Who in their right mind plays a Bach 1 1/2G ??

[ttf_savio]

I have posted to much here but want to do it because I want to say thanks to Chris Stearn. I got a mouthpiece from heaven today in my post box.  Its a Black Hill 2g. I have no words and are just so happy. My MT Vernon have been messed with but not sure its bad. It sounds very good. Maybe I'm not the right guy to handle it, but I was a little unsure on them. Probably me. 

I have been teaching the hole day and playing with the kids hole day. I think its the best lesson I have given because I did feel so happy.  Dear trombonists I'm just a teacher fare a way but have played hole my life. And I love it. This tread has helped me a lot. Not many trombonist around here so I love this forum. Despite of my bad English.

Chris you have been a big help for me. I just say thanks. More than you know. And I think he have to all of us. He gave me a fantastic mouthpiece.

If I had been a big name anywhere I would never post any mp3 files at all in a public forum.  And you probably never will see that any of these do so. I'm not a big name, I'm fare away, I have nothing to loose. I want to show the smaller mouthpieces can even give a regular player a sound that's not to bad.  Of course my playing is on my level and the songs are no fancy. But still it can give an image of the sound these "smaller" mouthpieces can give. Even for a teacher long way from USA or England´s high end players.  Everybody can.  And everybody can do it on these "smaller" bass mouthpieces. They feel big when you get used to them.
I was tired both in head and lips but I did feel happy to play a few tunes. And thanks to Brian (Sliphorn) I found a new method to record. One mic close into the bell in mono:

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=d79b8206360f2c08ab1eab3e9fa335ca517f4963f82adbb0

Chris Thanks and Cheers!

Leif

[ttf_blast]

Thank you Leif,
The sounds you recorded show that the mouthpiece has found the right home. 

Chris Stearn

[ttf_slideorama]

Thanks again Leif! Whatever mouthpiece/instrument combo you have there is seriously "right there". Nice.
I may have missed this in one of the threads, but where did you get these playalongs?

[ttf_sfboner]

Quote from: savio on May 12, 2010, 02:07PMI have posted to much here but want to do it because I want to say thanks to Chris Stearn. I got a mouthpiece from heaven today in my post box.  Its a Black Hill 2g.

Hi Leif.  This doesn't surprise me too much.  Out of all the files you've posted previously in which I could tell much difference, I thought you sounded the best before on the Greg Black 1.5.

How do the old Black hill models compare with the current Greg Black pieces - spec-wise,design-wise, or whatever?

Sounds great!  Stop with the search already! 

[ttf_savio]

Quote from: sanfranboner on May 12, 2010, 11:20PMHi Leif.  This doesn't surprise me too much.  Out of all the files you've posted previously in which I could tell much difference, I thought you sounded the best before on the Greg Black 1.5.

How do the old Black hill models compare with the current Greg Black pieces - spec-wise,design-wise, or whatever?

Sounds great!  Stop with the search already! 


Sanfranboner Thanks!  Forget those recordings. When I blow the first note with it, it was just a inner voice that told me thanks, there it is. A ton did left my shoulders. The design and comparing to other mouthpieces is to hard for me to explain. Its a unique mouthpiece. Maybe Chris did know exactly what would suit me after all my ramblings and searching?


Mike, these sounds are from soundfonts. They are nice? Listen that flute. Its echo on it. They are made out of real instruments sounds I think. Its just a hobby but my kids playalong with them. The arr. is made in BIAB. One click and its done. Amazing?

Chris, one more thanks. For all help and this tread. Many is with me on that.


Leif

[ttf_WaltTrombone]

Just listened to your recording of Stella By Starlight. Very nice, Leif! Mr. Roberts would smile if he heard that, I think.

[ttf_Sliphorn]

Quote from: savio on May 13, 2010, 02:24AMSanfranboner Thanks!  Forget those recordings. When I blow the first note with it, it was just a inner voice that told me thanks, there it is. A ton did left my shoulders. The design and comparing to other mouthpieces is to hard for me to explain. Its a unique mouthpiece. Maybe Chris did know exactly what would suit me after all my ramblings and searching?


Mike, these sounds are from soundfonts. They are nice? Listen that flute. Its echo on it. They are made out of real instruments sounds I think. Its just a hobby but my kids playalong with them. The arr. is made in BIAB. One click and its done. Amazing?

Chris, one more thanks. For all help and this tread. Many is with me on that.


Leif

Hey, I like the mic setup!  This sounds nice, Leif.  Bravo!

[ttf_Sliphorn]

Listening to Stella now...I think the difference in sound here is difficult to tell between your previously posted tunes because of the different microphone placement.  Placing the mic closer takes away some of the overtones in the sound...

On this mouthpiece you sound very comfortable, and the playing sounds great!  But the sound it different...I like it a lot, but it's not quite as rich...and that's probably because you don't hear the room. 

It really sounds good...but for a true comparison you'd have to record again the same way with all the other mouthpieces...BOOOO.

My opinion is that you sound great on this one, and most importantly, you sound like YOU.  Listening to Makin' Whoopee now.  Very nice, Leif.  Sounds like maybe you've found your mouthpiece!

[ttf_blast]

I have fitted mouthpieces to my students for many years now, but this is the first time I have done it just by listening to recordings and a player's comments about other mouthpieces. I am glad that it worked (so far) and it is nice that an exceptional mouthpiece has found a good home.

Chris Stearn.

[ttf_HouBassTrombone]

I have been going though a trend of playing smaller and smaller horns/ mouthpieces etc.  Probably because of the playing I have been doing.  I play on a Ferguson L and I have liked it... but I got out my UMI 1 1/2G and I liked somethings about it.  I was wondering if anyone here has played a Minick/ Ferguson V?  I believe it is the closes to a 1 1/2G and I would really like to try it out. 
Thanks in advance,
Zac

[ttf_tbarh]

Quote from: HouBassTrombone on May 15, 2010, 01:10AMI have been going though a trend of playing smaller and smaller horns/ mouthpieces etc.  Probably because of the playing I have been doing.  I play on a Ferguson L and I have liked it... but I got out my UMI 1 1/2G and I liked somethings about it.  I was wondering if anyone here has played a Minick/ Ferguson V?  I believe it is the closes to a 1 1/2G and I would really like to try it out. 
Thanks in advance,
Zac

The Minnick V has a different rim shape (if You are among those who can sucessfully play one , ... I am not !! ), more like a bach... This mouthpiece has by far given me the most earthshaking valve register out of any pieces I have tried... For me it sounds a little dead or dull in the higher registers... It would be a worthwhile experiment to have it made with a lighter blank ,more like the standard Bach blank to maybe get a litle more life in the tone...A far as I know, this piece is a copy of a very old Bach 1 1/2G ,New York or Mount Vernon .... so; maybe a little bit more like the original ,perhaps .. !

Trond

[ttf_slidejj]

The V feels like a rather small version of the 1.5G and the one I had played very bright, at least for me.  I do like wide rims but not the ones on the Ferguson L and V.  I think the Rath 1-1/2W is the best wide rimmed piece in that size.  I've been playing a Rath 1-1/4W more lately and accidentally put the 1-1/2W in the case for 2 gigs yesterday (they look the same), one a small orchestra and the other big band; no problem, I quickly got reacquainted with an old friend.

[ttf_HouBassTrombone]

Is the the Rath mouthpieces like the Minicks?  Like a Rath 1/4W would be close to a L?  I had read that somewhere.
-Z

[ttf_slidejj]

The Rath 1-1/4W is based on a Minick L but the 1-1/2W is very different from a V.

[ttf_savio]

Today I want to post some of my good and bad experience with all the trying I have done the past two years or is it three? Time goes faster and faster. I have got so much help here from many kind bass players. And the last help I got from Chris. Thanks all of you. I want to give some useful(hopefully) info back.

When I first started to search my own sound, and equipment that would make it easier for me to get that sound and feel, I did read a lot here.   What I was searching was how the mouthpiece design and feel was like. This is not easy to describe because it always will be very subjective and its also so much depending on our self and the instrument we play.

So have this in mind when you read this. It will not be the same feel and you all will have different taste, goals, ensembles and so on. Therefore read with a grain of salt. Equipment will always be very subjective.

I take the mouthpieces I remember best and try to describe how I look at them.  Remember this is my subjective thoughts.

First the regular Bach 1 1/2g.

All of you have played one so I don't describe this. And no one are the same. The new ones are more the same than the old ones. But still there is differences. My feelings about Bach is they all have a sound I like. The old ones have more character. I believe  the new regular Bach MP have more mass and more slotting. I like the sound and think the new are good if you try a couple of them. 

The Schilke 58.

This was for me more safe to play. Better slotting, easier to play. For me not the sound I want. I have one very old and one new. They are different. I think the old ones have more flat rim than the new. (not sure) And dint forget they have two options in shank choice. For me the sound was nice in mp dynamic but no good in ff. For me very good comfort but no soul or character in sound. Good slotting.

MB 108 and SB 108.

These have more quality in design, more options in choice of different setup. The rim on both are very comfy on the lips. The MB rim feels wider for me but that's just an illusion. Or design difference. When you look at them they are the same. So its just the feel.   For me these have a big modern sound, what ever that is. So the only reason I don't play them is my taste of old vintage sound. In all other aspects they both did work best for me. But the MB most. You cant find a rim that's more comfortable.  If you are looking for mouthpiece this is probably the first and last stop you should do. Doug; the only thing I say very honestly is more character in sound. More flexibility in sound. Its a big modern sound, its nice, ...but....for a person with difficult taste and are a regular teacher like me, long way from the real world of music, and searching an old vintage sound of Premru and Roberts it was an other option for me. Hope you don't throw me out from the forum.  In the real pro world I could not do what I do. I would be safe, and playing the MB 108.


The Faxx 1 1/2g


Very safe and cheap. For me better slotting than most Bach's,  Very consistent. A copy of a Bach MT Vernon so this is still a kind of Bach MP.  Just a little different as they all are.


The MT Vernon Bach

I had two but both was messed with. So I leave it to others to  talk about them. I believe even more different than all the later Bach MP.

The Greg Black

For me this is another Bach MP just much better in every aspect. But the older Bach mouthpieces are more flexible. Sorry but the more I write the more subjective I'm.  This is the sound I want. The one I tried was regular weight and for me they seem more heavy weight than the regular Bach. It works better in my Holton than in my Conn.  Maybe light weight is better in the Conn. But I have not tried it.  Anyway, this was the sound I wanted but as I told. The regular weight is maybe not the best for me and my Conn. Still this is the sound I want.  Anyway the Greg Black is for me a powerful, nice sounding, interesting choice. And he also made the mouthpiece I play today.


People, I have to tell you to read carefully, I'm just a regular player a long way from everything, and I have my taste. All of  you have another. What works for one will not work for another. 

Thanks for all help guys!

Leif

[ttf_savio]

When I read the above its obvious written by one who don't master the language and the words so good. And the mouthpieces I describe is the ones that was best for me and what I remember most.

I now play a Black Hill 2g I got from Chris. Since its unique its no point to tell so much about it. It is a little smaller than a Greg Black 1 1/2g. For me its easier to play, have the sound I want and suit my Conn and me better than everything else. So I have much to thank Chris, and the weakest point in my playing is now me.

But let me tell you all, even if I have tried a lot and it can seem I wiggle a lot in my search, I always was clear what I wanted. I did practice a lot, and I did learn all the time. I still will but are also a pearson that know where I want to go and do everything I can to make it. I mean with sound and equipment that suit me.  Hope my ramblings here is to use for some other. And for all of you that have very different goals and taste than me, its just one thing to do. Use your time and be interested in where you want to go. It seems funny that a teacher long away from any other trombone players can be so interested in this things. But without an interest and a goal there is no way to go.




Leif

[ttf_cozzagiorgi]

Thanks for your great posts Leif! And I don't only mean those two posts, all your posts are great!

And what I hear on your recordings is great, so obviously you made the right mp choice.

[ttf_Sliphorn]

Quote from: savio on May 21, 2010, 03:03PMWhen I read the above its obvious written by one who don't master the language and the words so good. And the mouthpieces I describe is the ones that was best for me and what I remember most.

I now play a Black Hill 2g I got from Chris. Since its unique its no point to tell so much about it. It is a little smaller than a Greg Black 1 1/2g. For me its easier to play, have the sound I want and suit my Conn and me better than everything else. So I have much to thank Chris, and the weakest point in my playing is now me.

But let me tell you all, even if I have tried a lot and it can seem I wiggle a lot in my search, I always was clear what I wanted. I did practice a lot, and I did learn all the time. I still will but are also a pearson that know where I want to go and do everything I can to make it. I mean with sound and equipment that suit me.  Hope my ramblings here is to use for some other. And for all of you that have very different goals and taste than me, its just one thing to do. Use your time and be interested in where you want to go. It seems funny that a teacher long away from any other trombone players can be so interested in this things. But without an interest and a goal there is no way to go.




Leif

These are great posts, and I'm sure will be very helpful.

Just for everyone to know...I've been listening to Leif play lots of different mouthpieces, and even if he finally settled on something, the thing I noticed was that he always sounds good...no matter what he plays.  Thanks for sharing your ideas, Leif.  We really appreciate you!

[ttf_anonymous]

Quote from: blast on Mar 09, 2006, 12:49PMThe poor old Bach 1 1/2G...... it gets a hard time these days.
Ed Kleinhammer can't see a use for it in the modern orchestra...
We call it a starter mouthpiece... a stepping stone to the serious stuff.
I've trumpeted the value of the improved Rath 1 1/2W and how we sorted the low register problems and funny rim that caused constant complaints (which we did)...
Well, the last couple of days, I've been thinking about all this....
Thinking a lot.
I took a few days out to see an old friend who is getting back into trombone after a long layoff from the profession. He wanted to settle on the right mouthpiece before really getting his head down and working...
so we took a couple of days, about forty mouthpieces, dozens of good recordings and a few bottles of wine, so that we were really sure that we had it right.
We played, we listened to old and new trombone recordings, we played some more, we drank, we played, I remodelled a rim, then another, then another, we played some more.
Then he gave me a present......
The finest Mt. Vernon Bach 1 1/2G that I have EVER come across !!
I had the Mt. Vernon 1 1/2G that I had turned into the prototype Rath 1 1/2W with me..... no comparison.
This new Mt Vernon is rich, creamy, refined, vibrant, singing, focussed......
and just as odd on the rim, and hard down low, and unforgiving as any Bach.......but when you work at it... it rewards you SO MUCH.
My Rath works better. Period. BUT ,the Bach is seductive beyond belief.
The sound I just love.... it's George Roberts, it's Tony Studd, it's not what you hear today.
Listening to lots of recent playing (non orchestral) the bass trombone has changed in sound.... almost everywhere.
SO..... perhaps I have been wrong....
perhaps all the kids should buy buckets that blow easy....
instant low register.... of sorts
They should fight for a sound on them for about twenty years....
Then they should try to buy a Mt. Vernon 1 1/2G, and try to play it if they do find one.
Not many will put up with all the problems....
But the few that do will be rewarded.....
It's not a starter mouthpiece...
It's a finisher mouthpiece.
Against my better judgement, I might just blow this quirky, stuffy, thing of beauty for a few weeks.....
I can always go back to the easy route....
but this is so interesting..... yes interesting.
Ask yourself when you play...is this the most interesting sound I've ever made ? It's a shame if it's not.

Chris Stearn.
Chris is it possible that the materials used to make the Mt. Vernon was in a sense more pure, although technology has gotten better w/the horns, the mouthpieces that are mass produced seem to be more of on the "crap shoot variety" you might get consistency you might not.   I too had the chance to play on a Mt. Vernon mouthpiece and was amazed how little effort it took to make the brass mouthpiece ring w/a sonorous but dark sound.  I kick my self in the butt for not "grabbing" the mouthpiece when I first had the chance.  And yes it was singing better than my Wick.  The Bach even seemed softer in texture but, not pretty like my wick, and its fancy shiny nickle plating.  Things in the old school seemed more of a "I will take the time to make pure products and with the best quality then use the cheapest material so I can make the most income."  I'm not surprised of your find about the Mt. Vernon Bach.
Sincerely Dorey

[ttf_johngsteel]

So what do you all think of the Kanstul coppies of the 1 1/2g, the 1 1/2gm, the George Roberts NY, and the recently create George Roberts (all from Kanstul - George uses that mouthpiece and a single trigger bass by Kanstul)

I have that same mouthpiece (the Kanstul George Robers) and it is huge!  fantastic large bore 1 1/2g sound!

- John

[ttf_anonymous]

 Maybe it's time for a new thread entitled "What in the world IS a 1&1/2G?" 

[ttf_blast]

Quote from: Donward59 on Aug 26, 2010, 06:45PM Maybe it's time for a new thread entitled "What in the world IS a 1&1/2G?" 
Well Don, you have a point.
When I started this off...way,way back.. I was talking about the Bach 1 1/2G in particular, but I suppose it was also the 1 1/2G size in general.
I was asking if people thought this size of mouthpiece still had a place and why it was worth working on. We have had a small discussion  about this that seemed to interest a few people 
There seems to be a large body of opinion that feels that 28mm at the rim is a watershed point where sound changes no matter who makes the mouthpiece... under that and you have the chance of getting that old, classic bassbone sound... over that and we go 'modern American school'. A vast generalisation i know, but it seems to hold up for most people on most mouthpieces. I have seen and played a vast number of mouthpieces in the general 1 1/2G size range... often courtesy of one Donward 59, and I have found this 28mm rule to hold good. What IS a 1 1/2G ??? ...I'm still working that one out 
Chris Stearn

[ttf_savio]

I'm so glad this tread is up and go again. It has been my inspiration to practicing and have joy from my trombone after a long downperiod.
The word 1 1/2g is a special and magic word for me.  What is a 1 1/2g?  Don, Its very clear for me. Its about sound. A beautiful, present,  rich,  warm, soulfull, vibrant, color full bass trombone sound.  1 1/2g is also about the size that make this sound possible.  Its not about what name the mouthpiece have, its just about size. There is a limit in rim diameter where you suddenly move in to another world.  The strange thing is this limit is where it is but everything has a limit. Why it suddenly change the sound?  I think nobody can tell why, it just the way it is.

I  dare to make an allegation here. (not sure the word) A Bb trombone is a trombone even it is called bass and tenor.  The characteristic trombone sound is lost when you have a mouthpiece that is too big to be in balance with a Bb trombone which a bass trombone still is. But don't take this ill up all you bass trombone players.  Please, its just a thought that is mine.  And are just thoughts.......They are just made from my love to the nice sound some excellent bass trombone players have made on the 1 1/2g for some decades.  That's all. For me personally I hope to listen this good bass sound more and more around where music is made. Both in big orchestras and small ensembles, and most of all in solo playing.

Leif

[ttf_tbarh]

Interesting about the 28mm "watermark" ; Its somewhat bigger than the usual generic 1 1/2g rim size.. I have tried and owned some really great sounding smaller bass mouthpieces including a Mount Vernon 2G , but unfortunately this small rim size really cramps my style..The smallest i can handle is a largish 1 1/2 G size. I have lately been using a Marcinkiewicz  1 1/2G (sic) which has a rim diameter just shy of 28mm and a smallish kind of 1 1/2G cup..Marcinkiewicz pieces seems too work with a big rim diameter and a smallish v-shaped cup, so it seems that i am making no compromises.. I have ordered a no. 3 which has an even shallower cup(but the same rim) in hope of getting a sound closer to the 2G without the backsides... The Marcinkiewicz pieces has a rather different construction with a very light blank,rather v-shaped cup, and a different rim shape, all contributing in making the sound too spread/squirrely/too "comercial"(subjectively speaking) . for me this was a question of adjusting the blow.. and its a perfect match to my Conn..

Anyone care to comment on what aspect of the classic bass trombone sound You lose when you go bigger in the rim? 


Trond

   

[ttf_blast]

I have heard several players get very good results with Marcinkiewicz mouthpieces and as you say tbarh, the player can adjust to get the sound they want with those mouthpieces. The Greg Black 1 3/8 is actually a little shallower than his 1 1/2.... part of a well thought out package, though that mouthpiece is right on the limits of rim size and tends to sound good on some trombones, but a spread sound on others.... that is what happens on rims over 28mm.... the sound spreads...bigger but diffuse. This is just what many players today are looking for... a big sound that is not too dense. The 1 1/2G people are looking for a very intense sound.. lots of focus and core.
This is the first time in history that players of any kind of bass trombone have been using mouthpieces of more than 28mm at the rim.... almost all classical music and a fair bit of commercial music was originally played on much smaller mouthpieces... the Conn Kenfield is about 6 1/2AL size at the rim and 19thC German mouthpieces were even smaller. Good or bad, who knows ? One thing is certain, mouthpiece sizes affect sound and sound is now very different to that heard by most classical composers... which can create problems in reproducing musical ideas in the concert hall. 1 1/2G and bigger is a post WW2 phenomenon ... indeed, I remember when the 1 1/2G was considered a big mouthpiece here with most players using a 2G on bass. Some in the UK still do.
Perhaps Savio is right... the 1 1/2G... a frame of mind.

Chris Stearn

[ttf_Birdy]

Quote from: blast on Aug 28, 2010, 01:34AMPerhaps Savio is right... the 1 1/2G... a frame of mind.


Ah, but is it the right mind? 

[ttf_Daniel Harris]

Quote from: blast on Aug 28, 2010, 01:34AM indeed, I remember when the 1 1/2G was considered a big mouthpiece here with most players using a 2G on bass. Some in the UK still do.

Chris, this observation raises an aspect of the issue that has largely been neglected, I think. This thread has discussed at length the 28mm "Rubicon," so to speak, but unless the 1.5G is simply to be a proxy for all mouthpieces on the smaller side of that divide, I think it is worth considering why the 1.5G rather than the 2G, in particular, or perhaps the even smaller mouthpieces that were used in earlier times.

What intrigues me personally about this is that, lately, I have found the 2G to be a more viable small option than the 1.5. The feel of the bite and rim contour seem very similar to me to the 1G Megatone I use most of the time. Even more interesting is the similarity in the blow of the 2G and the 1G. As different as the cup volumes of those two mouthpieces are, and as different as the backbores are, I have the sense that it is easy to provide the right amount of air to fill either mouthpiece, whereas with the 1.5G, even though it is smaller than the 1G, I don't feel I fill the mouthpiece unless I really think about it. There is something here beyond just large vs. small.

Dan Harris

[ttf_blast]

Quote from: Daniel Harris on Aug 29, 2010, 08:23AMChris, this observation raises an aspect of the issue that has largely been neglected, I think. This thread has discussed at length the 28mm "Rubicon," so to speak, but unless the 1.5G is simply to be a proxy for all mouthpieces on the smaller side of that divide, I think it is worth considering why the 1.5G rather than the 2G, in particular, or perhaps the even smaller mouthpieces that were used in earlier times.

What intrigues me personally about this is that, lately, I have found the 2G to be a more viable small option than the 1.5. The feel of the bite and rim contour seem very similar to me to the 1G Megatone I use most of the time. Even more interesting is the similarity in the blow of the 2G and the 1G. As different as the cup volumes of those two mouthpieces are, and as different as the backbores are, I have the sense that it is easy to provide the right amount of air to fill either mouthpiece, whereas with the 1.5G, even though it is smaller than the 1G, I don't feel I fill the mouthpiece unless I really think about it. There is something here beyond just large vs. small.

Dan Harris

Very interesting Dan,
I know were you are coming from... the interesting thing with the Bachs is that they are sized in .5 mm increments... all the large shanks... EXCEPT the 3G and 2G, which are really odd sizes... and I suspect that they are carried through from older models.. like the Clarke L model. In the UK, as I said, the 2G has been very popular for many years and is a very, very fine small bass mouthpiece.
Chris Stearn

[ttf_Daniel Harris]

Quote from: blast on Aug 30, 2010, 02:38PMthe interesting thing with the Bachs is that they are sized in .5 mm increments... all the large shanks... EXCEPT the 3G and 2G, which are really odd sizes... and I suspect that they are carried through from older models.. like the Clarke L model.

Thanks, Chris,

That is an interesting point, and certainly one I hadn't considered. It reminds me that some months back on Ebay, someone was selling a "bass trombone" mouthpiece (cup diameter of 26mm, I believe) made by Vincent Dell'Osa, whom the seller described as a Philadelphia mouthpiece maker and tech particularly known for his horn mouthpieces. I got the impression that Mr. Dell'Osa went back aways, so I wonder if he was at all a contemporary of Charles Gerhard, and if there might be some lineage there.


Dan Harris

[ttf_anonymous]

my friend is a junior at my highschool and he uses a 1 1/2g on bass and tenor trombone for marchingband 

[ttf_anonymous]

Hi there,

Just joined here after a layoff of 10+years, I was a freelance teacher/bass trombonist here in the UK.

Last month I made the journey to Mick Rath to try out some bass bones, armed with my trusty Mt Vernon 1.5G and a HW Wick 0AL - (which i quite liked when I was playing a lot) I set off for Huddersfield.

I was greeted by Chris Beaumont and he handed me an R9 & R9D and left me alone for 15 minutes to warm up and find which valve system I liked.  On his return I talked about which mouthpiece I should use, Chris informded me that by changing leadpipes/slides etc he could get me the volume of the 0AL with me using the MT V - interesting?  anyway to cut a 2 hour story short, I ordered a R9D, Gold bell, Dual bore slide in Bronze with the 9A leadpipe - this trombone gave me exactly the sound I wanted - centred, responsive and the loudest valve notes I have EVER played in my career, BINGO and all on the Mt V 1.5G.

So I'm not using as much effort as I would have done on the 0AL but getting as much volume and keeping it centred or am I?  Will have to wait and see what a pro Bass Trombonist thinks of the sound - suggestions for lessons please?

Can't wait for it to arrive at the end of the month.

[ttf_JSBassTrb]

Well I play A 1-1/2G...unfortunately not a Bach..but a Shires "Vintage", so close enough

[ttf_sdjazz]

One of the seniors at my school plays a Bach 1 1/2 G on a Bach 50B. But he's not all that good.

[ttf_JSBassTrb]

Quote from: sdjazz on Dec 01, 2010, 08:22PMOne of the seniors at my school plays a Bach 1 1/2 G on a Bach 50B. But he's not all that good.

Well at least we know it probably is not the mouthpiece

[ttf_sdjazz]

The mouthpiece has nothing to do with it. He's just not a very good sightreader, and tends to miss some accidentals (Ab versus A).

[ttf_JSBassTrb]

Sorry I meant my statement sarcastically. Its never the mouthpiece's fault. Rarely the horns, almost always his.

[ttf_sdjazz]

It's okay, I don't take offense to sarcasm. 
It's not the mouthpiece's fault. It may be some the horn's fault, because it's a school horn, and most school horns are @#$%ty. The missed notes are his fault.

[ttf_blast]

Once upon a time this was a useful and interesting discussion.
Anyone with anything useful or interesting, please post.
If not, DO NOT.

Chris Stearn

[ttf_blast]

Check the small print.... some might find it interesting.

Chris Stearn

[ttf_WaltTrombone]

I'm not familiar with Doug's gear, but... How are you getting on with it?

[ttf_blast]

Quote from: WaltTrombone on Dec 08, 2010, 06:38AMI'm not familiar with Doug's gear, but... How are you getting on with it?

Well Walt, I can do things on this set-up easier than any mouthpiece that I've used up to now... and the sound is surprisingly close to the Mt Vernon... and Doug is very, very helpful. I tried some of his stuff many years ago and liked it... but it was slightly different.... as I expect I was myself. This mouthpiece is teaching me new things... which is nice.

Chris Stearn

[ttf_Torobone]

Quote from: blast on Dec 08, 2010, 06:57AMWell Walt, I can do things on this set-up easier than any mouthpiece that I've used up to now... and the sound is surprisingly close to the Mt Vernon... and Doug is very, very helpful. I tried some of his stuff many years ago and liked it... but it was slightly different.... as I expect I was myself. This mouthpiece is teaching me new things... which is nice.
Chris Stearn

How did you arrive at this setup with Doug?

Phone interview, playing over the phone, face to face trial, or email?

[ttf_WaltTrombone]

One of these days I'll have to try some of Doug's stuff, especially on my euph. I'm using a stock 60 on that currently, love the sound, but not the work keeping the pitch up in the high register.

In perusing the specs, your setup looks like it's fairly close (on paper at least) to your 1.5G, but with a wide rim? I've gotten scared of flat rims like Bach, from playing so much high register stuff on that size rim, so I prefer the Schilke, feels cushier. Perhaps a wide rim would help compensate for a flatter rim with more bite?

Chris, you old dog, the day you stop learning new tricks is the day they bury you.

[ttf_blast]

Quote from: Torobone on Dec 08, 2010, 07:07AMHow did you arrive at this setup with Doug?

Phone interview, playing over the phone, face to face trial, or email?

Far more scientific....
A friend gave me a box of bits, including lots of mouthpieces... one of them was an Elliott combo. The rim was too big and the cup too shallow, but it had some qualities that made me interested in Doug's gear, having not tried them for many years. Within a week an interesting candidate appeared on Ebay UK, a 110 rim with J cup and J9 shank.... a quick snipe and it was mine.
 When it came I tried it... liked it, but didn't like the standard rim... the big wide one I had seemed better, but too big, so I ordered a 110 medium wide rim, after talking with Doug. I also got a MB109 J and J8 shank, just to have the closest version to the 1 1/2G size and to be able to compare 8 & 9 type shanks. My first guess proved correct and I settled on the LB110 MW with J cup and J9 shank.
I first tried it on a symphony live broadcast.... I realised that the mouthpiece I had been trying all summer was a blind ally, so I just shoved it in on the gig and blew the **** out of it. It worked a treat and has been in place ever since. I didn't want to post about it early on in the process as I might have changed my mind.... well, it's still early in the process, but so many good things are happening that I thought I would come clean and post.... it would take something unreal to replace this little gem !!!

Chris Stearn

[ttf_Torobone]

Quote from: blast on Dec 08, 2010, 08:03AMFar more scientific....
A friend gave me a box of bits, including lots of mouthpieces... one of them was an Elliott combo. The rim was too big and the cup too shallow, but it had some qualities that made me interested in Doug's gear, having not tried them for many years. Within a week an interesting candidate appeared on Ebay UK, a 110 rim with J cup and J9 shank.... a quick snipe and it was mine.
 When it came I tried it... liked it, but didn't like the standard rim... the big wide one I had seemed better, but too big, so I ordered a 110 medium wide rim, after talking with Doug. I also got a MB109 J and J8 shank, just to have the closest version to the 1 1/2G size and to be able to compare 8 & 9 type shanks. My first guess proved correct and I settled on the LB110 MW with J cup and J9 shank.
I first tried it on a symphony live broadcast.... I realised that the mouthpiece I had been trying all summer was a blind ally, so I just shoved it in on the gig and blew the **** out of it. It worked a treat and has been in place ever since. I didn't want to post about it early on in the process as I might have changed my mind.... well, it's still early in the process, but so many good things are happening that I thought I would come clean and post.... it would take something unreal to replace this little gem !!!

Chris Stearn


Thanks. That makes sense. I bought a Wick 1AL at an event here a couple of years ago to replace various 1 1/2Gs, including Bach, Holton and Kelly. The difference was amazing.

At some point, I may look into Doug Elliott's gear. My next MP project is on tenor.

[ttf_savio]

That's good to read Chris, I'm happy its working. I know this pieces. I remember for me the MB108 did sing very well. Difficult to explain but I listen my old practice/trying mp3 and it sings very nice. Oh I should not listen, then I start again..........I just wonder if the J cup is the same as I have? Mine say MB J? Anyway, glad to hear it works the right way for you Chris.

Leif

[ttf_Doug Elliott]

No, Chris liked the LB series medium-wide 110 rim and J cup.  It plays a little "bigger" than the MB series.

[ttf_JimR]

WOW Chris - a DE 110 rim?  That's getting pretty large compared to the Bach 1 1/2 "tradition" isn't it?

What makes this size "special"? Is the 1 1/2 G obsotlete?  After 60 pages, here are some questions I have using Doug's rim sizes as a baseline for the discussion.

I have also worked with Doug (unfortunately, never "in person").  I am currently playing a SB107 J J9 setup.  It is very close to the FAXX 1 1/2G rim size.  I am certainly not a pro, but play a lot in jazz bands in my area.

I have played the 106, 108, Rath B2W and Rath B2 and Faxx 1 1/2 as well as an older Bach 2G - all experience on the small side of the bass bone mouthpiece issue.  I have found the 107 to be the size that allows the best compromise to a solid low register while not sacrificing the upper register.  It is almost identical to the rim size of the FAXX 1 1/2.  I continue to improve all areas with this rim size and (dare I say) have found the best compromise for me.

I played a SB 108 rim for about a year, but the high range was not solid enough so I went back to the 106.  That gave me better "core" sound and a good high register, however, this size was just too constrained and I couldn't get the volume (loudness) I needed.  I switched to the FAXX 1 1/2 and it gave me a better volume of sound in the trigger register, but I really like the rim Doug has and did not like the shape of the FAXX rim.  The 107 size allows me to produce a bass sound with a lot of "core" with good volume when necessary.  it really took the best of the 106 and the 108 and balanced the differences for a very good sound for me.  I was surprised such a small change could make such a difference - but it did.

Doug lists the 108 as the 1 1/2 "size"; however, Bach lists the 1 1/2 at 27.0 mm and the 1 1/4 at 27.5.  The 106 is pretty close to 27.0 and the 108 is pretty close to 27.5 and the 110 - well 27.94 - that's pretty big to be a 1 1/2 "style" size; but Chris has found it to be close to the 1 1/2 style. (CHRIS - I hope this isn't putting words in your mouth here).

I know, I know, specs mean nothing, but ....

Chris is probably the most knowledgeable person on this topic and has found the 110 to be a good facsimile for the MV Bach 1 1/2 yet with a rim diameter approaching 28mm.  That's quite a bit bigger then the original "intent" of the 1 1/2G. Right?

So where does that leave the "magic" of the 1 1/2 when discussing mouthpiece "architecture"?  I have found it with the 107 rim and Chris, you have found it in the 110 - both J cups, both 9 stems.  Quite a bit of difference in rim sizes between 107 and 110 - so what creates the 1 1/2 style?

Chris, do you consider the 110 to be a MV 1 1/2 style mouthpiece or something "different"?   If it is in the style of the 1 1/2, what do you see as the key aspects of the design that give you that feel?  It seems rim size ain't the issue as far as I can tell.

What is it that creates the magic of the 1 1/2 size?  Maybe the original MV 1 1/2G really is obsolete being replaced by newer, better options that provide much of the magic of the 1 1/2 w/o the compromises - such as what Doug has provided in his designs (as an example)?

Jim

[ttf_Doug Elliott]

Jim, I'm pretty sure you and Chris are different embouchure types.  A 1-1/2G is a hair too big for you, and a little too small for Chris's ideal size.  You can both make it work, but that particular size is not perfect for either of you.  That is one of the reasons that people sometimes find the "magic" Mt Vernon (or other) mouthpiece that seems to work better.  They varied a lot, so if you might find one that is closer to "your size" than others.

And I think the 27mm and 27.5mm specs are just plain wrong.  I have never seen a 1-1/2G or 1-1/4G that measure that way.

[ttf_blast]

Doug has put things very well.
As he says, the Bach size figures are pretty meaningless in the real world. A Bach 1 1/4G feels WAY bigger than the 110 rim that I am playing.
My two remaining Mt Vernon 1 1/2Gs are both bigger than most modern examples at the rim.
I think there has been an acceptance in this thread that tonally, 28mm is a watershed point... below that MOST mouthpieces tend toward the more traditional/classic bass trombone sound, above this MOST mouthpieces tend toward the more 'modern' sound. Individual designs mean that similar sizes can sound and feel vastly different... so life is complex.
My position has always been that the sound I want to make is that traditional/classic style sound, but I have found it easier to play larger mouthpieces... I was about 15 years on a Schilke 60.
At the start of this thread I had moved onto a Mt Vernon Bach 1 1/2G because I loved the sound and feel and decided that it was worth the extra effort to make the lower register work...and the high register, which I find more challenging too on smaller sizes.
Since then I have been dipping into various other mouthpieces around the 1 1/2G size... always curious about finding a mouthpiece that gets me the sound but fits my face better. I kept coming back to the Mt Vernon, but now I have something that really gives me the best of both worlds.

Chris Stearn