BUZZING

[BrianJohnston]

Yes, this has been talked about (many times) before, but i'd like to bring up a renewed and more specific idea on the entire buzzing topic.

How many are you are pro/con buzzing & why?

I assume some of us know the video of Lindberg explaining why he thinks it is pointless/useless, although there is counter-evidence that shows how helpful buzzing can be.

I'd like to start a discussion on the following:
_____________________________________________
Do you think buzzing is helpful? Do you think buzzing is counterintuitive?

If you buzz, do you rim buzz? do you mouthpiece buzz? Do you mouthpiece + tool buzz? leadpipe buzz, slide buzz etc... & what do you think of the following whether or not you're pro or anti buzz.

How long do you buzz? How long do you think you should buzz? How much buzzing is positive vs negaive

How do you buzz? Articulation? Slurring? Target practice etc.

Empty your thoughts out here, I'm very curious on how buzzing for y'all is going in 2022;

[harrisonreed]

I'll keep it simple:

Buzzing hurts your playing. Typically, people buzz and try to get the best sound they can on the mouthpiece, which requires that person to use an artificial source of resistance to cause the lips to buzz. It is important to know WHY people are buzzing. Most people will give an illogical reason, like "it's good for my air" or "it transfers over to my playing on the instrument". I question these as valid reasons to buzz.

When we play the trombone, the lips and the air column reach a kind of homeostasis, essentially at the same time, where the frequency of the vibrating air in the instrument influences how the lips are "buzzing" in the mouthpiece -- a completely different mechanism and approach to getting a good sound buzzing the mouthpiece. Keeping the embouchure together while playing is easier and requires less effort than buzzing the mouthpiece by itself.

So, in order to buzz and get a good sound buzzing (which is what most people are doing), you introduce tension into the mechanics (and this is supposed to be some sort of thing that transfers over to your playing on the instrument).

You will hear teachers lately say, "oh no, that just means you are buzzing incorrectly". I didn't hear this ever in the 90s or early 2000s. Teachers weren't teaching that. They were teaching students to get the biggest, most open "chest" sound they could on the mouthpiece. I suspect this is because these same teachers simply can't admit that buzzing, as they were taught, introduces tension and really has nothing to do with the mechanics of playing a brass instrument. Changing your teaching to "still buzz, but it should be a very airy, low tension sound" after the year 2010 is just that teacher not wanting to admit that a technique they were teaching is flawed.

Free buzzing, rim buzzing, etc, are even worse, because then you have literally no air column to transfer energy into. You can't vibrate an entire room with just your lips or rim. So the tension needed to free buzz is incredible. Sure, you can free buzz very low frequency with minimal tension, but again, that's a mechanic that doesn't happen during normal playing.

The only way to train your playing mechanics up right, which at the end of the day comes down to applying the right amount of energy into the air column inside the trombone, is to play the actual trombone. Not the mouthpiece.

_________

Do you think buzzing is helpful? No
Do you think buzzing is counterintuitive? Yes

If you buzz, do you rim buzz? No buzz
do you mouthpiece buzz? No
Do you mouthpiece + tool buzz? Yes, the mouthpiece plus trombone
leadpipe buzz, slide buzz etc... & what do you think of the following whether or not you're pro or anti buzz. Leadpipe or buzzing the top tube is interesting. The pipe is long enough that you can apply energy to the air inside and get it to actually play. It might have benefits for opening up someone's sound.

How long do you buzz? How long do you think you should buzz? How much buzzing is positive vs negative sometimes I buzz a mouthpiece, not as a form of practice, but to just remember what it feels like in my face. Maybe less than one second. Longer than one second is negative.

How do you buzz? Articulation? Slurring? Target practice etc. none

*Edits for spelling only

[Burgerbob]

I didn't buzz for the last few years. I recently picked it up again and I gotta say... it has only helped my playing. Mostly just on the mouthpiece for a few seconds, sometimes with a leadpipe when I want to hit low range on bass or contra.

[WilliamLang]

I don't like buzzing often - but it's a useful tool to check intonation and make sure that I'm playing in the center of the partial once in a while. Just check a couple of notes or a passage or two with a decently tuned piano and i'm pretty good to go for another 6 months or so.

[Bach5G]

I buzz a bit. Free buzz (when walking the dog), mpc buzz. I try to keep it relaxed and easy.

[robcat2075]

I agree with the above sentiments that it's not enough like real trombone playing to be useful in developing real trombone playing.

Yeah, I might do a few toots on it to flap my lips but specific routines and extended time committed to it... no. That would be time subtracted from the real trombone playing. Since I have the real trombone... I might as well play the real trombone instead of a sadly inadequate fraction of a trombone.

No teacher I had, even the highly accomplished ones, ever taught it or even mentioned it. I have heard clinicians talk about it. I think they needed something to help fill out their hour.

I have a suspicion that someone somewhere had a deadline for an article for The Instrumentalist or some similar journal and suddenly... buzzing was something you ought to be doing!

Anyone know when daily buzzing entered the conversation? Who first mentions that as an essential?

[harrisonreed]

I don't like buzzing often - but it's a useful tool to check intonation and make sure that I'm playing in the center of the partial once in a while. Just check a couple of notes or a passage or two with a decently tuned piano and i'm pretty good to go for another 6 months or so.

This is one of those reasons that I question. For the sake of honest discussion, how can a 3" mouthpiece that would have actual "partials" in a harmonic series waaay waaay higher than the notes you are likely able to buzz on it help you know you are in the center of trombone partials as they can only exist on a much longer tube? You can neither play a real harmonic series (it would be so high, so much air) on a mouthpiece, nor the partials as they exist of the trombone.

Just to be clear, not taking a jab at you -- nothing but respect. Just want to question and discuss this as a valid reason or use for buzzing. Completely open to a revelation here.

[WilliamLang]

Sometimes i find i'm buzzing on the high side of the pitch, rather than the center, and letting the instrument compensate. I notice this mostly when I feel like I'm getting tired a little quicker than normal chop-wise for no obvious reason, or when I have to drastically change climates (like going from the Northeast to the Southwest of the USA or something.)

So I don't aim for a good sound with buzzing or anything else like that, rather I just use it as a chance to reset my pitch center and maintain efficiency. 99.99% of my playing is done without buzzing, but I do find this one aspect to be a useful tool.

[imsevimse]

I didn't buzz for the last few years. I recently picked it up again and I gotta say... it has only helped my playing. Mostly just on the mouthpiece for a few seconds, sometimes with a leadpipe when I want to hit low range on bass or contra.

I do the same except I have no contra.

[johntarr]

I find it fascinating that there are really good players/teachers who use/advocate buzzing and really good ones who don’t. How can we explain this discrepancy?

How do you buzz?

The way I think about this is that buzzing can be both beneficial and detrimental depending on HOW one uses it. As William Lang pointed out, he uses it very sparingly for a specific reason and that’s an example of what I’m getting at. These discussions are often binary in nature: do/don’t - right/wrong - for/against.

More useful discussions could be based on questions such as: Are there any aspects of buzzing that are helpful? If so, can they be used without causing harm? If not, what else can be done to get the same benefits without the negatives?

My own experience with buzzing is that I think it provides a novel stimulus that can, at times, provide useful information, leading to positive effects. It can also be detrimental if done too much. Additionally, HOW I THINK about buzzing can also influence the outcome.

A while back, I followed parkour and they had a somewhat similar discussion around weight lifting, especially the deadlift. People found that adding the deadlift to their training could increase their abilities to jump, until it didn’t and then after a while, actually hampered jumping. The “pro-deadlifters” claimed that strengthening the muscles led to better jumping. The “anti-deadlifters” claimed that the motor patterns for lifting heavy weights were different than those for jumping. Both statements are true but only useful in certain contexts (I am not comparing buzzing to weight training).

So HOW do you buzz, if you do? If you don’t, HOW do you solve problems that seem to be positively influenced by buzzing?


Respectfully,

John

[harrisonreed]

Sometimes i find i'm buzzing on the high side of the pitch, rather than the center, and letting the instrument compensate. I notice this mostly when I feel like I'm getting tired a little quicker than normal chop-wise for no obvious reason, or when I have to drastically change climates (like going from the Northeast to the Southwest of the USA or something.)

So I don't aim for a good sound with buzzing or anything else like that, rather I just use it as a chance to reset my pitch center and maintain efficiency. 99.99% of my playing is done without buzzing, but I do find this one aspect to be a useful tool.

I think I get your point. Some of the vocabulary around playing brass instruments is getting in my way, but that's a me problem.. Thanks for the reply.

In bold, I notice this too. There are some big band charts we do with interesting harmonies or chords (stuff that is "out there"), and none of the playing is difficult but I feel myself getting tired for no reason. I think it's because some of the band is playing 12tet, some is trying to temper the chords, and some are ... Umm, just not listening. Anyways it's one of those no win situations, where nothing an individual can do will bring the chord into true. This is where my chops absolutely tank out. I think it's like you describe, my chops are searching for a pitch that doesn't exist, subconsciously, after trying to find it and failing with the slide.

[MStarke]

I have gone through various stages of mouthpiece buzzing in my almost 30 years of trombone playing now:
First approximately 10 years without any of it. Had a great, but relatively traditional teacher. Generally speaking from my knowledge this didn't really happen in more traditional German trombone (/brass) methodology
From then on I had multiple variations/periods of mouthpiece buzzing as an exercise by itself, none of it at all, buzzing for warm-ups only, integrating it in practicing specific phrases/exercises, trying to solve specific problems with it.
I studied for some years with a renowned teacher who was quite strictly against it. I am not saying for that reason, but in that timeframe I came to the situation that I could hardly play at all anymore. That was almost the end of any plans as professional musician that I had.
Coming back from that and becoming a much more proficient player correlated with doing some mouthpiece buzzing again. I am not necessarily saying it's the (only) reason my playing got better, but it did not get into the way at least.

Now (since >1 year) my daily routine starts with some specific buzzing exercises that I do on normally two different mouthpieces. Takes 10-15 minutes. I cover up the end of the mouthpiece a little to create some resistance. I do not do any more mouthpiece buzzing than this in my practicing.
Effects that I see of this routine:
- It's more or less all the warm-up I need for the whole day. When I then pick up an actual instrument, I only need 10 seconds to feel ready
- For me it really helps with my doubling and makes me relatively independent from mouthpiece sizes
- I try to just do it, no matter how good/bad it works and sounds that day and not try to force some "perfect" result. In the end this creates confidence and a certain independence from the exact feel that I have
- On the other hand it also allows just focusing on some well capsuled aspects. Taking a good deep breathe, having a steady airflow, not creating unnecessary movements somewhere, good mouthpiece placement and embouchure formation. Just simplifying things, not having to hold a trombone, change slide positions, adjust intonation, working against balance changes when moving the slide etc
- The specific exercise I do is actually a workout, so if I do not manage to find more time that day, I at least have the feeling to give my embouchure some exercise within a minimum amount of time

Of course all of this can be at least partially mental, but most important is that it works.
I also do not want to say that what I describe is the only way to do it.
Just saying that for me it really works, at least at the moment. And that I feel clear benefits from it.
So it's more an empirical "proof" for myself than an actual logical argument.

[soseggnchips]

I find it takes WAY less effort to play in a section that's nicely in tune.

As for buzzing, I do it and find it beneficial, but go through long phases where I don't do it at all. That's purely by accident, not design though.

Lately, I've been making an effort to do it more regularly and I've been following the formula from 'The Reinhardt Routines' by Dave Sheetz and Rich Willey:

• (All the below to be done free-buzzing, without tongue, and quietly.)

• Buzz a mid-range note (I use Bb3) and hold it for the entire playing breath.

• Keeping the buzzing formation, put your finger in the centre of your lips and slowly breath in through the mouth corners.

• As you finish breathing in, remove your finger and buzz a higher note (I use D4). Again, hold for the entire playing breath.

• Re-fill in the same fashion (finger on lips, breath through the corners).

• Remove the finger and buzz another, higher note (I use F4). As before, entire playing breath.

• Breath in once more, and finish by buzzing a few bars of a ballad. I just pick something at random but try to choose a key that keeps it in that Bb3-F4 range... depending on the tune that's not always possible.

I find if I follow that formulation EXACTLY, then it takes about 2-3 minutes and by the end I can really feel the burn in my corners. If I just buzz mindlessly, that doesn't happen; I can keep going all day without feeling any fatigue, which I don't think helps me. Because it's tiring, I generally do it right at the end of my practice sessions.

I think the main benefit for me, personally, is that it reminds me of how to form a stable, firm embouchure. I keep falling back into the habit of playing with a very loose, mushy setup; I can get away with that on the horn, but it doesn't work without a mouthpiece rim to hold everything together so regular freebuzzing helps keep me honest. There are probably other benefits as well (building corner strength and improving control of small apertures / at the limits of breath) but that's the main one for me.

[hyperbolica]

I rarely buzz, but I might do it for a couple of reasons. First freebuzz to warm up when driving to a gig. But just for a minute or two. I can only freebuzz high range, but it helps solidify my high range. Sometimes I practice that transition from freebuzz to mouthpiece buzz to instrument, mainly to make sure I'm buzzing the right pitch, as I have a tendency to buzz above the pitch, play sharp and crack notes.

[Doug Elliott]

The routine of freebuzzing (no mouthpiece) that soseggnchips outlined above is exactly what I have done for most of my playing life. There was about a 20 or 30 year period when I never missed a day of that, even if I did no other playing. I have never found mouthpiece buzzing to be helpful at all.

[Wilktone]

As as already been alluded to above, there is some difference between lip buzzing (free buzzing), mouthpiece buzzing, and lead pipe buzzing (not to mention those devices that provide some resistance to mouthpiece buzzing to more closely simulate playing the instrument). I don't think anyone seems to be suggesting that these things do nothing for the musician, but whether they are a net positive, negative, or somewhere in between is debatable.

It's a good exercise, I think, to try to logic our way towards understanding this debate more thoroughly, but we have to take our conclusions with a grain of salt. I think we all know that for a lot of brass musicians the answer as to whether buzzing (of any type) will be helpful or harmful depends a lot in how the player is practicing it, where they are, and where they need to be going. Then we also need to consider whether we can achieve similar (or better) results by practicing something different. For example, advocates for mouthpiece buzzing often argue that it's good for ear training, but similar results might be achieved by singing, which doesn't risk the musician reinforcing something that works great for buzzing, but not so great for playing.

The idea that buzzing (of any type) is different from actual instrument playing is a valid concern, but buzzing advocates can make a good case that exploiting the differences is exactly what makes it helpful. One the one hand, we don't want to develop habits that don't translate to efficient instrument playing. On the other hand, we practicing things all the time that aren't exactly what we want to do while playing. For example, we might practice breath attacks or practice things with no tongue when we might want to use the tongue. Practicing different sized brass instruments can be helpful for playing your primary instrument. So I do feel that it's useful to take into account exactly how a musician is practicing buzzing.

A while back I took a good look at some of the literature specifically related to mouthpiece buzzing to see what can be objectively said about it. Most of it falls into the camp of being for mouthpiece buzzing, but a literature search about mouthpiece buzzing itself is somewhat biased towards it being positive. What I found disappointing is that only one paper I came across actually looked at the issue with decent research methodology designed to take an objective look at the practice of mouthpiece buzzing. Those results, by the way, showed no difference between beginning brass students who were given regular mouthpiece buzzing and those who were instructed to not mouthpiece buzz.

https://wilktone.com/?p=6722

I go into much more detail on the link above. If I'm pressed to put my nickel down, I advocate for free buzzing in a particular way and have found it very helpful in my own playing and generally for my students as well. I have used mouthpiece buzzing in the past and sometimes have a student do it to get a point or technique across, but feel there are usually better ways to get the same thing happening. I've experimented with lead pipe buzzing and feel similarly about it as I do for mouthpiece buzzing.

Dave

[brassmedic]

I do it sometimes, but I think the extended buzzing practice that I hear some players do is counter-productive. By that I mean when you are blowing too hard and forcing the note to come out with a shrill tone quality. I think that carries over to when you play the whole instrument. I was taught a technique by a great trombone player. First you make sure your mouthpiece is loose in the receiver so it can be easily pulled out. Then you play a note, and while holding the note, pull the mouthpiece out of the instrument, so that you continue to buzz exactly the same without changing anything. If I'm not in shape, my lips will simply stop vibrating. Sometimes the pitch will change as I remove the mouthpiece, which indicates I was buzzing a different pitch that was being forced onto the partial that was coming out of the instrument. If you have a good, relaxed aperture, the same note will continue to sound when you're only blowing through the mouthpiece. But it is a softer and mellower tone than the overly forced mouthpiece practice I mentioned earlier. Then I can reverse the process, buzzing on the mouthpiece first, trying to emulate that softer tone, and put the mouthpiece back into the instrument. I feel like this helps me when I'm having trouble getting a clear, open tone. Other things I do occasionally is to start on say a low Bb and buzz a slow glissando up a couple octaves and back down, the idea being to eliminate any embouchure shifts that would prevent smoothly transitioning through the range. A third thing I do sometimes is to play a difficult legato passage on the mouthpiece alone and then immediately on the instrument. It just helps me get the feel of keeping the air moving.

[VJOFan]

There is likely no way to get a consensus on any practice or pedagogical idea in brass playing. There are just too many players and teachers all trying a bunch of things, but more importantly, there is no objective standard of better and best in terms of outcome.

In my mind, I'm contrasting this with fields like timed and measured sports. For example, virtually everyone who has won a major marathon runs in the neighbourhood of 100 to 120 miles a week, so it is a good bet that you have to do those kinds of miles to be competitive. The core methods for elite training are very well understood and followed with coaches just looking around the margins and tweaking small components for small gains. Because it is clear what good is in running, it is easy to look at what is common among all the best runners.

In trombone playing, after the right note at the right time it's all opinion and personal taste. Because of that, who's to say what is a good or bad practice technique if the person using it is progressing the way they want?

If it isn't possible to truly measure best results (any "great" player is considered over rated by someone or a portion of all some ones based on taste, jealousy, whatever), it is hard to think how one could judge the methods it took to get there.

In the end we find things to do that get us to where we want to be. Until there is an ultimate way to play (or is that a way to measure ultimate playing?), there won't be a clear path to get there. And it doesn't matter how any individual "logics" their way to their own conclusions. We will all logic our ways to our own ideas.

Anyway, buzzing is always good for clicks.

[BGuttman]

Buzzing is actually required if you are playing the PDQ Bach Grand Serenade for An Awful Lot of Winds and Percussion.

[robcat2075]

There is likely no way to get a consensus on any practice or pedagogical idea in brass playing. There are just too many players and teachers all trying a bunch of things, but more importantly, there is no objective standard of better and best in terms of outcome.

I think what is lacking is the desire to craft such studies.

Experiments in psychology and education set out to measure even more gossamer concepts than a player's endurance or range and yet manage to acquire quantifiable data.

This would be doable...

Recruit a pool of thirty students of similar attainment. Measure their range in some consistent manner.

Then for the first group of ten, assign them to buzz every day per some plan such as has been described above.

For the second group of ten, assign them to perform some purely mental exercise about embouchure, one that takes the same amount of time as the actual buzzing routine.

Third group... they are assigned to do nothing extra.

After 20 weeks... measure everyone's range again. They will all be improved, how could they not after 20 weeks of practice? But did one group do notably better than another?

What I just described is pretty much a carbon copy of protocols I've read for studies of other aspects of human subjects' health, performance, and wellness with just the verbs changed.

I don't expect it to ever happen but it is doable.

[Bach5G]

There is likely no way to get a consensus on any practice or pedagogical idea in brass playing. There are just too many players and teachers all trying a bunch of things, but more importantly, there is no objective standard of better and best in terms of outcome.

I think what is lacking is the desire to craft such studies.

etc.

Does Dave Wilkins refer to such a study? It appears so.

The bottom line: no value.

[robcat2075]

I think what is lacking is the desire to craft such studies.

Does Dave Wilkins refer to such a study? It appears so.

The bottom line: no value.

Ah, I see... he buried the lede.

Hurray... objective study possible and done!

That is much more compelling evidence than anecdotal "I do it every day".

[JacobsianApostle]

I wouldn’t tell anyone outright that they should or shouldn’t buzz. I didn’t buzz for years for the reasons already outlined here and in other threads, but once I came back to it my playing was helped greatly. I buzz in small intervals usually not more than 30 seconds peppered throughout the day. I probably don’t exceed more than 5 minutes total on the mouthpiece throughout a full day of practice. Some people are comfortable doing an hour or even two of buzzing a day, which I can’t imagine doing, but it works for them. I also stopped bringing my mouthpiece with me when I can’t play somewhere. It’s better for me when paired with playing on the instrument. Concentrated aural exercises like singing and ear training paired with some basic breathing stuff have been a much more effective way for me to pass the time when I am unable to play.

I also had a teacher who made me buzz on the horn then remove the mouthpiece to continue buzzing the same pitch. He also had me free buzz a pitch>mouthpiece buzz> play on the horn all on one note, and the same in reverse. I spent maybe 6 months warming up this way and I was absolutely miserable. It ruined my sound and made my face feel like brick. I’ve learned that mouthpiece buzzing is useful to me precisely in the ways that it’s different from playing, not in how it’s the same (because it isn’t).

Last thought: Our first and most important tool in playing music is our brain. Attitude is everything. Even if it were to be proved that the positive effects of buzzing were only a placebo, I would argue that it was nonetheless an effective placebo for those who experienced benefits and that they should continue to do it so long as the benefits subsist.

[baileyman]

I heard a recording of Carl Fontana demonstrating doodle with a mouthpiece buzz. Aside from the articulation, it sounded nothing like what came out of the horn. In fact, it sounded pretty bad. The pitch range was greatly compressed. The buzz was rather indistinct.

I have not investigated, but it could be that pitch behaves differently on the piece than the horn. Back when I did buzz, I would match pitches free => piece => horn =>piece => buzz etc in continuous fashion and I thought that was great. And I would aim for a big resonant buzz like Arturo gets. But I have not been buzzing for a while now, and I think my horn works better than ever. There may be no correlation there, who knows?

[Bonearzt]

I mouthpiece buzz when I'm driving to a rehearsal or gig, or when I can't spend time on my horn.
I find it a great way to warm up my lips before I hit the horn.

I personally don't think it's a be all/end all replacement for practicing, but it can be a beneficial PART of a routine.

As with most everything we do as players, it's not for everyone.
But as we all have regurgitated time and again, to buzz or not should NOT be forced upon anyone!

[robcat2075]

I appreciate the value of ritual. There endless stories of professionals, athletes and otherwises, who insist incorporating some element in their routine even though others at the same level do not.

It works for them!

But if it's really just a placebo, as suggested above, why not spend the placebo time on something useful like learning French or mowing the lawn or... playing the fully assembled trombone?

[VJOFan]

I think what is lacking is the desire to craft such studies.

etc.

Does Dave Wilkins refer to such a study? It appears so.

The bottom line: no value.

If it the one I'm thinking of it was limited to checking on the development of intonation. The effects players ascribe to buzzing are larger than that.

Even then, I have a healthy skepticism of education research. It seems that there are just so many things out of an experimenters control that the results can't be much more than food for thought and directions to try personal experiments.

[JacobsianApostle]

For the record I don’t think it’s just a placebo. I feel better warmed up and ready to play when I add a small amount of buzzing.
That being said, a placebo is something that works for your mind. An MLB hitter maybe doesn’t need to tighten their gloves, walk a little circle and take a practice swing between every pitch, but that familiarity of routine is comforting for the brain, and in a game which is 90% mental(the other half being physical) that sense of comfort in the brain translates to real measurable results. I think daily routines for brass players have their value for partially the same reason.

Again, the mind is the primary instrument and its condition matters. I think if we were to thoroughly examine our own practicing and performing habits we would all find some things we do which act as placebos. I also doubt that knowledge of such would make us suddenly stop doing them.

[robcat2075]

... Even then, I have a healthy skepticism of education research. It seems that there are just so many things out of an experimenters control that the results can't be much more than food for thought and directions to try personal experiments.

That leaves us with anecdotes, for which nothing is controlled. And yet they somehow carry more weight in our discussions.

Our universities produce numerous masters and doctoral degree holders in instrumental pedagogy. How is that they have not produced more relevant research in this area? It can be studied and is certainly an area of perennial interest that would benefit from careful investigation.

[RustBeltBass]

I’ll make this very short and sweet. Came from a non buzzing tradition of teaching into a studio where it was used a lot. Tried to pick it up but never managed to “get it”. Came to the US and had lessons with big name people in big name Midwest Cities who did it a lot and somehow managed to make it “click” for me. Musically speaking my life has never been the same since and it continues to help me SO much in my professional career.

I know enough people I highly respect and admire who say it doesn’t help them, and that is cool but I wonder if the buzzing itself as an act doesn’t help them or if their mental approach to it/their expectations are holding them back.

[StevenHolloway]

It’s simple. If it works for you and improves your playing then buzz. If it doesn’t work for you then don’t do it. To make blanket statements like “buzzing is bad for everyone” is totally ridiculous. I’ve tried both approaches. I’ve gone periods where I buzz a lot and periods where I didn’t buzz at all. I always return to buzzing because I don’t like what happens to my playing when I don’t do it. The only times buzzing has harmed my playing is when I did too much of it. I mess around with free buzz, rim buzz, and mouthpiece buzz. I just go for a free, easy, resonant, singing, effortless buzz.

[Kbiggs]

I like what Dave Wilken wrote, and the article he referenced. Like Dave noted, from one experimental study there doesn’t seem to be any solid evidence for or against.

It’s simple. If it works for you and improves your playing then buzz. If it doesn’t work for you then don’t do it. To make blanket statements like “buzzing is bad for everyone” is totally ridiculous. I’ve tried both approaches. I’ve gone periods where I buzz a lot and periods where I didn’t buzz at all. I always return to buzzing because I don’t like what happens to my playing when I don’t do it. The only times buzzing has harmed my playing is when I did too much of it. I mess around with free buzz, rim buzz, and mouthpiece buzz. I just go for a free, easy, resonant, singing, effortless buzz.

This.

My personal opinion: it helps me. I started buzzing in college, and have found it helpful. It took me a while (years) to find what works best for me—I’m still experimenting. Lately, In the last year or so, I’ve used Doug’s and soggenchips’s method/style of freebuzzing. That too helps.

I’ve found that in my first session of the day, one or two minutes at most of mouthpiece buzzing before playing the horn helps—playing softly, with “sirens” in intervals of octaves or fifths, middle to upper middle register (up to an F or a G at most). I also occasionally use it to help work out embouchure and air problems during a passage.

When I was working a 50 hours/week day job, with a 60-90 minute commute, most of my practice time was mouthpiece buzzing in the car. Sometimes I used a B.E.R.P., sometimes a Sauer F.A.R.T. (sour fart?) , sometimes a Shortcut, sometimes just the mpc. It helped me stay in shape.

I do believe it’s helpful as a pedagogical tool. Not all students will understand what it is or how to use, so it needs to be taught and attended to, just like any other aspect of technique.

Re: Harrison’s objection that it sounds terrible: it sounds different precisely because you’re not used to it. Try to find the beauty in it. Failing that, try to find the utility in it. It will sound different precisely because it’s not the trombone. It is its’ own instrument—or a tool—to be used for very specific circumstances.

I like the way Sam Burtis woud put it: Try everything, use what works. I would add: Don’t just take somebody’s word for it (a teacher, a colleague, professional player M. Jones. Be curious. Find what works for you.

[musicofnote]

When my trumpet embouchure collapsed after dental work in the early '80's, an embouchure doctor (former student of Bo Nillson) put me back together three times, each time with diminishing results. Why 3 times? Because I didn't have the patience to see it through and started playing concerts too early.

I ended up quiting trumpet because ... I couldn't play at all any more. My throat would close up when attempting to despite his expert help. After 9 years away from active playing I wanted to make music instead of just conduct it, so took up trombone, because ... you know ... simple instrument for simple people. And I swore to NOT fall into any of the old traps. This stood me in good stead, but there were new traps to fall into ...

Anyway, I never EVER buzzed on the trombone. Neither free buzzing, nor mouthpiece buzzing. I simply used long tones concentrating on tone quality and moving from success to success in both directions of my range - simultaneously. This is something I still do today after 30 years on the horn, just optimised - using a trombone vesion of the Chicowitz warm-ups. A couple of tweeks along the way to get rid of some residual bad habits from my bad old trumpet days - the Wedge system helped with that and it appears I don't need that anymore.

Two years before this aforementioned embouchure doctor passed on, I visited him and during a great talk, he admitted, that in the course of these in total 40 years, he'd come away from the prerequisite that all his students must buzz. He admitted, that that was way to much tunnel vision. So he instead used buzzing if and when it was called for to approach certain problems in playing. But just like there are different players, there are different problems and different solutions. And in the most cases, once those problems were solved, he didn't insist those student needed to continue buzzing.

So if buzzing is right for the player, then there is no sense in NOT doing it. Just as, if it's not necessary for the player, it makes no sense to do it. OTOH, I've seldom heard the player who cannot benefit from long-tones and legato playing. Especially on the trombone. Less so on the trumpet if the trumpet play naturally is a lyrical type player. Trombonists, due to the limitations of the slide vs valves, are only lyrical players if they migrated from an instrument in which lyricism is some more natural. As in my case. But I just enjoy lyrical playing more myself. Always LOVED Concone and Bordogni on the trumpet and rediscovered for me Borgogni on the bass trombone - best thing EVER.

[SteelDeRosa]

Might any among you conject how Sabutin might respond to these important (and well-defined) questions?

[Bach5G]

See above:

“I like the way Sam Burtis woud put it: Try everything, use what works.”

[robcat2075]

...Two years before this aforementioned embouchure doctor passed on, I visited him and during a great talk, he admitted, that in the course of these in total 40 years, he'd come away from the prerequisite that all his students must buzz... So he instead used buzzing if and when it was called for to approach certain problems in playing.

So, apparently the secret of who needs it and who doesn't need it went with him to his grave.

“I like the way Sam Burtis woud put it: Try everything, use what works.”

After 600 years of trombone playing I would expect the accumulated expertise of the ages to have more specific guidance than that.

[RustBeltBass]

“I like the way Sam Burtis woud put it: Try everything, use what works.”

After 600 years of trombone playing I would expect the accumulated expertise of the ages to have more specific guidance than that.

If that expertise had been implemented in teacher’s minds, who knows where we would be….even today it is amazing to see there are some educators who flat will not want their students to do this or try that…because.

[BGuttman]

Most teachers think "if this works for me it must work for you" and make pronouncements. A great teacher can recognize when "what works for me doesn't seem to work for you" and come up with an alternative solution.

[MTbassbone]

Checkout the Trombone Retreat Podcast's interview with Christian Lindberg.

http://www.tromboneretreat.com/podcast

If you don't want to listen to the whole thing forward to the 1:03:00 mark.

Full disclosure: I attempt to free buzz with various levels of success. If you are interested in learning to free buzz get a lesson with Doug Elliott. I do not buzz on the mouthpiece.

[Kbiggs]

So, apparently the secret of who needs it and who doesn't need it went with him to his grave.

I think this fundamentally misunderstands the nature and art of teaching. Trial and error, technique, and knowledge are built up over time. And good teachers know they need their own teachers.

After 600 years of trombone playing I would expect the accumulated expertise of the ages to have more specific guidance than that.

See above. Also: Learning how to do something is part of the human condition. Knowledge—especially knowledge about how the brain and body work together—isn’t accumulated and downloaded to individuals. It’s passed down from teacher to student. It’s the same in sports and most other endeavours.

[martinfan]

I am walking on both sides of the issue here. When I travel (rarely these days) I have taken the mouthpiece I'm currently using along to get some practice in. Now. in the past month, I have gotten back into playing and this time I am focusing on......looooooooooooonnnnnnggggg tones as per Emory Remington. Doing so has really helped me get back in condition fast!

[GabrielRice]

Do you think buzzing is helpful? Yes

Do you think buzzing is counterintuitive? I don't understand the question

If you buzz, do you rim buzz? Occasionally

do you mouthpiece buzz? Yes, every day

Do you mouthpiece + tool buzz? I usually add a length of tubing about 4" long

How long do you buzz? About 10 minutes, but not continuously

How long do you think you should buzz? About 10 minutes, but not continuously

How much buzzing is positive vs negative I don't know

How do you buzz? Articulation? Slurring? Target practice etc. Mostly slurring, increasing range gradually and gently. I like a little bit of bouncy articulation with defined pitches (usually Arban's section 2 #19) after that.


The key for me is not to force anything. I like Norman Bolter's term "resonate the mouthpiece" more than the word "buzz." I don't play the mouthpiece loudly, and I strive for an even, pure sound throughout the entire range.

[GabrielRice]

I will add that most - maybe not all - of the players I admire specifically for TONE use the mouthpiece as a practice tool.

TONE is not everything, however. It's a lot in the orchestral game, of course, but it's not everything.

I have had students who could play very well and sound marvelous in the low register who could not play the mouthpiece in that register. Fine - I don't insist.

I have had other students who benefitted a lot from adding more mouthpiece practice to their lives.

I have had at least one student for whom mouthpiece practice was clearly counterproductive. I recommended other tools for him to work on his tone production and embouchure mechanics.

[Wilktone]

Does Dave Wilkins refer to such a study? It appears so.

The bottom line: no value.

If it the one I'm thinking of it was limited to checking on the development of intonation. The effects players ascribe to buzzing are larger than that.

The specific study I found is “The Effect of a Researcher Composed Mouthpiece Buzzing Routine On the Intonation and Tone Quality of Beginning Band Students,” by Jason Beghtol, so it didn't just check intonation but also tone quality. Again, the results showed no difference between the experimental and control groups.

Even then, I have a healthy skepticism of education research. It seems that there are just so many things out of an experimenters control that the results can't be much more than food for thought and directions to try personal experiments.

Yes, we do need to think further about any scientific research and put the results into context. There are indeed confounding factors that will make individual results different, even within the same subject sample/assigned group. There is always "noise" in experimental data. That's why we want to use large sample sizes over individual anecdotes to reach conclusions. Those confounding factors in research are magnified when considering individual anecdotes.

What I don't feel is fair is to dismiss the experimental study in favor of the personal experiments - not that I think you're doing so - just pointing out that of the two, I will favor scientific methodology over "it works for me!"

VJOFan wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 4:55 pm
There is likely no way to get a consensus on any practice or pedagogical idea in brass playing. There are just too many players and teachers all trying a bunch of things, but more importantly, there is no objective standard of better and best in terms of outcome.
I think what is lacking is the desire to craft such studies.

Our universities produce numerous masters and doctoral degree holders in instrumental pedagogy. How is that they have not produced more relevant research in this area? It can be studied and is certainly an area of perennial interest that would benefit from careful investigation.

Yes, lack of desire and also a lack of support for those who do have the desire. Fortunately the advisors I had in grad school supported and actually encouraged my interested in empirical research into brass technique, but some of my professors discouraged me. I've known other grad students who have been stymied in their interest to investigate brass technique and pedagogy topics because they are considered a "waste of time" by their academic advisors. There is a culture of ignorance that still prevails in academia regarding taking an objective look at brass technique and pedagogy, so grad students are often discouraged from empirical research like this.

And of course, the "it works for me!" approach also gets in the way. Regardless of what side you fall on, we can get locked into doing something out of tradition and not even realize that maybe there's a better way.

I mouthpiece buzz when I'm driving to a rehearsal or gig, or when I can't spend time on my horn.

So when this comes up I feel obligated to point out that if your air bag goes off for some reason while you're buzzing on your mouthpiece in a car that you might be in for a world of hurt, particularly if you're prone to distracted driving. Better to free buzz, although I generally don't feel that's a good warm up. Best to warm up when you safely arrive at your playing obligation, or before you leave.

But if it's really just a placebo, as suggested above, why not spend the placebo time on something useful like learning French or mowing the lawn or... playing the fully assembled trombone?

Placebo = 1. a harmless pill, medicine, or procedure prescribed more for the psychological benefit to the patient than for any physiological effect. 2. a substance that has no therapeutic effect, used as a control in testing new drugs.

Note, the first definition is not considered to be medically ethical. Nor do I think it's really ethical to knowingly assign materials to music students that you know are placebo. Sure, you can address a student's psychological state of mind, but that's different than giving them something to practice that you know doesn't work just to make them feel better.

To be clear, because some of us appreciate such distinctions, we're not really talking about placebo within individual stories, but rather bias. Cognitive biases are inherent in all of us, the trick is to become more aware of them an adjust our thinking accordingly. Regarding buzzing, if you're finding it works for you we can consider that perhaps it's not working as well as you think. Maybe something different is actually the cause of your improvements. Maybe it's simply the expectation that it should help. If you're on the other side of the fence, maybe your experiences with mouthpiece buzzing were doing it wrong. Or maybe your expectations that it can't help bias you.

In the case of the Beghtol study referenced above, mouthpiece buzzing was not found to be more effective than not buzzing. If we were to then do a different intervention (for example, maybe being taught now to properly use the "embouchure motion") and then split them up into different control groups, one using mouthpiece buzzing, then the buzzing would be considered a placebo if it showed no difference.

When an intervention does no better than placebo, then the intervention is considered to not work.

It's a tricky thing, which is why I want the field of brass pedagogy to me more open to using the scientific method to improve what we teach and why.

I like the way Sam Burtis woud put it: Try everything, use what works. I would add: Don’t just take somebody’s word for it (a teacher, a colleague, professional player M. Jones. Be curious. Find what works for you

Yeah, this is a can of worms. On the one hand, the *spirit* of the statement is to keep an open mind. The trouble with pithy sayings like this is that they are too simplified and reality is messy and complicated.

I don't need to spread bird poop on my head to decide if it "works for me" to grow hair. While that's an extreme example, my practice time is limited and I don't want to try "everything." That's why it's worth looking objectively at things that are more likely to work and trying those things first.

Yes, there's a lot of individual variation in what will work from playing to player, but that's also possible to look at objectively - and has been done in many cases. We can debate the best way to communicate playing technique to students, but we're getting better ideas of what works for different players all the time, you just need to continue to do the hard work and learn about what research is out there. You can learn a lot about this stuff on the internet, but consider your sources carefully for the bias I mentioned above. Academic research is not above the bias, but they tend to apply some controls to the research that make it more obvious when it's there and less likely to taint the results. Even then, there's a skill set to reading academic research and putting it into the appropriate context.

musicofnote wrote: ↑Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:45 am
...Two years before this aforementioned embouchure doctor passed on, I visited him and during a great talk, he admitted, that in the course of these in total 40 years, he'd come away from the prerequisite that all his students must buzz... So he instead used buzzing if and when it was called for to approach certain problems in playing.
So, apparently the secret of who needs it and who doesn't need it went with him to his grave.

I think this fundamentally misunderstands the nature and art of teaching. Trial and error, technique, and knowledge are built up over time. And good teachers know they need their own teachers.

Well that's another issue that often happens with brass teaching. Too many students only want to know how to play better. Too many teachers assume that what worked for them should work for pretty much everyone else. Too many teachers dismiss questions on technique because of "paralysis by analysis." Sometimes those teachers dismiss questions because they don't actually have a good answer.

The end result is that an awful lot of future teachers don't learn much about how to teach someone different from them. I want my students to come away from lessons knowing a little bit about how I know what I know so they can apply that into different situations with their own students.

I will add that most - maybe not all - of the players I admire specifically for TONE use the mouthpiece as a practice tool.

Again, the Beghtol dissertation I mentioned above did specifically address tone as a variable. Keeping in mind the specific situation (beginning brass students, testing after 1 school year of study), the results of that research showed no effect on tone. For non-beginners, it might be a different result. But personal bias tells me that it probably isn't so different.

Returning to the idea of mouthpiece buzzing as a practice tool, it could be more thoroughly investigated by not just testing something like intonation and tone, but by taking a very close look at the physical actions that the students are using to play and then comparing those as well. We (that is, the field as a whole) do (or should) have a better idea of embouchure technique, for example, than was widely acknowledged 50 years ago. Some of the confounding factors that taint the data can be more thoroughly controlled for in research moving forward. For example, what it mouthpiece buzzing was more destructive to upstream players while more beneficial for downstream? What if the resulting improvements in tone could be shown to be more closely related to tongue position? Are there better ways to make for the improvements we're looking for that don't involve buzzing on the mouthpiece? These are the things I think we should be formally researching and also informally considering.

Dave

[soseggnchips]

I really like 'try everything, use what works' as a principle.

In practice, I think the problems are:
1) 'Everything' is a lot bigger than we realise, and unless you've got huge amounts of time you won't be able to even scratch the surface.
2) 'Everything' is a lot smaller than it should be, because we have limited imaginations and things that might be worth exploring don't occur to us.

To pluck an example of the second out of the air... I expect we've all thought about where we tongue: roof of the mouth, ridge behind the teeth, on the top teeth, on the bottom lip. Lots of possibilities. By contrast, I've never seen any discussion of tongue placement side-to-side. It doesn't seem unreasonable; if some people play better with their mouthpiece placed slightly off-centre, maybe some people will play better tonguing off-centre?

The point is, it's not something you see discussed, and I'm willing to bet most of us have never thought about it (I hadn't until just now - I'll have to try it!) It doesn't seem particularly outlandish; certainly not outside the scope of 'everything' as far as brass experimentation goes. But if something's not on your radar, then how do you include it in the 'everything' that you try?

Faced with a huge range of possibilities, some of which are probably invisible to us, I can see three possible ways of finding the right answers:
1) Be lucky.
2) Spend huge amounts of time experimenting, and really push yourself to identify everything that might have an impact.
3) Seek help from someone who's further along in their trombone journey and hope they can narrow 'everything' down for you.

I think given those options, the quickest and most reliable is likely to be number 3. Yes, they vary hugely in quality and experience, but I don't think good trombone teachers are that rare.

[Kbiggs]

I like the way Sam Burtis woud put it: Try everything, use what works. I would add: Don’t just take somebody’s word for it (a teacher, a colleague, professional player M. Jones. Be curious. Find what works for you

Yeah, this is a can of worms. On the one hand, the *spirit* of the statement is to keep an open mind. The trouble with pithy sayings like this is that they are too simplified and reality is messy and complicated.

I don't need to spread bird poop on my head to decide if it "works for me" to grow hair. While that's an extreme example, my practice time is limited and I don't want to try "everything." That's why it's worth looking objectively at things that are more likely to work and trying those things first.

Yes, the spirit is to encourage an open mind. Obviously, absurd things can be a waste of time or (perhaps) harmless. I’ll have to watch my language. I’ll encourage myself and my students to “keep an open mind” when trying something new, and when reflecting on my own playing.

Yes, there's a lot of individual variation in what will work from playing to player, but that's also possible to look at objectively - and has been done in many cases. We can debate the best way to communicate playing technique to students, but we're getting better ideas of what works for different players all the time, you just need to continue to do the hard work and learn about what research is out there. You can learn a lot about this stuff on the internet, but consider your sources carefully for the bias I mentioned above. Academic research is not above the bias, but they tend to apply some controls to the research that make it more obvious when it's there and less likely to taint the results. Even then, there's a skill set to reading academic research and putting it into the appropriate context.

…

Well that's another issue that often happens with brass teaching. Too many students only want to know how to play better. Too many teachers assume that what worked for them should work for pretty much everyone else. Too many teachers dismiss questions on technique because of "paralysis by analysis." Sometimes those teachers dismiss questions because they don't actually have a good answer.

The end result is that an awful lot of future teachers don't learn much about how to teach someone different from them. I want my students to come away from lessons knowing a little bit about how I know what I know so they can apply that into different situations with their own students.


Dave

I’ve never liked the “it worked for me so it will, has to, etc., work for you” approach. It implies that everyone is the same physiologically, psychologically, developmentally, etc.

I do find it interesting how some players/teachers approach students differently than they do themselves, as if teaching others is different than learning what works in your individual playing.

[robcat2075]

"Try everything and use what works" is a just a careless attempt at sagacity by a person who seemed to have a history of intemperate and careless remarks.

We should stop treating it as some deep Zen.

Starting students on trombone and guiding them through at least the intermediate levels should be a well-understood teaching endeavor by now.

If someone is taking years to ascertain "what works" for such students, they should not be teaching at that level.

Those problems and the solutions should be old news at this point but somehow they remain mysteries.

I have seen teachers who can immediately spot and remedy any problem set before them so I know they exist and I saw that they were beneficial for the student, too.

I never had such a teacher as a trombone teacher. I regret not knowing that my teachers could have been much better than they were.

[afugate]

To pluck an example of the second out of the air... I expect we've all thought about where we tongue: roof of the mouth, ridge behind the teeth, on the top teeth, on the bottom lip. Lots of possibilities. By contrast, I've never seen any discussion of tongue placement side-to-side. It doesn't seem unreasonable; if some people play better with their mouthpiece placed slightly off-centre, maybe some people will play better tonguing off-centre?

Similarly, what about tongue shape. For example, In this front view MRI of Sarah Willis playing the french horn, it appears that she rolls her tongue as part of her approach to the high register?



--Andy in OKC

[harrisonreed]

To pluck an example of the second out of the air... I expect we've all thought about where we tongue: roof of the mouth, ridge behind the teeth, on the top teeth, on the bottom lip. Lots of possibilities. By contrast, I've never seen any discussion of tongue placement side-to-side. It doesn't seem unreasonable; if some people play better with their mouthpiece placed slightly off-centre, maybe some people will play better tonguing off-centre?

Similarly, what about tongue shape. For example, In this front view MRI of Sarah Willis playing the french horn, it appears that she rolls her tongue as part of her approach to the high register?



--Andy in OKC

This is what everyone (who can play well in the upper register) does. It's a major mechanic of brass playing. A lot of really good brass players don't know that they are doing this, and therefore don't know how to teach it.

Worth noting that buzzing, especially "buzzing as open as possible" works against this mechanic of tongue placement by changing the tension in the lips to create a buzz.

When you buzz, you're not only training your lips to form with the wrong amount of tension for the register you are buzzing, you are also:

1. Training incorrect tongue placement
2. Training incorrect air flow
3. Training your ears to listen for pitches that aren't quite right, and at the same time, training your lips to play what your ears want to hear in a way that is at least wildly out of tune and probably in a different partial when you add the horn.

These three things are amongst the most important physical aspects of playing brass, and buzzing messes with all three.

What is the actual positive that comes out of practicing buzzing, especially for extended period of time? Air? Is it some effect of "wow, adding the horn after I buzz sounds so much better and easier than trying to do the same thing on just a mouthpiece -- buzzing must be the reason!"

[afugate]

Similarly, what about tongue shape. For example, In this front view MRI of Sarah Willis playing the french horn, it appears that she rolls her tongue as part of her approach to the high register?

--Andy in OKC

This is what everyone (who can play well in the upper register) does. It's a major mechanic of brass playing. A lot of really good brass players don't know that they are doing this, and therefore don't know how to teach it.

Just to clarify, I'm not talking about arching the tongue. (You may not be either.) I wish the youtube clip I embedded showed the actual frame from the starting point I selected.

This is the tongue roll I referenced. She appears to both arch her tongue and create a channel in it by rolling her tongue.

Screen Shot 2022-09-07 at 9.33.16 PM.png

I was aware of the arch. But wasn't aware of other tongue manipulations like rolling the tongue.
--Andy in OKC.