Posted by Jay Bertolet on October 19, 2001 at 08:15:21:
In Reply to: OK, I did it - update posted by js on October 18, 2001 at 23:50:59:
Finally, something to really DISAGREE about! (rubbing hands greedily together)
Seriously, I've been fooling around with this style of mouthpiece for a few years now. I'm not familiar with Joe M's line of mouthpieces because I've never tried them before. Therefore, I can't comment on how they do or don't work. I can comment on how the Bach Megatone line works. In two words, it doesn't. In my opinion, the Bach has far too little added mass to make any difference. I did compare apples to apples in this case, ordering a Bach Megatone 18 and comparing that to my own regular Bach 18. Even enlisting other listeners, nobody could tell any difference in the sound. Comparing the R&S heavyweight mouthpieces was a completely different story. I compared the R&S heavyweight models to the original mouthpieces that they assert to be copies of (Conn-Helleberg & Schilke Helleberg II). In both cases there was a marked difference in the sound, a difference that was immediately noticable even to my physician wife. The next obvious step would be to compare the R&S heavyweight versions to the R&S regular counterparts.
What conclusions can I offer? One is that the amount and positioning of the added weight makes a difference. One of the regular posters to this BBS, Mike Finn, sent me one of his creations to try out, a mouthpiece very similar to a Bach 18. Actually, I like it very much. (An email with my detailed analysis is soon to follow Mike) What I noticed about his mouthpiece was that the added weight was concentrated in the center of the cup and extended into the throat region. On a Megatone, the added mass is much less in volume and it is concentrated in the bottom of the cup. My instinct is the lesser amount of mass is the bigger issue but it also could be the placement.
Another issue is the horn you use it on. I have found the differences in sound to be much more subtle on instruments made of a heavier gauge of metal. For example, my Rudy 4/4 shows some difference in sound but not as much as the difference on my Cerveny 601. I'm not surprised that you noticed a lesser difference on the Willson. They generally are a heavier instrument than others.
Two things that I am totally confident about are that 1) These mouthpieces can make an obvious difference in the sound and 2) Just like with regular mouthpieces, you have to find the right style of heavyweight for the particular horn you use it on. I don't think it is a coincidence that the most effective heavy mouthpiece I've used on my Cerveny is the R&S with its can-type design. The Cerveny is a thinner walled tuba and the extra damping effect of the R&S mouthpiece maybe plays a larger role. I used the R&S S-H II on my Willson Eb for a while and decided it wasn't such a good match. Perhaps on that tuba, the damping was too much?
Perhaps it is finally time to get a spectrograph program running on my computer. Maybe then I can offer some proof. Until then.
My opinion for what it's worth...