Wow! I am playing a BB1!

[warumtobendieheiden]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

I shoulda put in a smiley-face or inserted LOL, I guess.

I am reminded of a legendary swim coach who would indulge in all manner of antics when swim training got too deadly serious ... he would jump fully clothed into the pool (or whatever else) to break the tension, to remind his proteges that this was swimming, not brain surgery.

Anyway, there's an element of self-parody here: I, too, am faithfully reading this arcane stuff, am I not? I kinda get a grin out of the fact that I complained months ago that my Wick SM4 sounded colorless and "kinda fuzzy" ... was worried that that was probably a stupid thing to say, until the "Wick Fuzz" contagion erupted some weeks later.

The contributions of Fsung, JTJ, Rick, Daruby, Euphdude and many others never fail to be informed and instructive. The questions about the dimensions of the BB1 are a great case in point ... if the reported cup diams range from 25.4 to 25.9mm, then we sure enough need some discussion to sort things out.

Another case in point: I learned, thanks to all of you, that I probably can cross the 52E2 off my pieces-to-try list, because of the reported very rounded rim profile; whatever other virtues it might have, it is going to leave me with numb chops.

Gents, keep being esoteric and arcane and hyperanalytical and all that; viewed from another perspective, what you're doing can be called inquiry, research, and dissemination. Cheers!

[mbrooke]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

I guess my point is that too many folks become hung up with rim diameters. I've seen people on this forum say that they wouldn't try a particular mouthpiece because the rim is 1.03 rather than 1.04. Unless you try the thing, there's no way to tell how it will feel based on the measurements. If the BB1 is measured slightly below the top of the rim, is 1.02, if measured higher up, at the bite portion, it's 1.00. There's no way to tell unless you try it.

Mike

[Snorlax]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

Well, I got mine and I was surprised at how quickly I adapted to it.

I got the large-shank one (direct from Houser on eBay) that had been "misstamped". I was also bidding on the small shank one but lost out on it--I thought FOR SURE it would be the other way around.

The cup is a bit deeper than I had imagined but the throat is way smaller than I had imagined.

I find myself "backing off" a bit--not blowing as hard--so as not to overload the thing, and that's probably good; perhaps I had been relying on brute force too much in using things like a Bach 2.

Seems to work for all the UNT people, dudnit?!?!?!

Stay tuned for more--will take it to brass choir tomorrow & see how it does on Gaelforce & Dance of the Tumblers.

JTJ & FSUNG: I hope to meet both of you when I see my mother in Chapel Hill. Not sure when I'm going...

SLIGHTLY OT: Any ham radio operators here will note the similarities between euph playing and antenna theory...standing waves, impedance and impedance matching, nodes, feeding the device, harmonic radiation, directionality of lobes, etc.

[dkstone]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

Doug,

Have you noticed a difference in the amount of air required with the BB1 as opposed to the Wick 4AL? I have been playing a SM4 for several months, and one day on a whim I decided to pull out my old 51D which I had not played in some time. I was really surprised at how much less air the 51D required as compared to the SM4. I was wondering if the BB1 was similar in this respect.

Thanks,
David

[fsung]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

Jim, shoot me a PM when you come. Unless it's during TUSABTEC, we should be able work out a time and place to hook up.

At the risk of beating a dead horse:

Originally posted by: mbrooke
I guess my point is that too many folks become hung up with rim diameters. I've seen people on this forum say that they wouldn't try a particular mouthpiece because the rim is 1.03 rather than 1.04. Unless you try the thing, there's no way to tell how it will feel based on the measurements. If the BB1 is measured slightly below the top of the rim, is 1.02, if measured higher up, at the bite portion, it's 1.00. There's no way to tell unless you try it.

With all due respect, Mike, while it is possible to be irrationally obsessive about mouthpiece diameters, and while it is true that one cannot know how a mouthpiece feels without trying it, the way a mouthpiece feels is irrelevant if the mouthpiece is physically too large or too small for one's embouchure.

A difference of .01" is equivalent to .254mm, which is the almost exactly difference between the Bach 5 variants (25.50mm) and a Bach 4C (25.75mm), and slightly less than half the difference, as measured by Schilke, between a Schilke 52 and 52D (25.78mm) on one hand, and a Schilke 52E2 (25.91mm) on the other. For some people, that can be the difference between a mouthpiece that is useable and one that is unusable.

If someone has established through play-testing of various mouthpieces that mouthpieces outside a given diameter range are either too large or too small for him or her to play, it makes little sense for that person try other mouthpieces outside that range - even if the difference is "only" .01" - unless the person either knows that a particular manufacturer's measuring protocol yields specs that deviate significantly from measurements of that mouthpiece made by third parties, or has tried the immediately larger or smaller sized mouthpiece in that manufacturer's line and found it acceptable in all aspects (tone, timbre, intonation, responsiveness, articulation, rim contour, [/i]etc.[/i], save for the size. That's not being hung up on specs; that's making a rational decision informed by probabilities, one's prior experience and the limits of one's time and financial resources.

Case in point: because I have thick, fleshy lips, Bach 5s are all but unplayable once I'm warmed up, but the Bach 4C is serviceable.

Earlier this year, I tried the Mike Finn 55M and 55N rims with the B5 and C6 cups, based on numerous user comments both on this board and on TubeNet that they "felt bigger" than their 25.5mm spec would suggest.

While the rims did indeed FEEL larger and more comfortable than my Schilke 51D, the physical diameter of the rim left no room for my lips to vibrate once they were warmed up. That has been my experience with every one of the 10 or so 25.50-25.55mm mouthpieces I've tried.

On the other hand, I own all three standard Schilke 52 models, and know from testing that the 52 and 52D and other mouthpieces of similar dimensions (e.g.Bach 4C, Bach 4T (25.75mm), G&W Kadja (25.71mm), Wick 5AL (25.75mm), Wick 5ABL (25.71mm), et al.) are at the low end of the diameter range that I can use efficiently and effectively.

So, for me, that particular .01"/.254mm difference between 25.75mm and 25.5mm is the difference between a mouthpiece that is useable and one that is not. Given that, and subject to the exceptions noted above, I see no rational reason for me to consider, much less pay the costs of ordering on trial, mouthpieces spec'ed .01"/.254mm or more below 25.75mm.

[davewerden]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

For a quick overview, check out this page:

Euphonium Mouthpieces

If you scan quickly down the list, you will see that the differences between mouthpieces can indeed be a very small number, but may result in a significant difference.

And of course there is always the rim contour to totally confuse the deal. If a rim's inner curve is more square it makes the mp feel smaller, and if it is more round it makes it feel larger. But the cup diameters could be identical, even though the rims feel different and make the mouthpieces play differently. It's a wonder any of us ever find a mouthpiece that works for us!

[daruby]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

Originally posted by: dkstone

Doug,

Have you noticed a difference in the amount of air required with the BB1 as opposed to the Wick 4AL? I have been playing a SM4 for several months, and one day on a whim I decided to pull out my old 51D which I had not played in some time. I was really surprised at how much less air the 51D required as compared to the SM4. I was wondering if the BB1 was similar in this respect.

Thanks,

David

David,

The BB1 takes dramatically less air. I played a Bach 6.5AL for 20 years before I switched to the Wick 4AL about 25+years ago. So I am used to playing both "small" and "moderately large" mouthpieces. I can get a good sound on both. Up to a point I prefer the larger mouthpieces. If I practice every day, I can really fill up the 4AL (or an SM4), but not anything larger. However it takes a LOT of air. Since I suffer from the fact that I am approaching 60yrs old and my heart attack of a few years ago, my cardio/pulmonary capacity is not what it once was.

I really like the fact the BB1 allows me to pharase more elegantly and play with more control. If could maintain the same warmth and openess of sound (particularly in the low register) with the BB1 that I do with the 4AL, It would be simple, because it easy for me to play better technically, and even perhaps more expresively on the BB1.

Doug

[mbrooke]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

Doug,

A couple of suggestions in the BB1 size range that you may want to try:

Warburton 5GDL
Loud LM-27
Finn 55C6

IMO, all of these have a more open sound than the BB1. The easiest to play is probably the Finn.

Mike

[GregEuphonium]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

Doug,
Thank you for everything that you have said so far about the BB1. I'm the type of person who is always willing to try something new, and that usually ends up being the case for me with mouthpieces. It is a rare occasion for me to stick with any one mouthpiece for a very long time. I played on a 6.5AL in high school and the beginning of college, when I started college I quickly moved to a 5GS for about a year, then to a 5G for less than a year, then played a 51D for about 6 months, before settling on the SM4. I've been playing the SM4 for about a year and a half now which is the longest that I have stayed on any single mouthpiece since I started college about 5 or 6 years ago, and I'm ready to start trying some new mouthpieces. The BB1 was always a mouthpiece that I had on my list of mp's to try, but I never thought that it would really work for me especially once I moved to the SM4. I thought, "I don't really sound like Bowman and I also don't play on a Willson, so it isn't right for me," or I thought that it might be a bit too small of a mouthpiece for me. Hearing everything that you said has given me a glimmer of hope that I might be able to maintain the tone that I want while increasing endurance. I have found your comments on your experiences with the 4AL to be very similar to my experiences with the SM4. I find that if I spend a few days playing trombone instead of Euph (I still play a 5GS on trombone) that when I get back to playing Euph I need to focus a bit more than usual on putting air through the horn. I don't know if this has something to do with the difference in mp's or just the fact that my 842S is a significantly larger bore than my trombone. Either way I am going to give the BB1 a shot and see if it will ease the transition involved with going back and forth from euph to trombone. Hopefully I will still be able to maintain the tone and ease of playing in the low range that I have with the SM4. Thanks again, Doug!

[davewerden]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

If you have not already, take a look at my blog - I just did a review of two of the new Wick Heritage mouthpiece, a 4AL and a 4ABL. From what Doug and Greg said, you might both find the 4ABL a nice choice. It takes less air than the 4AL and has a similar but more focused sound. And it is smoooooooth to play.

[fsung]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

Originally posted by: davewerden

If you have not already, take a look at my blog - I just did a review of two of the new Wick Heritage mouthpiece, a 4AL and a 4ABL. From what Doug and Greg said, you might both find the 4ABL a nice choice. It takes less air than the 4AL and has a similar but more focused sound. And it is smoooooooth to play.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention the Heritage 4.5AL as another possible alternative.

I recently concluded a side-by-side test of the Heritage 4ABL and Heritage 4.5AL and found them both virtually identical in terms of responsiveness and sound. The 4.5AL was a little easier on the air, but both were noticeably more air-friendly than the Heritage 4AL, which I tried previously.

I ended up going with the 4ABL because it was just a bit more comfortable.

[GregEuphonium]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

I feel a bit weird even considering going to a smaller euph mouthpiece, kind of like it's sacrilegious to consider going from a bigger mouthpiece to a smaller one. I also feel weird about it because I really like my SM4... It has close to everything that I look for in playing and tonal characteristics, and it doesn't feel too big most of the time. Most days I practice both euph and trombone, but on occasion I will practice just one for a few days without playing the other. It is only when I practice trombone for an extended period of time without practicing euph that I find I need to focus more on my air when I do go back to euph. I'm definitely going to consider the Heritage 4AL and 4ABL... they really seem like excellent mouthpieces. And I really shouldn't feel bad about considering the BB1. It is a very legitimate euph mouthpiece with plenty of legitimate euphonium players who use it.

[dkstone]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

For what it is worth, I recently purchased a BB1 primarily based on what Doug had to say about it. After hearing everyone compare it to a Schilke 51D, I must say that I was quite surprised when I received mine and began using it. It does not play like a 51D for me. I was playing a SM4 for the past year, and when I first put the BB1 to my lips, it did feel a little smaller than the SM4. The surprising part, however, is that the BB1 for me has a low range that is every bit as good as the SM4. From low E-flat down to pedal B-flat speaks just as easily on the BB1 as it does on the SM4. Perhaps this is due to the unusual shape of the cup, but the low range of the BB1 is much stronger with much more flexibility than compared to a 51D. The upper range is much easier on the BB1 than with the SM4, and I was able to extend my range a few notes with the BB1 even over the 51D. Like the 51D, the BB1 is very efficient with air, and very soft playing in the high register is easy. So far I have been very pleased with the mouthpiece, and of course the sound us very lush. If you have ever heard Dr. Brian Bowman play in person, then you know there is no problem with his sound. Now I have to see if this mouthpiece stands the test of time. Will I eventually find some little nuisance that will cause me to go looking again for something different, or will I stick with it? Time will tell.

One other thing about the BB1, it is only one of three mouthpieces I have had that actually fit the receiver of my horn. I play a King 2280, and the receiver is slightly larger than most bass shanks. I have to wrap a little teflon plumber's tape around the shanks of Bach, Wick, and Schilke mouthpieces to get them to seat correctly in the receiver. The three that have fit without this were the Marcellus mouthpiece that came with the horn, a Giardinelli 1G I bought on sale for when I have to double on tuba parts, and the BB1. I don't know if this is a peculiarity to just my individual horn or all 2280s, but it is nice to have a mouthpiece that fits as is for a change.

[pgiampi1]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

Greg, I think you'll see that a BB1 will do exactly what you're hoping - keep your air focused (or make it easier to do so) and easing your transition. Not only have I switched to a BB1 (as one would have maybe predicted I would :-P ), but I now play a Schilke 51D on my trombone (this might be a temporary change) as well. Having played an SM3 and a Dillon mouthpiece that was probably even bigger in some regard, I was worried about losing some "darkness" to my sound, but really it just helped to make my tone a bit more direct. I instantly felt like my playing was much less masked (to steal a turn of phrase from JJ III), and that now it was MY job to make my sound "darker" via better breath support. It really strips your sound down to the core and makes you work it back up, especially if you had as bad of embouchure fundamentals as I did in high school and undergrad (cheek puffing, etc). The only complaint I've ever heard besides getting used to the unusually small-feeling of the piece is that it can be a little uncomfortable. But you get used to it. Good luck!

[mbrooke]

Wow! I am playing a BB1!

Phil,

Have you tried the Dillon B3B? It's approx. the same rim size and depth as the BB1, but the rim is a little more rounded and the backbore is slightly larger. Also, it is made of bronze rather than brass, which allegedly gives it a darker sound. Compared to a BB1, it does sound darker and more open.

Mike