First, this newsgroup is a truly great resource.  Great information and 
insights.  Thanks, everyone. Particular thanks to Jeff Rosner for the 
gauges, Patrick Springer for the website links, and Keith B. and Paul C. 
for helping with my previous questions.  I have a couple of new 
questions, which I hope are of wider interest. 

For my first practice mouthpiece, I've been working on a Yamaha 4C tenor 
piece that had a chipped corner.  I figure there's nothing to lose with 
this one.  My initial attempts at flattening the table were making the 
high spot worse just below the window.  After reading all of the 
table-flattening posts I could find and looking at Patrick's 
"in-progress" pictures on his website, I adjusted my technique and came 
up with a flat (but not completely perfect yet) table.  I opened up the 
tip to .085 (starting gently with a file), and started working on the 
facing to get a radial curve.  I shaped the tip to a sample reed 
(Vandoren) and shaped an even-looking tip rail (file and 600-grit 
paper).  That all went pretty well, and it actually didn't play too 
badly, but when I put a reed on it and try to suction the air out, it 
doesn't form a seal at all.  The table is OK - the non-sealing part 
seems to be the tip. It also has kind of a "chirp" to the sound, like 
it's on the verge of squeaking sometimes. 

Possible explanations I've thought of (some of which are, no doubt, 
crackpot theories):
1- The tip rail is not in a single flat plane, and it should be.  If so, 
should this be done on glass with sandpaper?
2- The side rails do not meet the tip rail smoothly enough. (the .078 
reading is a tiny bit lower than the calculated value).
3- There's a baffle just below the tip inadvertently created by opening 
up the tip and side rails without changing the mouthpiece interior near 
the tip.
4- The basic design of this mouthpiece precludes getting it to work 
right without exceptional skill.
5- "YOUR THEORY HERE"

Thanks, everyone.

In my limited experience your problems indicate that either the side rails are not even and/or the tip rail is not even and/or the tip rail is not parallel to the table. All these are, of course, related. Another possible contributing factor to the tendency to chirp could be that the baffle immediately behind the tip rail is too high--that there is not a clean delineation of the tip rail itself. 

I can only describe the methods I use, there are people here with much more experience than I, so hopefully they can also contribute.

I never use a file on the table or the rails, I use sandpaper on a piece of glass. You can swap different pieces of different grits depending on the stage of work. I have been mostly working on metal pieces, which of course are much harder than their plastic/rubber counterparts.

Anyway I flatten the table first by pressing down against the paper and drawing it towards me, butt end first. You don't want to hold the mpc perpendicular to the direction of travel, as you will definitely round the table from side to side that way.

You should be able to see where the table is making contact with the paper by the difference in the surface where it has been sanded. You can also see what is happening to the tip rails before the break. These should definitely be at the same height on both sides. If they aren't what I do is to continue to take down the table putting more pressure on the side where the break is lower as I work. You have to be careful not to tip the mpc to the side and round the table--but eventually just the difference in the pressure will bring the break point at the two side rails even while keeping the table flat.

That is the point where you can start work on the rails themselves. First, you will now have a very definite edge where the rail break starts, so you need to smooth that out. I generally pull the mpc back as before, but now I gently and evenly roll it up towards the tip, putting increasingly less pressure as I approach the tip. This should serve to even out the two rails. You need to check often and see that they are even all the way up with feeler gauges. If they are not you need to put more pressure on the higher side as you do this maneuver, especially at the point(s) where your gauges have shown that one is higher.

Once your side rails are even all the way up you can perform this same roll, but not putting any real pressure on until the tip--this will ensure that your tip rail is even. You have to be very careful not to continue to roll the mpc when you reach the tip rail itself, as this will make it curl upwards at the very center. You want that tip to be flat, so it means stopping the roll just as you reach the tip and continuing to pull straight back. You can sometimes also just place the mpc on the paper putting pressure near the tip with your index finger (while holding the body with thumb and other fingers) so that the mpc tip is in contact with the paper and pull straight back without rolling the mpc up to that point while pulling to get a flat tip rail. Be sure to do a couple of gentle rolls after that to eliminate any flat spots in the curve of the side rails.

Ata this point you will probably have a tip rail that is much too wide. At this point I take a small round or 1/2 round needle file and very carefully remove material from just behind the tip rail, and even the back of the tip rail to make it thin. It is important IME to make sure that there is a very definite cutting away and angle change of the baffle just behind the tip rail. You have to be very careful, though, with softer materials, as one slip can ruin the tip rail. Sometimes I wrap a piece of very fine grit sandpaper around the round butt of the file and use that instead of the file teeth at this point, changing the paper as it gets clogged. You will eventually want to do this anyway to clean up any roughness caused by the file work. Do this very slowly and be careful not to change the angle of the file and cut into the tip rail.

That's basically what I do and it has always worked for me, but it does require a certain amount of manual dexterity and "feel". You have to get a sense of how the materials react to what you are doing and develop the motor sensitivity to control the way you move the mpc on the paper.

I *strongly* suggest doing this slowly and in a relaxed state of mind. Almost all the slips I have made have been in impatience while trying to speed up the process...

Hope that helps. How 'bout some of you pros jumping in and commenting if you find my procedures in error so I don't mislead anybody.

Toby



  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dan Torosian 
  To: Mouthpiece Work 
  Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2004 5:53 AM
  Subject: [MouthpieceWork] Tip Rail?


  First, this newsgroup is a truly great resource.  Great information and 
  insights.  Thanks, everyone. Particular thanks to Jeff Rosner for the 
  gauges, Patrick Springer for the website links, and Keith B. and Paul C. 
  for helping with my previous questions.  I have a couple of new 
  questions, which I hope are of wider interest. 

  For my first practice mouthpiece, I've been working on a Yamaha 4C tenor 
  piece that had a chipped corner.  I figure there's nothing to lose with 
  this one.  My initial attempts at flattening the table were making the 
  high spot worse just below the window.  After reading all of the 
  table-flattening posts I could find and looking at Patrick's 
  "in-progress" pictures on his website, I adjusted my technique and came 
  up with a flat (but not completely perfect yet) table.  I opened up the 
  tip to .085 (starting gently with a file), and started working on the 
  facing to get a radial curve.  I shaped the tip to a sample reed 
  (Vandoren) and shaped an even-looking tip rail (file and 600-grit 
  paper).  That all went pretty well, and it actually didn't play too 
  badly, but when I put a reed on it and try to suction the air out, it 
  doesn't form a seal at all.  The table is OK - the non-sealing part 
  seems to be the tip. It also has kind of a "chirp" to the sound, like 
  it's on the verge of squeaking sometimes. 

  Possible explanations I've thought of (some of which are, no doubt, 
  crackpot theories):
  1- The tip rail is not in a single flat plane, and it should be.  If so, 
  should this be done on glass with sandpaper?
  2- The side rails do not meet the tip rail smoothly enough. (the .078 
  reading is a tiny bit lower than the calculated value).
  3- There's a baffle just below the tip inadvertently created by opening 
  up the tip and side rails without changing the mouthpiece interior near 
  the tip.
  4- The basic design of this mouthpiece precludes getting it to work 
  right without exceptional skill.
  5- "YOUR THEORY HERE"

  Thanks, everyone.




  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 


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 

Toby gave some good detailed descriptions of the basic rework steps.  I
have only a copule of comments:

>>>You have to be very careful not to continue to roll the mpc when you
reach the tip rail itself, as this will make it curl upwards at the very
center....

I prefer to extend the facing curve arc to the very tip of the tip rail. 
The tip rail surface does not need to lie in a flat plane to play well. 
Its just an alternative that some like.  I have found that curving to the
tip is better for high altissimo response.  I'm talking like E4 and up. 
Adding an exaggerated flip tip can make the altissimo upper alitissimo very
responsive, but the normal sax range will start to sound airy.   Since
squeaks and chirps are at similar frequencies, a flat tip rail may help
reduce their occurance.
 
>>>...I *strongly* suggest doing this slowly and in a relaxed state of
mind. Almost all the slips I have made have been in impatience while trying
to speed up the process...

Me too.  My biggest mistakes have been from using coarser sandpaper grits
to work faster.  I still use them on hard materials and when heavy cutting
is needed.  But I switch to finer grits sooner than I used to.

The Erick Brand manual has a facing procedure where you go for one
feeler/glass gauge number at a time and work your way towards the tip.  I
think this results in a facing curve that can measure well but is faceted. 
That is, a series of flat segments.  To look for this, look at the way
light reflects off your facing curve as you tilt it in the light.  I think
it is better to smooth out points and blend them into the flats.  I like to
sneak up on all the facing curve target numbers at once.  By plotting your
progress vs the targets, you can see several neighboring numbers that need
more work than others.  A few strokes over all these numbers works out
better than attacking them one at a time.


==2925 Crane St., Vineland, NJ 08361 
Paypal to MojoMouthpieceWork@... 
My CD, Lamps and Mouthpieces at http://www.geocities.com/kwbradbury/



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 

This html message parsed with html2text ---------------------------This helps a lot. I was working the tip and side rails with sandpaper on a
finger, so I think the inaccuracies inherent in that technique may be the
biggest problem.  
  
Keith Bradbury wrote:  

>
>     Toby gave some good
>     detailed descriptions of the basic rework steps. I have only a copule of
>     comments:
>

>> > >

>>>>     You have to be very careful not to continue to roll

>>>>     the mpc when you

>  
>  
>     reach the tip rail itself, as this will make it curl upwards at
>     the very center.... I prefer to extend the facing curve arc to the very
> tip of
>     the tip rail. The tip rail surface does not need to lie in a flat plane
> to
>     play well. Its just an alternative that some like. I have found that
> curving
>     to the tip is better for high altissimo response. I'm talking like E4
> and up.
>     Adding an exaggerated flip tip can make the altissimo upper alitissimo
> very
>     responsive, but the normal sax range will start to sound airy. Since
> squeaks
>     and chirps are at similar frequencies, a flat tip rail may help reduce
> their
>     occurance.

I think I have the upward curl that Toby mentioned. Think I'll try to correct
that first.  

>
>  
>

>> > >

>>>>     ...I *strongly* suggest doing this slowly and in a relaxed state of

>>>>  
>  
>  
>     mind.
>     Almost all the slips I have made have been in impatience while trying to
> speed
>     up the process... Me too. My biggest mistakes have been from using
> coarser
>     sandpaper grits to work faster. I still use them on hard materials and
> when
>     heavy cutting is needed. But I switch to finer grits sooner than I used
>     to.

That's how I was making the bump in the table worse. At least it's good to
know I'm not alone!  

>
>      The Erick Brand manual
>     has a facing procedure where you go for one feeler/glass gauge number at
> a
>     time and work your way towards the tip. I think this results in a facing
> curve
>     that can measure well but is faceted. That is, a series of flat
> segments. To
>     look for this, look at the way light reflects off your facing curve as
> you
>     tilt it in the light. I think it is better to smooth out points and
> blend them
>     into the flats. I like to sneak up on all the facing curve target
> numbers at
>     once. By plotting your progress vs the targets, you can see several
>     neighboring numbers that need more work than others. A few strokes over
> all
>     these numbers works out better than attacking them one at a time.

That made more sense to me, too. I put pencil marks along the sides at 10, 20,
30, 40 (i.e., 5, 10, 15, 20 mm) and looked at my measurements vs. targets,
then worked the highest areas more than the ones that were closer. The curve
measures well, and looks smooth. Thanks again, guys.  
  
Dan  

Following Toby's and Keith's suggestions, I carefully continued to 
flatten the table, and even out and flatten the side rails and tip rails 
on the Tenor Yamaha 4C I've been practicing on.  The facing length 
shortened (36 = 18mm!) and the tip opening closed a bit (.080), but with 
all the surfaces even and the curve very close to calculated numbers, it 
plays remarkably well.( I also rounded the very narrow square chamber a 
bit.)

The lesson seems to be that a well-formed curve and well-crafted 
table/tip/siderails (even within the limits of my meager abilities) can 
vastly increase a mouthpiece's playability.  To really zero in on tone 
and comfort issues (e.g., tip opening, resistance), a more complex 
interaction involving tip rail shape, baffle shape/height, chamber 
shape/volume, etc. comes into play.  Naive?  Accurate?

I'll probably go back to this piece at some point, maybe open it up to 
.090 and lengthen the facing (mid 40s? 50?) for further practice.

Dan

> To really zero in on tone 
> and comfort issues (e.g., tip opening, resistance), a more complex 
> interaction involving tip rail shape, baffle shape/height, chamber 
> shape/volume, etc. comes into play.  Naive?  Accurate?
> 

I'd say 90% or more of what you called "comfort issues" deal with the 
facing.  Table, tip, length and the quality of the curve in between.  
Along the way, just make sure the other parts do not stray far from 
what typical mouthpieces look like.  Dont let the rails get too fat 
or the baffle out of whack from what you normally see.

The baffle and chamber geometry will determine the basic tone of a 
piece (along with the player of course).  The baffle, or lack there 
of, is the biggest factor on the tone.  Sidewalls and chamber/throat 
are a lesser factors, but still significant.  There are some subtle 
things you can do with the facing curve, but I think it is best just 
to make it as responsive as you like and then alter the baffle some 
if the tone a little off you goals.  If it is way off, you need a 
different mouthpiece design.  You may be able to alter the one you 
have, but it is generally better to start with a mouthpiece that is 
close to the sound you like.

Dan, get the facing length out to 23-24mm (46-48 reading with .0015" 
feeler) and .090" tip opening, and I think you will find it even better.

Paul

Dan Torosian wrote:

> Following Toby's and Keith's suggestions, I carefully continued to
> flatten the table, and even out and flatten the side rails and tip rails
> on the Tenor Yamaha 4C I've been practicing on.  The facing length
> shortened (36 = 18mm!) and the tip opening closed a bit (.080), but with
> all the surfaces even and the curve very close to calculated numbers, it
> plays remarkably well.( I also rounded the very narrow square chamber a
> bit.)
>
> The lesson seems to be that a well-formed curve and well-crafted
> table/tip/siderails (even within the limits of my meager abilities) can
> vastly increase a mouthpiece's playability.  To really zero in on tone
> and comfort issues (e.g., tip opening, resistance), a more complex
> interaction involving tip rail shape, baffle shape/height, chamber
> shape/volume, etc. comes into play.  Naive?  Accurate?
>
> I'll probably go back to this piece at some point, maybe open it up to
> .090 and lengthen the facing (mid 40s? 50?) for further practice.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
> <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG9rpd0c7/M'3541.4247512.5496808.2248467/D=grplch/S05032198:HM/EXP94658647/A 61551/R=0/SIGsr5b9n1/*http://launch.yahoo.com/artist/videos.asp?artistID01301> 
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>     * To visit your group on the web, go to:
>       http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
>        
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>        
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

There is a general misconception that as far as bore/chamber, "bigger is 
better", more powerful, louder, more free blowing, etc.  No.  The baffle 
mainly determines tone, especially the first �" or so behind the tip 
rail.  The rest of the chamber and bore (actually, any bore past the end 
of the neck is part of the chamber) determine the mouthpiece volume, and 
thus, have more bearing on intonation.  Also, I have found an extremely 
large chamber will make the tone tubby and unfocused, very "spread".

Paul

Keith Bradbury wrote:

> > To really zero in on tone
> > and comfort issues (e.g., tip opening, resistance), a more complex
> > interaction involving tip rail shape, baffle shape/height, chamber
> > shape/volume, etc. comes into play.  Naive?  Accurate?
> >
>
> I'd say 90% or more of what you called "comfort issues" deal with the
> facing.  Table, tip, length and the quality of the curve in between. 
> Along the way, just make sure the other parts do not stray far from
> what typical mouthpieces look like.  Dont let the rails get too fat
> or the baffle out of whack from what you normally see.
>
> The baffle and chamber geometry will determine the basic tone of a
> piece (along with the player of course).  The baffle, or lack there
> of, is the biggest factor on the tone.  Sidewalls and chamber/throat
> are a lesser factors, but still significant.  There are some subtle
> things you can do with the facing curve, but I think it is best just
> to make it as responsive as you like and then alter the baffle some
> if the tone a little off you goals.  If it is way off, you need a
> different mouthpiece design.  You may be able to alter the one you
> have, but it is generally better to start with a mouthpiece that is
> close to the sound you like.
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
> <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129tvpbbo/M=298184.5285298.6392945.3001176/D=grplch/S=1705032198:HM/EXP=1094661808/A=2319498/R=0/SIG=11thfntfp/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185352&partid=5285298> 
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>     * To visit your group on the web, go to:
>       http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/
>        
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>        
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

This html message parsed with html2text ---------------------------Thanks, Paul; that's what I'll do - try to get the table really flat, then
another round of practice on doing a good facing curve (24 mm long with a .090
tip) and a viable tip rail. Then maybe some baffle experiments (with
beeswax?). The chamber modification was really an experiment - it was so
narrow and the side walls so thick that I thought I'd just see what would
happen if it were opened/rounded a little. This was indeed partly based on the
naive intuition of "bigger chamber, fuller sound", but this chamber was very
narrow compared to other tenor mouthpieces I have (which play well). The
intonation was formerly terrible, very flat on top. It seems more even now,
but the jury's still out until I get the facing and tip opening better. I'll
keep you posted!  
  
Dan  
  
  
Paul Coats wrote:  

> `Dan, get the facing length out to 23-24mm (46-48 reading with .0015"
> feeler) and .090" tip opening, and I think you will find it even better.`
>
> `****`
>
> `**Paul**`  
>  
>  Dan Torosian wrote:  
>
>

>> `Following Toby's and Keith's suggestions, I carefully continued to  
>  flatten the table, and even out and flatten the side rails and tip rails  
>  on the Tenor Yamaha 4C I've been practicing on. The facing length  
>  shortened (36 = 18mm!) and the tip opening closed a bit (.080), but with  
>  all the surfaces even and the curve very close to calculated numbers, it  
>  plays remarkably well.( I also rounded the very narrow square chamber a  
>  bit.)  
>  
>  The lesson seems to be that a well-formed curve and well-crafted  
>  table/tip/siderails (even within the limits of my meager abilities) can  
>  vastly increase a mouthpiece's playability. To really zero in on tone  
>  and comfort issues (e.g., tip opening, resistance), a more complex  
>  interaction involving tip rail shape, baffle shape/height, chamber  
>  shape/volume, etc. comes into play. Naive? Accurate?  
>  
>  I'll probably go back to this piece at some point, maybe open it up to  
>  .090 and lengthen the facing (mid 40s? 50?) for further practice.  
>  
>  Dan  
>  
>  
>  `  
>  
>  `Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
> [MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com](mailto:MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com)  
>  
>  Visit the site at  to see the
> Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.  
>  
>  To see and modify your groups, go to `  
>  
>  
>
>
>  
>  
>  `Got a Mouthpiece Work question? Send it to
> [MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com](mailto:MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com)  
>  
>  Visit the site at  to see the
> Files, Photos and Bookmarks relating to Mouthpiece Work.  
>  
>  To see and modify your groups, go to `  
>  
>  
>

Silly Putty works great for temporary baffles.  You can leave it in the piece for quite a while actually but make sure you only put it in a dry mouthpiece.


Ed


-------------- Original message -------------- 
Thanks, Paul; that's what I'll do - try to get the table really flat, then another round of practice on doing a good facing curve (24 mm long with a .090 tip) and a viable tip rail. Then maybe some baffle experiments (with beeswax?). The chamber modification was really an experiment - it was so narrow and the side walls so thick that I thought I'd just see what would happen if it were opened/rounded a little. This was indeed partly based on the naive intuition of "bigger chamber, fuller sound", but this chamber was very narrow compared to other tenor mouthpieces I have (which play well). The intonation was formerly terrible, very flat on top. It seems more even now, but the jury's still out until I get the facing and tip opening better. I'll keep you posted!

Dan


Paul Coats wrote:

Dan, get the facing length out to 23-24mm (46-48 reading with .0015� feeler) and .090� tip opening, and I think you will find it even better.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> 
Paul

Dan Torosian wrote:

Following Toby's and Keith's suggestions, I carefully continued to 
flatten the table, and even out and flatten the side rails and tip rails 
on the Tenor Yamaha 4C I've been practicing on. The facing length 
shortened (36 = 18mm!) and the tip opening closed a bit (.080), but with 
all the surfaces even and the curve very close to calculated numbers, it 
plays remarkably well.( I also rounded the very narrow square chamber a 
bit.)

The lesson seems to be that a well-formed curve and well-crafted 
table/tip/siderails (even within the limits of my meager abilities) can 
vastly increase a mouthpiece's playability. To really zero in on tone 
and comfort issues (e.g., tip opening, resistance), a more complex 
interaction involving tip rail shape, baffle shape/height, chamber 
shape/volume, etc. comes into play. Naive? Accurate?

I'll probably go back to this piece at some point, maybe open it up to 
.090 and lengthen the facing (mid 40s? 50?) for further practice.

Dan




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 





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 





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 


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
 
Get unlimited calls to
U.S./Canada




Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MouthpieceWork/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
MouthpieceWork-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.