Chromonica 270 too small for my big mouth!
Gday Winslow.
I've recently purchased a 270 super chromonica after learning to play on the Chrometta 12 for a couple of weeks.
Initially the Chrometta seemed impossible to play as the holes felt too big. Knowing I needed a larger embouchure for the true octaves as it was I struggled. However, after persisting due in large part to my recent love of Georger Harmonica Smith and William Clarke. tunes is tarted making progress. I figured it was worth the investment of stepping up and purchasing the 270. And just like that I felt like a complete amateur again my embouchure felt strained and leaky due to the large gap between the playing mouth piece and the beginning of the coverplates ???? The holes felt tiny in comparison and whilst the sound, look, feel ect was amazing I just could NOT play the 270 half as good as the Chrometta.
It's been about a month since I started chromatic and today I bit the bullet and made an adjustment to my 270.
I removed the cover plates and filed the screw holes toward the back of the harmonica (the side facing away from the payer) ultimately this moved the Reed plates forward, increasing the surface area around the mouthpiece, which felt a little closer in size to the Chrometta.... Et viola!! I'm able to enjoy the 270 as it should be now.
My question is, is that a genuine modification. Is it a common complaint regarding the 270? I notice that herring and other steel plates chromes have a similar protruding mouthpiece.... Surely others have struggles as I have? Would there be a better way of accomplishing this without defacing my coverplates so?
Appreciated.
Darron
Winslow:
As you so well explain, it's "different strokes for different folks." Or to put it another way, "Your mileage may differ."
My first chromatic was a Hohner Discovery. But I didn't take to the plastic mouthpiece, so I converted it with a 270 mouthpiece and flange. (Wedge shape.) It's still my travel chromatic.
But along the way I've acquired a C CX-12 and a Bb Suzuki SCX-48. I now prefer the rounded mouthpiece shape to the wedge. And the Hohner and Suzuki are a tad different, in that while the radius is about the same, the Suzuki terminates as it hits the cover plates, where with the CX-12 "Darth Vader," the mouthpiece and the cover are all one piece. Making the whole enchillada, as you say, pretty big. But even though I have no Joe E. Brown mouth, I like the CX-12 a lot. (And I especially like being able to pull out the slide without having to go into the tool kit.)
As for the Chrometta, while I have a friend who loves his, the 8-hole I once had, I gave away. The large square holes made it a sort of cheese-grater as far as my mouth was concerned.
But there are all sorts of chromatic mouthpieces out there that folks love. Viva la différence!
Gday Winslow.
Thanks for your info mate. I guess it's because I started on the Chrometta that I struggle with this. And yes, in a tounge blocker so I find it much more difficult to navigate.
Purchasing a 280 next do I'll make the same adjustment.
"Purchasing a 280 next do I'll make the same adjustment."
Careful. The 280 is built differently from the 270.
The 270 is a classic sandwich harp - without the mouthpiece assembly, it's like a Marine band - all the layers of the "sandwich" - the comb and the reedplates in addition to the covers - are exposed at the front. On top of this is laid the metal backing plate to supply a consistent level surface for the slide to lie and travel on. The the cage or U-channel is laid over the slide to give it vertical spalce to travel in, then the mouthpiece is laid on top of the U-channel.
The very oldest 280s (pre-1955 more or less) are built like that. But the newer ones are not.
The plastic 280 comb has a lip on the front, a little like a Special 20. Then, although it is not needed and is often eliminated by customizers, there's a backing plate, with the slide laid on top of the backing plate.
There is no U-channel. The back side of the mouthpiece has a channel that takes the place of the U-channel. And the newer mouthpieces are wide and flatter, not like the skinny mouthpiece on the 270 or the older 280.
If your mod works for you and doesn't compromise the airtightness, playability, or structural integrity of the harmonica, then it's a "valid" mod.
The Chrometta has abnormally large holes. I find that they make it harder to isolate a single note, not easier. Most chromatics have hole sizes, whether square or rounded, more like the 270. You might as well get used to that.
The sudden bump where mouthpiece meets covers is a real problem for tongue blocking on the chromatic, and both the 270 models and the 16-hole 280 suffer from it, though the modern 280 (since the mid-1950s) has a slightly more friendly mouthpiece design. The Hering models and some of the Seydels (Saxony, Orchestra, and Deluxe) are based on 270 and 280-style profiles, so suffer from the same problem.
The smoothest profile is where mouthpiece and covers meet with no bump. This is part of the design of several models:
Wedge shape:
Hohner Discovery
Hohner Ace 48
Hohner Meisterklasse
Hohner Super 64 and 64x (new versions since about 2017, not the originals)
Hohner CBH 2012 and 2016 (long discontinued)
Seydel Symphony 48 and 64
Comments: The Discovery is the most affordable, but I find that the mouthpiece strangles the volume. All the parts are swappable with the 270 Deluxe, and I find that the problem follows the mouthpiece if I mount it on the Deluxe (the 270 Deluxe is a 270 with screwed-on reedplates).
The ACE48 and Meisterklasse are great harps, but expensive. Ditto for the new Super 64 and 64x and the Seydel Symphony models
The CBH series has been out of production for decades and had its own set of problems, though you can still find them used. They were the first models to incorporate the wedge profile.
ROUNDED:
Hohner CX-12
All Suzuki models
Most Easttop models
Kongsheng Lyra
Seydel Nonslider and Deluxe Steel
Comments: Players sometimes comment that the CX-12 feels like a 2x4 board in the mouth. The Suzuki models have an almost identical profile, but for some reason players complain less about them. The Easttop and Lyra models all imitate Suzuki at lower price points.
The CX-12 has an alternative version, the CX-12 Jazz. The only difference is that the mouthpiece is scooped out above and below the holes to create something resembling a wedge profile. But the price bump for the Jazz, or just for its shell, is pretty steep.