Types of Lead Mouthpieces

[JVL]

The advice of trying a shallower version of the current mpc was a good one and got the consensus of almots everybody.
We gone of from the track when the conversation gone to the Shew mpcs.

To be clear : yes, i agree, as a 1st option, to use a shallower version of the current mpc.
But at the time i was in conservatory, we classical students when going to the jazz dpt there, were not warned in this way not to play "lead" mpcs. The classical teacher, that played pops and jazz in his youth, and of course the jazz teacher, gave us advices to try, then play "lead" mpcs if required.
And all us students then, with good embouchure, have not been messed up with these "lead" mpcs, but have became pro.
When i got my 1st Prix in classical, playing a big deep Courtois mpc, at the same time i was playing lead in the big band and orchestras with a Jet-tone Al Hirt.

The rule must be adapted to people and contexts, and must not be a dogma.

Best and peace

[B. Scriver]

This is from Gary Radtke:

It's not about shallow. It's about a match for you.

The alpha angle is the #1 issue with smaller Volume mouthpieces or any Volume mouthpiece. The alpha angle is simply the reference of the 1st cup radius to the bite radius. Super high 26+ degrees and that is about where the Shew is. High 21 to 26, Med high 16 to 20, Medium 14 to 16, Med low 12 to 14, low 10 to 12, very low below 10.

It's not uncommon to play great upper register on a 15 alpha. Of course the L1 and R1 come into play as well as L2 and the beta angle.

Think Smaller Volume, not shallower, you could have a shallower mouthpiece with a low alpha angle and it would have more volume.

The higher alpha angle can impinge the lip and stop vibration. An alpha angle too low will cause air balls where you can't build compression and the lip never returns to the equilibrium position causing a stop in vibration (you might hear some air or a splatter then air), this condition requires a higher alpha, more resistance, or smaller volume.

Best solution is to do some testing and find out what works. The things listed here are only a suggestion. It might work and it might not. We have way to help determine a process to figure this out.

GR
www.grmouthpieces.com

[Lionel]

[Brad361]

[TKSop]

[JVL]

[Brad361]

[JVL]

Brad, in general, both "ends" of the spectrum statistically concern only few percentage. I think we agree about that.

I just notice that the OP didn't say which mpc he's playing, which was the "lead" mpc he tried, so we all only could suggest him, like i repeated previously, to try a shallower version of his current mpc.
And the OP has disappeared from the thread while we're still debating about it

best

[Brad361]

[JVL]

Yes... when i start a thread asking question or advices from THers, i'm more implicated in the conversation...

to each his own !

Have a good weekend !

[trumpethead]

I genuinely would like your opinions on why a Marc. Shew 1.5 mouthpiece would be considered extreme?

It's not particularly small in diameter nor too shallow IMO.

So what is it then?

[Lawler Bb]

I have a Marcinkiewicz Shew 2. It feels pretty tiny in diameter (much smaller than the specs indicate), but then my regular diameter is in the Bach 3 to 5 range (I play a Marcinkiewicz 3/5C). The Shew 2 diameter feels like the Bach 10.5 range to me.

The depth of the Shew 2 is not shallow at all compared to some. It seems like it’s in the range of my Purviance 4*K4, perhaps a tiny bit deeper.
_________________
Eric Sperry
www.ericsperry.com
www.facebook.com/EricSperryTrumpet/
www.instagram.com/milwaukeetrumpet/

[JVL]

Hello, i'll not answer about small or large, since i think this consideration should be regarded as a relative/individual one.

But yes, indeed, Marcinkiewicz give pretty discordant (conflicting) specs, as they measure the ID differently than almost all the other brands.
My feeling about the Ingram mpc'ID, given at 16.54mm, is that it corresponds to a Bach 10 3/4 given at 15.75mm.

best

[Seymor B Fudd]

[plp]

I'll shamelessly paraphrase Tom Turner here, as he gave very solid advice (in my experience) regarding mouthpieces. It helped me a ton load when I was doing a safari.

Think of them as shoes. Yes, you can get a pair of Italian custom made shoes at Goodwill for 5 bucks, but if they are 3 sizes too small, what have you accomplished? They may look great, but if you can't walk a block in them, are no use whatsoever.

First thing regarding mouthpieces as in shoes, is what size fits? We are talking rim diameter here.

I'll now draw on personal experience, bought a Warburton demo kit and played a 2D, 5D, 8D and 10D each for a month. What I found was, varying only diameter, the 8D was the best overall for me. I have thin lips, an underbite, and at that time, limited time to practice. The 5D got a gorgeous tone, good articulation, but required an hour a day on the horn, to maintain anything in the realm of endurance.

Essentially gave away the demo kit (stinkeye in the direction of someone who if reading this, knows who you are, you still owe me) and bought a 6D.

Nirvana. Perfect balance across the board, and for cornet still play a 6D and 8* backbore today.

So of course, locked in to the 6 diameter, and bought a 6SV and 6M to supplement the 6D. And a 6BC, just to go to the other extreme.

6SV, which is a very shallow cup, was a total waste of money.

6M was better, but was constantly chipping notes and had a problem with intonation, but OMG, could lip up notes an octave above anything I had ever done before!

For 5 minutes. Not worth it.

So here I am, back to the original 6D. So I start messing around with different backbores, from some generic 6 and 8's, and some commercial variables.

Now understand this, every step, I was getting a bit better, because of a LOT of variables, like I was practicing regularly, doing Caruso and the Balanced Embouchure, and performing in two different bands, one pops, one blues and soul.

After all that, discovered the Stork Studio Master line of mouthpieces, and found 3, all the same diameter (remember the shoe reference?, find what fits) that do different things. The shallowest cup and tightest backbore kills endurance, but can accurately hit notes in the upper register, is my 'Polk Salad Annie' and 'Proud Mary' mouthpiece, and gets played for nothing else.

The next one is a deeper cup, and standard 27 backbore, and is my 75% mouthpiece.

The next one is deeper still, and is the ballad piece. I don't solo, don't improvise, so when I have to provide the lower voice, usually playing the tenor sax part an octave down, use this one. On the rare occasion I have to solo, use this one, and write out my solos (slowly, and painfully) to fit a range I can play at the end of a 4 hour gig. At this point my chops are sore and swollen, and just want to sound good, and do something somebody wants to hear.

The point of all this is, if you really want to do a mouthpiece safari, have a few grand available and plan to devote a few years to the process.

If you have good endurance, tone, and flexibility on what you have now, forget range, that will come with practice and experience. Mr. Sandoval plays a 3C, the worst mouthpiece I've ever owned or played, and can kill with it.

I never went on a safari for range, instead did it for endurance and tone.
_________________
Since all other motives—fame, money, power, even honor—are thrown out the window the moment I pick up that instrument..... I play because I love doing it, even when the results are disappointing. In short, I do it to do it.” Wayne Booth

[RussellDDixon]

[theslawdawg]

[Lawler Bb]

[TKSop]

Interesting that there's such huge disagreement on ID...

Firstly yes, marcinkiewicz stated ID figures seem to be different to other makers - not wrong, and consistent throughout the range, but you wouldn't want to assume that a piece will be your size just because stated ID matches what you'd choose from most other brands.

I definitely wouldn't put the marcinkiewicz shews at a Bach 3ish size, but I wouldn't put them near a 10.5c either... Somewhere inbetween, more 7E-ish to me

[chip crotts]

Hi Scott!!

There is a lot of positive to be taken as everyone on here is sincerely giving you their own personal thoughts and even though we can go round and round, we all mean well and want to help! Finding "the right tool" is personal and if the mouthpiece you tried made things a little bit easier for you, keep that in mind as you are looking. However, to go along with the idea of playing your same piece right now for all styles, I'd focus more on your approach to the upper register.

Players have played lead on everything from something like a 1C (Byron Stripling) to the smallest pieces you could find (Cat Anderson). The truth is its much more important that you focus on developing your range correctly than just finding a piece thats easier. The mouthpiece should ENHANCE the practice and work you've put in to build range correctly, not necessarily DO the work for you.

If you are dead set on trying other pieces, staying closer to what you currently play feel wise is always a good place to start. Personally, I play a bigger rim classical piece and a smaller rim commercial piece, but I've also taken years to learn how to do this. If you can stay close to your current rim size and feel, it might make switching easier long term, which is valuable for being a versatile player in today's music scene. Good luck!!