Naturally most of the work on mpcs focuses on the internal
dimensions. 
But how much thought goes into the outside shape? Obviously, there
are huge differences in the shape from different manufacturers, but 
why?
Is it purely down to individual comfort or does the fact that your 
embouchure is altered affect the sound? I've always thought that 
comparing HR and metal mpcs is difficult for this reason.

my minimal experience is that mpc shape matters at the beak, nowhere 
else, save for what feels comfortable to the individual.

nickwyver wrote:

> Naturally most of the work on mpcs focuses on the internal
> dimensions.
> But how much thought goes into the outside shape? Obviously, there
> are huge differences in the shape from different manufacturers, but
> why?
> Is it purely down to individual comfort or does the fact that your
> embouchure is altered affect the sound? I've always thought that
> comparing HR and metal mpcs is difficult for this reason.
>
>
> Got a Mouthpiece Work question?  Send it to MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
>
> Visit the site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork to see 
> the Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.
>
> To see and modify your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service 
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.

Nick,
It's interesting that you should say that. When Stan Getz (yes, I'm 
on about him again...) went to the Meyer mcp near the end of his 
life, he did so because he wanted a thinner beak, so that it would 
fit his mouth better (most of his life he struggled with the 
uncomfortable bulkiness (as far as he was concerned) of the HR Otto 
Link - and he himself said that he would prefer a metal mouthpiece, 
but none of them would give him the results that he wanted - material 
has a difference for some people it would seem).

However, when he went to the Otto Link guys about it, they wouldn't 
thin down the beak of a mouthpiece for him because (as far as their 
opinions were concerned) it would change the tone of the piece (hence 
he got the specially customised Meyer instead).

Fron this, it seems that outside dimensions do have something to do 
with the tone of the mouthpiece if they change its resonating 
characteristics.

DB


--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, "nickwyver <nicksax@b...>" 
<nicksax@b...> wrote:
> Naturally most of the work on mpcs focuses on the internal
> dimensions. 
> But how much thought goes into the outside shape? Obviously, there
> are huge differences in the shape from different manufacturers, but 
> why?
> Is it purely down to individual comfort or does the fact that your 
> embouchure is altered affect the sound? I've always thought that 
> comparing HR and metal mpcs is difficult for this reason.

Oops... Meant "Meyer mpc" (not mcp)...

DB

"went to the Meyer mcp near the end of his life"