[EgilF.]

Today I got seven Berg Larsen HR tenor mouthpieces that I'm going to reface. Chech the different -

• length on the windows
• thickness and shape of the tip rails
• thickness of the rails

Is it normal that Berg Larsens are so different?

 

[SaxTMan]

wow they are all different from each other in a big way [rolleyes]

 

[Sigmund451]

Yea, that is pretty much the Berg story. Nice thing is they can all be good players when done.

Just because they are SMS doesnt mean they are the same model. Different eras use different baffles and so forth.

The fun part is the Berg Larsen Infinite Facing Length Formula. The .0015 gauge will go all the way back to the shank on some of them.

 

[Swaman]

Don't forget that there are 4 different baffles available: 0, 1, 2 & 3. The 0 is the highest baffle & is usually a screamer. They should look different. I can't read the numbers but it looks like there's a variety. I'm having my STM Link refaced and if it doesn't work out I can always go back to my 105/2 HR Berg which has been old reliable for many years.

 

[EgilF.]

the Berg Larsen Infinite Facing Length Formula. The .0015 gauge will go all the way back to the shank on some of them.

Yes, the facings starts in the middle of the reed . BLIFLF :laughing:

But the window on the mouthpiece with chamber "0" is much smaller / shorter than the others. Is this just a normal "Berg Larsen" aberration, or does the is "the chamber 0 pieces" have smaller windows? Nice to know before I makes it longer...

 

[Sigmund451]

Windows on the really bright Bergs I have seen are smaller. My Assumption is that the smaller and more narrow window is part of what keeps the mouthpiece bright. It controls reed vibration and cuts back on areas that would introduce more low end. It also limits chamber volume keeping it small.

 

[EgilF.]

Windows on the really bright Bergs I have seen are smaller. My Assumption is that the smaller and more narrow window is part of what keeps the mouthpiece bright. It controls reed vibration and cuts back on areas that would introduce more low end. It also limits chamber volume keeping it small.

This makes sense.

But mine does not make sense, they are "opposite". The far left is a "3" and the second from left is a "0".

• 3 has the highest baffle and is the brightes, but this one has the longest window :shaking2:
• 0 has the lowest baffle and is the darkest BL, but this one have the smallest window :shaking2:

 

[soybean]

I'm glad you posted this photo so people can see how inconsistent Bergs were (are?).

 

[Bill Mecca]

This makes sense.

But mine does not make sense, they are "opposite". The far left is a "3" and the second from left is a "0".

• 3 has the highest baffle and is the brightes, but this one has the longest window :shaking2:
• 0 has the lowest baffle and is the darkest BL, but this one have the smallest window :shaking2:

#3 should be the lowest baffle and therefore darker and based on what Sigmund said have a longer window.
#0 should be the highest baffle and therefore brighter and thus the smaller window.

so did you measure the baffles, or are we reversing the BL #'s

 

[EgilF.]

yes, it is like Sigmund and Bill Mecca said. My mistake, I did not measure them at first, but have done it now. I was perhaps just confused over that 3 has a long baffle and 0 has a short. O is higher, but not much. Actually I am surprised how little difference there is between 0, 1, 2 and 3 in height.

 

[jd]

why reface?Theres probably a few there that play fine as is.There are lots of players that would buy them if left untampered with

 

[EgilF.]

why reface?Theres probably a few there that play fine as is.There are lots of players that would buy them if left untampered with

All the tables were convex, and the facings did start in the midle of the table. The tip rail was nice on only one of seven. This is reason enough for me to reface them.

 

[Sigmund451]

I never saw a modern Berg I would not reface. Im sure there is one out there.

 

[MojoBari]

I'm not so sure. The only nice Bergs I have seen are from the 60's or older. And there are plenty of bad old ones too.

 

[Bill Mecca]

had been thinking of trying a HR Berg, then the prices inflated, so... probably won't happen, but I'm happy with my Link STM that Bootman customized for me. But always curious....;-)

 

[The A Train]

Bill - I've got a HR 95 1 M that I don't use if you want it it's yours, Merry Christmas. :santa:

 

[artstove]

So if I am getting a modern HR Berg, and know I want to get it refaced, should I get it in the actual tip opening I want, or should I get one that has a larger or smaller opening? In other words, if I wanted to end up with a actual 105/2, should I start with a 105/2, or is it better to start with a 110/2 or 100/2?

 

[MojoBari]

They tend to run smaller than marked. But I have seen them from .025" small to .010" large. Most are .005" small as measured inside the tip rail. So I would say shoot for one that is marked 5 larger than you want. But if you get a deal on eBay and want it refaced, just try to get in the ballpark of what you want.

 

[artstove]

Thanks, Mojo.

 

[EgilF.]

Today I got into three vintage (?) Berg Larsen tenor mouthpieces. It is quite a big difference between them, see for example the length of the table.
The one in the midle is chamber is 0, the other is chamber 1. Number two from the right has an opening 113, not 95.
View attachment 54089
View attachment 54090