TubaForum.net

This is the only rim profile that I've personally used for years.

(As some of you know, I offer several other profiles in my three-piece stainless steel line of mouthpieces. Most of the others are similar to rim profiles found on other makes and models of mouthpieces, whereby people who purchase my mouthpieces will feel like they're putting on an old pair of shoes.)

This profile itself (which I stumbled across, me being not particularly clever, and one who stumbles quite a bit) isn't much wider than the width of a typical trombone mouthpiece rim profile. (Why would it need to be?)

I do not believe that wide tuba mouthpiece rims "cushion".
Rather, (I believe) they restrict.

Rims with sharp inner edges (that are also the highest point of the rim and contact the embouchure "suddenly") do not (at least, don't in my opinion) "define". Rather, they tend to pin down the edges of the "double reed" - ie. the player's lips (as if putting paperclips on the two edges of a bassoon reed, whereby the bassoon reed would probably still vibrate, but not quite as readily nor quite as well), and sharply defined raised inner edges of rims (I tend to believe) make it very difficult for a tuba mouthpiece to float on the players face - as a tuba mouthpiece certainly needs to, considering that our lowest pitches at their loudest (assuming we are producing full, pleasing, marketable sounds) involve our front teeth being spread apart over a fourth of an inch, and our highest pitches involve having our teeth closed nearly as much as a typical trumpet embouchure.

Notice the subtle white (appears white in the picture) reflective thin line roughly a fourth of the way from the innermost part of the top of this narrow rim profile (seen below). That's the only place (or at least it's the first, and hopefully the only place, if I'm not mashing) that it touches my face. Further, even though the rim is noticeably narrow compared to most, it is also asymmetrical, whereby the outside edge falls away from the player's face.

(Maybe I should be quiet about this "secret formula" , but anyone can copy anyone else's anything... And I'm probably going to convince about .001% of anyone reading this that it's a superior rim design. ("I won blah-blah with my blah-blah, which proves that it's blah-blah." etc.) Also (and it's not news to me ) bloke is dumb, so this rim design has to be dumb, too.

I only use this profile, but I currently use in three different donut sizes - whereby more or less of my lips are allowed to vibrate, depending on the instrument and the cup shape past the rim.

The three donut sizes that I personally use involve these three inner opening sizes:

33.2mm (candidly, not too often, these days)
32.9mm (most of the time)
32.3mm (special applications)

Ever since I began using this rim profile, I stopped being aware of the mouthpiece. I don't like mouthpieces to cause me to be aware of them, just as I don't like my instruments to cause me to be aware of them.

I realize there are strongly repeated (over many decades) theories about rims cushioning the face and high inner edges defining the embouchure...but I suspect that those theories were formulated by people who never encountered a rim quite like this one that I designed (and - just like so many things - not even with the intention of accomplishing the goals that were achieved).




I could talk about other aspects of this mouthpiece, but I've trolled quite enough for one night, and I need to go pee.

If i choose troll, will i turn to stone in sunlight?

For some reason the sharp(er) edge always made me feel i knew where the buzzing began, or something, so i always appreciate them? This comes to mind specifically with an old York Eb size mouthpiece. But hard to say. If i am paying attention to mechanics like that while i play, i'm probably less likely to count, or to follow the conductor, or play in tune.

Some day, maybe i'll know enough of what i'm doing to have thought to spare to like, personal improvement (but buying cool stuff, or by actually practicing)

PS...
i forgot to ask how much of me is .001% to be convinced...

The actual troll who controlled the bridge to musicality and technical ease, @humBell, required us to answer three riddles correctly, did he not?

bloke wrote: Sun Feb 01, 2026 10:50 pm The actual troll who controlled the bridge to musicality and technical ease, @humBell, required us to answer three riddles correctly, did he not?

You mean like "what is the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow?" or "what have i got in my pocketses?"

(Actually my favorite of trolls is the one with the contradiction stick...)

I´m using Blokepieces on BBb and F tubas.
Upon my first order, I chose two rims: the round one and a flat one with recognisable inner edge.
The latter is collecting dust, the former ha sbeen getting all the face time for years, now.

The end-on view of a rim is naturally a little ambiguous. What we need (along with better topic titles) is for you to saw one in half, a là Mike Finn, whose mouthpieces I believe mostly follow similar rim contours. Others I like with rounded rims, though possibly not as prominently rounded are a Dillon (Warburton?) F1B and Conn 1.

Blokepieces are too wide for me. I need to at least be able to SEE my corners.
Other than that, and responding to the troll: The reason I play on Wicks is that they force you to focus, and that makes them easier to be accurate on. If I play on a Miraphone cup (other than its being too wide) I have much more trouble figuring out where my lips are. Well-defined inner rims (I am not going to say "sharper") also do that, allow me to know where my lips are. Therefore easier to play on. Some are lip geniuses, I am not, so I appreciate the help.

Not that my uneducated opinion matters much but I think the #2 rim is very comfortable... but then again I really got along with most rim designs.. with the exception of the too wide C4 and the too sharp Helleberg. I played on C4 style mouthpieces because I liked the sound and how the smaller cup and tight throat tamed the big Conn 20J.. but I never grew to love the rim.

Solo with the #2 rim is just working well for me. I know they don't work for everyone as evidence by @MikeS's generous gift of a 32.3mm #2 rim.

For what is worth.. I really like the rim on my Jon Gross B12 from Giddings as well. Much more comfortable than the original LOUD design. Very middle of the road not too wide and not too sharp.

When I first thought I was on the right track (a rim design previous to my current favorite), I simply offered a thin rim that - again, without a hard/sharp/defined interior edge - avoids attaching the mouthpiece to the mouth and simply allows the mouth to contact the mouthpiece.

With the profile that I now encourage customers to try (if they don't already have a very strong preference), I moved the high point closer to the inside edge (as already discussed, and please notice how narrow the high point itself actually is - not much more than a line as opposed to a flat surface) while still avoiding "attaching" the mouthpiece to the face (which players seem to tend to do with a sharp interior edge).

The second change was to make it asymmetrical and (again, even though a good bit narrower than most, yet no narrower than a typical trombone or certainly bass trombone rim width) take the mouthpiece away from the person's face (towards the outside portion of the rim) where it isn't necessary for it to contact the face at all

I believe Miraphone discovered that - with the paddle shape they were using for their fifth valve lever for decades - the thumb actually needs to SLIDE across it - rather than simply depress it - as do fingers p. i. m. a. (index, middle, ring, pinky), which is why they dispensed with the large flat surface paddle and replaced it with a fairly narrow round bar, which allows the thumb to slide across the bar, rather than being uncomfortably stuck at one place on that wide flat paddle. ... This is the same concept. I don't believe the face needs to be bolted to the mouthpiece, any more than does a violin bow need to be held with a fist. ... That said, were it that violinists simply/mostly played quarter notes one and three, they might mostly be able to get by with grasping the bow with a fist, but would run into all sorts of complications when expected to play the types of passages that violinists are typically expected to play. Maybe I don't need to explain this any further..(??)

A human mouth exterior is soft, can accommodate a mouthpiece, and can move across the mouthpiece (if the mouthpiece rim is shaped in such a manner to allow the mouth to move across it). Those players who sport a semicircular dent in their faces after having played (or a permanent dent in their faces after having played on a sharp interior edge rim for years)... I rarely see that feature on the faces of the greatest players. Those with dented embouchure areas also seem to be the "same exact rim for every single mouthpiece no matter what" types of players, and I've already admitted to using three different interior openings which contact my face in three different places depending on the instrument and the mouthpiece (though I also do NOT claim to be one of the world's greatest players ). That said, my personal practice time is quite limited - either due to the amount of work that I'm expected to produce otherwise or (having reached the front end of old age) end of day exhaustion... but I'm still expected/required by those who hire me to play to a certain standard, whereby my equipment needs to be designed in such a way that - even without having played for a week, a month, or even a couple of months - I can deliver a performance product up to a certain standard whereby those who hire me will think positively rather than negatively.

I'm quite picky about my instruments for this reason.
For years, I just played mouthpieces that people who influenced me played - or that they directly suggested that I play, because they played those mouthpieces themselves (and then I would see them switch to something else...) Sometimes, I would even play mouthpieces that came with instruments that I bought. Back when I was selling new Rudolf Meinl tubas, I was playing on the 0 and 1 mouthpieces that were included with those instruments (and having a very difficult time with those mouthpieces)...though too lacking in curiosity - at that time - to ask myself why (and many of us know who made those mouthpieces).
ie: "bloke, you're just not working hard enough" (speaking to myself in my head)

Those of you who know how old I am and when I started delving in the mouthpieces know that it was pretty late in my life. I finally realized that no more than I want to be distracted or aware of the instrument that I'm playing, neither do I want to be distracted nor aware of the mouthpiece that I'm using. I also considered the rim contour to be the least important part of a mouthpiece, whereas now I believe I've come to realize that it is the most important part of a mouthpiece. Again, the two blades of an oboe reed or a bassoon reed need to vibrate freely yet be controlled by the player. Everything in musical instruments involves a balance. If the double reed on those instruments are overly controlled, the sound is going to lose resonance, and - if the double reed on those instruments is not controlled enough - the sound is going to be (as referred to by the players of those instruments) "wild". The rim contour of a brass instrument mouthpiece has the same effect.

As to tuba mouthpieces featuring a 28 or 29 mm opening for small players or players whose faces are very much pointed to the front (as opposed to flat across the front), I'm just going to have to defer to Wick. I'm just a guy, and I just can't offer everything to everyone. That said, Wick doesn't offer everything to everyone either, do they? (Having sold their mouthpieces in my former brick and mortar store, they certainly don't offer anything - in their stock tuba line - that captures my imagination.)

As to the titles of my threads, had this one truly been inadequate, I likely wouldn't have heard from the person who complained about it (as surely they would have refrained from clicking on it), so I'm probably just going to continue to entitle my threads in the ways that I choose.

the use of dashes in my typed posts:
Being aware that I type quite a few run-on sentences, I - in a grammarically incorrect way - use them to help clarify and punctuate my conversational style run-on sentences. I'm going to continue to do it.

donn wrote: Mon Feb 02, 2026 10:03 am The end-on view of a rim is naturally a little ambiguous. What we need (along with better topic titles) is for you to saw one in half

Houser has the cross sections in their spec sheet

https://housermouthpiece.net/wp-content ... heetv5.pdf

I believe the Laskey rim is like this as well, with a peak about 1/4 the way from cup to edge

Nemo wrote: Mon Feb 02, 2026 3:24 pm I believe the Laskey rim is like this as well, with a peak about 1/4 the way from cup to edge

This is completely true, but - with that rim profile - that peak is felt on the face more (at least in my experience, as I tried playing on that style rim for at least a couple of years) and it's another typically wide rim with a lot of contact area.