The Clarinet BBoard

The Clarinet BBoard The C4 standard

New Topic | Go to Top | Go to Topic | Search | Help/Rules | Smileys/Notes | Log In

Previous Message | Next Message

Re: Mouthpiece cushions, ( or the lack thereof )

Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2018-02-17 20:01

Caihlen wrote:

> Can anyone speak to the drawbacks of not using a mouthpiece
> cushion? I've tried both thick and thin and I dislike them.

If you've tried them and don't like using them, that should settle the issue for you. If they don't help, then they have little point.

Of course, patches do help to prevent damage to your mouthpiece. But tooth dents take time to form and mouthpieces can be replaced.

My original reason for using a patch was that, as a student playing single lip, I had really serious jolts of pain go through my upper teeth as a result of the vibration of the mouthpiece. Later after I made the gradual switch to double lip I kept using a patch because without one I found the mouthpiece beak to be slippery and I could keep a more stable embouchure with a patch.

I think the thickest patches can tend to cause small gaps to form around the edges, allowing air to whistle through. Bob's point about not putting the patch too close to the tip is well put. That's another edge that can add turbulence and resistance to the air column, especially as a thicker pad is used.

I do think for myself that the softer surface of rubber is more useful than the hard plastic surface of some of the thin patches. As a student, I used rubber cut from the thin rubber work gloves that you could get an any hardware store. As those gloves disappeared and my stockpile also dwindled, I started to experiment with commercial patches, gritting my teeth at the price of having a manufacturer cut them for me. Thin or medium thickness is a matter of comfort, but IMO the surface needs to be resilient, or it isn't any different from the bare surface of the beak itself.

Karl

Reply To Message | Avail. Forums | Flat View

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Topics