Has anyone else come to this conclusion? I have spent so much time focusing on what some mouthpieces can't do, I decided recently to rethink that. Maybe a better way to evaluate a mouthpiece is to look at what it is instead and what it does well; no piece will be perfect anyhow, right? And if you transcend the piece and sound pretty much the same on any given piece than why get caught up in all the things a piece can't do? If you are happy with how it plays and the things its does well (or there are enough factors that is does well) then maybe the thinking should stop there. This is probably obvious, but perhaps is worth thinking about...think of all the good pieces I have passed up that did a lot of things well for the one thing it didn't....