Small shank mouthpiece to large shank receiver

[SteveP]

Does this adaptor/bit even exist? I'd like to be able to use my Wick 5 small shank mp on an American shank tuba as well as on my Besson New Standard. Can anyone help me with this? I really don't want to have to buy another of the same mouthpiece with an American shank if an adapter is available.

Thanks,
Steve

[SteveP]

I didn't say this in my original post but if anyone has a Wick 5L for sale I'd be interested. Cosmetics aren't important as long as the shank is round and there aren't too many pits and scratches in the metal.

Thanks,
Steve

[iiipopes]

I have an adaptor I will no longer use. Send me $$ for postage and I'll ship it to you. Paypal preferred. PM me for details.

[2nd tenor]

I have an adaptor I will no longer use.

For those of us who might consider buying one who makes such adaptors?

[iiipopes]

I have an adaptor I will no longer use.

For those of us who might consider buying one who makes such adaptors?

I think mine came from Wessex, but I don't know if they still carry them.

[2nd tenor]

I have an adaptor I will no longer use.

For those of us who might consider buying one who makes such adaptors?

I think mine came from Wessex, but I don't know if they still carry them.

Thank you.

Wessex are out of stock, but Google (tuba mouthpiece shank adapter) did provide alternatives to explore. (Adaptor and adapter seem to be interchangeable spellings.)

JK seem to manufacture something that might work, it isn’t cheap but it’s a lot cheaper than another mouthpiece. How well the use of such adapters works out in practise I’m not sure, but sometimes good enough is good enough.

I don’t recall of hearing of such adapter before and they are available for other brass instruments; I have several spare small shank Tuba mouthpieces and at a reasonable price I can see applications for such an adapter.

[bloke]

The difference is only a very few thousands of an inch. Any adapter much thicker than foil is going to cause the mouthpiece to hang way out farther. It's going to play flatter, but it's also might might feel funny to play the instrument with such an adapter.

[iiipopes]

The difference is only a very few thousands of an inch. Any adapter much thicker than foil is going to cause the mouthpiece to hang way out farther. It's going to play flatter, but it's also might might feel funny to play the instrument with such an adapter.

Yeah, but it's worth a try considering how expensive mouthpieces are, and whether a favorite small shank mouthpiece is even available in the "American" size, other than Wick mouthpieces of which their basic line comes in both sizes as standard items. According to Matt Walters, in a very old post that describes all the different tuba shanks (It was on the other forum; I don't know if it translated over here) the small British shank tip is .490; the American tip is .520; the "Euro" tip is .530, and there are others. So the difference between old British and American is @ .030, or about 1/32" inch, divided by two 1/64, which is still a significant wall thickness across the diameter of the shank. And of course, if the tuba has a "Euro" .530 receiver that is even a hair thicker. And somewhere in between are some receivers that are attempting to be all things to all players. So it is still worth a try.

Found the link: http://forums.chisham.com/viewtopic.php?t=10390

[bloke]

Different manufacturers have different ideas of "standard" and "'euro" tuba mouthpiece shank sizes...whereby some high-profile tuba player pontificating re: what is "correct" for either size is (well...) an OPINION.

That said, the difference (with most manufacturers) is roughly .010" 1/4mm DIAMETER difference, which means .005" RADIUS difference...
...and the difference (in your case) between "small/old-British/old-European" and standard is ALSO only about .010" (1/4") diameter (whereas the old "small" size is just about the same size as a modern trombone/euphonium "bass shank".

"Heavy duty" aluminum foil is usually about .001" thick, yet can (even though obviously thicker than standard aluminum foil (and - therefore - more easily washable and reusable, if desired) EASILY be wadded up into a ball.

Now...
Think of a brass (also soft metal) or even steel (not that tough when quite thin) adapter that is only .005" (1/8mm) thick...still: EASILY crushable/deformable.
It's not only going to be really tricky to make (without f'ing them up in the manufacture of them), but tricky to handle, package, ship, and install (without f'ing them up). Once CAREFULLY slipped onto a mouthpiece, they might be OK...YET - the first time they decide to stick in the receiver (rather than stay on the mouthpiece) they're likely going to be toast (occurring in the extraction process)...likely EVEN IF there's a 1/8" wide knurled ring at the large end.

...so even a (thought to be VERY thin (say: .020" aka 1/4mm) adapter is STILL going to be quite delicate, and will (again) SIGNIFICANTLY move a "favorite" mouthpiece out quite far from the receiver-mouthpipe chokepoint (FAR MORE - about double the amount - than the difference in standard-vs.-euro shank mouthpieces would do this)...but NO adapters (at least, NONE that I've seen) are ONLY .020" thick.

[iiipopes]

Different manufacturers have different ideas of "standard" and "'euro" tuba mouthpiece shank sizes...whereby some high-profile tuba player pontificating re: what is "correct" for either size is (well...) an OPINION.

That said, the difference (with most manufacturers) is roughly .010" 1/4mm DIAMETER difference, which means .005" RADIUS difference.

"Heavy duty" aluminum foil is usually about .001" thick, yet can (even though obviously thicker than standard aluminum foil (and - therefore - more easily washable and reusable, if desired) EASILY be wadded up into a ball.

Now...
Think of a brass (also soft metal) or even steel (not that tough when quite thin) adapter that is only .005" (1/8mm thick.
It's not only going to be really tricky to make (without f'ing them up in the manufacture of them), but tricky to handle, package, ship, and install (without f'ing them up). Once CAREFULLY slipped onto a mouthpiece, they might be OK...YET - the first time they decide to stick in the receiver (rather than stay on the mouthpiece) they're likely going to be toast (occurring in the extraction process)...likely EVEN IF there's a 1/8" wide knurled ring at the large end.

...so even a (thought to be VERY thin (say: .020" aka 1/4mm) adapter is STILL going to be quite delicate, and will (again) SIGNIFICANTLY move a "favorite" mouthpiece out quite far from the receiver-mouthpipe chokepoint (FAR MORE - about double the amount - than the difference in standard-vs.-euro shank mouthpieces would do this)...but NO adapters (at least, NONE that I've seen) are ONLY .020" thick.

Where reasonable players may differ. The bottom line (pun intended) is that it is still worth trying a relatively inexpensive adaptor before, or at least to identify what's happening with the horn and the mouthpiece, before spending @ $100 to $300, or sometimes even more, on a mouthpiece, whether new or used.

[bloke]

LOL...

I was going to suggest a handsome large-shank euphonium receiver that would work (to convert the standard shank tuba to small shank), but (since bidenflation) the shop/jobber price is expanded from under $10 to nearly $47 (plus postage to the shop), so never mind.

[SteveP]

I just measured the difference in total length between a Benge 25 (standard shank) and Wick 4 (small shank with adapter) used with my Pan American Eb. The difference is a resounding 1/8 inch. That equates to a 1/16 inch pull or push on the tuning slide and makes no noticeable difference in playing position. Just sayin'.