View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Meet A Cheetah New Member
Joined: 01 May 2012 Posts: 4
|
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Seems to me that in order to predictably help a student or oneself with range that the clearest path to victory is the utilization of some simple physics. There would be plenty of disagreement as to what those principles are no doubt. But assuming the diagnosis was correct and the trumpet player took the simple advice his range ought to at least be in the ballpark of a High F or so. maybe higher. Going on the assumption that he/she was say a three year or longer playing serious practitioner of the instrument. on average that is.
I have seen cats not practice for six months and still blow huge Double C's on just a days practice. And I've seen others practice numerous hours per day for years and while playing well never seem to get past the High G. So clearly some natural gifts are involved at playing relatively easily around the High G.
The other problem with physics (besides agreeing on what the major principles of it are as they apply to extreme range production) is making the physics SIMPLE and easy to understand.
Reinhardt was very complicated. It however was adaptable by the much of the whole sample. Give it a solid B.
Stevens also complicated though not so much as Reinhardt. Though less complicated had more failure than Reinhardt. Give it also a B- minus though many would grade it lower.
Claude Gordon was insufficient in explaining physics for many but often exposed natural gifts in those that it worked well for. Something about pedal tones that can quickly help a significant portion of the trumpet playing public. Gordon was far simpler too. Especially liked his idea to avoid thinking about the lips too much. I'd give it a B minus over-all. _________________ Coming soon "Cheetah Mouthpieces" for trumpet. Ask me about them. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
2-5-1 Heavyweight Member
Joined: 21 Nov 2006 Posts: 1381
|
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Stevens also complicated though not so much as Reinhardt. Though less complicated had more failure than Reinhardt. Give it also a B- minus though many would grade it lower. |
Have you read the original Stevens book and the Encyclopedia of the Pivot? I find it VERY hard to believe that anyone could think that the encyclopedia is harder to understand than the Stevens book...that thing reads like stereo instructions.
I've never understood what is so hard to understand about Reinhardt. It's so clear. The drills tell you EXACTLY how to play them. My guess is that people who get caught up in the diagrams and the terms never took a lesson with someone who could show them the way. _________________ www.mikesailorsmusic.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jimh46 Veteran Member
Joined: 24 Sep 2008 Posts: 244 Location: Ottawa
|
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 3:02 pm Post subject: I have no range. :( |
|
|
Pops wrote: | On page 40 of "The Art of Brass Playing"
Philip Farkas wrote about observations of vibrations while looking at his visualizer buzz in a mirror. The buzz got half as small when he buzzed an octave higher and half the size again as he went up another octave. He also claimed to have done this same experiment on countless players and that it was always true.
Farkas writes that he feels the length of the aperture when playing determines the pitch. Of course he gets this correlation from string instruments where we see this is true.
|
We are in violent agreement on this. The stringed instrument analogy is good.
All the best with the surgery.
Regards
Jim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jimh46 Veteran Member
Joined: 24 Sep 2008 Posts: 244 Location: Ottawa
|
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 3:05 pm Post subject: On page 40 of "The Art of Brass Playing" |
|
|
beel40 wrote: | Ten pages...Sheesh.
I read them all last night when I should have been practicing my B-flat scale. Today my playing sucked.
Thanks. |
I know - I hate it when I am forced, against my will, to wade through pages of meaningless argument in a thread.
I hope you learned something from that.
Regards
Jim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TupeloCOTA Veteran Member
Joined: 20 Oct 2009 Posts: 305 Location: Mississippi
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Since I have nothing to do this week but medical tests and surgery and since I want to avoid thinking about that; I find that I have time to play.
|
Pops,
Best wishes on the surgery. Hope all goes well for you. _________________ LA Benge 3X+
Conn Connquest 77B
Olds Ambassador Cornet
Chinese 3+1 Piccolo
Curry 1.5 C/DC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
StupidBrassObsession Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Mar 2012 Posts: 1014
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
As fascinating as this has been, pretty sure my posting of the Herseth lesson notes on page 7 wins in terms of usefulness...
On a side note, here is what I am doing to improve my range and all around playing. No, I'm no Nakariakov, but I'm definitely improving. That said, I spend about 4-6 hours (Including rests... probably not enough of them though) with the instrument and mouthpiece most days. So that is probably a big factor...
----
Every single day, play things like Clarke Technical Study 1 as quietly as you can, from low F# to as high as you can, while staying as relaxed as possible. Also, use very little mouthpiece pressure.
... You should start playing that low F# -Low C run with no change between your face completely relaxed vs when playing, other than to let your jaw open a bit.
You can also try Bob Odneals Casual Double High C using the same approach
http://bobodneal.tripod.com/index-5.html
I personally like to do the F# scale instead of the F scale because I don't get to play in F# very often, and this means my warm up can also be used to work on finger co-ordination. This type of exercise is perfect for learning new scales.
Next I will probably start using Cb or B instead, as F# is getting pretty second nature.
----
Start mouthpiece buzzing everything you play. Every. Thing. Alternate playing and mouthpiece buzzing.
Like Herseth recommends, you're looking for a BIG SOUND.
If you start playing the instrument like that, you'll notice right away that there is suddenly a new clarity and ring to the sound.
And Pops himself says that: if you're mouthpiece is putting into the horn something that is within 10Cents of the note you are supposed to be playing (only) 9/10 times... then you owe the audience money.
99/100 times? You can probably start charing for gigs now. haha
----
Strength. Get a golf pencil, close your teeth in biting position, stick it between your lips and hold it above parallel with the floor for 30 seconds to a minute every day. That's it. No more than 1 minute for at least 1 month.
It's just a general exercises to help get some extra muscle fiber growing.
That strength on it's own would be useless without the relaxation and the co-ordination though...
I actually only do this a few times a week at the moment because with the amount I'm practicing it'd simply be overkill. My routine is muscularly challenging enough.
My current routine is Clarke 1, Odneal (warm up), work on 2, 3 or 4 concertos, a concert etude, a characteristic study and orchestral excerpts, then first 1/2 of clarke 1 again to warm down.
I think even the Claude Gordon die-hards would probably be happy with that.
Note that the only part of my routine which even touches my range is my warm up, and it is approached with great care. Other than that I don't worry about it, but I am noticing my range improving in increments every week. High C sounds fatter than last week... The F# above is just barely there, where as two weeks ago High D# was about the limit.
My point is that you range will improve on its own for the most part, so long as you aren't stupid and don't try and force your embouchure to play notes that it hasn't learned the co-ordination for yet!
This is said with a grain of salt as I am not a professional player, just someone who finds themselves lately to be an unexpectedly committed student. These things are working well for me, but perhaps someone will tell you otherwise. In which case, make up your own mind about who to believe. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kalijah Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003 Posts: 3260 Location: Alabama
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good stuff.
Hey JRoyal, you ned to post something your Post count number is freakin me out here! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JRoyal Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Apr 2003 Posts: 770
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
kalijah wrote: | Good stuff.
Hey JRoyal, you ned to post something your Post count number is freakin me out here! |
....over the hump. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001 Posts: 9830 Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
That was funny! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kalijah Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003 Posts: 3260 Location: Alabama
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John wrote:
No it wasn't!
( you see what i did there?) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bamajazzlady Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 May 2011 Posts: 691
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This "range" beef would have been better settled on with John and Darryl via YouTube posting examples of their trumpet playing to support their beliefs (or non beliefs) as there's no need for a TH soap opera. _________________ "Nobody can go back and start a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending." - Maria Robinson |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kalijah Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003 Posts: 3260 Location: Alabama
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jazzlady, you just dampened the vibe! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
INTJ Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Dec 2002 Posts: 1986 Location: Northern Idaho
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bamajazzlady wrote: | This "range" beef would have been better settled on with John and Darryl via YouTube posting examples of their trumpet playing to support their beliefs (or non beliefs) as there's no need for a TH soap opera. |
I would counter that TH, and in fact most Internet websites, need a soap opera at least once a week........ _________________ Harrels VPS Summit
Wild Thing
Flip Oakes C
Flip Oakes Flugel
Harrelson 5mm MP |
|
Back to top |
|
|
INTJ Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Dec 2002 Posts: 1986 Location: Northern Idaho
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have a question for Kalijah and/or anyone else who is familiar with fluid dynamics.
I used to competitively drag race. I flirted for a while with running in the NHRA Super Stock class. There were lots of rules and limitations, and the big one was though you could change the shape of the intake port on the head, you could not increase it's volume. One key to making max horspower is to get more airflow, and one would think the only way to do that was by making the ports larger.
It turned out that you could substantially increase the airflow with a given port size by changing the shape and smoothing out the flow of air. The roof of the port would be raised and then the bottom of the port epoxied in to create an arched path for the air. This smooth arched path allowed more volume of air to pass through the head and allowed the engine to make max horsepower.
Perhaps when we put a high arch in our tongue, we smooth out the airflow and allow more air to pass through the apeture with less effort????? _________________ Harrels VPS Summit
Wild Thing
Flip Oakes C
Flip Oakes Flugel
Harrelson 5mm MP |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kalijah Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003 Posts: 3260 Location: Alabama
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Your air port modification probably insured a more laminar flow and less turbulence because shape is all you had to work with. Making it narrower would have given you less air flow.
(They probably limited the AREA of the input ports. Not the "volume". And the most voluminous path would give you the least resistance and the best air flow.)
The open oral space is very low resistance to flow. i cant imagine how adding a reduction would enhance air flow. The added reistance is a necessary evil if you are going to use the arch. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
INTJ Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Dec 2002 Posts: 1986 Location: Northern Idaho
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They limited volume. They would fill the port with water and measure
the CCs of displacement. Laminar flow is probably the reason why flow would increase, but there was a definite increase in CFM the port would flow as measured on a flow bench. _________________ Harrels VPS Summit
Wild Thing
Flip Oakes C
Flip Oakes Flugel
Harrelson 5mm MP |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garrett901 Heavyweight Member
Joined: 07 Jan 2009 Posts: 1248 Location: Vacaville CA
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes. It works. The challenge is to get the correct shape to increase the CFM. _________________ Jeff Garrett
Playing "G" Soprano Bugle, Freelancers Alumni/Mini Corps
NorCal Horn Line Instructor/Musical Arranger
Kanstul G Soprano (Powerbore Bell)
Yamaha YTR-739T
Xtream XZ w/ XXX backbore GREAT MP!!!
http://freelancers-alumni.org |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001 Posts: 9830 Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 7:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
kalijah wrote: | John wrote:
No it wasn't!
( you see what i did there?) |
Yes... it... WAS!!!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001 Posts: 9830 Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
kalijah wrote: | Your air port modification probably insured a more laminar flow and less turbulence |
+1
The same applies to the development of artificial arteries via tissue engineering which is what I was studying at IIT. Achieving the highest level of laminar flow possible is crucial in that field.
If I can get myself back in school, there's a 400 level class in the Biomedical Engineering Program that is all about the Fluid Dynamics of Blood. Blood behaves differently when compared to other fluids in terms of Fluid Dynamics. I can't elaborate more (because I haven't taken the class yet) but there's a whole field of specialized study concerning the Fluid Dynamics of Blood. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kalijah Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003 Posts: 3260 Location: Alabama
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | They limited volume. They would fill the port with water and measure the CCs of displacement. |
Ok, I see.
Archimedes would be proud! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|