bass trombone equipment and pedagogy

[GabrielRice]

Inspired by the threads on single valve basses and dependent valve configurations, I need to vent a "you kids get off my lawn" mini-rant.

I am of the considered opinion that too many of the bass trombone students I see rely too much on the independent valves rather than the slide, and it impairs their development of accurate slide placement and therefore intonation.

To make matters worse - or at least more squirrelly - the big valve, big slot designs so prevalent now make it even more difficult to develop accurate slide placement because there is very little tactile feedback when playing out of tune. If I wasn't in the center of the pitch on the Bach 50B3 I learned to play on it both sounded and FELT terrible. One of the things that makes modern bass trombones from Edwards, Shires, Rath, Yamaha, etc. "easier" to play is that they are much more forgiving of small inaccuracies of slide placement. But there is a downside to that.

Sometimes I think it's valuable when one of my students needs to leave their instrument at a shop for several days to be repaired, so that I can lend them a single-valve Bach bass trombone that they then need to wrestle with for sound and intonation.

I understand the reactions people are having to Aidan's stated opinions here, but I've been following his progress since he was a student. He comes to his opinions about equipment having put in the time to play well on unforgiving instruments, and you can hear the results in his videos.

[Matt K]

Where I went to school, once a semester we had to turn in our f attachment tuning slides (for tenor players) and Gb/G valves for bass players

I'm a little conflicted to be honest. I spent a LOT of time on straight horns. I used a 42G for a year in college until I had an F attachment added and I was mostly a smallbore player, so no F attachment for most of playing up until beyond my master degree.

...but I have an F attachment added to everything now. Even my 2B sized horn. It's supremely useful, and I think on the flip side, there is a bit of a recalcitrance to avoid the F attachment when it would be a massive benefit, especially for jazz players. Having it is majorly underrated for small bore setups in my estimation. But I totally agree that you have to have the technique first, you can't use it as a crutch

[TomInME]

So much yes here.
I also think that the big valve, big slot designs lack enough color/overtones (focus/center?) to easily hear when one is out of tune, particularly when playing with others (harder to hear yourself when you're getting that "tubby" sound, which is more common on big independents).

I have never liked my sound on the easy-to-play basses I have tried - not enough zing/sing. But it is unfortunately the nature of auditions and solo work that accuracy and consistency are more important than color. For ensembles, I believe the opposite is true, and trombone (bass especially) is primarily an ensemble instrument.

The wide, thick sound that is prevalent today isn't what you heard back in the glory days of the Chicago Symphony or NY Phil - or George Roberts, for that matter. Big, yes, but vibrant.

[spencercarran]

Conversely, I see many players making inadequate use of the valve(s) they have - people who bought a double independent bass and still treat it as though it were a dependent or even a single, or tenor players who haven't found out about all the useful alternate positions their F attachment offers. These extra components got added to standard instrument design for a reason, and learning to use them effectively is a part of becoming a fully competent trombonist.

That said, I use my single valve 72H as often as I can get away with because I like the sound I get from it. It's a different technical challenge getting around bass repertoire with one valve that occasionally pulls to bE, and IMO also a worthwhile skillset to develop.

[hyperbolica]

I grew up on an F attachment. I was 11 and my parents got a deal on an 88h. In my opinion, that's too young for a large bore valve horn, but that was my situation. I played ONLY that horn for decades, but I learned to play it without the valve.

When I was old enough to make up my own mind and afford other options, the first thing I got was an 8h. What a glorious sound! I'm not afraid of the outer positions. I don't have long arms, but 5th, 6th and 7th don't bother me, especially when I get better sound than with a valve.

I think if you play trombone, you should be able to play trombone. And to me, that means use the slide. I'll use the valves when I think its an advantage, but even on my double bass I still use 5, 6 and 7. I've played the Yamahas and Shires and others, and I think you give up a lot in character. I actually bought a Shires and sent it back because I didn't think it was right. If those horns are "easy", it's not a measure of how easy it is to get a lot of character in the sound.

A single valve only starts to be useful at C on the staff (unless it's a G valve which gets a lot of air time, but you don't see them that much - cue all of the exception seekers). If I'm playing mostly first parts, I'm not going to be playing in that range. There's a huge advantage to having a lighter horn. I do like to have a small(er) bore with a valve, but I really prefer straight horns.

And you can play in tune on just about any horn. The one bone I got rid of because of intonation issues was a newer Courtois. It just had tendencies that were opposite of my instincts, so if I kept that horn, I'd have to get rid of everything else. I do struggle with intonation with the second valve on the bass. I don't have the background on 2 valves that I have on 1, but I keep working on it.

All this talk about age issues is kind of silly. 100% of young people (who don't die early) get old. 100% guarantee. And what's old? This year it's 35, but next year that line moves, and you have to keep on moving it. When you move out of the fairy land bubble, and even further out of lalaland bubble, you'll get a dose of reality. I'm not sure what kind of bitterness back in cowboy WY made you hate "old" people so much, but the music world is full of "them", and one day you will be one too, so grow up and get over it.

[timothy42b]

Conversely, I see many players making inadequate use of the valve(s) they have - people who bought a double independent bass and still treat it as though it were a dependent or even a single, or tenor players who haven't found out about all the useful alternate positions their F attachment offers.

I think youngsters should be playing their C and B in the staff on the trigger most of the time, at least if they have advanced to the point where they do hear intonation and do adjust positions as needed. That is so much easier and likely to happen in the close positions than at arms length.

[Kbiggs]

Conversely, I see many players making inadequate use of the valve(s) they have - people who bought a double independent bass and still treat it as though it were a dependent or even a single, or tenor players who haven't found out about all the useful alternate positions their F attachment offers.

I think youngsters should be playing their C and B in the staff on the trigger most of the time, at least if they have advanced to the point where they do hear intonation and do adjust positions as needed. That is so much easier and likely to happen in the close positions than at arms length.

Not trying to be a contrarian…

I see many young players on tenor and bass who use the F valve too much. It’s almost as if they become afraid of using 6th or 7th position because they have a valve. I’ve sat next to some college players who, for example, played the passage Db-C-Eb in the staff with the positions 5-V-3.

I agree that they should use C, B, and occasionally Bb (and sometimes even A!) in staff with the F-valve provided they’ve learned how to play with good intonation. The same goes for students with independent basses: they need to know C#/Db, C, B, and Bb with the second valve whether it’s tuned to either G or Gb.

Intonation and alternate positions are essential.

[spencercarran]

I see many young players on tenor and bass who use the F valve too much. It’s almost as if they become afraid of using 6th or 7th position because they have a valve. I’ve sat next to some college players who, for example, played the passage Db-C-Eb in the staff with the positions 5-V-3.

I agree it's important to use the valve(s) effectively. I've also seen players go between V1-5 more often than necessary when they could simply have used 6th position - part of learning to use the valve properly is understanding when it's more appropriate to play on the open horn as well.

Of course, most children and plenty of grown adults simply do not have long enough arms to reach 7th (or sometimes even 6th) position comfortably, without introducing additional tension that will negatively impact their sound. For those players, the calculation of when it makes sense to use the valve or not will be somewhat different than it will be for a player with longer arms who can reach the end of the slide more easily.

The intonation comments I'm seeing are confusing me a little; if someone doesn't hear and adjust intonation in flat 2nd position with the valve, why would we expect them to do any better in in 7th?

[BGuttman]

When John Coffey was teaching at New England Conservatory he used to disable his students' F-attachments for a period to make them learn the outer positions. Once the students were comfortable playing C, B, F, and E in 6th or 7th he would let them start using the valve.

I'm old enough that when I wanted my first bass trombone you could either get a single valve (Conn 72H was quite popular) or a double dependent in F/flatE. In fact, F-attachments were so uncommon that anything that had one was called a "bass trombone" including my Olds Ambassador A-15 (which is smaller than most modern trombones). We had a family friend who ran a pawn shop and when we asked him for assistance finding a "bass trombone" he assumed I wanted one of those G instruments that were by then really obsolete in the US and he told us that they weren't generally available (he lied: Conn 88H's were all over the place, as well as the King Symphony).

I stopped playing for around 20 years (college and after) and when I went to start back we had a mix of dependents and independents. I liked the feel of the independent, but I still trained myself to make use of the straight horn and the F-attachment alone in the longer positions. I also found that doing things like lip slurs through the attachment in outer positions honed my embouchure to play better on the shorter instrument.

I know the kids keep asking "should I get a dependent or an independent" and I always tell them buy what feels good to you and you will get used to it. A dependent in F and D can get you all the notes you need. Having an independent in F and Gb (and D) can sometimes give you a couple of useful notes (like playing C and F on the 2nd valve in 2nd position so they are not too flat) but that isn't a game changer. And most kids will not be able to feel the difference between playing through 2 valves all the time vs. playing through 1 valve all the time and occasionally 2.

[Burgerbob]

All this talk about age issues is kind of silly. 100% of young people (who don't die early) get old. 100% guarantee. And what's old? This year it's 35, but next year that line moves, and you have to keep on moving it. When you move out of the fairy land bubble, and even further out of lalaland bubble, you'll get a dose of reality. I'm not sure what kind of bitterness back in cowboy WY made you hate "old" people so much, but the music world is full of "them", and one day you will be one too, so grow up and get over it.

Wew! I don't hate old people. Where does this come from? I'm not being facetious, I haven't said that.

Sometimes I think it's valuable when one of my students needs to leave their instrument at a shop for several days to be repaired, so that I can lend them a single-valve Bach bass trombone that they then need to wrestle with for sound and intonation.

I have owned over 50(!) basses. I have bounced off all the Shires and Edwards I've owned for just that reason, I think. Something about the ease cancels out the fun, the spark that keeps me coming back to the instrument. It's not that I want to fight- it's that I want that middle point with a good instrument to play with some spice to it.

I have heard (and continue to) lots of college students on Shires. I am very, very rarely impressed with their sounds on them. They tend to sound big, but with a heavy response and not much other than that. I heard SO much of that at ITF 2023. Those designs cover up many faults with playing, I think- I know they've done the same for me in the past, and it feels good to have an instrument that makes your life easier... but covering up sins means those sins wait to get worked on.

When I hear top pros on Shires, I do enjoy the sounds- they have a density, a shimmer, and broadness that is enviable. But that only comes with top level chops, just like those sounds do on any other instrument. I know I don't get those sounds.

Edwards are similar, with some variations and more largesse, less color. Again- that feels great to have this really wide feedback behind the instrument, especially with a dual bore and a big mouthpiece, even though that's the wrong road that SO many students take.

Some of the best advice I've heard was from Kyle Gordon, saying that good pedals have very little feedback- they feel dry behind the bell, seemingly none of that room-filling sound. I think that goes for a lot of our playing, since that sound is actually projecting and has a core that is going somewhere. It's just hard to get on that train when you could have it the other way!

[tbdana]

I think if you play trombone, you should be able to play trombone. And to me, that means use the slide.

Bless you, kind sir. You were sent from heaven to deliver the message of trombone salvation.

[Burgerbob]

I almost brought it up in the other thread, but straight large bores are in the exact same boat as dependents. They are "better" and used almost never compared to their brethren.

I even have a straight gooseneck that plays great, but I would never take it to a gig where I haven't seen the music.

[TomInME]

I think the trade-off with big slots is more difficulty accessing interesting color and hearing intonation, in exchange for getting notes out more easily. Tighter slots probably mean more risk of notes chipping or not speaking, but easier color. Money/craftsmanship can help but only goes so far, and I think it's less about the number of valves than the overall build. Older singles likely have tighter slots while newer doubles likely have big slots.

I think a lot of it comes down to what you don't mind working on vs what annoys the living sh*t out of you. Personally, getting a fun sound is a really REALLY big part of what I enjoy about playing (and what I think others enjoy about my playing), and I don't mind working on consistency/accuracy even if it can be a slog sometimes. But I can also understand the comfort and enjoyment of having an instrument that is more forgiving.

It would be nice to have it both ways, wouldn't it?

[mrdeacon]

I think the trade-off with big slots is more difficulty accessing interesting color and hearing intonation, in exchange for getting notes out more easily. Tighter slots probably mean more risk of notes chipping or not speaking, but easier color. Money/craftsmanship can help but only goes so far, and I think it's less about the number of valves than the overall build. Older singles likely have tighter slots while newer doubles likely have big slots.

I think a lot of it comes down to what you don't mind working on vs what annoys the living sh*t out of you. Personally, getting a fun sound is a really REALLY big part of what I enjoy about playing (and what I think others enjoy about my playing), and I don't mind working on consistency/accuracy even if it can be a slog sometimes. But I can also understand the comfort and enjoyment of having an instrument that is more forgiving.

It would be nice to have it both ways, wouldn't it?

My Minick custom bass has incredibly tight slots. Like you’ll chip an F in the staff if you’re not careful. When you’re dialed in and nailing the slots you’ll have nothing but money out of the bell. If you’re having an off day the horn will back up on you and you’ll have to wrestle for every note.

It’s a hard horn to play but it sure sounds great when you’re playing well.

[Kbiggs]

I think the trade-off with big slots is more difficulty accessing interesting color and hearing intonation, in exchange for getting notes out more easily. Tighter slots probably mean more risk of notes chipping or not speaking, but easier color. Money/craftsmanship can help but only goes so far, and I think it's less about the number of valves than the overall build. Older singles likely have tighter slots while newer doubles likely have big slots.

I think a lot of it comes down to what you don't mind working on vs what annoys the living sh*t out of you. Personally, getting a fun sound is a really REALLY big part of what I enjoy about playing (and what I think others enjoy about my playing), and I don't mind working on consistency/accuracy even if it can be a slog sometimes. But I can also understand the comfort and enjoyment of having an instrument that is more forgiving.

It would be nice to have it both ways, wouldn't it?

I’m with TomInMe and Aidan and Gabe on this. Although I learned bass positions on an Olds Recording, and I’ve played a couple of different horns over the years, the sound in my head is from a Bach 50. I played an Edwards 454 (and a 350 tenor) for a few years, but I always felt like it was too big, and somewhat “vanilla” sounding (although that may have been the set-up I used). Very even, very big, but not the character I was after. After a couple of years, I sold them, bought back my 42, and had my old 50 retro-modded.

It’s an independent, with Instrument Innovations rotors. Yes, it slots narrow, even in the double-trigger range. Yes, it takes effort and practice. But it’s all about the sound. There’s nothing wrong with the horn—it’s all operator error!

[Burgerbob]

It would be nice to have it both ways, wouldn't it?

I think there are horns that straddle the middle. My M&W is right there.

[timothy42b]

The intonation comments I'm seeing are confusing me a little; if someone doesn't hear and adjust intonation in flat 2nd position with the valve, why would we expect them to do any better in in 7th?

That was the point I was trying to make, I probably explained it badly.

I'm average size, about 5'10" for non metric speakers, may have shrunk a bit by now I guess. I find it far easier to get V-2 exactly in tune than when I'm straining to reach 7th, whether it needs to be tweaked sharp or flat. And if you play with your horn tuned a little sharp, to get a little adjustment range in 1st, this is even worse. For beginners I'd err on the side of the easier path. Of course they need to learn both.

[TomInME]

I think there are horns that straddle the middle. My M&W is right there.

Meaning the best compromise between slotted/colorful vs forgiving? Or requiring the same amount of work for color as it does for accuracy? Or is it simply less effort in both respects?

[Burgerbob]

I think there are horns that straddle the middle. My M&W is right there.

Meaning the best compromise between slotted/colorful vs forgiving? Or requiring the same amount of work for color as it does for accuracy? Or is it simply less effort in both respects?

It plays great and it sounds great. It's got more refinement than a stock rotor bach, some of that coarseness (as Gabe would put it) is lost, but the bach color is still fully present. And it has just none of the bad quirks.

[TomInME]

My Minick custom bass has incredibly tight slots. Like you’ll chip an F in the staff if you’re not careful. When you’re dialed in and nailing the slots you’ll have nothing but money out of the bell. If you’re having an off day the horn will back up on you and you’ll have to wrestle for every note.

It’s a hard horn to play but it sure sounds great when you’re playing well.

(long post warning - skip to the end for the TLDR)
I was going to start a thread about my equipment odyssey over the past year, because the Bach I had then played like your Minick (or probably worse). The slot for the low B was basically zero - if I was truly in shape, it was meh, if I wasn't in shape, it was total garbage or didn't speak at all. Pedals were pretty stuffy too. But the color in the staff and down to D or so was pretty great.

The odyssey began when I started a bone quintet a little over a year ago after sitting in on Gabe's masterclass up here in Maine. (Best advice ever: play in a chamber group.) This demanded more of my playing than the occasional B, so I needed to do something - but didn't have $7-8k, or anywhere nearby to try instruments.
I moved to a bigger and better mouthpiece (thanks, Doug!) and later got some new valve cores (which were a VAST improvement - thanks, Pete!), and the slots got a lot easier especially on the low B, but the sound was substantially darker and deader. Gabe had steered me toward the better of the two DE combos I had (thanks, Gabe!), but it was still a little too dark/dead. I tried going back to the original nickel slide but it has a Bach open leadpipe and wouldn't center - the sound popped a bit more but the response was both sloppy and squirrely, not a fun time.

The recent acquisition of a nickel leadpipe for my Shires slide (still a B2, which Bob & Gabe recommend as best - thanks Bob/Gabe!) brought the color back the rest of the way (almost), without losing much of the improvement at all. Still pretty tightly slotted, but the low B is way more reliable and consistent now.
As soon as I put it in, I could hear that my intonation had gotten sloppy - just over the course of a few months. But I can hear it now. I really wonder how it would be for a student still learning what intonation means, to have an instrument that is too forgiving and also not easy to hear pitch on - changing to a single Bach must be a revelation...

TLDR: there are instruments at the extreme ends that can be improved and it's not necessarily a zero-sum game - but there still are limits. My Bach is in a much better place and has 98% of the color I have always loved, but it still takes some work to play consistently and the notes don't speak automatically. If I sell off the extra mouthpieces and leadpipes I tried, I'll still be in the hole about $1400 (mainly for the valve cores and DE mouthpieces), but I think it was well worth it.

Side note: It's very sad to me that the Bach rotors haven't improved in 50+ (70+? 90+?) years.

[TomInME]

It plays great and it sounds great. It's got more refinement than a stock rotor bach, some of that coarseness (as Gabe would put it) is lost, but the bach color is still fully present. And it has just none of the bad quirks.

I'll put one on my "when I win the lotto" shopping list.

[jonathanharker]

A few things recently have made me put my thinking cap on:

• the recent dependent vs. independent discussions,
• the almost zero pedagogical material for contrabass,
• the whole flat-F tuning to get an in-tune C (if your F in F1 is in tune, some slides aren't long enough for you to get C in F6)

So I cobbled these slide charts together over a couple of weekends. It's still draft, I might be over-thinking it (who would have thought?) and they're licensed CC-BY-SA so go ahead and use it if you want. There's still a whole extra chart to do for basses with B♭/F/G/E♭ tuning, and possibly even the contrabass tuned to F/D♭/C/A although it seems hardly anyone's using or making that any more(?)

The idea is to show that the distances between notes are always the same, regardless of which valve you're on, by aligning everything vertically. I've also had to invent nomenclature for positions based on the slide tuning, because T or V (or worse, V1 and V2) aren't consistent everywhere, whereas (e.g.) F4 is always the fourth position on the F slide, whether that's your F valve, or the open slide on the contra. It's always in the same place, which I've learned isn't immediately obvious to everyone. That's sort of where the diagram on page 4 came from, which is what I started with. I suppose if it wanted to be even more "universal" it should include the E♭ alto slide too

Anyhoo, I'd be interested in comments and criticism, from glowing to withering, from y'all. Merry Christmas!

(Update: v2 fixes 7th partial error on p.3)

[Burgerbob]

Very nice document!

[jonathanharker]

Very nice document!

Thank you sir!

[AtomicClock]

I have a problem with the chart. Tenor trombone doesn't go up to D. I demonstrated this in a concert last weekend.
Sigh.

[tbdana]

I have a problem with the chart. Tenor trombone doesn't go up to D. I demonstrated this in a concert last weekend.
Sigh.

ROFL!!!!

Yeah, I'm constantly demonstrating things a trombone "can't" do.

[jonathanharker]

Haha - I wondered about putting partials 8-10 into tenor clef, but then we're into the whole "B♭ treble clef while you're at it" argument. I suppose, now I think of it again, it's only the tenor trombone where that's a problem, since nobody's reading bass in B♭ treble (are they??) and the same seven people who actually get any work on contrabass aren't either, so maybe I just make a B♭ treble chart for tenor and bang it in there

[jonathanharker]

Zomg... I've got the 7th partial on the contra chart out by one! Whoops... (fixed .2.PDF attached)

[TomInME]

This chart would be super-duper useful the first time out on a double valve or contrabass.

Q: is the crook of the slide in the correct place? I don't think my slide has that much extra past 7th, and have yet to play a horn that had an in-tune C on the F valve with the F in-tune in first.

It's also very cool to put the pictures of the slides for each valve with first position lined up. It shows why the G-flat valve has to be sharper: F4 is not as far out as B-flat 5. (It also shows why my D in first is a little sharp: the C on the D valve is a little past 4th but my preference is to have it exactly in 4th - I don't tune to the D except to make sure I have to kick out enough to make the C in 4th)

You already mentioned the tuning bit - G-flat valves normally have to be on the sharp side to get the D in first, even if the F valve is tuned for usable F in first, so it would be interesting to see the G-flat visual shown in different places based on the tuning setup.

I'll play around with those visuals when I have more time and remember how to post images. Fun stuff!

[harrisonreed]

Aidan, there's a lot going on in your big post but I think you've made some assumptions or have some icebergs you're hung up on that could be holding you back. This is not me taking jabs at you, because I know you can play and teach very well, but maybe a counter argument to your points.

I have owned over 50(!) basses.

That's a lot. It's great to have a collecting hobby and knowledge of how all the makes of horns play as a teacher, but it seems like after searching through 50+ instruments you gotta finally settle on what you're working with. I think I've even seen your videos from a long time ago where you've found "the one", and more recent videos where you've definitely found "the one", and others where you've frankenboned together "the one", though I think you always are open about knowing you'll move on. Any of those could have been "the one", they all sounded good. Your next frankenbone project that you like, you should engrave your name on the horn and say it's the AR signature model, and take ownership of it. Then it will be harder (well, unless you're that guy who endorsed the 835...) to jump to the next horn.

The start of my counter argument is that I'm primarily a large tenor player and I've owned a whopping TWO large tenors in 26 years of playing. Aside from that, I've owned two different altos and two small bores (one student model and one pro model each). I've played thousands of concerts around the world on those horns. My sound has changed over the years, but the horns haven't.

I have bounced off all the Shires and Edwards I've owned for just that reason, I think. Something about the ease cancels out the fun, the spark that keeps me coming back to the instrument. It's not that I want to fight- it's that I want that middle point with a good instrument to play with some spice to it.

The fun of playing is the music you get to make! We all sound like ourselves regardless of the instrument we're on. Huge differences in sound to the performer dissipate the further away from the instrument you get.

It's not the arrow, it's the archer.

I have heard (and continue to) lots of college students on Shires. I am very, very rarely impressed with their sounds on them.

You're giving them too much credit! I've heard lots of college students on straight-up trombone -- they usually don't sound too good. It's not the horn. They're still learning, which is great! Shires is just better at getting instruments into the hands of college kids than the other brands.

They tend to sound big, but with a heavy response and not much other than that. I heard SO much of that at ITF 2023.

For my money they sound dull and flat on the pitch. They think that is what playing "big" is. Again, that's because they are still learning. And that they are learning to play in tiny rooms that eat all their sound up.

Those designs cover up many faults with playing, I think- I know they've done the same for me in the past, and it feels good to have an instrument that makes your life easier... but covering up sins means those sins wait to get worked on.

"The wand chooses the wizard Mr. Potter"
-Mr. Ollivander, some guy who wants to sell wands and does zero magic

"No, I am extraordinary..."
-Voldemort, most powerful wizard of all time, commenting on wands

It's on the students and the teachers to figure out what sins need working on and get on it. I think a lot of what actually gets in the way is the tiny rooms that students practice in and that teachers often have lessons in. How are you supposed to figure out what you're doing when you're training to play in a room that has feedback that is completely different from any performance space you'll ever play in. Small wonder students sound dull and flat with little projection -- they are trying to create resonance and reverb in rooms that are completely dead.

When I hear top pros on Shires, I do enjoy the sounds- they have a density, a shimmer, and broadness that is enviable. But that only comes with top level chops, just like those sounds do on any other instrument.

Exactly. The instrument isn't what makes them sound good, and you've said it yourself. You're comparing the best trombonists in the world to college kids. College kids are beginners. Joe Alessi has one of the best sounds any trombonist has ever had. I think it was Ian Bousfield who said that he wished he had had access to his Getzen when he auditioning and that he could have progressed twice as fast in college. Those guys rock. The equipment has nothing to do with it, aside from functioning.

Again, I'm not taking a jab at you personally. I just think that you've got it kind of backwards. The equipment doesn't make someone sound interesting. You don't need to use some "spicy" trombone to figure out your faults so that you can work on them. You need a teacher, a critical ear, and a room that somewhat matches where you are going to perform so that you can be critical.

[GabrielRice]

This conversation has gone to some interesting places, as I'd hoped.

I want to be clear that my initial point is not about sound. I've heard too many people - top level pros, students, and others - make GREAT sounds on big modern bass trombones to say it can't be done or that they would sound better on Bachs. I spent a long time playing Shires bass trombones and I'm very proud of the sounds I made on them. I'm not suggesting everybody should play a Bach or a Conn or an old Holton.

I'm talking about pedagogy, most specifically about learning to play in tune. Which, in my experience, is best done with the kind of feedback you get from an instrument that is not SO BIG.

In this regard I'll go ahead and say that I think Shires is better for this than Edwards/Getzen, specifically because of the dimensions of the main tuning slides - which are enormous on Edwards/Getzen basses. I'm happy to see that the Shires Q Series includes single bore slides rather than dual bore. I wish neither company included their number 3 leadpipe with the standard package.

And then the other part of my point is that many of the students I see using the 2nd valve a lot also have trouble finding the center of the pitch. Maybe this is a correlation-not-causation issue, but I see students who are constantly switching between valves rather than moving the slide - say, C to B in about the same position - often confusing themselves and playing neither note particularly well in tune.

Again, don't get me wrong - I'm all for learning your whole instrument and using the 2nd valve alone for passages that make sense that way. I do quite a bit of that myself (though not as much as most of my students). I'm not suggesting everybody spend some kind of purgatory on a single valve or dependent bass trombone.

I just want to prepare my students for professional careers, and that means playing in tune.

[VJOFan]

I had the experience of a great horn helping me to learn what playing should feel like. I came into a little cash in 1995 and got fitted for an Edwards dual bore tenor. That horn made a flawless legato and uniform sound through the registers almost automatic. When I felt what that was like it became much easier to play my Bach 42 and get similar results.

I got the Edwards three years after I started playing an orchestra gig so maybe I was ready to make use of the tool.

I'm having a similar experience now with my new small bore. Things come out of that horn that surprise me by how good they sound. I always wanted to play certain riffs and turns but couldn't do them cleanly. They just pop out of my new horn.

[Matt K]

Gabe, I think you make a lot of good points there. Something that I found is that I used to be an excessively bright player (still very easy for me to "turn that on" fwiw) until I started playing with drones. Discovered I was playing quite "high on the pitch"; and still do a lot of drone work. Before I did that, I would gravitate more towards "interesting sounding" instruments like Bachs and now tend to gravitate to equipment like the Edwards/Getzen (which I play for tenors) and Shires (which both of my basses happen to be).

From a pedagogical sense, I know it's super boring, but I find it hard to demonstrate how you can affect your overtones more quickly than using drones. I use a lot of the "warm-ups" that I got from studying with Jim Nova with them. I don't recall him mentioning the drones, but they're a very natural fit. A lot of the exercises that he does are flexibility (which, if you're using a drone, have the added benefit that you're working on accurately landing the pitch rapidly over larger intervals, as well as intonation in major and minor chords), lipping up/down, and small intervals. It covers all the basis.

In particular, the lipping up and down really demonstrates how to modify the color of your tone more than anything else I've tried, especially against a drone. Much better than a tuner, which will tell you if the pitch is literally in tune, but won't do anything to help adjust where you are playing it on the instrument. You can be "in-tune" and still be playing in a spot on the instrument that is a poor fit for that note. When I studied with Doug, he taught me something very similar too.

[TomInME]

they are learning to play in tiny rooms that eat all their sound up.

This is an important point. A more colorful sound in a small room (especially a Wenger) can sound pretty harsh/painful. Big instruments need big rooms.

I would add that they're likely spending a lot of time playing ALONE also (excerpts and auditions being what they are), which isn't all that great for sound or pitch.

I see students who are constantly switching between valves rather than moving the slide - say, C to B in about the same position - often confusing themselves and playing neither note particularly well in tune.

They should look at that slide chart, which shows they're not the same position - there are lots of places the slide might need to be for those two notes, depending on the valve tuning setup and the partials.

Buddy Baker was a stickler for keeping half-steps on the same partial, and I think that rule is a good one even with the valves - it's a more "trombone-y" sound with fewer complications (usually). I used to play in-the-staff C in first and D-flat also in first, but am re-learning to use the G-flat valve for both of those notes if they are neighbors. Same for F and G-flat.

The cure for confusion is consistent patterns rather than limiting the possibilities, IMO.

I just want to prepare my students for professional careers, and that means playing in tune.

And a colorful sound too, I hope! I think part of this discussion relates to how a very heavy prioritization on precision (right note, right pitch, right time) in auditions and elsewhere has taken some of the sparkle out of the listening experience. It's not a surprise that equipment design has followed the demand.

[harrisonreed]

Specifically for playing in tune, the big issue I hear is with not understanding when to use 12-tet, when to use 5-limit, and when to use melodic tuning. Students have a few of the 5-limit rules drilled into their head and apply that tuning to everything they play. This is part of why they sound flat.

For example, "lower the major third 14 cents!" eventually turns into playing, say, "D" flat regardless of the key or the note's function in the phrase. And "lower the major 6th 15 cents!" turns into the same thing -- everyone is suddenly playing G's flatter than the salt plain. "Lower the Major 7th 12 cents!" whoops, every leading tone is now flat as hell.

Unfortunately for bass players, given the long term incompatibility of 5-limit tuning and shifting key signatures, they really should just focus on 12-tet for everything except specific notes (marked into their music) that absolutely must be tempered, before worrying about just intonation. The bass has to keep the root and pitch center from drifting away from 440 or 442, even as the chords are tempered around them.

Some of the issue is not hearing it. A lot more of the issue is not understanding what tuning system to use, or just learning to lower D's, G's, and A's as a rule even though not all music is in the key of Bb, and not knowing that that is the wrong direction to tune half the time even when you are in Bb. And then beyond that, this inexplicable desire that I keep seeing for players to equate "big / dark / warm" with "thin / flat / unfocused".

[TomInME]

The reason players don't lower their thirds enough is not because their ears don't know what sounds good, it's because they have practiced putting their arms in a certain place (hopefully the equal-tempered place, but sometimes the B-flat major place) and can't believe how much they have to move to get the third in tune. And they've probably been playing alone so much they don't know what a harmonic major third sounds like.

But I think that may be a different issue from what Gabe is saying, which I think relates more to putting one's arm in approximately the right place and letting the big slot make it sound approximately correct, rather than putting the slide in exactly the right spot so that it sounds exactly correct (as required by instruments with tighter slots).

[harrisonreed]

Nah I'm saying they DO learn to lower a few notes and then do it as a rule regardless of key. I mostly hear out of tune players being *flat* on everything, and it's probably not a coincidence that most of the adjustments in JI involve lowering major thirds, 6ths, and 7ths.

Of course, wide slots and unfocused playing/instruments are also a culprit. So is trying to sound "dark" all the time.

Intonation is complex. That's why one of my pet peeves is pedagogy that insists "just play in tune", with no real analysis attached to it.

[spencercarran]

And then the other part of my point is that many of the students I see using the 2nd valve a lot also have trouble finding the center of the pitch. Maybe this is a correlation-not-causation issue, but I see students who are constantly switching between valves rather than moving the slide - say, C to B in about the same position - often confusing themselves and playing neither note particularly well in tune.

I really think someone playing thoughtlessly enough to make that mistake is also unlikely to, for example, make the correct adjustments to slide positions in the 5th and 6th partials. You have to listen and play in tune, no matter what combination of valves and slide are involved in any given note, and what you're describing are just students who aren't paying enough attention to intonation - they would probably be out of tune on a straight tenor, too.

[GabrielRice]

Intonation is complex. That's why one of my pet peeves is pedagogy that insists "just play in tune", with no real analysis attached to it.

I would argue that intonation is not that complex. I don't know or teach the math. My favorite intonation tool is a blindfold. Seriously. Put on a blindfold and play scales for a while - you will hear everything more clearly.

If the math is what works for you, great - I know people who do well that way. If the math helps you get to hearing the distinctions more clearly, great. But the math is a tool along the way to hearing and playing it clearly, not an end in itself.

I really think someone playing thoughtlessly enough to make that mistake is also unlikely to, for example, make the correct adjustments to slide positions in the 5th and 6th partials. You have to listen and play in tune, no matter what combination of valves and slide are involved in any given note, and what you're describing are just students who aren't paying enough attention to intonation - they would probably be out of tune on a straight tenor, too.

Again, I'm clearly not making my point well. It's not just students being lazy or not wanting to do the work. The instruments many young bass trombone players play are difficult to hear and feel the center of the pitch on. I can tell them what 5th and 6th partial should be until I'm blue in the face, but until they hear it and feel it clearly for themselves they will not place the slide with consistent accuracy.

[harrisonreed]

Intonation is complex. That's why one of my pet peeves is pedagogy that insists "just play in tune", with no real analysis attached to it.

I would argue that intonation is not that complex. I don't know or teach the math. My favorite intonation tool is a blindfold. Seriously. Put on a blindfold and play scales for a while - you will hear everything more clearly.

If the math is what works for you, great - I know people who do well that way. If the math helps you get to hearing the distinctions more clearly, great. But the math is a tool along the way to hearing and playing it clearly, not an end in itself.

There is no math needed, really. It's a chart that mathematicians made with 13 intervals on it. I can play in tune, so I don't think it's complicated to be able to innately hear what's in tune. But that doesn't help students who can't play in tune

[Burgerbob]

Aidan, there's a lot going on in your big post but I think you've made some assumptions or have some icebergs you're hung up on that could be holding you back. This is not me taking jabs at you, because I know you can play and teach very well, but maybe a counter argument to your points.

I have owned over 50(!) basses.

That's a lot.

I say this not because I can't find horns I like, but because I just love variety. I am jealous of people like you that can own literally one or two horns for an entire career and enjoy it. OF COURSE music is the reason we have the instrument at all- but I really enjoy the thing itself, and the differences they can embody. And simply enough, I get very bored playing the same thing all the time.

Luckily, I live here and I literally have to play 5 or 6 different instruments in different styles and settings. I've even had the chance to use all 3 of my basses this month, in settings that are appropriate for each. Could I use just one for all of them? I guess, but it would have been a compromise. Why compromise?

There's 100% something to be said about learning your basics on one instrument. In a way, I did this in undergrad on my first bass (a dependent, old, Holton!), but I still had lots of room to grow. I did that growing on many, many horns instead.

This helps my teaching immensely. People that grow up on one instrument have all sorts of things built into their playing to deal with that specific instrument- to the boon of their own personal playing, of course. But that doesn't always translate to general brass pedagogy. I just have to simply play well, or my instruments don't work.

At least those are my excuses!

Not everyone needs to agree with my opinions on sound. Again, I've heard amazing sounds on Shires. I just don't know if I think it's the right choice for every student, like they seem to be in the last ten or so years.

[tbdana]

Specifically for playing in tune, the big issue I hear is with not understanding when to use 12-tet, when to use 5-limit, and when to use melodic tuning. Students have a few of the 5-limit rules drilled into their head and apply that tuning to everything they play. This is part of why they sound flat.

I don't know what any of those things are, and I play in tune. How can that be?

Some of the issue is not hearing it. A lot more of the issue is not understanding what tuning system to use.

Naw, I disagree. All of the issue is not hearing it. Because if you hear it, you play in tune. I have no idea what 14 cents lower sounds like, but I know whether the note I'm playing sounds in tune or not, and I don't have to know the function of the note.

Intonation is complex. That's why one of my pet peeves is pedagogy that insists "just play in tune", with no real analysis attached to it.

As an intellectual exercise, tuning may be complex. As a musical exercise, it's quite simple. Every note has a place (or maybe a couple places) at a particular moment where it is "in tune". You just listen and put the note in that place in that particular instant. You don't have to know any of those systems or concepts, you simply have to hear it, and...sorry, pet peeve alert! ... just play in tune. I suggest that playing in tune by knowledge is much more difficult and precarious than playing in tune by hearing. If you know what in-tune sounds like and you know how to listen and fit into the harmonic space of the instant, you can play in tune without knowing any theory at all.

There are scores of musicians in all genres and instruments who don't know any of those theories but nevertheless have rock solid pitch. How do they do it?

Now, as with everything I post, when considering the value of what I say try to keep in mind that most mornings I can't even find my car keys.

(As an aside, I have a trombone friend who is also a piano tuner (not getting into that mess), and he has a great ear. He teaches students of all variable pitch instruments to play in tune by first listening to eliminate "beats" in the chord and then to identify particular harmonics that pop when the note is in tune. When I first watched his presentation I couldn't pick out those harmonics at all, but after a few minutes of concentrating it suddenly jumped out and revealed itself to my ears, wherein it became incredibly obvious.) There are many methods for teaching playing in-tune.)

[tbdana]

I say this not because I can't find horns I like, but because I just love variety...I really enjoy the thing itself, and the differences they can embody. And simply enough, I get very bored playing the same thing all the time.

Maybe not a good comparison, but your post reminded me of Facebook groups I'm in that relate to sound systems and home theaters. I find that the majority of people who post in those groups are folks who are into the gear. They love the gear itself, the variety, the different things components do, etc.

I heard one audiophile say, "You use your gear to listen to music. I use music to listen to my gear."

Folks can have a love for "the thing itself."

[Burgerbob]

Folks can have a love for "the thing itself."

Exactly! I just have to make sure to balance it with love for the music as well. Remember the reason for the gear.

I used to be quite into the audio thing too... thankfully I just have some setups I can use and not think about anymore.

[harrisonreed]

Some of the issue is not hearing it. A lot more of the issue is not understanding what tuning system to use.

Naw, I disagree. All of the issue is not hearing it. Because if you hear it, you play in tune. I have no idea what 14 cents lower sounds like, but I know whether the note I'm playing sounds in tune or not, and I don't have to know the function of the note.

Ah, my bad. I meant, some of the issue is the student literally not being about to hear what they are doing because of a woofy instrument.

You play in tune because you've heard many examples of good players playing in tune both horizontally in melodies and vertically in chords, and internalized it. I'm the same -- my mother taught me everything I talked about that you said you didn't understand and she did it by just singing, but she didn't actually say "oh this is xyz system". You're aware of them, even if you have no idea they exist.

I bet I could put up examples of each system, and have people pick what they like best, and each system would win respective in the situations where you are supposed to use it.

Again, that's no reason to not try to understand what is going on. "Just play in tune" doesn't always work for someone who is trying to learn intonation as an adult.

[WilliamLang]

Some students have great ears and can just fit the notes in. Most (like myself, honestly) had to learn a lot more context to gain that feel. The science behind tuning can help people, cause everyone is different!!! Saying "well it's natural, you have it or you don't, so just do it" is a gatekeeping pedagogical method. We need tools to help everyone at every ability level.

It's like seeing a natural swing a baseball bat - great for those that can do it, but even most pros need guidance here and there to learn how to approximate being natural.

[Kbiggs]

Very nice document!

Seconded!

[Kdanielsen]

Some students have great ears and can just fit the notes in. Most (like myself, honestly) had to learn a lot more context to gain that feel. The science behind tuning can help people, cause everyone is different!!! Saying "well it's natural, you have it or you don't, so just do it" is a gatekeeping pedagogical method. We need tools to help everyone at every ability level.

It's like seeing a natural swing a baseball bat - great for those that can do it, but even most pros need guidance here and there to learn how to approximate being natural.

Here here

[Burgerbob]

RE: intonation

I only really learned how to play in tune when I started to play better. I could sing in tune all day, but without making a solid pitch center on the instrument, there's no actually matching pitch, even when it's straight up and down on the tuner.

[atopper333]

Some students have great ears and can just fit the notes in. Most (like myself, honestly) had to learn a lot more context to gain that feel. The science behind tuning can help people, cause everyone is different!!! Saying "well it's natural, you have it or you don't, so just do it" is a gatekeeping pedagogical method. We need tools to help everyone at every ability level.

It's like seeing a natural swing a baseball bat - great for those that can do it, but even most pros need guidance here and there to learn how to approximate being natural.

Wow, very well written. I’d always thought of it as just being moderately dismissive or someone not quite having the ability to reduce a skill to be taught. I’ve never considered the gatekeeping aspect. Your response to it is very encouraging and brings hope for an open attitude and progressive approach to instructional methods.