Have a mouthpiece that feels too small? Too big? Bite is too sharp? Tone is blatty or colorless or muffled or brilliant? Those are all subjective criteria on which we base our (hopefully) final selections. And since it’s unlikely that we will ever get all the mouthpiece makers to agree on a universal standard, subjective evaluations become relatively more useful. Otherwise, why would so many people play a 6.5 AL? Even if makers did adopt a universal measurement standard and we all agreed on exact acoustical reference points for “bright” and “dark”, I am quite sure that no mouthpiece comparison chart would ever be more than a ballpark guide for most of us. But although players differ both physically and in terms of how they interpret terms such as bright and dark, there is enough commonality that a significant proportion of players will have a similar experience with the same make and model of mouthpiece. Mouthpiece makers don’t have a universal standard for taking measurements, and samples can be inconsistent.
This is pretty much what we have today - At best, something that you can use to narrow down what pieces you want to try. At best, something that you can use to narrow down what pieces you want to try. But not something on the basis of which you can make a confident decision. So it all turns into a real "ballpark" kind of description with a wide variance of acceptance and usefulness - because of the subjectivity. And we see the huge variation in this and how people often disagree with even the simplist comparison (It's very similar to a 1.5G. This is pretty much what we have today - with multiple mouthpiece charts where the chart-maker is either expressing his own opinion or parroting the description of someone else (player, manufacturer. Then in order to use that consensus comparison you have to decide where you stand individually with respect to those who are in the consensus and those who aren't. So then the best you could hope for is a kind of "consensus" comparison. are - precisely because these are subjective evaluations. You can't even get a good non-subjective comparison of what "bright", "dark", "sharp bite", "soft bight", etc.
And yet the whole point of this is to get some comparison that is meaningful to all players - so not subjective. The problem with subjective criteria is that they're. dark, bite is sharp or soft, diameter feels pretty much like. For criteria for comparison, I was thinking of more subjective things, such as bright vs.