Difference between Ultra Series mouthpieces?

[DankieHaugen]

What is the difference between SM4X, SM4U, SM4MU, and SM4MX? They all seem to have the same specifications.
In general, what is the difference between the different Ultra Series mouthpieces for large shank Euphoniums?

[daniel76309]

The M means medium shank. The U and X are pretty similar. I think the X is a little less deep and has a slightly sharper rim than the U.

[graeme]

Agree with Daniel the X is a little less deep and has a slightly sharper rim than the U

[Simes]

I bought a 4X yesterday and even though I have only managed about three hours playing with it, would like to share some observations. My immediate reaction was that the rim seems a little more comfortable. Articulation seems a lot easier - intially I was really overdoing it but once I backed off a bit it seemed very responsive. The lower register seems slightly brighter and could generate undue edge without care. This ain't so good. I'm not worried about super register notes but from bottom C (TC) down is very important to me. Top A and Bb seem higher in pitch, which is good and top C / C# seem neither better nor worse, but as I loved them on this hooter anyway that's perfectly fine. Initial thoughts are positive.

[JoCologne]

I love the SM4X. Additionally, this is an excellent bass trombone mouthpiece, when you have to play any solo. In bigband I play usually a Bach 1.5 G @ my besson bassbone, but the SM4X worked fine for my solo in the recent bigband concert.

[daniel76309]

If anyone is interested, I have a SM4X in excellent condition which I would sell for $70, shipped (CONUS). PM me if interested.

[Simes]

I have not long returned from a fairly heavy band practice using the SM4UX. I'm not in great touch but have recently been doing a decent amount of home practice, and for once doing the right stuff, rather than merely enjoying myself. However the meandering has a point - I have arrived at the conclusion that the 4X is a truly awful mouthpiece. No consistency of tone, and ghastly amounts of unwanted feedback through the instrument, as well as a total breakdown of sound at points, which extreme fatigue aside, I have never before experienced. the range involved of the pieces rehearsed is from bottom G to top Db (treble clef) but I seemed unable to centre anything. As I am guesting on solo euphonium it was both awkward and embarrassing. I do however now a dilemma - use the 4X for Sunday's gig or revert to my trusty battered 4AL?

Getting back to the 4X - I cannot recommend it. It will be going on ebay very shortly.

[davewerden]

...and ghastly amounts of unwanted feedback through the instrument

Could you explain that in different words? I'm not sure what characteristic you are describing, but I would like to understand the usage. Thanks.

[Simes]

Certainly, It's almost as if the venturi is too small, which is a nonsense as the backbore is bigger (I believe) than the 4AL. It is almost as if there was too much air going into the instrument, but given my build and lack of band practice is highly unlikely.

[davewerden]

Hmm. It MIGHT be one of those things you can adapt to, ultimately for a good effect. Or it could just be a bad cup shape for your embouchure, so that the air stream never gets properly formed for resonance.

[Simes]

Bob Childs said I had the oddest embouchure he'd ever seen, but didn't want me to change anything as it would probably be detrimental. Bizarrely the most horrific event took place in the opening statement of Calling Cornwall where the notes just fell apart. Admittedly this was two hours into a very heavy brass band rehearsal at pretty much full chat the whole time, but even so I wouldn't expect this to happen - I would expect a decline in accuracy of pitch and intonation but neither of those happened. I couldn't seem to form an embochure of any tension, but I think the aperture in my embocuhure is excessively large anyway, as I have never had much in the way of stamina. Back to the "setting up drills"! (And much more importantly, the 4AL).

[Cameron J.]

I have said this a few times on other threads. When I moved to euphonium last year, I was initially using a SM4X. After about a month, I gave up with it, mainly because it was far too bright of a tone for what I wanted (almost baritone like). I agree though it was a little more easier in the upper register (only by a couple of notes) and articulation had a bit more clarity to it. I ended up buying an SM4U, which is what I have been using ever since. Takes a bit more when going upstairs, but has a much more full and dark tone. And I don't have the most perfect embouchure.

On a side note, I am wanting to try an SM3X and compare it to my 4U soon to see what it is like.

[Simes]

I am guessing that there will be a development of a SM Ultra X PLus at some point, and the Denis Wick euphonium mouthpiece merry-go-round will continue.

[MichaelSchott]

I have not long returned from a fairly heavy band practice using the SM4UX. I'm not in great touch but have recently been doing a decent amount of home practice, and for once doing the right stuff, rather than merely enjoying myself. However the meandering has a point - I have arrived at the conclusion that the 4X is a truly awful mouthpiece. No consistency of tone, and ghastly amounts of unwanted feedback through the instrument, as well as a total breakdown of sound at points, which extreme fatigue aside, I have never before experienced. the range involved of the pieces rehearsed is from bottom G to top Db (treble clef) but I seemed unable to centre anything. As I am guesting on solo euphonium it was both awkward and embarrassing. I do however now a dilemma - use the 4X for Sunday's gig or revert to my trusty battered 4AL?

Getting back to the 4X - I cannot recommend it. It will be going on ebay very shortly.

Interesting. I think it might have been better to say this mouthpiece is horrible for You. Mouthpiece choice is a very personal decision. Do you know that Steven Mead plays an SM3X? It certainly works for him. I also am quite pleased with my X model.

Last, it takes a good amount of time to adjust to a new mouthpiece. I'd never consider using one if I were asked to be a guest soloist until I've had it for a few months.

[davewerden]

Interesting. I think it might have been better to say this mouthpiece is horrible for You. Mouthpiece choice is a very personal decision

I agree with the general statement, but I took Simes to be making a personal decision and describing the factors that were unsatisfactory for him. You may have read my post recently about my personal transitions to get to the 4AL. In the early days the 4AL just seemed sooooo big and endurance-taxing, but that was of course from the perspective of what I was used to, and to some extent what my own concepts were.

Last, it takes a good amount of time to adjust to a new mouthpiece. I'd never consider using one if I were asked to be a guest soloist until I've had it for a few months.

Very true in some cases, less in others. It depends on the mouthpieces on either end of the transition. I adjusted to some very quickly; and quite slowly to others.

That is what makes it hard to test mouthpieces. It really is best to play on one for a few months, but that is a commitment in a couple ways (including $$). I have purchased mouthpieces intending to switch to them, but after months of playing decided they were not for me.

At present my own stable consists of only 2: my standard 4AL and my alternate SM4U. The latter provides a little clearer articulation but much less expanse of sound for me.

As far as expressing things, I qualify most things. So I say, "The Adams is the very best horn for me." Now and then I get lazy and say, "Adams is the best horn on the market." That is how I feel, of course, but saying it that way is not accurate for all others.