Schilke 46D

[CharlieB]

Just wondering if anybody here has tried a 46D with a .500 bore tenor ?

[Posaunus]

Tried a Schilke 46 (sort of Bach 12C size). Tried briefly. Too small for me, unless you're striving (reaching?) for high range. But who knows – it may work for you.

[CharlieB]

Thanks, Posaunus.
I have played a 46, and I agree with you. Too small and tight.
By spec's, the 46D is more like a Bach 7 (which I like), but with a bigger bore.
I don't place a high value on mouthpiece spec's, so I am hoping that somebody here might have had some face time with a 46D.

[JohnL]

I have one; I use it on my double-bell baritone and on my American tenor horn. It does quite well for those instruments. I would consider its proportions (depth vs. diameter) to be other than ideal for trombone.

[FEWeathers]

I'd be interested to know what the rim/cup diameter is on it, because "slightly larger than the 46," which is "slightly larger than the 45" might actually mean something, seeings how the 45 I have measures 25.1-25.2mm (which is considerably larger than a 12C).

If you haven't tried the 45, you might like it. It has a D cup depth, .238" bore, and a #2-ish backbore, Elliot-wise. Makes good sounds.

[CharlieB]

Thanks for the suggestion, FEW ^^
The Schilke 45 rim is actually smaller than that of a Bach 12C. The Schilke 46 is about the same as a Bach 12C. My embouchure is happier with something a little bigger.

Schilke spec's here:
https://www.schilkemusic.com/products/m ... euphonium/

Bach spec's here:
http://mouthpieceexpress.com/specshub/s ... tenor.html

[CharlieB]

Thanks, JohnL. ^^
That's very helpful.
I also have a baritone horn, so I understand your point about trombone versus baritone horn mouthpieces.

[FEWeathers]

CharlieB,

Please don't confuse me with someone who thinks published specs of Schilke mouthpieces (at least) are even remotely, er, accurate.

What I said about the 45 is accurate, and it's more like a Bach 6 3/4 sized rim than any 12.

Behold! Pics are worth 1,000s of words...



Its rim contour is different, but its rim diameter is the same as the 47 (but it has a deeper cup, and larger throat...



Also, if Posaunus took his calipers to the 46, I'd be curious to know what the actual rim size of it is. Ciao!

[CharlieB]

Thanks to all who responded, and especially to FEW, who took the time to demonstrate the inconsistencies of Schilke spec's.
If the Schilke spec's are that bad, it's impossible to intelligently discuss Schilke mouthpieces based on their nomenclature, so I'll exit this thread and start hands-on testing of some 46D's and similar sized mouthpieces.

[FEWeathers]

The highlighted mouthpieces in the photographs below are ones that I have (or had) in my possession, and that I've measured. Maybe someone will find the information useful.

[harrisonreed]

That Schilke 45 in the picture looks painful

[CharlieB]

Just a follow-up about the Schilke 46D
I bought one, and I have been playing it alongside other very well respected mouthpieces of similar size. (0.970"ish rims and deep cups). (Names withheld to protect the innocent)
Differences:
The Schilke is cut from a very heavy blank. Lots of mass there.
The Schilke has a long stem.
The Schilke bore, 0.234", extends waaaay downstream before encountering the tapered backbore.

The sound is big but focused, and is a rich blend of overtones that I find very pleasing, especially above Middle C. A range of available timbres allows adding color to solos. It plays fast passages cleanly, legato passages smoothly, and has an easy high range, Overall, I like it a lot. I have no clue why Schilke places the 46D in between the 46 and 47 on their chart. The 46D is a completely different animal. The 46D works well for me on trombone. It would be an injustice for me to relegate it to my baritone.