View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Redhothorn Heavyweight Member
Joined: 08 Dec 2001 Posts: 1173
|
Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 3:34 pm Post subject: Yamaha Shew Lead VS. Marcinkiewicz Shew #1 ? |
|
|
Anyone out there played both of these mouthpieces and can give me your thoughts on the differences? Seems that I remember Bobby stating the Yamaha back bore was more open? Thanks for the info. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JonathanM Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Aug 2007 Posts: 2020 Location: Charleston, SC
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Russell; I haven't tried Shew's Yamaha mouthpiece, but I just picked up a lovely Xeno RGS and the guy had the Marcin (sp) Shew 1. I'm NOT a fan of shallow mouthpieces and thin backbores right now, but I'm surprised at the ease there is in playing it.
To me, the main diff that I notice is the rim. Seems a bit thinner, certainly thinner and more rounded than my Monette 4, or a Schilke 13a4a. The broad rims really lead me to mash onto the mouthpiece; this Shew 1 is very comfortable to me.
Not the contrast of Yamaha's brand and the Marc, sorry; but thought the rim comment might be of help to you. Incidentally, I'm so impressed I'm going to get at least one more of the Marc Shew models; preferably a 2, maybe a 1.75; perhaps all 4 of them. I am that impressed.
Blessings back at 'ya. _________________ Jonathan Milam
Trumpets: 18043B, 18043*, 18043 Sterling Silver +, 18037 SterlingSilver+, Benge 4x, Olds: '34 Symphony, '47 Super, '52 Recording
Flugle: Strad 182
Puje: American Belle
Cornet: Olds Recording & Super |
|
Back to top |
|
|
trumpetangel Veteran Member
Joined: 05 Oct 2004 Posts: 130
|
Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Yamaha Shew's diameter is a tad wider with a more rounded bite than the Marcink Shew. Yamaha cup is more bowl shaped, the Cink is more v-shaped.The Yamaha backbore is actually a bit narrower than the Cink, it has a different shape. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TrpPro Heavyweight Member
Joined: 12 Jan 2006 Posts: 1471 Location: Riverview, FL
|
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm experimenting with a Marcink Shew 1.25 model E10.3 and like it so far ... only a few days.
I've used the Yamaha Shew lead for a while and liked it but find the high register (G above high C and beyond) can get difficult to really open up. Also find articulating cleanly above high C to be a challenge.
The Marcink right away has a much fatter sound and more accurate attack, especially above high C and the extreme high end opens up. It also seems to have a softer feel on the lips.
Anyone have any comparisons between the other Marcink Shew models: Shew1/E14, Shew1.5/E9.1, Shew1.75/E8.4 and Shew2/E5. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Redhothorn Heavyweight Member
Joined: 08 Dec 2001 Posts: 1173
|
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Trpt Pro ... you may wanna try the Marcinkiewicz Ingram as it is a great piece as well and not quite as shallow as the E-14 ... yet, shallower than the 1.25. Thanks for the info. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ole Veteran Member
Joined: 27 Dec 2008 Posts: 123
|
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:59 pm Post subject: Roger Ingram Marcink |
|
|
According to Roger Ingram's book his Marcinkiewicz mpc has the same cup as a Shew 1. Just the ouside diameter is a wee tighter which makes the cup feel deeper. I think he even said that in the book. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RogerIngram Veteran Member
Joined: 24 Jan 2009 Posts: 214 Location: Chicago
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ejweiss Veteran Member
Joined: 15 May 2009 Posts: 297 Location: WI
|
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Roger, due you really play and record with that mouthpiece? Wow, you sound incredible! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RogerIngram Veteran Member
Joined: 24 Jan 2009 Posts: 214 Location: Chicago
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
KPC517 Veteran Member
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 100 Location: Syracuse, New York
|
Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have played both the Yamaha Shew Lead and the Marc. 1.25,1.5,1.75, and 2. The Yammie Shew feels about the diameter of a 3C to me. The cup is more rounded. I love the Marc. shape, size and efficiency. It is more of a "CV" cup which, for me, works great. I used to play the 1.5 exclusively with my Yamaha 8335LA. I just recently purchased a 1963-64 Conn 36B and the 1.5 felt a little restrictive (maybe because of the bore of the horn?). I switched to the Marc. Shew 2 and it is a great match. Range did not suffer and the sound is a little bigger. The 1.5 has a .140 drill while the 2 has a .144 drill. I am going to get a 1.5 and open it up to .144 to see what happens. I love the Marcinkiewicz mouthpieces. With that being said, for some reason I can't get the 1.75 to work for me. I think you will be very happy with the Marcinkiewicz mouthpiece. Give Rogers a try also. For the price, you can't go wrong! Hope this helps.
Ken Case _________________ Yamaha 8335LA- For Sale
1963 Conn Connstellation 36B
Flugel Yamaha 231
Marcinkiewicz Shew 1.5, Shew 2
Shew Flugel |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chadwick Veteran Member
Joined: 04 Oct 2009 Posts: 146 Location: United States
|
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2024 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
RogerIngram wrote: | The outside AND inner diameters of the Marcinkiewicz Ingram are downsized by one size from the Shew #1. |
This is a pretty old thread (though with over 10K views), but just wanted to clarify that Marcinkiewicz today sets the Outer Diameter of the mass-market E12.4 Ingram at the same size as their E14 Shew 1's OD. See the trumpet.cloud comparator and the Marcinkiewicz specs chart.
As mentioned in this thread, both the Ingram E12.4 and the Yamaha Shew Lead (YSL) are fractionally deeper (~0.003") than the classic Marcinkiewicz E14 Shew 1. If you feel you could benefit from that extra chop room, you might like one of these E14 Shew 1 spinoffs:
Vennture Mouthpieces also has these three tops on file should you want to customize the design to your needs. The first one in the above list is in the latest version of VennCAD; the other two are in the STL column of the specs chart (they should also be included by default in a future VennCAD update). Cheers! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|