| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kalijah
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 8:31 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | | Are you asserting that it's *not* true that at a given pitch, to increase the volume or loudness you have to increase the volume of air moving through the lips? |
Do you REALLY mean air "volume"? Or do you mean air "flow"?
Do you not understand the difference?
Yes. Flow varies with loudness on a given pitch. But air pressure must change first.
Volume depends on the length of note played. A whole note requires twice the volume of a half note at same pitch and loudness.
| Quote: | | That the pressure driving the air increases - i.e. pressure within the chest and oral cavity (within the hose) - as the restriction increases? |
NOPE. The pressure depends on the blowing effort. A resistance is ALWAYS present while playing. The total resistance will then determine the resulting flow, not the pressure. The pressure is by the blowing effort.
See you are assuming a given flow. And considering the pressure required to maintain the same flow if the resistance suddenly increases. But if you hold pressure steady and suddenly increase the resistance, the flow will reduce. This does NOT increase the pressure unless you concurrently blow with more effort. Which increases the pressure. See? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kalijah
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | My experience has been that players who rely solely on the lips to create resistance tend to run out of steam somewhere between about a D to an F and |
Do you not recognize that the instrument itself is the most important resistance.? If one were to depend on the aperture alone for resistance there would be no musical sound. through skill of embouchure and and a developed tone, one can put more tone in the instrument for the given amount of air power they are using. The more dominant the instrument resistance is, as a portion of the total resistance, the less of a liability the aperture resistance is. But this is not arbitrary. It depends on the skill of the player in creating tone by the embouchure and aperture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LSOfanboy
Veteran Member
Joined: 08 Jul 2018
Posts: 347
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| You didn’t answer the question Darryl... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kalijah
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I can reliably play F to F# in performance. I usually play to double C and higher if able during practice routine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mm55
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 01 Jul 2013
Posts: 1412
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
The laws of physics are not determined by "how high can you play."
_________________
'75 Bach Strad 180ML/37
'79 King Silver Flair
'07 Flip Oakes Wild Thing
'42 Selmer US
'90 Yamaha YTR6450S(C)
'12 Eastman ETR-540S (D/Eb)
'10 Carol CPT-300LR pkt
'89 Yamaha YCR2330S crnt
'13 CarolBrass CFL-6200-GSS-BG flg
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LSOfanboy
Veteran Member
Joined: 08 Jul 2018
Posts: 347
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kalijah wrote: | | I can reliably play F to F# in performance. I usually play to double C and higher if able during practice routine. |
Hi Darryl,
In the most polite way possible; the very fact that you say ‘F to F#’ kind of undermines the point of ‘reliable’ range. In the business, if you can’t play a note at the end of a performance every single day, regardless of personal situations, health, fatigue and performance pressure, it is not ‘reliable’.
Now there isn’t much point in progressing this point much further, because without playing alongside each other we’ll never really know, but you answer, and the manner in which it is presented, does little to disprove my earlier observations on playing with only the lips (and instrument as you point out) as resistance.
This is probably just a case where two players are going to have to disagree on their thoughts regarding trumpet pedagogy. If you want to send anything to me via pm go ahead, but please remember the standards of mutual respect and courtesy we all should adhere to on this forum.
All the best |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mm55
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 01 Jul 2013
Posts: 1412
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sometimes it bears repeating: The laws of physics are not determined by "how high can you play."
_________________
'75 Bach Strad 180ML/37
'79 King Silver Flair
'07 Flip Oakes Wild Thing
'42 Selmer US
'90 Yamaha YTR6450S(C)
'12 Eastman ETR-540S (D/Eb)
'10 Carol CPT-300LR pkt
'89 Yamaha YCR2330S crnt
'13 CarolBrass CFL-6200-GSS-BG flg
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LSOfanboy
Veteran Member
Joined: 08 Jul 2018
Posts: 347
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mm55 wrote: | | Sometimes it bears repeating: The laws of physics are not determined by "how high can you play." |
Hi,
Thanks for your input. Apologies, I was typing my reply before you posted originally- otherwise I would have responded to you at the same time.
I totally agree with your statement. However, we are in a situation where a number of people (none of whom are stupid) have added to this discussion with their understanding and interpretation of the laws of physics. Amongst them are several established professionals, some retired and some still active. To make claims that their, well thought out and calmly presented, understanding of physics is simply ‘WRONG’ (as Darryl puts it) puts us in a difficult position.
My point to Darryl is that he is talking to players who have potentially far greater abilities than him, and have also honed these abilities through an understanding of physics, the laws of acoustics and a study of human biology.
At the end of the day, if several people have different understandings and explanations as far as physics are concerned, I would be slow to take the word of a less-qualified player who is intent on dismissing everyone else’s learned opinion.
Thanks
Ps. The discussion in question is about playing high, asking someone about their abilities in the field they are claiming to be an expert in is not unreasonable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert P
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 28 Feb 2013
Posts: 2595
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kalijah wrote: | | Quote: | | Are you asserting that it's *not* true that at a given pitch, to increase the volume or loudness you have to increase the volume of air moving through the lips? |
Do you REALLY mean air "volume"? Or do you mean air "flow"? |
Tomayto/tomahto - you have to move more air at a given pitch to increase the loudness. This is a fact.
| Quote: | | Flow varies with loudness on a given pitch. But air pressure must change first. |
My original statement is about variables of pressure of air and the volume of air that's moved and how they're used to play higher and/or louder. At a particular blowing force you can increase the pressure in the chest/oral cavity by increasing the restriction. This is a fact. You can also increase the pressure at a given level of restriction by increasing the blowing force.
| Quote: | | Volume depends on the length of note played. A whole note requires twice the volume of a half note at same pitch and loudness. |
You'll use more air to play a longer note at the same loudness. You'll also use more air to play the same length note more loudly.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | That the pressure driving the air increases - i.e. pressure within the chest and oral cavity (within the hose) - as the restriction increases? |
NOPE. The pressure depends on the blowing effort. |
Blowing force is part of the equation it's not the whole equation. Pressure is how much the air - or water - is squeezed within the system. As I previously pointed out you can move a lot of air with very little pressure if there's little restriction.
Assuming there's some force moving the water - i.e. the spigot is open to whatever degree, if you put your thumb over the hose or block the expulsion of water altogether, the pressure within the hose will go up. If you don't think it will, you're mistaken. The pressure will also go up at a given level of restriction if you open the spigot more.
_________________
Getzen Eterna Severinsen
King Silver Flair
Besson 1000
Bundy
Chinese C
Getzen Eterna Bb/A piccolo
Chinese Rotary Bb/A piccolo
Chinese Flugel
Last edited by Robert P on Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:39 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kalijah
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Mental ruminations" about how you INTERPRET or "visualize" the laws of physics are not themselves the ACTUAL laws of physics. Your interpretation is not in question. You attempt to present your opinion as fact IS in question. And your facts are wrong.
Now you want to attack my playing as some kind of "proof" that I am wrong about the ACTUAL physics. (Bear in mind you have not heard me play) Then you attempt to lecture me on civility? Wow. Just, wow!
You conceded that you were confused about the definition of the difference between air volume and flow. Shows a basic incompetence regarding technical physics understanding or proficiency. No reflection on your playing ability, however.
I am a very competent player. But that has no bearing on my opinion regarding the laws of physics.
The fact that I am also an educated, degreed and licenced professional engineer should also carry much credibility in the technical discussion.
Last edited by kalijah on Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:53 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kalijah
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
RobertP wrote: | Quote: | | At a particular blowing force you can increase the pressure by increasing the restriction. This is a fact. |
That is NOT a fact.
If what you wrote is true then infinite resistance would yield infinite pressure.
Which is impossible.
And you still don't understand the difference between air volume and air flow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kalijah wrote: | | Quote: |
I think tongue arch is the main contributor to creating that resistance. |
Any resistance, other than the resistance of the tone in the instrument, is a liability to air power. The claim that the tongue arch creates pressure that is bearing on the embouchure is absolute nonsense.
it is amazing the mental exercises that John will go through to try to give the tongue credit for air pressure, pitch, the moon, the stars, you name it.
That is typical Claude Gordon Dogma b*******. |
I did not write that "tongue arch creates pressure that is bearing on the embouchure." I wrote that tongue arch helps create resistance (much like the nozzle on the end of a hose creates resistance).
I'm just curious, why do you always claim it is "Claude Gordon dogma" when in fact the role of the tongue arch is widely recognized by the vast majority of professional trumpet players, great teachers and authors?
Why not call it "Arturo Sandoval dogma"? Or perhaps "Frank Kaderabek (former principal trumpet of the Philadelphia Orchestra from 1975-1995) dogma"?
You could call it "Charles Colin dogma", too. Or "Herbert L. Clarke dogma". Why not "Louis Maggio dogma"? Don't forget Allen Vizutti, Doc Severinson, Walther Smith, Susan Slaughter, Adam Rapa, or any of the hundreds of other accomplished players who share the same opinion of what the tongue does. Maurice Andre seemed to believe as you did - until he saw the motion picture X-ray film of his tongue arching as he reached high C during John Haynie's research at North Texas State.
How about calling it "Sarah Willis Dogma"? After all, she (a French Horn player with the Berlin Philharmonic) participated in that MRI study at the Biomedical NMR Lab at the Max Planck Institute in Göttingen, Germany that showed clearly how the tongue arches upward and forward in the extreme when playing the extreme upper register, creating a tiny orifice through which the air passes just before hitting the lips.
Reference:
From the side: https://youtu.be/MWcOwgWsPHA?t=1m44s
From the front: https://youtu.be/MWcOwgWsPHA?t=7m14s
The whole story: https://www.dw.com/en/sarahs-music-music-and-science/av-18404705
Actually, let's call it "Biomedical NMR Lab at the Max Planck Institute in Göttingen, Germany" dogma.
Rather ironically, the only true "dogma" here is that which you keep clinging to Darryl. Your idea regarding tongue arch not being at all causal in the playing of high notes has been disproved now in several University level research studies, one them done all the way back in the 1960's. Sadly, there are probably at least a few young struggling players who are influenced by your prolific postings of your misunderstanding of this particular area of brass playing mechanics. But at least the rest of what you post about trumpet playing tends to be excellent.
Sincerely,
John Mohan
P.S. Edited one of the final sentences from this:
"Your ideas have been disproved now in several University level research studies, one them done all the way back in the 1960's."
to this:
"Your idea regarding tongue arch not being at all causal in the playing of high notes has been disproved now in several University level research studies, one them done all the way back in the 1960's."
Most of Darryl's ideas are good and his understanding of the terminology is excellent and I did not mean to imply otherwise. It's just this tongue arch thing that seems to be the issue... 
Last edited by John Mohan on Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LSOfanboy
Veteran Member
Joined: 08 Jul 2018
Posts: 347
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kalijah wrote: | "Mental ruminations" about how you INTERPRET or "visualize" the laws of physics are not themselves the ACTUAL laws of physics. Your interpretation is not in question. You attempt to present your opinion as fact IS in question. And your facts are wrong.
Now you want to attack my playing as some kind of "proof" that I am wrong about the ACTUAL physics. (Bear in mind you have not heard me play) Then you attempt to lecture me on civility? Wow. Just, wow!
You conceded that you were confused about the definition of the difference between air volume and flow. Shows a basic incompetence regarding technical physics understanding or proficiency. No reflection on your playing ability, however.
I am a very competent player. But that has no bearing on my opinion regarding the laws of physics.
The fact that I am also an educated, degreed and licenced professional engineer should also carry much credibility in the technical discussion. |
Hi Darryl,
I have to admit, this thread has disintegrated in an incredibly disappointing manner.
On several occasions throughout this thread I have praised your approach and given your (constantly condescending and confrontational) posts a calm and balanced response.
I also have great respect for your job as an engineer and appreciate the depth of knowledge it gives you.
Unfortunately you have adopted a virtually permanent state of confrontation and aggression in all of your posts, you act as if you are the single voice of reason on this forum and work to attack small points and gain petty victories rather than stepping back, taking a breath, and applying your potentially very useful and learned opinion in a manner that can benefit the thread.
Yes, you have correctly identified some incorrectly-applied terminology (plus points for those!) but you have, on every occasion, failed to see past this and enter into a constructive discussion on the subject at hand, preferring instead to focus on, and start multiple arguments over, minute points in large posts.
I do disagree with your statements on a number of counts, and from my own study of the laws of physics (which has been significant to say the least) I believe you have made inaccurate assertions on multiple occasions. I have raised these points in previous posts, but no response from you on any.
On the subject of your playing; I have at no point suggested you are a bad player. I did raise the point, however, that you (very strongly) put across your 'facts' (which, as I have said, I actually don't think are always correct) and disregarded other people's 'facts'. Truthfully, I think you should be careful telling players that their grasp of physics is completely wrong and misguided when they are, in fact, far more capable than you are at the instrument, and have therefore experienced much more success with their application of the laws of physics than yourself.
I hope that you can read this post with a certain degree of calmness and acknowledge the praise I have given you, and the respect I also have for your opinion, whilst taking on board the points I have made. We would all appreciate the knowledge and discussion you can bring to the thread, but not this constant confrontation and anger.
With the upmost sincerity.
All the best |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mm55 wrote: | | solo soprano wrote: | | Bill Knevitt said it this way,:"... the same as when you put your thumb over the end of a garden hose to make the water pressure greater. |
When you put your thumb over the end of a garden hose, you are NOT making the water pressure greater. |
This is true. Knevitt was not a formally educated phycisist and his terminology wasn't entirely accurate - but what he was trying to convey was and is.
I think when most of us discuss "compression" we are referring to the increase in compression in the area before the arching tongue (thoracic pressure).
And though with the garden hose, the pressure of the water stream is not increased by the thumb over the end of it (or by a restrictive nozzle), the water stream is affected. It is made more condense and much faster, and acts upon stones and debris with much more effect. I think (as do most) that it is similar in terms of the arching tongue, what it does to the air stream and what that air stream then does with the lips.
Quick physics lesson for those that chose band over physics class:
Bernoulli's Principal describes (correctly) that in a fluid flow, pressure is inversely related to velocity. If you speed up the flow of a fluid through a tube by reducing the diameter of the tube, the pressure will decrease as the velocity increases. But though the pressure drops when a flow velocity is increased, the kinetic energy of that flow is increased and the flow can do more work. Which is a part of how we can play the extreme high notes on a trumpet.
Cheers,
John Mohan
_________________
Trumpet Player, Clinician & Teacher
1st Trpt for Cats, Phantom of the Opera, West Side Story, Evita, Hunchback of Notre Dame,
Grease, The Producers, Addams Family, In the Heights, etc.
Ex LA Studio Musician
16 Year Claude Gordon Student
Last edited by John Mohan on Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kalijah
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Quick physics lesson for those that chose band over physics class:
Bernoulli's Principal states (correctly) that in a fluid flow, pressure is inversely related to velocity. But though the pressure drops when a flow velocity is increased, the kinetic energy of that flow is increased and the flow can do more work. Which is how we can play the extreme high notes on a trumpet. |
No John. The higher velocity flow can NOT do more work than a more static flow of the same energy state. In the real world the statc pressure can do more work because viscosity is negligible for static pressure.
Air flow velocity is a liability to the energy of the air.
Last edited by kalijah on Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kalijah wrote: | | Quote: | Quick physics lesson for those that chose band over physics class:
Bernoulli's Principal states (correctly) that in a fluid flow, pressure is inversely related to velocity. But though the pressure drops when a flow velocity is increased, the kinetic energy of that flow is increased and the flow can do more work. Which is how we can play the extreme high notes on a trumpet. |
No John. The higher velocity flow can NOT do more work than a more static flow of the same energy state. In the real world the statc pressure can do more work because viscosity is negligible for static pressure.
Air flow velocity is a liability to the energy of the air.
Nice try! |
So you're telling me that placing a nozzle on the end of a hose causing the water stream to shoot out like a jet does not effect how it then hits stones and debris in my driveway with more force sending said stuff flying? You're telling me that hose nozzles are a waste of time and money? Or are you trying to claim the nozzle is not causal but just happens to close up a bit as the stones start to fly away? Nice try! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mm55
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 01 Jul 2013
Posts: 1412
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John Mohan wrote: | | So you're telling me that placing a nozzle on the end of a hose causing the water stream to shoot out like a jet does not effect how it then hits stones and debris in my driveway with more force sending said stuff flying? You're telling me that hose nozzles are a waste of time and money? Or are you trying to claim the nozzle is not causal but just happens to close up a bit as the stones start to fly away? Nice try! |
I just re-read carefully, and in fact, kalijah is telling you no such thing. You have managed to vanquish yet another straw-man of your own invention. Like playing high notes, vanquishing straw-men does not determine the laws of physics.
_________________
'75 Bach Strad 180ML/37
'79 King Silver Flair
'07 Flip Oakes Wild Thing
'42 Selmer US
'90 Yamaha YTR6450S(C)
'12 Eastman ETR-540S (D/Eb)
'10 Carol CPT-300LR pkt
'89 Yamaha YCR2330S crnt
'13 CarolBrass CFL-6200-GSS-BG flg
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kalijah
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 3257
Location: Alabama
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Can you show where air pressure, flow. Velocity or resistance was actually measured in regard to any of those videos? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irving
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Feb 2003
Posts: 1886
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I recall that Doc Severinsen posted a video about how to play high notes, and used the same garden hose, with thumb analogy. What does this tell us? That a great trumpet player did not understand the actual physics involved in playing high notes. I'm not saying this in a negative way in the least. Understanding the physics of playing the trumpet won't help you in learning how to play it, just as knowing how a car works won't help you learning how to drive it. Nevertheless, the debunking of age old myths really seems to be ruffling a few feathers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
