Posted by Steve Skov on June 10, 2002 at 22:34:56:
In Reply to: Laskey 30H vs Perantu. 50 posted by Mouthpiece Check on June 10, 2002 at 10:02:41:
I agree with Mr. Chisham's comment that the pt-50 and the Laskey are two different animals. I used the PT-50 for a VERY LONG time on my Kalison "Italian Shoe" Daryl Smith CC with tremendously wonderful results. When a good friend of mine loaned me his Laskey, it was not what I wanted, at first. I actually played for a couple of rehearsals, then pretty much put it on the shelf for a while since it was so much different from the 50. For this player, the Laskey is a little smaller with a sharper rim.
Then, after trying it again, for something I do not remember, it just clicked. The response was there and the tone growled (is that a good thing?). It could have been the horn, the stars and planets lining up, playing routine with the Three Stooges on the tube, or just plain Spring Fever. It just worked and I haven't switched back since. I think the Kal-zone DS is a .750 bore. I'm not counting.
After going back and forth to the PT, and it is a great mouthpiece, there is not as much front on the attacks but has more fundamental in the sound. The Laskey may tend to bring out more upper harmonics along with a lot of front without the effort. At least that is what this minion has discovered.
Since switching from the Kalison to a 6/4 Hirschbrunner, and the Laskey is holding its place, a good balance between attack and sound. Actually, have been using the Laskey on the f-tuba when playing concert band stuff. Worked too hard for attacks with the PT-50 (on the Hirshbrunner). Probably 99.9% sure its just the player, so heed these words and try them out for yourself. That is the best way to judge.
Steve Skov
USAF Band of Liberty