Re: Re: am I good to go??


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Rick Denney on February 22, 2001 at 09:19:17:

In Reply to: Re: am I good to go?? posted by Aubrey Foard on February 22, 2001 at 00:46:22:

One huge advantage to a 186 is that it is relatively impervious to mouthpiece choices regarding intonation. I've played the following mouthpieces in my 186 over the years: Bach 24AW, Bach 18, PT-1 (old numbering--what is it now? a PT-36?), Miraphone Rose Orchestra, Conn Helleberg, and now a PT-48. Each mouthpiece has a profoundly different sound on the horn, but they all have similarly good intonation.

This must be a huge advantage for a college player. As they grow and develop, they can experiment with different mouthpiece shapes to find that sound they are after.

I love my York Master, but it is sensitive to mouthpiece choice. Most of the above choices cause unmanageable intonation difficulties. It was nothing a trip to Doug Elliot couldn't fix, but constructing a mouthpiece that allowed acceptable intonation while still permitting the instrument's full voice was no trivial matter.

As to "brightness," that is more the player than the horn. I'd sound bright on a jumbo sousaphone. I kept trying to fight it (hence the steady progression from cup-shaped mouthpiece to funnel-shaped mouthpieces), and finally I got the PT-48 to make that concept work its best. Now, I can play (for me) loudly on that horn with a lot of projection and with a lot of clarity, and the gigs where that is needed work best on that horn. But I know several players who get warm and mellow sounds on their 186's, using mouthpieces like the Helleberg.

And I would not be too eager to dismiss the 188 if one comes your way. I personally know at least one professional player who used a 188 for years for solo, jazz, and quintet applications. It's a little fatter than a 186, but it's still no 5/4 horn.

Rick "only recently understanding how sensitive some horns are to mouthpieces" Denney


Follow Ups: