CKB 3C Honeymoon

[Tom LeCompte]

Well, it finally came in - my CKB 3C trumpet mouthpiece.

I have grown to like the CKB 3C flugelhorn mouthpiece that came with my Vintage One, and have been scouting around for the equivalent trumpet mouthpiece. I was a little apprehensive, because even if the rim was okay, maybe there would be problems with the cup or backbore, but closed my eyes and leapt in and bought one anyway.

Initial comments:

1. Nice box. I might actually keep it. It is covered with marketing hooey, but what did you expect? It's clearly designed to sit on a retail shelf, which is kind of odd since so few retailers have them.

2. It's heavy. Not quite as heavy as a megatone, but there's still an awful lot of brass on the mouthpiece. It's substantially heavier than the typical Bach blank. It's also longer than average. The flugelhorn version is neither terribly heavy nor terribly long, so this was a bit of a surprise.

3. The cup is shaped more like a ~20 year old Bach 3C that I have than a modern one. The cup feels wider, and there's definitely more volume there. The inner edge is a little sharper - not as sharp as a Bach 7C, but sharper than any of my three 3C's.

After playing it for a while, I certainly like it better than what I was playing, although I freely admit it's the honeymoon period. Articulation was much cleaner. The G under the staff, a note I often struggle with, sounded as clear as the C above it. The tone was good. "Brighter" and "darker" mean different things to different people, so it's difficult to describe things on that axis and be sure I am communicating. I would describe the sound as full and rich, with a little less edge above the staff (compared to the Bach 3C). Lip slurs were maybe a little easier up to the G above the staff.

I would have said the upper register support was not as good as with the Bach 3C, except that I took it up to the best DHC of my life. I swear, I sounded like Wayne Bergeron. (It's not every day I can even make the DHC, so this is something) So the jury is still out here. Even if it ends up that the upper register support is a little worse, I think it's still a good compromise considering the other features of the mouthpiece.

The resistance is noticably less than the Bach 3C.

I can't speak to endurance. I played a lot of hard stuff today, and I'm tired. But had I played the same music on my Bach 3C, I'd stll be tired. In general, less comfortable rims seem to improve my endurance (as counter-intuitive as that sounds), so there is reason to hope.

I'll post another report in a couple of weeks after the honeymoon is over. My initial impression is favorable, though. If one is looking for a Bach mouthpiece, I'd certainly recommend trying a CKB of a similar size.

If you can find one.

[vlstpt]

Thanks for the info. If you would get the chance, (I know everyone is very busy) put a review on Mouthpieceexpress.com. I always look to see if there are reviews on different pieces. Thanks!
_________________
VLS
John 3:16
Psalm 150:3
Church Musician
Port Jeff. Station, NY , USA
Bach Strad 180/72 GP ML Tpt
Bach Strad 180/37 SP ML Tpt
Bach Strad 181 SP ML Crnt
Yamaha, Flugel SP 63110Z
Bach 3, 3C, 3D, 5A,5V
Curry Mpcs
Ultra Pure products

[rwbanks1962]

Tom,

Please keep us in the loop on how the "after the honeymoon" evaulation works out. I've been interested in picking up either a 1 1/2 C or 3C since they came out, but none of the dealers around here stock them either.

Thanks,
_________________
Ron Banks
Fort Worth, TX

Kanstul ZKT1600 WB
75 LA Benge 3X

[DaveH]

Yes, keep posting please.

I have a CKB 1 1/2C that I have experimented with, and in all fairness, I haven't really given it that much time. I have played Bach nearly all my life.

So, if you have good experience with it, I just might get it back out and work on it awhile, because it was, in fact, very comfortable...

I'm especially interested in your further reactions to the overall Bach comparison and the further experience you have with the extra mass if the mouthpiece...

Dick Akright? Maybe look there....I seem to think I have seen a website and it mentioned being a dealer for CKB?

[Tom LeCompte]

I'll be sure to let you know. I'm now in the immediate post-honeymoon period - where none of the notes are where they should be and I am asking myself "what was I ever thinking?" Of course, I've been around the block enough to know that making a long-term decision in this phase is just as foolish as making a long-term decision on the honeymoon phase.

Dave, I can tell you my overall conclusions, but I can't tell you whether anything is due to the extra mass or some other feature.

[Tom LeCompte]

Dave, I did a few comparisons with my orginal 3C today. (I haven't touched it in a week) There are two effects which I think may be due to the higher mass. One is that using by copper Jo-Ral bubble mute works much, much better than with any other mouthpiece I own. I think that's just the physical balance of the horn and the weight of that mute.

The other is that I have a little more trouble (just a pinch) hearing myself with this mouthpiece. It sounds almost like the sound is produced a few inches farther forward. The only reason that I ascribe this to the mass is that this is the only mouthpiece where I get that feeling.

I tried recording myself on both mouthpieces and failed - I can't tell the difference from the recording. Whether this is due to a cheap mic and sound card, or to the effect on the sound at the other end being too small to pick up, I can't say.

[Tom LeCompte]

Gee, I should have titled this thread something else. (Moderators? Can you remove the "honeymoon"?) I'm past the honeymoon period now, and have a little different perspective.

Endurance is substantially better with this mouthpiece than the Bach 3C. I attribute this to the sharper rim shape. If you try using pressure, the mouthpiece lets you know it in a hurry, so you can't go into what I call the pressure downward spiral: you get a little tired, so you use a little pressure, which wears you down faster, so you use more pressure and pretty soon you are in big big trouble.

I would describe the upper register as "expanded". The notes seem farther apart, which is good and bad. It means that the highest notes are further away and more difficult to sound. But it does mean that the higher notes are more secure and it's harder to overshoot. (Relative to the Bach)

The sound seems somewhat fuller and with a tiny bit less edge. Some would ascribe this to more mass, but I would think that the visibly deeper cup and larger backbore (as measured by the totally unscientific "mouthpiece brush" test) would also be likely to do this. In fact, it's not clear to me that the added mass is doing much. Yes, it makes using heavy mutes feel less likely that they are going to pop out of the horn, but other than that, if it's doing anything it's very subtle. Sorry, DaveH, but I can't say anything more about the mass and what it's doing. If anything. I would describe the sound as very middle-of-the-road: works fine for legit playing, fine for section work, and is okay for lead playing. (I should warn everyone that my sound concept when playing lead is not "make it sound just like the Tastee Brothers".

The rim matches the flugelhorn piece rim very closely. For years I played radically different trumpet a flugelhorn pieces, with success. Then I went to similar but not identical pieces, and struggled. Now that I have identical rims, it's working again.

Overall, it's a keeper. Flexibility is better, articulation is better, low range is better, high range has improved in places and taken a step backwards in places, tone is a notch better for legit work than the Bach 3C, but with a little less zing above the staff. If I thought the mass was a problem (and so far, the only downside seems to be related to size, not mass), I would keep the mouthpiece, but have it cut into a Schilke blank.

[DaveH]

Thank you very much...very interesting.

I note a comment above in which you say flexibility and articulation are better. I seem to have the opposite result with the limited playing I have done on the CKB which I have. I feel as though the extra mass mouthpiece may be making the articulation more sluggish and thicker, and the flexibility more difficult.

It seems to me like the CKB takes more effort to play than a standard Bach.

I spend most of my time on a standard Bach 3C. I like that sound and overall playability. I'd like to play the CKB also, but after a little while, I'm back on the 3C. It just seems to be easier and more responsive for me. And, I like the tone quality of a Bach 3C - I like the "zing."

Thank you for the further report.

[Tom LeCompte]

Dave, my guess is that the rounder rim is what's helping me out with articulation and flexibility. If so, that's certainly something one would expect to have a lot of variation between players.

I think this does take more, if not effort, air. The resistance is quite a bit less than the Bach 3C. In my horn with most resistance, a Bach 37, this is a plus. On my very open horns, like my B1, this is less positive. I wouldn't want to go farther down the path of a more open horn.

I'm pretty sure I would find a CKB 1-1/2C bigger (on the inside) than I would like.

[MFMeow]

Well... I'm on my own CKB 3C honeymoon at the moment. It arrived yesterday.

I'm not a big fan of what UMI did to Conn... or King... or Benge... but I have to hand it to them, I'm loving this mouthpiece. (My prior "weapon of choice" was a Schilke 13C4.)

Just out of curiosity - anyone out there know the throat size on these CKB trumpet pieces? Feels more open than my Schilkes...

Kirsten
_________________
Adopt a homeless pet...

[Tom LeCompte]

The throat size is pretty big. I know this by the entirely unscientific test of using a mouthpiece brush.