kalijah

How can you possibly try to diagnose this kid? I can tell you with no uncertainty that the AMOUNT of wind was not the problem. I could have played fff above high C with the amount of air flow and pressure this kid was using, but all he was trying to play was a middle C at mf. And yes, his embouchure was screwed up. But it was the crazy advice from his teacher that really floored me. But it appears that if you were there you would have given the same advice so what can I say..? What I said to the child was.. "OK.. now.. relax, back-off of the air and try again". But relax and back-off is something few brass students hear these days, if any. I will say again, there are only two characteristics of "wind"(I will call it that since you insist) 1. Flow (speed) 2.Pressure And yes wind is related to sound but ONLY in these three ways: 1. Air Flow determines volume. 2. Air Pressure must be appropriate for the desired note AND volume. ( This is what we were talking about earlier that a bit more pressure is required as we ascend AND/OR play louder.) 3. Flow and Pressure are ALWAYS proportional for a GIVEN "playable" note. It is imposiible to increase one without the other at a nearly constant resistance ( given note) AND the three points are all inter-related. But.. Vibrational EFFICIENCY of an embouchure is independent of any of the above but is revealed in the three concepts above in this way: 1. Same volume with less air flow. 2. Same note and volume with less required pressure. 3. Flow and pressure are still proportional but both are reduced Since you brought it up, YES there are really as many embouchures as there are players, but some players are similar, some are good some are bad. Following are the characteristics of a good embouchure for a player: 1. Gives the player a good sound at all of his usable note range and dynamic range. 2. Is comfortable for the player. 3. Requires only modest and diminishing (with practice) muscular effort from the muscles in the lips and around the mouth with almost NONE required at the soft low notes. 4. Requires only modest and optimum mouthpiece pressure. 5. Works properly with a reasonable jaw position - that is - width between the teeth is in the area where the jaw is relaxed. (Varies from tumpet down to Tuba) Not overly open for any mouthpiece, so that the embouchure can be supported by the teeth. 6. Lips resting position inside the mouthpice is close enough for a full vibrational swing. (Do not make a large hole between the lips) 7. Allows improvements of all of the above with practice. If ANY of the above is not the case, it is not the optimum embouchure for the player. BUT... #1 should not be overly emphasized at first, but should be monitored for development, especially whan a player is a beginner or is coming back or has made an embouchure change. This statement is way too general, YES wind is related to sound but in specific ways. Go back and read my posts again and be sure you are understanding what it is I am trying to say. The BEST thing to do with the throat is to RELAX it. There is no muscular action to "open the throat" especially once you have chosen the optimum jaw position in #5 above. If you "try" to open the throat with muscular action not only could you ruin #5 above you will also introduce muscular tension. JUST RELAX. As for tounge position keep it down but relaxed. Other than articulating it can work WITH an embouchure change by rising as the embouchure tightens. This is a coordination movement that affects the two basic characteristics of wind (air pressure and flow) it is not a seperately derived characteristic of wind, it just allows control of such. When you say "air" 99.9 percent of the brass community knows that you are talking about air flow as applied to playing, wind is interchangeable the above reason is just plain goofy to me. "Air flow"and "wind' are perfectly interchangeable and acceptable. What do you mean by "thickness"? Do you mean density? If you do that is generally a constant for ALL of the above, therefore, it actually does not matter. As for "temperature" it does not come into play so it does not matter either other than the ambient temperature, which affects the tuning of brass. ( Asking a player to use "warmer" air is only a throat relaxation excercise, it does not directly affect the tone based on temperature) You need to keep on questioning. You have only replaced old myths with new ones. They may be improved but they are not totally sound and I assure you they can lead to problems with a developing player, especially if taken to extremes. Some of your thinking or at least your understanding is still based on mythical concepts and not physical realities. I have been exactly where you are, I believed the same ideas. Some of the ideas are created by instructors to coax more VOLUME from young players or to alter their sound on the spot without development, they are usually mind games and tricks. You must be able to understand what is the "real" science of brass playing and what is "junk" I guarantee it will help you and your students in the long run. Good day!

Yes, I know. But there are teachers who say to students that their problem is a lack of air when many times it is not. Especially when the student embouchure is in the process of developing a good sound. I have a perfect example: I dropped in on a band I had done some charts for a couple of years ago to see how the show was coming. The band director was in the process of warming up and tuning the brass. One kid played who had the most awful sound ever. Could hardly produce a tone at all but was pumping air like crazy. The teacher said to this kid; "You are not using enough air, that is your problem, use more!" Well, this was all the advice the teacher could give because that is ALL that most instructors, especially in corps, are all about. And it is causing huge problems for developing players because they learn constantly that forcing the air is the correct way. But in this quote of yours it shows that you still believe that air flow and a "good" sound are related, they are not. Air flow and volume are related. The volume can be low or loud depending on air flow, this applies for those with a good sound or a bad sound. But I know what you are saying; that if you tell a player to back off of the air you may have them not playing at the proper volume. I know you think I am not into the popular thinking on this, but there is a real "dogma" among the brass community about air that is just plain wrong, and I believe that it causes harm to many players who develop bad habits. I have a theory as to why this is the case, but I will have to present it later. Enjoying the dicussion, :) SFT, DJ

I never said that the difference would not be noticeable. But the better trained one is, it is also noticeably smaller. Can you show me the Jacobs experiment? Were the pressures measured? Was there a real scientist or engineer present. Were the octave notes held to a constant "measured" SPL, Or was the ear used to monitor the loudness? Was there a control group of less experienced players or players of differnt levels for comparison. Was the efficiency of these players measured? A great trumpet player is not neccessarily an efficient one, but I am sure it is likely. I have not read a detailed report of the Jacobs experiment so I can not review its validity. And I do not need a measuring device to know that my pressure difference is improving as my resonance does. Nor would you. Measuring it would be a benchmark for comparison, I will give it a try and let you know what the results are. I am talking about minimizing air flow (and pressure) required for a GIVEN volume of sound. That is, using the smallest possible for a know volume. I am not talking about using less than is required, that would result in me playing softer. Let me ask you this; If you were a car racer and I said that for a given amount of engine power and/or road speed I could reduce your fuel consumption. Would you say, "no thanks, I want to use more fuel than is required at all times" ? or as another example; If You had a sound system and I said you could get just as loud a sound level but could get it by reducing the power consumed by the amplifiers, would you say, "No I want to use more power than is actually required" ? Having worked as a sound engineer I know of none that would respond this way. You agreed that we would want to maximize efficiency, well there are two ways to demonstrate improved efficiency with regard to brass playing: 1. Increased output (sound volume) for a fixed power input (air flow x pressure) 2. Decreased input (air flow x pressure) for a fixed Output (sound volume) So if you are maximizing efficiency you WILL be minimizing air flow ( and required pressure), for a given volume. Real world example again, If I was playing a high C and had acheived the exact tone and volume that I set out to have. Then if you told me I could play the exact same high C ( same volume, tone quality, everything) with, lets say, 20 percent greater efficiency, first of all I would jump for joy. But I would experience a similar DECREASE in air power required. The benefits of improved efficiency (and minimimum air flow) are. 1. Less body energy required, resulting in better endurance. 2. Less mouthpiece pressure and embouchure effort to contain the pressure, also resulting in better endurance. 3. Ability to play longer passages with a breath. 4. Improved dynamic range. Maximum acheivable loudness can be increased. (Also known as "headroom" to borrow an audio term) 5.Improved Pitch range possible. Now Mike you have reverted to brass-speak. Exactly what do you mean by "more intense air"? I will assume you mean air that is under more pressure. There are only two real characteristics to air as it applies to brass playing. Flow and Pressure. That is right because the primary result of air velocity change is to change the volume. There is quite a bit more to playing higher than just increasing air pressure.

I assume you are talking about high or low notes at a fixed volume, because air flow and pressure are also proportional to sound volume. I would add to this and say that as the embouchure or point of vibration becomes more efficient the difference in air pressure required between low and high notes begins to be reduced. Example: a young untrained player can hardly produce enough air pressure to play a high C and the air practically ceases to flow. On the other hand a player with a well trained and resonant vibration point will be able to play a middle C and a high C with only a slight increase in air pressure and practically no change in air flow. I have experienced this in my own practice and I have been working toward a more even airflow (minimized) and pressure (also minimized) over a larger range. I guess your assumptions are counter to the popular thinking that playing higher requires more air. I also believe that to be correct. The volume of sound is primarily propotional to air flow (and pressure). And as you have shown air flow is slightly inversely propotional to range, and that pressure is directly proportional to range.

Phil wrote; and Screamer wrote: and Click wrote: Your conclusions are not correct. Air flow inside the horn is imaterial and not of significance. You are mistaken in your ideas that the tubing of a brass instrument is for air flow, it is not. Air flow is a consequence of the system but it is not the goal once the air has crossed the apeture and entered the mouthpiece. The purpose of tubing in a brass instrument is to provide an enclosed resonant chamber for the standing waves in the horn. Those standing wave resonant frequencies are determined by the length of the horn. Brass instruments are designed at various tapers from the throat to the bell. Most instruments are cylindrical (no taper) at the valve section which is required in that area for the valves and the valve slides. (It would be impossible to build tapered slides). Then the taper (conical) continues from the valves to the bell. Resonant energy is stored in the standing waves of a horn. In a perfectly cylindrical horn the standing waves are well defined (good "slotting", as you all say), but the projection is poor, that is to say, energy leaves the system at a slow rate. In a widely tapered horn the resonant energy escapes very quickly but tapering makes the standing waves less defined and less stable. To sustain a tone in the cylindrical (non-tapered) instrument, in which energy exits slowly, only a small rate of energy input is required to sustain a given level of resonance energy inside the horn. The energy source is the air (velocity x pressure) applied. Conversely in the tapered horn, where the energy exits faster, more power input is required to sustain a level of stored energy in the resonant column. Considering the formula: (sorry for the algebra here) W = V x P Where W is power, V is air velocity and P is air pressure. If we hold pressure P as constant; For an increase in Power W, V must be increased. And since the players percieved air resistance is the ratio of air velocity and pressure, the tapered horn would have less resistance (freer blowing). Thus the tapered horn would require more energy in, project more energy out and would have less air resistance. But only at the cost of poorer defined resonances, (or slots) How does this relate to the reverse lead pipe, you ask? The normal trumpet tapers from small to large in 2 places, in the lead pipe and in the bell pipe. By building a reversed tuning slide on the front end, the lead pipe can continue its taper for a few more inches before settling into the cylindrical section. This makes the horn more tapered than a horn without the RLP. And as I explained before the more tapered horn will project more but at the cost of more energy input required and poorer resonance. (probably poorer intonation and less accurate tuning) Be aware that bore size is related to the same argument as well, and has nothing to do with air resistance inside the horn because of the larger tubing. A larger bore horn at the valve section (where it is measured) will alow a more tapered instrument and the above applies. Any questions? Darryl Jones

Interesting, on the Calicchio website it shows that the operation is moving to Oklahoma. This may make it even more difficult to get one for a while. I have also heard that some newer Callichios beat the old ones, which were great. Another thing about that other horn; I was talking to a local young lady band director who had just emerged from college (I was designing her show and doing the music arrangements for her on her first school job). She asked me what valve oil i used (for my Calicchio) and I said "O what ever is lying around, WHEN I have to oil them" (note that these Calicchio valves require only a little moisture from your breath to operate perfectly most of the time, I might put oil on them about once every 2 weeks, or less. She said to me "All of the trumpet players at my College were VERY particular about their valve oil." I said; "They all played Bach Strads didn't they?" and she said "As a matter of fact they all did" I can't tell you how many bach owners I have known whos valves give them problems. No player should have to deal with this.

Calicchio

I own one but can't spell it, Calicchio! Awesome horn however you spell it.

Yes, I am suggesting that. First of all, most of the PRO players I know do NOT play Bach, afew do but not most. I think they are overpriced. They are trumpets for the masses. I have not played one Bach that I like. The only one that was good was an Old Mt Vernon, and it was bad above high C. The best horns I have played under $2000 are Callicchio (my fave, I own one) and Callet. Also Schilke, and some Yamaha Pro horns. There are some moderately priced horns with good sound and features. There is nothing wrong with the Yamaha student horn for learning. If it had a 1st valve slide hook, I would honestly prefer it over a Bach if I had to choose. I was teaching a lesson to a student with a brand new Bach Strad. We traded horns for a few minutes. I could not wait to get mine back. Sorry if I offended you Bach fans but for me, playing is believing, and don't flame me till you have played something better in comparison. Thats my opinion,

Get a Bach Stradivarius, Oh you mean price cheap!

I do not like Bach. Never have, never will. Highly overated instruments. Not really bad horns but just mediocre in my opinion. Yamaha is a good trumpet. I like the Shew model. I play a Calicchio trumpet. If you have the money you should get one of these. I have not played a better Trumpet, and I tried dozens before I decided.

I would like to use French horn bugles if we had the players. Must have a french horn background and preference. I like the Kanstul Alto horn in place of the flugel. We had these 2 years ago but I believe they have been sold. Much better for the lower alto parts and blends well with sops or loud baritones. It seems that corps are wanting to get away from so many different instruments in the altos. Like you Chris, I don't undestand why.

Truth is a matter of opinion here, especially if you are playing B flats. If that loud playing is in contrast, appropriate, and in musical taste, not sacrificing quality, then standing ovations are in order and certainly will occur, hail, I'll be the first one standing. If you think a drum corps crowd are such baffoons to care about pure loudness and not musicianship, you may be wrong. I would also say that most standing Os are becase the crowd got the point.

All brass players use articulations more similar to the D not the T. You use the D on high or low, loud or soft, mega accented or very light, depending on the air pressure buily up behind it. It seems to me that for most attacks the action is similar to both D and T. T has a hissing air sound associated with it as used in the english laguage. ( Pronunce "Tah" very slowly and you will see what I mean.) This turbulent blast or "hiss" of air would be of no use to a brass player. The Indian language D is more similar to the way we should do it in brass playing, which is like a D that has a very distictive front end like we would pronounce on a forceful "Tah". Flugelist wrote, Why would you want to do all this? You are creating lots of tension in the embouchure by doing all this corner pointing and chin flattening. Who ever taught you this is not teaching you to have an efficient and relaxed embouchure. Plus, the way you articulate with the tounge is totally independent of the embouchure. Darryl Jones

Trumpets: Calicchio 1s2 - silver Benge 3x+(Burbank circa 1959) - silver Flugel: Yamaha Pro Bugles: Kanstul Powerbore Soprano Darryl Jones

Decible measuring is silly. Playing is a musical art and it is musical contrast that is important. That is, relative loundness and perception of relative loudness that only serves musical means. To use a db meter at a drumcorps show would only serve to measure absolute loudness at the high point and compare it corps to corps. Since percussion adds so much to this measurement it probably would dilute any measure of horn loudness. Anyway, taking a db reading of a horn line would have very little meaning because you would have to control the evironment and physical position of the players and measuring device to have any standard of measurement. Any claimed measurement of a corps would have almost no finality or real meaning. For instance I could bring the whole line into a tight circular arrangement near the measuring device and have them blow their faces off and get a reading beyond the threshold of pain, but what would be the point? It makes more sense to me to have an appropriate level of loudness at the correct moment in the music to maximize an emotional musical moment. But within control as to not lose musicianship. To me this would be a lofty goal rather than pure loud for louds sake. Obviously some horn lines will be larger and some will be able to extend volume greater than others. This will help them to maximize the musical goal. I went to hear the Rolling Stones in 89 and it was so loud it REALLY hurt. It was a very unpleasing and unmusical experience for me. So many Senior corps play WAY beyond what is musically pleasing and that really baffles me. But I really hope they keep on doing it for my corps sake. I will say that instructing Corpsvets is beginning to be bad for my hearing (all within limits of tatefull musicianship). I may need to start wearing earplugs.:D Darryl Jones

Guilty as charged. Trumpet player first, engineer next ( to support my habit). DJ

Then you should play the clarinet, Homer. (8-]

Mike wrote: Actually the way these work is the opposite of your explanation. The added weight actually prevents the absorption of energy from the tone with the result of more sound energy being transmitted through the remainder of the horn. The primary result is that attacks and the tone in general feels more centered. This causes a percieved reduction in flexibility becase tones center so well. The reason that added mass does not absorb energy has to do with one of Newton's first laws. That is; objects at rest tend to remain at rest. Or to expand upon that theory; more massive objects tend to remain at rest even more than less massive objects. The tone intensifier adds a bit more acoustic stability at a crutial point on the horn on the mouthpiece near the mouthpiece/horn coupling. SO the key here is reduced sympathetic vibration (resulting in absorption) at a crutial point at the beginning of the horn. The reason that a "darker" sound is percieved has nothing to do with fewer overtones or any harmonics, especially high ones, being absorbed. The harmonics that are most likely to be lost due to sympathetic vibrations, without the added mass, are the lower harmonics; the fundamental, the first few above and to a large degree, sub-harmonics. This is also another reson for the perceived loss of flexibility, the improved transmission of the fundamental harmonic into the horn. The result is a slightly darker sounding tone from the bell, especially to the player. Though there there is less perception of this at any appreciable distance. Other factors have much more to do with the color of sound from a horn and a tone intensifier or a heavy reciever will only slightly (if at all) change the sound of the horn overall. I personally prefer to use a horn with a medium to medium heavy reciever. The effect is the same if not better than the intensifier, but less pronounced, leaving some flexibility. I play a Calicchio 1s2 trumpet (medium receiver), and a Kanstul Powerbore G Bugle (medium heavy receiver) and I love them! Hope this helps your understanding, Darryl Jones

To quote first Mike Myer: Rather than "open" throat, think "relaxed" throat. As before, you can not appreciably increase sound quality or volume by opening your throat and forcing more air across the embouchure. Best to just keep the throat muscles out of the way by keeping them relaxed. Trying to force open the throat, forcing open the jaw (dropping the jaw), holding the tounge down (actively), all contribute to wasted effort and inefficient playing. If you really want to increase the sound from a section, have the players produce better and more efficient vibration, by doing personal practice as I have described above. Andy Smith said: Air goes into the lungs, end of story. And then Mike Ary you said: Not exactly correct, Mike. High volume of sound is a product of air velocity and the pressure of that air. An inefficient embochure requires more air AND pressure for a given volume of sound. An efficiently vibrating embouchure will require less air velocity (and pressure) for a given volume than a poorly vibrating, inefficient embouchure. You WOULD need a large "quantity" of air for a lengthy note or musical phrase. So in effect a large quantity of air would be required for ANY volume level, given that the note or phrase was lengthy. It's just that with higher volume the quantity of air will be used up faster due to the faster air. I think this is what you were trying to say. Mike you also said: Yes, I agree. These are totally misused and misunderstood terms. It is best just to dispense with thems and say "breath in". If you tell someone to take a big breath, or they are taking a breath to swim underwater for a great distance, they will instinctively fill the lungs to capacity in a very efficient way. They don't stop and think to themself, " Well, I will need to be sure and use my diaphragm". Trying to tell people how to breathe to play brass is kind of silly. We have all been breathing in and out since the day we were born so all the technical jargon and made-up dogma just confuses people into bad habits. If I am facing a long note or phrase at ff on the trumpet or bugle I don't have to be told to fill up, my musical instincts will come in to play and I will fill the tank. Taking a full breath has more to do with using more time (if available) to draw in the breath and minimizing restrictions to incoming air. If you do this, less muscular action is required to draw in the breath. As Mike said: Again I have gone off on the tangent that I was trying to minimize in importance. The gist of my comments was that breathing properly is really instictive for most musicians but this is the domonant advice given to brass players. Especially young ones ( in bands and especially in corps). But most of the time insufficient air is NOT the problem. The problem with young brass players in general is a lack of understanding of the role of the embouchure as a vibrating point and there is practically no effort by teachers or instructors to remedy this. Mainly because they came up under the same dogmas when they were students. I have witnessed this over and over (practically every time). If a student has a problem with tone quality, attacks, volume (even low volume), etc. the teacher will always exclaim, "More Air!". When it is evident that lack of air is almost never the problem. But somehow some young players instictively develop good sounds amid this sea of bad teaching. As for me this kind of teaching almost destroyed my playing by creating terrible habits. Thank goodness that is all in the past. Not trying to be abrasive, just trying to give you guys something to thiink about. ;)^

correction: Corpsvets 98-02 typo! DJ

DON'T BELIEVE ALL THAT STUFF! Let me state some facts: 1. Air goes into the lungs and nowhere else! 2. Air capacity can not be appreciably increased, basically, what you have you are born with. 3. Abdominal muscle strength CAN be increased via development excercices in the gym or workout room. (But you may not need it) 4. Aerobic capacity can be increased (reducing the body's need for oxygen) thus focusing the use of air to playing. It is amazing to me how people think that volume of sound is totally dependent on air volume and pressure when there is very little you can do over the short term, (or at all) to increase those. Take a lesson you corps-heads! To increase volume (or flexibility, or range, or tone quality) you must develop one thing, and that is: THE CAPACITY OF THE EMBOUCHURE TO VIBRATE EFFICIENTLY. Note my use of the word "efficiency". It is also likely that with development of embouchure efficiency you will require LESS air quantity, and less pressure from the abdominal muscles for a given level of volume. Trust me, all this volumous air and brute force, so-called "diaphragm", pressure will only wreck what chops you have. Try this: play as soft as you can possibly play and practice low H.L. Clarke studies or out of Vizzutti's book 1. Don't worry about the quality of tone at first, just play comfortably and effortlessly. As you do this for an hour or more, listen for improvements in your sound and articulation (crisp attacks) at the lowest level of effort you have. Do this for hours and hours. Eventually the sound will begin to grow in fullness and effortlessness (the embouchure efficiency is increasing). Gradually increase the volume and range with only small increases in effort (air quantity and pressure, embouchure muscular effort, and mouthpiece pressure). Do this on all types of exercices. Occationally lightly buzz the mouthpiece alone with the same concepts. Gradually, work up to a louder level of sound with only a modest increase of air quantity and pressure, then put your horn away with fresh chops. Do this every day. Try it, it will take time, trust, and a willingness to forget what you have heard, and what you believe you know about playing brass. Also, NEVER use these words again: "Diaphragm", "Support", these are dogmatic words and teacherspeak. Just breathe! Do not overcomplicate it. Let me know how it goes. Darryl Jones Spirit of Atlanta '82, Corpsvets 89-02, Lead Sop, Brass Arranger and captionhead.