only meant to help you out and give you ideas. There are great players who might need to learn more about equipment, and there are equipment nerds who can't play a lick. Here goes:

You're assuming the width of the cup (you call it rim width, but that is the distance between the inside of the rim and the outside and is a different spec) is what affects your register, but that's not quite true or at least not the whole story. I have found that the cup depth/volume is the number one factor that affects endurance and register. Switching to a different mouthpiece with a slightly different cup width feels to you like your lips are vibrating better, but think about this:

1. How do you know the specs you're quoting here are correct? Did you do the measurements yourself, and are the rim contours the same on both? Manufacturers specs are not too useful because they can measure anywhere along the "bite" of the inner rim.

2. How do you know that the angle formed from the inner rim into the cup (some manufacturers call this the "beta angle") isn't allowing your lip to go further into the cup? Changing the beta angle will completely change the way a mouthpiece feels and plays, even if the cup width and rim profile are exactly the same.

3. How do you know the rim contour difference isn't what accounts for this difference? For example, the Doug Elliott 106N rim and the Griego Alessi 1 rim have the same cup diameter, but they play and feel and articulate completely differently because one is a narrow profile, and the other is a very wide rim width between inner rim and outer rim.

4. How do you know that the upper register isn't more difficult on the "larger" piece simply because that one has a deeper cup, or a different throat backbore? Heck, even the inner bite of the rim shape will affect your range.

I believe that the differences between the two mouthpieces you are experiencing have little to do with the miniscule difference in cup width spec. If you want to really get this figured out, here's an experiment you can do as a tenor trombonist.

Try to go large, since you're an orchestra player. It seems unlikely that you'd do better on something smaller than the 5G sizes gear you're currently on:

Get Doug Elliott's standard setup for large bore first trombone. I want to say it's the XT G cup and G8 shank. Get the XT 101 rim, which is very close to what you have now. In addition to that, get the 103 and 106N rims.

You may be very surprised which rim feels the best. You want to pick the rim that allows for the full range, F5 to C1, and allows you to change registers / lip slur without physically moving where the mouthpiece sits on your lips and without very drastic shifts in the angle of the horn in different registers. Shifting the lips up and down on the teeth is necessary, as are slight changes in the horn angle, and the cup width choice and rim contour should be to maximize the efficiency of these movements. Once the mouthpiece is physically sliding to different places on your lips just to play notes, or you're going from downstream to upstream to play pedals, that means the cup width is too small. If you physically cannot play notes because it feels like your face is lost inside the mouthpiece, then it's too big. Like I said, you might be surprised to see which of those three rims feels the most comfortable to play.

Once you've figured out which of those general sizes allows your lips to vibrate freely through the registers, then you might decide that the upper register is more challenging than it used to be. Give it a few weeks or months. You may be surprised! If you find that you haven't quite adapted, and the high Fs in the T-bone concerto are too iffy still, that is when you can go for a shallower cup. Like the XT E cup. Solo literature as plated by our favorite guys on CD is usually not done with their normal symphony mouthpiece.

[Posaunus]

Good and helpful post Harrison! Mouthpiece Cup shape/depth/volume, Throat diameter, and Backbore (and perhaps even Rim width) all have a strong influence on the ease of playing and the sound you produce.

I prefer to use, for clarity, the term "Rim inner diameter" or "Cup inner diameter" or "Cup I.D." rather than "Cup width." No chance of confusion that way – at least in concept.

But there are still the problems, as Doug Elliott and others frequently remind us, that:
.. • It is not clear where to measure the cup diameter on a curved surface such as the inner rim.
..... Some manufacturers measure in one place; some another.
.. • Most manufacturers' mouthpiece machining processes result in inconsistent sizes – especially Cup I.D.
Because of these issues, it's difficult to predict what you can get by looking at catalog specifications.

[BrianJohnston]

Thank you for the above advice, lots of which I haven't thought of!

[Doug Elliott]

Rather than randomly trying mouthpieces in different sizes, I give good advice if I can see and hear you play. I look for lots of details most people wouldn't even be aware of, to recommend the best solution for the individual.

And regarding my snarky comment - I'm well aware of how accurate my mouthpieces are because I am the only one involved from start to finish in design, machining, and buffing. I'm also well aware of the variances in other makes, sometimes unbelievable differences in the range of .020 to .025 inch away from the published specs (yes, that's .5 or .6mm !!! Tenths, not hundredths). And for some unknown reason players aren't even aware of it.

[Geordie]

Rather than randomly trying mouthpieces in different sizes, I give good advice if I can see and hear you play. I look for lots of details most people wouldn't even be aware of, to recommend the best solution for the individual.
Snip ....

This worked for me. I regret not doing it sooner. The ability to try different combinations of rim, cup and shank with his advice via Skype helped isolate issues. Doug has a friendly sale or return policy. Great value mouthpiece and service. My only connection is as a satisfied customer.

[elmsandr]

Rather than randomly trying mouthpieces in different sizes, I give good advice if I can see and hear you play. I look for lots of details most people wouldn't even be aware of, to recommend the best solution for the individual.

And regarding my snarky comment - I'm well aware of how accurate my mouthpieces are because I am the only one involved from start to finish in design, machining, and buffing. I'm also well aware of the variances in other makes, sometimes unbelievable differences in the range of .020 to .025 inch away from the published specs (yes, that's .5 or .6mm !!! Tenths, not hundredths). And for some unknown reason players aren't even aware of it.

To add to this a little from my manufacturing point of view...

The reason we as players aren't aware is because the gage we are using (our face) is so not repeatable most can't discern even some large changes. This reinforces WHY those manufacturers let them vary that much... the true tolerance is what the customer accepts.

Bruce, while noting some of the limitations of CNCs but misses the biggest one: the operator. Even a CNC when you program it to cut to a specific size, you then have a gage somewhere (inline or offline) that the operator uses to adjust the machine. They have all the same problems measuring this contour that we we do at home. Quite frankly, aside from Doug, I've probably got better gaging handy than most the manufacturers. I certainly have a better understanding of gage error than they do. If they don't have a repeatable and reproducable measurement, they won't have a consistent product. You measure a part, make a move, but if you are following what could be a random noise generator, I don't care how repeatable the CNC is, the parts won't be. It is really hard to understand that the part you just measured as bigger in your hand might not actually be bigger than the one you measured an hour ago. Some of the worst CNC operators are the ones who are too attentive and just unskilled with the gaging.

To return to the OP... Seeing that these are two rims from different manufacturers... I wouldn't hazard a guess. In a consistent world, I can tell you that I don't mind a step or two off in Doug's system. I have a 112, 114, and 116 bass rims and don't mind too much grabbing the wrong one. I DO have a preference and feel better on my chosen size, but not extremely so. That said, notice that the difference in these sizes is a scale factor LARGER than what you are noting. I am certain that you are a better player and probably more discerning than I am, but I would look to other factors than just the 0.1mm specified on the listed specs.

Cheers,
Andy

[spencercarran]

And regarding my snarky comment - I'm well aware of how accurate my mouthpieces are because I am the only one involved from start to finish in design, machining, and buffing. I'm also well aware of the variances in other makes, sometimes unbelievable differences in the range of .020 to .025 inch away from the published specs (yes, that's .5 or .6mm !!! Tenths, not hundredths). And for some unknown reason players aren't even aware of it.

Didn't intend to insinuate anything about your QC. (Of course one person doing all the production doesn't necessarily guarantee precision/consistency, but if you're making such claims I assume you also check finished mouthpieces to make sure they match the standard)

I would definitely believe that my Bach 1 1/4 GM was half a millimeter off from published specs, but I'm not sure if listed specs for Bach bass mouthpieces even match what they're attempting to make.

[FOSSIL]

Some really insightful stuff posted here. I would add that in many respects, rim shape is more important than rim size. The rim shape has a huge impact on how the muscles behave when we play. Didn't Bach say that the mouthpiece that was most comfortable might not be best ?

Chris

[Kbiggs]

Some really insightful stuff posted here. I would add that in many respects, rim shape is more important than rim size. The rim shape has a huge impact on how the muscles behave when we play. Didn't Bach say that the mouthpiece that was most comfortable might not be best ?

Chris

Agreed. And Denis Wick said, “Human flesh can adapt to almost anything!”

[Blenky]

"....the high Fs in the T-bone concerto are too iffy still, that is when you can go for a shallower cup."

"Solo literature as plated by our favorite guys on CD is usually not done with their normal symphony mouthpiece."

Hi Harrison, I always enjoy your mouthpiece threads as they always seem to touch on issues that I'm facing myself!

I'm just a reasonable amateur who typically practices 6-7 hours a week and under normal circumstances also plays three times a weeks in Brass and Wind Bands! One of the pieces I love to blow through after a good warm up is the T-Bone concerto as I find its mix of technical passages and beautiful melodies a great challenge and a pleasure to play.

I have noticed that even after a really good week of practice (Conn 88HT + Conn 5G) that I still struggle to get above high E's, and might just squeak a high F occasionally if the wind is blowing the right way! I don't feel like this is a limitation of my chops, more like a feeling of being 'constrained' by the Conn 5G.

I moved onto a Griego/Bousfield 5V at one point and was amazed that my higher register, endurance and attack were much improved (although the high F's were still inconsistent), I felt that my embouchure was a lot less constrained, "more room to move", if that makes sense! I also tried a Bousfield 5O and 4V, but neither matched the 5V. I stuck with this for about 18 months and recently, just for giggles, popped the Conn 5G back in for a practice session and was amazed how much more rich and full bodied my sound was.

So, I sit here today trying to work out what halfway house MP might provide the free feeling and easier range of the 5V, but with the richness of sound of the Conn 5G (which visually, seems to have a bigger throat and a different cup shape/depth to a 'real' 5G. dimensions seem impossible to find online).

I've looked at the tech specs of many of the more common MP's out there, and thought maybe a shallower cup might help with range (as I don't play/practice 6 hours a day!). I then came across your other recent thread (late Jan) which seems to conclude that changing one aspect of the MP always seems to compromise playability in a different area.

I narrowed my search down to a Wick 4 or 5 ABL (which don't seem to be particular favoured here, but most of you are Pros ), or the equivalent Bach 5GS. Is there a DE equivalent mix that might give me better flexibility, buying wise? I've promised myself a DE session a few times, but never got around to actually booking one!

Do you think that for an amateur, a shallower cup might help the upper register? I know my face is different to everyone elses, but happy to try one more thing to get the sound and playability I'm looking for.

Out of interest, do you know what MP Alessi used in his recording of the T-Bone?

Many thanks.

Peter.

[Doubler]

https://www.bachbrass.com/ is worth a look, if you haven't seen it already. It has an interesting video about mouthpiece manufacture and a link to Bach's mouthpiece catalog, which explains the characteristics of the parameters used. I expect that I'm not the only one who has reviewed this information countless times.

The only mouthpiece issue I've had was an inability to get a clean attack. My teacher at the time and I worked on this for maybe a year and a half. I switched from his recommended mouthpiece, one with a relatively sharp inner rim, to one with a slightly more rounded shape with a flatter contour, which instantly and permanently resolved the problem. He was not pleased, and we parted ways. There's no room for ego in a music teacher; good ones are flexible and seek the student's best results, instead of insisting on misdirected dogma.

[harrisonreed]

I don't know what mouthpiece he used for the T-Bone concert. Probably the 1A or his shallower Greg Black model, but I don't know. When we saw him in Colorado, he did a masterclass and performed the Rouse Concerto the next day. He had some mouthpiece I couldn't identify for the class and that's what he probably used the next day. It wasn't his Greg Black or Griego gear. It didn't matter to the audience because he sounded like Joe Alessi!

Here's the deal with shallow mouthpieces -- you can try to force a bigger sound out of them but really they are going to sound like you do, just more compact and favoring the upper register. If you want to be playing high Fs and solo rep all the time they will help you. In a concert band or orchestra, there is no such thing as constant high Fs. You can have a mouthpiece you use for that that helps you blend in and it doesn't matter if high Fs are tough to play on it. You won't play higher than a D 99% of the time and you'll likely never get more than one or two in an entire concert.

Tools are just tools and it's nice to have a set that works, not just one multi-tool. Then you can pick the right tool for the job.

[spencercarran]

I have noticed that even after a really good week of practice (Conn 88HT + Conn 5G) that I still struggle to get above high E's, and might just squeak a high F occasionally if the wind is blowing the right way! I don't feel like this is a limitation of my chops, more like a feeling of being 'constrained' by the Conn 5G.

...

I narrowed my search down to a Wick 4 or 5 ABL (which don't seem to be particular favoured here, but most of you are Pros ), or the equivalent Bach 5GS. Is there a DE equivalent mix that might give me better flexibility, buying wise? I've promised myself a DE session a few times, but never got around to actually booking one!

By high F, do you mean up at F5 (top of treble clef staff) or F4 right above middle C?

I've used a Wick 4A and 4B. They're nice and comfortable, but I don't think they'll be easier in the high register than any 5G. Doug's the expert, of course.

[Doug Elliott]

Shallow cups are going to be brighter and a little easier in the high range because they favor high frequencies. But they won't give you notes you don't have.

The important things are to be playing with correct mechanics for your particular face, and have a rim size and style that works best for you in both high and low range. Both of those are where many players are lacking.

[Blenky]

I don't know what mouthpiece he used for the T-Bone concert. Probably the 1A or his shallower Greg Black model, but I don't know. When we saw him in Colorado, he did a masterclass and performed the Rouse Concerto the next day. He had some mouthpiece I couldn't identify for the class and that's what he probably used the next day. It wasn't his Greg Black or Griego gear. It didn't matter to the audience because he sounded like Joe Alessi!

Here's the deal with shallow mouthpieces -- you can try to force a bigger sound out of them but really they are going to sound like you do, just more compact and favoring the upper register. If you want to be playing high Fs and solo rep all the time they will help you. In a concert band or orchestra, there is no such thing as constant high Fs. You can have a mouthpiece you use for that that helps you blend in and it doesn't matter if high Fs are tough to play on it. You won't play higher than a D 99% of the time and you'll likely never get more than one or two in an entire concert.

Tools are just tools and it's nice to have a set that works, not just one multi-tool. Then you can pick the right tool for the job.

Thanks Harrison, I appreciate that playing up in the clouds is not really important in most band settings, high Bb's and C's are the most likely in my current repertoire. The goal for me is to find a MP which maintains the sound I can make on the Conn 5G but feels less constrained like the Bousfield 5V.

Local music shop is currently offering a 14 day trial/return, so I'll try a couple of the shallower pieces I mentioned and see how things shape up

[Blenky]

Shallow cups are going to be brighter and a little easier in the high range because they favor high frequencies. But they won't give you notes you don't have.

The important things are to be playing with correct mechanics for your particular face, and have a rim size and style that works best for you in both high and low range. Both of those are where many players are lacking.

Thanks Doug, without being able to find the dimensions of the Conn 5G (it is definitely not the same as the Bach equivalent), its difficult to use any of the data out there to know where to go next. Pretty sure the Conn is never going to provide the playability I find with the Bousfield, but the tone it produces is (frustratingly) audibly better.

[Blenky]

Shallow cups are going to be brighter and a little easier in the high range because they favor high frequencies. But they won't give you notes you don't have.

The important things are to be playing with correct mechanics for your particular face, and have a rim size and style that works best for you in both high and low range. Both of those are where many players are lacking.

Hi Doug, I think it’s time to stop wasting time and money on random MP choices and invest in some of your expertise. I’ve PM’d you.

[BrianJohnston]

[Blenky]

I consider myself humbled by the overwhelming science of mouthpiece selection

[BGuttman]

Mouthpiece selection can be similar to shoe selection. Two pairs of shoes at the same nominal size but different styles may differ greatly in comfort. And which shoe is best can be different for different people. Same with mouthpieces. If only one design worked best for all of us, we'd all be playing it.

[Pre59]

There's some old VB literature that makes a connection between a sharper rim leading to a more pronounced attack, but with the caveat that too much pressure leading to pain should be seen as a signal to back off. Also that a sharper rim can be better for players with uneven teeth.
I'd say that he's spot on, because the Artisan 7C that I discounted as unusable because of the relatively sharp rim seems to be the one, well, still after 3 months anyway.

[Blenky]

Shallow cups are going to be brighter and a little easier in the high range because they favor high frequencies. But they won't give you notes you don't have.

The important things are to be playing with correct mechanics for your particular face, and have a rim size and style that works best for you in both high and low range. Both of those are where many players are lacking.

Hi Doug, I think it’s time to stop wasting time and money on random MP choices and invest in some of your expertise. I’ve PM’d you.

Thought I'd round off my contribution to this thread.

I had a session with Doug earlier this week and even after two days of implementing the slight changes to my chops that he recommended, my range is predictably and noticeably better and my chops don't get tired as quickly. It'll take a few weeks for this all to settle, but its looking good right now!

And that's even before I take ownership of the MP combo that Doug recommended.

For any amateurs out there struggling with finding the right MP, wasting money on random MP purchases, I can't recommend a session with Doug enough.

As they say, the right time to contact Doug was 30 years ago, but the second best time to contact him is right now

[Doug Elliott]

I didn't know as much about chops or mouthpieces 30 years ago.

[BGuttman]

I didn't know as much about chops or mouthpieces 30 years ago.

It's OK. Many of your potential students were pre-utero as well.

[harrisonreed]

Hi Doug, I think it’s time to stop wasting time and money on random MP choices and invest in some of your expertise. I’ve PM’d you.

Thought I'd round off my contribution to this thread.

I had a session with Doug earlier this week and even after two days of implementing the slight changes to my chops that he recommended, my range is predictably and noticeably better and my chops don't get tired as quickly. It'll take a few weeks for this all to settle, but its looking good right now!

And that's even before I take ownership of the MP combo that Doug recommended.

For any amateurs out there struggling with finding the right MP, wasting money on random MP purchases, I can't recommend a session with Doug enough.

As they say, the right time to contact Doug was 30 years ago, but the second best time to contact him is right now

What DE setup did you get?

[Doug Elliott]

I'll be sending him an XT 103G8 and EUPH 103J8 to use fake bass with the same 103 size rim.

[Blenky]

I'll be sending him an XT 103G8 and EUPH 103J8 to use fake bass with the same 103 size rim.

What he said