Question: "What are your thoughts on Short vs. Long Mouthpieces?"

GR :

I have had many calls regarding the subject of Short vs. Long mouthpieces so I will try to address some of the issues.

I don't see this as a debate but an area of personal choice. This choice is player and equipment specific. I will try to give some insight without giving away trade secrets regarding this subject.

I do not recognize the term "short shank mouthpiece". It is a shorter overall length mouthpiece. The shank taper must have the dimensions to fit correctly into the trumpet receiver. When this is done the cup remains the same but the backbore and bore (throat bore) are changed. In many cases the bore is much longer and the backbore much shorter. This will cause the backbore to have a much larger average taper. Acoustically this shorter backbore will cause a compromise, although, it is just about a wash when the player is added to the system.

Many mouthpiece makers produce mouthpieces at a length of about 3.5". A mouthpiece can be made in any length and work well.

It is not the length but the mathematical design that will determine if it is good.

The length of the mouthpiece doesn't have the effect on pitch we think it does. If the mouthpiece were a straight linear tube the length would have an effect on pitch. Mouthpieces can be made up of linear bores, linear tapers, and non-linear shapes. When dealing with non-linear shapes the pitch is determined by the volume not the length. Yes, a longer mouthpiece may have more volume but not always. Put a long, small volume mouthpiece and a short, large volume piece in the same horn and play tuning C. The long piece is much longer than the short, although, you will have to push your tuning slide in with the short to be in tune. Why? The volume of the short mouthpiece is much greater. Both mouthpieces have a specific use and players will have a different preference.

There is another factor and that is lip engagement. This is player specific and that is why different players must adjust differently for different mouthpieces. If we take the total volume of the mouthpiece and subtract the lip volume in the cup what do we have left? Yes, it will be different for every player. Therefore, lip engagement is a major factor when trying to deal with in the intonation of a trumpet.

Statement: " I think short shank mouthpieces are superior to standard length mouthpieces for many reasons: 1. They improve intonation. Although this seems to be impossible, a mpc can improve the intonation of an instrument."

GR : They only improve intonation if the design is superior. Yes, a correctly designed shorter mouthpiece will have better playing characteristics than a poorly designed longer mouthpiece. The key here is a good mathematical design. Another is the fit between player, horn, and mouthpiece. This is player specific. My design program allows me to make a good design in any length mouthpiece. If the shorter mouthpiece works for you than use it. That doesn't mean it will work for everybody.

A longer mouthpiece is much more difficult to machine than a shorter mouthpiece! Longer mouthpieces cost more money to produce, furthermore, better machines, process, and tooling is required to maintain the tolerances of a good design.

" More control of sound. Due to the shorter shank, all aspects of sound production are more easily regulated."

GR : I believe this control is due to a good overall design and a proper fit between player and equipment rather than the shorter overall length. I believed this control could be had with any length mouthpiece as long as it had a good mathematical design and good match between the player and equipment.

"Ease of flexibility is increased. An obvious benefit of the shorter shank. Air is getting there faster, therefore releasing the necessary resistance."

GR : Usually a shorter backbore with a large average taper and a very long throat bore will aid in slotting and reduce flexibility. Air is not the issue here. It is the acoustical feedback from the pressure or standing wave that is reflected back to the face that we feel. The acoustical phenomena of the standing wave mirrors flow dynamics, although, this is not an issue of airflow. Removal of discontinuities will make this phenomena react much quicker. Discontinuities are mathematical in nature; furthermore, they can be present due to a poor mathematical design or poor manufacturing processes.

"Another question that I have that I feel is related to the topic of short shank mouthpieces is how does the short shank affect the mouthpiece/receiver gap relationship? Is this still important with a short shank mouthpiece?"

GR : The gap should be calculated the same for any mouthpiece short or long. Many times longer mouthpieces are cut down and the tapers are not to the correct tolerance. If a longer mouthpiece is cut down it usually will not work as well. The mouthpiece must be designed to be a certain length.

" I think that it is also the very reason that a person can love a mouthpiece on one horn and absolutely hate it on another."

GR : This is a great statement.

I have 3 key criteria for brass playing:

1. The lips must be supple and free to vibrate without impingement or manipulation, furthermore you must have cushion.

2. You need a constant supply of uninterrupted airflow that is supported.

3. The player, mouthpiece, and horn must be a good match.

In conclusion:

1. If a mouthpiece is designed well it can be any length and work well.

2. The volume rather than length will determine the intonation or pitch of a mouthpiece. Lip engagement will reduce volume and is a major factor that is player specific.

3. The resistance we perceive to be airflow is an acoustical phenomenon of the standing wave that mirrors flow dynamics. Other considerations for resistance may be a high alpha angle that can impinge the lip due to pressure or discontinuities due to a poor mathematical design or poor manufacturing processes.

4. Everybody is different. If it works for you stick with it. If it does not work for you it could be a good match for someone else.