Posted by Rick Denney on January 07, 2003 at 18:18:03:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Funnel vs. bowl? posted by Greg on January 07, 2003 at 17:12:30:
I would not consider these two to be archetypes of their respective designs, despite how Custom categorizes them. My PT-48 is much more bowl-shaped than the Doug Elliott T cup, which seems to have more bowl to it than a Conn Helleberg. The PT-48 is a strong-sounding mouthpiece, putting a lot of intensity into the sound. It might be really colorful on the BAT Holton, but the two just don't seem to match up well.
I don't have a PT-88, but I wonder if its depth means it is a bit more funnel-shaped than most bowl-concept mouthpieces.
If you want to make the comparison, the archetypes of the two concepts have always been the Bach 18 and the Conn Helleberg.
But I think that there are other differences, too. Cup volume and throat bore seem to have as big an effect as the cup shape, it seems to me. So, comparisons are difficult unless you control for those other factors.
Personally, I just try mouthpieces (or mouthpiece parts) until I get the playing characteristics and comfort that I want, and then I look and see what shape it is.
Rick "who admires any player who can make a good sound, especially up high, on a Bach 7" Denney