hornplayer.net Information archive

Giardinelli Mouthpieces

The lower the wire gauge number in the mouthpiece designation, the less resistance in the mouthpiece. The C1 has the least resistance in the C-Series of mouthpieces. The Chambers Model, up to the C10, is a deep cup. Generally, the rest of the C-series are shallower cups, though with a similar inner contour. The reason the C12 and C15 are shallower is because the proportion of bore size to cup depth ought to be kept "reasonable". A very large bore, as the #1, has even less resistance in a medium or shallow cup, plus the resulting tone of that combination is coarse and airy.

In my mouthpiece-crafting experience, persons with a naturally hard and potent buzz tend to benefit from the larger-dimensioned mouthpieces like the C1, as this cup smooths the tone. Conversely, players with a rather soft buzz (of course this buzz ought to be strengthened by practice...) can benefit from the shallower cup & smaller bore, as it helps concentrate the sound & reinforce the higher partials. A deep cup, coupled with a smaller bore (say, like the old King H2) tends to produce a dark and covered tone on most horns, though again this depends on the resistance of the horn, too. Using a famous player's mouthpiece MAY be a good thing, but in most ways it is like trying to wear somebody else's clothes. Better to get your own size!

Which brings me the the rim of the Chambers. Most of the rims which were cut onto the C-mouthpieces have been the reverse-peak type. Maybe Chambers used this arrangement, maybe not. In any case, the rim on the C-Series is narrow, which will suit SOME but not all. It has an outside edge that gives the rim a very distinct feeling, unlike a standard curved contour.

It is always better to start out with a screw-rim setup so that the feel of the new mouthpiece in the horn is not confused by adding an alien rim to the mix. Whenever I get a call for a custom mouthpiece I ask the player what he/she has been playing up to that point, and advise them to keep the same rim if they are happy with it. Chances are I have a pattern for their long-time favorite, and I can certainly make small changes to enhance the existing rim for better comfort & control.

Factory-made mouthpieces can be very good indeed, if you don't need custom work and don't have a lot of bucks. I have a copy here of the latest Conn 7BW, which came with a new 8D. The finish is extremely fine and the rim looks well- defined and very comfortable. It was apparently made on a computer-numeric- controlled lathe (CNC). Holton also makes their mouthpieces on CNC lathes, so dimensional control is nearly absolute. The Holtons are inexpensive as well. Hope this rather long post is helpful. I have a small brochure available (free) on trying out a new mouthpiece.

Just because someone else finds that a Shilke TripleXXX, Laserlight, fuel injected, quadraphonic model allows him to jump through musical hoops with panache, doesn't mean that mouthpiece will work equally well for you. Perhaps a generic Joe-Blow model will allow you to sound like Dennis Brain. So what Phil Myers or any other player uses should not enter into your consideration about which mouthpiece to select.

As well, you may have lips which require an extra thick or extra thin rim. You may find that a shallow cup doesn't work as well as a deep cup or vise versa. If you're playing on a shallow cup and finding that playing loud, especially in the high range, is a struggle, you may find that a deep-cup version of the same model will correct the problem.

Just remember, you can play on the same equipment as someone else and not have the same result. You may have the same ability, but your equipment needs may be different. Above all, never play on a mouthpiece which makes your lips sore or swell. A new mouthpiece should not take much time to get use to if it really fits you.

So, if someone suggests a particular mouthpiece is the best mouthpiece, that mouthpiece is probably the best mouthpiece for that player but might not serve your technical or musical needs. You just have to try a variety of mouthpieces from thick to thin rims, deep to shallow cups, small to large bores. Keep in mind, if you find a particular rim you like, but the cup and bores don't suit you, you can always have a custom mouthpiece made combining all the positive elements of the various mouthpieces you liked.

In all the recent discussion of Giardinelli mouthpiece cup depths & bore sizes, I didn't hear anything about rim shape.

Doesn't anybody besides me find the Giardinelli rim uncomfortable & tiring? It's not that the Giardinelli rim is too narrow, just that it has a reverse-peak contour that really digs in. (Maybe this relates to the "pressure" discussion from a few weeks back.)

Aren't the mass-produced mouthpieces like Holton Farkas, Holton Tuckwell, & Conn Connstellation lots more comfortable where the metal meets the lipflesh?

I find the "bite" - the inner edge of the mouthpiece - on Giardinelli mouthpieces to sharp, and it bruises my oh-so-tender lips. The nice thing about Stork is that they offer a rounded bite version.

I just ordered a Stork from the Osmun site (http://www.osmun.com) and the rounded-bite Stork is annotated as "W"

I am biased - being the Osmun site designer - but Bob Osmun's price is hard to beat. $44 US for a one piece silver plated Stork that regulary goes for $60.

I suspect part of this thread is a manifestation of the fixation that American Horn players are being accused of in Europe -- of being maniacal about volume and the "Big Tone" -- whatever that is. Some one is being misled badly to think that an Alto Horn can be made to have the same sound as a Horn, which is double the length of tubing found in the F Alto Horn.

In short, I do not believe Loud and Beauty are synonyms; nor are Big and Better. Sometimes, less IS more!

How can you be "wrong" about your own experience?

I would bet my Master's degree that Mr. Myers' intent is misstated: The inference that a bigger mouthpiece equals a "better sound". I cannot believe he would say that (as gospel) to a student. Just read his Stork article.