Re: Does it matter what horn you play?
Posted: Sun Oct 20, 2019 3:30 am
I'm with the yes and no crowd.
Over the course of the last 15 years I've gone from primarily playing a King 5B to a Getzen 3047AF to a Kanstul 1688 ST to a Shires 0.525. Going from the King to the Getzen was probably the most difficult - the Getzen slots completely differently than any other horn. Not in a bad way, just different. Once I got used to it, it was fine. From the Getzen to the Kanstul was like going back - but the horn 'felt' like nothing I'd ever played before or since. And the Shires is like playing a sports car - it is SO responsive!
HOWEVER
While each horn feels completely different to me - I doubt if anybody listening could tell a difference between them. Any of them. When I play a passage or a piece, I *know* what I want it to sound like. It may be easier to make that sound on one instrument than another, but in the end its the sound I want. Also - some horns are definitely more versatile than others. When I was playing the Kanstul, I only played it in concert band and orchestra but not in my trombone quartet (3rd part) because it was more work to play than the Bach 36B I had. But the Bach I couldn't use in orchestra because I couldn't play it loudly enough - I would get to a certain point after which all I was doing was overblowing and getting an ugly sound. With the Shires, its easy to play with the quartet, but when it needs to get big there is like no limit - it just gets louder and louder the more air I give it.
But that is all how it feels from behind the mouthpiece; I really do think that from in front of the bell, I sound like me. And if I'm playing similar-sized horns, I probably sound exactly the same. Each horn definitely has its own character and feel - to the player. I'm not sure how much of that translates to the other side of the bell.
phil
Over the course of the last 15 years I've gone from primarily playing a King 5B to a Getzen 3047AF to a Kanstul 1688 ST to a Shires 0.525. Going from the King to the Getzen was probably the most difficult - the Getzen slots completely differently than any other horn. Not in a bad way, just different. Once I got used to it, it was fine. From the Getzen to the Kanstul was like going back - but the horn 'felt' like nothing I'd ever played before or since. And the Shires is like playing a sports car - it is SO responsive!
HOWEVER
While each horn feels completely different to me - I doubt if anybody listening could tell a difference between them. Any of them. When I play a passage or a piece, I *know* what I want it to sound like. It may be easier to make that sound on one instrument than another, but in the end its the sound I want. Also - some horns are definitely more versatile than others. When I was playing the Kanstul, I only played it in concert band and orchestra but not in my trombone quartet (3rd part) because it was more work to play than the Bach 36B I had. But the Bach I couldn't use in orchestra because I couldn't play it loudly enough - I would get to a certain point after which all I was doing was overblowing and getting an ugly sound. With the Shires, its easy to play with the quartet, but when it needs to get big there is like no limit - it just gets louder and louder the more air I give it.
But that is all how it feels from behind the mouthpiece; I really do think that from in front of the bell, I sound like me. And if I'm playing similar-sized horns, I probably sound exactly the same. Each horn definitely has its own character and feel - to the player. I'm not sure how much of that translates to the other side of the bell.
phil