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

After 35 years is this really what one should expect.


Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Comeback Players
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bassguy
Veteran Member


Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gwood66 wrote:
There is an article posted on the ITG website that accurately describes the comeback timeline. I found it pretty accurate. I constantly had to remind myself to slow down. You don't start out training for a marathon by running a marathon. Resting after each line you play is an absolute must if you don't do it already.

http://www.trumpetguild.org/resources/pedagogy/category/8-articles-and-essays

There is so much information available that it is easy to get paralyzed. I started out my comeback fretting about my embouchure and how it was developing. Once I internalized the Clarke/Gordon saying "forget about the lips, the only function of the lips is to vibrate", I stopped being paralyzed by fear of it developing incorrectly.


Yes, I don't think paralysis by analysis can be an issue with me per se. I am making a point not to oveethink things. That isnt ro say there arent obvuoys peeceptions to have to deal qith. As stated earlier, I had planned on putting myself in my 10 year old frame of mind & going at this thing viscerally, as I did playing along with Herb Alpert recordings--& having fun.

I did check your link out, & it is a bit geared to Morman players taking a 2 year layoff to do their missionary work. The author's timeline is about 6 months to get back in shape, in some cases a year. Not quite the same as a 35 year layoff & an attempted comeback on flugelhorn, not trumpet as previously played. As stated before, I would settle for having the chops I had before unecessary embouchure changes. I was actually 14 by then---& with those chops I could musically put them to better use now.. (Maybe after 6 months of poor progress I should radically reevaluate what I'm doing).

Less an issue than paralysis is shear unadulterated FRUSTRATION. Now at age 60 I can't quite persue this with the patient 10 year outlook: that I have lumitless years ahead of me. I am behind my own expected timeline, as I assumed two things: 1) that embouchure muscles don't really need to be physically that strong if used optimally 2) that even if much strength is required, " muscle memory" comes unto play & both muscle strength & muscle skill quickly come back.

Links see such as this is what I was looking for. In a comeback situation you can't assume that I am using the wrong embouchure" or that I can't progress significantly without a teacher or until we get a general sense that I am not where I should be in my comeback.

I'm not pretending that I know everything & that I am entirely dismissive of those suggestions. But first things first.

Also, a common suggestion: "play trumpet or cornet to become proficient at flugelhorn". I will concede that my attempted comeback as a flugelhornist is a bit of an incongruous & misleading notion. In the 70s I owned a Getzen Eterna Flugelhorn that I never used. The truth is that a flugelhorn is a bigger instrument that's quite taxing. Right off the bat gauging my present comeback on flugelhorn in terms off where I was as a childhood cornetist isn't entirely an apples to apples comparison. It would be wise to gauge my progress on a cornet played iccassiinalky.


Last edited by bassguy on Fri Apr 28, 2017 6:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bassguy
Veteran Member


Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

furcifer wrote:
Hmmm... OK, in that case, I think your idea about comparing on another horn might give you some insight as to what's going on. Think about fullness of the buzz and efficient air. A flugel almost sounds too pretty sometimes to really tell us the truth about what's going on inside the mouthpiece at the buzzing surface. For me, it inspires rather relaxed playing and a dynamic range that involves a lower overall volume.

You've got an endurance issue, but it may still be related to technique. The "drooping" staccato notes is evidence of collapsing air compression. This may be related to where and how you actually tongue the notes, how you stop the air or form the tongue arch, or maybe it's just a lack of support for your embouchure type. Collapsing air compression and/or collapse of the embouchure might be related if both are occurring.

For now, I would concentrate on maintaining air compression and blowing through the phrase even though it may have staccato notes. Also, working out with a P.E.T.E. helps me quite a bit with endurance.


First point. On strictly a musical level the relaxed playing sound & limited dynamic range is a good thing. In the Hotel/restaraunt venue where I regularly perform as a bassist indoors in Winter & outdoors in Summer, I can't afford to be loud. My guitarist was enthralled with how quiet my dynamics are, & he's sure that unmiked, my volume will be acceptable indoirs.

About the stacattos. I am not sure what air compression is. I can now tell you that it seems related to the pressure issue I qrote about. It seems that in the middle to upper register I can't play well unless the pressure against my teeth is absolutely minimal.

In fact, when I play there is a substantial bubble if air separating my teeth & the soft mouth tissue between the mpc & teeth. It seems there is a bit of backoressure air buildup (even though my flugelhorn mouthpiece is 3/4" & has a 4.3mm throat) & that back pressure facilitates the air bubble build up that helps*. When I stacatto (rather than slurring or blow through the notes while tonguing) an air bubble just isn't there to prevent pressure & the embouchure gives way. This does seem to indicate a bit of a technique issue, more than endurance--although both are related. The only remedy I can imagine is make a more concerted effort to support the embouchure muscularly by starting & stopping, using less air support to relieve pressure.

* the flugelhorn IS a bigger instrument & can tax ones range, endurance more than a trumpet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bassguy
Veteran Member


Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2017 12:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Question to anyone still reading this thread: I bwgan teumpet using a Bach 7C, & finished using a Bach # 1. At that time, my teacher was impressed with how those bigger mouthpieces improved my playing he told me to consider getting a Shilke George Meger mouthpiece.

My question: if my comeback were on trumpet (not flugelhorn) should I start as I did as a beginner with a 7C & work my way back up to a Bach 1?

IMO that is a vital question. I'd like to use a Dennis Wick 4 FL flugelhorn mouthpiece. It sounds exactly as I want, doesnt feel constricting, & so resonantly full, dark, without sounding muffled. But it is so taxing in terms of my endurance & range. I question if I ever can use it to perform. Now I'm using a Curry 7 FL. (.750" deep, 4.3 mm throat. That's also a challenge. A shalower .625" deep & 3.99mm throated Curry 7 FLM causes me upper lip pain--though not enough to keep my from playing. (No pain at all using the Wicks or deeper Curry)

. Now I have actually ordered a used Yamaha 11F4 mouthpiece with a trumpet style U shaped cup & only a 3.80mm throat. It's actually a converted trumpet mouthpiece & "recommended for beginners". Interesting to see how it will be once it arrives.

What's really vital about my question is that my rebuttal to the advise about prioritizing a trumpet or cornet over flugelhorn, is that the best way to improve one's skill using a particular tool is by practicing on that particular tool--negative transference in sports medicine. So if I adamantly stick to a flugelhorn that I want to play, shouldn't I also stubbornly stick with the DW 4FL?

By attempting to make my comeback using smaller shallower mouthpieces, I am contradicting my own argument. (Though 35 years ago I was too inundated with trumpet etudes to touch my Getzen Eterna flugelhorn. I never demonstrated any skill on the Flugelhorn & had no favorite flugelhorn mouthpiece analogous to my Bach 1 trumpet mpc)

It stands to reason that if I should start with less taxing shallow flugelhorn mouthpieces & work my way up to deeper ones, then taking that logic a step further, a smaller, less fatiguing instrument (such as a cornet) should be used for a while.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dstdenis
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 25 May 2013
Posts: 2123
Location: Atlanta GA

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2017 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bassguy wrote:
Question to anyone still reading this thread: I began trumpet using a Bach 7C, & finished using a Bach # 1. At that time, my teacher was impressed with how those bigger mouthpieces improved my playing he told me to consider getting a Shilke George Meger mouthpiece.

My question: if my comeback were on trumpet (not flugelhorn) should I start as I did as a beginner with a 7C & work my way back up to a Bach 1?

I also started on a Bach 7C and worked my way toward a Bach 1C. But I changed mouthpieces because I was growing up. My mouth and lips grew bigger, and I developed bad habits where my subconscious was scrunching my lips together to try and fit them within the rim. Messed up everything.

Once I moved to a bigger rim, my embouchure could lay flat again, as I had originally learned to play, and the bad habits went away. If I were starting as an adult comeback player, I'd still use a mouthpiece that fits. The 7C doesn't fit me anymore; it's too small, so I wouldn't go back to that.

bassguy wrote:
I'd like to use a Dennis Wick 4 FL flugelhorn mouthpiece. It sounds exactly as I want, doesnt feel constricting, & so resonantly full, dark, without sounding muffled. But it is so taxing in terms of my endurance & range. I question if I ever can use it to perform...So if I adamantly stick to a flugelhorn that I want to play, shouldn't I also stubbornly stick with the DW 4FL?

There are two issues at play here: rim diameter, and cup volume. You should select a rim diameter that comfortably fits your embouchure, probably no larger. If you go larger, you'd get additional cup volume too, and that's more strenuous to play. You can save yourself some struggle by going no larger than necessary. Rim diameter: big enough, but no bigger.

Once you've settled on rim diameter to fit your lips, then you pick the cup volume that gives you the sound you want. But if you want a deep, dark, mellow sound, that will lead you toward more cup volume, which hurts range and stamina. It's a trade off. Only you can decide where you want to settle on this trade off. I might pick a piece with less cup volume because playability is more important to me than having a deep, dark sound. But you might love a dark sound and be willing to give up some range and endurance to get it. No right or wrong answers here, just choices.

bassguy wrote:
It stands to reason that if I should start with less taxing shallow flugelhorn mouthpieces & work my way up to deeper ones, then taking that logic a step further, a smaller, less fatiguing instrument (such as a cornet) should be used for a while.


I don't think so. Play whatever you want to play. I wouldn't urge you to play cornet if you really want to play flugelhorn.

I would encourage you to have some fun playing flugelhorn music that's easy for you to play. Set aside the harder music for later. The nice thing about flugelhorn is that you can entertain an audience by playing something easy, sweet and pretty. It's such a wonderful sounding instrument.

For example, I just love hearing 'Round Midnight on flugel. It isn't the hardest thing in the world to play either. Much easier that most Chuck Mangione tunes. Save those for later. Have fun playing something that's within reach right now. I dunno, how about Cocktails for Two for example? Super easy to play, and sounds great on flugel. How about I Remember Clifford. Nice tune too. Give yourself some positive reinforcement and enjoyment for your efforts. And your audience would much rather hear you play something you can play well. Everybody wins.
_________________
Bb Yamaha Xeno 8335IIS
Cornet Getzen Custom 3850S
Flugelhorn Courtois 155R
Piccolo Stomvi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
furcifer
Veteran Member


Joined: 24 May 2014
Posts: 155
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2017 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bassguy wrote:

About the stacattos. I am not sure what air compression is. I can now tell you that it seems related to the pressure issue I qrote about. It seems that in the middle to upper register I can't play well unless the pressure against my teeth is absolutely minimal.

In fact, when I play there is a substantial bubble if air separating my teeth & the soft mouth tissue between the mpc & teeth. It seems there is a bit of backoressure air buildup (even though my flugelhorn mouthpiece is 3/4" & has a 4.3mm throat) & that back pressure facilitates the air bubble build up that helps*. When I stacatto (rather than slurring or blow through the notes while tonguing) an air bubble just isn't there to prevent pressure & the embouchure gives way. This does seem to indicate a bit of a technique issue, more than endurance--although both are related. The only remedy I can imagine is make a more concerted effort to support the embouchure muscularly by starting & stopping, using less air support to relieve pressure.


Air compression in the oral cavity is ideally controlled entirely from what I'll term "the gut" (to avoid getting into that technical explanation), and not with ancillary cheek and outer lip soft tissue giving way, expanding, and then contracting/collapsing when the air stream is interrupted. That collapse is why the notes droop. This is why the air bubbles/ gaps in the oral cavity need to be eliminated (Unless you're Dizzy Gillespie or you want to spend a lifetime figuring out something totally unorthodox on your own to perfect it.) Sides of the tongue should be sealing against the gums above the upper molars. The air stream should come up over this trough formed by the tongue (tongue arch for higher notes notwithstanding) and that's it. Air shouldn't be forming bubbles anywhere outside of the palate - least of all behind the soft tissue in contact with the mouthpiece rim.

"No pressure" is theoretically ideal, however, most players must concede that a certain amount is necessary for embouchure support. Otherwise, mouthpiece rim design wouldn't even matter at all. There should be a layer of brass rim, then lip tissue, then teeth, then air, and then tongue which interrupts the air. There shouldn't be any other layer of air working its way in between any of that. If there is, then there's your problem; that is an uncontrolled area of compressed air that must equalize (uncontrolled decompression that is undesirably participating in sounding the note) when you stop the air stream. So these bubbles external to the teeth keep dispensing air when the PRIMARY air stream stops, and the note droops, just like the last bit of air let out of a balloon, instead of ONLY the gut and tongue in control of ALL the air that passes through the lips.

Straight teeth would be nice, of course, but you're talking to a guy who learned to play with the old-style medieval braces on for my first four years of playing. I know all about scar tissue on the inside of the upper lip. There is a way to play with just enough "acceptable" pressure to provide SUPPORT, but not so little that your embouchure is practically eschewing ALL potential benefit of support from the mouthpiece rim AND teeth.

I can only imagine that this floating on an air bubble must be like trying to stand on a beach ball and chop wood. I suppose anybody can get good at it if they practice enough, but man, that's really an unnecessary level of challenge, and there's certain things you're going to find that you are just not going to be able to do compared to people who don't have to stand on a beach ball to chop wood, LOL!

For all that said, I don't think mouthpiece choice is going to make a hell of a lot of difference for you until your embouchure mechanics are addressed and better-aligned to what mouthpiece design is actually intended to assist.

So, assuming you get all that squared away (I did a major embouchure change during my comeback, and was playing better with more range and endurance within 6 weeks than I had in 35 years prior - so fear not!), you can almost throw out any and all preconceived notions of how mouthpiece sizes will help you. Back when you and I started playing, they always said to play the widest-diameter piece you can handle. Nowadays, they're *almost* saying just the opposite. My take-away from it all is that there is an OPTIMAL mouthpiece for YOU, and YES, it should be based more on SOUND and playability than "feel", HOWEVER, I'll just throw in that I have no use for sharp inner rims anymore! Whatever a sharp rim was ever supposed to facilitate ("cleaner attacks"? PFFFT! I think that's just a bunch of esoteric BS), that design cue never did a damn thing for ME. So, let me just suggest here that you look for rounded inner rims to help you with all this, do NOT go too big, and in fact you can probably even go a tad smaller than what you might be inclined towards now, IF you can get a more rounded inner rim edge. That's much easier to find on "lead" and "commercial" trumpet mouthpieces, so it might be a challenge on flugel.

Just for your reference, I play a Marcinkiewicz 3FLD on flugel, and it sounds great and plays very well on my Getzen, but I'd like an even more rounded inner rim edge if I played flugel all the time. I do, however, play very relaxed on flugel (no temptation to take everything up an octave, LOL), so I've never felt fatigued on it. My main trumpet piece is the Marcinkiewicz E14 B. Shew #1. It's VERY rounded, and I don't think I've ever loved a mouthpiece more, especially for lead work.
_________________
Stomvi S3 Big Bell -2018
Bach 180ST37 -'80
Benge CG -'78
Buescher LP 9 -1926
Getzen 896S-4 flugel -'86
Conn 18H bone -'64
Getzen M2003E Bb/G bugle
Getzen Titleist 2v soprano G -'79
King K-50 G mellophone
Henri Gautier Cornet C/Bb/A -1919
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bassguy
Veteran Member


Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

PostPosted: Mon May 08, 2017 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Update. I got a Yamaha 11F4 mpc & the difference was amazing. Subsequently, every day I feel stronger. No question in my mind that NY embouchure is right. The face muscles now better support the mouthpiece. Almost no pressure against teeth, & it can be sustained longer. No build up of air in upper cheeks, making them puff out a bit. As I play the tone is right, the legato tongue is beautiful. Yeah, still some issues. When I play high sometimes the aperture closes up. I still have a ways to go to get speed & technique back, but I definitely have a handle on what I'm doing now. .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bassguy
Veteran Member


Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336

PostPosted: Mon May 08, 2017 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

furcifer wrote:
bassguy wrote:

About the stacattos. I am not sure what air compression is. I can now tell you that it seems related to the pressure issue I qrote about. It seems that in the middle to upper register I can't play well unless the pressure against my teeth is absolutely minimal.

In fact, when I play there is a substantial bubble if air separating my teeth & the soft mouth tissue between the mpc & teeth. It seems there is a bit of backoressure air buildup (even though my flugelhorn mouthpiece is 3/4" & has a 4.3mm throat) & that back pressure facilitates the air bubble build up that helps*. When I stacatto (rather than slurring or blow through the notes while tonguing) an air bubble just isn't there to prevent pressure & the embouchure gives way. This does seem to indicate a bit of a technique issue, more than endurance--although both are related. The only remedy I can imagine is make a more concerted effort to support the embouchure muscularly by starting & stopping, using less air support to relieve pressure.


Air compression in the oral cavity is ideally controlled entirely from what I'll term "the gut" (to avoid getting into that technical explanation), and not with ancillary cheek and outer lip soft tissue giving way, expanding, and then contracting/collapsing when the air stream is interrupted. That collapse is why the notes droop. This is why the air bubbles/ gaps in the oral cavity need to be eliminated (Unless you're Dizzy Gillespie or you want to spend a lifetime figuring out something totally unorthodox on your own to perfect it.) Sides of the tongue should be sealing against the gums above the upper molars. The air stream should come up over this trough formed by the tongue (tongue arch for higher notes notwithstanding) and that's it. Air shouldn't be forming bubbles anywhere outside of the palate - least of all behind the soft tissue in contact with the mouthpiece rim.

"No pressure" is theoretically ideal, however, most players must concede that a certain amount is necessary for embouchure support. Otherwise, mouthpiece rim design wouldn't even matter at all. There should be a layer of brass rim, then lip tissue, then teeth, then air, and then tongue which interrupts the air. There shouldn't be any other layer of air working its way in between any of that. If there is, then there's your problem; that is an uncontrolled area of compressed air that must equalize (uncontrolled decompression that is undesirably participating in sounding the note) when you stop the air stream. So these bubbles external to the teeth keep dispensing air when the PRIMARY air stream stops, and the note droops, just like the last bit of air let out of a balloon, instead of ONLY the gut and tongue in control of ALL the air that passes through the lips.

Straight teeth would be nice, of course, but you're talking to a guy who learned to play with the old-style medieval braces on for my first four years of playing. I know all about scar tissue on the inside of the upper lip. There is a way to play with just enough "acceptable" pressure to provide SUPPORT, but not so little that your embouchure is practically eschewing ALL potential benefit of support from the mouthpiece rim AND teeth.

I can only imagine that this floating on an air bubble must be like trying to stand on a beach ball and chop wood. I suppose anybody can get good at it if they practice enough, but man, that's really an unnecessary level of challenge, and there's certain things you're going to find that you are just not going to be able to do compared to people who don't have to stand on a beach ball to chop wood, LOL!

For all that said, I don't think mouthpiece choice is going to make a hell of a lot of difference for you until your embouchure mechanics are addressed and better-aligned to what mouthpiece design is actually intended to assist.

So, assuming you get all that squared away (I did a major embouchure change during my comeback, and was playing better with more range and endurance within 6 weeks than I had in 35 years prior - so fear not!), you can almost throw out any and all preconceived notions of how mouthpiece sizes will help you. Back when you and I started playing, they always said to play the widest-diameter piece you can handle. Nowadays, they're *almost* saying just the opposite. My take-away from it all is that there is an OPTIMAL mouthpiece for YOU, and YES, it should be based more on SOUND and playability than "feel", HOWEVER, I'll just throw in that I have no use for sharp inner rims anymore! Whatever a sharp rim was ever supposed to facilitate ("cleaner attacks"? PFFFT! I think that's just a bunch of esoteric BS), that design cue never did a damn thing for ME. So, let me just suggest here that you look for rounded inner rims to help you with all this, do NOT go too big, and in fact you can probably even go a tad smaller than what you might be inclined towards now, IF you can get a more rounded inner rim edge. That's much easier to find on "lead" and "commercial" trumpet mouthpieces, so it might be a challenge on flugel.

Just for your reference, I play a Marcinkiewicz 3FLD on flugel, and it sounds great and plays very well on my Getzen, but I'd like an even more rounded inner rim edge if I played flugel all the time. I do, however, play very relaxed on flugel (no temptation to take everything up an octave, LOL), so I've never felt fatigued on it. My main trumpet piece is the Marcinkiewicz E14 B. Shew #1. It's VERY rounded, and I don't think I've ever loved a mouthpiece more, especially for lead work.


The Yamaha 11F4 I allude to was old, tarnished, & purchased via 'Reverv' for $20 out the door. It's not a flat rim like the newer Yamaha mourhpuwces. Is's shape is similar an old stock Holton mouthpuece. Its inner rim is so rounded that the cup appears to be narrower than it 16.46mm spec looking straight at it. Quite rounded. I got this mouthpiece about a week ago, & have gotten markedly stronger every day. Very firm embouchure, minimal pressure against the teeth in only 3 spots where the teeth are most crooked: the lower sides of the two upper incisors, & one crooked lower tooth. I can maintain a firm embouchure much longer & no puffing out of upper cheeks. Huge improvement!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rod Haney
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 22 Aug 2015
Posts: 937

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 8:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bassguy wrote:
Question to anyone still reading this thread: I bwgan teumpet using a Bach 7C, & finished using a Bach # 1. At that time, my teacher was impressed with how those bigger mouthpieces improved my playing he told me to consider getting a Shilke George Meger mouthpiece.

My question: if my comeback were on trumpet (not flugelhorn) should I start as I did as a beginner with a 7C & work my way back up to a Bach 1?

IMO that is a vital question. I'd like to use a Dennis Wick 4 FL flugelhorn mouthpiece. It sounds exactly as I want, doesnt feel constricting, & so resonantly full, dark, without sounding muffled. But it is so taxing in terms of my endurance & range. I question if I ever can use it to perform. Now I'm using a Curry 7 FL. (.750" deep, 4.3 mm throat. That's also a challenge. A shalower .625" deep & 3.99mm throated Curry 7 FLM causes me upper lip pain--though not enough to keep my from playing. (No pain at all using the Wicks or deeper Curry)

. Now I have actually ordered a used Yamaha 11F4 mouthpiece with a trumpet style U shaped cup & only a 3.80mm throat. It's actually a converted trumpet mouthpiece & "recommended for beginners". Interesting to see how it will be once it arrives.

What's really vital about my question is that my rebuttal to the advise about prioritizing a trumpet or cornet over flugelhorn, is that the best way to improve one's skill using a particular tool is by practicing on that particular tool--negative transference in sports medicine. So if I adamantly stick to a flugelhorn that I want to play, shouldn't I also stubbornly stick with the DW 4FL?

By attempting to make my comeback using smaller shallower mouthpieces, I am contradicting my own argument. (Though 35 years ago I was too inundated with trumpet etudes to touch my Getzen Eterna flugelhorn. I never demonstrated any skill on the Flugelhorn & had no favorite flugelhorn mouthpiece analogous to my Bach 1 trumpet mpc.. a while.


All my earlier playing days I used 7c and tried 3c but it felt like a bucket. I didn't try much different because I didn't know anything other than what was around. Skip 47 years (not playing) and I find that my tone, range (hi and low), and everything else is better with a .600 or dime sized mp. Not a shallow cup but a moderate cup. Ive been told that I play with very little lip in the mp and that I am lucky to be able to do so. What I noticed when I made the move to the narrow MP (my 1st and only so far) was the feel to the lip. It suddenly felt as if I could move the MP laterally while playing to no effect (felt). Everything in my playing improved and improvement came at an accelerated rate when I wasn't fighting the mp. The reason I'm posting isn't to get you. To start playing narrow but to go to a show where you can try many mps and try your best not to have pre conceived notions, just go on sound feel and ease of each. I'm sure a lot of people like and advocate big mp's but I just advocate trying a lot and see what fits. No one I know is knowledgeable enough to give advice over the internet with such a small amount of data. I advocate try all you can and use your own judgement. If the mp is the issue then explore a lot of mp sizes and styles ?? If that isn't it look somewhere else. I believe in my own experience when I can get it.
Rod
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bflatman
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 720

PostPosted: Sun Nov 12, 2017 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have read the posts through and one thing strikes me. Analysis.

I read Analysis Intellectualisation Intellectualisation Analysis. Blah Blah Blah.

You seem to have some quirky ideas for example you mentioned early on muscle memory as though expecting muscle memory to help you as a comeback player.

I have trained people in activities and I can tell you that muscles dont have a memory, they easily do the things they have done before so this so called muscle memory can assist you repeat actions the next day or next week, but there is no way on gods earth that muscle memory will help you twenty years later or even one year later.

I see players analysing what they do well in an attempt to explain it, some of these explanations are useful but much of it is describing what they think is happening rather than what is really happening. And trying to do the right things by recreating what they think the results are is doomed in my opinion to failure.

In my view the embouchure is the result of playing habits good embouchure is the result of good habits bad embouchure is the result of bad habits. But trying to play well by recreating the embouchure of a player with good habits is getting the cart well and truly before the horse.

Trumpet playing should be natural, place the mouthpiece to your lips, blow into it. Out comes a tone. Make the tone as beautiful as you can. You then will love the sound, and others will too.

The embouchure will form itself in the most natural way for your mouth shape, dont try to manipulate it.

And most important find a good teacher rather than trying to analyse every little detail of your embouchure chops breathing tension lips teeth tongue.

Does this playing naturally work, well I have been told I have a great tone great articulation great tonguing good range good phrasing. I have been invited to play with the premier orchestra in the region, and I have a global fanbase. Yes it works.

Stop analysing start playing naturally, and find a teacher.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Comeback Players All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
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