Is there a good video on mouthpiece elements?

[tbdana]

I'd like to understand mouthpieces better, and I confess I'm completely ignorant. Is there a good YouTube video somewhere that explains each element of the trombone mouthpiece, what each one does, and how changing that aspect affects performance?

Time for me to start learning.

[Burgerbob]

I'm not sure those things are really understood outside some mouthpiece makers, and they aren't going to share all of that hard-earned info.

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[AndrewMeronek]

You mean like the metallurgy of brass?

https://www.xometry.com/resources/mater ... plications.

[Doug Elliott]

Serious answer to the OP's question.

No.

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[Doug Elliott]

Well what do you think of what's out there?

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[Doug Elliott]

I give individual advice to anyone who asks, individually.
Most of the information out there is half-truths at best.

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[DougHulme]

Well we speak as we find I suppose. For my part Doug Elliot knows more about mouthpieces and embouchure than anyone I know of or have heard of. He is also a gentleman and a consumate professional. He goes out of his way to give advice and impart his knowledge to whoever asks. I have seen and heard him patiently engage with people who I might have considered to border on being idiots but he has always responded with kindness and in depth knowledge and done whatever he could to help. His approach to individuality and to thsoe who asks is a gerat way because lets face it what is good advice to one person might be bad to another taking into consideration all the personal/physical variables, thus the advice he gives is tailored and accurate. That said a lot of the knowledge he has imparted and disseminated to evryone in open and public forums (and there is much) can only be described as authoritive. So in conclusion and in reply to musicofnote's assertion that Doug thinks a lot of himself and very little of any others I have to say I know that the complete opposite is true. I've been around the block a few times but I wouldnt dare argue a single point about embouchure or mouthpiece design with Doug Elliot

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[DougHulme]

Just search on his name and all the posts he has put on here and all the questions he has answered, this forum alone but the old forum and other public areas too, he's spent an immense time answering questions.

I see you have withdrawn your remark about he thinks a lot of himself and not of others - thats a step forward for you.

You could argue the point you made about the FS section here being so full of mouthpieces, perhaps that reflects either the massive variation of individual needs or the lack of consultation with an expert like Doug in the first place!

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[Rusty]

I'd like to understand mouthpieces better, and I confess I'm completely ignorant. Is there a good YouTube video somewhere that explains each element of the trombone mouthpiece, what each one does, and how changing that aspect affects performance?

Time for me to start learning.

Not a video, but I have found the info on the Stork website quite interesting https://storkcustom.com/doctor-mouthpiece/

[MStarke]

Another interesting source: https://www.jk-klier.de/en-gb/mouthpieces

IMO there is probably zero research around mouthpieces (or also instrument design) that would withstand real scientific requirements (sufficient number of participants for statistical evidence, documentation, measuring inputs and outputs, eliminating other influencing factors, A/B testing etc.). However still people like Doug Elliott and at least some of the other sources shared here are very very helpful and valuable in understanding the functioning of mouthpieces.

In the end it is not about knowing the exact scientific effects, but about how a change impacts your feel and playing which is very much individual, partly just in your brain and has a lot of variables.

For my own small mouthpiece business I feel confident sharing my individual preferences and also some degree of recommendation, but always under the disclaimer that it's based on my own feel and perception.

[harrisonreed]

Because everyone is different and not everyone is going to play the same way, it would be very difficult to get legitimately scientific about mouthpiece design. The human being playing the thing is a wild card.

I'd add the GR website into the mix:

https://www.grmouthpieces.com/category-s/235.htm

If you use the menu on the left, there are many topics in the "school" section. The most scientific thing in there (and corroborated in the Conn mouthpiece manual) that seems to hold true is what he writes about backbore and throat dimensions on overall intonation, specifically compressed or stretched octaves. I also like his idea about the alpha and beta angles.

[boneagain]

I'd like to understand mouthpieces better, and I confess I'm completely ignorant. Is there a good YouTube video somewhere that explains each element of the trombone mouthpiece, what each one does, and how changing that aspect affects performance?

Time for me to start learning.

I'm going to vote with Doug's response.
Quite sure I, for one, do NOT have a full grasp on all the interesting questions you bring up.

For background, consider I've spent countless hours with Benade's "Fundamentals of Musical Acoustics" and writings of Helmoltz, Bouasse, and countless links to university acoustics links. We used to have a TTF member named Alistair Braden who did some amazing modeling of instruments, including collaborating on recreating a Bach-era "Lituus". I've had the good fortune to be able to discuss design alterations on King trombones with George McCracken over many year. My lack of grasp is not due to lack of good sources of information.

Mouthpiece design is a minefield of variables. I can't think of any of those variables that are not important.

The trouble starts with the basic design of trumpet-like instruments. These are pipes, closed at one end. We think of trombone play seven partials in any position. Pipes closed at one end only play every OTHER partial in any position. The shapes of the bell and mouthpiece "squeeze" (lots of license in calling it that) those every-others such that we get the "natural overtone series" we all love. So right there you have a big challenge: how far can you vary the mouthpiece and still have it work with the bell shape you have?

Another challenge is from the nature of the acoustical system. The standing wave reflects (more or less) from the lips to some point in the flare of the bell and back. That provide a reactive impedance that allows the lips to return to "zero" to continue vibrating. I'm a fan of free buzzing, but this reactive impedance is a reason why free buzzing is undeniably different from in-horn buzzing. Why do I mention free-buzzing? Because even though just buzzing is enough to get sound out of the horn, research by Richard Smith has shown that the mouthpiece has an important function of dumping air that has been used to maintain the buzz. This becomes an exercise in fluidics.

And the third big area is ergonomics. Every face is different, so things like bite, rim diameter, cup depth and shape ALSO affect player comfort and ability to get the right part of the face in the best place to response as desired. And, of course, just as every face is different, desired responses are different.

I've been lucky enough to get to chat about mouthpieces with Jon Stork, Bob Giardinelli, Mick Rath, George McCracken, and Doug Elliot. From those discussions I am convinced that the pile I noted above is just scratching the tip of the iceberg.

Which leads me back to Doug's response. I think Christan's videos are, like his mouthpieces, excellent. That being said, there is just no way to cram answers to the kind of questions you raise in a video.

For me "The Quest" has always worked better by defining what is, and is not, working for me very clearly, then just go to one of the makers and see what they can do.

Related side-note: Kanstul at one point tried to organize an online comparator. They were trying to overlay profiles of different cups. Turned out to be hard to do, and did not really shed much light on how a mouthpiece would work for any given individual with a given set of requirements. I still wish they had followed through, though, just for curiosity's sake.

[harrisonreed]

The Vennture software has all the "comparator" data in it. You can compare. The "F-pop" freq and amplitude calculator is interesting -- all my mouthpieces I designed (besides the O2) have very high amplitudes on that calculation and they play with far more dynamic contrast than typical mouthpieces. My O2 mouthpiece is a bit easier to blend with but doesn't go as loud or as soft easily.

I finally have a specific taxable brokerage account to fund my lathe -- very excited to eventually start making mouthpieces and continue experimenting myself.

[Doug Elliott]

Maybe someday I'll have time to write some good info on mouthpiece selection. For now I prefer to work one-on-one. You can't really discuss some aspects generally without talking about specifics of embouchures, embouchure types, and how they function differently. The same "rules" that apply to one person do not necessarily apply to others. Then there's what you have become accustomed to, for how many years. Different size horns, different sound concepts, different natural tendencies. If someone gets a naturally too-bright or too-dark sound, is it better to fix it with mouthpiece size, depth, or playing techniques and mechanics?

If Dana wants good advice or information, I invite her to do a Skype call.

[mcphatty00]

That escalated... QUICKLY.

[tbdana]

After reading the tone and content in this thread, I'm sorry I asked. Never mind.

My takeaways:

There is no information out there on YouTube. Everything out there is lies and half truths. Doug will pair me with a mouthpiece if I want to Skype with him (thank you for the offer, but I'm just looking for general knowledge and to learn how things work, not a new mouthpiece), but I can't simply learn about the mechanics of mouthpieces anywhere online. But some websites have some information, which is contradicted by other websites, and is in any case incomplete and half truths. But none of it matters because mouthpieces are magical creatures that are entirely subjective to the individual and no aspect of any mouthpiece does the same thing all the time. Somehow, and there is no science for this, what has one effect when one person plays it might have an entirely different effect when someone else plays it, and that's all we will ever know. Now go drink some scotch and learn about a serious subject, like Bigfoot. And stay out of the mouthpiece forum.

Okay. Got it.

Maybe I would have learned this if I had gone to conservatory.

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[harrisonreed]

After reading the tone and content in this thread, I'm sorry I asked. Never mind.

My takeaways:

There is no information out there on YouTube. Everything out there is lies and half truths. Doug will pair me with a mouthpiece if I want to Skype with him (thank you for the offer, but I'm just looking for general knowledge and to learn how things work, not a new mouthpiece), but I can't simply learn about the mechanics of mouthpieces anywhere online. But some websites have some information, which is contradicted by other websites, and is in any case incomplete and half truths. But none of it matters because mouthpieces are magical creatures that are entirely subjective to the individual and no aspect of any mouthpiece does the same thing all the time. Somehow, and there is no science for this, what has one effect when one person plays it might have an entirely different effect when someone else plays it, and that's all we will ever know. Now go drink some scotch and learn about a serious subject, like Bigfoot. And stay out of the mouthpiece forum.

Okay. Got it.

Maybe I would have learned this if I had gone to conservatory.

FWIW, I gave some good resources. They aren't videos though. Sorry!

[Doug Elliott]

Dana, I'd be happy to discuss it over Skype without trying to sell you a mouthiece. I never "try" to sell my mouthpieces. Plenty of people on here will tell you I've told them to stick with what they have, or go in a general direction with something else. I've heard you play - but I also need to see you play, and show you "how things work" on YOUR chops.

[tbdana]

FWIW, I gave some good resources. They aren't videos though. Sorry!

Yes, you did. Thanks Harry. As for videos, it's 2024, we don't read anymore, we just watch videos and drool a lot.

I'm just a bit disappointed the direction this thread took.

Dana, I'd be happy to discuss it over Skype without trying to sell you a mouthiece. I never "try" to sell my mouthpieces. Plenty of people on here will tell you I've told them to stick with what they have, or go in a general direction with something else. I've heard you play - but I also need to see you play, and show you "how things work" on YOUR chops.

Thanks, Doug. I'd be happy to do that, but I'm not looking for anything personal, I just wanted to learn how mouthpieces work, in general. Of course, I'm happy to play for you as much as you can tolerate, LOL! , but I'm not sure that's helpful to my quest.

By way of analogy, I'm asking for resources to learn how internal combustion engines work so I can understand them in general. I'm not (at the moment) interested in which car is best suited for me.

[imsevimse]

I'm sorry that this thread got so heated. It sometimes do. We just have to accept that some things can be explained with science and some can't. I mean how do we even explain what makes something "good". It just depends on context. What we could do is to ask specific questions on specific elements to know what people think from their own experience. We then have to know what that experience is. See, even this will be worthless because we do not know much about the ones whom we discuss. Conclusion is we just have to deal with fact best we can. In this case however we do know some here are experts on mouthpieces. One thing I've questioned myself when it comes to mouthpieces is why people sometimes use a drill and make the backbore larger. I have heard many testimonials about doing this and I just wonder why did they do this? Sometimes someone thinks the result is better and just want to drill a tad more and then they ruin everything. This means the perfect backbore must have been just before that. I'm just curious what was the goal? Maybe this is specific enough question about one of the elements or parts of the mouthpiece and might be possible to be answerd by any of the makers here. What happens at that exact point when the mouthpiece gets ruined and what was the goal?

/Tom

[Kbiggs]

Knowledge acquired during a career is precious and valuable.

Sometimes it’s in the public good to share this information freely, e.g., scientists like Banting, Gilchrist, Collip, etc. who developed a viable method to produce insulin. They cited medical ethics as a reason for not patenting their process. (That hasn’t stopped drug companies from developing and selling their own processes, however.)

Doug, like Greg Black, AR Resonance, LI Brass, Vincent Bach, Scott Laskey, etc., is under no obligation to share his knowledge freely, just as he is free to voice opinions about the quality of the freely-available knowledge.

We can disagree without being disagreeable.

[tbdana]

Doug, like Greg Black, AR Resonance, LI Brass, Vincent Bach, Scott Laskey, etc., is under no obligation to share his knowledge freely, just as he is free to voice opinions about the quality of the freely-available knowledge.

I was just looking for general knowledge, not proprietary information or trade secrets. Geez...

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[KWL]

...There is no information out there on YouTube. Everything out there is lies and half truths. Doug will pair me with a mouthpiece if I want to Skype with him (thank you for the offer, but I'm just looking for general knowledge and to learn how things work, not a new mouthpiece), but I can't simply learn about the mechanics of mouthpieces anywhere online. But some websites have some information, which is contradicted by other websites, and is in any case incomplete and half truths. But none of it matters because mouthpieces are magical creatures that are entirely subjective to the individual and no aspect of any mouthpiece does the same thing all the time. Somehow, and there is no science for this, what has one effect when one person plays it might have an entirely different effect when someone else plays it, and that's all we will ever know. Now go drink some scotch and learn about a serious subject, like Bigfoot. And stay out of the mouthpiece forum...

Now go to a cycling forum and substitute "saddle" for "mouthpiece" and "ride" for "play' and you'll find a similar conversation.

Ken

[Posaunus]

I'd add the GR website into the mix:

https://www.grmouthpieces.com/category-s/235.htm

Interesting - especially if you're a trumpet or flugelhorn player. But GR seems confused about their plastic mouthpiece rims.

Lexan is a brand name (originally trademarked by General Electric; now apparently owned by (Sabic) for polycarbonate plastics. Delrin is a brand name for completely different material, with different properties than polycarbonate. It is a homopolymer acetal, rather easily machined from rod stock.

Has GR ever made trombone mouthpieces?

[Kbiggs]

We can disagree without being disagreeable.

And being disagreeable starts with accusing those others of spreading "half truths at best". Pretty strong accusation, that. I'm sure neither Christian nor Dr. Dave need me to defend them, but that "hat meinen Kragen zum platzen gebracht". That was a totally unnecessary comment and ... "unprofessional at best". And without even the common courtesy of identifying what the things were, he felt were "half-truths at best". But he demanded I identify what I found good about them. One way don't work. Good for the goose, good for the gander.

Now as to ... no science available. True as to determining "claims" if they were indeed scientific hypothesis. Which they aren't. The closest anyone comes, was Dr. Dave (amongst other things, a medical doctor) talking about improved blood flow and re-oxygenation with his design, as well as how that is optimised through lymphatic drainage - functioning more optimally than traditional mouthpieces. So one should be at least "half satisfied" with "based on established physiological knowledge", physiology being an accepted evidence driven science. But no one identified what the "half-truth at best" part of that explanation as given by Dr. Dave was. And even if ... I'd expect it to come from someone with comparable professional (ie medical) qualifications.

I’m surprised by the forcefulness of your responses. Some people shared videos and websites. One other member offered an assessment of the current state of mouthpiece information and manufacture, based on his years of professional experience, and then offered to provide whatever information is needed in an individual lesson.

People will pay physicians, particularly specialists, to look at their symptoms and findings, make a diagnosis, and suggest treatments. Those same physicians will occasionally comment on other well-meaning (but sometimes misguided) folk remedies. People will take their cars to a mechanic to look over, find the problem, and fix it or replace the parts. If you’ve ever talked with a mechanic, they can be quite opinionated about cars, parts, quality, etc.

We all find information out there and make assessments about it, however informed those assessments might be. Likewise, we all seek out professional and expert advice, and pay for it. Accepting or disregarding it is up to the individual.

Frankly don’t understand why this is so controversial.

[harrisonreed]

I'd add the GR website into the mix:

https://www.grmouthpieces.com/category-s/235.htm

Interesting - especially if you're a trumpet or flugelhorn player. But GR seems confused about their plastic mouthpiece rims.

Lexan is a brand name (originally trademarked by General Electric; now apparently owned by (Sabic) for polycarbonate plastics. Delrin is a brand name for completely different material, with different properties than polycarbonate. It is a homopolymer acetal, rather easily machined from rod stock.

Has GR ever made trombone mouthpieces?

I think they just do trumpet stuff. Maybe trombone on special request but I don't know.

I started understanding what they were all about with a couple different lead trumpeters I've known who use their stuff. They had specific mouthpieces from GR that ensured they either did not go flat (more common) or sharp (less common) in the upper register. They would play something on a different mouthpiece (bobby shew, etc) and you could see on a tuner and hear the octaves compress. The GR one would only be a few cents off.

[tbonesullivan]

By way of analogy, I'm asking for resources to learn how internal combustion engines work so I can understand them in general. I'm not (at the moment) interested in which car is best suited for me.

I think you might be surprised at how similar the two are.

combustion engine - burn gas make engine go

mouthpiece - funnel used to buzz lips make trombone make noise

After that there are tons of designs, philosophies, ideas, and lots of things that are pretty much only experimentally verified. It's very hard to make wide generalizations like "larger throat makes sound more open", as in some cases the felt response can be the exact opposite. There are talks of "air cushions" inside mouthpieces from some trumpet mouthpiece makers, and there are "double bubble" style mouthpieces as well.

I remember stumbling upon a diagram of a Marcinciewicz mouthpiece where there were explanations for the outer shape of the blank, as well as regarding the venturi size. I think Denis Wick mouthpieces also have some type of diagram, and all of this has come from learning and experience. This also means that there won't be an absolute consensus on how to achieve a specific result.

The one person whose ideas I would really be interested to hear on this forum? Sesquitone. I know valve design is mostly what he has talked about, with several patented designs under his belt, but it would be interesting to know what his thoughts are on mouthpiece shape.

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[Burgerbob]

Well, I‘m done. As I wrote, Neither Christian nor Dr. Dave need defending by me. But it does show very plainly „No good deed goes unpunished.“ should have kept my thought to myself the next time some decides to insult the integrity of another, accusing him/her of dispensing „half truths at best“.

You keep raising the stakes on a very, very low stakes post.

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[Doug Elliott]

You apparently have lots of spare time.
I don't. I'm making mouthpieces, teaching, and getting ready for gigs.
If you've ever looked at my posts, you'd see that they are always short and to the point. I don't feel any need to explain or defend my opinion.
You posted 7 videos, over an hour total. I had already seen most of them, and I stand by what I said.
Blah blah blah advertising.

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[harrisonreed]

Who is this "Christian" everyone is always talking about?

[BGuttman]

Who is this "Christian" everyone is always talking about?

I guess "Christian Grimago" who makes imaginary instruments. I know a Christan who might be more appropriate

If you want more of the "lies and half-truths" there is a lot of that in the Bach Mouthpiece Manual (I don't know if it's still available -- my copy is in paper from the 1970s).

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[GabrielRice]

There are a couple of general principles to keep in mind - for this discussion if not necessarily the elements of trombone mouthpiece design.

1. The larger you go, the more margin for error there is.

2. Trumpets have valves, trombones have slides.

The fact that we are holding giant tuning slides in our hands makes some of the factors of intonation, octave compression, etc. less relevant to trombones than trumpets. How many of us make unconscious slide adjustments when we change octaves?

That's not to say those design elements are not important, just that they are much harder for us to get a grasp on. As Doug says, there's the important consideration of what the player is used to and how long they've been used to it.

And these are the reasons you see a lot more information about trumpet mouthpieces than trombone mouthpieces. It's much easier to quantify the differences, because they are walking a much smaller tightrope.

Phyllis Stork is incredibly knowledgeable, and her articles on the Stork website are extremely informative. But she is a trumpet player and Stork trumpet mouthpieces are much more comprehensive and much more widely used than their trombone mouthpieces. Also, while high register is an extremely important aspect of trombone playing, trombone players - especially in symphonic music - need command over lower relative registers than trumpet players. That's a convoluted sentence - we need more low notes.

She says in this article https://storkcustom.com/tongue-position/ "Successful brass playing is all about the ability to create the velocity of air needed to play loud and high with maximum efficiency." As a symphonic bass trombone player, I need to be able to play in the high register for sure, but my low register actually need to be a higher priority.

My mouthpiece is still probably too big though.

[Burgerbob]

You keep raising the stakes on a very, very low stakes post.

At least be "truthful at best" enough to quote the entire posting and not just an excerpt without the context behind it.

There is no context needed. I guess this quote works. Please calm, remember that we are talking about trombone mouthpieces, and re-read your posts before posting.

We had a similar "conversation" recently about low range pedagogy that seemed to be very serious.

[timothy42b]

There's a line in the Princess Bride, one of the greatest movies ever made, that I like: After the big sword fight, Inigo Montoya asks the Dread Pirate Roberts a question and says "I must know." The reply is "get used to disappointment."

Mouthpiece design is complicated and hard to reduce to equations, and resistant to experimenting partly because of extreme variability between and within players. That doesn't stop people from strong opinions, some of which are inevitably wrong.

Doug (and some others I guess) has a modular system that at least lets you mix and match components.

And here's an example of carrying that even further, including the leadpipe:

https://www.madbone.info/

(no I'm not recommending it. I don't seem to be as sensitive to mouthpiece differences as most of you)

[harrisonreed]

Auto-correct corrected where possible. Satisfied? I certainly hope so.

I was just defending him. Poor guy almost never has his name spelled correctly, and he makes great mouthpieces.

[Kbiggs]

My last post in this thread: I’m out.

[ZacharyThornton]

My God this thread is a shitshow.
Doug Elliot absolutely is one of the great experts on this topic.
This is continuing the “death of the expert” trend of the internet.
Ever wonder why no experts hang around here anymore outside of Doug? It didn’t use to be that way.

[Bach5G]

“This is continuing the “death of the expert” trend of the internet.”

Death of the expert seems to be all over society. Eg. Roberts, yesterday, in the Loper Brights case. The courts: I did my own research.