| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TKSop
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 23 Feb 2014
Posts: 1735
Location: UK
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:41 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Richard III wrote: | | I don't want to turn this into a Darryl vs. John thing. |
Neither do I... but since the first response to most questions these days is "use google and search these boards, it's all been answered before" it's important not to leave incorrect information unchecked (and I'm pretty sure you're wrong here).
In that spirit, none of what follows is in any way personal... it's purely for posterity.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | the alpha I know is the same on the C and BC and IIRC only a fraction lower on the B |
That's the opposite of true. The B rim has a higher alpha angle. |
No, the B cup model has a lower apha...
The rim is the same (see source #1 - on page 1 Mark confirms that the BC and C share the same rim, on page 2 he confirms that the C and B share the same rim):
"the Curry BC line uses the same C rim contour of the 1.25, 1.5, 2, 3, etc."
"Curry B cup and rim are identical to the Curry C cup and rim. The depth of the Curry B cup is 20-23 thousandths deeper than the C cup (about .5 mm.)"
So... yes, the rim itself is identical up to the transition into the cup (and the alpha is that transition between the two, since we're linking to the GR page) - the difference essentially is in the shape of the cup below the bite radius.
On the Curry 3C. and 3BC. this is exactly the same, up until .125 down (see source #1 again) where the BC changes shape - there's a definite demarcation where the shape changes. You see this often when you have one rim cut to fit a different cup and they're shaped differently (even if the ID at the rim-underpart interface is identical)... which is because that's exactly what the BC model is - it's a 1B cup mated up to C-cup rims as if it were a 2-piece, just cut as a solid one-piece instead of as 2 pieces (source #1 again).
The B is definitely the deeper cup compared to the BC (source #2 again, Mark explicitly says so), and since we know that the alpha is shared between the C and BC cups, the question now becomes whether the B or C cup has the lower alpha...
Mark Curry himself says that the B cup has "extra room in the cup helps those players that have more than moderate lip intrusion who tend to bottom out on the C cup" (quote from source #2 again), it's pretty likely that the B cup would have a lower (possibly the same, definitely not higher) alpha, given that we already know they share the exact same rim... oh and let's link back to GR: "The lower the Alpha Angle, the greater the lip room will be in the first cup"
Unless you're disagreeing with Mark that the B cup has more chop room in the cup (a hallmark of lower alpha's), but it seems that everyone that's played both (myself included) disagrees with you if that's the case, along with the man that designed and produces them...
(Source #1 - the horses mouth this thread.
(Source #2 - the horses mouth again: this thread)
| Quote: | From GR's site and the reason I like lower alpha angles:
| Quote: | | The lower the Alpha Angle, the greater the lip room will be in the first cup. |
From GR's site and the reason I don't like higher alpha angles:
| Quote: | | If two mouthpieces are the exact same diameter, the one with the higher alpha angle may feel smaller. |
| Quote: | | if the alpha angle is just too high for you, you could experience lack of control, high blow resistance because the chops are being held too closed, poor articulations, intonation may suffer, thin sound, your chops could feel like they are "thinning out", and you could actually "bottom out" stopping vibrations completely. |
|
All those quotes are true (of course they are, they come from the people who invented the term in the first place)...
| Quote: | | I have found all of this to be true. The beauty of the BC is that I get the deeper and more sonorous sound of the B cup and open bore with the room and feel of the C rim. |
And then somehow we're getting things backwards now...
The B-cup is a deeper version of the C-cup, with the same rim - the B has more chop space at the top (according to it's maker), so it makes zero sense for you to then say that the C cup has a lower alpha... a deeper version of the same cup (on the same rim) with more chop space might have the same alpha or it might have lower, but it's not going to have a higher one.
Either way, you've clearly got strong preferences for the BC and C cups over the B cup - that's great, it's much more important to know what works for you than to necessarily get why.
To continued success, my friend...
Last edited by TKSop on Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:52 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TKSop
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 23 Feb 2014
Posts: 1735
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Kitchen_Sink wrote: | | I was going to call to ask for some clarification directly from Mr. Curry, but his website says that isn't possible. Oh well.
|
If you don't mind comparing bits and pieces back and forth, you'll find some of his old posts pertaining to the BC model relative to the C and B cup models here and here.
(Same links as I put in previous post, but I realise there's a lot of text there). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaysonr
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 19 Mar 2015
Posts: 797
Location: Conway, NC
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's a shame the 3B/3BC overlay isn't working on the 3B. thread too.
Apparently Mark's used up too much of his free bandwidth 
_________________
Isaiah 40:8
3 John 2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TKSop
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 23 Feb 2014
Posts: 1735
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jaysonr wrote: | It's a shame the 3B/3BC overlay isn't working on the 3B. thread too.
Apparently Mark's used up too much of his free bandwidth |
It is indeed.
I have it on my computer, though (can't remember why I saved it, but I stumbled across it the other day).... seems to suggest they're actually identical alpha...
(Remember, as Mark Curry said - the B cup is the deeper of the two).
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Kitchen_Sink
Regular Member
Joined: 31 May 2016
Posts: 55
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just thinking...
I like my 1c, but it is too big for me at this time. I absolutely need a smaller mouthpiece.
On my C trumpet, I like and do well my Yamaha Hagstrom, which is basically a Bach 5c rim on a Bach 1B cup.
I also quite like my Bach 5c, but I play my Olds too much (because I leave it at work) and am pretty dang bright on it with a C cup. (I'm even a bit too bright on that horn with the 1c when playing higher and with a full tone.)
Might a Curry 5B be a better idea for me instead of trying an entirely new rim since I know I like the Bach 5c rim and its Yamaha equivalent with the Hagstrom? The 5b could work on both the Olds and my Bach 37.
I know I started the thread about how a Hagstrom compares to a Curry 3b or 3bc, but maybe I should be looking at a Curry 5b.
Hmmmmmmmm.
_________________
1971-72 Bach Strad 37 ML Bb
1960 Olds Studio Bb
1972-73 Getzen Eterna ML C
1982-83 Selmer C700 ML C
1985-86 Getzen Eterna Picc
1947-ish Reynolds "Professional" Cornet
1975-ish Yamaha 631 Flugelhorn
Mark Curry 5 Rims |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Kitchen_Sink
Regular Member
Joined: 31 May 2016
Posts: 55
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
(...and thank you for linking the posts with Mark talking about his mouthpieces.)
_________________
1971-72 Bach Strad 37 ML Bb
1960 Olds Studio Bb
1972-73 Getzen Eterna ML C
1982-83 Selmer C700 ML C
1985-86 Getzen Eterna Picc
1947-ish Reynolds "Professional" Cornet
1975-ish Yamaha 631 Flugelhorn
Mark Curry 5 Rims |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TKSop
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 23 Feb 2014
Posts: 1735
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Personally I'd start with the 3. (dot) versions...
The Bach 5C has varied quite a bit over time (so has the Bach 3C, in fairness) so you'd need someone who'd played both the Hagstrom and the Curry rims to tell you which *they* find closer to a match.
However, it's the 3. rim that Curry is most famous for around here - partly because lots of people used Bach 3C's anyway and partly because Curry's 3. rim is incredibly comfortable and effective, it works really well for lots of people where the 5 rim seems to be marmite (love/hate, little in between) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard III
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2654
Location: Anacortes, WA
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Unless you're disagreeing with Mark that the B cup has more chop room in the cup (a hallmark of lower alpha's), but it seems that everyone that's played both (myself included) disagrees with you if that's the case, along with the man that designed and produces them...
|
TK, I am not disagreeing with Mark. The B cup is deeper. That's why I like it. The angle from the inner rim dropping into the cup on the B is shallower and points more towards the hole at the bottom. The rim on the C is steeper and drops a little before curving to point towards the hole at the bottom. This is from all of my examples in different diameters.
No use of proprietary descriptors here or other quotes. The inner rim feels softer on the B and sharper on the C or BC. Does that work for you?
_________________
Richard
King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TKSop
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 23 Feb 2014
Posts: 1735
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | | Quote: | | Unless you're disagreeing with Mark that the B cup has more chop room in the cup (a hallmark of lower alpha's), but it seems that everyone that's played both (myself included) disagrees with you if that's the case, along with the man that designed and produces them...
|
TK, I am not disagreeing with Mark. The B cup is deeper. That's why I like it. The angle from the inner rim dropping into the cup on the B is shallower and points more towards the hole at the bottom. The rim on the C is steeper and drops a little before curving to point towards the hole at the bottom. This is from all of my examples in different diameters.
No use of proprietary descriptors here or other quotes. The inner rim feels softer on the B and sharper on the C or BC. Does that work for you? |
Richard, do you have these in front of you right now?
Because what you're describing as the B sounds for all the world like the BC...
I used a 3B and 3C as sop mouthpieces for quite a while and found exactly as Mark says, the B is a deeper version of the C - the BC definitely vee-ing in more (but still technically the same alpha as you can see above).
The B and C were definitely the pair as far as shape goes, the BC being the odd one out.
Wity respect - are you 100% sure you haven't mixed up the B and BC?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | | John Mohan wrote: | | Richard III wrote: | | Here's another vote against a Curry B cup. The rim is too rounded and everything suffers. The BC however, works great on everything. I don't like C cups. Too shallow and bright sounding and the flat bottom just makes the response off. |
The rims of the B and BC cups are identical within any number size range. Example: a Curry 3B. and a Curry 3BC. have the same rim shape, diameter, and thickness. From Mark's website:
| Quote: | | Engineered like no other mouthpiece, the Curry Standard Line incorporates the same rim and bitepoint on the shallowest to the deepest cup within each diameter. This feature gives you the freedom to select the right cup for the job without having to get used to a different rim. |
|
The B has a B cup rim and the BC has a C cup rim with a B cup under. |
Hi Richard,
I think you are misunderstanding his description. And your last sentence you wrote above is not a quote from Mark's website - it is a misinterpretation of what Mark wrote (I'll quote Mark's words down below).
All rims within any number size on Marks Standard line are identical. It not only says this on his website (which I quoted previously) but Mark himself has told me this.
I think it is this you are misunderstanding from Mark's site:
| Quote: | BC Cup: The BC, or "Chicago" cup is actually a 1-piece version of the C rim combined with the Bach-style B cup. Excellent for orchestral work.
B Cup: The Curry B cup is more like a deeper C cup (The Bach B cup is more funnel shaped, and has a different rim). Good when a deep rich tone is required. |
He is not saying his B and BC cups have different rims. All the rims in any Curry number size are based off the Bach C cup rim of that number size (usually a Mt Vernon Bach C cup rim). The Curry BC cup and the Curry B cup both have the Bach C cup style rim. It is the cups that are different. The BC has a C-cup style rim mated with the (fairly shallow for a B cup) Bach 1B cup (note that ALL the Curry number sizes in the BC line have a cup shaped based on the 1B, whether you buy a 1BC, a 3BC or whichever number size). The difference is that the Curry B cup is a deeper bowl shape cup, more like a deep C cup whereas the Curry BC cup has the shape of a Bach 1B cup (more V or funnel shaped).
Where Mark wrote, "The Bach B cup is more funnel shaped, and has a different rim" note that he was writing that the Bach B cup has a different rim then the corresponding number size Bach C cup, not the Curry B cup.
What I write here is based not only on what I read on Mark's site, but on what Mark told me.
I hope this clears everything up.
Best wishes,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard III
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2654
Location: Anacortes, WA
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here is the BC and B side by side. The B is on the right. There is a straight drop from the edge of the rim before the cup starts on the BC. On the B the cup starts right at the edge of the rim. The effect of that to my lips is that the rim is sharper on the BC. That additional space is one of the things I like about this mouthpiece. This was the best of the photos I could take with my phone. Looking through my collection I also found a DE. Cool mouthpiece is if anyone wants a really zippy and easy upper range. But I'm getting off track. Here's the photo.
[img] IMG_0975 by genevie7, on Flickr[/img]
_________________
Richard
King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | Here is the BC and B side by side. The B is on the right. There is a straight drop from the edge of the rim before the cup starts on the BC. On the B the cup starts right at the edge of the rim. The effect of that to my lips is that the rim is sharper on the BC. That additional space is one of the things I like about this mouthpiece. This was the best of the photos I could take with my phone. Looking through my collection I also found a DE. Cool mouthpiece is if anyone wants a really zippy and easy upper range. But I'm getting off track. Here's the photo.
[img]IMG_0975 by genevie7, on Flickr[/img] |
Hi Richard,
I know exactly what you mean. Because the 3BC is blending a Mt Vernon 3C rim with a (larger diameter) 1B cup, there is a definite point where the two different number sized parts meet and one can see it (I can too, as I have a 3BC that Mark sent me several years ago). That blend spot exists because at the point they are blended, the 1B cup is still getting bigger as it heads toward the rim area. And on the Curry 3B there is no such spot visible because the 3B is simply a Mt Vernon 3C rim with Mark's 3B cup (both are 3 sized diameters so there's no visible merger point).
But you are misinterpreting what you see. Both mouthpieces have the same rim and the same rim alpha angle. It is due to your 3BC having the cup of a larger mouthpiece (Bach 1B) blended to the rim of a smaller mouthpiece (Bach Mt Vernon 3C) that you can see the merger point.
As to how they feel to you, that is entirely subjective and I would never argue with that.
Best wishes,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard III
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2654
Location: Anacortes, WA
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Huh? I have a 8.5BC and a 8.5B. Not a custom made anything. I must be getting old because I don't get the confusion. Mark makes a mouthpiece with a C rim on a B mouthpiece. They feel totally different. That's sort of the point to the mouthpiece. There is no difference in diameters.
_________________
Richard
King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loweredsixth
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Posts: 1844
Location: Fresno, California, USA, North America, Earth, Solar System, Orion Arm, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | | Huh? I have a 8.5BC and a 8.5B. Not a custom made anything. I must be getting old because I don't get the confusion. Mark makes a mouthpiece with a C rim on a B mouthpiece. They feel totally different. That's sort of the point to the mouthpiece. There is no difference in diameters. |
ALL of Curry's mouthpieces have a Bach-style "C" rim.
The 8.5B has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
The 8.5BC has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
The 8.5C has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
The 8.5DE has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
The 8.5ZM has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
The 8.5* has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
The 8.5Z has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
The 8.5XS has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
The 8.5TC has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
The 8.5TF has a Bach-style 8.5 C rim.
_________________
The name I go by in the real world is Joe Lewis |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tpt_Guy
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 1102
Location: Sacramento, Ca
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is it possible there could be a confusion between the bite and the alpha angle in all this?
I have a 1BC and a 1* (1-star). Despite their rims being said to be identical, there is a slight difference in the bite, with the 1* being just a bit softer - rounder, meaning a slightly larger arc. (This is empirical. I have both of these mpcs to look at.)
The bite is the arc that shapes the inner edge of the rim. The alpha angle is below the bite arc, the first slope into the cup. The 1BC has a very small bite which makes it feel sharp. The practically straight drop is the alpha angle for that cup.
A mouthpiece design is a combination of arcs and tapers, really, so it seems possible to design two mouthpieces with the same rim, but use a wider arc on the bite on one making it a bit softer.
_________________
-Tom Hall-
"A good teacher protects his pupils from his own influence."
-Bruce Lee |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | | Huh? I have a 8.5BC and a 8.5B. Not a custom made anything. I must be getting old because I don't get the confusion. Mark makes a mouthpiece with a C rim on a B mouthpiece. They feel totally different. That's sort of the point to the mouthpiece. There is no difference in diameters. |
Sorry, for some reason I thought you were referring to the 3B vs the 3BC. But it's the same situation, in fact, with the even smaller diameter 8.5C rim being mated to the 1B cup shape (which is what your 8.5BC is composed of), the junction between where the 8.5C rim and the 1B cup meet will be even more pronounced. While it might look like the 8.5BC's rim has a more pronounced drop (alpha angle), it really is the same as the 8.5B's drop (angle). It just looks steeper because of the 1B cup shape meeting it.
If I didn't make it clear before, as Mark told me all of Mark's BC mouthpiece use the specific shape and depth of the Bach 1B cup. Maybe a picture will help. The following is a Bach 1B (green) compared to a Bach 8.5C (red):
https://s1.postimg.org/11vg0b5vfj/Bach_1_B_green_vs_Bach_8.5_C_red.jpg
The Curry 8.5BC is basically consists of the red rim area blended into the green cup area from the above picture. The Curry 8.5B is going to have a rim and cup shape that is nearly identical to the (red) Bach 8.5C mouthpiece in the scan (but a little deeper). While it may look like the 8.5BC has a steeper drop, that is really just due to the shallower angle of the 1B cup where it meets the 8.5C rim. Both mouthpieces have the 8.5C rim.
As an aside, it is interesting that due to the unusually deep cup of the Bach 8.5C (compared to the other Bach C cup mouthpieces), and the unusually shallow cup of the Bach 1B (compared to the other Bach B cup mouthpieces), when the 8.5C rim is combined with the 1B cup, you end up with a mouthpiece that has less cup volume than the 8.5C has.
Best wishes,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ed Kennedy
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Posts: 3187
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tpt_Guy wrote: | | TKSop wrote: | | Richard III wrote: | | The BC was a C rim on a B cup with a 24 bore. |
Correct... Because all Curry models have a C-cup rim and alpha.
|
Where does it say on his website that all models have a C-cup rim and alpha?
The only model I find on his website that he describes as having a C rim is the BC line.
Otherwise, he simply states that "the Curry Standard Line incorporates the same rim and bitepoint on the shallowest to the deepest cup within each diameter." |
Mark is differentiating between Bach, which has different rims with each cup and his own line which uses the same rim for every piece of a given diameter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ed Kennedy wrote: | | Tpt_Guy wrote: | | TKSop wrote: | | Richard III wrote: | | The BC was a C rim on a B cup with a 24 bore. |
Correct... Because all Curry models have a C-cup rim and alpha.
|
Where does it say on his website that all models have a C-cup rim and alpha?
The only model I find on his website that he describes as having a C rim is the BC line.
Otherwise, he simply states that "the Curry Standard Line incorporates the same rim and bitepoint on the shallowest to the deepest cup within each diameter." |
Mark is differentiating between Bach, which has different rims with each cup and his own line which uses the same rim for every piece of a given diameter. |
You definitely are more efficient with your use of words than I am!!!
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And just in case things aren't confusing enough:
In reference to TKSop claiming that the Curry B cup has a lower alpha angle than the BC cup, I don’t think that is actually true. I think they both have the same alpha angle. Please read on:
It is my understanding the per GR, the “alpha angle” is the angle that occurs at the point in the mouthpiece just below the inner edge (bite) where the cup starts dropping down, before it starts turning inward. This could also be considered to be where the rim ends and the cup begins.
BUT: When a rim from one size mouthpiece is blended with the cup (aka underpart) of another mouthpiece, whether in a screw rim set up, or a one piece set up, where the “rim” ends and where the “cup” begins is much more ambiguous. For instance, a Bach screw-rim setup retains less of the rim and more of the cup in comparison with a Bob Reeves screw-rim set up which has its juncture between the Rim and the Underpart down a bit lower than that of the Bach. When looking at a Curry BC mouthpiece, especially the ones with higher number (smaller diameter) sizes (where the rim is smaller in diameter but the cup section is still based on the larger diameter 1B cup), one can easily see where Mark choose to make the blending point between the two – and it is clearly well below where the inner rim edge (bite) is. In other words, the initial alpha angle of the number size rim is retained on the Curry BC mouthpieces. That alpha angle will be the same as the alpha angle on the corresponding Bach C cup mouthpiece of that particular number size.
Make sense?
Hope so!
Cheers,
John Mohan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JVL
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 07 Feb 2016
Posts: 894
Location: Nissa, France
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 11:52 pm Post subject: Re: Yamaha Hagstrom and Curry 3BC and 3B mouthieces--and Bac |
|
|
| The_Kitchen_Sink wrote: | Has anyone compared the Yamaha Hagstrom to a Curry BC cup? I do like how my Hagstrom plays in my C and Bach Bb, but I hate it in my Olds Studio Bb (which is actually a really fun horn).
After intense playing with my Bach 1c (which is probably too big but yields the best sound coupled with wretched endurance), the Hagstrom becomes more difficult to play. It isn't as extreme as not being able to buzz with a Bach 7 after playing the 1c too long, but things get more difficult and begin to sound worse.
I'm wondering if a Curry 3BC delivers some of the strengths found in the Hagstrom, especially a similar orchestral sound while using a piece with a smaller rim. I'm also curious if switching to a Curry 3B on my Bbs might help me keep the sound I need while reducing lip swelling and fatigue. Staying on the same size rim for everything seems like a good thing for me. If a Curry 3BC is anything like my Hagstrom (and a Curry 3b can deliver something similar to or better than the sound of a Bach 1c), then dropping $120 for a Curry 3b and Curry 3bc will probably be worth it.
I play mostly at work with my band and orchestra kids, at church, with wind bands, and at church gigs. I just feel like I'm working too hard and falling short too much for the benefits of the 1c. (I cut glass with a Bach 3c, so it's out.)
Thanks for any thoughts, comments, or comparison knowledge of those pieces. |
hello
i'll try to answer, even if i never played those mpcs, giving some principles i retained from my experience.
I play what most would consider a smaaall ID : a Marcinkiewicz custom serie given at 16.59mm, that in Bach would be given at 15.80mm (so let's say between a Bach 10 3/4 & a 10 1/2).
When i asked the first time for custom work for mpcs that i'd use for classical, ballads etc., i asked for a 12.42mm cup depth (approx. a Bach A cup depth), with a #27 throat and symphonic backbore.
If the sound was pretty ok to me, i felt a little tight, compared to mpcs with the same specs but larger ID.
So, i asked for a #26 throat and it was really better in term of sound and blow (less resistance).
So, my conclusion is that if you want to sound identically playing two mpcs that differ with their ID, you have to modify throat and/or bb; if throats and bb are ok for you, then you should modify the cup depth.
For instance, playing my "classical" mpc with an approximative Bach 10 1/2 ID, i sound the same than somebody playing a Bach 1C.
Why ? because principally of the A cup depth, throat and bb being important but a little less.
I mean that a smaller ID would need a deeper cup (A for instance) to get the sound and maybe the feeling that a larger ID mpc with a C cup delivers.
So, my answer is YES, you can find a smaller ID mpc getting close to the benefits you get from a larger ID mpc, if you choose the right modifications.
You should look at Dario Frate's mpcs, he offers different rim shapes and a lot of combinations in the same size mpcs. It's a great advantage
For other purposes, i remember Jet-tone having the same mpc with flat A, semi-round B, and round C rims. It was very interesting.
best |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
