Posted by Anon on January 24, 2003 at 11:08:14:
In Reply to: Euphonium Mouthpiece? posted by eupher on January 23, 2003 at 14:14:11:
I have made several mouthpiece changes in the past couple of years. First, I feel it doesn't matter which mouthpiece you use, until you have a solid, reliable embouchure (through long tones, lip slurs, range work, etc.) and proper breath support. Second, I think the shape of the cup has alot to do with the "feel" of a mouthpiece. Some cups are more bowl-shaped while others are more conical. It has been my experience that the more bowl-shaped the cup, the more the embouchure slots, centers, or pegs pitches (right or wrong). In other words, I feel it decreases flexibility, but tone clarity is usually good. A bowl-shaped cup also seems to create more back pressure. Vice versa, a more conical-shaped cup allows for flexibility of pitch (i.e. "bending notes and slurs tend to be easier) and is more "free" blowing. However, the tone can become less focused with a more concial cup. The truth is that most cups are a combination of cone and bowl shapes.
It is my opinion, that the cup of a Schilke 51D is more bowl-shaped than that of SM mouthpieces. As for the Wick 4AL, it is only slightly more bowl-shaped than the SM4 (the SM is a little deeper and the bore is a little wider). The Doug Elliot XT I cup is a pretty good cross between the SM3 and Schilke 51D. My only reccomendation is to be educated in your selection of a new mouthpiece. I apologize for the lack of technical jargon in this reply. -Anon