Marcinkiewicz most similar to Schilke 51?

[Bach5G]

I can’t decipher the specs. Anyone?

[BGuttman]

This is a problem. The specs say the 8H was supposed to be like a Bach 4G, but it's really more like a 6 1/2 AL. There is something about the Marcinkiewicz specs that they don't feel like they should.

I would try the 5 size. But maybe Doug Elliott would know better.

[HGrobot]

Yeah, the spec sheet on their site gives me a headache. I was poking around it this morning curious about what they have that would be close to a Bach 5G or 7C, but I can't make sense of the darn thing . Much like Bruce was saying what I see on the spec sheets does not match any comparisons given in what few reviews I could find.

[Posaunus]

I have a Marcinkiewicz ET1 "Peebles" mouthpiece which seems pretty close to a Schilke 51. Marcinkiewicz's specs on cup diameter are inscrutable. They say this mouthpiece has a cup I.D. of 26.14mm at the lip, and a throat I.D. of 6.76mm. When I measure it, though, I find the cup I.D. to be more like about 25.55mm. (The throat is indeed 6.76mm) When I measure a Schilke 51 using similar methods, I get a cup I.D of about 25.60mm, and a throat of 7.04mm. I also know that Byron Peebles (L.A. Philharmonic) played a Schilke 51C4d (similar to a Schilke 51 with a slightly shallower cup, a flatter rim, and a custom backbore. (I have one of his mouthpieces, gold-plated, which he sold when he retired from playing.) So it would seem reasonable that his "endorsee" model from Marcinkiewicz would be similar to the 51C4d.

As Bruce noted, the non-"endorsee" Marcinkiewicz 8H, that looks like bigger on paper, is really closer to a 6½Al size piece. I would guess that the Marcinkiewicz 4 is pretty close to a Schilke 51 (same throat size, too) – but have never tried one.

Good luck.

[greenbean]

I have played many Marcinkiewicz mouthpieces and have really liked them all. The description of the Marc Peebles and the Marc H8 is spot on. My 8H is labeled 8H/6.5AL because it is definitely 6.5 sized (but better playing than most).

I have also used a Marc 4 on large-bore a lot. Bigger cup than a 51. Roughly a 4G sized. Very nice player.

[greenbean]

(It is the bass mouthpieces that really shine!)

[BGuttman]

(It is the bass mouthpieces that really shine!)

Amen to this.

I use the GR model (was also called 2) on bass trombone when I haven't been playing bass for a while.
I use a 3 as a "small bass" mouthpiece with a large tenor.
I use a 107 in my 125 year old Eb tuba (it's a pretty small bore instrument).

[Grahambone]

Graham Middleton here. I have been working at Marcinkiewicz for a couple of years now and have slowly been able to decipher most of the mouthpieces. The model numbers and measurements are certainly confusing. If anyone need any help finding a size or wants a recommendation, please feel free to email me at [email protected]

Lots of good information in the above postings. The ET1 Peebles is indeed a good comp to the Schilke 51. The rim is a little more rounded and has a softer bite than the Schilke, but cup, throat and bb are a good match. Also, our standard mouthpieces are pretty light weight so will play a little more "live" than the Schilke. We also make the ET1 in our heavier Concert Hall weight.

I am certainly aware that the measurement on our charts don't make a ton of sense when compared to other manufactures. To be fair, the numbers are accurate (Joe was one of the first makers to use computer design and CNC technology to make mouthpieces), but they are just measured from an point on the rim curve that doesn't always accurately represent the rim as a whole. For mouthpieces with an elevated high point on the rim, like the 8H, Joe's measurement point, gives a rim diameter point that is before the bite and is too large compared to the place where the chops actually feel the rim.

We are working on redoing these numbers to be more inline with the rest of the industry and hope to have them posted on a new website soon.

Cheers,

Graham Middleton

[Bach5G]

Graham: I don’t see the ET1 in a CH weight on the website. Assuming it’s available, is it priced as an ET1 or as a CH model?

[Posaunus]

... the measurement on our charts don't make a ton of sense when compared to other manufactures. ...they are just measured from an point on the rim curve that doesn't always accurately represent the rim as a whole. ...gives a [specified] rim diameter point that is before the bite and is too large compared to the place where the chops actually feel the rim.

This is as I expected, and makes a lot of sense to me. It took me a while to figure our how to make the conversions from the Marcinkiewicz tables to something that I understood.

We are working on redoing these numbers to be more inline with the rest of the industry and hope to have them posted on a new website soon.

Glad to learn that the specifications will be rationalized so others can select the mouthpieces they want.
I really like the Marcinkiewicz pieces in my collection:
• "Geo Roberts" bass trombone
... (really nice piece for non-classical work - and I think of George whenever I play it)
• ET1 "Peebles" large shank
• 9B "B. Stroup" small shank
... (somewhere between a Bach 6½AL & a Schilke 51 - but better than either for a small/medium bore trombone)
• 11 small shank
... (sort of like a Bach 6½A - but better)

As Graham said, these pieces are all relatively lightweight (not a lot of extra metal), which works well for me. The rims seem comfortable to me - but I'm pretty flexible from that standpoint. I've never played a heavier "Concert Hall" piece.

[JohntheTheologian]

I've played several Marc mps and I like them all. I find their rims very comfortable.

I've used the 8H on my small bore, a 4 on my large bore and a 3 on my bass unless I'm playing a lot of charts that favor the low range.

When I'm playing low range oriented charts, I use a Bach 1 1/2G, but I'd like to get a Marc of comparable or slightly larger size.

Any suggestions?

[Posaunus]

I've used the ... a Marc 3 on my bass unless I'm playing a lot of charts that favor the low range.

When I'm playing low range oriented charts, I use a Bach 1 1/2G, but I'd like to get a Marc of comparable or slightly larger size.

Any suggestions?

Marcinkiewicz lists Bass Trombone mouthpieces labeled 1.5G (specified 27.84mm cup I.D.) and 1 (28.19mm). I would guess that the Marc 1.5G is about the same as a Bach 1½G (or maybe a little larger) and that the Marc 1 is appreciably larger. Perhaps Graham Middleton has accurate information?

[BGuttman]

I found the Marc 1 to be similar to the 1 1/4 G (or Schilke 59).

I like my GR (which was originally 2). It's just a little bigger than a 1 1/2 G but not too much so.

[JohntheTheologian]

Thanks. I might put out some feelings on the Classified unless one of you has a Marc 1, 1 1/2, 2 or GR model that your interested in parting with.

I might add that a friend of mine who plays monster bass bone euipment loaned me Marc J Martin #106 model that was HUGE. Not only was the cup diameter and cup depth huge, but the mp was about an inch and quarter longer than any other bass bone mp I've ever seen. It was far too big for me.

[BGuttman]

105, 106, and 107 are supposedly contra mouthpieces. I tried to use a 105 on my King 7B and it was a dud. But it works OK (and a 107 works better) on my ancient Conn Eb tuba.

[Schlitz]

.

[greenbean]

Thanks. I might put out some feelings on the Classified unless one of you has a Marc 1, 1 1/2, 2 or GR model that your interested in parting with.

I might add that a friend of mine who plays monster bass bone euipment loaned me Marc J Martin #106 model that was HUGE. Not only was the cup diameter and cup depth huge, but the mp was about an inch and quarter longer than any other bass bone mp I've ever seen. It was far too big for me.

John, I can sell you one of my two Ernie Tack model Marcs. Slightly bigger than a 1.5. Great player.

I currently play a Phil Teele model. Bigger and perfect for me.

I also own a Bill Reichenbach model. Deeper still and the throat is larger. Too much!

[JohntheTheologian]

Sorry about the duplicate post above. My computer was doing wacky things when I tried to respond to this post and I ended up posting twice.

Tom, you mentioned that you have an Ernie Tack model you'd like to sell. From the Marc specs it looks like it might work well along with my Marc 3. In our big band our charts seem to switch between those that treat 4th bone as a true bass bone, with lots of low notes and others that treat 4th bone more like a tenor, expecting a far amount of playing in the upper range at times. The Marc 3 works very well on the latter type of charts and I've been switching mps during rehearsals and gigs when the true bass bone charts come up, using the 1 1/2 G.

Since I like Marc rims, it sounds like ET model might be a good one for me. Has anyone else played both the Marc 3 and ET model for comparison and done switching between them?

BTW, Bruce, thanks for the info on the 106 model. Makes sense. As I said, my friend plays monster equipment-- a Rath with dual bore slide, etc.-- and all his mps are toilet bowl size. He just didn't like the Marc rim and loaned it to me for a trial. Even another tuba playing friend who doubles on bass bone found that mp too big when he tried it. It was impossible for me to play much higher than the F above middle C on it. Pedal tones sure sounded great, though.

[Grahambone]

Graham: I don’t see the ET1 in a CH weight on the website. Assuming it’s available, is it priced as an ET1 or as a CH model?

You are right, the Concert Hall ET1 isn't on our website. One of the many reasons we need to update and rework the site.

We make all of the Endorse trombone and bass trombone mouthpieces in the Concert hall weight. they are $200

Also FWIW, The concert hall mouthpieces aren't really a heavy weight mouthpiece, they are more of a standard weight. I did a quick measurement yesterday. A Schilke 58 weighs 6oz. A similarly size Concert Hall 1.5G is 5.6oz. The grooves are there to take extra weight off of the mouthpieces while still giving the stability and sound of a heavy mouthpiece.

[Grahambone]

I've played several Marc mps and I like them all. I find their rims very comfortable.

I've used the 8H on my small bore, a 4 on my large bore and a 3 on my bass unless I'm playing a lot of charts that favor the low range.

When I'm playing low range oriented charts, I use a Bach 1 1/2G, but I'd like to get a Marc of comparable or slightly larger size.

Any suggestions?

So I have 3 Bach 1 1/2Gs. Two are slightly smaller than the Marcinkiewicz 1 1/2G, one is a dead ringer. If you are looking for something slightly bigger, but with a similar blow the EBT3 is a good choice. It is roughly a Bach 1 1/4 cup rim on a 1 1/2G cup.

EDIT: Just caught up to the end of the tread. Greenbean know whats up. The EBT3 is the same as the ET and sounds like a good idea.

Graham

[Grahambone]

I found the Marc 1 to be similar to the 1 1/4 G (or Schilke 59).

I like my GR (which was originally 2). It's just a little bigger than a 1 1/2 G but not too much so.

One bit of misinformation here, the 1 1/2G is the same mouthpiece as the GR. Same program made on the same lathe. There was never a Model 2

The Marcinkiewicz 1 is slightly smaller than my Greg Black 1 1/4G both in terms of rim diameter and cup depth. It is a much closer match to the Schilke 59.

[Grahambone]

Yes, the 105, 106 and 107 are designed as contra mouthpieces. They are slightly longer, the same length as the older Schilke mouthpieces. We frequently make the 105 for people as a standard length mouthpiece. The 105 is a good option in you like the sound of a Schilke 60, but hate the cookie cutter rim feel.

[Bach5G]

So I ordered a Peebles from MP express.

And I’ve had my Teele in my bass for the past few days.