SC vs CC

goldenhornplayer · Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2002 8:37 am Post subject:

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.
_________________
Psalm 98:6

dbacon · Heavyweight Member Joined: 11 Nov 2001 Posts: 8592

edtaylor · Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2002 10:29 am Post subject:

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 · Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2002 10:42 am Post subject:

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.
_________________
Psalm 98:6

tom turner · Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2002 11:06 am Post subject:

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 · Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2002 11:42 am Post subject:

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 ]

Emb_Enh · Veteran Member Joined: 29 Oct 2002 Posts: 455

Dave says: Please, keep the Callet stuff in one forum.

I agree!

Roddy o-iii<O
_________________
Regards, Roddy o-iii RoddyTpt@aol.com

"E M B O U C H U R E___E N H A N C E M E N T"
BOOK 1 also... BOOK 2 + demo CD

[Self Analysis and Diagnostic Trumpet Method]

goldenhornplayer · Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2002 5:11 pm Post subject:

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 · Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2002 5:42 pm Post subject:

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 · Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2002 8:04 pm Post subject:

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 · Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2002 12:48 am Post subject:

Jeff Lambardino · Regular Member Joined: 05 Dec 2001 Posts: 81

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 · Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2002 8:23 am Post subject:

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 · Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2002 11:22 am Post subject:

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 · Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2002 3:43 pm Post subject:

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

edtaylor · Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2002 5:27 pm Post subject:

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 · Veteran Member Joined: 12 Nov 2001 Posts: 110

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 · Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2002 7:46 pm Post subject:

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 · Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2002 8:23 pm Post subject:

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 · Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2002 5:09 am Post subject:

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.
_________________
Psalm 98:6