Bach 11C question

[Leonardcaldera]

Hello, over the last few days while searching for a new mouthpiece i stumbled across somw comparsion charts and pages that compare different mouthpieces. I play small bore and i play a Bach 7C which i feel comfortable, but i feel like i could control my notes better with a deeper/larger cup. I ve noticed that on many post some say that the 11C is actually deeper and larger in diameter than the 7C.
So i found this image, if someone who knows can clarify the waters here would be great help, how accurate is this picture and how does this small differences affect?. (And also where the 6 3/4c stands?)[/img]

[Doug Elliott]

That seems about right, only very small differences between them. And obviously not accounting for the considerable variances that exist.

[pjanda1]

Trying an 11C isn't a bad idea. A better idea is to try a bunch of them. And a 6 3/4C or 3. Maybe even a 6 1/2A.

If you want a deeper cup, why not a 7 (no letter)? I've got an old NY 7 with an out shape much like the new "artisan" series. It was my main small shank mouthpiece for years. I love the narrow, flat rim, but the throat is pretty tight and not at all right the Conn 32H I use now. I've never played a newer 7, but maybe they are great?

There are so, so many choices for small shank mouthpieces. 11Cs are a bit tight for me, but Brass Ark's is by far the best thing 11C-ish that I've played. The high register screams and it has a crazy rich core to the sound for something so small.

Finally, you can't go wrong trying Doug's stuff. Much easier to find a fit than mucking through all the random out there, unless the chase is fun for you!

Paul

[imsevimse]

If you look at your picture you see they are a bit different at the rim, and even though it doesn't look like much it is enough to be felt. I can't tell wether the picture is correct or not but since Doug says it looks right then I guess it is showing were the differences are. To me the rim is most important, I mean the shape of the rim, not the width. You can see at the picture that the Bach 7C shape has a sharper edge compared to the 6 3/4C. The 11C is even more round. This is also how they feel when I play them. Strange is the 7C is (for me) very uncomfortable and the two others are not, even though the 7C and 6 3/4 C differences looks small at that spot.

I play a lot of mouthpieces and I'm comfortable on most but I've never been comfortable on a 7C. I don't know how it compares to a 12C - another small but great and common mouthpiece -, but 12C is a good match for me. Can't understand why my lips don't fit the 7C

Mouthpieces are very personal but (for me) is the 11C best from these and is right now what I'm playing a lot. I've started to play more lead in big band lately and I notice I prefer the 11C before my Yamaha Nils Landgren signature on many small bore horns. The "Nils" is more suited for solo work and doesn't cut as well as a 11C (YMMV). The 6 3/4 C is closer in feel to a 11C compared to a 7C (again YMMV).

Try a mouthpiece a couple of weeks before you decide. I think you can always tell immediately if a mouthpiece will work, but question is also. Will it work with that band, that horn, that part and that role. I always keep at least two mouthpieces in my case.

/Tom

[tbonesullivan]

It is pretty amazing how such small differences can FEEL big, and how much the shape of the inner edge of the rim can affect the perception of size.

[lagii]

I totally agree with the above assessments. I played an 11C for most of my pop playing for years, then switched to a Bach 7C for a while, then went back to the 11C.

[baileyman]

I spent some time on an 11c just for the heck of it. After a while, I realized the irritating part of it was the relatively sharp inside of the rim. The sound was good, but not the feel. So I went back to 11c and haven't looked back yet.

[ngrinder]

Bach mouthpieces need to be looked at as "variations on a theme." I have a handful of 11Cs from different eras that all play differently - they're characteristically 11C-ish, but there are wide variables in throat, rim width, blank shape, and cup depth. I'd get your hands on a few and play through them. Some of my favorites from modern makers are Greg Black's version and the Marcinkiewicz Ian McDougall.

[Posaunus]

Hello, over the last few days while searching for a new mouthpiece i stumbled across somw comparsion charts and pages that compare different mouthpieces. I play small bore and i play a Bach 7C which i feel comfortable, but i feel like i could control my notes better with a deeper/larger cup. I ve noticed that on many post some say that the 11C is actually deeper and larger in diameter than the 7C.
So i found this image, if someone who knows can clarify the waters here would be great help, how accurate is this picture and how does this small differences affect?. (And also where the 6 3/4c stands?)

[See original post]

These contour scans are a little misleading, since they do not show the different Rim inner diameters.
They seem to be "normalized" to the same Rim diameter.
I presume the inner Cup contours are accurate; just don't think of these as a cutaway of the entire mouthpiece.

The 6¾C Cup / Rim are of course appreciably larger than an 11C or a 7C.

[cubetrom]

I think, as others have mentioned, it's worth trying a few different ones because Bach variability is pretty legendary. If you just want one to try there are the GEWA and Arnolds copies - I had a GEWA one for a while which I ended up selling with a student trombone as it didn't fit me too well. It blows bigger than the specifications will lead you to believe.

I've not played a 6.75C but I have a Nils Landgren signature that is supposed to be close in size. As said above it is appreciably larger than a 7C or 11C. Not sure about how the rim matches up but it is sharper than a standard Yamaha rim. I played this for a little while before deciding I felt more secure on a smaller mouthpiece.

Yamaha 46C2 might be worth a go as well. I've got a 45C2 that I play on my small tenor that I really enjoy and Yamaha mouthpieces tend to be significantly more affordable than Bach ones unless you go for a copy. The Yamaha cup is a slightly different profile to the Bach one. It's more of a medium bowl. I think they are nominally the same depth and throat size but can't appreciably tell anything about the backbores.

There are loads of options out there and it can be overwhelming (not to mention expensive) trying to dial it in. We can only give our own thoughts and feelings which may vary considerably between players.

[hyperbolica]

Someone I know had a similar question as OP, and Bach 9 was suggested. Somewhat less common, but different enough from the usual cast of characters that it worked - a better sound and better feel.

[dukesboneman]

The Bach 7C is my go to small bore horn mouthpiece since 1978.
Now I can play a 12C and a 15C but I`ve never been able to comfortably play a 11C

[CheeseTray]

The Reeves 11C's are really nice

[Posaunus]

If you like the Bach 7C Rim but want something a little deeper, get a Bach 7. Problem solved.

[Rusty]

Someone I know had a similar question as OP, and Bach 9 was suggested. Somewhat less common, but different enough from the usual cast of characters that it worked - a better sound and better feel.

The Bach 9 has a lovely rich sound and is right in that sweet spot for being just a bit bigger than the 11c. The rims are also a little flatter and usually very comfy. The issue I had with the 9 was it being harder work for lead type playing in acoustic settings like a bigband, it’s more mellow and doesn’t quite have the same presence or cut as a good 11c or 7c.

Another vote for the Reeves 11c, although I have a modern 11c that whilst having a simpler sound than the Reeves, has a little bit more cup volume that I also like. The 6.5a is also like a bigger 11c (but substantially bigger feeling than an 9 or most 7c), and not as cumbersome as a 6.5AL.

[ssking2b]

I also suggest the Marcinkiewicz Charlie Loper model. It was coppiedm from Lopers Bach 11C with the throat opened by Peppy in NYC. THey play very well.

[Posaunus]

I also suggest the Marcinkiewicz Charlie Loper model. It was copied from Loper's Bach 11C with the throat opened by Peppy in NYC. They play very well.

This is confusing to me. According to Marcinkiewicz, the ET3 "C Loper" mouthpiece is indeed "related" to a Mt. Vernon Bach 11C, but its Throat is only enlarged to 5.94mm (vs. Bach's 5.85mm). But it plays better. Why?

I also like the Marcinkiewicz ET4 "L Ulyate" piece, allegedly based on Lloyd's New York Bach 7C, but with the Throat enlarged to 6.25mm. Great mouthpiece!

[ssking2b]

Loper's piece and several others use a 15/64 inch throat. The Mt Vernon 11C used a Bach Standard throat and #10 back bore shared by the 6 3/4 C, 7C, 11C, 12C et al. Any of the pieces with a C designation could be successfully opened to 15/64 - the magic number! The ET4 is more like a modern 12C size.

Why does it play better? Who knows, but it sure does. A standard current 11C opened up to 15/64 plays even better than the Marc versions.

[Aznguyy]

Loper's piece and several others use a 15/64 inch throat. The Mt Vernon 11C used a Bach Standard throat and #10 back bore shared by the 6 3/4 C, 7C, 11C, 12C et al. Any of the pieces with a C designation could be successfully opened to 15/64 - the magic number! The ET4 is more like a modern 12C size.

Why does it play better? Who knows, but it sure does. A standard current 11C opened up to 15/64 plays even better than the Marc versions.

I’ve been using the ET3 a lot lately and like how it plays better than a regular Bach 11C. There’s just something about that slightly opened up throat that makes everything lock in better. The ET3 with a 500 bore horn is like the perfect match for any situation.

The ET4 is nice also when I’m in a loud playing situation where I need to push a lot of air.