• FAQ • Search • Memberlist • Usergroups • Register • Profile • Log in to check your private messages • Log in

Flip Oakes Extreme Flugelhorn mouthpiece series

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Mouthpieces

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:37 pm Post subject:

GuidoCorona wrote:

Hi Bassguy, Curry FL-M will not make your flugel sound like a trumpet.... It will still sound like an unmistakable flugel with all its conical uniqueness, although Fl-M does sound to me more brilliant -- Note I prefer not to use the term "bright" -- than Curry Fl.... still it does In a darkling flugelsome way, that is *Grins!*

Regards, G.

Clarification. My apprehension is that the FL-M may sound similar to the Conn. On the Bright --Dark spectrum I am looking for something an increment between the Curry7 FL & Conn 7 CFL. (Whose depth might be close to
6" approach thst of the Curry FL-M at .624"). Hopefully the 7 FL-M will be the Mama bear of these mouthpieces.

BTW. Today I tried the Conn & liked it. Nice comfortable rim & less fatiguing. Not really trumpety in sound, but little need for brighter by flugelhorn standards.

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:44 pm Post subject:

bassguy wrote:

delano wrote:

Mr. Bassguy, what do you mean by "troll". People call me blunt or hardheaded but troll?

Please indicate why the words of Flip Oakes are new to you and where his conclusion about large bore flugels differs from mine.

Right there Delano. By challenging me to have to explain how Flip Oakes words were new to me you are either putting my honesty or sincerity in question, or you are telling me that I was being way to naive & have no business making the inquiry in this forum. That's trolling. And I have to point out that prior to elaborating on your objection to .460 bores, you were being rude. Every forum has people such as you. In TMF it's a German guy named Kurnawald. In his case he practically runs the forum single handedly, so there is no one to put a muzzle in him..

To answer your question only this time, my background was such that in the 70s there were no discussions of flugelhorn bores in my limited circle. Generally Clark Terry fans first checked out Martins. Doc Severenson fans first considered Getzen Eternas, Maynard Furgeson fans first considered MF Horns, & others considered Cuesnons because they were dirt cheap. I got a good deal on the Getzen Eterna & bought it. However I NEVER played it because of tbe interminable drudgery of doing etudes on my trumpet. No internet, no way of knowing about bores starting as low as .401" except in catalogues. Of course, no teacher or vendor brought these issues to light, other than telling me that my trumpet should be my priority, NOT a flugelhorn.

After years of not playing I came across YouTube videos of Art Farmer, Steve Swallow & Jim Hall playing for BBC educational shows. (I once asked Swallow for bass lessons, but I wasn't a bass major at Berklee) Inspired by Farmer's economicsl approaache (he doesn't double & triple tongue a zillion notes per second like Clark Terry) those videos inspired me to consider taking up the flugelhorn again. Ironically locally, after first calling Oakes he told me that Farmer's Besson had been willed to him & that it had been a bit of a model for his Wild Thing.

In a more recent phone call conversation I toldd Mr Oakes how I even found the Getzen 3895 stuffy. He acknowledged that I could find a smaller bore Getzen stuffy, but instead of berating me for making thst observation (as you did when I merely raised the question) Flip added that if I combined that Getzen 3895 with one of his mouthpieces, I would have probably perceived the 3895s back pressure as insignificant & would have appreciated if more. Actuslly, something along those lines would have been enlightening in my thread last year--rather being berated for my naivety. But my present .460 bore FH seems to suit me just fine--& at 1/10 the price?

delano
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 3118
Location: The Netherlands

Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 1:26 am Post subject:

bassguy wrote:

delano wrote:

I did read this and don't see even the beginning of an answer so I think this is going too fast. Next year I will try again.

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 3:30 pm Post subject:

Richard III wrote:

bassguy wrote:

Richard III wrote:

Also the good news is that flugelhorn requires much less strength. It is a technique driven instrument.

I can't really discern really how much facial strength is needed to play any brass instrument. Much of it might be making efficient use of one's strength, which is simply skill.

You said you have to tune your Flugelhorn differently for the DW4FL? Because the DW is so short? No intonation issues that require small adjustments of the 1st & 2cnd valve slides? What flugelhorn do you use?

Another observation. I'm now finding that my tone with the Curry mouthpiece is getting a little brighter & beamy as I get back into shape. Now when i use the DW 4FL the inner rim feels less constraining & apparently the wider throat doesn't seem to constrict the air flow as much as the Curry I know you've stated that you find that the feel of the inner rim feels similar for both the Curry 7 & DW 4 (not quite for me) but do you find the Wicks' wider throat makes for less air resistance? I find the DW 4FL slots better in some registers, but not others. I now AM going to have to consider going with the Curry 7 FL & FLM, & the DW4FL & 4BFL. 4 mouthpieces! Obviously while getting my chops back my skill & strength level & perceptions change from day to day. In my case finding an optimal mpc can take longer than any trial period.

I play an Adams F1 flugel and the Wick 4FL makes it flat.

The reason I feel the flugel is easier is that much less air is needed. It feel like just a delicate touch is needed. Less air means less air to resist blowing the chops apart. Hence it feels easier to me.

Larger throats slot better for me and yes, have less resistance.

I just got a Dennis Wicks 4BFL & I think its pretty spectacular. As with your observation regarding the Curry 7FLD (having a resonant peak making it seem brighter than the 7 F) the DW4FL has a resonant peak that imparts a sense of "presence" ( my guitarist observed). The DW4BFL is about .75" deep like the Curry FL, but its throat is 4.6mm like 4FL. If one is looking for a dark, smooth, forgiving sound, like the Curry FL, but fatter, & a with a deeper resonance, the 4BFL is your mouthpiece. I don't understand why it's not more popular among flugelhornists.

I'll still wind up playing a Curry FLM when range extension & a more generic flugelhorn sound is needed. The Curry FL is still useful. Conceivably there will pieces that lend themselves to the spund of the DW 4FL, quite a challenge to play, but at worst a great practice mpc.

Lastly, about your stement about the FH being easy & more technique driven, I find the embouchure requires more if a puckering of the lips, whereas the trumpet requires more of a pursing of the lips. if you play French horn, I think you might have bit of a head start. After 8 1/2 weeks, I'm starting to get used to the deep mouthpiece, & can now play my flugelhorn with more ease than my keyboardist's trumpet--which I borrow sometimes as a reference..

jiarby
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 08 Jul 2011
Posts: 1188

Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 5:19 pm Post subject:

I played this MPC on Brian's beautiful copper WT Flugel.. what a sound!

Richard III
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2654
Location: Anacortes, WA

Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 6:10 am Post subject:

Quote:

Lastly, about your stement about the FH being easy & more technique driven, I find the embouchure requires more if a puckering of the lips, whereas the trumpet requires more of a pursing of the lips. if you play French horn, I think you might have bit of a head start.

There are similarities in embouchure. Also in air support. For horn, much air support is needed but not in blowing through the horn.
_________________
Richard

King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 11:14 pm Post subject:

I went with the Curry 3 FLM because the Curry 3 rim felt the same as the Wicks 4 & I wanted all my mouthpueces to match. Today using my Curry 3FLM, I practiced to the point of fatigue setting in & my range diminishing. Then I tried the deeper Curry 7 FL (that I kept to long to return) & found my range (at that point) comparable to what my range with the 3 FLM was. It dawned in me right there that it I should be playing a 7 or even 8.5 FLM at this point, & it was a mistake to try to stay consistent with the Wicks mouthpieces. As a matter of fact, those Wicks mouthpieces must be taken out of the equation. Wicks flugelhorn mouthpieces sound & feel great as long as I don't have to play above the staff--but I must play above it. Time to get another RTA & return the 3 FL-M while I can. And yes, a Curry 3 does feel comparable to a Wicks 4. I really thought the extra .4mm wouldn't matter, but it does. Any benefits to the 600 series rims by Curry?

delano
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 3118
Location: The Netherlands

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:21 am Post subject:

bassguy wrote:

I really thought the extra .4mm wouldn't matter, but it does.

Are you serious?

0.4 mm is the difference between a Bach 8.5 and a 2.

By Curry almost between a 7 and a 1 (ok that's 0.5)

You can't compare measurements of different companies, they all use a different system of measuring.

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 2:34 am Post subject:

delano wrote:

bassguy wrote:

I really thought the extra .4mm wouldn't matter, but it does.

The 16.9 of the Curry 3 feels like the 16.5 of the Wicks. This is the general consensus & I agree as I have had several Curries 7-3. The 16.9mm obswevaation I made relative to the 16.5mm I made, was a Curry 7 compared to a Curry 3. What I meant was it's a surprise that the extra .4mm of the larger Curry cut down my range & endurance. So this us an apples to apples comparison.

In fact, I am thinking of going with a Curry 8.5. The Curry 40 is the same size but with a different rim. That I might consider if I can get any info on it

delano
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 3118
Location: The Netherlands

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 2:44 am Post subject:

bassguy wrote:

The 16.9 of the Curry 3 feels like the 16.5 of the Wicks. This is the general consensus & I agree as I have had several Curries 7-3.

I don't think it's right to call a consensus between you and you a general consensus.

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:22 am Post subject:

delano wrote:

bassguy wrote:

The 16.9 of the Curry 3 feels like the 16.5 of the Wicks. This is the general consensus & I agree as I have had several Curries 7-3.

I don't think it's right to call a consensus between you and you a general consensus.

In fact the contour of the wicks mouthpiece is different & feels different. The 4FL felt different to me & Perry Sutton & other Dillon emoyees confirmed that the Wicks 4 is in effect larger than the actual 16.5mm measurement. He said that to match the way it feels you must go with something between a 5 & a 3. Richard III gave me the heads up when he told me that most people equate the Curry 3 with the feel of the Wicks 4. (though he didn't feel that way himself) but I agree, they feel on par with one another.

However, I have to point out that the gist of my point was that both the Wicks 4 FL & the Curry 3 FLM are to big for me (at this time).

<Personal attack and bad language deleted by Moderators. Everybody (not just bassguy) needs to take a deep breath and step back. Personal attacks are against the UA and we do not want to have to pull this thread.>

Richard III
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2654
Location: Anacortes, WA

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:40 am Post subject:

Quote:

Having had this conversation before and compared them again and again, I feel that the Wick 4 and Curry 7 are close. I just recently acquired a Curry 5 and perhaps that is a more direct match. I've never had a Curry 5 size before. Yes, many Curry 3 sizes and they were larger feeling than the Wick 4. Such is the issue with trying to compare different manufacturers. And then there is Flip Oakes. My sense is that they are slightly larger than the Curry of the same size. I don't try to make sense out of all of this, I just try the mouthpiece and if it works, I use it.

Lately I use none of them because I'm only playing vintage cornets and I use the original pieces made for them.
_________________
Richard

King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Wed May 10, 2017 8:54 pm Post subject:

Richard III wrote:

Quote:

Of course the Yamaha 11F4 is working very well for me. Because it has such a rounded inner rim it seems smaller than its 16.46 mm spec. The one I got was old & tarnished & the rim differed markedly from the 13F4 I tried out & sent back. The 13F4 has a flat rim like a Bach or Curry. This rim resembles the Holton 7C mpc that came with the trumpet my keyboardist lent me--that was so much easier to play.

Because the old 11F4 felt cramped with its narrow looking inner rim, I looked for a newer model. I found one dealer who claim the moc was pretty new (but he takes no returns) & I got it. Exactly the same mpc rim. I don't get it.

In comeback players forum some guy told me to consider getting a mpc with a rounded inner rim. Of course I already had this one, & now that I'm acclimated to it & don't play any other mouthpieces it feels less cramped. Actually, because I can actually play it, it seems just right.. I must say that this mpc seems to have everything the Curry FLM didn't have. It is a bit darker than th FLM, but not as dark & dull as the FL, & when you accent or crescendo it opens up, without getting edgy. The 11F4 seems to have a certain deep resonance (particularly in the middle register) somewhat like the DW4FL, but of course not as much. This seems like a Hell of a mpc, & its questionable what I'd sound like without it. My playing is far from virtuosic, but I get stronger every day. I basically test myself by doodling around. I should soon start on a Comeback Method book someone sent me to review.

I don't know quite what to do with the extra mpc, sell it the used one for $20 or the new one (still in the plastic wrapper unplayed) for $40. Anyone interested? (its your size Richard). Though small items I frequently misplace, so maybe just keep both.. I am definitely unloading the Wicks 4FL & probably the Curry 7FL.

Richard III
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2654
Location: Anacortes, WA

Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 9:20 am Post subject:

Quote:

I don't know quite what to do with the extra mpc, sell it the used one for $20 or the new one (still in the plastic wrapper unplayed) for $40. Anyone interested? (its your size Richard). Though small items I frequently misplace, so maybe just keep both.. I am definitely unloading the Wicks 4FL & probably the Curry 7FL.

Sorry, no interest here. I'm happy with all my Curry mouthpieces on flugel. Here's an issue for you to think about. If you play something that isn't available anymore, what do you do if it's damaged or lost?

My current favorite cornet mouthpiece hasn't been made since the 1940's. Of course, since I'm a flake and want to play all my horns, my favorite can change every week, but just a thought for you to ponder.
_________________
Richard

King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2017 7:43 pm Post subject:

delano wrote:

bassguy wrote:

delano wrote:

I did read this and don't see even the beginning of an answer so I think this is going too fast. Next year I will try again.

Hi Delano, again thanks for giving me that heads up regarding the rotery valve Jimbao products--though it's an attractive horn.

I will answer you 2 part questions here & be more articulate & less heated.

1) I had no idea that flugelhorn bore sizes range from .401" to .460" plus. The issue never came up in my conversations about flugelhorns back in the 70s. It WAS news to me in my 2016 conversation with Flip Oakes.

2) Essentially Flip's objection to the large bore flugelhorn was precisely yours: that the valve blocks of "doubler's flugelhorns" are made from the trumpet valve blocks, strictly out of expedience. (However, by itself, this reasoning us circular, & doesn't specify the aural effect of the large bore. It's a little like saying "I don't like guy who are 6' 7" because they're tall). Flip attrubted the practice of using trumpet valve blocks to Yamaha. I pointed out that Clark Terry's .460 bore Martin might predate Yamaha, & Flip was very surprised that Clark Terry used a Martin before the Olds & Selmer.

Flip elaborated that Art Farmer had commissioned him to custom make a flugelhorn, & that he had experimented with various bore sizes. With a flugelhorn being a bastard offspring of a French horn & trumpet, the smaller size made it closer to a French horn. The bigger sizes bors never sounded quite right & he concluded that it's not really a flugelhorn if it has a trumpet size bore. I asked flip if he meant that the doubler's flugelhorns aren't warm, or dark sounding enough, & that's what he meant by "not sounding right". He replied, " NO, warmth of darkness is mostly controlled by mouthpiece depth". With no adjective elaborating on "not sounding quite right" I was a bit lost. So that was the content of our conversation back then. I can only surmise by "not sounding right" Flip was saying large bore flugels aren't smooth enough, but now I've personally observed that my smaller bore flugelhorn sounds warmer than my .460 bore fligel. Had Flip said yes when I inquired about the relative darkness of both instruments I'd have immediately developed a bias against .doubler's flugels.

That's where my thread was started, asking the THF community to clarify all this. Frequently users claimed their doubler's flugelhirns sounded "too trumpety" or "too trombony" which translated to nothing in my mind. Again, maybe if they had written, " edgy like a trumpet or trombone" I would've underdtood better. Also uders utged me to go oit & try out various instruments. Good advuse ordinarily, the problem was thst I quit in 1982 & had no chops with which to make any evaluation, & no existing instrument to get my chops back .

I took a chance on the .460" Hawk flugelhirn because of its favorable reviews, but I could never quite get the right sound. Using a shsllow Yamaha 11F4, or a Curry FLM, it was too bright. Using a Curry 7FL gave me a better sound, but not a convincing flugelhorn sound compared to flugelhorn recordings. My new Ebay flugelhorn (.413" bore) is smoother, fluffier & that much warmer sounding than my .460" flugel that I do get my desired sound using my 11F4 mouthpiece, & can probably scrap sny other plans of using anything deeper such as a Curry FL. I really like this new flugelhorn. I haven't acclimated myself long enough to it that I can see obvious intonation problems--were Cuesons even perfect in this realm? (Also some quirks, such as a very tght fitting lead pipe & second valve slide. But this instrument still might be a good fit).

Also, on that old thtead, someone referred me to an internet article that raised even more issues. One concerning "stuffiness" of small bores. I openly mused that stuffiness could be a significant issue given how uncomfortable I had been with my Bach Stradivarius trumpet, compared to a Holton MF Horn--whuch was infinitely easier to play with a huge, open sound. Now I have a .413 flugelhirn, I have to say that it's an apples to oranges comparison: projecting negative impressions of a trumpet onto a different instrument. Now I would say that if you want a trumpet/French horn hybrid to sound right, some back pressure pays off in a better sound, & perhaps greater responsuveness in the long run. It's simply the nature of the beast.

Another issue I raised was concern over my rather inherently small sound. This was a concern of two of my teachers in HS, who urged me to "think big", or think " fat".This led to my having a complex about my sound, & artificially widening my aperture to a point that my flexibility & endurance was severely compromised. I would now say my concerns were wrongheaded-- given my immediate goal of playing with my ensemble as an occasional soloist. With no other brass players present in the ensemble a small sound is irrelevant.

My thread was just an inquiry & I was not trying to promote the use of wide bored flugelhorns. I wanted to make an informed purchase decision--as I'm destitute & at the midpoint of a long 4 year SS Disability process & couldn't afford to waste big bucks on flugelhorns I might not ever get to play in public with, or do justice to.

GuidoCorona
Veteran Member

Joined: 29 May 2014
Posts: 377
Location: Summerville, SC

Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:03 am Post subject:

Thank you Bassguy for your thoughtful and informative post... How about also posting a link to the eBay page featuring the flugel that you purchased... If I remember correctly from the PM you sent me, the seller might have been Joyears Concerning a couple of technical points you raised... Inexpensive flugels are not the only ones suffering from stiff receivers.... My own 1525 also has a mouthpipe that moves with difficulty, even when oiled/greased... And my 2nd slide is not particularly smooth either Rolls eyes! May I suggest some cycles of deep/gentle washing and regreasing/reoiling of the instrument... There is probably residual loose gunk inside the tubing which might account for at least some of the stiffness of mechanical parts, slow valves, and mayhaps undue backpressure. Keep us posted... BTW, your new flugel might deserve its own thread... How about it, Bassguy?! Saluti, G. _________________ Cornet: Carolbrass CCR7772R-GSS Euphoniums: Miraphone M5050. Wessex Festivo

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2017 2:25 pm Post subject:

GuidoCorona wrote:

Thank you Bassguy for your thoughtful and informative post... How about also posting a link to the eBay page featuring the flugel that you purchased... If I remember correctly from the PM you sent me, the seller might have been

Joyears

Concerning a couple of technical points you raised...

Inexpensive flugels are not the only ones suffering from stiff receivers.... My own 1525 also has a mouthpipe that moves with difficulty, even when oiled/greased... And my 2nd slide is not particularly smooth either *Rolls eyes!*

May I suggest some cycles of deep/gentle washing and regreasing/reoiling of the instrument... There is probably residual loose gunk inside the tubing which might account for at least some of the stiffness of mechanical parts, slow valves, and mayhaps undue backpressure.

Keep us posted... BTW, your new flugel might deserve its own thread... How about it, Bassguy?!

Saluti, G.

Guido, I pmed you to let you know how good the new flugelhorn is with a 16F4 mpc. It turns out my range/endurance issues are a result of my lips being cramped inside the mouthpiece, & the aperture closing up. This is consistent with my past trumpet history of requiring large mouthpieces.

I don't think I can post an ebay link to this site using this android. It's a lifeline phone & the only internet access I have. I can post a new thread about the flugelhorn. I can email you a link if you want to pm your email to me.

The flugelhorn might deserve a thread because THF users often bash those unbranded Chinese flugel, but I seriously doubt their ever having tried one. I acclimated myself to thus instrument after 3 days, & I am not plagued by intonation deficiencies, but I'm not a virtuoso either & have no business spending thousands on a flugelhorn (as many in this forum urged me to do).

GuidoCorona
Veteran Member

Joined: 29 May 2014
Posts: 377
Location: Summerville, SC

Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2017 3:10 pm Post subject:

Sure Bassguy, I will send you my email address in my next PM. Once you create a dedicated thread, I'll post a link to it. Saluti, G. _________________ Cornet: Carolbrass CCR7772R-GSS Euphoniums: Miraphone M5050. Wessex Festivo

bassguy
Veteran Member

Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2017 3:48 pm Post subject:

GuidoCorona wrote:

Sure Bassguy, I will send you my email address in my next PM.

Once you create a dedicated thread, I'll post a link to it.

Saluti, G.

Well, the 3rd valve trigger mechanism fell apart. I can't find the tiny not & bolt that holds it together. I guess this is why THF users urge me to spend big bucks. A shame because the instrument blows & sounds adequately, but who knows what to expect. I just contacted the vendor about it.

Few cheap or intermediately priced small bore flugel out there.

Display posts from previous:

	trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Mouthpieces	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Page 8 of 8

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum