Schilke Mpcs. Who does'nt + does.

Emb_Enh · Veteran Member Joined: 29 Oct 2002 Posts: 455

.....from a VERY well respected player the other day came a surprise to me...would the forum please discuss....

The player asked me to NOT to name them personally....

They said that in amongst good company it was realised that...

''Schilke mpc's are quite a lot harder to get a seal on lip wise and that they generally (in this players opinion) caused alot of excess pressure playing''

....Now I don't use them ...but this came as a surprise to me..I thought they were good..any thoughts....

(just one thing this player is ''almost certainly'' more famous and well respected than anyone else I'm aware of on this forum)

_________________
Roddy o-iii<O website
http://www.members.aol.com/RoddyTpt/

[ This Message was edited by: Roddyo-iii<O on 2002-01-17 04:34 ]

[ This Message was edited by: Roddyo-iii<O on 2002-01-17 04:35 ]

[ This Message was edited by: Roddyo-iii<O on 2002-01-17 04:37 ]

[ This Message was edited by: Roddyo-iii

Martin · Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2002 8:39 am Post subject:

Hey, this is going to be interesting!

My Schilke mpc experience is limited to a 14A4 which I didn´t care for sound-wise - besides, it wouldn´t fit properly into any of my trumpets´receivers because of the longer shank.
Just this week, I tried a # 11 - and I indeed had a hard time getting a sound out because I couldn´t make a proper seal with my lips(something that I haven´t experienced so far, no matter what size or brand mpc I tried). I guess this was just that particular model, but it was surprising anyway.
I know many players swear by Schilke mpcs, but they are decidedly not for me. Maybe the player you mentioned has had a similar experience.
_________________
All the best

Martin
_____________________________________________________________________
"I have found that it is enough when a single note is beautifully played." - Arvo Pärt

_Don Herman · Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2002 10:34 am Post subject:

Schilke uses a more rounded rim than Bach on most of their mouthpieces. This could be felt as a "sharper", "thinner", or "higher" rim due to its shape. Because it has more of a hump, it is less forgiving of pressure. For me, this equates to a more comfortable fit, and I've not had any problems with the seal. I do prefer the 4 rim, which is a bit broader, but the standard rim on my Schilke 14 suits me fine. To me, the sharp inner rim on most of the Bach line causes me grief (I loathe the 7C; I started on a 6, the one V. Bach used, and stuck with it).

I, too, have heard comments from people who really like Bach and don't like Schilke -- and vice-versa. Same for virtually every other mpc (horn, mute, car, doggie biscuit, etc.) brand. To each his own! I'm just glad we've such a variety to choose from.

Usually.

FWIW - Don

p.s. Just realized I should have checked the Kanstul comparator... Oh, well, this time I have the mpcs in question, which was enough reference for me.

p.p.s. Martin, FWIW I didn't like the 14A4a either -- too shallow for me! And, the Schilke design philosophy (one of 'em, anyway) is that the gap adds distortion to the airstream and is thus bad, so their mpc shanks run a hair longer to minimize the gap in most receivers.
_________________
Don Herman/Monument, CO

[ This Message was edited by: Don Herman on 2002-01-12 13:38 ]

jakepainter · Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2002 11:06 am Post subject:

I have used a Schilke 14A4 for the last 4 years, and have found it by far the most comfortable mouthpeice for me. I really like the sound i make on it also, although i do play mainly salsa so i guess i like sound to be a bit on the bright side.

Im actually looking for a second hand 14A4A, so If anyone has one getting dusty, i'd be happy to relieve them of it.

My personnal experience with Bach was that they were very painfull after long gigs, But i guess everyones different. At the end of the day i have found its better to use what feels good for me, rather than playing a peice, just because its "what i should be playing".

cp · Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2002 11:21 am Post subject:

That's very interesting what this 'mystery' player said...maybe we can all try to guess who it was!

Anyway, I'm currently using a Schilke 15. I don't find a problem with the 'seal', but I think it plays a little on the bright side...and a bit more focused that the equivalent in Bach. But I like the rim better than Bach.

Take care,
-Carl

Quadruple C · Heavyweight Member Joined: 28 Nov 2001 Posts: 1448

[ This Message was edited by: Quadruple C on 2003-10-17 18:08 ]

cp · Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2002 12:24 pm Post subject:

Quadruple C --

Would you say that the yamaha pieces correspond pretty well to schilke(numbering-wise)? I've never tried them out...but am curious.
I'd be curious to try their 15 equivalent.
-Carl

Quadruple C · Heavyweight Member Joined: 28 Nov 2001 Posts: 1448

[ This Message was edited by: Quadruple C on 2003-10-17 18:09 ]

SchilkeB1 · Regular Member Joined: 12 Nov 2001 Posts: 42

Hey everybody,

I just got a Schilke 19 a few weeks ago, so I am not by any means qualified to tell you exactly how they play, etc. My experiences so far, however, are favorable. I agree totally with the guy in the shop who told me Schilkes to many people have a flatter, and thus more comfortable rim. I just played a three-hour band rehearsal today (lead) and am not tired a bit! My endurance has gone way up since I got this new piece. And, as has been mentioned, I think it is much easier to center pitches, have good intonation etc. The tone on this thing is HUGE, which is awesome, since that is the main thing by teachers/band directors have been saying is my weakest point. Now I get many more favorable comments on my sound. And my range has gone up too, since I have more room in this thing. Not what you'd think with a huge piece like this! The seal has always been good for me, I never have heard anyone mention any type of problem like this before. Some people do NOT like Schilke at all, though, just ask Hakan Hardenberger.

Matt

[ This Message was edited by: SchilkeB1 on 2002-01-12 16:00 ]

[ This Message was edited by: SchilkeB1 on 2002-01-12 16:02 ]

_Don Herman · Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2002 1:03 pm Post subject:

The Schilke Loyalist site says Yamaha runs about one number off (smaller than) the Schilke system. Also, he (Jim Donaldson) notes that the Schilke numbering system was invented by Will Scarlett, one of the first Schilke employees before he got his Chicago gig (with the CSO). My (very limiteed!) experience with Yamaha mpcs is that the rim is a little faltter than the standard Schilke rim, which may be why the Yammie feels more comfortable to some. The Yamahas also tend to be more massive, at least the couple or three I've tried. They did feel good to me, FWIW.

Another interesting note is that the big Schilke 20D2d, with the narrow, rounded, 2 rim, was developed for Georges Mager, of the BSO. He was able to handle the seal leaking problem, I reckon! To me, it feels too close to a "cookie cutter" rim, but it certainly helps me reduce pressure when playing. But, it is a matter of what works for you, not anybody else. The 14A4a, most popular in the line (all those would-be screamers out ther, I guess) was developed for Forrest Buchtel (Woody Herman Band).
_________________
Don Herman/Monument, CO
"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music." - Aldous Huxley

Martin · Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2002 5:35 am Post subject:

Right, the Yamahas are smaller than the Schilkes with the same number. The funny thing is, I play both Bach (7C - yeah, I know, but I like it!) and Yamaha (11B4) mpcs, and I feel very comfortable on both (and I use very little pressure). It was just the very flat rim of the Schilke 11 that gave me troubles.
Being the mouthpiece junkie that I am, I wouldn´t mind trying out more Schilkes, but obviously their shanks don´t fit into my horns. And their numbering system isn´t all that logical, too - by toying around with the Kanstul Comparator, I noticed that the #9 is actually bigger than the #12, and the #15 is bigger than #16 and so on. Also, aren´t the rim contours on all these pieces supposed to be the same?
_________________
All the best

Martin
_____________________________________________________________________
"I have found that it is enough when a single note is beautifully played." - Arvo Pärt

Lazarus · Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2002 1:22 pm Post subject:

First off, let me say that if Wynton Marsalis were the mystery player, I'd still say that he was not an authority on what equipment everyone should use. One thing I'm sure of, is that the schilkes didn't work for him/her

. I switched to a schilke 18 awhile ago and have had nothing but praises for it (of course mine is from the 60's and I don't know what changes have been made to the company). It is a deeper and 'larger' piece than my bach 5C that I used to play on. However, my endurance, range, and tone have all gotten better with the large piece. It is also interesting to note that the diameter on the Schilke 18 is pretty big compared to alot of mouthpieces. I've heard alot of guys who don't like schilkes because the rims feel 'cookie-cutterish' to them (just look at a bach and a schilke and you'll see a huge difference). Ultimately, it works for me but it may not work for you. Thanks for reading my blabbering! Have fun, best of luck to you.

--Stephen

P.S. I also have a 14a4a and do not particularly care for it. I like the rim, but the cup and everything else is a little too tight for me (even if it is for upper-register playing). Again this is personal preference.

John Mohan · Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2002 3:41 am Post subject:

Hogwash to that "mystery player", whoever he or she is!

To imply that the better players don't like Schilke mouthpieces by saying "that in amongst good company it was realized that" Schilkes don't work as well as Bachs was a misleading and untrue statement.

Or are guys like Bill Chase, Scott Englebright, Forrest Buchtel, and me (on occasion I use a 14A4A) considered "bad company"? Well, on the other hand, maybe we are... no, never mind that.

Seriously, most Schilkes have a 26 throat as standard (a bit bigger than the standard Bach's 27) so they blow a little easier. And the the idea that Schilkes have a more rounded and narrower rim is not necessarily correct. Schilkes do have a less-sharp inner edge on their rims usually (thank God), but if you use the Comparator to really compare them to Bachs, you'll see that usually they have a wider rim (though a bit more rounded sometimes) then comparable sized Bach mouthpieces.

What it comes down to, is Bachs work better for some players, Schilkes work better for some others, and other brands work better for the rest.

My two cents worth,

John Mohan
_________________
Trumpet Player, Clinician & Teacher
1st Trpt for Cats, Phantom of the Opera, West Side Story, Evita, Hunchback of Notre Dame,
Grease, The Producers, Addams Family, In the Heights, etc.
Ex LA Studio Musician
16 Year Claude Gordon Student

TPTXC · Veteran Member Joined: 06 Nov 2001 Posts: 112

John, is right, why bash a certain mouthpiece just because you and some "mystery" player don't happen to like them. I play exclusively on schilke pieces and have not had any of the problems you had mentioned. Yes, the standard schilke rim is rounder and thinner, but this aids my flexibility, and has forced me to use less pressure. My endurance was worse at first, but it trained me to use air and lip strength instead of jamming the horn into my face. I play a shilke 14 for legit stuff (similar to a 1/12 C bach), and with the 14's larger throat (26) i get a very big, full sound that doesnt get shrill or nasal in the upper register, plus i can play much louder without distortion. I play lead for jazz band and use a 13A4A, but this mouthpiece is too bright and shallow for anything else... perhaps it is the very tight "A" backbore.. maybe i should try a 13A4 or 14A4. Anyway aside from all this rambling, whatever works for YOU should be what you play, it doesnt matter what brand! It just irks me when someone has a negative bias towards something just becuase of what someone else said. The bottom line: Try it for yourself!

Brian Montgomery

trickg · Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2002 6:39 am Post subject:

I was using a Schilke 14A4a for lead work and although it enabled range and endurance and gave me a bright edgy sound, I was all over the place with it and I never could really find a center on it, which seemed to change depending on the day. Why? Who knows.

I was splattering stuff all over the place and decided to make a change. At the moment, I'm acclimating myself to a GR 66s which I really like. It has a great center and focus and I'm by far more accurate on that than on the 14A4a.

This isn't to say that Schilke doesn't make good mouthpieces because there are about a thousand differet variable per person that affect how they play. It could be that it just wasn't right for me, but could be absolutely perfect for someone else. I was playing the Schilke because a friend had given it to me and it was what I had available at the time.
_________________
Patrick Gleason
- Jupiter 1600i, ACB 3C, Warburton 4SVW/Titmus RT2
- Brasspire Unicorn C
- ACB Doubler

"95% of the average 'weekend warrior's' problems will be solved by an additional 30 minutes of insightful practice." - PLP

_Don Herman · Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2002 7:10 am Post subject:

FWIW, I really like Schilke, and didn't take the original post as "bashing" their mpcs. Like horns, different things work for different people. Not wrong, just different.

Regarding the rim, _in my opinion_ (based on experience, not the mpc comparator), Schilke standard (3) rims, while perhaps generally wider overall, may "feel" sharper not because of the inner edge (which is softer, no doubt) but because the overall more rounded (like a small hill, if you will) shape of the top of the rim compared to Bach. Before a flame fest erupts, this is obviously a very general statement and will not be true for all the mpcs in either line.

I have heard this comment ("sharper" rims) from several players, some professionals and others simply hacks like me. I'm not going to run off and get permission from all of them so I can post names; for me, I can see why they have their opinion and have no need. For me, the more rounded "top" of the rim is more than offset by the smooth approach from the inside of the cup (less "bite" than Bach) and so I like the feel. I don't care for most Bach rims, but that doesn't mean I'm bashing Bach -- they just don't suit _me_ as well as others.

Bach claims (in their mpc book) that the sharper inner rim facilitates better control etc. than a softer rim. I can't really dispute that. Another interesting (to me, anyway) statement is that the mpc which "feels" best may not in fact _be_ the best for you to use, in terms of sound and control. Fortunately, I have enough playing problems that the mpc is the least of my worries.

Peace - Don
_________________
Don Herman/Monument, CO
"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music." - Aldous Huxley

John Mohan · Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2002 3:34 pm Post subject:

Tim80 · Heavyweight Member Joined: 11 Nov 2001 Posts: 1415

I tend to bottom out a my 14A4A. Is this uncommon. I do tend to put a lot of lip into the mouthpiece. Is this unusual? I tend to put more upper lip into the mouthpiece also. As a comeback player for lack of a better term.
I hope I am not developing a bad habit. Advice appreciated.

unclebuddy · Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2002 8:40 pm Post subject:

Schilke also makes custom mouthpieces upon request. I recently found an old Schilke mouthpiece in a junk box in a repair shop of a music store. The name Schilke is written in large letters, and a single letter "J" is stamped on it. Anyone have a clue who may have had this piece? I cleaned it up, tryed it out, and now it is all I play on.

Redhothorn · Heavyweight Member Joined: 08 Dec 2001 Posts: 1173

I played a 13A4; 13A4A; 14A4A and tooted on a 6A4A ... saw nothing wrong with any of them. Bill Chase played on a Schilke. John, Scott Englebright plays on a Marcinkiewicz E-14 (Bobby Shew #1) unless he has recently changed. I know the 13A4A has been a very popular model over the years.