Cup variation of profile
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
This a hard one to describe. I've read about double cup mouthpieces but never owned one as the general consensus seems to be that they don't work as well as conventional mouthpieces. I DON'T want to have that conversation here. What interests me are some mouthpieces that seem to have a hint of this idea... a small funnel shaped section that joins the cup to the bore and backbore. These have cropped up over the years and I have examples from PHD, Neil Sanders and even a pre war Bach.... anybody know anything about this idea and where it came from ? Doug ?
Chris
Chris
- LeTromboniste
- Posts: 1634
- Joined: Apr 11, 2018
I have a mouthpiece from circa 1840 that has a rudimentary form of what I think you are describing (if I understand you correctly; it is hard to describe Indeed).
It has a hemispherical cup and like earlier mouthpieces a very sharp edge at the throat (not curved at all, it has a clear angle to it), then a short funnel section. The narrowest point is maybe 5-7 mm into the bore, and then it tapers out again. A colleague has an almost identical mouthpiece from the same period but without this venturi in the backbore. Trying them side-by-side with a horn that can be played with or without a leadpipe, hers (without venturi) works better when combined with a leadpipe, but mine (with venturi) works better without the leadpipe. That makes sense as the venturi helps slotting in a similar way as a a leadpipe does (but not as much)
I would say that due to the absence of sharp edges and because the throat is always more of a shoulder, virtually all modern mouthpieces have this idea to some extent, it's just that the further into the backbore the narrowest point is, and the wider the diameter is at the start of the shoulder (and thus the softer the curve if the shoulder is), the more noticeable it is.
It has a hemispherical cup and like earlier mouthpieces a very sharp edge at the throat (not curved at all, it has a clear angle to it), then a short funnel section. The narrowest point is maybe 5-7 mm into the bore, and then it tapers out again. A colleague has an almost identical mouthpiece from the same period but without this venturi in the backbore. Trying them side-by-side with a horn that can be played with or without a leadpipe, hers (without venturi) works better when combined with a leadpipe, but mine (with venturi) works better without the leadpipe. That makes sense as the venturi helps slotting in a similar way as a a leadpipe does (but not as much)
I would say that due to the absence of sharp edges and because the throat is always more of a shoulder, virtually all modern mouthpieces have this idea to some extent, it's just that the further into the backbore the narrowest point is, and the wider the diameter is at the start of the shoulder (and thus the softer the curve if the shoulder is), the more noticeable it is.
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
[quote="LeTromboniste"]I have a mouthpiece from circa 1840 that has a rudimentary form of what I think you are describing (if I understand you correctly; it is hard to describe Indeed).
It has a hemispherical cup and like earlier mouthpieces a very sharp edge at the throat (not curved at all, it has a clear angle to it), then a short funnel section. The narrowest point is maybe 5-7 mm into the bore, and then it tapers out again. A colleague has an almost identical mouthpiece from the same period but without this venturi in the backbore. Trying them side-by-side with a horn that can be played with or without a leadpipe, hers (without venturi) works better when combined with a leadpipe, but mine (with venturi) works better without the leadpipe. That makes sense as the venturi helps slotting in a similar way as a a leadpipe does (but not as much)
I would say that due to the absence of sharp edges and because the throat is always more of a shoulder, virtually all modern mouthpieces have this idea to some extent, it's just that the further into the backbore the narrowest point is, and the wider the diameter is at the start of the shoulder (and thus the softer the curve if the shoulder is), the more noticeable it is.[/quote]
So this idea goes back at least to 1840... assuming that the mouthpiece has not been tampered with .... very interesting indeed. I know how differently mouthpieces with a sharp cup/throat transition play...easy to sound airy unless you get air flow and focus just right... could this be a very early way to make mouthpieces more easy to play ? Apart from the Bach, these are not particularly good sounding mouthpieces in a modern context, though the Bach (an 11 with a very small funnel section) is utterly awesome.
Chris
It has a hemispherical cup and like earlier mouthpieces a very sharp edge at the throat (not curved at all, it has a clear angle to it), then a short funnel section. The narrowest point is maybe 5-7 mm into the bore, and then it tapers out again. A colleague has an almost identical mouthpiece from the same period but without this venturi in the backbore. Trying them side-by-side with a horn that can be played with or without a leadpipe, hers (without venturi) works better when combined with a leadpipe, but mine (with venturi) works better without the leadpipe. That makes sense as the venturi helps slotting in a similar way as a a leadpipe does (but not as much)
I would say that due to the absence of sharp edges and because the throat is always more of a shoulder, virtually all modern mouthpieces have this idea to some extent, it's just that the further into the backbore the narrowest point is, and the wider the diameter is at the start of the shoulder (and thus the softer the curve if the shoulder is), the more noticeable it is.[/quote]
So this idea goes back at least to 1840... assuming that the mouthpiece has not been tampered with .... very interesting indeed. I know how differently mouthpieces with a sharp cup/throat transition play...easy to sound airy unless you get air flow and focus just right... could this be a very early way to make mouthpieces more easy to play ? Apart from the Bach, these are not particularly good sounding mouthpieces in a modern context, though the Bach (an 11 with a very small funnel section) is utterly awesome.
Chris
- elmsandr
- Posts: 1373
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Trying to turn to some pictures, is the picture of Monette's "Slap" profile a portion of what you are describing?
Seems to match their description a little as well:
Cheers,
Andy
Seems to match their description a little as well:
Many years ago, our dear friend and client Maynard Ferguson asked us to improve his mouthpiece design so that it would have an even bigger sound, a larger, more forgiving “sweet spot” on each note, and make it easier to play in all registers—especially the upper register. We did it, and the MF III model was born. Since then, we have adapted our other rim sizes with corresponding “SLAP” cup designs to improve all Monette mouthpieces in the same way we improved Maynard’s. SLAP cups rapidly became the new standard, and today nearly 100% of our mouthpieces have “SLAP” cup designs.
1)The larger, more bowl-shaped cup at the top of the mouthpiece makes for a bigger sound and more room for the chops to swell up without degrading performance.
2)The middle of the cup comes in faster than old designs, allowing a faster response
3)The bottom of the cup has a wider funnel shape, to open up the “target size” of each note and make the mouthpiece more forgiving to play.
Cheers,
Andy
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
The description is on the same page but the graphic is much softer...smoothed out... these mouthpieces I have look like someone has just put a cone shaped drill down there...you can really feel the sharp transition from cup to funnel. I don't think Monette went that way on his bass pieces...I have a BT 1 and 2 in the collection.
Chris
Chris
- Reedman1
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Apr 14, 2018
I've been wondering about this topic. Specifically, I wonder how the interior shape of the mouthpiece influences the sound of the trombone through the various registers. I have played mouthpieces with the same rim and shallower or deeper cups, and I see that the over depth (or volume) of the cup brightens or darkens the timbre globally. I wonder if a more s-curved interior profile might give both brilliance in the high register and fullness in the low register - or if any mouthpiece helps or hinders in that regard.
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
[quote="Reedman1"]I've been wondering about this topic. Specifically, I wonder how the interior shape of the mouthpiece influences the sound of the trombone through the various registers. I have played mouthpieces with the same rim and shallower or deeper cups, and I see that the over depth (or volume) of the cup brightens or darkens the timbre globally. I wonder if a more s-curved interior profile might give both brilliance in the high register and fullness in the low register - or if any mouthpiece helps or hinders in that regard.[/quote]
I think that is the idea behind the full blown double cup mouthpiece . These are much more of a hint of a change in cup shape...the funnel part is real, but small..perhaps largest on the PHD. More to talk about, I hope.
Chris
I think that is the idea behind the full blown double cup mouthpiece . These are much more of a hint of a change in cup shape...the funnel part is real, but small..perhaps largest on the PHD. More to talk about, I hope.
Chris
- Reedman1
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Apr 14, 2018
[quote="FOSSIL"]<QUOTE author="Reedman1" post_id="112845" time="1589292767" user_id="3067">
I've been wondering about this topic. Specifically, I wonder how the interior shape of the mouthpiece influences the sound of the trombone through the various registers. I have played mouthpieces with the same rim and shallower or deeper cups, and I see that the over depth (or volume) of the cup brightens or darkens the timbre globally. I wonder if a more s-curved interior profile might give both brilliance in the high register and fullness in the low register - or if any mouthpiece helps or hinders in that regard.[/quote]
I think that is the idea behind the full blown double cup mouthpiece . These are much more of a hint of a change in cup shape...the funnel part is real, but small..perhaps largest on the PHD. More to talk about, I hope.
Chris
</QUOTE>
What's the PHD?
I've been wondering about this topic. Specifically, I wonder how the interior shape of the mouthpiece influences the sound of the trombone through the various registers. I have played mouthpieces with the same rim and shallower or deeper cups, and I see that the over depth (or volume) of the cup brightens or darkens the timbre globally. I wonder if a more s-curved interior profile might give both brilliance in the high register and fullness in the low register - or if any mouthpiece helps or hinders in that regard.[/quote]
I think that is the idea behind the full blown double cup mouthpiece . These are much more of a hint of a change in cup shape...the funnel part is real, but small..perhaps largest on the PHD. More to talk about, I hope.
Chris
</QUOTE>
What's the PHD?
- Posaunus
- Posts: 5018
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
I have a Parduba true double-cup mouthpiece, purchased on a lark. It actually plays pretty nicely; easy high range, but perhaps a bit thin sounding; low range is more of a struggle. But fun to experiment with - I should give it a longer workout to see if I could adapt. :idk:
- Doug_Elliott
- Posts: 4155
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
I have no opinion except that I would never make a mouthpiece that way.
- Reedman1
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Apr 14, 2018
[quote="Doug Elliott"]I have no opinion except that I would never make a mouthpiece that way.[/quote]
Which way?
Which way?
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
[quote="Reedman1"]<QUOTE author="FOSSIL" post_id="112846" time="1589296309" user_id="7109">
I think that is the idea behind the full blown double cup mouthpiece . These are much more of a hint of a change in cup shape...the funnel part is real, but small..perhaps largest on the PHD. More to talk about, I hope.
Chris[/quote]
What's the PHD?
</QUOTE>
PHD was a name used by Bach's old shop foreman John Pettinato (sp?) after he left VB when the company moved to Elkhart. He started making mouthpieces with trombonist Neil DeBoise (sp?). The mouthpiece I have is a Bach blank (modified) and is unique in design including this feature.
Chris
I think that is the idea behind the full blown double cup mouthpiece . These are much more of a hint of a change in cup shape...the funnel part is real, but small..perhaps largest on the PHD. More to talk about, I hope.
Chris[/quote]
What's the PHD?
</QUOTE>
PHD was a name used by Bach's old shop foreman John Pettinato (sp?) after he left VB when the company moved to Elkhart. He started making mouthpieces with trombonist Neil DeBoise (sp?). The mouthpiece I have is a Bach blank (modified) and is unique in design including this feature.
Chris
- Doug_Elliott
- Posts: 4155
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
[quote="Reedman1"]<QUOTE author="Doug Elliott" post_id="112871" time="1589308997" user_id="51">
I have no opinion except that I would never make a mouthpiece that way.[/quote]
Which way?
</QUOTE>
The subject of this thread:
[quote="FOSSIL"]... a small funnel shaped section that joins the cup to the bore and backbore.
Chris[/quote]
I have no opinion except that I would never make a mouthpiece that way.[/quote]
Which way?
</QUOTE>
The subject of this thread:
[quote="FOSSIL"]... a small funnel shaped section that joins the cup to the bore and backbore.
Chris[/quote]
- Reedman1
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Apr 14, 2018
[quote="Doug Elliott"]<QUOTE author="Reedman1" post_id="112874" time="1589312612" user_id="3067">
Which way?[/quote]
The subject of this thread:
[quote="FOSSIL"]... a small funnel shaped section that joins the cup to the bore and backbore.
Chris[/quote]
</QUOTE>
What about a gentler "shoulder" going from cup to throat? Would that affect timbre from register to register?
Which way?[/quote]
The subject of this thread:
[quote="FOSSIL"]... a small funnel shaped section that joins the cup to the bore and backbore.
Chris[/quote]
</QUOTE>
What about a gentler "shoulder" going from cup to throat? Would that affect timbre from register to register?
- Reedman1
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Apr 14, 2018
Maybe a better question is: How does the interior profile of a mouthpiece work?
- Fridge
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Apr 04, 2018
I actually have one of the PHD mouthpieces that he made for BB McCullough.
Fridge
Fridge
- Doug_Elliott
- Posts: 4155
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
According to Benade (IIRC) the shape doesn't matter, it's all about volume.
- TheBoneRanger
- Posts: 225
- Joined: Apr 04, 2018
[quote="Doug Elliott"]According to Benade (IIRC) the shape doesn't matter, it's all about volume.[/quote]
Which orchestra did he play in again?
Andrew
Which orchestra did he play in again?
Andrew
- Reedman1
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Apr 14, 2018
[quote="Doug Elliott"]According to Benade (IIRC) the shape doesn't matter, it's all about volume.[/quote]
I believe that you have mentioned that conical or v-shaped mouthpieces for trombone yield a rather French-horn-like sound...
I believe that you have mentioned that conical or v-shaped mouthpieces for trombone yield a rather French-horn-like sound...
- Posaunus
- Posts: 5018
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="TheBoneRanger"]<QUOTE author="Doug Elliott" post_id="112893" time="1589325415" user_id="51">
According to Benade (IIRC) the shape doesn't matter, it's all about volume.[/quote]
Which orchestra did he play in again?
Andrew
</QUOTE>
Arthur Benade was a nuclear physicist and science educator, with a particular interest in the physics of musical instruments. He authored several papers and books on these subjects. He was also a flutist, probably not in any famous orchestra.
<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.amazon.com/Horns-Strings-Ha ... 0486273318">https://www.amazon.com/Horns-Strings-Harmony-Dover-Books/dp/0486273318</LINK_TEXT>
According to Benade (IIRC) the shape doesn't matter, it's all about volume.[/quote]
Which orchestra did he play in again?
Andrew
</QUOTE>
Arthur Benade was a nuclear physicist and science educator, with a particular interest in the physics of musical instruments. He authored several papers and books on these subjects. He was also a flutist, probably not in any famous orchestra.
<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.amazon.com/Horns-Strings-Ha ... 0486273318">https://www.amazon.com/Horns-Strings-Harmony-Dover-Books/dp/0486273318</LINK_TEXT>
- Doug_Elliott
- Posts: 4155
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
I said "according to Benade"
I don't think anybody else agrees. Except probably other acousticians with no real world experience.
I don't think anybody else agrees. Except probably other acousticians with no real world experience.
- TheBoneRanger
- Posts: 225
- Joined: Apr 04, 2018
[quote="Posaunus"]<QUOTE author="TheBoneRanger" post_id="112895" time="1589326981" user_id="2973">
Which orchestra did he play in again?
Andrew[/quote]
Arthur Benade was a nuclear physicist and science educator, with a particular interest in the physics of musical instruments. He authored several papers and books on these subjects. He was also a flutist, probably not in any famous orchestra.
<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.amazon.com/Horns-Strings-Ha ... 0486273318">https://www.amazon.com/Horns-Strings-Harmony-Dover-Books/dp/0486273318</LINK_TEXT>
</QUOTE>
Perhaps I should have made my joke a little more clear. Thanks anyway...
Andrew
Which orchestra did he play in again?
Andrew[/quote]
Arthur Benade was a nuclear physicist and science educator, with a particular interest in the physics of musical instruments. He authored several papers and books on these subjects. He was also a flutist, probably not in any famous orchestra.
<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.amazon.com/Horns-Strings-Ha ... 0486273318">https://www.amazon.com/Horns-Strings-Harmony-Dover-Books/dp/0486273318</LINK_TEXT>
</QUOTE>
Perhaps I should have made my joke a little more clear. Thanks anyway...
Andrew
- Posaunus
- Posts: 5018
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="Doug Elliott"]I said "according to Benade"
I don't think anybody else agrees. Except probably other acousticians with no real world experience.[/quote]
You're right about that Doug. I took a musical acoustics/physics course at a well-known technical institute. The professor was well-educated and erudite. Sort of interesting. But in some areas he was totally out in left field - which some of us students proceeded to demonstrate by real-world examples. ;)
I don't think anybody else agrees. Except probably other acousticians with no real world experience.[/quote]
You're right about that Doug. I took a musical acoustics/physics course at a well-known technical institute. The professor was well-educated and erudite. Sort of interesting. But in some areas he was totally out in left field - which some of us students proceeded to demonstrate by real-world examples. ;)
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
The Griego Bousfield V3 is exactly this type of mouthpiece. Ian sounds great on it. I think I sound pretty good on mine. I will say it is the easiest playing mouthpiece I've ever used.
- paulyg
- Posts: 689
- Joined: May 17, 2018
Benade's two books that I have do not attempt to answer this question. In fact, as far as I can tell, Benade is fairly up-front about his objective, which is to analytically explain the BASIC acoustic phenomena at play in all instruments. The subtleties of mouthpieces are a bit further down the road from anything found in those two books, and would require considerably more depth to provide any sort of satisfactory explanation.
There have been those who have attempted to "science" musical instruments- we even had a few of those people on the old forum. They will always be left in the dust by those who treat science as merely a tool to refine their art.
My gut instinct (and I will limit my "analysis" to instinct, so as to keep time wastage to a minimum) is that the most pronounced effect of varying the cup profile is to affect the magnitude of the reflected wave (from this transition from cup to throat) to the vibrating lips. When waves encounter a change in their guide boundary or their medium, a portion of the energy passes the disturbance as a transmitted wave, and a portion of the energy takes the form of a reflected wave. Filleting/fairing the transition between the cup and the throat of the mouthpiece would probably reduce the magnitude of the reflected wave. A very abrupt transition (seen on many trumpet mouthpieces, and some old-school trombone mouthpieces) may cause a stronger reflection- more feedback on the chops. I can see this helping, from a physical standpoint, in reinforcing the lip's vibration at low dynamics. I suspect that this region of the mouthpiece has a great deal to do with a player's perception of the instrument's "resistance." Also, I actually would buy Monette's claim of this effect producing a "faster response."
There have been those who have attempted to "science" musical instruments- we even had a few of those people on the old forum. They will always be left in the dust by those who treat science as merely a tool to refine their art.
My gut instinct (and I will limit my "analysis" to instinct, so as to keep time wastage to a minimum) is that the most pronounced effect of varying the cup profile is to affect the magnitude of the reflected wave (from this transition from cup to throat) to the vibrating lips. When waves encounter a change in their guide boundary or their medium, a portion of the energy passes the disturbance as a transmitted wave, and a portion of the energy takes the form of a reflected wave. Filleting/fairing the transition between the cup and the throat of the mouthpiece would probably reduce the magnitude of the reflected wave. A very abrupt transition (seen on many trumpet mouthpieces, and some old-school trombone mouthpieces) may cause a stronger reflection- more feedback on the chops. I can see this helping, from a physical standpoint, in reinforcing the lip's vibration at low dynamics. I suspect that this region of the mouthpiece has a great deal to do with a player's perception of the instrument's "resistance." Also, I actually would buy Monette's claim of this effect producing a "faster response."
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
[quote="Fridge"]I actually have one of the PHD mouthpieces that he made for BB McCullough.
Fridge[/quote]
So is your PHD a conventional design ? Does the outside look like a Bach with the cup shape machined straight?
I know PHD was discussed on TTF way back but not a lot came out of that as there are so few of these mouthpieces around.
Chris
Fridge[/quote]
So is your PHD a conventional design ? Does the outside look like a Bach with the cup shape machined straight?
I know PHD was discussed on TTF way back but not a lot came out of that as there are so few of these mouthpieces around.
Chris
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
[quote="harrisonreed"]The Griego Bousfield V3 is exactly this type of mouthpiece. Ian sounds great on it. I think I sound pretty good on mine. I will say it is the easiest playing mouthpiece I've ever used.[/quote]
I'll have to get in touch with Ian and ask if this is true and where the idea came from if it is.
Let me be clear, I am mostly interested in where this style of cup came from historically. As to the playing qualities, that's another, very subjective issue.
My Bach New York 11 is, to me the most interesting...is it original? The position of the bore and backbore suggests it is... but is there another out there ? My Mt Vernon 11 is conventional and the New York is far superior, but the others I have with this feature are less successful.
Chris
I'll have to get in touch with Ian and ask if this is true and where the idea came from if it is.
Let me be clear, I am mostly interested in where this style of cup came from historically. As to the playing qualities, that's another, very subjective issue.
My Bach New York 11 is, to me the most interesting...is it original? The position of the bore and backbore suggests it is... but is there another out there ? My Mt Vernon 11 is conventional and the New York is far superior, but the others I have with this feature are less successful.
Chris
- Tbarh
- Posts: 505
- Joined: Aug 16, 2018
[quote="FOSSIL"]<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="112930" time="1589346008" user_id="3642">
The Griego Bousfield V3 is exactly this type of mouthpiece. Ian sounds great on it. I think I sound pretty good on mine. I will say it is the easiest playing mouthpiece I've ever used.[/quote]
I'll have to get in touch with Ian and ask if this is true and where the idea came from if it is.
Let me be clear, I am mostly interested in where this style of cup came from historically. As to the playing qualities, that's another, very subjective issue.
My Bach New York 11 is, to me the most interesting...is it original? The position of the bore and backbore suggests it is... but is there another out there ? My Mt Vernon 11 is conventional and the New York is far superior, but the others I have with this feature are less successful.
Chris
</QUOTE>
I think Ian describes it as sort of an augmented 6 1/2A with the size (big inner rim) and depth like the big G mouthpieces but with higher "shoulders" like the 6 1/2A.. I remember that the "Wedge" mouthpiece Company distributed cup profiles on their web Page.. Showing that the shape of the G pieces Were pretty similar to each other, while the 6 1/2A had a much more pronounced "shoulder".. The 5GS was in between.. Unfortunately they took the Page down..
Trond
The Griego Bousfield V3 is exactly this type of mouthpiece. Ian sounds great on it. I think I sound pretty good on mine. I will say it is the easiest playing mouthpiece I've ever used.[/quote]
I'll have to get in touch with Ian and ask if this is true and where the idea came from if it is.
Let me be clear, I am mostly interested in where this style of cup came from historically. As to the playing qualities, that's another, very subjective issue.
My Bach New York 11 is, to me the most interesting...is it original? The position of the bore and backbore suggests it is... but is there another out there ? My Mt Vernon 11 is conventional and the New York is far superior, but the others I have with this feature are less successful.
Chris
</QUOTE>
I think Ian describes it as sort of an augmented 6 1/2A with the size (big inner rim) and depth like the big G mouthpieces but with higher "shoulders" like the 6 1/2A.. I remember that the "Wedge" mouthpiece Company distributed cup profiles on their web Page.. Showing that the shape of the G pieces Were pretty similar to each other, while the 6 1/2A had a much more pronounced "shoulder".. The 5GS was in between.. Unfortunately they took the Page down..
Trond
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
In the video where Ian says "It's a 6.5al that we just expanded outwards but kept the ratios the same", Christan gives him a strange look. Hard to read.
I'll take a picture or draw a cross section or something.
V3 on the left. Badly drawn, but that is the shape of the cup.
<ATTACHMENT filename="DSC_0324.JPG" index="0">[attachment=0]DSC_0324.JPG</ATTACHMENT>
I'll take a picture or draw a cross section or something.
V3 on the left. Badly drawn, but that is the shape of the cup.
<ATTACHMENT filename="DSC_0324.JPG" index="0">
- Fridge
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Apr 04, 2018
Hey Chris, yes, a conventional design. A guy walked into Dillon Music in the early 2000’s one day with stuff he was trying to sell Steve. Ha asked me if I was interested. I grabbed this up.
Fridge
Fridge
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
[quote="Fridge"]Hey Chris, yes, a conventional design. A guy walked into Dillon Music in the early 2000’s one day with stuff he was trying to sell Steve. Ha asked me if I was interested. I grabbed this up.
Fridge[/quote]
Ha ha!! I'm not surprised you jumped on that...a bit of history and super rare ! I'm sure that with a few adjustments I could make mine work but that's not going to happen to my bit of history...it stays as is, as a reference.
Chris
Fridge[/quote]
Ha ha!! I'm not surprised you jumped on that...a bit of history and super rare ! I'm sure that with a few adjustments I could make mine work but that's not going to happen to my bit of history...it stays as is, as a reference.
Chris
- Fridge
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Apr 04, 2018
Hey Chris, I feel the same way. It feels more like a 2G than a 11/2.
Fridge
Fridge
- RobbTooley
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Apr 11, 2020
I’ve recently got hold of a PHD - it’s marked “S3”. It’s got a very “funnel” shaped outer but the inside appears to be much more cup-shaped.
- Tbarh
- Posts: 505
- Joined: Aug 16, 2018
I once had a similar PHD piece like BB Mc Cullough used on bass in Pittsburgh... Really strange! Very small throat and very tight backbore... Looks like it wasnt finished..
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
[quote="Tbarh"]I once had a similar PHD piece like BB Mc Cullough used on bass in Pittsburgh... Really strange! Very small throat and very tight backbore... Looks like it wasnt finished..[/quote]
Did I buy that from you ?
Chris
Did I buy that from you ?
Chris
- Tbarh
- Posts: 505
- Joined: Aug 16, 2018
No, I sold it to Michael Mc Lemore (of M&W trombones).. Cant imagine he found use for it.. Allthough, it had some virtues, flat(strangely so) rim was both efficient and comfortable,It was very easy to play soft on, but had no fortissimo (with me at the helm)... I regret selling it though.. Rare and special... But i am a player first, collector second..
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
[quote="Tbarh"]No, I sold it to Michael Mc Lemore (of M&W trombones).. Cant imagine he found use for it.. Allthough, it had some virtues, flat(strangely so) rim was both efficient and comfortable,It was very easy to play soft on, but had no fortissimo (with me at the helm)... I regret selling it though.. Rare and special... But i am a player first, collector second..[/quote]
Yes, mine has a thin round rim..oversize 1 1/2G... bare brass, small backbore...unique.
Chris
Yes, mine has a thin round rim..oversize 1 1/2G... bare brass, small backbore...unique.
Chris