| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Wilktone
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Aug 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Asheville, NC
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2023 5:45 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| abontrumpet wrote: | | Wilktone wrote: | | I did a pretty deep dive on this a while back, which you can read here. |
I'll always do my duty to say that this paper and the logic presented in it has many flaws and lacks serious expertise. |
Yes, you always do. You also always forget to point out what flaws and how my supposed lack of expertise makes the overall thesis inaccurate. Until you do your homework too, and site the sources you found, I will stick to my guns.
| Quote: | | It would not stand the test of a peer review. |
You're right, it would almost certainly not. Largely because the survey I conducted was a pilot study in scope and would need to be improved for peer review.
(If you haven't read the paper, this study tested internet "experts" at their abilities to hear a trumpet player's mouthpiece placement by sound alone. The results were consistent with random chance. If you want to argue that there are some experts who are so good at this skill they can tell by sound alone whether a player places the mouthpiece on the red, I would like that individual to put it to an honest test. They didn't volunteer for my study.)
| Quote: | | SOME trumpeters can play in the red. |
ALL brass musicians play in the red. So you must be behind the argument that there's something mechanically wrong with placing on the red, rather than in the camp that it's inherently damaging.
| Quote: | | They are very few and nearly nonexistent in the professional world. |
They are rarer, but calling them few and nearly nonexistent is too extreme. I have run into them, am an example myself, and posted another example earlier this thread. You don't have to go very far out of your way to find them.
But let's assume that your characterization of how rare is correct. That still doesn't mean that there's something inherently wrong with those players who do.
ALL mouthpiece placements are unique. ALL embouchures are exceptions. There are amazing players with mouthpiece placements all over that might look strange to someone not accustomed to embouchure study. The metrics I use in my teaching to decide whether the mouthpiece placement needs adjusting is based on objective and observable features, not arbitrary features that don't influence embouchure technique in any meaningful way.
| Quote: | | It is very evident when playing in the red is not a functional embouchure for the player at hand. |
It can be, if you're using objective metrics. But many teachers are ignorant of how different players play in different ways. Upstream players, such as myself and the trumpet player who I posted video of above, often place in the red of their upper lip. And these players have embouchure characteristics that are sometimes exactly opposite of what other players need to do. When a teacher instructs upstream students to play in a way that is not conducive to that embouchure type they can struggle and their problems get interpreted as related to the mouthpiece placement. Instead, these players should learn how to work with their upstream embouchure instead of trying to move their placement away from where it wants to go.
I have heard from several professional upstream brass musicians who have stated something to the effect that they got through college by ignoring what their teacher was telling them and playing the way they new worked. Other musicians may not be so lucky to work that out if they have that sort of teacher.
Dave
_________________
wilktone.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
abontrumpet
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1808
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2023 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilktone wrote: | | Yes, you always do. You also always forget to point out what flaws and how my supposed lack of expertise makes the overall thesis inaccurate. Until you do your homework too, and site the sources you found, I will stick to my guns. |
I am happy to do that in the DM's because everytime we get into it, literally nobody cares. But broadly:
1. Your basic argument is obicularis oris is the same on lip versus vermilion therefore placement doesn't matter. That argument can easily be struck down with "well, the lip vs vermilion is inherently different, so placement should matter. Not saying your argument isn't correct, just pointing out the bad logic.
2. You constantly point out that "all brass musicians play in the red" aka, the sides of their mouthpiece. But at no point in your research do you actually measure the forces of the mouthpiece at the 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock positions versus the 12 o'clock on 6 o'clock position. You also don't address a wedge mouthpiece. Therefore, very poorly researched.
3. There is no evidence that you have worked with an expert in anatomy to address exactly what's up with the obicularis oris. A quick google turned up: https://oa.mg/work/10.1097/PRS.0000000000009685 which elucidates that there is more to it than just obicularis and actually contains insertions of the elevator muscles throughout. So how are you imaging the obicularis oris of "successful" players and how that differs than "non-successful" players?
4. Your sample size is way too low to speak with any authority. IMO lead players, orchestral players would be the population to look at for those with the most demands placed on the embouchure. See what the rate of "in the red" is there.
5. You mention tears in the obicularis oris as injury, but you don't at least do a basic inquiry on "in the red" players versus "non" in the amount of playing days has been thwarted due to things like skin issues/bruising/et al.
That's just what I can think of off the top of my head.
| Wilktone wrote: | | abontrumpet wrote: | | It would not stand the test of a peer review. |
You're right, it would almost certainly not. Largely because the survey I conducted was a pilot study in scope and would need to be improved for peer review. |
Fantastic!
| Wilktone wrote: | | ALL brass musicians play in the red. So you must be behind the argument that there's something mechanically wrong with placing on the red, rather than in the camp that it's inherently damaging. |
See point 2 above. I am not saying there is something mechanically wrong or inherently damaging with it. I am simply saying, in my equally scientific obersvations of students "in the red" they have all exhibited the same issues and have had the same complaints. You can get very far with a student that plays in the red. My best friend (RIP) played in the red and was very successful. But only when it moved slightly closer to the "white".
In my VERY non-scientific hunch, I suspect there is a point on the lip where the curl of the obicularis isn't sufficient to sustain the 12 o'clock pressure effectively. It isn't necessarily the transition point between red and "white" (aka the white roll) but there is a point.
| Wilktone wrote: | They are rarer, but calling them few and nearly nonexistent is too extreme. I have run into them, am an example myself, and posted another example earlier this thread. You don't have to go very far out of your way to find them.
But let's assume that your characterization of how rare is correct. That still doesn't mean that there's something inherently wrong with those players who do. |
See point 4. I'm mainly talking about lead and orchestral players. I'm not saying there is something inherently wrong. I'm saying your paper has many assumptions and leaps in logic.
| Wilktone wrote: | | ALL mouthpiece placements are unique. ALL embouchures are exceptions. There are amazing players with mouthpiece placements all over that might look strange to someone not accustomed to embouchure study. The metrics I use in my teaching to decide whether the mouthpiece placement needs adjusting is based on objective and observable features, not arbitrary features that don't influence embouchure technique in any meaningful way. |
I agree. Same.
For any further discussion, I welcome a PM or phone call. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilktone
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Aug 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Asheville, NC
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2023 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, abontrumpet. Seriously, I appreciate it. I wouldn't assume no one cares and it's better to put this out in public. We could both be wrong and it helps to have other folks put eyes on the logic.
| Quote: | | 1. Your basic argument is obicularis oris is the same on lip versus vermilion therefore placement doesn't matter. That argument can easily be struck down with "well, the lip vs vermilion is inherently different, so placement should matter. Not saying your argument isn't correct, just pointing out the bad logic. |
I don't have the numbers at hand, but I do recall the difference in thickness of skin between the vermillion and the rest of the lip comes down to about the thickness of a human hair. It's not a lot. Furthermore, I think it's most likely that the muscles underneath are what provide the support for the lips, not the thickness of skin. Furthermore, I believe that normal variation in physiology from person to person would probably make any discussion of the thickness of skin impossible to quantify in this context.
I don't feel your criticism here is relevant to my logical argument.
| Quote: | | 2. You constantly point out that "all brass musicians play in the red" aka, the sides of their mouthpiece. But at no point in your research do you actually measure the forces of the mouthpiece at the 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock positions versus the 12 o'clock on 6 o'clock position. You also don't address a wedge mouthpiece. Therefore, very poorly researched. |
I am aware of at least two studies that measure the forces of the mouthpiece on the lips. Neither addressed the relative amount of pressure around the different parts of the mouthpiece rim. I'm not sure how one could measure that effectively.
I would agree that it's a good idea to keep a little more mouthpiece weight on the lower lip. The upper lip tends to be thinner on most people (I'm not talking about the size of the vermillion, I'm talking about how much "meat" there is to protect the upper lip from mouthpiece pressure.) and more prone to injuries.
But I'm not sure how your criticism here changes the results of the research. The medical research typically doesn't even mention the vermillion. Embouchure injuries in the literature also indicate that they don't always occur at the point where the mouthpiece rim contacts the lips in the first place, although they appear to me more likely on the upper lip (not the upper vermillion, the upper lip). It appears that injuries to the lips happen just as often outside the vermillion as they do inside.
| Quote: | | There is no evidence that you have worked with an expert in anatomy to address exactly what's up with the obicularis oris. A quick google turned up: https://oa.mg/work/10.1097/PRS.0000000000009685 which elucidates that there is more to it than just obicularis and actually contains insertions of the elevator muscles throughout. So how are you imaging the obicularis oris of "successful" players and how that differs than "non-successful" players? |
I guess I should have cited my wife (speech therapist, took anatomy at a medical university). But I did cite some medical resources in my literature review that stated the vermillion tolerates pressure quite well, although the inner membrane of the lips do not. So don't roll your lips out and place the mouthpiece on the inside of your lips.
The paper you cite above came out in 2022, and wasn't available when I wrote that paper. I'm not surprised that there is new material out there that is relevant. Maybe there's even something that shows conclusively I'm wrong, but your citation does not. If anything, it suggests that there's even more muscle fibers under the vermillion of the upper lip than I stated in my paper. The abstract states, "The presence of a muscle layer on the orbicularis oris muscle was confirmed in all samples."
That supports my argument more than yours.
| Quote: | | 4. Your sample size is way too low to speak with any authority. IMO lead players, orchestral players would be the population to look at for those with the most demands placed on the embouchure. See what the rate of "in the red" is there. |
That was explicitly stated in my paper and the study was called a "pilot study" many times also. But pilot studies are taken to determine whether a more complete and thorough study is going to be worth the time, effort, and expense. In my opinion, the results would probably be similar to what I got in my pilot.
But you seem to be missing the point of the experiment in the first place. It wasn't to address how many professional players play with rim placement on the vermillion, it was to see how easy it was for people to hear the difference (they didn't). Your thoughts here would make for an interesting study. You're welcome to go ahead and run it, but we can't assume that it would get your predicted results. Best we can say is we don't really know, but we can find excellent brass musicians who do place their mouthpiece rim on the top or bottom vermillion. We can find players who don't who also struggle and have lip injuries.
| Quote: | | 5. You mention tears in the obicularis oris as injury, but you don't at least do a basic inquiry on "in the red" players versus "non" in the amount of playing days has been thwarted due to things like skin issues/bruising/et al. |
As far as I know, no one has put together an experiment that would look at those questions. Again, that wasn't the specific point of my research and experimental design. Go ahead and run that study if you need to scratch that itch.
Anecdotally, I have fewer issues with the issues you mentioned *since* I moved my mouthpiece placement onto the red of my upper lip. Because that placement works best for me, I end up using less pressure, less effort, and overall have had more consistent days than when I played with a different placement.
| Quote: | | I am simply saying, in my equally scientific obersvations of students "in the red" they have all exhibited the same issues and have had the same complaints. |
Honestly, I'm not trying to be rude here, but I have doubts that your observations of your own students are "scientific." What controls did you place on the observations and what empirical measurements did you use? Did you blind yourself or at least have outside observers check your data and hypothesis? What other technique issues did you consider when addressing those student's problems as potentially influencing the root cause? Were all those students upstream players? If so, what specific instructions were those students given that conform or don't conform to upstream embouchure form and function?
At best your claims here are anecdotal in nature. My formal embouchure research in the paper in question (as well as others) attempts to reduce researcher bias and applied controls - outside of lesson time. Until you do so similarly I would think that my formal research carries a bit more weight than your anecdotes.
Maybe I'm wrong and you do have data and methodology to share.
Here's the thing, some of your criticisms are valid - but they don't invalidate my thesis. At best they show that there are places where we can do more research. If and when that happens, we can adjust our thinking accordingly - assuming that the results of that research end up what you expect them to be. Until you or someone else does so, the best you can say is we don't really know about that specific point and whether it's really relevant to placement on the vermillion.
To date, the evidence suggests that the anatomy of the vermillion is an arbitrary feature with regard to brass embouchure mechanics It doesn't directly influence embouchure technique in any meaningful way, and there are examples of excellent players in both the orchestral and lead trumpet world who do play on the vermillion.
Until more and better research is done, I have to assume that there's nothing inherently wrong with placing the mouthpiece on the vermillion - as long as it fits the player's anatomy. That's not as common, but it does happen and when it does too many teachers decide to "fix" it. A lot of my teaching these days is helping players who had been "fixed" by those teachers.
Thanks,
Dave
_________________
wilktone.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doug Elliott
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1185
Location: Silver Spring, MD
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2023 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I sure am glad I'm not in academia.
Statistics have nothing to do with helping an individual fix their problems, and I have pretty much 100% success with that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
abontrumpet
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1808
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2023 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilktone wrote: | | I don't feel your criticism here is relevant to my logical argument. |
Once again you're not hearing what I am saying. Your logic is "obicularis oris is obicularis oris regardless of vermillion or not" or more simply said "its all the same so placement doesn't matter" and I'm saying, if you apply that same logic to the counter argument "it's different so placement does matter" it's an equally valid argument.
| Wilktone wrote: | "The presence of a muscle layer on the orbicularis oris muscle was confirmed in all samples."
That supports my argument more than yours. |
This is the other reason I don't like to get into it with you, because you do not read the words I write. I am not trying to invalidate your argument, I am trying to show leaps in logic and research.
| Wilktone wrote: | | But you seem to be missing the point of the experiment in the first place. It wasn't to address how many professional players play with rim placement on the vermillion, it was to see how easy it was for people to hear the difference (they didn't). |
You cannot hear mouthpiece placement. I can sound equally well in a multitude of placements but not long enough for professional success.
| Wilktone wrote: | Honestly, I'm not trying to be rude here, but I have doubts that your observations of your own students are "scientific."
At best your claims here are anecdotal in nature. |
Please read what I wrote. This is exactly my point. I said "equally scientific." Which I mean to say, not scientific at all.
| Wilktone wrote: | | Here's the thing, some of your criticisms are valid - but they don't invalidate my thesis. At best they show that there are places where we can do more research. |
Again, I am not invalidating your thesis, I am pointing out the flaws in logic and lack of research.
| Wilktone wrote: | | Until more and better research is done, I have to assume that there's nothing inherently wrong with placing the mouthpiece on the vermillion - as long as it fits the player's anatomy. |
I already agreed with this point.
You do not read what I write so I will not respond again. Again, I welcome a phone convo.
All the best.
Last edited by abontrumpet on Fri Aug 11, 2023 9:52 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilktone
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Aug 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Asheville, NC
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| abontrumpet wrote: | | Again, I welcome a phone convo.
|
I appreciate the offer, but no thanks. For a variety of reasons I prefer to keep the conversation here. Largely because although I'm responding to you, I'm not writing for you. Frankly, I am pessimistic that I could change your opinion on this topic, but there may be some people on the fence who can benefit from having some information on this topic.
Your criticisms about my logic and research I don't find compelling at all. You haven't provided anything beyond raising weak questions that collapse with a little thought.
| Quote: | | Once again you're not hearing what I am saying. Your logic is "obicularis oris is obicularis oris regardless of vermillion or not" or more simply said "its all the same so placement doesn't matter" and I'm saying, if you apply that same logic to the counter argument "it's different so placement does matter" it's an equally valid argument. |
First, my discussion of the anatomy of the lips was in direct response to brass pedagogues who spread the misinformation that the lips are made up of "fatty tissue" or that mouthpiece placement should take the "muscle line" of the vermilion border into account. Those people are making a false premise and the conclusions that they draw are highly questionable. It is more than fair for me to point out those errors and draw the conclusion that they are wrong for it.
The rational that your counter argument is a comparable one contains an unstated premise. It is logically invalid because it says nothing about whether your premise is true or false. You have the burden of proof that there is something inherently different about the vermilion that affects brass embouchure technique. I have already provided different lines of evidence here and in my paper that suggests it's not.
Your accusation that my paper is poorly researched by citing a paper that provides additional nuance to the lip anatomy is also unfounded. There was no way I could cite that paper or provide that information in my work as it came out 10 years after I wrote mine. Furthermore, it only bolsters my thesis in the first place.
Regarding me not understanding you well enough, I apologize, but in my defense, you're not being very clear. Your use of the expression "equally scientific," for example, was placed in a context where it's not clear that you were being sarcastic. I understand that you feel it's too much work to type out your thoughts rather than just talk off the cuff over the phone. If you're truly interested in helping others, then you should make the effort to be clearer in your writing. A phone conversation only helps the two of us.
| Quote: | | You cannot hear mouthpiece placement. I can sound equally well in a multitude of placements but not long enough for professional success. |
The survey I ran was specifically in response to one brass pedagogue who stated that he could hear in a blind audition within one minute whether a trumpet student places the mouthpiece on the red of the lips. I called shenanigans and created that poll to put it to the test.
But you seem to have changed your tune now, so perhaps you can be convinced.
| abontrumpet wrote: | | I'll always chime in to disagree when this is posted (sorry Dave, not personal). It's gotten to the point where I can tell that a trumpeter plays in the red (top lip) without looking at them after hearing them play for about 5 minutes. |
| Quote: | | Again, I am not invalidating your thesis, I am pointing out the flaws in logic and lack of research. |
But you are, and you do so consistently in order to disagree with my thesis that the lip vermilion is an arbitrary feature and not of concern to brass embouchure technique. If my thesis is valid, then it can't contain logical flaws and be poorly researched. If it's rife with errors, then the thesis is questionable. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
| Quote: | | I already agreed with this point. |
You agree that it's best to assume there's nothing inherently wrong with placing the mouthpiece on the vermilion? Then what's your beef with my research?
If you have specific logical fallacies to point out please do so. If you know of examples in the literature I should have considered and cited in my paper (that came out BEFORE I wrote mine), please do so and explain how they relate.
I have a vested interest in learning if I'm actually wrong here - I'll need to change my own embouchure. Trust me, I can take it.
Dave
_________________
wilktone.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
abontrumpet
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1808
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| abontrumpet wrote: | | I'll always chime in to disagree when this is posted (sorry Dave, not personal). It's gotten to the point where I can tell that a trumpeter plays in the red (top lip) without looking at them after hearing them play for about 5 minutes. |
Well researched!
Yes, it seems I engaged in a bit of hyperbole. I am trying to think of why I wrote that but: in person, if I know they are playing in the red, there are characteristics evident when it isn't the placement for them (auditory, mostly in slurs and articulation). Or I probably was thinking of the particular way with which the embouchure fails that is characteristic. I apologize for my hyperbole.
| Wilktone wrote: |
I appreciate the offer, but no thanks. For a variety of reasons I prefer to keep the conversation here. |
Perfect, that saves me a lot of time!
All the best. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JayKosta
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 24 Dec 2018
Posts: 3333
Location: Endwell NY USA
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| abontrumpet wrote: | ... in person, if I know they are playing in the red, there are characteristics evident when
it isn't the placement for them ... |
--------------------------
That seems to imply that for some players 'it is the placement for them'.
Because those 'characteristics' are not present.
Am I not understanding your views?
_________________
Most Important Note ? - the next one !
KNOW (see) what the next note is BEFORE you have to play it.
PLAY the next note 'on time' and 'in rhythm'.
Oh ya, watch the conductor - they set what is 'on time'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doug Elliott
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1185
Location: Silver Spring, MD
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| When there's a problem, it's virtually always caused by playing contrary to the individual's natural embouchure type. Correct or incorrect may be either in or out of the red. That's not an indication of anything. If you don't understand embouchure types this will mean nothing to you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
astadler
Veteran Member
Joined: 11 Feb 2014
Posts: 130
Location: Little Rock, AR
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In the name of actual scientific research I feel compelled to say that a sample size of 6 players is not at all acceptable to form any sort of conclusion here. I won’t weigh into the debate one way or the other, but please don’t try to claim any level of scientific authority with that particular research paper given the sample size. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilktone
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Aug 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Asheville, NC
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | That seems to imply that for some players 'it is the placement for them'.
Because those 'characteristics' are not present.
Am I not understanding your views? |
I'm glad that I'm not the only one having difficulty understanding exactly what he's saying.
| Quote: | | When there's a problem, it's virtually always caused by playing contrary to the individual's natural embouchure type. Correct or incorrect may be either in or out of the red. That's not an indication of anything. If you don't understand embouchure types this will mean nothing to you. |
Thanks, Doug. For what it's worth, I think you would have made an excellent academic.
| Quote: | | In the name of actual scientific research I feel compelled to say that a sample size of 6 players is not at all acceptable to form any sort of conclusion here. I won’t weigh into the debate one way or the other, but please don’t try to claim any level of scientific authority with that particular research paper given the sample size. |
The sample size of my pilot survey was 98 participants, who listened to 6 different trumpet players. I wasn't testing the trumpet players, I was testing musicians' abilities to hear the difference. I fully acknowledge in the paper that this was a pilot study to determine if there was enough to go on to warrant further research.
I welcome criticisms, but please make them valid ones or ones that weren't already addressed.
Dave
_________________
wilktone.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
abontrumpet
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1808
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JayKosta wrote: | That seems to imply that for some players 'it is the placement for them'.
Because those 'characteristics' are not present.
Am I not understanding your views? |
That is exactly what I meant to imply. I am, as they say, "leaving room for Jesus" or the unknown. I'm glad you are reading my words carefully and picked up on that implication.
My background with playing in the red has been with 5 classmates over the years and then my own journey of playing in the red (I didn't play in the red, over-fatigue caused it to slip to that position unbeknownst to me) and a friend. So total, 7 cases. Admittedly, my own journey makes me acutely aware of just how much placement can affect the system (I've had more lip and teeth placements than you can count) and how it affects the mental side of things.
The characteristics I discovered about playing in the red for myself, held true for the other 6 cases. The most notable characteristic is that everyday felt as if they were starting from scratch, that endurance didn't build over time. It's hard to describe unless you've experienced it. However, for one of them (my friend), he managed to slide his up a bit more but was still just barely "in the red" and was having great success. Whether he managed to buck the trend or not, I won't be able to know because he has since passed.
Ultimately my experience is purely anecdotal as is wilktone's. In fact, everybody on here is just talking from anecdotal teaching experience, but I don't pretend to be an expert on it. I do feel that I am able to help those going through the same woes about playing poorly in the red due to my experience with it. I went through years of experimenting on myself and discovered just how little a tiny little placement change had massive effects over the long term.
I am happy to be proven wrong at some point (and it's possible my friend has already proved me wrong or this one horn player I saw on this orchestral broadcast), but I have to see it in person and examine it to believe it. Unfortunately, the "proof" that wilktone presents is nothing more than him throwing darts in a dark room. It does not meet any scientific standard and therefore does nothing more for me than presenting one's anecdotes against my own. I'm sure he will still be baffled at the end of this response but he does struggle with logic.
In summary: you read correctly (thank you). I have my biases but am VERY open minded and do not beholden myself to any dogmatic views. Thanks for the question!
EDIT: One thing I wanted to clarify is that all the players above were high quality players. Players that went on to have assistantships, good placements in ensembles etc. I myself was fooled at my ability to successfully play in the red. But they all had the same complaints and they all had to have a higher level of management on the day to day than those that could abuse things a little more and get away with it. It is not poor playing vs good playing; it was often great playing -- it's more about the mental and physical toll it takes. I believe it is why we see so few (I have yet to see one in the pro world) in the orchestral field. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JayKosta
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 24 Dec 2018
Posts: 3333
Location: Endwell NY USA
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| abontrumpet wrote: | | ... I went through years of experimenting on myself and discovered just how little a tiny little placement change had massive effects over the long term. ... |
--------------------------------------------------
Thank you for giving a fuller explanation about your views and experience.
Your mention of a 'tiny little placement change' is similar to my experience with control and adjustment of rim pressure distribution.
_________________
Most Important Note ? - the next one !
KNOW (see) what the next note is BEFORE you have to play it.
PLAY the next note 'on time' and 'in rhythm'.
Oh ya, watch the conductor - they set what is 'on time'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doug Elliott
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1185
Location: Silver Spring, MD
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What does "in the orchestral field" have to do with anything?
Just wondering. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
abontrumpet
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1808
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2023 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Doug Elliott wrote: | What does "in the orchestral field" have to do with anything?
Just wondering. |
It's just my background. Those are the people I was around and the world I pay attention to. I can't adequately speak on the jazz/commercial side of things.
I suspect for the "elite" players of both worlds, we would find similar things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilktone
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Aug 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Asheville, NC
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2023 7:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| abontrumpet wrote: | | I'm sure he will still be baffled at the end of this response but he does struggle with logic. |
I find the ad hominem ironic.
| Quote: | | Unfortunately, the "proof" that wilktone presents is nothing more than him throwing darts in a dark room. It does not meet any scientific standard and therefore does nothing more for me than presenting one's anecdotes against my own. |
I imagine that it’s very comfortable to take pot shots and make vague accusations of shoddy research from a position of anonymity. What is your background in research methodology that you can so confidently state this? Are you familiar with the steps of the scientific method?
I. Ask a question about something that can be observed.
II. Conduct a review of the literature to learn what has come before
III. Develop a hypothesis that can be tested
IV. Experiment to test the hypothesis
V. Analyze the data and then communicate the findings to others
My research on this topic:
I. A lot of brass players and teachers say that it’s very bad to place the mouthpiece on the vermilion for a number of reasons. Are the below reasons accurate?
A. The vermilion is prone to damage
B. The vermilion needs to be free to vibrate
C. It sounds bad or just won’t work
II. Looking through the literature we can find several lines or evidence that contradict the often cited rational that placement on the vermilion is always wrong
A. It doesn’t appear to be more prone to damage than any other part of the lips
B. There is muscular support under the vermilion
C. There is no particular change to the pattern of lip vibrations at the vermilion border
D. There are different embouchure types that require different players to put different amounts of upper to lower lip inside the mouthpiece and the varying size of any individual player’s vermilion is arbitrary to the lip ratio inside the cup
E. There are some fine players who place the mouthpiece rim on their vermilion, so it's not always wrong
III. Hypothetically, if it sounds bad then it should be aurally recognizable
IV. Grab recordings of 6 different trumpet players and test a bunch of folks on their abilities to hear which of those players places the mouthpiece rim on the vermilion and which don’t
V. The statistical analysis of those responses were consistent with random chance, which would suggest that there’s no discernible difference in sound
A. Write up a paper that includes a discussion of the methodology and post it
Is it the gold standard of science? Absolutely not, but I’m pretty clear about what its value is. As I pointed out in my conclusions, musicians tend to not have a background in research methodology and so we should encourage those who do have an interest to explore these topics.
If there is an issue with the research, it needs to be corrected. That will be best done by offering specific criticisms that point towards the presented information being inaccurate in some way. Nonspecific accusations don’t count. Nor does arguing that it doesn't address something not relevant to the specific research questions.
Dave
_________________
wilktone.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig Swartz
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 7770
Location: Des Moines, IA area
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2023 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Not sure about the "red part", but this thread has gotten into the weeds... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
abontrumpet
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1808
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2023 6:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig Swartz wrote: | | Not sure about the "red part", but this thread has gotten into the weeds... |
It has indeed lol |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
abontrumpet
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1808
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2023 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I wasn't going to respond to Wilktone again, but I feel like he's the kind of person that would take my silence as a win. But I can just link to this post in the future. I won't address him specifically but try and illustrate, to whatever audience is left, the issues as he has presented them. The only thing I will address directly is:
| Wilktone wrote: | | Are you familiar with the steps of the scientific method? |
Yes I am familiar with the scientific method. So is every 8th grader with a decent public school education.
Moving on:
| Wilktone wrote: | I. A lot of brass players and teachers say that it’s very bad to place the mouthpiece on the vermilion for a number of reasons. Are the below reasons accurate?
A. The vermilion is prone to damage
B. The vermilion needs to be free to vibrate
C. It sounds bad or just won’t work |
General: Prime example of wilktone's issues in this paper. He says "a lot of brass players" (above) and "many" when all that are quoted are: Campos, Whitener, Smiley, and Porter (maybe Weast too?). 4 (or 5) people. Campos is heavily quoted in the paper and it seems that the paper is seeking to discredit Campos' statement that "in a blind audition, I can tell within a minute that someone is playing on the red." The method for his "experiment" was to basically see if amateurs* could hear a difference in placement within a minute. Wilktone has cherry picked a few quotes and made sweeping generalizations.
The other GLARING issue is that I suspect that most of these trumpeters he quotes are talking about players not with a "low-setting" embouchure, but rather a type of embouchure that he would classify as a having the "upper lip vibrating with more intensity." But he doesn't actually interview any of the sources to examine that point. HE EVEN CALLS IT UNUSUAL in his paper -- "Player D places the mouthpiece just barely right on the red of his upper lip. This player is a little unusual in that he is a 'medium high placement' emouchure type who places on the red of his upper lip." And yet, he is the only one in this line up that "many" -- if not most -- (and I'm using "many" as loosely as wilktone) would call "playing in the red" by the definition of "upper lip vibrating with more intensity"; more information is needed for player C**. So the one person in his paper that "plays in the red" barely plays in the red, has notably large vermilion which means he/she/they is potentially using more of their upper obicularis than many of us.
A. In Wilktone's paper, for some reason, in the section regarding damage, he repeatedly mentions that "no specific mention was made to how rim contact placed on the vermilion correlates with these injuries." So all the evidence he presents are basically saying: they didn't address this point specifically. Which seems to work against him? The best part of the quotes on the damage to the lip vermilion is from a Clarinetist, which I go into further below in "A"
B. For some reason wilktone conflates "free to vibrate" here on trumpetherald and in his paper with the quote "the upper lip should be responsible for most of the lip vibrations...". The way he dispels that quote is by basically saying (and I think he has sufficient proof in his videos) that more bottom lip = greater intensity of lower lip vibration. More top lip = greater intensity of upper lip vibration. Regardless, lips need to be free to do what they need to do aka vibrate. So he doesn't disprove that the upper lip "doesn't" need to be free to vibrate, he just disproves the quote that "the upper lip should be responsible...". Which is a valid point to make, but just pointing out that "free to vibrate" as he presents it here is different than what the paper aims to clarify.
C. If one reads my previous write-up, you will find that "in the red" players quite often (and in my experience, most of the time) sound very good.
| Wilktone wrote: | II. Looking through the literature we can find several lines or evidence that contradict the often cited rational that placement on the vermilion is always wrong
A. It doesn’t appear to be more prone to damage than any other part of the lips
B. There is muscular support under the vermilion
C. There is no particular change to the pattern of lip vibrations at the vermilion border
D. There are different embouchure types that require different players to put different amounts of upper to lower lip inside the mouthpiece and the varying size of any individual player’s vermilion is arbitrary to the lip ratio inside the cup
E. There are some fine players who place the mouthpiece rim on their vermilion, so it's not always wrong |
A. My favorite chuckle is that main source of quotations in his paper on the vermilion not being more prone to damage is Wilson (2000). Which is from the H.L. Wilson book titled -- The Clarinet. Not a scientific text as far as I know.
B. Sure
C. Sure
D. Yup
E. This statement should be a big red flag here. It was addressed in my most previous write up. I would go into further detail, but I'm sure he will focus his next write up on just this portion.
| Wilktone wrote: | | III. Hypothetically, if it sounds bad then it should be aurally recognizable |
You are answering a question nobody really asks. In my opinion, if you want to wave this paper around like it means something, then the question you might have explored could have been: "why do we see so few elite trumpeters that play in the red." Not, fine, but the elite, the best of the best. It would have yielded a paper much richer in value, IMO. Now, if it were me pursuing this paper, I would have interviewed at least 1 professor per state (minimum 50 opinions). The reason for the volume is because even professors can have extreme views, teaching things in a way that they later kind of regret (Phil Smith mentions that he learned a lot from his dystonia journey and now teaches drastically differently), and can just be misinformed. 2-3 plastic or lip surgeons. Maybe a structural engineer to determine forces and maybe make some computer models of similar shapes and how forces would act on them. I would have also found students struggling with the issue and asked their experience and determine if there were any common threads in complaints.
*The thing I just realized in going over his paper again, was that the audio samples were posted on trumpetherald, trumpetmaster, and a trombone forum. He even quotes trumpetheralders by their user name. His 98 people are just forum users, not (necessarily) experts. Not something I would have done. My playing samples would have been at least 20 minutes and I would have sent them to the professors that felt most passionately that they could "hear someone playing in the red."
The whole paper seems to be a vendetta against Campos and crusade for Reinhardt (nothing wrong with a good crusade) but doesn't even send the samples to Campos (as far as I can tell)!
Some nitpicky things about his paper are that --
1. We do not actually see the embouchures of the players so we cannot see whether he has properly identified playing in the red (I'm sure he can...well, maybe ... but it's not good to omit that for a research paper).
2. He defines lips properly in his definitions but then says "Player E does not place the mouthpiece with rim contact on the upper or lower lip." Which makes it sound like he does not put the mouthpiece on his lips...so where is it going?
3. "Player F does not place the mouthpiece so the rim contacts the red of the lips" when wilktone often says something like -- well everybody puts their mouthpiece on the red. So which is it?
4. On his website he says "Medical experts typically have an insufficient background in brass technique to understand how improper playing mechanics may contribute to injuries." but then quotes medical experts in his paper.
5. THE BIGGEST one -- is that he is basically invalidating the complaints of the "victims." In my ANECDOTAL experience we see in my most previous statement, all the trumpeters sounded great and but had the same poor physical experience. We must take into account the complaint of the person which he doesn't even attempt to do.
**This is to notate that I do not have the sufficient bandwidth to determine whether or not wilktone makes a distinction of "playing in the red" as a phenomenon that requires being coupled with the primary vibrating lip. Just as there is more acceptance of playing in the red of the bottom lip (in fact in some cases encouraged -- Clevenger), it is probably because it is more common that the upper lip is the primary vibrator (39/40 examples used more upper according to the paper). I have not met a person IN PERSON that plays in the red on the top lip and vibrates primarily with the bottom lip (which potentially might be the source of their complaints?). So Player C could be bottom vibrator and red upper lip and Player B their inverse (top vibrator, red bottom). In my view, that has potential to bypass the issues as the "many" have come to understand them. I recognize my lack of knowledge in this area but it should have been addressed in the paper, IMO
Edit: also, I'm happy to be wrong, but I don't think it was an ad hominem fallacy. My initial claim was "the logic presented in it has many flaws" and was never about the viability of playing in the red. Wilktone is the author of the paper therefore he is the one using the logic. If someone can chime in on this, I'd be happy to be proven that I indeed used a fallacy here.[/u]
Last edited by abontrumpet on Tue Aug 15, 2023 7:06 am; edited 17 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shifty
Veteran Member
Joined: 23 Feb 2013
Posts: 255
Location: Phoenix AZ
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2023 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| abontrumpet wrote: | | I wasn't going to respond to Wilktone again, but I feel like he's the kind of person that would take my silence as a win. |
Is this a forum for the exchange of ideas or is it contest to see who wins and who loses?
If it's the latter, this thread might go on forever...
_________________
Getzen Eterna 700, Eterna 800
Conn Connstellation 28A, Victor 80A, Connqueror (1903)
ACB Doubler Flugelhorn |
|
| 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
|
