I've borrowed a 5G type mouthpiece from a friend. I've had it a few weeks now and it's settled in OK. I have 88H and a .525" bore and, compared to my Bach 5G, found the tone much improved on both bores but I was randomly splitting more notes on the Conn than usual. However, when I put the loan mouthpiece in the .525", hey presto, no splits or cracks (well, hardly any) and a lovely tone. Same mouthpiece , two different outcomes. Now here's the thing: The mouthpiece on loan is a Rath and the .525" is also a Rath. The Conn prefers the Bach, but I don't, and the Rath prefers the Rath. Is it a coincidence that these two compliment each other or is it a stroke of genius from Rath ? Could there be other explanations? Anybody had similar cases of instruments choosing a mouthpiece?

Too many variables.

You have a playing problem of splitting notes, which is a similar situation to to a double buzz. An equipment change makes the symptom better, but you still have the problem.

Yes there's such a thing as matching various aspects of mouthpieces to horns and players, but with a playing issue going on you're not in a position to evaluate that.

Thanks, Doug. I'll keep working on it.

There is no match between mouthpiece and instrument that will make a problem in your playing disappear.

But there are mismatches between mouthpiece and instrument that can create problems in how the instrument plays, a common example being messing up the tuning of the partials, or making the response bad on certain partials or notes.

Matching mouthpiece to instrument is a science unto itself. Mouthpieces and instruments by the same maker are of course expertly matched (ex. Bach mouthpieces match Bach instruments really well, and of course the Remington mouthpiece with the Conn 88H). In general, a heavier mouthpiece matches well with a lighter horn and vice versa, but of course there are exceptions and variables.

[quote="Macbone1"]... Bach mouthpieces match Bach instruments really well, and of course the Remington mouthpiece with the Conn 88H).[/quote]

I never found this to be true with my 88H (other than the perfect taper match between Remington shank and 88H receiver). I could not get comfortable with the Remington piece. Schilke 51 was my long-term standby. But now ... it's a great Doug Elliott setup. :good:

I never found this to be true with my 88H (other than the perfect taper match between Remington shank and 88H receiver). I could not get comfortable with the Remington piece. Schilke 51 was my long-term standby. But now ... it's a great Doug Elliott setup. :good:

[/quote]

Tell you the truth, I never I liked the Remington piece either and do not own a Conn 88H.

As I was going through my formative years, people were discarding the Remington pieces left and right. They could generally be found for free around bandrooms, backs of lockers, et cetera.

[quote="Posaunus"]<QUOTE author="Macbone1" post_id="293266" time="1769440125" user_id="7770">
... Bach mouthpieces match Bach instruments really well, and of course the Remington mouthpiece with the Conn 88H).[/quote]

I never found this to be true with my 88H (other than the perfect taper match between Remington shank and 88H receiver). I could not get comfortable with the Remington piece. Schilke 51 was my long-term standby. But now ... it's a great Doug Elliott setup. :good:
</QUOTE>

[quote="Macbone1"]Tell you the truth, I never I liked the Remington piece either and do not own a Conn 88H.

As I was going through my formative years, people were discarding the Remington pieces left and right. They could generally be found for free around bandrooms, backs of lockers, et cetera.[/quote]

Funny thing is that I now have a small-shank "Remington" Connstellation mouthpiece (similar dimensions to the large-shank Remington that came with my 88H) and it plays pretty well with my more-recently-acquired 1970 0.522" bore Conn 79H. :amazed:

Have I changed over the decades? Is the Remington a better match to medium-bore trombones? Should I retrieve my large-shank Remington and try it again with my 88H? (I think the 6.15mm throat is too small.) :idk:

People change over the years. Dentition changes in subtle ways. And according to a clinic l attended by Carsten Svanberg, the face itself migrates downward over the years. All this can drive mouthpiece choices.

The “mouthpiece to instrument match” is somewhat of a thing. Griego & Edwards, Hammond & Bach are two examples because these are the horns the players were on when developing this brand mouthpiece for them. Doesn’t mean a Hammond won’t sound good in a shires or a Greg Black will automatically sound great in a shires etc and exceptions to the rule exist. The mouthpiece world is a difficult one.

With the player being the biggest variable, I don't think there is such a thing as a mouthpiece to instrument match.

The closest thing I can think of, besides a backbore being tailored to match up with a particular bore size, is the shank tip diameter/ insertion depth rabbit hole:

It is absolutely true that there will be an ideal mouthpiece insertion depth, for that particular player, on that particular instrument, with that particular mouthpiece in question. And it will be different on a different instrument, and different on a different mouthpiece model. But finding that out will likely take having to taper down the shank and getting lucky, or then having to deal with building the shank up with tape. Which is crazy.

The goal of this is to change the perceived openness (further in) or resistance/compression (further out) of the instrument.

A great example of this for me are the Yama 830 basses that eat up the mouthpiece shank. There is some debate about if this is cosmetic or if it legitimately changes where the venturi is in tension to the shank tip on this particular horn (the leadpipe receiver opening would need to be larger than the slide bore for this to be the case), but setting that aside, the horn plays better if you build up the shank of your mouthpiece to go in around 1". It's like a completely different horn. You can try this on any horn risk free, although only in an "additive" direction with tape or Teflon tape. I've found that mouthpieces seem match up better if they are designed to be slightly longer than normal and insert slightly further in.

Except when they don't. The Griego 1C for example is a great design and that doesn't even go in the normal 1".

You can drive yourself mad if you worry about it too much. Or maybe it will make all the difference. Case in point, check out the shank on the mouthpiece on the table here, Lindberg's original Minick to go with his Minick 88H:

<ATTACHMENT filename="images (6).jpeg" index="0">[attachment=0]images (6).jpeg</ATTACHMENT>

Shank turned down and looks taped.

Whatever works for you works.

There are certain trends, or fashions, but they come and go, they do not mean anything in most cases.

A few exceptions (in my opinion): If you play a vintage horn, try finding a mouthpiece (that you like), from roughly the same time period. Old Conns, old Bachs etc.

Play a German trombone with a German style mouthpiece.