Mouthpiece choices and Father Time

[Macbone1]

Has anyone on this forum addressed the influence of aging on mouthpiece selection? The face starts to sag after age 50, and in men at least, facial skin can thicken and toughen. A mouthpiece from HS band days may no longer do the job. That's a good reason to keep a few choices around and not to sell off a bunch for a few quick bucks. My preferences are notably different than they were 20 years ago. Still need a good match to your horns though.

[Doug Elliott]

Frequently I find players preferring larger rim sizes as the get older. In many cases I attribute that to finally realizing that's what they should have been on all along.

Less often, players move to smaller sizes, maybe due to dental changes more than anything else.

[hyperbolica]

I'm 57. About 8 years ago I switched from the std tenor setup 5g to DE 104 size rims. I probably should have done this before. I haven't had the desire to change again since then. But, I am playing euph, bass bone and tuba on bigger mouthpieces.

I do worry about the embouchure muscles starting to deteriorate. I've got friends into their 70s playing well. One friend who is probably 80+ is showing signs of slipping. I knew a trumpet player who played past 100, although probably should have stopped doing it in public in his 90s. I'd be happy to do that well.

[BGuttman]

I think you may need to abandon the "toilet bowl" bass mouthpiece in favor of something smaller as you age -- I find that I am more liking my Marcinkiewicz GR now (but that's maybe because I don't play bass much and my Doug Elliott setup is comparable to a Yeo).

I wouldn't be surprised if as you age you need a different mouthpiece. Maybe for the reasons Doug mentioned and maybe because you have changed.

[Bach5G]

Does your sense of pitch go as you age?

I don’t know if my high range, which was never great, is deteriorating, but I’m lucky to squeak out an Eb these days.

[Macbone1]

Good input here. Not changing mouthpieces at a certain point could make playing a little frustrating going forward.

[Kingfan]

Could the (perceived) need to change mouthpieces as we age be due more to less air support and not due to changes in the embouchure?

[Doug Elliott]

Definitely in some cases.... but everybody's different.
Another big cause is weight loss.

[MTbassbone]

Definitely in some cases.... but everybody's different.
Another big cause is weight loss.

Doug, what happens when weight loss occurs?

[Bach5G]

Weight loss not an issue for me. Unfortunately.

[Kingfan]

Weight loss not an issue for me. Unfortunately.

Me, too! My six pack abs turned into a pony keg

[Macbone1]

I attended a clinc by Carsten Svanberg once; he addressed embouchure considerations related to aging.

[robcat2075]

For most of the trombone players I have performed with, it is hard to imagine that losing weight... would be a bad thing.


But, anyway... In my advancing age I am pleased that high range is actually easier.

When I was taking lessons in college I could barely squeeze out a G above the staff. Now I can hit that and on up to Bb fairly well and even C D and... Eb?... if I'm fresh. Still using the big Schilke 60.

What changed? I certainly haven't spent hours on high range etudes. Somewhere in that last ten years I made the connection between the vowel the tongue is shaping and ascending in range.

ahh-eee-ick

It is a rare case of me playing smarter, not harder.

I wish any of the many teachers I've had had gotten me on that 40 + years ago instead of preaching nonsense about "diaphragm" or "intensity" or "column of air".

In the intervening decades I did occasionally experiment with smaller mouthpieces but didn't see a high range advantage from them and they impeded my low range.

ahh-eee-ick was the solution i needed.

[Macbone1]

"Ick"??
Those with well-formed embouchures and comfortable with their range (like me) who notice new struggles as time goes by should consider at least a slight mouthpiece change at a certain point, IMHO. And that's not necessarily a plug to give Doug Elliott more business!

[BGuttman]

Alan Raph used to use the syllable "SSS" for very highest range. I like it better than Ick.

As we get older the muscles aren't as strong as they used to be so sometimes a change in mouthpiece can compensate. I don't know enough about embouchure to say which way to go. Doug indicates that most of his contacts (customers / students) seem to go larger; maybe this is because they became more corpulent with age (unlike me, who was always corpulent). Whatever Doug or Dave Wilken says about this, I defer to their better knowledge.

[timothy42b]

What changed? I certainly haven't spent hours on high range etudes. Somewhere in that last ten years I made the connection between the vowel the tongue is shaping and ascending in range.

ahh-eee-ick

There's a complication here. The vowel may make a difference but remember we can do an ahh on a variety of pitches - the mouthshape can change pitches in the oral cavity independently of the vowel.

Also, the vowel implies vocalizing to some people, but it is possible to get the pitch without that.

[ithinknot]

There's a complication here. The vowel may make a difference but remember we can do an ahh on a variety of pitches - the mouthshape can change pitches in the oral cavity independently of the vowel.

Not exactly... we're altering resonant frequencies, not pitch.

In singing and speech, the fundamental pitch and its harmonics are generated by the vocal folds, and varied by the tension thereof via the laryngeal muscles, as well as by air pressure. The resonators (pharynx, oral cavity, nasal cavity, etc) separately determine formant frequencies. These are the 'signature resonances' of given vowels, which exist independently of pitch (and when the fundamental frequency is higher than the first formant, then we lose the sense of the vowel, which is why sopranos' vowels get very approximate above a certain point).

For brass playing, the situation is (sort-of-) simpler, because (special effects like the 'faux muted' trick aside) the goal is a single optimised resonance for a given pitch.

Re the vowels/tongue position, in singing you're covering the ah-ee range, beyond which you run into 'closed ng', where pitch is maintained, but airflow is only directed through the nose. If maintaining airflow through the lips is the priority then there's the whole voiceless fricative (tongue-controlled air leak, basically) spectrum between German 'ch' - I'm assuming that's what 'ick' more-or-less represents above - and ss. (There are plenty of other voiceless fricatives, of course, but many aren't compatible with tongued articulations or buzzing - 'th', for example.)

(There are also plenty of 'extras' not used in classical singing, like a pitched zz, where air leaks through a front-of-tongue ss shape. If you try this while intermittently pinching your nose - and, really, why not treat yourself - you'll find there are multiple versions of this sound, some of which involve the nasal cavity as a resonator and some of which don't.)

[robcat2075]

English is awkward for discussing this since the spelling and pronunciation of sounds varies quite a bit, among regional variations and even in standard dictionary English.

These "vowels" are not something that is sung or audibly spoken. The vocal cords are not active in this.

Calling them "vowels" is all I've got, however, short of delving into technical phonetics jargon.

These vowels are shapes the tongue makes inside your mouth when you speak these sounds... we are borrowing these shapes for the non-speaking purpose of tuning our vocal tract to best produce a resonant sound on our horn.

This is an alternate way of explaining common advice like "raise the back of your tongue for high notes..."

If I were to roughly map out where in the trombone range I feel myself making these different shapes as I play over the trombone range it might be like this...

Range Vowels2 sm.png

I've placed each one on a note where I feel it is purest in form. In between those notes the form is in gradual transition. The whole range is a continuous spectrum of gradually morphing tongue shape.

I speak un-accented Midwestern American English. Those spellings are how I imagine they should be represented. Below each one I've listed several words that rhyme with the vowel.

The last one... k... is hardest to describe. It's not much of a vowel. The German ch can be similar but German speakers vary, none-the-less. It is NOT like JFK's Berlin accent, "eeshh bin ein Berliner"

Imagine whispering "kiss". Then leave out the ss and just say "ki...".

Then leave out the stop that is the initial k sound and do only the hiss of air over the back of the tongue that is between the "k" and the "ss" of "kiss".

My experience is that if I use the wrong vowel in the wrong range I get a congested and un-resonant sound. When I do lip slurs, changing the vowel is a big part of that.

Notice there is no "oo" or "uh" among them. Advising beginners to tongue with "too" or "tuh" is a crippling mistake.

I presume most players of any proficiency are already doing some or all of this, though perhaps unaware of it.

Consciously recognizing the use of these vowel shapes has been the key to getting my range and flexibility to what it should have been decades ago. Too late for any serious trombone activity, but at least now I know what was wrong.

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[Basbasun]

Thankyou musicofnote for sharing your traveling through the mpc size hunt, and the very fascinating youtube clips.
I am a bit older than you , changed from tenor to bass in 1969 with a Holton 1 1/2 G mpc, I was using bigger mpc to get a bigger low range, the largest was a Black 1G. Latter I was going the other way to what I play now a Bach 1 1/2G. I practise all pedals, and a few double pedals. And the high range. Actually after 70 I started downsizing. It works.

(as you all know there are different ways to pronounce vocals, I sweden the vocal "ooo" is often used in teaching trombone, and with good result)

[Basbasun]

About weight. 2018 my weight was 83, now it 76. It was 70 for some time. Actually I trie for some time get to 83 again.

[robcat2075]

robcat2075 - I think what you're speaking about is more tongue position relative to range and not actual vowel sounds. Whilst saying those vowels, if one notices what the tongue and glottis are doing, that's what is a big help.

Yeah. I said that...

These "vowels" are not something that is sung or audibly spoken. The vocal cords are not active in this.

Calling them "vowels" is all I've got, however, short of delving into technical phonetics jargon.

These vowels are shapes the tongue makes inside your mouth when you speak these sounds... we are borrowing these shapes for the non-speaking purpose of tuning our vocal tract to best produce a resonant sound on our horn.

[Bach5G]

Since my mid-50s, I have progressed from a 5G to DE 101, 102 and, recently a 104. A few years ago, C Griego recommended his 4C which is very close to the 104.

I am 67 now. I struggle to play above a C and although I work at it, it doesn’t seem to be improving, although conventional wisdom might attribute that to the larger mouthpiece.

The takeaway from the videos for me was raising or arching the tongue. Use whatever syllable that works for you.

[harrisonreed]

Somehow Jay Friedman be hitting high Fs on a 3G at 83.

[Bach5G]

I wonder what Jay has to say about hitting high Fs at age 83?

[Posaunus]

I wonder what Jay has to say about hitting high Fs at age 83?

Well - he does it! ( I think.) But he's a freak of nature! (And one of my T-bone heroes.)

I can barely squeak out a high F these days - and not on Jay's large equipment.

I'm a bit younger than Jay, and have also gravitated to slightly larger mouthpieces over the years, but am certainly not part of the "bigger-is-better" crowd. Long-gone is the time when I could play a credible high F on my 88H!

[Doug Elliott]

Jay didn't play on a big mouthpiece until about the time Charlie got there and I'm sure that's no coincidence.

[Chatname]

Jay didn't play on a big mouthpiece until about the time Charlie got there and I'm sure that's no coincidence.

Which piece/sizes did he use before that, would you happen to know?

[Doug Elliott]

I think the Schilke 51B was the Friedman model.
Not big and not deep.

[Bach5G]

I’ve heard the 51B was Jay’s “Bolero” mouthpiece.

[Chatname]

I don’t know the 51B but it’s not very different from a 51C4, or?

[Burgerbob]

I don’t know the 51B but it’s not very different from a 51C4, or?

Much shallower

[dukesboneman]

I was having some chop problems in 2018. My Mount Vernon 7C just plain hurt to play after playing since 1978.
I switched to a Schilke 51B - NO pain at all. I played the 51B exclusively for almost 2 years. Loved the sound, hated that I`d lost my extreme upper range. I went back to the 7C and , BINGO no problems since.

[Bach5G]

Any thoughts about Jay Friedman/Brass Ark masterclass DVD? Any insights into playing after age 65?

[BurckhardtS]

I've watched the Friedman DVD when it came out back around 2019. There is a lot of really good stories and information there, but like anyone speaking in open documentary fashion (as opposed to a direct private lesson) it's hard to say that his advice is going to work well for someone else.

I am trying Doug's SYM mouthpieces on my large bore right now and I'm a fan. Of note, I actually sized down to a N105 rim from N106 and I actually am liking it a lot. I need to try the N106 a little more to commit to the 105 but I've only had positive things with Doug's new designs.

[baileyman]

...
This is an alternate way of explaining common advice like "raise the back of your tongue for high notes..."

If I were to roughly map out where in the trombone range I feel myself making these different shapes as I play over the trombone range it might be like this...

Range Vowels2 sm.png


I've placed each one on a note where I feel it is purest in form. In between those notes the form is in gradual transition. The whole range is a continuous spectrum of gradually morphing tongue shape.
...

I'd be interested what you think. This part is certainly true for me. Though I think I perceive a second dimension related to "chop tension", whatever the heck that is.

That is, I find mouth volume has a rather limited range purely by itself, perhaps an octave. And i find for any note in that range I can vary the mouth volume as usual, but hold the pitch steady. I think it is "chop tension" wthti that compensates to hold the pitch.

As a result, it seems to me that "chop tension" wthti takes the pitch into different ranges where mouth volumes then manipulate the pitch in the range. If it were possible to graph this, put "chop tension" wthti on the y-axis and mouth volume on the x-axis and then there are paths to follow representing combinations of the two in order to get the pitches needed.

As I continue to live with this scheme, I think for general playing I am converging on a certain combination of the two to do things like full range slurs. But i am aware that the combination I am using is only one of many possibilities.

[Bach5G]

I’ve been working on a Griego-Alessi 4C (as well as a DE104) recently. Big mpc but I thought it might fix a few issues (double buzz, air escaping from my corners) that I’d been dealing with. But this aft I noticed a post from Islander in which he mentioned working on a 5G model with mixed results. On a whim I got some of my 5G mpcs down from my shelf: a 5G, 5GL, Conn 5G, and a Schilke 51.

After a bit of adjustment, the Bach 5Gs were delightful. The problems I was working on along with new stuff from the bigger mpc improved or disappeared. We’ll see over the next month I guess.

What was Crisafulli’s quip about a new mpc working for 3 weeks which is why he switched every 2?