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

The real differences between cornet and trumpet


Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Cornet/Flügelhorn
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cheiden
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8910
Location: Orange County, CA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 9:10 am    Post subject: Re: A similar argument: Reply with quote

Denny Schreffler wrote:
...conch-and-bull story...

Perfect.
_________________
"I'm an engineer, which means I think I know a whole bunch of stuff I really don't."
Charles J Heiden/So Cal
Bach Strad 180ML43*/43 Bb/Yamaha 731 Flugel/Benge 1X C/Kanstul 920 Picc/Conn 80A Cornet
Bach 3C rim on 1.5C underpart
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
delano
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 3118
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 10:08 am    Post subject: Re: A similar argument: Reply with quote

Denny Schreffler wrote:

Interestingly, people will read the article linked by the OP and Robb's essay and still dispute them.
-Denny


What's wrong with that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Denny Schreffler
Veteran Member


Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 383
Location: Tucson

PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 4:24 pm    Post subject: Re: A similar argument: Reply with quote

delano wrote:
Denny Schreffler wrote:

Interestingly, people will read the article linked by the OP and Robb's essay and still dispute them.
-Denny


What's wrong with that?


Well, one would have to have a solid reason to argue against Robb Stewart's research which, for the sample of instruments which he measured, shows that the concept that the cornet is basically a conical instrument and the trumpet is more cylindrical is unfounded.

From Robb's essay ► Years ago, when asked the difference between cornets and trumpet, I would say that a cornet starts out smaller and gets bigger in the end. I observed this to be true in some cornets but have since seen enough variability to stop using this generality. So, what is the difference between a cornet and a trumpet? The chart shows that a Bach cornet has 3% more conical tubing than a Bach trumpet and that a Schilke cornet has 5% less conical tubing than a Schilke trumpet. Averaging the percentage of conical tubing, the trumpets are 67 % and cornets are 66%.

What would be another expert researcher's reason for disputing those findings?

-Denny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard III
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2611
Location: Anacortes, WA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 4:47 pm    Post subject: Re: A similar argument: Reply with quote

Denny Schreffler wrote:
delano wrote:
Denny Schreffler wrote:

Interestingly, people will read the article linked by the OP and Robb's essay and still dispute them.
-Denny


What's wrong with that?


Well, one would have to have a solid reason to argue against Robb Stewart's research which, for the sample of instruments which he measured, shows that the concept that the cornet is basically a conical instrument and the trumpet is more cylindrical is unfounded.

From Robb's essay ► Years ago, when asked the difference between cornets and trumpet, I would say that a cornet starts out smaller and gets bigger in the end. I observed this to be true in some cornets but have since seen enough variability to stop using this generality. So, what is the difference between a cornet and a trumpet? The chart shows that a Bach cornet has 3% more conical tubing than a Bach trumpet and that a Schilke cornet has 5% less conical tubing than a Schilke trumpet. Averaging the percentage of conical tubing, the trumpets are 67 % and cornets are 66%.

What would be another expert researcher's reason for disputing those findings?

-Denny


But here's the thing, cornet starts out with an itty bitty mouthpiece end and eventually ends in a bell roughly the size of a trumpet. So doesn't that mean the cornet starts smaller and ends the same? And doesn't it then follow that the cornet must be more conical in total?
_________________
Richard

Conn 22B Trumpet
York Eminence Model 4028 Cornet
1903 Conn The Wonder Cornet
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dale Proctor
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 9343
Location: Heart of Dixie

PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Percentages of conical vs cylindrical tubing comparisons do prove the similarity of cornets and trumpets in that respect (which I suppose is the subject of this thread), but don’t really prove that they sound the same. Some trumpets and cornets do, if they have similar build characteristics and are played with the same mouthpiece design, but others can be night and day apart due to the variance of rate of taper of the conical parts. Cylindrical tubing has a narrow definition - a constant diameter along its length. Conical has a much looser definition - the bells of a pea-shooter trumpet and a flugelhorn are both conical, but there’s a pretty big difference in their sonic attributes. How conical the conical parts are is what really matters.
_________________
"Brass bands are all very well in their place - outdoors and several miles away ." - Sir Thomas Beecham
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Denny Schreffler
Veteran Member


Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 383
Location: Tucson

PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:39 pm    Post subject: Re: A similar argument: Reply with quote

Richard III wrote:
Denny Schreffler wrote:
delano wrote:
Denny Schreffler wrote:

Interestingly, people will read the article linked by the OP and Robb's essay and still dispute them.
-Denny


What's wrong with that?


Well, one would have to have a solid reason to argue against Robb Stewart's research which, for the sample of instruments which he measured, shows that the concept that the cornet is basically a conical instrument and the trumpet is more cylindrical is unfounded.

From Robb's essay ► Years ago, when asked the difference between cornets and trumpet, I would say that a cornet starts out smaller and gets bigger in the end. I observed this to be true in some cornets but have since seen enough variability to stop using this generality. So, what is the difference between a cornet and a trumpet? The chart shows that a Bach cornet has 3% more conical tubing than a Bach trumpet and that a Schilke cornet has 5% less conical tubing than a Schilke trumpet. Averaging the percentage of conical tubing, the trumpets are 67 % and cornets are 66%.

What would be another expert researcher's reason for disputing those findings?

-Denny


But here's the thing, cornet starts out with an itty bitty mouthpiece end and eventually ends in a bell roughly the size of a trumpet. So doesn't that mean the cornet starts smaller and ends the same? And doesn't it then follow that the cornet must be more conical in total?



Ivan Hunter (excerpt, below), linked in the original post, states the a 1970s Besson cornet and a Bach 180-37 , "Both ... have bores starting at around 0.335” at the mouthpiece entry," so the seemingly intuitive idea that the cornet starts out smaller doesn't seem to be a solid argument against Stewart's and Hunter's work.

Again, here is that finding by Stewart → a Bach cornet has 3% more conical tubing than a Bach trumpet and that a Schilke cornet has 5% less conical tubing than a Schilke trumpet. Averaging the percentage of conical tubing, the trumpets are 67% [conical] and cornets are 66%[conical].

• Read Robb's essay. again
• If you're not sure that Robb Stewart is a top professional in this very particular area, investigate his experience and his work.

Ivan Hunter -- the author of article in the original post -- comes to the same conclusions ► Many think that the tubing of the cornet is conical whereas the trumpet is cylindrical. This is incorrect. Both instruments have roughly the same proportion of tapered to straight tubing as the accompanying graphic shows. Both the measured instruments have bores starting at around 0.335” at the mouthpiece entry, 0.459” though the valve section, and 4.8” at the bell.

Re-read that short article and notice his line drawing which compares conical and cylindrical sections between the Besson cornet and the Bach trumpet.

No one is asserting that the internal shapes and designs of most trumpets and most cornets are nearly identical.

The argument is against the notion that -- and we've all said something like this as if we were the expert -- cornets are roughly 2/3 conical and 1/3 cylindrical while trumpets are roughly 1/3 conical and 2/3 cylindrical.

-Denny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TrumpetMD
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 22 Oct 2008
Posts: 2411
Location: Maryland

PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do euphonium and baritone horn players have this same type of discussion? (Not meant to be sarcasm.)

That being said, I agree with Dale and others, that it's not just the percentages of conical vs cylindrical tubing. It's more about what the manufacturer does with it. And I think it's also about how the player approaches the instrument.

Mike
_________________
Bach Stradivarius 43* Trumpet (1974), Bach 6C Mouthpiece.
Bach Stradivarius 184 Cornet (1988), Yamaha 13E4 Mouthpiece
Olds L-12 Flugelhorn (1969), Yamaha 13F4 Mouthpiece.
Plus a few other Bach, Getzen, Olds, Carol, HN White, and Besson horns.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Denny Schreffler
Veteran Member


Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 383
Location: Tucson

PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TrumpetMD wrote:
... And I think it's also about how the player approaches the instrument.

Mike


Yes -- see Robbs' comment about that.

-Denny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
delano
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 3118
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2021 12:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm afraid the topic of this thread is much more complicated.

First, in the quite recent history of the cornet and the trumpet there has been an era in which the trumpet was on the winning hand at the cost of the market position of the cornet. For that reason there has been all kind of experiments with the layout of the cornet from long cornets to trumpets with a modified leadpipe. Lots of examples, the Olds cornets, the 80A, the Mendez cornet and so on. Obviously they were trying to build a cornet but then as close as possible to a trumpet. Then it's indeed difficult to find BIG differences between these cornets and the trumpet in general.
But times changed the story a bit. The long, trumpetty cornet is now a niche instrument, a Schilke, a Bach, a Yamaha student, Van Laar built one specimen of it, maybe there are a few more.(I remember complaints on this forum about the availability of the long cornet).
The short cornet with a SC is now the leading model of the cornet, the Yamaha's Neo, the Besson Sovs and the Prestiges, the fabulous Getzens, that kind of stuff. So that's now my picture of a cornet.

Second, the Hunter/Stewart stuff.
Maybe they succeeded in proving that there is not much quantitative difference in conical/cylindrical tubing between cornets and trumpets in general but that was not the topic of this thread. That's about differences between cornet and trumpet and the tubing is only one aspect of that, ok with some history. (BTW the Schilke example is not very convincing: the B5 is like all B trumpets a step bore horn which is a little deviant structure of a trumpet).
And let's look closer to the Stewart story:
He draws the conclusion that the structure of the leadpipe (more or less conical, the length) could have influence on the intonation and the playability of the instrument but only minimal on the sound (timbre). It must be in the taper and diameter of the bell. But that also is a fundamental characteristic of the cornet: because the leadpipe of a cornet is longer, the bell part must be shorter and therefor have more, or at least, a different taper, after all on both horns the bell part starts on the first valve of the machine.
And cornets DO have different bells than trumpets. The fact that there are a few cornets that share the bell with the trumpet is not enough prove (old Besson, Bach 37).
So now some differences between the (modern?) short cornet and the modern trumpet:
the cornet has:
- a longer (and more tapered?) leadpipe;
- a shorter bell section;
- a different (bigger and more tapered) bell;
- a different wrap with more curves;
- a different receiver;
- a different mouthpiece.

I don't mean with this all that there are very big differences between these horns but only gradually differences just like a comparison with the flügelhorn which also can be played with a trumpet or a cornet sound if you really want that.
And to quote mr. Stewart:

In the case of the other player he decided against using the small bore Conn for his recording project in favor of a modern Getzen cornet that he was more comfortable playing and could more easily get a perfect track down. This last instrument has a larger bell and darker sound that the trumpets that he uses.

So one of the two best trumpeters he knows uses a cornet to get another (darker) sound on a recording than his trumpet will give him. Why if the difference between a cornet and a trumpet is:
'more perceptual and subjective than academic'.

One of my most favorite classical players has always been Hans Gansch (of course after Dokshizer). Look and listen to him and ask yourself: why FTF he uses a cornet for this???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9UmCSc3W2s&ab_channel=SchagerlClub

So my final conclusion is: Yes, there is still much to discuss.


Last edited by delano on Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:37 am; edited 5 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
deleted_user_687c31b
New Member


Joined: 03 Apr 1996
Posts: 0

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2021 12:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TrumpetMD wrote:
That being said, I agree with Dale and others, that it's not just the percentages of conical vs cylindrical tubing. It's more about what the manufacturer does with it.

That makes sense. The average percentage may not tell the whole story. The thing delano mentioned about the way the cornet is tapered is something I also noticed about the bell on my cornet: it seems like the taper gets larger earlier on the bell pipe than my trumpets, but ends at roughly the same bell size. That will lead to a roughly equal average taper over the entire length, but how it's applied is pretty different. If the bells were examined separately, it wouldn't surprise me if the average diameter would be larger for the cornet.

I also agree with delano that it matters which instruments you use for comparison: cornets that were made to be trumpetty (or trumpets to be more cornetty) wouldn't apply for a proper comparison as naturally they'd have more similarities. Today they might be classified as 'hybrid' instruments with fancy names like flumpet, corumpet or coppernicus...but back then, they just called 'em long cornets.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cheiden
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8910
Location: Orange County, CA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2021 9:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

delano wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9UmCSc3W2s&ab_channel=SchagerlClub

One of my all-time favorite YouTube videos.
_________________
"I'm an engineer, which means I think I know a whole bunch of stuff I really don't."
Charles J Heiden/So Cal
Bach Strad 180ML43*/43 Bb/Yamaha 731 Flugel/Benge 1X C/Kanstul 920 Picc/Conn 80A Cornet
Bach 3C rim on 1.5C underpart
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard III
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2611
Location: Anacortes, WA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2021 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TrumpetMD wrote:
Do euphonium and baritone horn players have this same type of discussion? (Not meant to be sarcasm.)

That being said, I agree with Dale and others, that it's not just the percentages of conical vs cylindrical tubing. It's more about what the manufacturer does with it. And I think it's also about how the player approaches the instrument.

Mike


Not exactly. There are discussions of bore size at different points in the tubing but nothing like this. The rate of new threads regarding euphonium players is quite low compared to this.

And with french horns, there really is no forum site supported by players.

Trombone players have it. Tuba players too. But trumpet players love to discuss as nauseam.
_________________
Richard

Conn 22B Trumpet
York Eminence Model 4028 Cornet
1903 Conn The Wonder Cornet
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Denny Schreffler
Veteran Member


Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 383
Location: Tucson

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm afraid the topic of this thread is much more complicated than mr. Schreffler thinks.

DS••► You have either completely missed or have misread what I have written as clearly as I was able.
From an earlier post by me –
Quote:
No one is asserting that the internal shapes and designs of most trumpets and most cornets are nearly identical. The argument is against the notion that – and we've all said something like this as if we were the expert – cornets are roughly 2/3 conical and 1/3 cylindrical while trumpets are roughly 1/3 conical and 2/3 cylindrical.


Second, the Hunter/Stewart stuff.
Maybe they succeeded in proving that there is not much quantitative difference in conical/cylindrical tubing between cornets and trumpets in general but that was not the topic of this thread.


DS••► Proving the quantitative similarity in total conical/cylindrical tubing between cornets and trumpets, in general, is the original topic, not the tangents and individual opinions that were certain to arise –
••► The original post by Proteus –
Quote:
Just found this really interesting article by Ivan Hunter (Jaeger Brass). Surprising, myth-busting, and definitely worth a read. https://www.jaegerbrass.com/Blo/Entries/2019/9/difference-between-cornet-and-trumpet.html

••► From JWG, the first response (partial) to the original post –
Quote:
The myth of "conical cornet" and "cylindrical trumpet" got busted over a decade ago, perhaps 2 decades ago


Dale Proctor expressed it in his post –
Quote:
Percentages of conical vs cylindrical tubing comparisons do prove the similarity of cornets and trumpets in that respect (which I suppose is the subject of this thread), but don’t really prove that they sound the same.



So my final conclusion is: Yes, there is still much to discuss mr. Schreffler.


DS••►Yes, lots to discuss about the differences and similarities between trumpets and cornets.

-Denny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
delano
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 3118
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2021 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you start a topic here on TH you use, in the chosen category, the 'new topic' button. After that the first thing you have to fill in is the subject of the topic.
In this case (copy):
The real differences between cornet and trumpet

So I felt myself free to discuss the real differences between cornet and trumpet, even if the OP thought that the myth of conical/cylindrical tubing was all there is.
Maybe that whole myth, which was indeed very popular, was only based on the wish to explain something complicated in an easy manner.
But it is your choice to blow up the meaning of the conical/cylindrical topic till it fills, for you, the whole cornet/trumpet differences discussion.
BTW the Hunter and Stewart findings are not THAT scientific but that's quite a different discussion.
And there is a world of difference between the conclusions of Hunter and those of Stewart, roughly: Hunter finds essential differences, Stewart not except perception and something subjective.
So I sustain that there is a lot to discuss about this subject and IMO Hunter/Stewart did not produce the last word about it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
deleted_user_687c31b
New Member


Joined: 03 Apr 1996
Posts: 0

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2021 2:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Can it be stated that the conical/cylindrical bore is not strictly essential for the cornet/trumpet then, but helpful in achieving the desired sound?

Personally, I'm somewhat reluctant to designate the mouthpiece as an essential part of the instrument, given that you can get all shapes for both trumpet, and cornet (and flugelhorn). Also, when the exact same mouthpiece used on either a trumpet or a cornet (with the trumpet receiver on the Olds Super cornet, this is something I could test), there's a noticeable difference in timbre (the cornet being less bright for 3 different mouthpiece shapes: a shallow C cup, a deep C cup and a deep V cup). So again, while the mouthpiece affects the sound greatly, it too doesn't seem to be the defining factor.

The wrap as a defining factor if mentioned a lot as well, but the argument against that is the pocket trumpet...

Another thing mentioned was the position of the valves: that's different for trumpets and cornets...but it's the same for rotary trumpets and flugelhorns, yet they sound vastly different.

So I'm inclined to agree with some of the earlier posters that everything points to the difference being a combination of things rather than a single aspect, and I'll accept that changing too many of those (or even a single one) takes away what makes the cornet a cornet (as I'm not qualified to assess that).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
delano
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 3118
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2021 4:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is enough reason to believe that the length of the conical/cylindrical bore is not essential but maybe how tapered the conical zones are can be more important.

The mouthpiece is very important. The point is not that you can use the same mp on cornet and trumpet but that there are only minor differences between cornet and trumpet but they are strengthens by using the right mouthpiece.

The wrap may be important, the pocket trumpet has nothing to do with that, too much resistance, better ask yourself why Adams and Marcienkiewicz produce trumpets with a single or double shepherds crook.

The sound of the flügelhorn is probably the most determined by the outragious big bell and big bell throat, that makes every comparison with another horn tricky. (BTW the rotary trumpet is probably more cylindrical than a piston trumpet which can make the difference even bigger).

And yes, of course it is in the end an accumulation of minor differences that together determine the outcome.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
delano
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 3118
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2021 4:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

More in general, I am convinced that my cornets produce a different sound and play differently than my trumpets. The 'why' seems to be not that simple, all I did was not more than a thought guess.
I am very curious what mr. Getzen has to say about this subject, maybe he can chime in, he must know much more, would be nice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
deleted_user_687c31b
New Member


Joined: 03 Apr 1996
Posts: 0

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2021 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

delano wrote:
More in general, I am convinced that my cornets produce a different sound and play differently than my trumpets. The 'why' seems to be not that simple, all I did was not more than a thought guess.

Understandable. I don't disagree with you, I was merely trying to indicate why I think the individual aspects aren't 'the essential difference'...not that they don't matter at all, on the contrary.

delano wrote:
I am very curious what mr. Getzen has to say about this subject, maybe he can chime in, he must know much more, would be nice.

Indeed, a builder's perspective would be very interesting. At least they would know what they're doing differently between the two instruments...though I suspect that may be a trade secret.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve A
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 1799
Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2021 7:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just adding my own experience - personally, I'm interested to see that the differences between the two don't lie in the conical/cylindrical ratios. One of the bands I play with (or did back when bands played, and everything) recently had a set of bugles made, and there was a discussion within the band related to sound character that largely focused on the conical/cylindrical question.

Personally, I think the bugles are great, but some people felt they sound too trumpetty, and felt strongly that the instruments had to have more conical tubing to achieve their desired sound. While it may be a minor point, in the interests of informing future discussions, I'm interested to learn that there's not really much difference between modern cornets and trumpets on this basis.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Moderators
TH Moderator Group


Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 3897

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2021 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Discuss, debate, do not attack. Tone it down folk.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Cornet/Flügelhorn All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
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