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

CSC



 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Pedagogy
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
goldenhornplayer
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 22 Nov 2001
Posts: 1123
Location: Winston-Salem, NC

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 5:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Ed--

I'm trying to close the SC vs CC thread and continue under this new thread called CSC for Current Superchops.

Your comment: "I have discovered that I have a problem with either approach. Even though I thought I was making progress with a closed embouchere I find that I am puffing. It's hard to describe but I am blowing the lips open slightly as I articulate. I am now trying to concentrate on closed and my tone is ratty."

You'll discover that Jerome doesn't think in terms of open or closed embouchure in CSC. What's important is that the buzz or vibration occur between the top lip and tongue primarily. So, if anything is "closed" it's the tongue against the top lip. I did notice, in observing Jerome spit buzz, that his top lip, just in the very center, does puff out slightly on every articulation. This is caused by the center of the tongue striking the back of the top lip and is normal for this technique.
_________________
Psalm 98:6
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Kirk 1
New Member


Joined: 27 Jan 2002
Posts: 2
Location: Richmond Virginia

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote]
On 2002-02-11 11:31, bugleboy wrote:
Ken,

Whatever you decide will accomodate me. The important thing is that it accomodate you. If you use abbreviations that get confused with another method, sometimes the perceptions get muddled. For example, I would have thought this thread was a discussion pitting Super Chops against Carmine Caruso.

Also, the weakness in using the term "current" to define an approach by Jerry Callet is that the current today may not be the current tomorrow. Maybe his initials need to be dated, something like JC01, JC02, etc. Then, for example, JC02 would always mean the way Jerry callet was teaching in 2002. It does get confusing though if he refers to two different approaches by the same name. Maybe the SC abbreviation needs to be dated to be more precise.

Whatever you guys figure out will be fine with me.




_________________
Charles Raymond

Mr Raymond makes very valid points which I really wish that Ken would pay attention to. Using the term "current" is just going to keep people confused. I mean just look at what can be considered "current"
I log onto the http://www.callet.com site and see the picture and explanation.
I log onto the http://www.super-chops.com site and yet another picture and poorly explained explanation different from the other site.
Now in the forum Ken Barnes is telling of yet another explanation and another picture.
There is a Superchops forum on this site where the actual Superchops book is is "currently" being shared discussed and taught by those who benefited from it. I mean some innovative ideas keep emerging on how to make even the original SC applicable to more people without contradicting the original book. That can also be called "current Superchops" CSC.
This is becoming insane because without some sort of time date stamp on the frequent changes that Mr Callet keeps making then the use of the term "current" is highly ineffective.
The continuing use of the term Superchops is equally ineffective based on the radical changes which Mr Barnes claims has happened.
I would suggest that Callet's current teachings should be organized into an understandable book format and renamed so the confusion will end.
It seems to me that the best way to handle this is to use a name like Callet's ongoing journey star date log 2-12-2002

Kirk

[ This Message was edited by: Kirk 1 on 2002-02-12 15:46 ]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tptgeek
New Member


Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 7:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I brought the replies over from the SC vs CC thread. I don't want them to go away because im studying this whole SC mess whatever SC is suppose to be. Maybe others can benefit.

Author SC vs CC
goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-02 11:37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm wondering if there are enough CC (Current Callet) students tuned in to start a thread comparing SC (as in the 1987 book) to CC. As many may be aware, there was a vote on the SC forum not to add in the newer ideas from Jerome Callet. In essence, that move left the last 15 years of Jerome's important work uncovered on the SC forum. It seems logical that this is an appropriate subject for the pedagogy forum. Since CC represents significant changes from the SC book of 1987, I would be interested is pursuing the discovery of these changes and hopefully doing that without inviting "flammers". The purpose of this thread should be to discover new things that some will find helpful.
_________________
Ken Barnes-Current Callet Student

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

dbacon
Veteran Member

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 200 Posted: 2002-02-02 13:24
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please, keep the Callet stuff in one forum.

Dave Bacon

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

edtaylor
Regular Member

Joined: Dec 24, 2001
Posts: 41
From: Brevard, NC
Posted: 2002-02-02 13:29
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken, I would certainly be interested in a good comparison in order to be sure which approach is best for me. I want to know all I can glean about different approaches to better understand similarities and differences. Also, I promise to participate with neither complaint nor attack.
By His love, Ed Taylor

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-02 13:42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed-I've just sent you privately by e-mail a somewhat detailed description of the differences, as I understand them. It's just too much to reprint here. For anyone who is unaware of the basic, underlying difference, it is found in the use of the tongue. In book SC, compression is formed between the top and bottom lips. In CC, compression is formed between the top of the tongue and the top lip. These contrasting approaches result in different relative positions of the lips and tongue.
_________________
Ken Barnes-Current Callet Student

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tom turner
Veteran Member

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 281 Posted: 2002-02-02 14:06
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Ken,

I know that you've talked to Callet this week about all this stuff, hopefully including your offer to help him update his book.

Does he intend to update his book to incorporate the differences he now teaches.

What was his reply?

Thanks a bunch!

Sincerely,

Tom Turner



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-02 14:42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Tom--If you look back at our posts, you will not find anywhere that I said I would help Jerome with his next book. For some reason, that was a thought you inserted along the way. What I did say, was something to the effect, that being involved in a future book was far beyond what I had in mind. As I have repeatedly stated, all I want to do is attempt to shed some light on current Callet ideas. In that vein, I am hopeful this thread will invite other current Callet students to share their perspective on the newer information. In the end, the goal would be to extract as much helpful information from current Callet teachings as possible for those who would want to know it. Also, as you already know, Jerome has said he does not currently have time to write a new book.

_________________
Ken Barnes-Current Callet Student

[ This Message was edited by: goldenhornplayer on 2002-02-02 14:44 ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Roddyo-iii<O
Veteran Member

Joined: Nov 24, 2001
Posts: 241
From: Wales
Posted: 2002-02-02 16:56
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave says: Please, keep the Callet stuff in one forum.

I agree!

Roddy o-iii<O
_________________
Roddy o-iii<O website
http://www.R-o-d-d-y-T-r-u-m-p-e-t.cC

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-02 20:11
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roddy--Perhaps you and Dave should consider two things which may affect your perspective. First, read the objective of the Pedagogy forum. Second, the SC forum does not allow the discussion of Callet's current teachings. Clearly, SC (book) and CC are both valid approaches of Superchops and by definition belong under this forum as it relates to the differences in the two approaches. Nobody is forcing either of you to spend any time reading this and it is being offered to those who want to benefit from it. Finally, I don't believe it's your call or Dave's call as to what subject matter appears under this forum. As for me, I don't intend to respond to either of you further. I will only be responsive to those who have something of value to offer or to someone with a legitimate question pertaining to the subject.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

histrumpet
Veteran Member

Joined: Nov 11, 2001
Posts: 129
From: Mobile, Alabama
Posted: 2002-02-02 20:42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken,
If you continue to neglect the use of good social skills, you may find that soon you will have no one to respond to.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

airegin
Veteran Member

Joined: Nov 08, 2001
Posts: 106
From: Marco Island, Fl
Posted: 2002-02-02 23:04
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm certainly interested in reading more about CC, not necessarily the differences between CC and SC though I'm sure they will surface.

The system administrator has said that it would be ok for CC to be discussed ouside of the SC forum since it was recently banned there. Thank You!

In the not-so-distant past I've pestered posters in threads where I haven't understood what was being dicussed and I honestly didn't have any real interest in learning what was being shared. I was a thread-crasher and for that I apologize If I don't care about a thread, why should I spoil it for those who do??

_________________
Rob Lauderdale

[ This Message was edited by: airegin on 2002-02-02 23:21 ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bj
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 14, 2001
Posts: 26
From: Scotland
Posted: 2002-02-03 03:48
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On 2002-02-02 20:11, goldenhornplayer wrote:
As for me, I don't intend to respond to either of you further. I will only be responsive to those who have something of value to offer or to someone with a legitimate question pertaining to the subject.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hello Ken
Why so defensive? All Roddy said was that Callet should be in one forum. I thought that was what you wanted. When you became active on the forums you contributed strongly to the SC forum rather than create your own based on current Callet teaching - that developement seems to have come about after you were voted off the island.
Ideally for those of us on the outside it would be easier in one forum (if you superchoppers could get along) but the tone of some of the exchanges between Lee and yourself would seem to preclude that (especially as it is Lee's little pond).
Just because some people would prefer to see one forum dedicated to Callet and SC it doesn't mean that anybody is being critical of you - just that as you are all talking about the teachings of one man it could be discussed in one forum. Have you considered that some of us are amazed at the depths of feeling and entrenched positions of two groups of people dedicated to the study of the teachings of the same man?
Don't see reds under the bed everywhere, I don't think Roddy was attacking you, just expressing an opinion that all SC should be on one forum - that is not an attack on you, merely a wish to see all SC in the one place.
yours (not a red under the bed)
Brian Jones


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeff Lambardino
Regular Member

Joined: Dec 06, 2001
Posts: 14 Posted: 2002-02-03 09:41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bj

Just to clarify the facts. There were no public exchange(s) in the SC forum between Lee and Ken. Only one reply was ever on record from Lee to Ken when Lee set up the continuing Callet threads for Ken. It clearly stated that Lee had done everything that Ken asked of him short and simple. bj if you want indicte or pass this mess off on Lee then you have absolutely no case to present. In fact Lee set up threads for the CC even after Ken had brought confusion and contradiction that disrupted the SC forum.
Please be advised if you closely study the statements made by the SC forum moderator in the threads called, statement of purpose, vote, vote results, all of these show a willingness on Lee's part to accomodate Ken and CC.
Let me also point out that Lee graciously offered to reinstate CC in the future(Vote Results Thread) once the presentation of it(CC)and the questions and challenges presented to it could be better answered and dealt with in a public forum.
Even with Lee's continued desire and offer to accomodate CC in the future. Lee told me as of Saturday night that NO ONE including Ken Barnes has contacted him with a willingness to work out the details so CC and SC can coexist on the same forum.
Lee did state to me that he has contacted a current Callet student this past Wednesday who showed some interest in working together with Lee to keep the two on the same forum. The effort put forth by Lee is commendable. He has been genuine and sincere in trying to keep controversy and bad publicity from happening for the name of SC and Callet.

Even though CC was voted off by the users and viewers of the SC forum. Lee allowed the users to make the decision by taking a vote. So bj your statement of calling it Lee's pond is very false in fact it's slanderous.
Anyone who followed the recent folly in the SC forum knows that this is not a Ken vs Lee issue as bj has indicated that is a gross misrepresentation which I simply will not stand for. The users of the SC forum decided the recent turn of events to remove CC from the island 39 to 6.
While Lee still with open arms offered to work with the losing party. Lee was even the first one to make the move at restoring unity.
So let's keep the facts straight about who has been willing to work together and those who have their own missions.

Jeff Lambardino

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

trumpetteacher1
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 49
From: Garland, Texas
Posted: 2002-02-03 11:23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian, Roddy, Dave,

Last time I looked, there was no Callet forum on the Trumpet Herald. There IS, however, a Superchops forum.

The two are not the same. Jerry has taken a significantly different turn, which is not explained in book form. Whether or not his new ideas will be shown to work, or be simply another numbers game, is anybody's guess.

SC by itself can be very confusing. The contributors to the SC forum have gone out of their way to present SC in the most rigorous, replicatabe way possible. For that reason, the "new" stuff has been toned down.

But Ken is very sold on the newer stuff, and insists upon posting it out here on the open forum.

I cannot fathom why it would upset you in any way.

Jeff Smiley

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-03 14:22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Has anyone else, besides me, noticed that we still have not been able to begin a meaningful discussion of CC in this thread. Some opposition to this is from well-meaning Superchoppers who are concerned about confusion being created as we attempt to "interpret" current Callet teachings. While this may come as a surprise, I do understand and appreciate this concern and it is a very real possibility. It would be helpful to us all if Jerome would update and reprint the SC book but that doesn't appear to be forthcoming. In lieu of that, the only way I see to begin discovering CC, without taking direct lessons from Jerome, is by participation of those who continue to study with Jerome. Of course, I can well understand why any of those people would hesitate to get involved, in an effort like this, having seen how I have been attacked. This effort I continue to make is not for me, since I am a direct and current Callet student, but is being made of behalf of others who might find it helpful. What started out as a simple effort to share some new information and to get others involved has turned into nothing more than having to defend myself. It seems to me that this is too important to give up on. I never started this thinking I would be going it alone. Why don't we try this--If no one else will post helpful things that they have recently learned from Jerome and, if there are no sincere and specific questions about CC, then let's just let this thread die. Above all, let's all not continue to waste our valuable time debating things that have no real concequence. Sincerely, Ken Barnes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bj
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 14, 2001
Posts: 26
From: Scotland
Posted: 2002-02-03 18:43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Jeff
Where to start? I wasn't "trying to pass this mess" onto Lee. The trouble with this SC business is that everyone thinks that every post is a personal attack on them and what they believe in - relax mom and apple pie are safe.
Both sides profess to follow the teachings of Callet and those of us on the outside who wish to learn are becoming confused and disillusioned. Not only do you fight each other but you attack people who wish to learn.
From an outsiders perspective when I came to this forum it was populated by people who believed in Jerome Callets Superchops. Jerome Callet and the term superchops being always linked together.
After the appearence of Ken Barnes it appears that Callet has moved on and abandoned/evolved his own teachings and boy does it then get messy as it is SC now and not Jerry Callets' Superchops. I never knew this - did anyone else?
I thought that the SC forum was "Lee's pond" (a turn of phrase, perhaps unfortunate - sorry of it offended) as he was the moderator. I also thought that Ken not being able to post about Current Callet there currently had something to do with the moderator - sorry for the misconception.
I also didn't mean to represent it as a Lee vs Ken issue. If Ken is telling the truth about his lessons with Callet, and you take issue with what Ken says then it is Callet vs SC rather than Ken vs Lee.
I wish to learn about SC but do you know? I have never, ever seen such a sensitive bunch of people in my life. Both sides seem to think that any post that isn't an "I too" post is a threat to be jumped all over.
I see the SC forum as a potentially great resource. Where else can you get so many SC exponents in one place? Sadly it is being wasted by the in fighting and the attitude of and suspicions of both sides.
Let me also say I think anyone who devotes the time an energy to moderate a group should be commended, that includes Lee, John et al.
I didn't mean to slander Lee and you have read far more into my post than I meant but hell, sue me, you are very keen on it over there I hear.
yours disappointedly
Brian Jones

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 Next Page )
Author SC vs CC
edtaylor
Regular Member

Joined: Dec 24, 2001
Posts: 41
From: Brevard, NC
Posted: 2002-02-03 20:27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi to all,
Most may think me a bit nutty to be trying this, but I am trying both SC and CC. My thought is to see which gets me to the dubbas first. The approaches are mutually exclusive, but since both are based upon lip compression I don't think I can do any damage other than slowing my progress. I am about at the point of choosing CC because I seem to have more control from middle to high C than with SC, and I am not into dubbas yet. However, that has only to do with me and is not worth debating. I really would like a forum that we could freely express our progress and problems with more light than heat.

By His Love, Ed Taylor

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jim
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 13, 2001
Posts: 37 Posted: 2002-02-07 21:52
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bickering between posters has nothing to do with pedagogy. Please don't foul a great website with pettiness. As a member who really enjoys the knowledge-laden discourse of the many learned practitioners of the trumpeters' art as offered in this forum, I must state that reading non-trumpet-related, venemous posts is not pleasant. Just my thoughts, Jim

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

trptsbaker
Regular Member

Joined: Jan 01, 2002
Posts: 18
From: t.baker
Posted: 2002-02-07 22:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is amazing. Really. If someone wanted to find out about JC, SC, CC, or any other Callet-oriented pedagogy, and was unfortunate enough to read it here first, that person would most likely say "forget about it" and get out the old "Double-High C in 37 Weeks" book and start blowing. Jerome Callet has had an impact on the trumpet world, for better or worse, hopefully for the better. He means well, anyhow. Respectfully, Tom Baker.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

airegin
Veteran Member

Joined: Nov 08, 2001
Posts: 106
From: Marco Island, Fl
Posted: 2002-02-07 23:23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, in CC, with the teeth apart, the top lip comes towards the center, down( below top teeth edge) and slighty in to meet the tongue "top" and bottom lip, while the bottom lip comes towards the center, up( above bottom teeth edge) and slightly in to meet the top lip and tongue "tip".................right?

Rob
_________________
Rob Lauderdale

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-08 08:09
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob wrote: "So, in CC, with the teeth apart, the top lip comes towards the center, down( below top teeth edge) and slighty in to meet the tongue "top" and bottom lip, while the bottom lip comes towards the center, up( above bottom teeth edge) and slightly in to meet the top lip and tongue "tip".................right?"

Rob--sounds like you've got the right idea. What Jerome is currently teaching seems to center around just a few concepts. One basic is learning to get the lips thick in the center which some might think of as puckering. In this case it's a pucker from the sides toward the center and not a pucker outward. Another basic is positioning the lips and tongue so that the top lip, in particular, can have easy access to the top of the tongue. As you described, the bottom edge of the top lip needs to be kept below the cutting edge of the top teeth in order to be accessible to the top of the tongue. With the tongue "beveled" in front, both lips are able to come inward on the tongue top surface. Jerome refers to this as encircling the tongue but that is a little misleading. What we're really doing is forming a circle with the lips as we compress them on a spot on the top of the tongue a short distance back from the tip. This helps to accomplish the goal of getting the lips and tongue is the proper position. Another basic is keeping the tongue tip located on the top, inside of the bottom lip. Of course, a very important basic is keeping the tongue forward and "beveled" and the teeth apart. Finally, there is the basic of creating the vibration or buzz primarily between the top lip and the top of the tongue. Some "sympathetic" buzzing will occur in the bottom lip too but that's not the main objective. I hope this helps to confirm and clarify your thoughts on CC.
_________________
Ken Barnes-Current Callet Student

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don Herman
Veteran Member

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 205
From: Monument, CO, USA
Posted: 2002-02-08 10:41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken -- I'm not an SC (or CC) student, but I am (eternally) curious... Your description above of the "pucker towards the center" has me wondering. Previous SC posts said that Mr. Callet advocated essentially no lip curl. However, if I try to pucker towards the center without puckering outwards as (I think) you described, I am forced to slightly curl my lips to prevent puckering outwards. Is this the way it works, and perhaps another difference between SC and the current Callet teachings? (CC to me is Carmine Caruso, sorry...)

Thanks for your descriptions, and for fueling the fires without fanning the flames. - Don
_________________
Don Herman/Monument, CO

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-08 18:19
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Don and welcome. There's certainly nothing wrong with being curious. Your statement as follows:

"However, if I try to pucker towards the center without puckering outwards as (I think) you described, I am forced to slightly curl my lips to prevent puckering outwards."

The idea of puckering the lips, from the sides and toward the center, is Jerome's way of simply thickening the lips in the center. He is also thinking primarily about the top lip and he's after getting the top lip to be nice and "fleshy" in the center. This is as opposed to pulling back the corners and stretching the lips and making them thinner. In the lower register, the lips can be very relaxed and even allowed to pucker outward slightly but, as you ascend, the top and bottom lips come inward on the top of the beveled tongue. Of course, we're mainly concentrating on the top lip and tongue relationship and making sure the top lip, not only comes down on the tongue, but inward on the tongue as well. In that sense, the top lip is not "curling" but simply gripping or pressing against the tongue. That's why you'll hear about the buzzing being between the soft inner tissue of the top lip and the tongue. If you curl too much, you get on the firmer part of the top lip and that's not good for CC. I realize these ideas are very different from how most folks play but this is what Jerome has come up with and it seems to work exceedingly well.
_________________
Ken Barnes-Current Callet Student

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don Herman
Veteran Member

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 205
From: Monument, CO, USA
Posted: 2002-02-09 16:51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Think I got it -- thanks!

The whole tounge bit is curious (to me anyway). The times in the past (take with large block of salt) anything advocating such a tounge position (or anywhere close) was pretty much a "learning" tool to help set the lips, like Caruso's and Callet's "spit a seed off the tounge" advice. Once lip position was learned, the tounge was allowed (encouraged, usually) to drop down and allow a more open (resonant) oral cavity and stimulate a larger airflow. This newest CC material may not follow that trend, since it seems to exaggerate it more than most (again, "most" being a pretty small number of comparisons for me).

Very interesting, nonetheless, and it certainly seems to be helping people. Like most things, it takes a bit to figure out if it will help or hurt. Certainly having a good teacher is far and away the best thing to do, but at least there are plenty of souls on TH willing to do all they can for long distance learning.

Peace - Don
_________________
Don Herman/Monument, CO

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wtrager
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 20 Posted: 2002-02-10 21:38
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this the way it works, and perhaps another difference between SC and the current Callet teachings? (CC to me is Carmine Caruso, sorry...)"
Don,
You bring up a very good point. Frankly, I'm getting confused with the use of the initials CC. We have a Carmine Caruso forum, and so I keep thinking Caruso everytime the term CC is mentioned. Perhaps we can collectively come up with terms to define each technique being discussed. i.e.- Caruso(CC), SuperChops(SC), Callet's present teachings as (JC), Callet's early trumpet yoga as either (TY, or BE, or something). Jerry lives fairly close to me, and I have had the opportunity to meet with him on several occasions. I have a lot of respect for the man, but the problem that I see is that Trumpet Yoga is juxtiposed to Super Chops, and what Ken is describing as current Callet is somewhat juxtiposed to Super Chops. Frankly, I find it all very confusing. Maybe that's why I love Caruso so much.
Sincerely,
Wayne
http://communities.msn.com/TragerTrumpetTalk


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bugleboy
Carmine Caruso Forum Moderator

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 197
From: Tampa Bay, FL
Posted: 2002-02-11 03:14
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree completely. Plus I already referred to Carmine Caruso in the old forum as CC, and since CC are his initials they ought to be reserved as an abbreviated reference to him. Much more logical.

Maybe something like JC2 or JCC would be better for the current Callet approach.

_________________
Charles Raymond

[ This Message was edited by: bugleboy on 2002-02-11 03:21 ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lee Adams
Superchops Forum Moderator

Joined: Nov 07, 2001
Posts: 70
From: Atlanta, Ga
Posted: 2002-02-11 09:26
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A few weeks ago I set up a thread for Ken Barnes and others to use in the SC Forum.
I named it Callet's Continuing Works because I knew that CC was already being used in the forum for Carmine Caruso.
Anyway the thread had to be removed because of controversy and negativity but maybe the initials based on that thread where Callet's newest incarnation was first discussed could be used?

Callet's Continuing Works= CCW

Just an idea to prevent any further confusion.

As always AAtozhvac@cs.com 706-347-2429

Lee Adams



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-11 09:29
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles and Wayne--Good points. Obviously, this is something I had not considered when I came up with CC (Current Callet) designation. Jerome still calls what he is currently teaching Superchops but, as you know, there was a need to differentiate between the old and new approaches. Maybe we need to use CCSC for Current Callet Superchops. I certainly don't have a problem with that and, if it will reduce confusion, we probably should make that change. Thanks for the suggestion.
_________________
Ken Barnes-Current Callet Student

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bugleboy
Carmine Caruso Forum Moderator

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 197
From: Tampa Bay, FL
Posted: 2002-02-11 10:41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why not SC2 (as in SC also). The fewer letters the better. Just a thought. Trying to keep the two Cs from being together.
_________________
Charles Raymond

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-11 10:57
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles- I sure do want to come up with something to accomodate you and, apparently, it needs to be something without 2 C's together. How about CSC for Current Superchops? Do you see any conflict there? The reasoning behind CSC is that SC is Callet anyway so putting a C for Callet is redundant. I think it is important to have the C for current because as long as Jerome is around, his approach is likely to continue to evolve. By using CSC, we'll always be referring to what he is currently teaching. Thanks-Ken.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bugleboy
Carmine Caruso Forum Moderator

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 197
From: Tampa Bay, FL
Posted: 2002-02-11 11:31
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken,

Whatever you decide will accomodate me. The important thing is that it accomodate you. If you use abbreviations that get confused with another method, sometimes the perceptions get muddled. For example, I would have thought this thread was a discussion pitting Super Chops against Carmine Caruso.

Also, the weakness in using the term "current" to define an approach by Jerry Callet is that the current today may not be the current tomorrow. Maybe his initials need to be dated, something like JC01, JC02, etc. Then, for example, JC02 would always mean the way Jerry callet was teaching in 2002. It does get confusing though if he refers to two different approaches by the same name. Maybe the SC abbreviation needs to be dated to be more precise.

Whatever you guys figure out will be fine with me.




_________________
Charles Raymond

[ This Message was edited by: bugleboy on 2002-02-11 11:32 ]


Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 )
Author SC vs CC
goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-11 11:49
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles--My immediate concern, that you first raised, is to remove any confusion caused to your forum by using the letters CC. It sounds like using CSC for now, for current Superchops, will be fine as far as you're concerned. You're right that we may need to come up with some way of dating current teachings from Jerome but that's our problem. We can certainly address that as we go along. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Sincerely, Ken Barnes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

edtaylor
Regular Member

Joined: Dec 24, 2001
Posts: 41
From: Brevard, NC
Posted: 2002-02-11 23:02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have discovered that I have a problem with either approach. Even though I thought I was making progress with a closed embouchere I find that I am puffing. It's hard to describe but I am blowing the lips open slightly as I articulate. I am now trying to concentrate on closed and my tone is ratty.
By His love, Ed Taylor

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

airegin
Veteran Member

Joined: Nov 08, 2001
Posts: 106
From: Marco Island, Fl
Posted: 2002-02-12 07:27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Ed,

Could it be that with a "closed" lip setting that your lips feel "open"?

My OPINION is that in a "closed" embouchure, without blowing air causing the lips to open, they are closed........while in an "open" setting, without blowing air, the lips are open in the middle (not touching each other).

Rob
_________________
Rob Lauderdale

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

goldenhornplayer
Regular Member

Joined: Nov 23, 2001
Posts: 66
From: Ken Barnes
Posted: 2002-02-12 08:26
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attention to all: Based on the previous posts, I am starting a new thread under Pedagogy. This is to remove the CC reference since some felt we might be referring to Carmine Caruso. The new thread will be called CSC for Current Superchops. I would ask everyone to cooperate by not making any further posts under this SC vs CC thread. Thanks-Ken Barnes.

[ This Message was edited by: goldenhornplayer on 2002-02-12 08:27 ]










[ This Message was edited by: tptgeek on 2002-02-12 11:15 ]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
goldenhornplayer
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 22 Nov 2001
Posts: 1123
Location: Winston-Salem, NC

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kirk wrote: "It seems to me that the best way to handle this is to use a name like Callet's ongoing journey star date log 2-12-2002".

Kirk--that's Captain Kirk, I presume. As you may have gathered, I am a weekly student of Jerome's. As such, it seems appropriate to call this CSC for Current Superchops. Current means what Jerome is teaching today and, as you noted, that may evolve even more as we go along. Now, if someone drives a stake in time and takes a snapshot of what he is teaching, they'll probably have to give it a real name and a date. Until then, I would think "current" pretty much says it all.
_________________
Psalm 98:6
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Kirk 1
New Member


Joined: 27 Jan 2002
Posts: 2
Location: Richmond Virginia

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

On 2002-02-12 11:21, goldenhornplayer wrote:
Kirk wrote: "It seems to me that the best way to handle this is to use a name like Callet's ongoing journey star date log 2-12-2002".

Kirk--that's Captain Kirk, I presume. As you may have gathered, I am a weekly student of Jerome's. As such, it seems appropriate to call this CSC for Current Superchops. Current means what Jerome is teaching today and, as you noted, that may evolve even more as we go along. Now, if someone drives a stake in time and takes a snapshot of what he is teaching, they'll probably have to give it a real name and a date. Until then, I would think "current" pretty much says it all.



Ken a stake has already been driven into the ground and it was done by Jerome himself. He wrote a book and named it SUPERCHOPS.
Continuing to use the term Superchops in naming these ongoing Callet experiments is only an invitation for confusion. Im not even a Superchop enthusiast and I am overwhelmed.


I see why weekly lessons are needed with the experimental embouchure system that Callet currently teaches and keeps changing. I know a player who studied with Jerome and gave up because he keeps changing his teachings too often. I suggest that using something like CJC (current Jerome Callet) is a better approach being that you didn't like my other suggestion of Callet star date log 2-12-2002. By the way Ken you presumed wrong about refering to me as Captain Kirk.
My last name is Aaron


Kirk Aaron





[ This Message was edited by: Kirk 1 on 2002-02-12 15:37 ]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dbacon
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 11 Nov 2001
Posts: 8592

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DB

Last edited by dbacon on Sun Jun 19, 2022 2:33 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Emb_Enh
Veteran Member


Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 455

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

....I have never seen such a mess in my entire life...if there is anything I can do to help please ask (I mean it!)

---my simple suggestion to stay in one forum was misinterprted and other stuff....

The best thing I think I can do probably, is keep out of the way.

Incredible!

Roddy o-iii<O
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
bj
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 580
Location: Scotland

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Roddy

It seems the best thing is to duck mate. All sides are so paranoid that any comment is seen as an act of treason (or slanderous).
all the best
Brian Jones
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
William Bentley
Regular Member


Joined: 15 Jan 2002
Posts: 34
Location: Nashville Tenn

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

On 2002-02-12 13:45, bj wrote:
Hi Roddy

It seems the best thing is to duck mate. All sides are so paranoid that any comment is seen as an act of treason (or slanderous).
all the best
Brian Jones


The problem bj is blatently simple.
You jumped the gun big time and cluttered the other thread by making public statements pointing fingers and falsely using other peoples names before getting your facts straight. Jeff Lambardino put you in your place and then you had the nerve to come back and respond that more was being read into your post than was necessary. WELL HELLO bj if you had bothered to post responsibly then there would not have been a problem. Then to top it all off you had the nerve to say "hell sue me"
This says a great deal and the readers can make their own determination about the situation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
goldenhornplayer
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 22 Nov 2001
Posts: 1123
Location: Winston-Salem, NC

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aaron Kirk it is---Here's the problem with removing the Superchops name. Jerome gave his technique the name Superchops. He still calls what he is teaching, Superchops. In my opinion, it is neither my place nor yours to try to change that. Here's the really incredible reality that has truly amazed and surprised me. Here's a man who has dedicated his life to teaching and developing trumpet embouchure techniques. Even after achieving success years ago, he continues daily striving to find even more efficient ways to do it. And for that, he is criticized. Go figure.
_________________
Psalm 98:6
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
edtaylor
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 23 Dec 2001
Posts: 1199
Location: Brevard, NC

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rob and Ken,
Thanks for your posts, I think I am on track again. I got scared that I was off base and was trying too hard on the compression. How quickly I forget, it wasn't that long ago Ken and I were discussing the issue of making it harder than it really is in private emails.
By His love, Ed taylor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ljazztrm
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 03 Dec 2001
Posts: 2681
Location: Queens and upstate, NY

PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2002 4:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow...I should log into other forums more often...I wasn't aware there was a Callet discussion going on here! Well, I have posted about my experiences with Callet's new teachings on the SC forum awhile back...recently I updated my progress report on the SC if anyone is interested...I am enjoying the new range and power I am continuing to develop practicing the tonguing a few minutes a day the way Jerry showed me. (Only about 10-15min because it is a REALLY INTENSE WORKOUT!) Once again let me state that at this time I still feel that this technique of Jerry's is something that can only be taught in person by Jerry himself...As a side note I would like to say I am very much enjoying playing on my 63**** and 63***** Northern Brass mouthpieces made by Gary Radtke...I have always been a somewhat fanatical mouthpiece experimenter..lol..but I really haven't found anything that works for me like these particular pieces...about the only thing I have left to try is John Lynch's asymmetric concept when his deeper models are ready. For more info on these check http://www.asymmetric-mouthpiece.com For more info on the wonderful Northern Brass line check Northernbrass.com...Bruce Lee runs the Northern Brass and is an absolute pleasure to deal with. Also, for the complete GR line check http://www.grmouthpieces.com All the best, Ljazz:)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
edtaylor
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 23 Dec 2001
Posts: 1199
Location: Brevard, NC

PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2002 7:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am beginning to make some progress with tongue forward in the low register. It is hard to keep the tongue from retreating after the attack, and it is hard to keep the tongue stable enough to get good and solid intonation, but I am making progress. I keep the trumpet close at hand and make good use of TV commercials or Sky Angel station breaks to get in a few low scale tones.

I guess my old chops must have been similar to what BADBOY DON calls "sloppy chops" because I can return to it at will with good intonation (however, don't anyone get the idea that I am really a trumpet player). I find that the reason I could not do the classical SC is that I tend to play with teeth apart. In fact too far apart to bring my lower lip over the upper teeth without supreme concentration.

Would like to see some other posts on progress.
_________________
Ed Taylor . . . a Messianic gentile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Pedagogy All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
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


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group