Wayne Downey's Brass Advantage: Discussion

[supersop]

Interesting. I find some of Wayne's thoughts flawed .. and I find the arguments in the OP flawed as well. Engineering degree in hand, please explain to me why blowing faster air across the top of a Coke bottle moves the pitch to a higher harmonic.

With that in mind, I find Mr. Downey's tongue arch method to be very applicable. It creates a smaller opening for the same amount of air to pass through ... giving you the same result as the coke bottle I mentioned. It also requires a focussing of the aperture. Two mechanisms that must work together in order for the ideology to work properly. I think PRESSURE in this case ... is an illusion. You're just creating a way for your body to increase the air speed in to the horn without having to work harder. I'm sure you'll tear this to shreds .... but I'm a firm believer regardless of what you post.

End result, to each his own. Some things work ..... some things don't. I just depends on how you apply the theory to your own personal technique. I hardly find this subject cause for bashing Mr. Downey's views ... regardless of how many degrees you have. As a trumpet player who is required to play in the upper stratosphere .... it works for me ... and that's all I need to know.

I almost forgot..... The in depth analysis of how the sound wave is projected basically throws everything out the window with regard to embouchure, aperture and air speed. Sorry my friend ... but that's not true. The instrument is a resonator of what the body produces. Air speed and buzz frequency are what creates the sound ..... not the instrument itself. Why would every mouthpiece manufacturer on earth make varies sizes of shank, cup depth and rim width if it didn't play a major roll in restricting/helping air speed, buzz frequency wave lengths and various sizes of lips? A shallow cup and a tiny shank will help you play higher ... hmmmmm why is that? A deep cup with a bored out shank makes it harder but gives you a darker sound...... why is that?

I promise ... using a deeper cup and larger shank makes it difficult to play high .... but it sounds good if you know how to control your aperture, buzz frequency and air speed. Sorry but it's true.

[supersop]

You are quite wrong.

When whistling the oral space is a crude Helmholz resonator. And the size of the cavity will determime the pitch. Very related to blowing across bottles of various sizes and getting higher pitches for smaller bottles.

As for buzzing, buzzing is not required to play the horn and when you remove the horn from the mouthpiece the buzzing will tend to stop because you have removed the dominating resonance.

Thanks for proving my point.

There is a small amount of resonance in the mouthpiece alone that will facilitate some help to sustain a buzz. But in some way the mp buzz is also just a forced burp.

And you are correct in saying that the mouth is not a resonant chamber when buzzzing. And neither is it while playing. (Yet another brass-myth)

You lost me there. It all works in harmony my friend. You can't just blow air into a horn and get a sound. The mouthpiece was never intended to induce a buzz or facilitate it. This entire argument seems to be going WAY off course. I'm sure YOU understand what YOU are talking about and trying to get across ... but I fail to see how it relates to tongue arch, air speed and upper register playing.

[skluyuk]

<respectful snip to reply only to that part pertaining to my post>

...

I almost forgot..... The in depth analysis of how the sound wave is projected basically throws everything out the window with regard to embouchure, aperture and air speed. Sorry my friend ... but that's not true. The instrument is a resonator of what the body produces. Air speed and buzz frequency are what creates the sound ..... not the instrument itself. Why would every mouthpiece manufacturer on earth make varies sizes of shank, cup depth and rim width if it didn't play a major roll in restricting/helping air speed, buzz frequency wave lengths and various sizes of lips? A shallow cup and a tiny shank will help you play higher ... hmmmmm why is that? A deep cup with a bored out shank makes it harder but gives you a darker sound...... why is that?

I promise ... using a deeper cup and larger shank makes it difficult to play high .... but it sounds good if you know how to control your aperture, buzz frequency and air speed. Sorry but it's true.

Not true at all (about throwing things out the window). As a matter of fact, the mechanism of creating the buzz was not discussed in depth at all for the exact reason illustrated above. I did not wish to get into a debate about how to produce a buzz, but rather I wished to point out that the buzz is the key element for initiating and maintaining/modifying the sound. If you will notice, I skirt around the embouchure, aperture, air speed discussion by speaking of the lip and orifice and mass flow rate.

Now for you to say that the instrument is not creating the particular sound is not exactly true. The instrument is optimally designed to create a specific range of sounds within a particular set of pitches. That's why things like tube length, diameter, flare of the bell, thickness, type of material used (i.e. red brass, gold brass, sterling silver), etc. come into play. You are absolutely correct to say that the instrument resonantes based on the input from the mouthpiece. It is that resonance of the brass that is the sound moving out into the world. You should know this since when you buzz on your mouthpiece alone, you can't possible make as beautiful a sound as when you get the bell of you horn ringing in perfect pitch.

You are a bit sarcastic...I think you didn't read my post very well. Please read it again and you will see that we are in agreement on almost everything. I understand your perspective of the mechanism, because I too am a player. You don't necessarily understand the mathematical development of resonance. That's cool, you don't have to, sometimes we just want to play. But, in general the frequency of pitch (from a mathematical perspective) is defined by the square root of the stiffness divided by mass. If you play around with those parameters, you can easily see how to change the pitch. All the different mouthpieces (and horns for that matter) available simply assist with modifying those two parameters. That's the human variation you speak of. Not everyone has the same technique. Some do better with deep bore and others do better with shallow....and so on.

I envy your stratospheric abilities. lol. But make it a pure sound, OK? :P

[kalijah]

This subject (i.e. the specific mechanics of producing the sound in a brass instrument) has been a subject of interest to me for some time. I also have engineering degrees (mechanical & applied mechanics). Have you written any white papers or other reports on your research that I could peruse?

No but I could direct you to some things.

Matt, I believe your perspectives are generally accurate. However the discussion really is on air in the body not the physics of the horn so much. Air flow thru the body and approaching the embouchure is a bit simpler but still a bit difficult for some to relate to since they have an even simpler but faulty "laymans" understanding of how air flows.

However I had a couple of thoughts on your post.

It's power and frequency is determined by the input....that being the buzz. The buzz is the key. That is what initiates and sustains the wave. The amount of air pushed through the buzz (mass/volume flow rate) is what determines power.

If by "buzz" you mean the pulses of air into the moutpiece facilitated by the opening/closing aperture, then yes.

If by "buzz" you simply mean the flapping of the lips and any sound power that may contain, then I dissagree. Air pulses into the mouthpiece are necessary for sound in the horn.

But,

To be accurate, the power applied is due to the pressure AND the flow of the pulses of air into the mouthpiece.

To be more accurate it is the mathematical product of the two. Flow x Pressure. (Notice "speed" is not part of the picture)

The only thing the player really can control, once he has formed his or her embouchure habit is the pressure applied at the aperture. FLow will result due to efficiency and horn acoustics once that player reaches the dynamic they wish to play.

However, the air power into the mp/horn is NOT the same as the Power "Applied" by the player since the embouchure will cause a loss of pressure. And a loss of power.

In other words efficiency is important to maximize the power expended to actually become sound. Since the embouchure is very "lossy" only a fraction of the power expended by the player actually becomes sound power. But even that varies for the player's level of skill in creating tone efficiently an effectively.

and you wrote:

The frequency of the buzz is what determines pitch. Frequency can be modified by changing only two parameters: mass and stiffness. If you increase the stiffness of the membrane (portion of the lip in the exit orifice) you can increase the frequency. Likewise, if you decrease the mass (amount of lip in the mouthpiece), this should also result in an increase to the frequency.

Well I believe that stiffness is part of it. But it is not so much how much lip is in the mouthpiece as it is how much of that is allowed to displace on vibration of pulses.

In a analogous way that a shorter string will vibrate at an higher pitch by an octave or two where as adding tension to a string will increase pitch but with in a more limited way.

In brass playing, the vibrating apperture becomes smaller as one ascends: O 0 o %

The embouchure aperture setting does , in a the most dominant dominant way, determine pitch. Air flow, speed and pressure are related to the volume of sound.

Wayne has been doing this for many many years. I trust his judgement here and don't believe he would just accept something to spit out in an article.

I am afraid he has. If it had not been things that players and teachers have said and written over and over for years I would not be so critical of the ideas.

The only real support that the tongue arch / air speed crowd has is hearsay, and opinion based on only the most poorly understood science. I don't doubt his belief in what he has written. And as I wrote before, shifting the tongue is sometimes necessary to embouchure manipulations. As is blowing stronger to play a louder note or to achieve the desired loudness of a higher note. And making the aperture a bit smaller is required for increasing the pitch.

These actions should not be discouraged OR over done. But the attached science presents some REAL falshoods and opportunities to create problems with players who mis-undertand them.

He is a very uncompromising man when it comes to the sound he demands of his hornlines. I think I would perhaps stand back and think about this a little more before calling him out like you did.

I called out his attempt to "explain" the method by enlisting science that is completely wrong. And I will stand by that. His explainatins, in that ONE article are incomplete and inacurate.

If Wayne hade used the term's "visualize" faster air or blow "as-if" faster air to encourage certain actions such as embouchure changes or air pressure I would not have much problem with it.

But to say things such as "arching the tongue creates more air pressure" just MIGHT be taken literally by someone who may leave out two essential elements, one for changing pitch ( embouchure change) and one for increasing or sustaining volume (increasing the air pressure of the lungs)

Besides, as one gains skill and efficiency, less of these actions are required, not more.

Not trying to challenge you or anything, but Wayne's credentials in this area are perhaps better than most wouldn't you say?

Not the science involved here. Wayne shows faulty knowlege on the subject of air flow and dynamics. I dont believe he has the credentials in that area.

Dont get me wrong , I have tremendous respect for the fellow. And his hard work and accomplishments.

He has had a influential effect on my arranging style. As have alot of others.

But everyone can learn something sometime, even Wayne.

I would imigine he learned a bit from Jim Ott and who knows who else.

[kalijah]

Dan wrote:

I find some of Wayne's thoughts flawed ..

How dare you! :)

Engineering degree in hand, please explain to me why blowing faster air across the top of a Coke bottle moves the pitch to a higher harmonic.

Flute playing/ bottle blowing are VERY MUCH unrelated to brass playing in mechanics.

WHen flute or bottle playing, increased force of air WILL sometimes cause a different vibrational mode at a certain point. Generally an octave. However, before this force of air is acheived the sound simply gets louder on the resonant pitch showing that there is no "linear" relationship to air speed and pitch.

In brass playing the pulsation of the lips need only match the resonant frequency. This can be easily done for a WIDE range of sound volumes air presures, flows, and speeds, all on one single pitch.

Try to blow your "bottle octave" softly.

With that in mind, I find Mr. Downey's tongue arch method to be very applicable. It creates a smaller opening for the same amount of air to pass through ... giving you the same result as the coke bottle I mentioned.

What???

Blow your bottle tone and ONLY arch your tongue up.

Now blow the bottle and increase the lung presure only.

What happened?

It also requires a focussing of the aperture. Two mechanisms that must work together in order for the ideology to work properly.

Changing the aperture causes reactions by the mouth-floor, teeth (jaw), corners. There is a muscular connection and interaction that causes the tongue to rise a bit.

Some people prefer to concentrate on the tongue movement to "coax" their embouchure changes without directly thinking about the embouchure and to limit those changes.

The smaller oral space causes a narrowing of the air path it is true. But this does not cause an increase in air pressure at, or air speed thru, the aperture. At least not due to the "narrower" path.

To use the "garden hose" as an example: (sorry) Putting a "kink" in the hose might (or might not) cause the water through that kink to be faster than thru the un-kinked hose. However the water coming out of the nozzle will be less because 1. you decreased the flow with your "kink" and 2. you caused an extreme pressure loss through your "kink", all at the expense of "speed" at the kink. And pushing the "kink" righ up to the nozzle (aperture) will give the same result.

Now the arched-up tongue is hardly a kink and since the embouchure is still multiples smaller, the narrower oral space will not cause much loss of flow or pressure unless you really over-do it. But neither will it increase the flow or pressure at the embouchure.

The lung pressure can easily make up for reasonable losses to air pressure due to reasonable tongue arches. The lung pressure is THE source of air pressure and speed while playing. Everything else "spends" the air.

Hopefully you will "spend" the air energy on tone. Not a closed throat, a extreme arch, or an overly long or clamped embouchure. Each of which may have more "air speed" there, at those restrictions, but ONLY there!

Understand?

I think PRESSURE in this case ... is an illusion. You're just creating a way for your body to increase the air speed in to the horn without having to work harder.

In other words you think you are getting somethig for nothing.

You ARE working harder if you are over-resricting before the mp cup.

I'm sure you'll tear this to shreds .... but I'm a firm believer regardless of what you post.

Oops, too late.

Why don't you take a stab at trying to understand what I wrote. I guarantee it will not cost you a note of range.

Actually there ARE also some "advantages" to a smaller oral space via tongue arc, mouth-floor etc. but they are small.

Edited July 31, 2007 by kalijah

[kalijah]

You can't just blow air into a horn and get a sound. The mouthpiece was never intended to induce a buzz or facilitate it.

When i blow air into the horn I get a sound, is a swishing "airy" sound. Oh , you meant a tone.

If i blow into the horn with my lips in playing position there is a tone every time.

If i remove the horn the pulsations stop and there is only air.

However, my buzzing approach is air-only at first then with soft attacks of air. With sufficient embouchure function these "impulses" wil induce a tone using the tiny bit of resonance in the mouth piece. If I can exlpoit the tiny bit of resonance in the mp, then playing tones on the horn is easy as falling off a log.

But, forcing raucous "burps" and "raspberries" into the mp will surely give an awful sound if you attempt to play the horn with the same technique.

IMO the way most people buzz is only hurtful to their playing. ANd the action is really abused by beginning band teachers on poor students.

Chech this out:

http://www.trumpetguild.org/pdf/2001journal/0106Science.pdf

[Martybucs]

I find this whole discussion fascinating. I have to admit, I've been in drum corps 43 years and although I've heard of Mr. Downey, I know nothing of his brass playing technique.

I began playing in Drum Corps and basically taught myself to play using tips and advice I picked up along the way and by listening to great players and trying to emulate them.

I'm an OK player and I have good range and endurance. Enough so, that many times people will ask how I have so much endurance and range even at the end of long parade.

For me, I first tell them tons of practice, except that's not so much the case anymore. If I get to practice once a week these days I'm doing good. Yet, I still have good range and endurance.

Second, I tell them that once I start playing I kind of ride the wave of the sound. I get funny looks with that one, but really, once my sounds starts I can kind of relax and sort of play on the pressure or sound wave, (I don't know what to call it). It is something hard to describe, but it is something I discovered on my own and it works for me.

In the article you linked to, it mentioned something about "feedback resonance", (I think that's what it mentioned, it was late when I read it). Could that be the effect I'm talking about? Is there a feedback that I'm "riding" in order to decrease the amount of work I have to do on the lips end of things?

[JohnZ]

Actually there ARE also some "advantages" to a smaller oral space ........

Okay, I'm with you so far on this one............ :P

(music has certainly come a long way since I learned how to play - so much science behind the art....)

[BWEAR]

OMG! Stick the horn up to your mouth and blow air between the lips to make a sound. After that, more imformation just gives me a headache . I played for 10 years in the upper stratos of the horn and never had a lesson. Then my first teacher said stop moving your tongue so much and my range went to hell. So I move my tongue now and have for 26 of my 27 years playing. It's good excersise for the bedroom too.

If you get a pay check or personal happiness after you play then I say you're doing it right. Geez!

Edited July 31, 2007 by BWEAR

[kalijah]

OMG! Stick the horn up to your mouth and blow air between the lips to make a sound. After that, more imformation just gives me a headache . I played for 10 years in the upper stratos of the horn and never had a lesson. Then my first teacher said stop moving your tongue so much and my range went to hell. So I move my tongue now and have for 26 of my 27 years playing. It's good excersise for the bedroom too.

If you get a pay check or personal happiness after you play then I say you're doing it right. Geez!

I hear you Bill!

I had instructors who not only forbid me to move the tongue, but also demanded that I hold it as low as possible in the mouth. Even as I played above high C.

Their encouragement (enforcement) was based on some completely bogus "science" about oral resonance. . yada-yada.

Well I found myself, as I tried to be a good student, caught in a muscular game of "twister". You can imagine what that did to my range. And made playing very uncomfortable.

However, I don't see a problem with some investigation into the science of playing if one is so inclined. Especially if the player is freed from the idea of doing (or not doing) certain actions based on bad information.

If one is not so inclined that is okay too.

There is no requirement of scientific thinking, correct OR bogus, to play well. I would say good and musical habits of practice are more important to success.