kalijah

Start with trumpet. Learn it first. Then move to mello later.

The reduction in size is a dominant factor in producing higher pitches. But this can be accomplished with the muscles of the embouchure. Not simply mp force. If you watch a clear-moutpiece video you will se the exact thing happening. You are a good observer. Now this guy said: Well, acceleration is irrelevant. I suppose you mean air pressure. Which will depend on the dynamic or volume of tone, not range alone. The tongue does not accelerate the air through the aperture.

MBI is about right. The spread should have been about 5 points.

Ah, so only .5 difference between Hurcs and MBI was an accurate representation too?

Chase, as in Bill www.amazon.com/Chase/dp/B000002R4Z

I guarantee that almost every player that shows up for Wayne's ensembles have already established their habits of tongue movement. Abdominal pressure. Habits of sound production etc. Yes, players DO engage in tongue arching to some degree, and abdominal pressure in the course of manipulating the embouchure and air pressure respectively. That is ALL that is required to understand. No air-speed explainaton is required. As I pointed out, if the concept of "air-speed" is introduced to encourage these actions then so be it. But air speed does NOT determine pitch and tongue "position" does NOT increase pressure. But to some unexperienced, ususpecting student the advice, which WAS give literally by Wayne, may go home and arch and arch and arch, seeking that elusive pressure increase, or that elusive air-speed increase. Only to be frustrated. (I can speak from experience here because i was duped by the Gordon-teacher "explainations", which did not work for me and made my playing worse.) Most players early on, and instictively, learn the actions that are required to play and refine all of the actions involved to make music. I just find it odd that instructors DO venture in to "explaining" (yes scientifically, not pedagogically) things that players are already doing. Even things that they do less of as they mature. And the concepts of air-speed, pressure etc. are venturing into the realm of science. Even in the case of Waynes explainations. While these explaination SOUND correct they can, and do, lead to forced and unmusical playing. Like I said , most players learn to play instictively by action and listening in spite of the "explainatons" asociated with instructive advice.

Not really. Most brass types avoid the term at all costs. And substitute other terms in its place: "air speed", "air support", "the blow" etc. Some even deny it's neccessity. (See the brass forum)

Tom wrote: No, I mean the physical quantity of wind, moving or not. (call it volume?) So I guess you mean the physical quantity of air, moving or not. That is "volume". Wind is a flow of air. Flow=Volume/time. You can have high air flow and very little air volume,. Example: a very loud but short note. You can also have low flow and high volume. Example: A very long soft note. So to be accurate. Flow and volume are not the same. You must consider the dimension of time.

Maybe someone who has auditioned recently can shed some light. i am pretty sure that spirit has an audition piece they post before the audition.

Spirit needs your quality of player. But you could march anywhere. Just play like you normally do.

Tuba joe wrote: The inherent pressure varies depending on how much air you hold. At a point of muscular equilibrium there is still air in the lungs. But no pressure above ambient (zero). Engage the respiration muscles at this point and you can continue the flow of air. This is a region of less than zero air pressure (relaxed) where there IS air in the body. So the "inherent" air pressure due to elasticity alone will vary with the amount you have in the lungs. From some positive pressure for full lungs to a negative pressure for empty lungs. Not necessarily. There is only inherent pressure if there is more air than the relaxed lungs hold. And even then this pressure varies with fullness. It is not constant. Just above "relaxed" is not enough for any but very soft / low playing. Only if you are playing a continually diminishing volume on a note. (And obviously you never played anything smaller than a tuba.) The inherent positive pressure IS due to the elasticity of the body (not "combined" with). Also, if you are playing a tone that is significantly long. You must engage the muscles of exhalation as you approach and cross the point of neutral pressure. And, if one plays a very soft, low note, even on trumpet, the "inherent" pressure of the "full" lungs is too much for the dynamic and the player must engage the muscles of inhalation to adjust the pressure. Now most players will deny that they engage in such action but they indeed do that. YES, A player SHOULD use the inherent pressure of full lungs to his advantage. And when I discuss air "pressure" provided by the player I am NOT disregarding that pressure contribution. However the player MUST adjust the TOTAL pressure, the pressure required for the musical dynamic they are playing at the time, by engaging (or sometimes reversing) the muscles of exhalation, and this is a constant process.

Air mass? Or do you mean air "flow"? And dont forget air "pressure"!

Do not attempt to tune players who are so unskilled that they play way off pitch-center. Tune their horn yourself. Or have several good players with similar mouthpieces play the horn and see where the tuned slide position generally is. Accomodating a poor player's pitch bending by extreme tuning slide positions will only reinforce their bad pitch habits. Also, any advice regarding "air" "air support" "fill-up the horn" etc. is not helpful. And most certainly not the problem. Yes, it does take increasing air pressure AND flow to play louder. But as a player becomes more efficient in creating tone he/she will also require relatively less air flow and pressure. Tuning is an embouchure and tone quality issue. Air pressure/flow/ support/ (whatever you wish to call it), is related to volume of sound, that diminishing with efficiency. Encouraging one to use "more air" when the embouchure is the problem will never accomplish good habits.

Read my last post on the other thread. If contextually, you want to deal in absolutes, you really ought to have some idea what you are talking about. I don't get worked up about dissagreements. If someone says "I like to focus on the air speed over the tongue" or "air speed or air flow is the way I visualize it" I have NO problem with that, so be it. But don't even try to pass of your "vizualizations" or "beliefs" as real science in the context of absolute. And dont attempt to bring some real poorly understood science into an "absolute" discussion. If the subject reverts to the pure science involved (remember, context). And someone attempts to discredit my point with a woeful understanding of a subject that I actually do know something about, then, I will defend my points. But that does NOT mean I introduce this stuff in teaching or even think about it while playing. Would you guys PLEASE, PLEASE get over that accusation?

The science seems easy to me. But I can speak that language. I've played around some greats myself. Hunter Moss, Chip Crotts, Lou Marini (sax player) My avatar picture is from a gig I played with the Temptations Review featuring Dennis Edwards this past July 3rd at the Dick Clark American Bandstand Theatre in Pigeon Forge.. Do you think they hired me for my understanding of the science of brass or because I could play funky and with a good sound? :)