A STUDY OP BRASS MOUTHPIECE INTONATION

by

DONALD LEWIS MEREDITH

B. S. Kansas State Ihalverslty, 19^2

A MASTER'S REPORT

submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree

MASTER OP SOIENOE

Department of Music

KANSAS STATE UlTIVERSITT

Manhattan, Kansas

1964 fl

Apj^raved b;
 TABLE OP CONTENTS
yv^^i''?

INTRODUCTION 1

TECHNICAL BACKGROUND 2

Explanation of Mouthpiece Parts and Their Interaction.. 4

The rim V 4

Cup diameter 5

Cup depth 6

The throat 7
The baokbore 8

equipment used 8

procedures 11

indi\t:duals sho/ a dipperencs in

overall intonation pattern 13

differences in intonation patterns i.hbn

mouthpiece cup sizes dipper 17

dippsrences in intonation between standard

and symphony throats 18

conclusion 20

acknowledgment 23

BIBLIOiBRAPHY 24

APPENDIX 26
 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report Is to explore the intonation

oharacteristlos of different types of mouthpieces used upon the

same trumpet by three Individual players. It Is hoped that the

research will accomplish these three premises:

1. To show a definite difference between Individuals In

an overall Intonation pattern.

2. To show a difference In Intonation pattern, either

sharper or flatter, when the size of the mouthpiece cup

differs,

3. To show a difference In Intonation patterns In selected

registers when the size of the throat changes and the

rest of the measurements of the mouthpleoe remain

constant.

It Is believed that this type of Information and research

will make it easier for music educators in their evaluation and

selection of brass mouthpieces.

This study is in no way Intended to refute or support any

existing studies or to prove or disprove any published reports.

It is, rather, an outcome of the author's curiosity, and a desire

on his part to make a first-hand Investigation of the behavior

of certain types of mouthpieces under controlled conditions.

Literature concerning trumpet mouthpieces is found in

periodicals, manufacturer's publications, dissertations, and in

books on acoustics and on musical instruments in general. The

most Important of the periodicals is Uii Instrumentalist , which

contains articles and research findings by recognized authorities.

 Occasionally The Journal ££ JJ^ Aooustioal Society o£

rica has Information on the trumpet mouthpiece. The material

found in this publication consists of data and findings based

on measurements of vibrations, existence of acoustical properties,

new patents, etc.

There are three manufacturers' publications that present

technical information concerning the mouthpiece. These are the

gmbouchure and Mouthpiece I'lanual published by the Bach Corpora-

tion, which is now a division of Selmer Corporation; The Proper

Selection of Cup Mouthpieces and The Inside Story of Brass

Instruments , both of which are published by the C, G, Conn

Corporation. In the preparation of this report, the three

publications ;Just mentioned were of considerable value. The

first two were especially important.

A Masters* Report on the brass mouthpiece, by David Stuewe,

VftB of invaluable assistance in finding reference and background

material. This report, entitled ^ Study of the Brass l^outhpiece .

presents a general study of the brass mouthpiece, problems of

standardization, physical operation, and information to aid in

the selection of a mouthpiece,

TECHNICAL BAOKGSOimD

Figure 1 identifies the parts of a trumpet mouthpiece. All

of these parts are interacting, and one cannot be ohangtd to

too great a degree without necessitating a change in the others,

When these parts are In the proper relationship to each other,

the mouthpiece Is considered "usable". If any of these parts

 — J

are out of relationship, an irregularity will show up In either

the tone produced or the Intonation pattern

Cup Diameter
Rim Bite

Shoulder of
Throat

Backbore
Shank

Fig, 1. The Brass T^louthpiece Out in

Half iflth the Parts Labeled.

Receiver i Opening
V- — A A.
=1
y- 00
b

T
7" ^
«
• ^ -/'

,7"
^'Ife

Fig. 2. Outer Dimensions of *louth-

pleces Used In the Research.

1
Jody Hall, Xbs. ££<2^S£ g,.9AQca.9a 2£ £]i£ Mouthpieces, p. I7.
 Figure 2 Illustrates tha outside dimensions of the trumpet

mouthpieces used in the research which did not cliange as the cup

and rim dimensions were varied.

Explanation of Mouthpiece Parts

and Their Interaction

The rim

R»M Curvature
Ri(v\

Width

Bite

Fig, 3. The Mouthpiece

Figure 3 Illustrates the three basic portions of a mouth-

piece rlra. By far the most commonly used mouthpiece has a medium

wide rlra (Rlra vridth), with a somewhat rounded curvature (Rlii

Curvature), and a rather sharp Inner s^dge (Bite), Tf the rim

Is too rounded, It will cut Into the lips and the player's

endurance will suffer.^

The most Important part of the mouthpiece rim Is undoubtedly

the Inner edge or "bite**. The rim of a mouthpiece must have a

1
Jody Hall, 22l£ Proi^er Selection o£ O^ ^^outhDleces . p. 17.
 2 3

sharp Inner edge, "but It should be low enough in the mouthpieee

so as not to cut into the lip. In order to produce a clear tone

there must be a definite contact point for the embouchure at the

inner edge of the rim, Just as one has to press his finger down

tightly on a stringed instrument to produce a clear tone,^

A mouthpiece with a sharper bite often responds like a

mouthpiece with a slightly smaller diameter. The sharper bite

will tend to produce a tone irith a little more "edge", a brighter

sound, and sometimes even a slightly higher pitch.

Cup diameter

The cup diameter is one of the most important factors in

a mouthpiece. If the same basic cup shape is retained and the

oup diameter is enlarged, the volume of the cup is obviously

enlarged, '(Then the diameter of the cup is enlarged, both the

area and the length of the lips' surface in contact xvlth the

inside of the rira are Increased. As a result, the lips tend to

vibrate at a lower frequency; this tends to emphasize the lower

partials unless the player compensates. Also, the resonance

pattern of the larger cup makes the higher notes less responsive.

Because the larger diameter of the oup covers a greater

area of the player's lips, he must utilize greater muscular

development and control. A greater volume of tone in the low

Wincent Bach, %]?9ttgh«r9 S^

Mouthpiece Manual, p. 13.
|Jody Hall,
3lbid., p. 15.
SM
l£2£S£ Selection qI 2M. Mouthpieces, p. 17.
 2 J ^

and middle register is usually easier to produce with a mouth-

piece having a larger diameter. The player whose muscular

control has developed sufficiently, and who is accustomed to

playing a larger cup dlsuneter, is able to produce uniform low,

high, and middle registers with great flexibility

Cup depth

The tone quality, pitch level, and intonation of a mouth-

piece is determined primarily by the volume of the cup and the

depth of the cup. A cup vfhlch has a wide diameter and a deep

cup will play lower In pitch than will a mouthpiece which has

a small diameter and a small cup. Some players play as much as

a quarter of a tone sharper than others using the same mouthpiece

In the same Instrument.

Experiments done with mouthpieces which have exactly the

same volume, the same throat diameter, the same rim, but different

cup shapes, display only slight variations in intonation patterns.

This tends to Indicate that cup volume and depth are probably

more Important than cup shape, especially in Intonation patterns.

A mouthpiece with a reasonably shallow cup might prove to

be excellent, providing that the backbore taper and the throat

opening are In the proper relationship to compensate for the

small cup. Unless there are some exceptional circumstances.

^Jody Hall, The Proper Selection of Out> Mputhrileces . p. 15.

Embouchure and Mouthpiece 'lanual . p. 16.
271ncent Bach, Um]
3Hall, op. clt. p. 14.
.t. p.
 ^

It Is usually best to choose a medlura cup for the average player.

Mouthpieces which have large deep cups should be recommended for

players with strong well-developed embouchures,'

The throat

A small throat In a brass mouthpiece does not produce an

easier high register. If a mouthpiece with a small throat Is

used, the extreme registers will be constricted, the high

register vrill be flat, and the low register very sharp.

If the size of the throat changes and the volume of the

cup stays the same, the "resistance" of the mouthpiece is

changed, ifhen the throat is enlarged, the resistance of the

mouthpiece is changed, 'fhen the throat is enlarged, the

resistance of the mouthpiece will be reduced and a greater

amount of physical endurance will be required. As the throat

size becomes larger, it becomes more and more difficult to play

Pianissimo, especially in the higher register. With a larger

throat the player will find it easier to produce a greater

volume of tone.^

A medium-sized throat is recommended for average players

since it is conducive to physical endurance and produces a good

intonation pattern and an even response in all registers.^

^Bern?,rd Fitzgerald, "Selecting a Mouthpiece." The

^npl^ruTiontaHat.. Sept. -Oct., 19^7, 2J 20-21.
mncent Bach, %]?9ttghur? SM. Mouthpiece Manual, p. 18.
JJody Hall, The Prober Selection of Quri r^outhpleces . p. 10,
^Jody Hall, "There Is Ho Magic in Choosing a Brasswlnd
Mouthpiece." OonnOhord . January, 1964, 7j8-11.
 ^^

But a mouthpiece with the larger symphony throat Is recommended

for players with strong embouchures who do a great deal of playing

In larger ensembles, since the larger bore lends Itself to the

greater volume of tone and a wider variation In tonal color.

Many mouthpieces are found to have throat sizes which are

too small for obtaining best results. In this case, It Is

advisable to enlarge the throat opening. Players who play with

a pinched high register are often helped by this procedure.

The baokbore

The backbore of a mouthpiece Is very Important because It

hat a definite effect upon tone quality and Intonation, It

bears a relationship to the throat, cup, and rlmj but Its

relationship to the make and bore of the Instrument In which It

Is used Is especially Importajit.^ The backbores of the mouth-

pieces used In the experiment were all matched to the Instrument

at the factory. If the backbore had been too small, the upper

register would have been "stuffy" and flat. If the backbore

had been too large, the upper register would have tended to be

sharp, and the resistance of the horn would have been decreased.^

EQUIPMENT USED

The equipment used In this research consisted of the Items

H'lncent Bach, Embouchure and FouthT?lece ?^anual . p. 18.

^"Bernard Fitzgerald, "Selecting a Mouthpiece." The
Instrumentalist . Sept. -Oct., 194?, 2i?0-?1.
^Jody Hall, The Proper Selection of Oup Mouthpieces , p. 1 2,
*Ibld.
 ^

listed belowi

Oonn Chromatic Stroboscope

fork Unit

Oonn Dynalevel

Two microphones

Transformer

Leblanc Sonic 707 trumpet with a medium- large bore

Five sets of Bach trumpet mouthpieces

lie Standard Throat

1*0 Symphony Throat

30 Standard Throat
30 Symphony Throat

7B Standard Throat
7B Symphony Throat

70 Standard Throat
70 Symphony Throat

lofo Standard Throat

io|o Symphony Throat

The subjects for the research were: Joe Hostetter, Senior

in music education at Kansas State University; Russell Berlin,

Senior In music education at Kansas State University; and the

author, who was Assistant Director of Bands at Kansas State

University. The observer was Keith Meredith, Junior In music

education at Kansas State University.

Table 1, which describes the mouthpieces used. Is taken

from the publication, Sffl^?9^(?nurffi asA Mouthpiece Manual by

Vincent Bach.

Wlncent Bach, Embouchure and Mouthpiece Manual , pp. 30-43,

 I

10

Table 1. Desorlptlon of mouthpieces

used in research.

Approximate Deoth of
^odei
Ml
gap gi^ag^gg s^ fiAa Shape

1^0 17mm Medium Medium wide

43/64" shallow
Description:
Extra large cup diameter for powerful symphony,
opera, and solo trumpeters, rell suited for inter-
changing between Bb, 0, and D trumpet used in modem
symphony compositions. Crystal clear, brilliant, yet
compact tone of great carrying power throughout its
entire register.

30 l6.3iHm Medium Medium ^/ide

21/32" shallow
Otsoriptiont
A brilliant tone. For players who must use a
large mouthpiece but want an easier high register.
Excellent for large symphony orchestra.

7B 16,2mm Medium Medium >ride,

21/32" lowered toward
the outside.
'
Medium sharp
Inside edge ^fith
a perfect grip,
A most comfort-
able "lay".
Description
Although full In the low and middle registers, this
mouthpiece responds very easily on high tones and is
therefore well suited to orchestra work where an effec-
tive all-around register is essential.

70 16.2mm Medium Medium wide

21/32" shallow (same as 7B)
Deseriptiont
It has a sparkling, brilliant tone, free of nasal
twang, is ideal for dance music, stage presentations,
"firetrork" performances and trick work where a player
Is required to perform the seemingly impossible. Pre-
ferred by beginners, advanced school musicians ^<ho desire
to progress quickly, and by many symphony artists who
regularly interchange betvreen Bb, 0, and D trumpets.
It is the mouthpiece you can buy blindfolded if you are
not set on any other model.
 )

11

Table 1 ( ooncl.

Approximate Depth of
Model Qup diameter qw^ Rim Shape

10^0 15,9Tnm Medium Tedium xv'-lde

5/8" shallow comfortable rim

Description:
This marvelous mouthpiece Is an even contender with
the 70 In popularity. It has a remarkable fine high
register, a rich, resonating low register, and offers
great endurance. It Is one of the best selling models
and particularly useful to players -^d-th a not too strong
•mbouohure or women performers. It Is the Ideal mouth-
piece for solo work and for "O" trumpet as nothing superior
can be found.

PROCEDUHES

The equipment used In this research was stored and used In

the band office where the temperature remained at a constant

level. The player sat in a special cubicle in order to avoid

any tendency to adjust his embouchure and Intonation because of

observing the window patterns of the Stroboscope,

During the tests, the tuning slides of the trumpet were

completely closed, and the subjects were Instructed not to

compensate for faulty intonation by changing either embouchure

or air support. The commonly accepted fingerings for the

chromatic scale were used consistently in each test. The level

of the Stroboscope and the Dynalevel, the placement of the

microphones, and the distance and angle of the trumpet bell

in relation to the microphones remained constant in all research

sessions.^

^for a description of the Conn Ohromatlo Stroboscope and

Dynalevel, see Appendix B.
 12

Five sets of mouthpieces were used for the research, each

set containing two mouthpieces which were Identical In all

dimensions except that of the throat size. At each session all

subjects played upon the same set. The number Indicating the

manufacturer's Identification for each mouthpiece was covered

throughout the entire experiment so that the players could not

know which mouthpiece was In use. In order to Insure that the

mouthpieces being used for a particular session were In the same

set, the observer used a code of colors and numbers.

The players were Instructed to make every effort to use

a constant type of embouchure, and to produce the same quality

of sound. To maintain a constant dynamic level, the Conn

Dynalevel was placed In sight of the subject so as to give a

visual picture of the dynamic level. The players were Instructed

to keep this level constant from session to session and from

player to player.

Before each player began his series, a period of warm-up

practice took place. The purpose of this period was to let the

player become used to the mouthpiece being used at that time,

to let the trumpet's temperature adjust to the player's playing

level, and to let the observer check the levels and placement

of the equipment used.

A chart listing the chromatic tones to be used In the

research was used by the observer In selecting the sequence of

tones to be played by a subject during his session. These

tones were called at random, with special care being taken that

no two successive tones were half-steps, octaves, or sevenths.

 13

This procedure was adopted In order to Isolate each tone by

obliterating as much as possible Its relationship with any-

other tone. It was hoped that this procedure would sharpen

the objectivity of the player, ,-,

Certain techniques were developed during the preliminary

tests used for setting up procedures. The observer discovered

that the accuracy of the readings was Improved If a tone of

approximately three-seconds* duration, used to orient the Porlc

Ihiit, was followed by consecutive tones of approximately one-

second duration. Before a particular reading was recorded, a

stationary window pattern was required for three consecutive

tones.

Each player was subjected to two series of Intonation

readings for each set of mouthpieces. These series were

accomplished on separate days. The Stroboscope readings xrere

then sent to the Statistics Laboratory where they were processed.

The following sections of this report are based upon the results

of the Statistics Laboratory analysis of the data oolleoted

from the research. Throughout the remainder of the report the

mouthpieces used are Identified by the research observer's

Identification number followed by the manufacturer's Identifi-

cation number In parentheses,

INDIVIDUALS SHOW A DIPPBEBHOB II

OVERALL INTONATIOI ?AfTSlI

The first premise of this report was that Individuals show

a difference In their overall Intonation patterns. In order to

substantiate that premise the following table was used to

 u

Illustrate the mean reading, in cents, of the two tests which

were conducted on different days using the thirty chromatic tones

from Gr3 to 06. A cent Is defined as one-hundredth of a semitone

based upon the equally tempered scale. The tones used were the

written pitches and not the concert pitches. The numbers used

In Table 2 were arrived at by adding the Stroboscope readings for

the sixty tones played during the two days and dividing that sum

by the total tones played, which was sixty. The result was the

mean reading for the player's overall Intonation pattern.

The Statistics Laboratory analysis of the data presented In

this table stated that any two numbers compared horlssontally or

vertically which equal or exceed 2.60 cents can be termed a

significant difference. Individual means were recorded for both

symphony and standard throat sizes.

All of the numbers are positive, which Indicates that all

of the tones are sharp. This was to be expected because all

tuning slides were closed. If the players had played perfectly

in tune to the squally tempered scale, the mean numbers ^rould

have all been 0.00.

Table 2. Table of overall Intonation means

Player 1 Player 2 Playe r 3

Std. Sym. Std. Sjrm. Std. Sym.

10(70) 48.58 41.60 44.58 43.45 42.62 41.33

M2(3C) 54.07 50.53 47.33 47.02 46.08 49.92
M3(7B) 38.08 44.75 46.45 44.90 40.55 42.72
M^dOiO) 54.00 54.17 48.52 49.97 49.93 49.58

M5(U0) 36.0? 42.93 41. 17 42.63 45.97 39.57

 15

Table 2 reveals that Individuals differ In their overall

Intonation means. Among the three players used in the research,

there vas not an excessive amount of difference obseirved ^rhen

comparing them upon the same mouthpiece. However, there were

enough differences of significant size to warrant the above

conclusion.

There would seem to he a tendency for the symphony throat

mouthpiece to even out individual differences, thereby malclng It

•asler for Individual players to match their Intonation patterns

to one another. This tendency became apparent after an examina-

tion of the thirty combinations of Individual comparison possible

for each throat size. Of the thirty possible comparisons from

player to player for the standard throat, twenty-two equaled or

exceeded the significant level. Of the thirty possible compar-

isons from player to player for the symphony throat, only twelve

differed to the extent of becoming significant. In order to make

any statements to the significance of this tendency, further

research will have to be undertaken.

The differences In means for the throat sizes are shown In

Table 3, with the numbers equaling or exceeding the significant

level marked by asterisks. The first column gives the mouthpiece

Identification number. The second column shows the overall

Intonation mean for the player who Is being compared to the

other players. The third and fourth columns show the difference

between the player In the first column in comparison irith the

other two players. A minus sign placed before a number In

column three or four Indicates the player referred to Is i^l'^Y^ iag

 16

sharper than the player referred to in the second column by the

number of cents shown, while a plus sign Indicates he Is playing

Table 3, Difference of Intonation lei/el by

Individual comparison.

standard Throat
Player 1 Player 2 Player 3

Ml 70 48.53 +4.00* +5.96*

M2 30 54.07 +6.74* +7.99*
M3 7B) 38.08 -8.37* -2.47
M4(10^C) 54.00 +5.48 +4.02*
M5(lic) 36.02 -5.15* -9. 95*

Player 2 Player 1 Player 3

Mf{7C) 44.58 -4.00* +1.96

M2 30 47.33 -6.74* +1.25
M3 7B 46.45 +3.37* +5.90*
M4(10i0) 48.52 -5.48* -1.46
M5(liO) 41.17 +5.15* -4.80*

Player 3 Player 1 Player 2

Ml (70) 42.62 -5.96* -1.96

M2(3C 46.08 -7.99* -1.25
H3 7B 40.55 +2.47 -5.90*
M4{10|0) 49.98 -4.02* +1.46
W5(li0) 45.97 +9.95* +4.30*

Syaphony Throat
Player 1 Player 2 Player 3

Mil 70 41.60 -1.85 + .27

M2 30) 50.53 +3.51* + .61
M3( 78) 44.75 - .15 +2.03
M4I io4o) 54.17 +4.20* +4.59*
M5 lio) 42.93 + .30 +3.36*
Player 2 Player 1 Player 3

Ml (70) 43.45 . +1.85 +2.12

K2 30) 47.02 -3.51* -2.90*
M3 73) 44.90 + .15 +2.18
M4 loio) 49.97 -4.20* + .39
M5 lio) 42.63 - .30 +3.06*
 17

Table 3. (concl.)

Player 3 Player ; Player 1

Ml (70) 41.33 -2.12 - .27

M2 30) 49.92 4.2.90* - .61
M3 7B) 42.72 -2.18 -2.03
M4(10|0) 49.58 - .39 -4.59*
M5 liO) 39.57 -3.06* -3.36*

DIFFBRBHOES IHf INTONATION PATTERNS

WHSI lieUTHPIBOE OU? SIZES DIPPER

The second premise of this report was that there Is a

difference In Intonation patterns, either sharper or flatter,

when the cup dimensions change. This premise Is supported by

the data presented In the following comparisons of extremes In

cup diameter and extremes In cup depth and volume.

Using the means In Table 2, the two extremes of cup diameter

were compared. The M4(10t0) mouthpiece with a cup diameter of

15.9mm was compared with the M5(li0) mouthpiece with a cup

diameter of 17mm.

Table 4. Intonation differences between

extremes In cup diameter.

Player 1 Player 2 Player 3

Std, Sym. 3td. Sjna, Std. Sym.

HKlOlO) 54.00 54.17 48.52 49.97 49.98 49.58

I5.9ma

M5(liO) 36.02 42.93 41.17 42,63 45.97 39.57

17mm

Dlff. 17.93 11.24 7.35 7.34 4.01 10.01

 18

Table 4 shows that In all cases the mouthpiece with the

tiler oup diameter played at a significantly sharper level.

The reader is reminded that any difference equaling or exceeding

2«60 cents is significant.

Again using the means in Table 2, the two extremes of ©up

depth and volume were compared. The M4(10i0) mouthpiece vrith

a medium shallow cup depth and a cup volume of 19.5 was com-

pared vrith the rT3(7B) mouthpiece with a medium cup and a oup

volume of 21, 5«'

Table 5. Intonation differences between

extremes in cup depth and volume.

Player 1 Player 2 Player 3

Std. Sym, Std, Sym, Std. Sym.

M4(10iC) 54.00 54.17 48,52 49,97 49,98 49.58

M3(7B) 38.08 44.75 46.45 44.90 40.55 42.72

Diff, 15,92 9.42 2.07 5.07 9.43 6,86

fable 5 shows that in all but one instance the mouthpiece

with the smaller oup depth and volume played at a significantly

sharper level.

DIFfBHBHOES IN INTONATION BBTWBBI

STANDARD AND SYra»HONY THROATS

The third premise of this report was to show a difference

in intonation patterns in selected registers when the size of the

'Specific measurements of these mouthpieces are shoxm in

Appendix B, p, 30,
 19

throat was changed and the other measurements of the mouthpiece

remained constant. However, a comparison of player to mouth-

piece rer note failed to reach a level of 1.15 (which the

Statistics Laboratory considered significant) by .03* and there-

fore could not be Included In the definite findings of this

report. But since this comparison came so close to the signifi-

cant level, the table of means for the iT2(3C) mouthpiece was

Included In Table 9 found In Appendix S.

Because the above data ;fas so very close to the significant

level, the author was convinced that further research should be

attempted In order to obtain a significant level of correlation

in a player to mouthpiece per note comparison. In making this

ooaparlson, the means for the symphony throat and standard

throat should be kept separate In order that a comparison can

be made between Intonation at different registers of pitch. The

author believes that In comparing the results of such research,

the symphony throat mouthpiece will show a definite tendency

to level out the variation of intonation through the low,

middle, and high registers.

A definite pattern of intonation differences in regard to

throat sizes is not apparent in the follovring table, which

represents the overall intonation differences between standard

and symphony throats for each mouthpiece and each player.

The numbers In Table 6 are the result of subtracting the

standard and symphony throat means shown in Table 2 for each

mouthpiece. The result vraa placed in the column corresponding

to the throat size which played sharper in Intonation.

 20

Table 6, Differences In intonation between

standard and symphony throats.

Player 1 Player 2 Player 3

Std. Sym, Std. Sym. Std. Sym.

Ml (70) 6.98 1.13 1.29

M2(30) 3.54 .31 3.84

1

M3(7B) 6.67 1.55 2.17

M4(10i0) .t7 1.45 .40

MSdio) 6.91 1.46 6.40

The lack of significant differences, and a definite pattern

of differences for the mouthpiece throat sizes, would seem to

show that the using of either the standard throat or the Symphony

throat would not greatly alter the overall intonation pattern.

The decision of whether to use the standard or symphony throat

would then probably rest upon such factors as the player's

embouchure development, desired tone quality, and desired tone

volume rather than a consideration of intonation differences

between the two throat sizes.

OOHOLUSION

The findings presented in this report substantiate the

author's contention that there are significant intonation

differences between players using various mouthpieces upon the

paae instrument. Two of the three premises were substantiated

¥/ tlgnlfioant statistical evidence, while the third approached

a significant level to a close enough degree to warrant
 21

further research.

The first conclusion was that the tone production of

individual players differs In Intonation patterns when produced

vpon the same mouthpiece smd Instrument. Tendencies observed

while organizing the data for this first conclusion show that

further research Is needed In order to determine whether the

symphony throat mouthpiece might actually promote an evening

of these individual differences.

On the basis of this research. It was concluded that

mouthpieces with small cup diameters definitely play sharper

than mouthpieces with large cup diameters, and that mouthpieces

with small cup depths and volumes play sharper than mouthpieces

with large cup depths and volumes.

The data to be used for the third premise of the report

failed to reach a significant level by a very small margin,

thereby making It Impossible to come to any definite conclusions

as to whether one throat size responds more accurately than the

other In different registers of the trumpet. However, because

the data came so very close to the significant level the author

feels that further research Is definitely warranted.

It was established that when choosing between the symphony

throat and the standard throat, the overall Intonation pattern

would not be altered sufficiently to warrant the choice of one

over the other. It would seem from this conclusion that the

player's embouchure development, desired tone quality, and

desired volume of tone would be the primary determinants of the

throat selected.
 22

The author had no Intention of removing the personal

element from the choloe of the mouthpiece. The player's

embouchure development, comfort, and formation should still

be used In aiding in the selection. But the author is convinced

that as much objective information as oan be obtained is helpful

in determining the proper mouthpiece selection.

The author is certain that more research of this type

should be attempted on all phases of brass mouthpiece intonation

to help supply such information to music educators, for the

final responsibility of selection rests with them.

 23

AOKHO^LBDOlOSirT

The author ;rt.shes to express sincere appreciation to

Professor Thomas B. Steunenberg, Major Professor; to Professor

Luther Leavengood, Head, Department of Music; and Professor

Paul Shull, Director of Bands, for their examination of this

report; to Professor Gary Krause, Statistical Laboratory, for

his work on data analysis; to Joe Hostetter and Russell Berlin

for their work as subjects; to Keith Meredith for his hours

spent as observer; to Mr. Matt Betton for the use of the Conn

Dynalevel; and to Mr. Vincent Bach and the Selmer Corporation,

Elkhart, Indiana, for the use of the trumpet mouthpieces used

In the research.
 .

24

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Bach, Vincent. Embouchure and ^louthpiaoa l^anual . Mount Vernon,

Hew York. Vincent Bach Corporation, 1954.

Hall, Jody 0. The Proper Selection of Cup :"outhgleces .

Elkhart, Indiana. 0, a. Oonn Oorporatlon, 1962.

Kent, Earle L, The Inside otory of Brass Instruments . Hkhart,

Indiana. C, G. Oonn Oorporatlon, 1956.

Periodicals

Bach, Vincent. "Selection and Use of Brass I-^outhpleces.'*

The InstruTientallst . November-December, 1952, 7»40-41.

Fitzgerald, Bernard. "Problems Involved In Standardizing

Brass "outhpleces," The Instrumentalist . May-June, 1953»
7 » 24-26.

"Selecting a Mouthpiece." The Instrumentalist .

September-October, 1947, 2:20-21.

Hall, Jody 0. "There Is No Magic In Choosing a Brasswind

Mouthpiece." OonnOhord . January, 1964, 718-II.

Long, T, H. "On the Performance of Cup Mouthpiece Instruments,"

The Journal £f the Acoustical Society of America . November,
T946, 20:875.

. "Performance of Cup Mouthpiece Instruments."

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America . July,
Tp7, 19:723.

'Performance of Cup ?4outhplece Instruments."

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America . September,
1947, 19:392-901

Maleky Vincent P. "'fhat Is a Good Oomet or Trumpet Mouthpiece?"

The Instrumentalist . May, 1954, 8:22-23.

Rohner, Traugott. "Standardization and Classification of Brass

Mouthpieces." The Instrumentalist . November-December,
1952, 7:30-39.

How to Measure a Brass Mouthpiece," The

Instrumentalist . January-February, 1953» 7:31-34.
 S9

Schllke, Reynold 0, "Dimensional Characteristics of Brass

Mouthpieces." The Instrumentalist . November-December,
1952, 7JP8-30.

Webster, John C. "An Electrical ^'^ethod of Measuring the

Intonation of Oup Mouthpiece Instruments." The Journal
of the Acoustical Society of America . September, 19^7,
191902-906.

Unpublished Vt'orks

Stuewe, David 3. ^ Study o£ i^ie Brass KouthPleoe . Unpublished

Master's Report, Kansas State University, Manhattan,
Kansas, 1957.

fflymii-Pgo4-.nT'g»T' Product ^^anuals

0. G. Conn, Ltd., The Conn Chromatic Stroboscope Operator's

JKgnual.

0. a* Conn, Ltd., The Conn Product Manual.

 26

IPPSUDIX
 27

AfpnrDix A

LISTING OP TEST NtJMBi5RS, DATES, AND MOUTHPIECES USED

Test l^umber ^'outhplace Number* Date

1 30 January 29

2 30 February 3

5 1|0 February 6

4 70 February 12

5 7B February \ 3

tf 70 February 18

7 lOiO February 24

9 liO February 26

9 7B February 27

10 10^0 February 28

Includes both symphony and standard mouthpiece designation.

 26

APFBNDIX B

The following explanation from the publication by the Conn

Corporation with regard to the Chromatic Stroboscope and the

Dynalevel Is quoted to acquaint readers who are not familiar

with this equipment:

The Conn Chromatic Stroboscope consists of two units,

the Stroboscope Unit and the Pork Unit. Tn the Stroboscope
Unit there are twelve windows having the relative positions
of the white and black keys of the piano keyboard In the
octave from C to B. The twelve notes of the chromatic
octave are thus represented, Sound picked up by the
microphone causes these windows to be Illuminated.

As an Illustration, suppose that a piano Is available

tuned to exactly equal temperament vrlth the "A" string
executing 440 vibrations per second. If this A string
Is sounded, there will appear across the center of the
"a" vrlndow a characteristic stationary pattern composed
of alternating light and dark bars. Upon sounding the
A an octave higher, a similar pattern appears with twice
the number of bars, since the frequency Is doubled. The
position of the pattern Is also shifted outward from the
center to the next band. Space Is provided for seven
octaves so that any one of theso seven A*s within the
piano range can produce Its own appropriate stationary
pattern.

Tf the piano string which was previously tuned to

the standard A Is now tightened, making Its tone sharp,
the characteristic pattern which originally was stationary
will move to the right. Similarly a tone which Is some-
what flat will cause Its pattern to move to the loft.
The direction of the motion thus serves to indicate
whether a given tone Is sharper or flatter than standard,
the standard being the equally tempered scale. The A on
a piano which has been flatter than standard, say to
435 vibrations per second Instead of 44o, will oauss the
pattern in the ''A" window to move toifard the left. By
moving the knob on the Pork Unit In the same direction,
thus moving the pointer to the left, the pattern may
be brought to a standstill. The pointer >rt.ll then read
-:?0" on the graduated scale above the adjusting knob,
thus showing directly how much the 435-vibratlon tone in
flat compared to the standard A of 44o, the reading being
expressed In hundredths of a semitone (cents). If the
entire piano had been tuned to equal temperament on this
loafer pitch standard, then all strings would produce
stationary patterns with the pointer at "-20'*,
 ¥lth the fork pointer set as zero, the Conn Chromatic
Stroboscope Is in exact tune with the equally tempered
scale based on A-440 vibrations per second. I'lth the
pointer set to any position other than zero all notes
are equally changed in parts of a semitone and the Conn
Chromatic Stroboscope Is still In tune with the equally
tempered scale based, in this case, on an A of some other
frequency. The scale on the Pork Unit is graduated to
50 hundredths of a semitone, plus or minus. The Conn
Chromatic Stroboscope is essentially a logarithmic
frequency meter, having an accuracy of frequency deter-
mination of about 1/20> (0.01 of a semitone) in the
continuous range of 32 to 4070 cycles per second,^

The Dynalevel indicates the intensity or volume of

sound with a column of eleven lights which are illumi-
nated, in sucoe«5sion, according to the intensity of
sound. iiach section of the column represents a four-
decibel change in intensity. Sach section is illuminated
with different colored lamps so that a change In sound
Intensity is seen as a change in color as well as a
change In length of light column.

The Dynalevel responds to sound practically

Instantaneously, with a slight delay before the column
of light recedes, so that sharp peaks of sound power
can be seen. Its sensitivity can be adjusted to handle
all musical situations. The range of the Dynalevel Is
40 decibels, which is a 10,000 to 1 ratio of sound
lntenslty~ample for nearly every application.

^0. Gr, Conn, Ltd., The Conn Chromatic otroboscoge Operator's

Manual , pp. 3-4,
^0, G, Conn, Ltd,, The Conn Product Manual , p. 152,
 30

APPENDIX

Table 7» Measurements of mouthpieces

used In the research.

Mouthpiece T '/
D R B

10 26 26 15 20.5 68 11 20 3

30 27 26 16 21 67 12 20 3

Tl 28 27 16 21.5 67 11 20 2

70 28 24 15 20 65 14 21 4

10^0 27 25 14 19.5 64 11 21 4

Interpreting the table:

Column T in the table of statistics indicates the

throat measurements, the narroi^est part of the hole. The
number of the largest drill shank that will go through the
throat is given in this column. One should bear in mind
that the smaller the number of the drill the larger is the
hole.

7 consists of three columns of figures indicating

cup depth and •^•d.dth and their combination into volume.
The first of these three shows the number of sixty-fourths
of an inch that the 3/1 6 depth gage can be inserted into
the cup, doi-m from the top of the rim. The second column
shows the number of sixty-fourths the -l-inch depth gage
can be inserted, and the third column figures equal
the sum of the first two columns divided by 2. It is
this third composite figure which is used for the single
number indicating cup volume.

Column D lists the diameter of the cup at a point

near Its top where the curvature of the cup meets the
curvature of the rim. One might call this the Inside
rlra diameter. It is not always easy to locate the exact
point where the two curves meet.

Column C shows the curvature of the rim. The numbers

are In sixty-fourths; specifically, they indicate a circle
that has a radius of many sixty-fourths of an inch.
oliiiilarly coiuwn B is for bite, the inside edge of the
rlra, and is also in sixty-fourths of an inch for a circle
having this radius. Obviously, the larger the number
the larger is the curve and the larger is the circle.
 3t

Oolumn R lists the rim thlofcness or ^fldth. These

figures are secured by measuring the outside of the rim,
subtracting the Inside rim diameter from It and dividing
by 2. (If one did not divide by 2, the resultant figure
would Include two thicknesses of the rim.)

This table does not Include the throat measurements of the

symphony throat. The author found that In all cases the symphony

throat was one drill size larger than the standard throat—if

the standard throat is 28 the symphony throat is 27.

The table on the preceding page also includes a mouthpiece

which was not used in the research. The Rohner study did not

Include the measurements of the 1^0 mouthpiece. However,

after consulting the Bach manual it was found that the IC and

th« lie would compare almost exactly the same in their measure-

ments. Therefore, the measurements of the IC are included in

the table.

'Traugott Rohner, "Standardization and Classification of

Braes Mouthpieces." The Instrumentalist . Nov. -Dec. 1953, 7J32-34.
 32

APPMDIX D

Table 8. Correlation of mouthpieces

for each player.

Player 1 Player 2 Player 3

-
Mouthpiece iq^a

Day 1 .8458 .8604 .8818

Day 2 .3983 .9006 .8975

Both Days .8540 .8737 .8846

]>'iouthplece 70

Day 1 • 7722 .8975 .8246

Day 2 .8326 .8767 .7890

Both Days .8022 .8796 .7751

Fputhp^?9? J2
Day 1 .7704 .8310 .8617

Day 2 .8373 .8758 .9071

Both Days .8327 .8535 .8597

Moutht)lQce -20

Day 1 .7631 .8821 .7942

Day 2 .5962 .9069 .8974

Both Days .6712 .8970 .8446

Mouthpiece 1^0
Day 1 .8129 ,8688 .8866
Day 2 .8991 .8154 .3783
Both Days .8615 .7915 .8956

Table 3 illustrates the ability of eaoh individual player

to match intonation patterns between the symphony coid standard \

 35

throat mouthpiece. The correlation figures for Day 1 and Day 2

are arrived at by comparing the readings of each individual day.

The correlation figure for Both Days is arrived at by comparing

the readings between days. A correlation which is smaller for

the Both Days' comparison than the correlation for either Day 1

or Day 2, as for Player 2 on the 1^0 mouthpiece, probably means

that from one day to the other the entire Intonation pattern

shifted one way or another, either flatter or sharper,

A large number tending toward 1., a perfect correlation,

would seem to mean that the player using that mouthpiece vms

more consistent with that size of mouthpiece. This cannot be

a definite statement because this measure of correlation la

not between two mouthpieces whose dimensions are identical in

all respects.
 APPENDIX E

Table 9. Chromatic scale means In cents for

mouthpiece M2(30).

»ote Player 1 Player 2 Player 3

G3 52.25 47.50 51.00

a#3 28,50 25.25 15.75

A3 46.75 40.25 37.00

A#3 45.75 39.75 30.25

B3 30.25 26. 25 13.75

OA 42.75 33.50 9.75

0#4 98.25 101.00 79.75

D4 75.25 79.50 62.00

D#4 50.00 48.75 46.50

14 61.75 58,00 52.25

P4 71.75 46.75 48.50

P#4 51.00 45.25 30.25

G4 56.50 45.75 26.00

G#4 54.25 46.50 46,75

A4 56.75 64.25 58.00

A#4 51.50 53.25 41.25

B4 42.25 38.50 26.00

05 51.75 46.50 30.25

0#5 50.75 47.25 63.00

B9 50.75 42.75 48.75

i)#5 30.75 26.50 2'^00

B5 33.50 32.00 37.00

Pitches given are written pitches.

 39

Table 9 (ooncl.

Note Flayer 1 Player 2 Player 3

P5 59.25 55.00 74.75

f#5 50.50 48,00 •

60.25

G5 61.25 47.00 61.50

a#5 51.00 50.00 75.25

A5 62.75 65.50 92.25

A#5 58.50 48.50 76.50

B5 44.00 27.75 56.00

06 43.75 38.50 62.75

Pitches given are written pitches.

The means recorded in Table 9 are arrived at by adding

the Stroboscope reading for the symphony and standard throat

on both days and dividing the sum by 4— the number of readings

recorded.
A STITDT OF BRASS MOUTHPIECE INTONATION

by

DONALD LEWIS MEREDITH

B.S., Kansas State University, 1962

AN ABSTRACT OP A MASTER'S REPORT

submitted In partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree

MASTER OP SCIENCE

Department of Music

KANSAS STATE UHTVERSITT

ilanhattan, Kansas

1964
 The purpose of this report Is to explore the intonation

characteristics of different types of mouthpieces used upon the

same trumpet by three Individual players.

The equipment used in this research consisted of a Oonn

Ohromatlo Stroboscope and Pork Unit, which were used to measure

the subjects* Intonation; a Conn Dynalavel, which was used to

show the subjects their dynamic levels; a Leblanc Sonic 707

trumpet with a medium-large bore; and five sets of trumpet mouth-

pieces. This equipment vras used in a room where the temperature

remained at a constant level.

During the tests the subjects were instructed not to

compensate for faulty intonation. The player sat with the

Stroboscope out of sight In order to avoid any tendency to

observe the windox/ patterns. The commonly accepted chromatic

fingerings were used. The physical and acoustical relationship

of all the equipment remained constant throughout the research.

3aoh mouthpiece set contained two mouthpieces which were

identical in all dimensions, except that of the throat size.

The throat sizes were designated by the manufacturer as standard

throat and symphony throat, with the symphony throat being the

larger. At each session all subjects played upon the same set.

Before each player began his series, a period of warm-up

practice took place. This allowed the player to become

accustomed to the mouthpiece being used at that time, to warm

the trumpet to playing level, and to let the obsei^er check

the equipment.
 The chromatic tones used In the test were called at random

In order to Isolate each tone and obliterate Interval relation-

ship in intonation as much as possible.

The players were subjected to two series of Intonation

readings for each set of mouthpieces, each on a separata day.

The conclusions of the report were based upon the Statistics

Laboratory analysis of the data collected.

The first conclusion of the report was that the tone

production of individual players differs in intonation patterns

Vhtn produced upon the same mouthpiece and Instrument. Tendencies

observed while organizing the data for this conclusion show that

the symphony throat might actually promote an evening of these

individual differences.

It was also concluded that mouthpieces with small cup

diameters definitely play sharper than mouthpieces with larger

oup diameters, and that mouthpieces with small cup depths and

volumes play sharper than mouthpieces with large cup depths and

volumes.

The data to be used for a third conclusion failed, by a

very small margin, to reach a significant level, thereby making

it impossible to come to any definite conclusions as to whether

one throat size responds more accurately than the other in

different registers of the trumpet.

It was established that when choosing between the symphony

throat and the standard throat, the overall intonation pattern

would not be altered sufficiently to warrant the oholce of one

over the other.

 The author is certain that more research of this type

should be attempted on all phases of brass mouthpiece intonation

to help supply such Information to music educators, for the

final responsibility of selection rests with them.