• FAQ • Search • Memberlist • Usergroups • Register • Profile • Log in to check your private messages • Log in

Trumpet compression

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> High Range Development

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Tpt_Guy
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 1101
Location: Sacramento, Ca

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:29 pm Post subject:

Seymor B Fudd wrote:

Tpt_Guy wrote:

TrpPro wrote:

Can't separate air and lip vibration. They work as a unit and I believe must be practiced as a unit to successfully learn to play the trumpet.

YES!!!

So let's all take this as a cue to go become better musicians in the practice room, rather than at the keyboard!

So compressed/pressurized air makes the lips vibrate creating a wave - this wave gets the air molecules inside the horn going - in their turn getting feedback from the horn (=impedance); in the lower register helping the player, not so much in the higher. Different horns better or worse at helping, every horns has its unique coloring.
No actual air is transported throughout the horn - as in wave systems at sea, no "mass" of water is transported. What we see is not water moving but the wave system moving.
The very process of getting the vibration under way then should be the main topic. Does the tongue interfere? Higher up more tongue up against the roof of the oral cavity? If so why does this help producing these higher notes?
Have I got it right??
ps water and air behaves differently due to the difference in mass?!(the hose and balloon analogies).
Ps and now for the practice room
ps The MRI of Sara Willis blowing is very instructive with regards to the tongue positions (www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWcOwgWsPHA)

I wasn't necessarily commenting on mechanics specifically, but rather than continue to hash out this discussion ad absurdum, let's all go practice!

But since you brought it up, I'll bite...

I don't see any difference between liquids and gasses (or water and air) in this discussion, and here's why:

In engineering, both liquids and gasses follow the principles of fluid mechanics - they are both fluid substances. This means that both Bernoulli's Principle and the Venturi Effect are at play. The Venturi Effect states that anywhere there is any sort of constriction on a fluid flow, there is an decrease in pressure as a result of the increased velocity of the fluid medium through the constriction. Bernoulli's Principle states that when there is an increase in velocity of horizontal flow in a fluid substance, that increase in velocity is attended by a decrease in pressure through the medium. The two are corollaries. Kalijah mentioned earlier that when one arches the tongue, there is a slight decrease in pressure right before the aperture. This is why.

The hose and balloon analogies are examples of these principles at work, but they do not provide a clear answer because the air/water we see escape doesn't continue in any system after the venturi, which is not analogous to how a trumpet works. This has been mentioned several times but still seems to be ignored.

Now, as far as whether or not there needs to be air flow through the instrument, I don't think we need to be poking at Prof. Moore because "he should know better". I think his statement about "buzzing the lips without air" is being taken too literally. I think what he was trying to communicate is that if there were a way to induce a vibrating air column in a trumpet without air flowing through the instrument, the trumpet would still sound. That was the purpose of his demonstration. And it is possible to induce vibrations in air without actually having air flow - electronic speakers, tuning forks, tympani...these all work that way. If any of you have a tuning fork, take your horn out, insert the mouthpiece, strike the tuning fork and stick it into the mouthpiece. The whole horn will begin to resonate, but the volume will be low because the amplitude of the vibrations is low. If a larger vibration could be achieved, the volume would increase. This can be achieved on a small scale by striking the tuning fork softly or smartly. On a brass instrument, increase in air flow increases volume (when done right) because it increases the amplitude of the wave pulses we input into the trumpet.
_________________
-Tom Hall-

"A good teacher protects his pupils from his own influence."
-Bruce Lee

kalijah
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 6:17 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Bernoulli's Principle states that when there is an increase in velocity of horizontal flow in a fluid substance, that increase in velocity is attended by a decrease in pressure through the medium. The two are corollaries. Kalijah mentioned earlier that when one arches the tongue, there is a slight decrease in pressure right before the aperture. This is why.

Quote:

On a brass instrument, increase in air flow increases volume (when done right) because it increases the amplitude of the wave pulses we input into the trumpet.

Increasing air pressure increases the loudness, the flow increase will follow.

razeontherock
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 05 Jun 2004
Posts: 10609
Location: The land of GR and Getzen

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:20 pm Post subject:

One major problem here is thinking that any of this happens at the speed of airflow. It doesn't. It all happens at the speed of sound. You're not blowing fast enough to create 440 cycles per second, much less two octaves above that. Lynn Nicholson's demonstration, blowing just a rim and getting something like a trumpet sound, is not much like how most of us play. Starting the buzz with our air, as we do when buzzing just our lips, does not sound much like a trumpet, nor is it much like how we play. This means the standing wave is a big deal, which is also why gap matters.

Tpt_Guy
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 1101
Location: Sacramento, Ca

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 10:06 pm Post subject:

kalijah wrote:

Quote:

You have made an incorrect assumption about what I mentioned.

While Bernoulli's law IS in effect for reduction of the path width, I was referring to viscous losses. These reduce the pressure as air flows through a narrow path. Bernoulli's law does not consider viscous losses in its theoretical definition.. But in the real world these viscous losses exist. ESPECIALLY for narrow passages. That includes tongue arch AND the playing aperture.

Maybe what was stated before could have been a bit more clear? I say that because it is not apparent that there are two factors causing a decrease in pressure from reading, "Yes, arching the tongue does help on ascending lip slurs and high notes. But it does NOT contribute to air compression. It actually reduces it a bit before the aperture." The frame of reference for brass players is air flow, hence citing Bernoulli's Principle. Most people aren't going to immediately jump to friction loss. The only people who might jump to that conclusion are probably engineers. A lot of THers seem to be pretending to be such, but I would bet my bottom dollar few of them actually are.

Quote:

On a brass instrument, increase in air flow increases volume (when done right) because it increases the amplitude of the wave pulses we input into the trumpet.

Increasing air pressure increases the loudness, the flow increase will follow.

That's an interesting way of looking at it, but I believe the sequence is off. Here's why: Players increase pressure by both blowing harder to flow more air through the embouchure and adding the proper resistance AT the embouchure so it doesn't blow apart. This does what? Increase the size and strength of individual air pulses as they flow through. This is an increase in pressure and therefore wave amplitude. Each pulse joining the condensation-rarefaction pattern of the vibrating air column has higher pressure, higher amplitude, and therefore higher sound volume when it reaches our ears. It starts with the player blowing harder, otherwise it doesn't happen.

The reason I said increasing the flow increases the volume is because blowing air through the instrument is the way human beings have to play it. We can't do it any other way. I think we are in agreement on this.

If we do disagree, I would love to read some published data. So far no one has really posted any, except the reference to the presentation by Thomas Moore.

_________________
-Tom Hall-

"A good teacher protects his pupils from his own influence."
-Bruce Lee

Seymor B Fudd
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 17 Oct 2015
Posts: 1468
Location: Sweden

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 2:28 am Post subject:

Tpt_Guy wrote:

Seymor B Fudd wrote:

Tpt_Guy wrote:

TrpPro wrote:

Can't separate air and lip vibration. They work as a unit and I believe must be practiced as a unit to successfully learn to play the trumpet.

YES!!!

So let's all take this as a cue to go become better musicians in the practice room, rather than at the keyboard!

Thanks a lot! Finally I got the solid explanation I was looking for!
Now happily returning to my practice room!
_________________
Cornets:
Getzen Custom Series Schilke 143D3/ DW Ultra 1,5 C
Getzen 300 series
Yamaha YCRD2330II
Yamaha YCR6330II
Getzen Eterna Eb
Trumpets:
Yamaha 6335 RC Schilke 14B
King Super 20 Symphony DB (1970)
Selmer Eb/D trumpet (1974)

kalijah
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 5:25 am Post subject:

Quote:

Maybe what was stated before could have been a bit more clear? I say that because it is not apparent that there are two factors causing a decrease in pressure from reading, "Yes, arching the tongue does help on ascending lip slurs and high notes. But it does NOT contribute to air compression. It actually reduces it a bit before the aperture." The frame of reference for brass players is air flow, hence citing Bernoulli's Principle.

Bernoulli's law says TOTAL pressure is constant. It has no bearing on the conversation in this case for a couple of reasons. Also, most people do not understand the nuance of Bernoulli's law and interpret it incorrectly. Just as you have.

Quote:

The only people who might jump to that conclusion are probably engineers. A lot of THers seem to be pretending to be such, but I would bet my bottom dollar few of them actually are.

Are you?

Quote:

That's an interesting way of looking at it, but I believe the sequence is off. Here's why: Players increase pressure by both blowing harder to flow more air through the embouchure and adding the proper resistance AT the embouchure so it doesn't blow apart.

No. Players increase the pressure by blowing harder. THAT IS ALL.

"Adding resistance" does not increase the pressure.

There is no "proper resistance" required at the embouchure. The embouchure sets to play the pitch desired. There is also the dominant resistance from the instrument itself. If the player increases the air pressure by increasing the blowing effort while playing a note, the note will be louder immediately. No "resistance change" is required. The flow will be determined by the total resistance. Most of this being the resistance of the instrument due to its acoustic impedance.

Adding resistance at the embouchure reduces flow, it does NOT increase the pressure.

Quote:

It starts with the player blowing harder, otherwise it doesn't happen.

Correct. If by "blowing" harder you are referring to increasing the blowing effort and therefore the supplied pressure.

Tpt_Guy
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 1101
Location: Sacramento, Ca

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 2:18 pm Post subject:

kalijah wrote:

Quote:

The only people who might jump to that conclusion are probably engineers. A lot of THers seem to be pretending to be such, but I would bet my bottom dollar few of them actually are.

Are you?

Let's keep it civil. Attempting to discredit someone directly tends to make him less receptive to what you have to say, even if you are right. The point of my statement is that because few of us actually ARE engineers, concise explanations are not likely to communicate the point. In order to be understood, clear explanations in this case would require more words and clarification, not less, for us non-engineers and non-physicists.

Quote:

No. Players increase the pressure by blowing harder. THAT IS ALL.

"Adding resistance" does not increase the pressure.

Never said it did by itself. The two work together. I should have said, "by simultaneously blowing harder to flow more air through the embouchure and adding the proper resistance at the embouchure." Resistance is something to blow against. I do understand that the breathing muscles are the source of the air pressure and that there is no other source, but with nothing to blow against, air would rush out in a low-pressure flow and the results wouldn't be ideal. Adding the resistance hinders the air flow, the breathing muscles then have something greater to push against and thus there is greater pressure in the whole system. With this increase in pressure of the entire system, each pulse of air through the aperture is also at a higher pressure.

There is no "proper resistance" required at the embouchure. The embouchure sets to play the pitch desired. There is also the dominant resistance from the instrument itself. If the player increases the air pressure by increasing the blowing effort while playing a note, the note will be louder immediately. No "resistance change" is required. The flow will be determined by the total resistance. Most of this being the resistance of the instrument due to its acoustic impedance.

There have been many instances where I've been fooling around with buddies and increased my dynamic output far beyond something pleasing to hear (aka, over-blowing) and experienced a pitch change simply because I did not act to maintain proper embouchure resistance. So the above explanation doesn't seem practical. Actually, I have had the pitch move UP an entire partial or more, so the resistance factor is a bit more complex than I first postulated. Thanks for giving me something to think about.

And I thought I read on another thread on the subject of tongue arch that impedance peaks diminish as one ascends and are practically nil above E6. This would tend to indicate that as one ascends, the player is supplying an increasing portion of the resistance until he reaches a point where acoustical impedance is no longer a significant factor. It is hinted at earlier in this thread, but I will have to locate that other thread.

Adding resistance at the embouchure reduces flow, it does NOT increase the pressure.

I would tend to agree. Adding resistance while not simultaneously increasing the blowing force makes a smaller aperture, which increases the velocity of the air through it and causes a drop in pressure, but only at that point. The space behind it -- say, through the rest of the respiratory system -- is at an increased pressure, but probably not by much.

Quote:

It starts with the player blowing harder, otherwise it doesn't happen.

Correct. If by "blowing" harder you are referring to increasing the blowing effort and therefore the supplied pressure.

We agree on something!! Woo hoo!! As has been stated already, in a pressure wave system, amplitude = wave pressure. More air compressed into the wave. I seem to recall that you posted this somewhere as well, so I still think we are talking about the same thing. Because I am NOT an engineer or physicist and you seem to be, our language discrepancy seems a barrier and we are arguing the same point.

I know you post on this subject because you want people to understand what is truly happening and dispel some of the quasi-science passed around by trumpet pedagogues. That is appreciated. I am willing to be schooled on this. However, are there any scientific references or studies that we can be referred to for edification? Simply telling me I'm wrong and trying to state how it is without giving me reference material isn't particularly helpful and inspires feelings of contempt. I don't particularly like feeling that way, especially about a fellow trumpeter and someone I've never met. I have looked and can't easily locate anything that helps. You had to learn this stuff from somewhere. I'd like a crack at reading it. I'll save my contempt for the politicians...

_________________
-Tom Hall-

"A good teacher protects his pupils from his own influence."
-Bruce Lee

kalijah
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:50 pm Post subject:

Quote:

That is appreciated. I am willing to be schooled on this. However, are there any scientific references or studies that we can be referred to for edification? Simply telling me I'm wrong and trying to state how it is without giving me reference material isn't particularly helpful and inspires feelings of contempt.

Tom, thanks for the feedback. Thanks for being willing to try to understand my perspective. I have limited time and can't always do lengthy explanations or respond to every thought that is in the weeds..

Not trying to inspire contempt. Sometimes I am brief and to the point.

It IS possible to understand these things in a qualitative sense. But there is significant misunderstanding among players in subjects like this thread.

I cant respond immediately to all the points you brought up in your last post. I hope I can in time.

What is frustrating for me is that terminology is sometimes tossed about that is either undefined or incorrectly defined. IF words have no specific meaning that is agreed upon by the communicating parties then there can be no meaningful communication.

The WORST example is the word air volume. Players, clinicians and teachers are OFTEN using the term "volume" when they define it as "flow". They are not exactly the same thing and they have specific definitions and a specific relation.

Quote:

However, are there any scientific references or studies that we can be referred to for edification?

Tpt_Guy
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 1101
Location: Sacramento, Ca

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:16 pm Post subject:

kalijah wrote:

What is frustrating for me is that terminology is sometimes tossed about that is either undefined or incorrectly defined. IF words have no specific meaning that is agreed upon by the communicating parties then there can be no meaningful communication.

The WORST example is the word air volume. Players, clinicians and teachers are OFTEN using the term "volume" when they define it as "flow". They are not exactly the same thing and they have specific definitions and a specific relation.

I see this also. I try to use the terms correctly. Having limited formal schooling in the subject, it's easy to make (or repeat) a blunder. When I studied chemistry we got into Boyle's Law and how ideal gases behave, so it was pounded into us that volume is a measure of space or the amount of a substance occupying said space. At least I have that going for me.

In retrospect, my statement about increasing flow (blowing harder) causing an increase in volume is a bit ambiguous. I meant volume to be loudness, dynamics.

Quote:

However, are there any scientific references or studies that we can be referred to for edification?

Yes but they tend to be very technical and are not handled as they relate to playing an instrument. Some music professor types try to relate the science but they do it very poorly. Because they are not strong on the nuance of the actual science. So they usually resort to the same old myths, like air velocity determines pitch , etc.

I've heard it defined in terms of air speed - "faster air speed is higher pitch." I think it's misunderstood because people can confuse the speed of the vibrations (faster vibration IS higher in pitch) with flow velocity. Not really related. Once I figured that out I stopped overblowing.

But don't lose hope. My video blog will be coming on soon where I can more effectively help players understand.

I eagerly wait!

_________________
-Tom Hall-

"A good teacher protects his pupils from his own influence."
-Bruce Lee

Seymor B Fudd
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 17 Oct 2015
Posts: 1468
Location: Sweden

Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 1:13 am Post subject:

kalijah wrote:

Quote:

However, are there any scientific references or studies that we can be referred to for edification?

So here I was, sitting in my practice room diligently doing my chores. Then in a break I opened the TH again....
In the meantime I had roamed the net finding: www.khanacademy.org
There you'll find a discussion of Bernouilli's principle as well as the Venturieffect.
And now for some new musical challenges: my efforts to use the tongue arch
ps: a question: as the compressed air tries to evacuate through the aperture
(water is not compressable air is?) - would it be correct to assume that the loss of pressure is transformed into kinetic energy? Just wanting to understand. Something must set the air molecules in motion?!
_________________
Cornets:
Getzen Custom Series Schilke 143D3/ DW Ultra 1,5 C
Getzen 300 series
Yamaha YCRD2330II
Yamaha YCR6330II
Getzen Eterna Eb
Trumpets:
Yamaha 6335 RC Schilke 14B
King Super 20 Symphony DB (1970)
Selmer Eb/D trumpet (1974)

Lionel
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 25 Jul 2016
Posts: 783

Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:45 pm Post subject:

Seymor B Fudd wrote:

Seymor,

There exists some kind of occillation of the air inside the brass tube we know of as a trumpet when we play it. Or any brass instrument or tube which we buzz in to. From what Ive been told this air column tends to divide into portions as we buzz. On your low C? Two portions of the air column vibrate simultaneously. G above low C? Three groups. As the pitch rises the division of the stationary waves incrrases until the trumpet player hits his cut off point.

As in river rafting the wave is stationary while the medium flows. Ie: in water the wave stays put while the water continues. In trumpets the wave is also stationary. In either case as soon as the medium is shut off? The wave disappears.

When the dam builders close the lock gates? No more wave. Stop blowing air through your horn? No more wave. Or sound.

So yes the release of pressurized air through the mouthpiece produces a form of kinetic energy. It was always kinetic however. Just changed from one form of energy to another. Meanwhile producing a sound along the way.

However these kinds of discussions only satisfy certain curiosities we have. One could be totally oblivious to all the laws of physics and still blow a triple C. Another guy could have a doctorate in physics and not blow even a tuning note.

I put these kinds of topics into the category of interesting matters but basically useless towards playing the trumpet. On occasion Ive seen those supposed high note gurus post all sorts of these true but useless facts into their books. I guess it helps them sell their work but it doesnt do a thing to help anyone. The farmer has grown wheat for thousands of years without knowing that nuclear fusion in our sun is what produces the light rays which grow his crop...

Next: I'm going to be generous here with the tongue arch for range (TAFR) advocates. They probably don't deserve it but I will admit that some kind of forward movement of the tongue may greatly assist range production in some trumpet player. Am in realization that this wasnt your question Seymor but once in a while I get a bug up my ear and cant resist setting the record straight...

Yet if this forward or upward tongue movement does assist in high range production (and often it does not)? It can not be due to the creation of "faster air " within the mouth. These TAFR types are confusing the action of whistling through the mouth. Yes in whistling the tongue does rise, constrict the airflow and raise the pitch. Thus our TAFR fellows have naturally if mistakenly inferred there exists a correlation between the movement of tongue restricting the mouth cavity in whistling. Then applied their mistaken assumption to trumpet playiing.

However the restriction of the airstream inside the mouth is 100% irrelevant to playing higher notes. If we were to put any stock into their poor logic we might also conclude that fish create the ocean's waves. Or that seals cause the tides. I assure all that the concepts of the TAFR types are equally ridiculous.

Now had they just said,

"well shucks I move my tongue up and forward becayse it helps get a fat sound above high C"?

I would respect that position.
_________________
"Check me if I'm wrong Sandy but if I kill all the golfers they're gonna lock me up & throw away the key"!

Carl Spackler (aka Bill Murray, 1980).

Last edited by Lionel on Thu Jul 27, 2017 1:57 pm; edited 1 time in total

Tpt_Guy
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 1101
Location: Sacramento, Ca

Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 1:56 pm Post subject:

Lionel wrote:

There exists some kind of occillation of the air inside the brass tube we know of as a trumpet when we play it. Or any brass instrument or tube which we buzz in to. From what Ive been told this air column tends to divide into portions as we buzz. On your low C? Two portions of the air column vibrate simultaneously. G above low C? Three groups. As the pitch rises the division of the stationary waves incrrases until the trumpet player hits his cut off point.

...

However these kinds of discussions only satisfy certain curiosities we have.

Renold Schilke wrote a paper about this:

http://dallasmusic.org/schilke/Brass%20Clinic.html

I found it rather interesting.

http://cnx.org/resources/33b9e3ffe9c26b229df13bf3ee8b5146f96e8905/Figure_18_05_08a.jpg

This is a picture showing vibrational patterns in a string going up from the fundamental at the left. Progressing to the right corresponds to moving up the harmonics. On a trumpet, we don't start at the fundamental. Low C is actually the first harmonic. For an explanation of why our Low C is really the first harmonic, go here:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Music/trumpet.html

Lots of other goodies there, as well.
_________________
-Tom Hall-

"A good teacher protects his pupils from his own influence."
-Bruce Lee

Lionel
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 25 Jul 2016
Posts: 783

Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 2:02 pm Post subject:

Yeah I get it Tom. Btw: always enjoyed your hits back in the '70's. Esp "Harper Valley PTA & "Clayton Delaney". Never knew you played trumpet. Kinda makes sense though. Cuz I hate to say it but your voice has really gone to hell... _________________ "Check me if I'm wrong Sandy but if I kill all the golfers they're gonna lock me up & throw away the key"! Carl Spackler (aka Bill Murray, 1980).

Tpt_Guy
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 1101
Location: Sacramento, Ca

Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 2:06 pm Post subject:

Lionel wrote:

Yeah I get it Tom.

Btw: always enjoyed your hits back in the '70's. Esp "Harper Valley PTA & "Clayton Delaney".

Never knew you played trumpet. Kinda makes sense though. Cuz I hate to say it but your voice has really gone to hell...

Thanks for the kind words, but I think I may have been confused for someone else. I couldn't possibly have any hits from the '70s...I was born in '81.
_________________
-Tom Hall-

"A good teacher protects his pupils from his own influence."
-Bruce Lee

kalijah
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama

Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 7:18 pm Post subject:

Quote:

These TAFR types are confusing the action of whistling through the mouth. Yes in whistling the tongue does rise, constrict the airflow and raise the pitch.

The reason that pitch changes when whistling has nothing to do with "constriction". When whistling, the oral space is the resonating cavity. This is a type of a Helmholtz resonance. Smaller cavities resonante at a higher pitch.

Seymore asked:

Quote:

ps: a question: as the compressed air tries to evacuate through the aperture - would it be correct to assume that the loss of pressure is transformed into kinetic energy? Just wanting to understand. Something must set the air molecules in motion?!

The loss of air pressure due to viscous losses is converted to heat primarily. This can not be recovered.

As pressurized air escapes through the playng aperture:

If you were blowing into ambient air, yes, the air would have more kinetic energy at the expense of the static pressure that is the source. (It would be completely kinetic) But its energy would be LESS than the static pressure that supplied it due to viscous losses.

But in the case of playing we are not blowing into the atmosphere, but yet into another pressure (on average) that is above ambient pressure. You are, in effect, "blowing up" the air pressure in the tone such that it is nearly the same pressure as the supply, This REQUIRES a flow of air on each pulstion cycle. These cycles happen so frequently that if "feels" as a steady stream of air into an existing pressure. This tonal pressure is what players describe as "back-pressure" or "resistance".

The air molecules are already in motion. Even in a static pressure.

Lionel
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 25 Jul 2016
Posts: 783

Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 8:29 pm Post subject:

Tpt_Guy wrote:

Lionel wrote:

Yeah I get it Tom.

Btw: always enjoyed your hits back in the '70's. Esp i"Harper Valley PTA & "Clayton Delaney".

Never knew you played trumpet. Kinda makes sense though. Cuz I hate to say it but your voice has really gone to hell...

Thanks for the kind words, but I think I may have been confused for someone else. I couldn't possibly have any hits from the '70s...I was born in '81.

Oh thats right! Got you mixed up with Tom T Hall. Of "Old Dogs, Children. Watermelon Wine".

Well DUH! Lol.

At one time Mr Tom T had 9 hits tunes of his on the Billboard 100. Mostly a Country songwriter he did pull off several hits under his own singing.
_________________
"Check me if I'm wrong Sandy but if I kill all the golfers they're gonna lock me up & throw away the key"!

Carl Spackler (aka Bill Murray, 1980).

JVL
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 07 Feb 2016
Posts: 894
Location: Nissa, France

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 2:22 am Post subject:

i hope the OP got the answer(s) he was looking for

Seymor B Fudd
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 17 Oct 2015
Posts: 1468
Location: Sweden

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:48 am Post subject:

JVL wrote:

i hope the OP got the answer(s) he was looking for

well the poor guy as well as becoming able to fix high notes might, by now, also have deloped a good endurance.....
As Don Herman wrote already in the second post there seems to be a .....ahum....slight tendency to all sorts of physical distractions..
Being very guilty of having added to these distractions, however, I do think that something valuable has come out of our discussions.
Personally, having devoted my professional life to the understanding of human nature (did I succeed? well at least I got under way..)I always had this interest in understanding the nature of things.
We have tried to deconstruct compression/pressure/the "ill-fated" where abouts of all that air we try to project into our mouthpieces etc.
I just love reading the llinks provided by tpt_guy. Kalijah did his best to clarify - thanks. Hopefully the OP could forgive me for being one of the hi jackers...
We have saying over here "warum etwas einfach machen wenn es so Schön kompliziert werden kann" meaning "why put it simple when it's so rewarding to obfuscate..."
E.g raising your tongue does not constrict the air, it reduces the available space through which said air can pass raising the pitch. So getting the ability to play higher up does not mean that you have blow harder getting a red face.
Maybe Lionel ment that, not constricting but restricting?
At least I have gotten a lot to think about. E.g. why my horns produce different tonal colors, why some are more playable high up, why all the air I collect from the bottom of my lungs does not hit innocent bystanders.
Always knew it didn't but not why!
Still I might have gotten it all, or some, wrong?

Over and out.
_________________
Cornets:
Getzen Custom Series Schilke 143D3/ DW Ultra 1,5 C
Getzen 300 series
Yamaha YCRD2330II
Yamaha YCR6330II
Getzen Eterna Eb
Trumpets:
Yamaha 6335 RC Schilke 14B
King Super 20 Symphony DB (1970)
Selmer Eb/D trumpet (1974)

Last edited by Seymor B Fudd on Fri Jul 28, 2017 9:02 am; edited 1 time in total

kalijah
Heavyweight Member

Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 4:26 am Post subject:

There were some comments by Tom that I wanted to respond to in time. Well, I have some time.

Tom wrote:

Quote:

Resistance is something to blow against.

And when playing there is ALWAYS a resistance present to "blow against". Not only from the aperure but also, and PRIMARILY, from the instrument tone itself.

(I write instrument "tone" because the instrument itself provides very little resistance to simple air flow. The mp throat being the primary contributor in that case.)

Quote:

I do understand that the breathing muscles are the source of the air pressure and that there is no other source, but with nothing to blow against, air would rush out in a low-pressure flow and the results wouldn't be ideal.

But, again, when playing there is always something to blow against. ALWAYS.

Quote:

Adding the resistance hinders the air flow,

Increasing an existing resistance reduces the air flow. If that is what you mean by "hinders".

Quote:

the breathing muscles then have something greater to push against and thus there is greater pressure in the whole system.

FALSE. An increase in the resistance does not change the supplied pressure or increase it. It will, however, reduce the flow.

Note: in certain systems and cases, the "self resistance" of the system supplying the pressure and flow will come into play for high flows. This is not the case for playing because the resistance of the instrument/aperture is MUCH greater than the resistance of the airway from the lungs to the aperture. EVEN FOR THE LOWEST NOTES.

This concept is ignored or not understood by many of the "fast air" or "compressions" videos that are on Youtube. Namely the one referenced earlier by Charlie Porter in his "3 compressions" videos. (Where he also failed to mention the instrument itself as the primary resistance.)

Quote:

With this increase in pressure of the entire system, each pulse of air through the aperture is also at a higher pressure.

But the increase of pressure can ONLY be supplied by the blowing effort. And yes. The tone will be louder. AND a bit more air flow will be required as well.

Display posts from previous:

	trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> High Range Development	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

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