Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

ttf_blast
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:15 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_blast »

Well Gabe,
Not a can of worms,
more a party bucket.
invite some friends round and feast.
I've been studing these playing problems for quite a while, and
have helped quite a few people.
I've seen Bob Hughes... he is an old friend... so I know what his situation is.
There is no way that I am going to discuss any of that here. No way.
What I will say is that in the years of experience that I have had with these
problems, I have never been able to connect a physical breakdown with the
attempt to make a big sound on small equipment.
Several people have found themselves physically overstressed by the use of
large equipment in situations where it is not the norm.
These problems are most often found in bass trombone and tuba players, and least often found in trombonists who use smaller equipment in non symphonic settings.
I've talked at length with Jan Kagrice about such things, and she is a remarkable and skilled person in this area. Probably the best person on the planet to help with these problems.
Focal Dystonia seems to be used as a blanket term by the medical profession these days, which is not helpful.
The numbers of players suffering in this way is increasing, and to be honest, we have no hard evidence as to what is causing the damage... we can only look and see if specifics emerge as the victims grow.
Back to the big v small thing.... I think it is ever more obvious that there are quite deep conceptual differences between some of us. What I hear as tubby and fuzzy, others hear as big and dark.... we have different ideas of how a trombone should sound.
Personally, I think that's quite healthy.... if we all sounded the same it would be a boring world.
Chris Stearn.
ttf_evan51
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_evan51 »

Quote from: "blast"What I will say is that in the years of experience that I have had with these problems, I have never been able to connect a physical breakdown with the attempt to make a big sound on small equipment.

Several people have found themselves physically overstressed by the use of large equipment in situations where it is not the norm.
These problems are most often found in bass trombone and tuba players, and least often found in trombonists who use smaller equipment in non symphonic settings.

I've talked at length with Jan Kagrice about such things, and she is a remarkable and skilled person in this area. Probably the best person on the planet to help with these problems. Focal Dystonia seems to be used as a blanket term by the medical profession these days, which is not helpful.

The numbers of players suffering in this way is increasing, and to be honest, we have no hard evidence as to what is causing the damage... we can only look and see if specifics emerge as the victims grow.

Thanks for the overall picture, Chris. It helps to see the big picture, as anecdotal evidence tends to be rather confined to individual experience. For example, I can say that the "over 40" crowd generally seems to be moving to smaller equipment, but that ends up being my circle of acquaintances in a relatively small geographic area.

blast wrote

QuoteIf comfort at the lips is so critical, why are there not trombone players playing with trumpet rims, and trumpet players playing with trombone rims, if that is their most comfortable size ?
Does not the mouthpiece have to primarily relate to the instrument in which it is played ?

As far a big v. small, I tend to see this as you suggested earlier--that the horn tends to dictate a "range" of mouthpieces. I look for a balance among the horn, the player and the mouthpiece. Again, this is mostly anecdotal, but I find almost everybody sounds good playing a Bach 6 1/2 on a Bach 36 straight horn. I see it as a "core" piece, from which one can move in either direction. A King 3B---a Bach 7C, and so forth. But I agree completely that one uses what works. We have a kid up here playing a Bach 4G on a .500 bore----sounds golden.  Image
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

Off topic....


I attended the ITA masterclass in the early 80's where the old NY Phil section was reunited after DECADES and Mr. Gordon Pulis was there to answer questions after decades of having done no interviews.

He was asked what to practice and work on. He said there were only THREE things you had to work on-----   the notebooks and pens came out so nobody would forget what to BUY---he continued:

" Perfect sound, perfect intonation and perfect ensemble playing."


Ooooooooohhhh, so simple. It'll just take every single one of us the rest of our lives to get even 2% of the way there, no matter where we are right now. And thats what makes the horn so terrific and playing such a pure joy. There is always TOMORROW.

Sorry if I've stepped on toes regarding the Grade 9 crowd. I was there once and went down the garden path in the wrong direction--- wrong for me anyway-- every day for about 25 years. I'm converted now, so forgive me for preaching. And as for bass trombonists playing at the age of a young teenager-----man, its tough enough for a huge adult to do it. Physically its a brute of an instrument to play well at any age, if you're really in grade 9 you should be concentrating on drinking your milk and getting 14 hours sleep a day so your bones can hold the horn when it comes time to practice.

When I was in grade 9 I was doing hard time on a monster 4-valve 40 pound old BBb King tuba with a 24" bell and the appropriate mouthpiece, and getting good lessons as well. So, when it came time for me to make the leap to doubling on bass bone at age 17 ( old age to some of the forum members) I was already broken in and found bass bone to be a nice small treat. Boy, was I wrong! Tuba is way easier to hack on.....no cheating on bass bone.

And as for Gabe, in his rebuttal--bless him-- he mentioned the magic words AGAIN--- " PRACTICE" and "PRACTICE HABITS." Beautiful.
ttf_Gabe Langfur
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:00 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Gabe Langfur »

Quote from: "blast"I've seen Bob Hughes... he is an old friend... so I know what his situation is.
There is no way that I am going to discuss any of that here. No way.

And no reason you should. I probably shouldn't have brought it up.

He talks about it just a little bit in his interview on Matt Guilford's blog: http://matthewguilford.blogspot.com/

QuoteB.H.: The strangest and the most frustrating thing to happen in my career has been the onset of Task Specific Focal Dystonia. This started about 4 years ago and affected my control on a few low notes. Over about 18 months it gradually got worse until I could hardly produce a sound in the mid and low register. Unfortunately I have recently resigned from the LSO which was a very sad decision to make.
I would like to mention the kind and generous support I have received from all my friends and colleagues, but especially Jan Kagarice in Texas who has given hours of her time in trying to help me overcome this condition. She has a remarkable understanding of problems affecting brass players and her expertise, generosity and enthusiasm in helping players overcome Focal Dystonia is quite remarkable.

Quote from: "blast"What I will say is that in the years of experience that I have had with these
problems, I have never been able to connect a physical breakdown with the
attempt to make a big sound on small equipment.

Fair enough.

QuoteFocal Dystonia seems to be used as a blanket term by the medical profession these days, which is not helpful.

My point exactly. Overstress may be related, but it seems to me that that's probably its own issue, and doctors simply find a dignosis that looks right and stop there.

And if overstress is its own issue, as I would frankly bet dollars to donuts it is, then overstress stemming from mismatched equipment is another step removed from focal dystonia.

QuoteI think it is ever more obvious that there are quite deep conceptual differences between some of us. What I hear as tubby and fuzzy, others hear as big and dark.... we have different ideas of how a trombone should sound.

But I thought you just got done saying I sounded interesting, not tubby and fuzzy!  Image  I think you owe me a beer... Image

QuotePersonally, I think that's quite healthy.... if we all sounded the same it would be a boring world.

Sure would. And you find big fans of Ray Premru and Bob Hughes on this side of the pond too. As I'm sure you find big fans of Charlie Vernon on yours.
ttf_blast
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:15 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_blast »

Now the great thing is that I am going to be able to continue this conversation with Gabe over some of the best beer in the world, in just three days !
For now we must continue in this less social mode.
The overstress idea would be just great if we could discount every lead trumpet and latin trombone player out there.... just think... these people batter their lips on a regular basis, yet how many Dystonia victims do you know from that group ?
Biggest numbers on low symphonic instruments... what have we got there ?
Alcohol abuse is a good candidate... and can be seen as a contributor on occasion.... but there are too many examples where it is not a factor.
One of my strange ideas is that it may be linked to the quality of modern instruments.... they are so good, so centered, that we can easily slip into bad habits without suffering at the bell end.... for a while... and when we start to be aware of a problem... we are too far down the road to correct it.
The interaction between face and brain is vastly complex and relies so much on automatic response that we can be unaware of the breakdown of the playing system until it is at a point of virtual collapse.
Another idea is that most victims do not work for long periods in the high register.... the toning of the facial structure is not in evidence in these players.
These are just ideas... thoughts thrown out for the hordes to devour !
Let's hope a solution is not far away.
Chris Stearn.
ttf_The Bone Ranger
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_The Bone Ranger »

Chris,

Please don't think I was asking you to discuss details of Bob's, or anyone else's problems here on the forum. I was merely wondering if anyone would perhaps ask someone of his ilk to chime in here with his thoughts, if they felt so inclined. You've seen some of this first hand, and I can understand how you don't want to disclose details, and I don't want to speculate without the proper knowledge. Speculating about ANYTHING is not my favourite past-time.

Besides, I can understand how a sufferer would not be interested in chiming in here, so it's a long shot. Man, it makes me want to cry thinking about what it would be like to be in that situation. I can imagine discussing it would be difficult.

Not looking for rumours or innuendo. I have my thoughts, too, but I don't think they would be of help.

Andrew
ttf_Gabe Langfur
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:00 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Gabe Langfur »

Quote from: "blast"Now the great thing is that I am going to be able to continue this conversation with Gabe over some of the best beer in the world, in just three days !

Can't wait!

Ray used to talk about "low register fatigue," which he would combat by playing a few sfz notes in upper register, say chromatically from F above middle C to C above. Focus to his embouchure was very important to him, but a gentle focus that you can't force to happen.

It is physically tiring in many ways to play for extended periods in the low register. I know that my metabolism speeds up when I have extreme demands there, and I get very hungry in the breaks of the rehearsals.

When I talked with Phil Teele about his long tone routine, he talked about overtraining to become "so strong you can always be relaxed." He also talked about how you need strength not just in your face, but also in the musculature in your neck, shoulders and throughout your back, and how this was all addressed in a very specific way by playing many many long tones.

Maybe, in some cases, when the rest of the body isn't doing the job it needs to, the face overcompensates...

Sounds like a doctoral dissertation in the making.
ttf_Doug Elliott
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Doug Elliott »

Gabe and Chris, I'll talk to you guys at ITF about this.  My internet access is not good enough right now to get into it here.
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

" Low register fatigue".

  I complained to my physician about the fatigue after playing and the hunger. He attributed it to low blood sugar caused by the incomplete combustion of the oxygen in the blood etc. etc. etc. etc.


Then he told me to get off my a** and lose 25 pounds because trombone playing is NOT a form of exercise.

I can't recall it all. The answer I got was that I was NOT hungry. It was caused by blowing out too frequently instead of breathing normally and as a result I'd upset some fine balances. Its like getting to the point of fainting, but you save yourself because you're always sucking carbon dioxide from the interior of the horn that collects there from your exhalation. Thats why you don't faint when you play as loud as possible....the carbon dioxide establishes an equilibrium.


This came up again during a coaching course I attended to get soccer coach certification. Haven't got the books to hand but you may look into AEROBIC and ANAEROBIC exercise and the differences.


One of the fun things was to get the various participants in the course to describe activities particular to their sport to illustrate the different bodily methods of utilizing oxygen. The big surprise? BASEBALL. No way to prove any activity in baseball lasted the 30-45 seconds to be aerobic exercise. Longest period of activity they could come up, with as a group of 15 baseball coaches, was about 8 seconds.


So, look into the various forms of exercise to explain the low register fatigue. Seriously, it also explains why --- with 100% scientific validity--- that certain refreshing malt beverages and even the group of foodstuffs knows as lagers and ales  are scientifically the best things to consume in large groups ( and refreshing quantities!!) after a rehearsal or gig to replenish the body as quickly as possible and restore the blood oxygen level back to its normal level.
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

This will be even further off topic, then I'll be done.

When the body exercises for periods of just a few minutes ( like a long low blow) lactic acid is produced.

Lactic acid is the same miracle substance to be found in human mother's milk that puts babies to sleep while they are nursing. It is also the same substance, that found in the blood and NOT given an opportunity to be consumed by the large muscle groups, will cause fatigue.

Example-- ice hockey players play in two minute shifts ( bursts) and then return to the bench when they are exhausted. Their legs feel like lead. The bright lights at my coaching course predicted the day when there will be a bicycle like aparatus you can use with ice skates on--- at the bench--- for the leg muscles to quickly consume the lactic acid and resume their normal state....you have to burn it off by "cooling down". Its crazy but it works. You will become fresher by exercising more.

    And so, it is conceivable that the human body, when taxed past endurance by the combination of a requirement to pump 1,000 litres/minute of air through the horn in a Bruckner low brass passage-- combined with the lack of oxygen from the blowing-- will produce to the body a sensation like anaerobic exercise.

No where to burn off the lactic acid, the body gets fatigued. And you feel hungry as well. For your own edification conduct the following experiment: Practice some long pedal tones to the point of feeling tired. THEN do a few push-ups. Or if you're unable to do that, then put the horn down and stand with the feet about 4 feet away from a wall and lean forward with the full body weight supported by the outstretched arms. Do a few "mock push-ups" into the wall to get your arms and legs stretching.

It'll do your practice routine a world of good as well-- I'm pretty arthritic from 5 knee operations so I find it to be very theraputic for a lot of reasons, but for playing purposes is the best.
ttf_evan51
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_evan51 »

Quote from: "Kevin Marsh"This will be even further off topic, then I'll be done.

When the body exercises for periods of just a few minutes ( like a long low blow) lactic acid is produced.

Lactic acid is the same miracle substance to be found in human mother's milk that puts babies to sleep while they are nursing. It is also the same substance, that found in the blood and NOT given an opportunity to be consumed by the large muscle groups, will cause fatigue.

I know we're getting a bit far afield, but I can't help thinking that low brass players can be in danger from underestimating the physical demands of playing their instrument---watch a clarinet player during a concert and then move over to the bass bone player. Two valves, one slide, air in and out of the lungs all moving together, left forearm/hand holding up the whole mess while the right arm pumps the slide---we have a perpetual motion machine.

So--are we talking about tweaking a mouthpiece to keep all this together? Sounds like a big expectation.
ttf_griffinben
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_griffinben »

QuotePosted: 18 Jul 2006 14:40   Post subject:  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Kevin Marsh wrote:
This will be even further off topic, then I'll be done.

When the body exercises for periods of just a few minutes ( like a long low blow) lactic acid is produced.

Lactic acid is the same miracle substance to be found in human mother's milk that puts babies to sleep while they are nursing. It is also the same substance, that found in the blood and NOT given an opportunity to be consumed by the large muscle groups, will cause fatigue.


I know we're getting a bit far afield, but I can't help thinking that low brass players can be in danger from underestimating the physical demands of playing their instrument---watch a clarinet player during a concert and then move over to the bass bone player. Two valves, one slide, air in and out of the lungs all moving together, left forearm/hand holding up the whole mess while the right arm pumps the slide---we have a perpetual motion machine.

So--are we talking about tweaking a mouthpiece to keep all this together? Sounds like a big expectation.


Well, you can't blame the mouthpiece for everything; but if you aren't using the the most efficient mouthpiece, or ratehr are using an extremely inefficient mouthpiece for you and the job you're doing you can cause major damage or tire your self to the point of overexertion.

Its like running with a parachute or weights, if you perform, competitively race like that, you ARE going ot hurt yourself.  Also, the face is extremely sesitive, we can feel the width of a sheet of paper as someone so eloquently put somewhere else...if you are using something vastly too big for your physical make up you are going to overextend and possibly really hurt yourself in the long run.

Its no substitute for staying in good physical condition, with a good diet and regular excercise (which can't be emphasized enough!), but a proper mouthpiece choice can help prevent problems down the line in the long run.

-Ben
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

I know I'm coming late into the fray here, but since I have just one concrete example, and because Ben G and I traded a related e-mail lately, here goes . . . my main horns are Kings a 1970's 3B and a 2+ year old 2102PL (2B+) -- so small horns.  Up until about 5 years ago, I hadn't played in 25 years!  When I started back in, I was playing only the 3B with a custom Bach gold mouthpiece -- a Bach 3 with a widened throat.  . . and I was attempting to play lead in a big band with this set up (I had done so for a specific reason 25 years ago -- long and dull story).

Anyway, cut to today, and I mostly play the 2B+ using a Mount Vernon Bach 12C, thanks to Erling.  As Ben knows, I've had my doubts about it as I've begun using it regularly -- "can I get enough volume?  can I get enough warmth? is it really that great?  does it fit my face?"  I've discovered if I just relax, move the air, and play with the least pressure possible, the dang thing opens up in a beautiful way.  I'm able to whatever I want and FORGET about the equipment, and just play music.  It's the first mouthpiece I've ever owned that allowed me to do that . . . so the older, smaller Bachs obviously havce SOMETHING right going for them.
ttf_Jeff Smith
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Jeff Smith »

I play a Wick 5AL, and with it's 25.73 rim diameter, I find it to be just a TAD small. It fights me in the low tessitura-  Image  Image to  Image .

I'm looking forward to trying a Greg Black 5G, with it's 25.80 rim diameter, it might be just what I'm looking for. Either that or the JA 5 series. But that might be too much, with it's 25.95 diameter.

My Wick 4AL has a 26.00 diameter, and I like that, but I lose a little bit of comfort in the upper register, due to the bigger diameter. So, I'm looking to go in between my 4AL and 5AL.
ttf_brucejackson
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:00 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_brucejackson »

Quote from: "tbonegeek07"I play a Wick 5AL, and with it's 25.73 rim diameter, I find it to be just a TAD small. It fights me in the low tessitura-  Image  Image to  Image .

I'm looking forward to trying a Greg Black 5G, with it's 25.80 rim diameter, it might be just what I'm looking for. Either that or the JA 5 series. But that might be too much, with it's 25.95 diameter.

My Wick 4AL has a 26.00 diameter, and I like that, but I lose a little bit of comfort in the upper register, due to the bigger diameter. So, I'm looking to go in between my 4AL and 5AL.

Y'know there is a Wick 4.5 AL don't you?  Its ID is between the 4 and 5 but the OD  is the same as a 4 so the rim is a little thicker than either.  Sounds like an interesting mouthpiece.
ttf_Jeff Smith
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Jeff Smith »

Yeah I know there is a Wick 4.5AL.

I just won't be getting it because there are no cup variants or a small shank version.

With Greg Blacks, there's a small shank version of the mouthpieces I'm interested in, so I can use the same rim when I switch horns.
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

Quote from: "evan51"Kevin Marsh writes of Alain Trudel:

QuoteLots of modern trombonists , both bass and tenor, play equipment that is AS LARGE as they can get away with. Then they have to practice excessively , to build the necessary muscle mass and physical strength to be able to produce the pitches they require to do their playing. And also to produce the necessary air capacity and air speed to control a mouthpiece TOO LARGE for their needs.
They are practicing too much just to get to the point where they are able to produce music ONLY after they are able to control the brass.


Trudel's theory is totally different---

He plays AS SMALL a mouthpiece as he can because he wants to play MUSIC from the first time he picks up the horn. He is unconcerned with building muscle or muscle mass or excessive strength to control the horn. He plays as openly as possible and with as little pressure as possible.

He inhales- he exhales. Sometimes a trombone gets in the way....at that point he is playing a trombone, otherwise he breathes the same all the time, effortlessly.

This is a very interesting quote and lays out two opposing and common views about selecting a mouthpiece. Where do y'all stand on this? What have your teachers recommended? What have you actually done in approaching this issue (when their backs were turned  Image ?).

Well . . . I use the smallest mouthiece I can find, and where I get my timbre from is by playing all top lip. Doesn't stop me from nailing pedals right into the basement, doesn't make my sound overly bright or hard or brittle, allows me to play effortlessly all day and night with a range up to double high Bb. And I'm a sectional player, not a soloist.

That said, on trumpet I use a Schilke model 24 with a cup diameter of around 18.30 mm, which could well be the biggest trumpet mouthpiece made. Dunno why this works for me, but I've been called a freak more than once for switching between trumpet, trombone and tuba several times during a gig, and using a completely different embouchure on each horn.

I'm tempted to say that it really doesn't matter what you stick on your face, that it's all the same, but I know people who really struggle when they try to switch and in watching them I'm pretty much convinced that it's not all psychological.

I don't know why chops and mouthpieces either work together or don't. It could be magic for all I know.
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

i pretty much go for how easy it is,  and how great the sound is. i'd say if one mouthpiece was a bit easier, but if i worked harder on another i'd get a better sound, i'd take the latter. so... i say, not in terms of big or small, but comfyness and sound quality.
ttf_Doug Elliott
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Doug Elliott »

Quote from: "gsmonks"... Well . . . I use the smallest mouthiece I can find...A Schilke 24 is the largest (trumpet) mouthpiece you could find, not the smallest...

You don't say what you mean by "the smallest mouthpiece you could find."  Do you mean on trumpet, tenor trombone, tuba, or any of them except trumpet?
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

Quote from: "Doug Elliott"Quote from: "gsmonks"... Well . . . I use the smallest mouthiece I can find...A Schilke 24 is the largest (trumpet) mouthpiece you could find, not the smallest...

You don't say what you mean by "the smallest mouthpiece you could find."  Do you mean on trumpet, tenor trombone, tuba, or any of them except trumpet?

Sorry- guess I should have been clearer. I use the smallest mouthpiece I can find on trombone, the largest I can find on trumpet. When playing tuba I use a very generic MOR mouthpiece.

It's what works for me. I know other guys who use very different equipment in the same horns, who also play horns in all three ranges.

For example, a fellow here in town uses a very small, shallow trumpet mouthpiece, but on trombone, euphonium and tuba he uses the largest mouthpiece he can find.

I can just barely get a sound out of his trumpet mouthpiece, and I can't begin to control his BBb tuba mouthpiece.
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

Wayyyyy to much time/energy spent focusing on the hardware.

If a player sounds bad on current eqpt and thinks a change of mouthpiece/horn is the answer, it probably isn't.

More practice is.

If lack of talent is the problem, well....

All right, futz around with all kinds of hardware if it keeps ya happy.

BUT...fixation on eqpt doesn't mean the player is bad.  Carl Fontana was GREAT and he goofed around with different horns and mouthpieces a lot, I guess.

So....never mind!

 Image  Image
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

Quote from: "evan51"Kevin Marsh writes of Alain Trudel:

QuoteLots of modern trombonists , both bass and tenor, play equipment that is AS LARGE as they can get away with. Then they have to practice excessively , to build the necessary muscle mass and physical strength to be able to produce the pitches they require to do their playing. And also to produce the necessary air capacity and air speed to control a mouthpiece TOO LARGE for their needs.
They are practicing too much just to get to the point where they are able to produce music ONLY after they are able to control the brass.


Trudel's theory is totally different---

He plays AS SMALL a mouthpiece as he can because he wants to play MUSIC from the first time he picks up the horn. He is unconcerned with building muscle or muscle mass or excessive strength to control the horn. He plays as openly as possible and with as little pressure as possible.

He inhales- he exhales. Sometimes a trombone gets in the way....at that point he is playing a trombone, otherwise he breathes the same all the time, effortlessly.

This is a very interesting quote and lays out two opposing and common views about selecting a mouthpiece. Where do y'all stand on this? What have your teachers recommended? What have you actually done in approaching this issue (when their backs were turned  Image ?).

This sounds A LOT like the philosophy I recently  adopted. Granted, I flip it completely. I like having a relatively larger mouthpiece because I have to squish to get into anything smaller. I find that my lips fit better in/on a larger mouthpiece, and I play more naturally that way.

As far as pitch production, what matters is the ability to buzz the pitch. The trombone is a giant, pretty, expensive megaphone, nothing more. The only difference between a large and a small bore horn is the amount of air required to make it resonate.
ttf_Dave Tatro
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:53 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Dave Tatro »

I think that using the smallest equipment possible to do the job at hand well is a good idea for the most part. The catch is that this will cover a very large gray area which will need to encompass many different players with vastly different performance demands.

Some players can do anything on a 6 1/2 or smaller mouthpiece. High, low, loud, soft, bright, dark, you name it. I am not one of those players. I played on a 6 1/2 from 7th grade until my third year of college, because it came with my horn and I didn't know any better. I always shyed away from trying anything larger because I already had endurance issues. So I practised and practised and beat my chops to a bloody pulp, figuratively. My tone was pinched and I had no low register to speak of. Despite these technical issues, my playing was very confident and musical because of all my practicing and playing all different kinds of music. So I ended up sitting first chair most of the time from middle school through junior college.

When I got to a large university setting, I finally hit the sound wall, and I realized that I was way behind and had to do something about it. By the time I finished music school, I was up to a 5G and things were a bit better. Of course I was playing many hours a day to maintain all the chop contortions that I had to perform to play strongly in all registers on the 5G! After school, I didn't play for about four years. When I came back to the horn, I decided that I was going to throw convention aside and figure out how to really make things work for me. This led me to experiment with many different aspects of equipment and technique, but the biggest and most significant change I made was ending up on a much larger mouthpiece than I had used previously.

My embouchure is of the very high placement type, which in general requires larger diameter mouthpiece rims to function most efficiently. Whereas before, I had to use contortions and big shifts to make the low register speak, now I use pretty much the same setting for everything. (Every embouchure uses subtle shifts, of course. I am talking about consistent m'piece placement.) This makes flexibilty between registers much easier. My sound is also light years from where it once was. It used to be my biggest weakness, and now it is a strength. Some of that is practice and better concept, but most of it is using the right equipment for me. My embouchure is as strong as it has ever been, even though I don't play nearly as much now as when I was in school.

The point of this long rambling spiel is to underscore the idea that one size does not fit all. Not by a long shot. That having been said, I think that Alain Trudel's ideas carry great wisdom and are a good realty check for those players that think that they can buy proficiency on their instrument. But for those of you that have the talent and have the motivation to practice and are still struggling, be aware that you may need to do a little bit of judicious experimenting to find something that works well for you. If you are like me at all, you will not find this by using what "everybody else is using".

Dave
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

Going back to the original question, I think that a player shouldn't have to feel like the mouthpiece that he or she is using is "the largest" or "the smallest" of whatever limits they set up for themselves, but instead they should feel like it is the most great sound coming out of the horn. I believe that it is much easier (and more enjoyable) to work on endurance and have a great sound to start, and than to have chops all day long, but know that your sound is hurting. To me, conciously trying to pick the "smallest" or "largest" of something sounds silly. If it sounds great, then you've achieved the goal we all strive for, right?
ttf_bigbells
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_bigbells »

Regarding mouthpiece size for trombones: It is a prevalent attitude among school band directors to instruct their students to go bigger as they gain in playing experience. I was surprised to hear Ben say that he'd never heard anyone say it.  In my experience what is rare indeed is to hear a teacher suggest a smaller mouthpiece. It doesn't help that many use "12C" and "beginner mouthpiece" as synonyms.  As someone else pointed out, Bach's literature on mouthpiece selection doesn't do anything but cement this crazy philosophy, and a number of other makers use the same kind of blurbs in their literature.  Largest possible or smallest possible? Let's define "possible".  If it means "without errors" then there's no mouthpiece for me. Hypothesis: A 10% improvement in tonal quality and a 3% increase in personal playing satisfaction from behind the horn is worth an increase in flubs from one per 100 notes to two per 100 notes, if those flubs sound 25% less disagreeable and if endurance decreases by 5% or less. (Plug in any numbers you'd like, or refute the assumptions that created the hypothesis.) My take on this is: if I'm thinking of trying a different mouthpiece, I might as well, if I've got another mouthpiece to try.
ttf_BassBoneFL
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_BassBoneFL »

There is a common trend with band directors in this area that I have observed, at a distance, over the past decade or so. I can't even begin to count the number of middle and high school bass trombone players I have seen/heard who have been handed, by their band directors, a Schilke 60 as their 1st mouthpiece. Most of these players switched from small student models and have had little or no time on even a large bore tenor setup. The result is often not pretty, as you can well imagine. When I then suggest they explore an option in the 2-1.25G range, they (and sometimes their directors) act as if their honor has been violated.

Is there not some means to educate the educators on reasonable equipment options for young players? Any "forumites" out there have any ideas? Any journals where one could submit articles?

When I taught brass methods to ed majors at Eastman, I tried to stress the importance of good fundamentals and reasonable equipment choices for young players. I half jokingly told them "I don't want to spend years cleaning up problems caused by your lack of knowledge and information.". Unfortunately, I seem to be doing alot of that.
ttf_Precious
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:54 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Precious »

I read the first page of this topic, and skipped the others, so please forgive me (especially if what I'm posting doesn't fit the current topic drift).

I play what sounds best...and normally that is one of the smaller mouthpieces.

I'm not a big person (most people call me "tiny" in stature after meeting me in person), I have a small face, and would fall into (and probably get stuck) in a large mouthpiece.

I struggle with a 6.5AL, a 7c feels too large sometimes, and my 12c is just about right.

I had a hell of a time finding a mouthpiece I could play on when I played bass a number of years ago.  If memory serves, they found me a 6.5AL large shank to play on, because the 5G nearly swallowed my face.
ttf_Dave Tatro
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:53 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Dave Tatro »

Quote from: "BassBoneFL"Is there not some means to educate the educators on reasonable equipment options for young players? Any "forumites" out there have any ideas? Any journals where one could submit articles?

This seems to be a very prevalent issue across the board. Band directors who are brass players may not know what to give their woodwinds, etc. Even within instrument groups, their may not be enough specific knowledge to make approriate recommendations. My HS director was fine on trumpet and horn. As far as I know, he never imparted any equipment knowledge to the low brass players.

I certainly don't expect every band director to be equipment gurus for every instrument, but it would be nice if they had some basic knowledge of appropriate choices. I'm sure that many of them do, but we only seem to hear about the bad ones, ie those that mandate S. 60's for every beginning bass 'bonist.

Good idea about the journals, BBFL. In fact, I would guess that a series of articles written by experts on teaching each instrument could be a very positive thing for educators AND students.
ttf_zellerbrook
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_zellerbrook »

My head hurts.
ttf_Molefsky
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:00 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Molefsky »

I think the idea of playing the smallest equipment that allows you to get the sound you want makes perfect sense.  Wouldn't that be the most efficient way to go?  I play a pretty generic Bach 5g on my .547 and a greg black 11c (recently acquired) on my small tenor and alto.  I love it.  I used to match rims for my small and large horns and played a 4g rim.  I wanted to go even bigger.  The thing i found after several mouthpiece changes is that what may feel good at first may not last through the "honeymoon" period.  So i gave up the switching and went back to my rusty 5g and made a decision to stick with it for a year or more and just focus on the human side of my playing(fundamentals etc).   It's been almost two years and i've progressed by leaps and bounds.  I love my sound on all my horns and feel comfortable switching when the playing situation requires it.
        I still have friends that put a lot of stock in the "bigger is better" mentality.  This includes an undergraduate friend that spent a few years playing a Bach 2g on his tenor.  He swore it got the sound he wanted and always attributed his lack of tone focus to a myriad of other factors.  I'm not saying that you can't get a focused tone out of a big piece like that; obviously Alessi does a pretty good job.   I'm just saying i'm not Joe Alessi.
ttf_Bob Riddle
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:40 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Bob Riddle »

I nelieve the 7M is closer to the Bach 7 than a 7C.Deeper cup.
I checked my mouthpiece the throat is an E throat with *5*backbore,whatever that is.
Bob

SORRY! I screwed up and posted this in the wrong place. Image
ttf_blast
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:15 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_blast »

Just to restate where we were in this discussion, at least as I saw it... it is not about biggest and smallest in extreme terms, but is about advanced players, who could play the same material in the same group on a range of different sizes of mouthpiece, choosing to play either at the small end of those choices or the large end of those choices, and the reason for such a selection.
....well that is where I thought we were...
Chris Stearn.
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

I don't have any set opinions other than that, with string bass and trombone  (my two intstruments) the more i experiment with equipment, the closer i get to the middle.

Anecdote time: I picked up bone soph. year of high school, and bass bone a few months later, first mouthpiece i bought was a 1g. I was stupid. Couldnt play worth a damn on it, or the basss bone, or the bach 42B's the school had (15 year old horns, we weren't thhaat lucky). Went to tuba, forgot about trombone for two years or so. Recently started up again. only horn i had to work with was a small bore conn director witha  (gasp) 7c. after three weeks, i was better than i ever was on trombone, and when i borrowed an 88h and a 5g, my sound is infinitely better.

Rambling is fun...
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

hmm .. interesting.

i didn't read all of the threead .. please excuse me if i become ignornant, but.. i'd heard both the says "Play the largest equipment you can play easily."  But, I've also heard, "Play the smallest equipment you can."

Meaning, play a or b, too the X or Y size, with = to best sound.
ttf_Funbone
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Funbone »

I was wondering if someone could comment on the Bach 7?
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

Quote from: Funbone on Nov 19, 2006, 02:19PMI was wondering if someone could comment on the Bach 7?

I get a bigger sound out of a 7, compared to a 7C, which has a slightly shallower cup than the 7.
To me, they feel about the same, but 7 sounds bigger.

I'm about to test the "smallest possible" theory and ordered a Bach 15EW for long nights of high lead playing in a big group . . . see if I don't wear out after awhile.
ttf_bigbells
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_bigbells »

Quote from: little bone on Nov 20, 2006, 03:46PMI'm about to test the "smallest possible" theory and ordered a Bach 15EW for long nights of high lead playing in a big group . . . see if I don't wear out after awhile.
For some, a 15EW would be "smaller than possible". Others have no trouble with a mouthpiece that has an inner rim that small and a cup that shallow. Have you tried something smaller than you're playing now, but not as small as a 15EW, like a 12C? If a 12C is too small, then the much shallower 15EW with a smaller rim diameter would REALLY be too small, unless the wider rim somehow makes it more playable for you.
ttf_sabutin
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_sabutin »


Largest? Smallest? Or best?

Also...largest or smallest in what categories?

Rim?

Backbore?

Throat?

Cup?

Shank?

To fit what kind of playing?

What kind of horn?

Plus...there IS no "theory."

No unified theory, anyway.

Not even of embouchure, let alone the m'pce(s) on which any given individual's embouchure will best work. ESPECIALLY since any given embouchure changes from hour to hour, day to day and year to year.

For example, people who generally play in louder, more projecting situations and/or use a great deal of fairly percussive fast tonguing at volume need relatively open backbores so that the air doesn't back up. TOO open however, and you lose the necessary resistance...necessary to YOUR stage of embouchure balance, air power/control and strength...that will allow you to play softly or with easy, well controlled flexibility. Similar problems occur when choosing rim sizes, cups, etc., plus every aspect of a m'pce affects every OTHER aspect to some degree.

Is a puzzlement.

On a GOOD day.

So instead of terms like largest or smallest, I would like to suggest "best balanced."

And further, I would like to suggest the following. (A reprint of something I recently posted both here and on my own website.) If you follow these ideas, you will find the right m'pce for you on any given horn at any given time in your career.

The "Goldilocks" effect m'pce.

Not too small...in any dimension(s).

Not too large.

Juuuuust right.

Read on.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is really only one golden rule about choosing m'pces.

About choosing any equipment, really.

Try everything.

Use what works.

In my extensive m'pce experience...I own easily 100 trombone m'pces in four general sizes (For small bore,medium bore, large bore and bass trombones),  have probably tried 1000 in my time, and at one time altered or had custom made at least 20....a m'pce that is going to work for you on any given piece of equipment will feel and sound good IMMEDIATELY.

First note.

Unfortunately, so will many m'pces that are NOT going to work out.

But a m'pce that does NOT feel good up front never works out.

So it goes.

Y'pays yer money and y'takes yer chances.

Here are some general guidelines that will serve to break down the search procedure a little.

1-Try m'pces and m'pce sizes that have generally been used by great players on the kind of equipment you are playing for the kind of music(s) on which you play that equipment.

2-Try EVERYTHING. Go to stores and be a pest. You play with other trombonists. Try their m'pces. Including the ones they do not use.

3-Try m'pces intelligently. Which means to me, curiously enough, WITHOUT the use of the mind. Do blindfold tests. I cannot tell you how many times I have been surprised by lining up and blindly playing say 6 or 7  m'pces in a general size range, some of which were supposed to be...supposed to be in my own little mind... good high range pieces, others good low range, good flexibility, good sound, etc. After about 10 minutes of switching around, certain of them would recommend themselves in certain ways, others would begin to eliminate themselves...not open enough, weak highs or lows, sound not right...until one or two would clearly be the best. Upon examination of which ones I preferred they were almost  invariably not the ones that I had expected them to be out front.

Relatively small m'pces with a big sound, relatively large ones with a great high range, etc.

Go figure.

Or maybe better...go NOT figure.

4-Then try that/those m'pces in real life playing situations. If they STILL show promise, move to the next step.

5-When you find a m'pce that really seems like it will work...play it exclusively for about three weeks. (This can be very hard to do for doublers. If you CANNOT stop doubling while in this process...make it a couple of months. Exclusively on that particular horn.) There will be an adjustment period...usually for me within the first week or so...where the m'pce sounds and feels TERRIBLE. This is the crux point as far as I am concerned,  the point where most m'pce choices go awry. The temptation is to go back to the old one because you are embarrassed or somehow troubled by what is happeniong. DO NOT SURRENDER HERE. Push on through for another week of two. If at the end of that period of time it still isn't working...well, then, there you jolly well are, aren't you. Go back to your old m'pce until that one feels comfortable again...usually a pretty quick adjustment...and keep looking.

6-Do NOT go from m'pce to m'pce like a hummingbird goes from flower to flower. With no exceptions I have played given m'pces on given horns for at least a year. Most often, as much as 8 years and with a few, as long as 15. For me it takes at about a year to really find a m'pce/horn combination once I have chosen it, and the choosing process itself almost always entails a backward step or two on the instrument. Every equipment change means that you are wasting valuable practice time messing around with equipment and it is in practice and in performance that the real gowth occurs.

Bet on it.

Choose a m'pce and then stick with it until your own requirements change and/or you reach the definitive end of what you can do on it and you want to go further. This goes for ALL equipment changes.

I have played unchanging equipment for as long as 8 years, and individual horns with perhaps one or two m'pce changes for over 15 years sometimes.

Most important of ALL of these ideas?

Image

Yup.

Match the right m'pce to the right horn for what YOU want to do.

Which  about 99% of the time means making fairly common size and style choices. Occasionally you will find special interest players like Gary Valente or Slide Hampton or Charlie Vernon playing very extreme apparent mismatches, but they can make it work FOR WHAT THEY DO, and unless you are really going to  specialize, those mismatches will NOT work.

Get the right tool(s) for the job(s).

You be bettah off.

And...

Have fun.

The sheer joy of progress is inestimable. I have been practicing seriously for nearly thirty years now, and NOT so seriously for maybe ten years before that (I was a bad, bad boy for a decade or so. MY bad.), and I still get up every day and spend 6 hours or more on my axes every day that I can possibly do so physically. (Hard to do when you are working/playing strenuous music. But I try. An hour or two, minimum. EVERY day.) And I do so not for any reason other than it simply feels good to get better. Not for money; not for fame; not for NUTHIN'.

Except that it FEELS good.

Like I said...have fun.

It's all there really is.

QuoteMy attitude is never to be satisfied, never enough, never.
and

QuoteI don't pursue anything. The only thing I always answer is my own impulse.
Both from Duke Ellington.

Yup.

HE knew.

Bet on it.

Image

Yup.

Later...

S.
ttf_blast
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:15 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_blast »

Sam... did you read all of this thread ?

Chris Stearn.
ttf_blast
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:15 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_blast »

Quote from: blast on Nov 24, 2006, 12:33PMSam... did you read all of this thread ?

Chris Stearn.
That might have looked like the invitation to a fight... it is not (I would lose).. just that in light of the previous course of this topic, I thought you would want to relate some of your observations to previously posted ideas.
Following from your post, would you say that the idea of a size range within which a choice can be made is more applicable to the orchestral fields than jazz work, or do you dismiss the idea totally ?

Chris Stearn.
ttf_griffinben
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_griffinben »

Its been a few months since i took a look at this, so it was interesting to come back and read what has been posted in the interim.

Since originally posting, I actually heard about this theory from someone else, a trumpet player...Dave Trigg.  Those of you who think you don't know him, you do...because he is working all the time and plays on so much that you are bound to have heard him.  long story short, he gets an amazing, rich, fat sound anywhere on the horn...from pedals to high range so extreme that dogs wince in pain.  And he does it on the smallest mouthpiece possible.

Anyhoo, after that i started asking other people and it seems that a lot of people have a theory one way or the other.  A lot don't.

The thing is, amongst all those people, some of them sounded great, some of them didn't.  It seemed to me that it boiled down to one thing:

Use the most efficient mouthpiece for you.

Or more succintly:  use the right tool for the job.

Some physicalities dictate certain things.  i know guys that have played the same thign for years, sound great.  Some poeple that have played something for years, sounded terrible, and later found something that fit them, and then sounded great.  Soem never found it.

the bottom line is results.

If you have subscribed to a theory for years and it doesn't work...drop it.

If you want to try something, through logical progression, research and conlucsion, don't drop it after an hour.

The bottom line is be Smart.

Be in touch with your chops.

That and your gut will lead you a long way.

-Ben
 
ttf_GetzenBassPlayer
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_GetzenBassPlayer »

Nice job Ben.
ttf_Slidennis
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:00 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Slidennis »

Both, for me : largest and smallest : I explain : nearly largest "normal" size on small shank mpc, and smallest "normal" size on large shank mpc...

I'm surely not as experienced as Ben or Sam, but after a (too) long process to find the right mpc for me, my Yammy 697z and my 8HT .525" slide, I chose two 6 3/4 sized mpcs for both, which are the most comfy and most efficient for me and my way of playing : Laskey 50C and Yamaha 47 (lg shank)...

And I tried lots of diff mpcs, in every direction possible, believing I could handle different rim sizes easily, which is not completely true, I'm so at home with a 6 3/4...

On small shank mpc, always looking for the most open feeling, and found it on very few mpcs...  Stork's and Laskey's...

On large shank mpc, I was looking for a responsive mpc that did not break up a FFF...
Not so easy to find at that size...  So, I'd better change of music type and don't have to play too many FFF passage too often... Which I did.

But it seems to me, that careful throat and backbore designs need to be improved drastically, because the vast majority of mpcs I could try was not at all at my liking for this, narrowing my choice to only few of them.

My little take on this... Image
ttf_mellotbone
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_mellotbone »

Interesting Denis as I too have settled on this size for myself, a Bach 6 3/4c on my 3B and a Yamaha 47 on my 646 (.525). I've actually considered using the 47 on both.

I was wondering how the Laskey 50C compares with a bach 6 3/4c, sound-wise, comfort-wise, etc?


ttf_Slidennis
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:00 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Slidennis »

Quote from: mellotbone on Dec 03, 2006, 07:39AMI was wondering how the Laskey 50C compares with a bach 6 3/4c, sound-wise, comfort-wise, etc?
I find both Bach 6 3/4 and small shank Yam 47 quite less open than Laskey 50C and Yam 47 Large Shank  And I always tend to favor the openess of feeling and sound...

For the Bach 6 3/4, I found the sound to be very even from low to high range and pp to ff...  But a litlle muffled and lacking character, which the Laskey has a lot : so vibrant is the sound out of it that it takes some time to adjust for pp playing... 

Also because this piece is a little bit more resistant, and if you try to break that resistance too strongly, the sound will pop out too loudly all at once...  Not at all the case with the Bach 6 3/4C

The high range is also very resonant and easy on the Laskey...  The only drawback is that you can be tempted to push to much in the high register just because this mpc allows you to do so, then the exhaustion comes all of a sudden... and you know the rest... Image

I also found that the backbore of the Yamaha 47 SMALL SH, was giving a stuffy feeling and sound in comparison to the same in LARGE SH, so I'm playing the large shank exclusively on my 8H/.525"...  The Laskey on that axe gives a too trumpety sound, that even can be shrill...

I now have a Laskey 54M for the 8H (large shank) that I like also very much, but the resistance that is comparable to the 50C, is a bit annoying for the high register sometimes...
Work very well with my King 4B though...

ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

I've been doing some mouthpiece fiddling lately on the tenor and bass, and am centering in on an efficient size.  So far the GB 5G-4G is working great on tenor, but go figure - a 4 (greigo) was too open and the rim was too wide, causing airy tone... a 5 (bach) was too small and the air was "backing up", so go figure, a more comfortable 5 rim size with a nice deep cup to give the air someplace to go... magic so far.

Anyway, the interesting observation I had was on bass: I have a Yeo replica that I was using playing bass in my undergrad's jazz band.  I figured it'd give nice flexibility and immediacy to the low range.  I didn't even try the Getzen 1 1/2 that came with the horn.  Whoops.  I get SUCH a better, darker, livelier, fuller sound with the same immediacy to the low notes with the 1 1/2 (and increased flexibility between partials).  As a doubler, I doubt I could ever practice enough on the bass to use anything bigger than the 1 1/2.  I'm decidedly not an upstream player - I have an overbite and do play downstream.  I haven't practiced bass more than about 3, 4 hours since getting to IU - but still, the 1 1/2 works great.   (note, this is not to say I haven't practiced more than 3 or 4 hours since getting to IU! Image)
ttf_JazzPro
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:26 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_JazzPro »

It's really pretty simple.  Instead of trying to keep up with the trends of everyone else, use what works for you.  All it has to do is get the job done.  It doesn't have to be a name brand or expensive.  It just has to work well for you.  Bigger doesn't mean better if you can't play it.  Instead of trying to grow into something (which I think just wastes precious time), find something that works now. Smaller isn't better if it doesn't fit you either.
ttf_Thomas Matta
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:01 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_Thomas Matta »

Bass trombone - I think of using the largest I can play and still sound like a trombone. Griego .5 for now.

Tenor trombone - I think of using the smallest I can play and still be comfy as a doubler. Bach 2G for now.
ttf_AxSlinger7String
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_AxSlinger7String »

How does a Bach 9 compare to other mouthpieces? (a 12C is the only thing I've played besides it for more than a few minutes).  What does it mean that there's no letter after the number?
ttf_anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Theory---Largest..or Smallest?

Post by ttf_anonymous »

Of late I have found myself playing the bass trombone almost exclusively.  It is just how the calls have been going.  Oh, I'll take my small bore tenor to school in order to play with my jazz students, but I don't consider that true practicing (at least for me). Needless to say my tenor practicing in general has been few and far between (both small and large bores).  The other day I got a call to play a church gig on tenor.  Taking a look at the music, which was not very difficult, I found that my sound began breaking up even in mid-range on my Bach 42BO and Getzen 1047, both normally reliable horns for me.  I normally play a Schilke 53 on these instruments and found that I could not control pitch or tone very consistently.  It was a strange disconnect for me because I have always been able get away with less practice on the smaller bores while concentrating most of my practice time on bass trombone, which I play about 75% of the time.  I had in fact never experienced anything like this before. 

Out of desperation, I dropped my Schilke 59 (what I use on my 1062) into both the Bach and the Getzen tenors and the problems I experienced with the 53 just went away!  I have never been an advocate of playing a .547 with a bass trombone mouthpiece, but at least for this gig that is exactly what I will have to do - until I have time to work my chops back into the 53, a mouthpiece that I have always liked on my large bore tenors.

The biggest concern that I would have with this new arrangement in the long run is projection; that might be an issue if I were playing tenor in an orchestra.  In a small brass trio against a choir on this gig, I shouldn't think that there would be a problem.  I also would not use this arrangement in the brass band that I occasionally play in because I know that I might have trouble blending with the other tenors.  I would think that endurance in the long run might also be a concern.

Practice, practice, practice is the answer, but I was also wondering if anyone else had ever run into this problem while using their large mouthpieces, and if so, how did they work around them, both short term and long term. 



Post Reply

Return to “Mouthpieces”