As the velocity of a flow is increased due to a narrowing of the passageway, the pressure of the flow decreases. This is not to say that arching the tongue does not help the lips vibrate faster and cause higher notes to be played. Clearly it does. This is also not to say that a nozzle on the end of a hose would not cause the water stream to be concentrated and be able to push stones off a driveway it couldn't otherwise move without the concentration of the stream caused by the nozzle. We all know that works, too. Many things in the realm of Physics are not intuitive.
In my opinion, at least part of the effect of the arching tongue is to direct the force of the air directly to a tiny area of the lips, helping reduce the size of the vibrating area and concentrating all the force of the air on that one little area. And yes, I think the velocity of the air stream is increased by arching the tongue and that increased velocity of air is causal in producing faster lip vibrations (but not the only thing in the system responsible for those faster lip vibrations). I think a tiny, thin, fast jet of air is created. I'm pretty sure Kalijah would still disagree with me about the increased velocity part. I find that interesting given his knowledge of Bernoulli's Equation. But there's no need to argue, debate, or even know for sure exactly what's happening.
Just do as Claude suggested: Practice, and practice a lot, knowing how things work in general. To play higher, we blow harder, arch our tongues and tighten the muscles around our lips. The exact amount of each of these can never be described. But with practice, the correct balance can be felt by the individual player and developed to where it works correctly by habit.
Best wishes,
John Mohan
Skype Lessons Available - Click on the e-mail button below if interested _________________ Trumpet Player, Clinician & Teacher
1st Trpt for Cats, Phantom of the Opera, West Side Story, Evita, Hunchback of Notre Dame,
Grease, The Producers, Addams Family, In the Heights, etc.
Ex LA Studio Musician
16 Year Claude Gordon Student
Many things in the realm of Physics are not intuitive.
Obviously!
Quote:
In my opinion, at least part of the effect of the arching tongue is to direct the force of the air directly to a tiny area of the lips, helping reduce the size of the vibrating area and concentrating all the force of the air on that one little area.
Well, Yet again the same erroneous "opinion" where you attempt to claim that the "force" can be "concentrated". The "force" for any area exposed to a pressure depends on the size of the area in question. This means, reducing the area exposed results in less force. You are attempting to claim that there is some increase by your explanation. And particularly by "concentration of force" verbiage.
The state of the aperture determines the pitch. Your attempts at giving air velocity influence or credit requires an erroneous interpretation of the Bernoulli law. The correct interpretational nuance of the Bernoulli law eludes you. (Not to mention the law of F=PxA)
The tongue moves in tandem with certain muscular manipulations of the aperture. It is no doubt easiest to form the embouchure to be small (to ascend) by not fighting this natural reflex of the tongue moving forward as the inner corners are engaged to make the aperture smaller. Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.
The tongue arch, by the very law of physics you referenced, can not increase the air energy or air pressure bearing on the aperture.
Joined: 14 Nov 2001 Posts: 2368 Location: SF Bay Area
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 1:30 pm Post subject:
We should rename the forum the Bernoulli forum. But since we're here, I'll make a comment. I do agree with Kalijah on physics and flow and all that. However this is not physics or fact. It is one person's observation and that person is not me.
Quote:
The tongue moves in tandem with certain muscular manipulations of the aperture. It is no doubt easiest to form the embouchure to be small (to ascend) by not fighting this natural reflex of the tongue moving forward as the inner corners are engaged to make the aperture smaller. Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.
Joined: 13 Nov 2001 Posts: 9830 Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 1:43 pm Post subject:
kalijah wrote:
Mohan wrote:
Quote:
Many things in the realm of Physics are not intuitive.
Obviously!
Quote:
In my opinion, at least part of the effect of the arching tongue is to direct the force of the air directly to a tiny area of the lips, helping reduce the size of the vibrating area and concentrating all the force of the air on that one little area.
Well, Yet again the same erroneous "opinion" where you attempt to claim that the "force" can be "concentrated". The "force" for any area exposed to a pressure depends on the size of the area in question. This means, reducing the area exposed results in less force. You are attempting to claim that there is some increase by your explanation. And particularly by "concentration of force" verbiage.
The state of the aperture determines the pitch. Your attempts at giving air velocity influence or credit requires an erroneous interpretation of the Bernoulli law. The correct interpretational nuance of the Bernoulli law eludes you. (Not to mention the law of F=PxA)
The tongue moves in tandem with certain muscular manipulations of the aperture. It is no doubt easiest to form the embouchure to be small (to ascend) by not fighting this natural reflex of the tongue moving forward as the inner corners are engaged to make the aperture smaller. Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.
The tongue arch, by the very law of physics you referenced, can not increase the air energy or air pressure bearing on the aperture.
For all your Physics knowledge (and having taken Engineering Physics 1, 2, 3 and Mechanics Dynamics with A's in most, I'm not exactly a slouch in the area), if you think the force (speaking in layman's terms, not F=ma right now) of a water stream from a hose cannot be concentrated by a nozzle to have more profound effect on the stones on a driveway, you're just a silly person!
And if you can't understand that idea (of how a concentrated, fast, water stream can push stones off a driveway that a wider and slower water stream coming from a hose with no nozzle cannot move) then by gosh, you're never going to be able to understand how the airstream can be concentrated and directed by the arching tongue onto only a small area of the lips and do things to that area that the airstream when not concentrated by the arching tongue, cannot do. Or perhaps it's not a matter of you not being able to understand. Maybe you just don't want to understand. I think most others can and do understand.
And while I'm at it, in reference to this in particular:
kalijah wrote:
The tongue moves in tandem with certain muscular manipulations of the aperture. It is no doubt easiest to form the embouchure to be small (to ascend) by not fighting this natural reflex of the tongue moving forward as the inner corners are engaged to make the aperture smaller. Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.
1) Anyone who has taken Physiology and Anatomy 1 can tell you, the tongue muscles and the muscles around the mouth that manipulate the lip (Zygomaticus, Buccinator, Mentalis, Orbicularis oris and a few others I can't think of right now) are completely independent of the muscles of the tongue (Genioglossus, Hyoglossus, the Styloglossus, and Palatoglossus). Anyone can move their tongue all over the inside of the mouth without doing anything with the face muscles, and anyone can tighten the corners of their mouth without tongue movement. It's preposterous to dismiss the role of tongue arch and suggest that the only reason for tongue arching at all is because the tongue is just moving in a reflexive fashion.
To see this kind of misinformation anywhere on this website is frustrating. But to see it here, in the dedicated Claude Gordon forum, well, let's just say I don't think you'll find opinions and claims similarly antagonistic to the views and beliefs of the other dedicated forums within their topic threads. And if posted there, such opinions and claims are quickly "moderated" away.
2) Your claim that about the inner corners "engaging" to make the aperture smaller and being completely responsible for the creation of the high notes by creating a small aperture ("Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.") is completely refuted by the fact that there are players whose corners are so open and loose when playing high notes that their molars could be seen through the corners of their mouths when playing Double High C." One of those students was Claude Gordon's student Marshal Hunt. Jeff Purtle wrote about this fact in a recent post in this very thread. I do not mean to imply that the corners are not involved. They are (as are the wind power, arching tongue and to some extent, mouthpiece pressure). But those corners are not the only contributor or even I think (as do many others including Maynard Ferguson), the main contributor.
Best wishes,
John Mohan _________________ Trumpet Player, Clinician & Teacher
1st Trpt for Cats, Phantom of the Opera, West Side Story, Evita, Hunchback of Notre Dame,
Grease, The Producers, Addams Family, In the Heights, etc.
Ex LA Studio Musician
16 Year Claude Gordon Student
Joined: 23 Feb 2008 Posts: 1992 Location: New York City
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 3:46 pm Post subject:
John Mohan wrote:
kalijah wrote:
Mohan wrote:
Quote:
Many things in the realm of Physics are not intuitive.
Obviously!
Quote:
In my opinion, at least part of the effect of the arching tongue is to direct the force of the air directly to a tiny area of the lips, helping reduce the size of the vibrating area and concentrating all the force of the air on that one little area.
Well, Yet again the same erroneous "opinion" where you attempt to claim that the "force" can be "concentrated". The "force" for any area exposed to a pressure depends on the size of the area in question. This means, reducing the area exposed results in less force. You are attempting to claim that there is some increase by your explanation. And particularly by "concentration of force" verbiage.
The state of the aperture determines the pitch. Your attempts at giving air velocity influence or credit requires an erroneous interpretation of the Bernoulli law. The correct interpretational nuance of the Bernoulli law eludes you. (Not to mention the law of F=PxA)
The tongue moves in tandem with certain muscular manipulations of the aperture. It is no doubt easiest to form the embouchure to be small (to ascend) by not fighting this natural reflex of the tongue moving forward as the inner corners are engaged to make the aperture smaller. Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.
The tongue arch, by the very law of physics you referenced, can not increase the air energy or air pressure bearing on the aperture.
For all your Physics knowledge (and having taken Engineering Physics 1, 2, 3 and Mechanics Dynamics with A's in most, I'm not exactly a slouch in the area), if you think the force (speaking in layman's terms, not F=ma right now) of a water stream from a hose cannot be concentrated by a nozzle to have more profound effect on the stones on a driveway, you're just a silly person!
And if you can't understand that idea (of how a concentrated, fast, water stream can push stones off a driveway that a wider and slower water stream coming from a hose with no nozzle cannot move) then by gosh, you're never going to be able to understand how the airstream can be concentrated and directed by the arching tongue onto only a small area of the lips and do things to that area that the airstream when not concentrated by the arching tongue, cannot do. Or perhaps it's not a matter of you not being able to understand. Maybe you just don't want to understand. I think most others can and do understand.
And while I'm at it, in reference to this in particular:
kalijah wrote:
The tongue moves in tandem with certain muscular manipulations of the aperture. It is no doubt easiest to form the embouchure to be small (to ascend) by not fighting this natural reflex of the tongue moving forward as the inner corners are engaged to make the aperture smaller. Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.
1) Anyone who has taken Physiology and Anatomy 1 can tell you, the tongue muscles and the muscles around the mouth that manipulate the lip (Zygomaticus, Buccinator, Mentalis, Orbicularis oris and a few others I can't think of right now) are completely independent of the muscles of the tongue (Genioglossus, Hyoglossus, the Styloglossus, and Palatoglossus). Anyone can move their tongue all over the inside of the mouth without doing anything with the face muscles, and anyone can tighten the corners of their mouth without tongue movement. It's preposterous to dismiss the role of tongue arch and suggest that the only reason for tongue arching at all is because the tongue is just moving in a reflexive fashion.
To see this kind of misinformation anywhere on this website is frustrating. But to see it here, in the dedicated Claude Gordon forum, well, let's just say I don't think you'll find opinions and claims similarly antagonistic to the views and beliefs of the other dedicated forums within their topic threads. And if posted there, such opinions and claims are quickly "moderated" away.
2) Your claim that about the inner corners "engaging" to make the aperture smaller and being completely responsible for the creation of the high notes by creating a small aperture ("Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.") is completely refuted by the fact that there are players whose corners are so open and loose when playing high notes that their molars could be seen through the corners of their mouths when playing Double High C." One of those students was Claude Gordon's student Marshal Hunt. Jeff Purtle wrote about this fact in a recent post in this very thread. I do not mean to imply that the corners are not involved. They are (as are the wind power, arching tongue and to some extent, mouthpiece pressure). But those corners are not the only contributor or even I think (as do many others including Maynard Ferguson), the main contributor.
Best wishes,
John Mohan
Can I quote you John? Brilliant response!!! _________________ CG Benge @1975
Reeves Custom
Torpedo Bags
As the velocity of a flow is increased due to a narrowing of the passageway, the pressure of the flow decreases. This is not to say that arching the tongue does not help the lips vibrate faster and cause higher notes to be played. Clearly it does. This is also not to say that a nozzle on the end of a hose would not cause the water stream to be concentrated and be able to push stones off a driveway it couldn't otherwise move without the concentration of the stream caused by the nozzle. We all know that works, too. Many things in the realm of Physics are not intuitive.
In my opinion, at least part of the effect of the arching tongue is to direct the force of the air directly to a tiny area of the lips, helping reduce the size of the vibrating area and concentrating all the force of the air on that one little area. And yes, I think the velocity of the air stream is increased by arching the tongue and that increased velocity of air is causal in producing faster lip vibrations (but not the only thing in the system responsible for those faster lip vibrations). I think a tiny, thin, fast jet of air is created. I'm pretty sure Kalijah would still disagree with me about the increased velocity part. I find that interesting given his knowledge of Bernoulli's Equation. But there's no need to argue, debate, or even know for sure exactly what's happening.
Just do as Claude suggested: Practice, and practice a lot, knowing how things work in general. To play higher, we blow harder, arch our tongues and tighten the muscles around our lips. The exact amount of each of these can never be described. But with practice, the correct balance can be felt by the individual player and developed to where it works correctly by habit.
Best wishes,
John Mohan
Skype Lessons Available - Click on the e-mail button below if interested
Very nice! Easy to understand and makes it more understandable for me. And I learn some trumpet science. _________________ CG Benge @1975
Reeves Custom
Torpedo Bags
Joined: 23 Feb 2008 Posts: 1992 Location: New York City
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 3:52 pm Post subject:
John Mohan wrote:
kalijah wrote:
Mohan wrote:
Quote:
Many things in the realm of Physics are not intuitive.
Obviously!
Quote:
In my opinion, at least part of the effect of the arching tongue is to direct the force of the air directly to a tiny area of the lips, helping reduce the size of the vibrating area and concentrating all the force of the air on that one little area.
Well, Yet again the same erroneous "opinion" where you attempt to claim that the "force" can be "concentrated". The "force" for any area exposed to a pressure depends on the size of the area in question. This means, reducing the area exposed results in less force. You are attempting to claim that there is some increase by your explanation. And particularly by "concentration of force" verbiage.
The state of the aperture determines the pitch. Your attempts at giving air velocity influence or credit requires an erroneous interpretation of the Bernoulli law. The correct interpretational nuance of the Bernoulli law eludes you. (Not to mention the law of F=PxA)
The tongue moves in tandem with certain muscular manipulations of the aperture. It is no doubt easiest to form the embouchure to be small (to ascend) by not fighting this natural reflex of the tongue moving forward as the inner corners are engaged to make the aperture smaller. Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.
The tongue arch, by the very law of physics you referenced, can not increase the air energy or air pressure bearing on the aperture.
For all your Physics knowledge (and having taken Engineering Physics 1, 2, 3 and Mechanics Dynamics with A's in most, I'm not exactly a slouch in the area), if you think the force (speaking in layman's terms, not F=ma right now) of a water stream from a hose cannot be concentrated by a nozzle to have more profound effect on the stones on a driveway, you're just a silly person!
And if you can't understand that idea (of how a concentrated, fast, water stream can push stones off a driveway that a wider and slower water stream coming from a hose with no nozzle cannot move) then by gosh, you're never going to be able to understand how the airstream can be concentrated and directed by the arching tongue onto only a small area of the lips and do things to that area that the airstream when not concentrated by the arching tongue, cannot do. Or perhaps it's not a matter of you not being able to understand. Maybe you just don't want to understand. I think most others can and do understand.
And while I'm at it, in reference to this in particular:
kalijah wrote:
The tongue moves in tandem with certain muscular manipulations of the aperture. It is no doubt easiest to form the embouchure to be small (to ascend) by not fighting this natural reflex of the tongue moving forward as the inner corners are engaged to make the aperture smaller. Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.
1) Anyone who has taken Physiology and Anatomy 1 can tell you, the tongue muscles and the muscles around the mouth that manipulate the lip (Zygomaticus, Buccinator, Mentalis, Orbicularis oris and a few others I can't think of right now) are completely independent of the muscles of the tongue (Genioglossus, Hyoglossus, the Styloglossus, and Palatoglossus). Anyone can move their tongue all over the inside of the mouth without doing anything with the face muscles, and anyone can tighten the corners of their mouth without tongue movement. It's preposterous to dismiss the role of tongue arch and suggest that the only reason for tongue arching at all is because the tongue is just moving in a reflexive fashion.
To see this kind of misinformation anywhere on this website is frustrating. But to see it here, in the dedicated Claude Gordon forum, well, let's just say I don't think you'll find opinions and claims similarly antagonistic to the views and beliefs of the other dedicated forums within their topic threads. And if posted there, such opinions and claims are quickly "moderated" away.
2) Your claim that about the inner corners "engaging" to make the aperture smaller and being completely responsible for the creation of the high notes by creating a small aperture ("Smaller aperture = higher frequency of tone. It IS that simple.") is completely refuted by the fact that there are players whose corners are so open and loose when playing high notes that their molars could be seen through the corners of their mouths when playing Double High C." One of those students was Claude Gordon's student Marshal Hunt. Jeff Purtle wrote about this fact in a recent post in this very thread. I do not mean to imply that the corners are not involved. They are (as are the wind power, arching tongue and to some extent, mouthpiece pressure). But those corners are not the only contributor or even I think (as do many others including Maynard Ferguson), the main contributor.
Best wishes,
John Mohan
Can I quote you John? Brilliant response!!! _________________ CG Benge @1975
Reeves Custom
Torpedo Bags
The thing I have to monitor is 'where is the resistance?"
Other than my back muscles being strong and firm for blowing purposes,
my playing is transformed for the better when I place the resistance
( created by my tongue ) at the front of the oral cavity.
I recently spoke with one of the finest players around, and he completely disagreed with that. He said the tongue resistance should be more toward the back of the oral cavity. Putting it in the front makes for a lousy sound.
His main thrust is building up tons of chop muscle to resist the wind force.
Opposite from Claude's teaching. He specifically said the tongue was NOT
arched in back.
With the resistance in front, I believe much less facial and lips muscles are necessary to make the horn work.
When my air support slacks off, my tongue normally drifts backwards,
which causes my chops to work much harder to get a vibration.
Joined: 13 Nov 2001 Posts: 9830 Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 10:16 am Post subject:
BigT wrote:
The thing I have to monitor is 'where is the resistance?"
Other than my back muscles being strong and firm for blowing purposes,
my playing is transformed for the better when I place the resistance
( created by my tongue ) at the front of the oral cavity.
I recently spoke with one of the finest players around, and he completely disagreed with that. He said the tongue resistance should be more toward the back of the oral cavity. Putting it in the front makes for a lousy sound.
His main thrust is building up tons of chop muscle to resist the wind force.
Opposite from Claude's teaching. He specifically said the tongue was NOT
arched in back.
With the resistance in front, I believe much less facial and lips muscles are necessary to make the horn work.
When my air support slacks off, my tongue normally drifts backwards,
which causes my chops to work much harder to get a vibration.
As fine a player as that gentleman must be from your description, his knowledge of what goes on when we play the upper register is not accurate. Arching the back of the tongue is like taking a pair of pliers and squeezing on a water hose several inches before the end of the hose. Instead of the jet-like stream created by a nozzle at the very end of the hose (which is what proper up and forward tongue arch does), the water stream is choked off and loses its velocity as it leaves the constriction (an inch or more before reaching the lips).
He is not alone in his misinformed opinion. Maurice Andre, one of the greatest players of all time was sure he kept his tongue flat in his mouth, even when playing his highest notes. He took part in John Haynie's fluoroscopic research, and when he saw the X-ray film of his tongue showing his tongue to clearly arch up and forward as he ascended above High C, his reaction was to exclaim, "Oh my God!"
From pages 82 and 83 of the book "Trumpet Technique" by Frank Gabriel Campos, published by Oxford University Press, ISBN number 978-0-19-516693-4:
Quote:
Working with Alexander F. Finlay, a radiologist in Denton, Texas, Haynie used a fluoroscope and one of the earliest videotape recorders to document “jaw position, teeth and jaw aperture, tongue arching, pivot, mouthpiece pressure, position of tongue for attack, [and] position of tongue for double and triple tonguing” (Haynie 1968, 7)…
...Over a five-year period, beginning with still photography and moving to 16 mm film with a real-to-reel audiotape that had to be manually synchronized with the movie, Haynie observed the performance technique of over seventy University of North Texas students and a number of professional performers, including Maurice André, Gerard Schwarz and the members of the American Brass Quintet, Richard Giangiulio (former principal of the Dallas Symphony), and big band leader Claude Gordon.
French trumpet virtuoso Maurice André was astounded: he was completely unaware that the tongue arched to produce changes in register. Like many of the world's finest players, he just did it without thinking. According to Haynie, few of the study participants had an opinion about the actions of their tongue and no one could describe exactly what happened inside the oral cavity. It is interesting to note that many of the poorer players improved by observing and imitating the action of the tongues of the finest players as demonstrated in the videotape. [emphasis added]
Here is a video from a modern research study using MRI technology to get an even better view of the role of the tongue:
Two highlights of the video occur at 1:45 where the tongue can be seen arching all the way up and forward for the top notes, and at 7:15 where a view from the front shows how the channel on the top of the tongue gets smaller as the player (Sarah Willis from the Berlin Philharmonic) ascends into the upper register. By 7:29 where she plays the highest note of the section, the channel created by the tongue arch is tiny.
I found it very interesting that Sarah Willis, just like Maurice Andre when he participated in John Haynie's earlier Fluoroscopic research of the tongue level, had no idea how her tongue arched and created a tiny channel for the higher notes prior to seeing it happen. While this shows that knowing about the true role of the tongue is not essential, as one of the researchers pointed out in the video, learning these things and then being able to apply that knowledge in practice routines can lead to significantly faster development of abilities on an instrument.
Best wishes,
John Mohan
Skype Lessons Available - Click on the e-mail button below if interested _________________ Trumpet Player, Clinician & Teacher
1st Trpt for Cats, Phantom of the Opera, West Side Story, Evita, Hunchback of Notre Dame,
Grease, The Producers, Addams Family, In the Heights, etc.
Ex LA Studio Musician
16 Year Claude Gordon Student
I believe you are absolutely correct. And, many fine players are terrible teachers. I studied with an excellent symphony player who instructed me to do 'this and that'. When I took a week of lessons from Claude, he was sooo pissed off. He knew the player and called him. Kind of let him have it!
Also, I've noticed that the tongue position varies based on equipment.
My tongue needs to be more forward for larger mouthpieces and horns.
For shallow and tighter pieces, I have to back off a little.
Don't know if it's true, but I read that Lynn Nicholson had a mouthpiece that was so shallow and tight that he didn't need much, if any, tongue movement.
At least that was his impression. Most everything was done with air.
I CAN play with muscle chops and the tongue back too far, as you described.
But it wears me out and is horribly inefficient.
Don't know if it's true, but I read that Lynn Nicholson had a mouthpiece that was so shallow and tight that he didn't need much, if any, tongue movement.
At least that was his impression. Most everything was done with air.
Lynn Nicholson says he uses large throats, combined with small, shallow V cups. James New is now producing a Nicholson Personal mouthpiece like that for Lynn.
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
