Some thoughts on the Chicago School

Nonsense Eliminator · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 2:15 pm Post subject:

Hey Dave, keep your productive and on-topic posts to yourself. Can't you see we're having a knock-down drag-out punch-up here? Where do you get off dragging the actual point of the discussion into a perfectly good shouting match?

P.S. FOR DUMBASSES: I'M BEING SARCASTIC.
P.P.S for Dave: Well said.

Unrelated reply to Bugleboy:

1.) I would submit that it is more effective to debate ideas than individual sub-clauses. It is pretty easy to take a few words out of context and argue with them, but it doesn't prove anything.

2.) The idea you seemed to be arguing with but in fact agreed with is the one that you initially replied to with a series of complaints but later edited your post to read "Agreed."

[ This Message was edited by: Nonsense Eliminator on 2003-04-16 17:23 ]

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

I once asked Mr. Jacobs why he did not write a textbook on Brass Playing. I never really understood his reluctance to putting his approach into print, but I certainly do now. Each lesson (only one summers worth), I would press him on the subject and he finally told me he believed his concepts would be misunderstood by other schools of thought. Many players came to him, many working pros, that had all sorts of strange theories about Brass Playing. Rather than get into unproductive debates with them, he gave them as much as he could and encourage their artistry. He could not have forseen the internet, but he did understand the Brass Players mind and chose not to put something out there that he would not be around to defend. The last is my take, could be wrong.

Somebody else posted this some time ago during one of these spats and I've remembered it. "It's OK if you guys don't get it!"

In some way I believe Mr. Jacobs thought it was OK if some guys never got it. Others will.

Simple, not easy.

Dave Bacon

_trumpetgod_02 · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 2:46 pm Post subject:

Hey,

Eric:

I don't think that Charly has in and out approved of any method or disapproved any method in his own words.

Everyone,

I think what happened here is that he asked for some clarification on a subject said by someone and everyone proceeded to knock him for it. I have not seen him "knock" any particular method or any particualr person. Only the statements made by those people. He is not attacking anyone here. He merely asked questions and is wanting answers. I see people making mistakes about what he says trying to get to the root of someone's argument and think that he is trying to flame particular people or schools of thought. Nothing of which I have seen him do in this thread. He has merely made some questions and statements to others asking for clarification of what they said originally or some point past that (which I still believe that some have not answered). And they are the one's getting offended for having to explain what they said in the first place.........

A few humble outside opinions....

Nick
_________________
www.trumpetherald.com

_bugleboy · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 5:32 pm Post subject:

Eric,

I can't imagine why you pretend to reference logic or try and say anything intelligent in these discussions. You obviously don't read the posts, and then come in making statements that don't make any sense. Robert_White is the poster who first asserted that methods that stress what to do (willful manipulation) with the aperture, etc., will rarely produce a pro level player. Apparantly you had no objection to that blanket statement, when it was made, even though you supposedly are a product of such a method.

Now when I challenge Robert to defend his statement or deny that that was what he meant, you come in accusing me of somehow insinuating that CG was a "crappy teacher." And you call it logical? I'd love to see how you have constructed that argument.

Why isn't Carmine on your list of incompetent teachers, Charley?

Since I have never made a list of incompetent teachers, I suppose that would be a sufficient reason. The logic, Eric, is that since I have never made that type of a list, then it would not be possible for CC, or anyone for that matter, to be on it. Here are some examples of how the logic works, Eric.

Why isn't Jeff Smiley on your list of incompetent teachers, Charley?
ans: Because I never made a list of incompetent teachers, therefore Jeff Smiley could not be on a list that doesn't exist.

Why isn't James Stamp on your list of incompetent teachers, Charley?
ans: Because I never made a list of incompetent teachers, therefore James Stamp could not be on a list that doesn't exist.

Why isn't Claude Gordon on your list of incompetent teachers, Charley?
ans: Because I never made a list of incompetent teachers, therefore Claude Gordon could not be on a list that doesn't exist.

Why isn't Jerry Callet on your list of incompetent teachers, Charley?
ans: Because I never made a list of incompetent teachers, therefore Jerry Callet could not be on a list that doesn't exist.

Do you see how this works, Eric? There is no list. You have invented a list and then accused me of not putting a name on the fictitious list with the statement,

Why isn't Carmine on your list of incompetent teachers, Charley?

Sounds like willful manipulation if I ever heard it.

Now this is an interesting statement by you, Eric.
Regarding the concept of "willful manipulation," (and in the VERY SAME PARAGRAPH) you have made two interesting statements.

So Claude was a "willful manipulator", whatever the hell that is.

But then you say
Sounds like willful manipulation if I ever heard it.

First you don't know what it is, and then you suddenly know what it is.

Most dictionaries will contain the words "willful" and "manipulation" and will be the help that you need to get past this problem.

[ This Message was edited by: bugleboy on 2003-04-16 21:00 ]

_bugleboy · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 5:52 pm Post subject:

NE,

1.) I would submit that it is more effective to debate ideas than individual sub-clauses. It is pretty easy to take a few words out of context and argue with them, but it doesn't prove anything.

My goodness! If you have a problem clarifying simple terms, how in the world will the more complex ideas that are constructed from these terms be dealt with?

I challenge you to show me one thing that I misrepresented in any way by taking it out of context. If something has been misrepresented by me, I will be the first to correct it, but you need to back this one up NE.

2.) The idea you seemed to be arguing with but in fact agreed with is the one that you initially replied to with a series of complaints but later edited your post to read "Agreed."

Did you really miss my explanation of that post that actually came after it on the next page?

_________________
Charles Raymond

[ This Message was edited by: bugleboy on 2003-04-16 20:56 ]

Nonsense Eliminator · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 8:25 pm Post subject:

BB,

My goodness!

I don't see where your moral state has anything to do with this, and I regard this premise as unproven in any case.

If you have a problem clarifying

Actually, I worked in a restaurant and it's pretty easy. I'll put it in simple terms, how it's done. You heat up the butter until it melts and skim off the gunky stuff. Presto, clarified butter. It doesn't burn as easily.

in the world will

I think recent geopolitical events make it pretty clear that the world does not have a single will and even when a majority will exists it may be disregarded by the powerful few.

the more complex

I am familiar with inferiority complexes and the like, but I am uncomfortable with you throwing around terms like the more complex without further definition.

id

And now you're getting all Freudian on me. That's not cool.

that are constructed

Now you're not making any sense at all. "That" is singular and requires the singular form of the verb "to be", that is, "is."

from these terms

You haven't sufficiently defined "these terms" for this to have any meaning.

be dealt with

I have attempted to elucidate what I feel are important points. Should I therefore be face with veiled threats? This is a forum for trumpet discussion, not a street brawl.

?

&

Did you really miss my explanation of that post that actually came after it on the next page?

Evidently. Still looking.

_________________
Nonsense Eliminator

[ This Message was edited by: Nonsense Eliminator on 2003-04-16 23:27 ]

allofyougetalife · Veteran Member Joined: 19 Mar 2003 Posts: 207

BRAVO NE!

Now you're playing his game. We may just get somewhere yet!

Keep the faith!

-aoygal

trpt-master · Veteran Member Joined: 02 Apr 2003 Posts: 352

Amazing work NE! BRAVO,

You are sharper than a tack aoygal! The only way to debate BugleBoy is to play his game. (I learned this lesson the hard way) Otherwise, you are sure to fight a losing battle and BB has proven that he has the time and tenacity to pick apart statements piece by piece until no one has any idea what is going on. For many reading BB’s debate style responses (where just about every single phrase is picked apart) might be a similar experience to Japanese Water Torture.

In Peace,

trptmaster

trptczar · Veteran Member Joined: 09 Mar 2003 Posts: 102

I'll tell you it is hard sometimes lwading through the many posts but it is well worth it when I am enlightened by the thoughts of some of you. I think I've said this before but this topic poses some great questions. Bravo to some of you. Particularly NE and rw.

Come on guys. Making great music on the trumpet is hard enough do we really need to apply a more cerebral way of thinking about it. My friend says he usually thinks about what his big toe is doing while playing the trumpet. Works for him.
cheers
tc

_trumpetgod_02 · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 4:33 am Post subject:

NE,

I have found a fundamental flaw in your "debating". YOU DO NOT USE COMPLETE THOUGHTS. If you wish to sit there and try and say that BB has no idea about debating, which he has shown to all of you that he can do quite well. Eventhough it seems to me like there is nothing to debate about. He asks a question and waits for a response, others will not answer that/those question(s), and then challenge him with further questions, never even making an attempt at what he really asked in the first place. What you showed as " an example of how Bugleboy debates" is a silly overdramatic, misrepresentation. If you wish to "debate", (which is not whatI am seeing here), with him you must learn to debate Ideas and thoughts, complete ones at that. You can not take two or three words (unless they form a complete coherent thought) and make some vein attempt to intimidate us with your overwhelming knowledge and abuse us with your verbose vocabulary. If pontificating around spewing grandiose words in a banal manner is how to get the respect and concensus of everyone, perhas I should try that. Instead we should all try to be a people which makes every attempt to be exegetical and are not lead about like little dogs on collars behind one or two masters.

With the greatest ammount of respect and reverence,
Nick
_________________
www.trumpetherald.com

_bugleboy · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 5:21 am Post subject:

NE,

OK. You're not interested in intelligent discussion. Wouldn't it have been easier to just say that?

aoygal,

Trumpet playing is a game? Never thought of it that way.

trpt-master/trptczar

You also have shown that you lack the desire, motivation and possibly the ability to participate in any intelligent exchange about the trumpet.

I wish all of you the best.

Nonsense Eliminator · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 6:23 am Post subject:

Bugleboy --

Your own medicine doesn't taste so good, eh?

Obviously, I exaggerate. However, the point is that it is impossible to express an idea in a way which is not reducible into a string of absurdities. Every word and every phrase takes its exact meaning from its context, and to divorce concepts from their context is to deprive them of meaning.

Who is the one "not interested in intelligent discussion": The person who has made some rather lengthy posts laying out his opinions, or the the person who admits, "I haven't posted any arguments, yet. I've agreed with certain statements and suggested that other's could be easily challenged, but I haven't posted an argument on this thread."

The creationists in the Lounge make more sense -- at least I know what their point is.

Nick --

I'm sorry my use of language offends you.

Of course my example of how Bugleboy debates is a "silly overdramatic, misrepresentation." That's pretty much the definition of "parody", isn't it? Presumably you know that since you attempted one yourself.

I am a little curious about what you feel constitutes a "complete thought." How many pages long must my post be to rate as a complete thought? Or are you suggesting that my parody of Bugleboy's post was an honest attempt at debate? Can you show me some other place where I took "two or three words" and based an argument on that?

I'm really quite curious how I am the bad guy in this debate. I think I've been pretty clear about what I think. Perhaps next time I will begin the thread with a post twice as long, using no words with more than three syllables, and spell everything phonetically.

_trumpetgod_02 · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 6:33 am Post subject:

Hey there,

First off, I never said that you or anyone was the "bad guy" in the particular event.

Second, when you say Charly takes eveything out of context, I fail to see that. I have always seen him make a fair point about whatever he has taken and chosen to make a statement about.

Finally. I am leaving this thread. I think that we all know where I stand in relation to what is going on here. That and I do not feel that this is worth my time. Everyone seems to be arguing about how to "debat" (which this is not). And the trumept thing has become lost in an attempt to make charly "slip-up". I am done.

Nick
_________________
www.trumpetherald.com

allofyougetalife · Veteran Member Joined: 19 Mar 2003 Posts: 207

_bugleboy · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 8:38 am Post subject:

galaoy,

How about sharing some of your sound files? Since you have found the time to comment on mine, surely you can find the time to share your virtuosity with me.

What? Is that a negative answer. Tsk, tsk. But, by all means, though, do continue critiquing others.

If you have found my posts to be tedious, why have you bothered to read them? Even better, why not the blocking feature that Todd has recently made available? I can think of only a few others that I would love to know were blocking my posts than you.

_________________
Charles Raymond

[ This Message was edited by: bugleboy on 2003-04-17 12:08 ]

_bugleboy · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 8:59 am Post subject:

NE,

Your own medicine doesn't taste so good, eh?

I would love to have a taste of my own medicine, if only it were possible in this thread. Unfortunately, Robert is the only one who has made that attempt and so far he hasn't been up to the task. If this is your idea of dishing it out it's no wonder that the Creationists are kicking your butt over in the lounge.

the point is that it is impossible to express an idea in a way which is not reducible into a string of absurdities.

Even more reason why you're not faring so well in the Lounge. They definitely have the upper hand on reasoning in that thread.

The creationists in the Lounge make more sense .....

Than you. Absolutely. Yes, they certainly do.

Keith E Miland · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 10:16 am Post subject:

All of you,

FWIW from a FNG to TH. (military term). I am an OF (another military term) and play trumpet for fun. I have had very few trumpet lessons and the few lessons from trained trumpet playesr not until I was 40 +. That was a while back.

I found TH in January and have been reading everything I can on many of the subjects. I never new that these "schools" exsisted. I post little so my ingorance doesn't show. Why I waded through this whole mess, now going on 7 pages, I do not know.

What I can tell you all is that after wading through this thread I'm just about ready to sell my horns and never admit to ever wanting to be called a trumpet player. That's the effect this thread has had. I won't though, becasue no matter what kind of playetr I am, I still have fun playing.

I've read all sorts of statements about the forum about being here to help trumpet players play better. You have kids reading these posts, some as young as 11 I believe. Go back to page 1 and read everything all the way through. What sort of message, or better yet, what are you teachers teaching these young people when you get into it like this?

There's my $.000001 worth. I've got may flame retardant suite on, so you can dis me all you want for butting into your private snit.
_________________
Keith E Miland
Formerly brassbandplayer

WT Flugel/FO5
Bach Strad 37/Curry 5TF
Conn Wonder Solo Cornet (1897)/5VC

weekendwarrior · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 10:56 am Post subject:

Kevin,

If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

WW

_swthiel · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 7:06 pm Post subject:

Batmann · Veteran Member Joined: 29 Dec 2002 Posts: 112

If you are you had better hurry up and get over there, you guys are getting your butts kicked.:lol:

[ This Message was edited by: Batmann on 2003-04-17 22:09 ]