TromboneChat

I am a sophomore in college and I have been finding much success. I have found success in my studio, joined an awesome brass band, play 2nd for the Cleveland Philharmonic, and have started two brass groups.

Today I found I out definitively that I am an upstream player, that is, my bottom lip vibrates rather than my top.

I have no range issues, I can reliability play from pedal F to double F with a clear tone. My slurs leave something to be desired, but I do genuinely believe that is a practice thing as I have made slurs in practice sessions that I am very happy with.

While I am happy with my overall sound. It is not yet a professional level sound. I've been told by peers and other players better than me that being an upstream player will make me hit a wall in the future when it comes to sound production. They say that I will work 10x as hard as a downstream player to create a dark sound with good overtones. I am told that I will be stuck with a more brilliant sound rather than a deep stable sound.

I struggle to say I want to make the change because... can I trust them? Are the right is saying this? Should I make the switch? If so, how will I manage with all my playing responsibilities in the interem?

Thank you!

Yes, if you want to spend the rest of your life struggling to play, you should change.
Seriously, that's what usually happens. Well-meaning but uninformed players or teachers will tell you upstream is bad and you must change to playing like they do.
Well guess what?
Blair Bollinger has done pretty well as an upstream player.
Dick Nash and Kai Winding did OK.
Doc Severinson has made it into his 90's playing pretty well that way.

There are ways to work on your sound. Some upstream players have that issue but certainly not all.

To be clear, Doug is being sarcastic in his first sentence above.

I think there are a couple of issues here. First, as Doug suggests, there are world-class players with upstream embouchures - probably many more than you think. If you practice effectively you will absolutely not "hit a wall" with sound production.

Second, a lot of young players prioritize "dark" and "thick" when they think about their ideal trombone tones, and they often go too far. Go to a trombone event - the ITF, the American Trombone Workshop, etc. - and REALLY listen to the tones of the players at the top of our profession. Yes, there is body and thickness, but there is also upper overtone sparkle in the balance. The ability to manipulate the balance of weight and what Doc Severinsen calls the "rub" of the sound is key to having a truly expressive range of tone color available to you.

LoganTrombone wrote: Sun Jan 19, 2025 9:24 pm struggle to say I want to make the change because... can I trust them?

No, you can't. They don't know what they are talking about.

Stay with your current embouchure and learn how to work with your anatomy, not against it.

For what it's worth, I have an upstream embouchure too.

Dave

Ignore them. They are wrong. There are great upstream players, among them Kai Winding, Dick Nash, and Dave Wilken, to name but a few. Many, many upstream players develop great chops and beautiful sounds. I say lean into your embouchure.

I also completely agree with Gabe Rice, above, about the "dark" tone. Every tone has three components: core, warmth, and sizzle. Folks may use different words than that, but are describing the same elements. When folks strive for a "dark" tone they're really going for emphasizing the warmth and cutting out the core and sizzle. This sounds very pretty three feet in front of the bell, but it doesn't project and it loses punch and impact at any real world distance. You want to get a balance of all three of warmth, core, and sizzle.

Listen to Joe Alessi. Dude does not have a dark tone at all, and he's done pretty well for a trombone player.

They might mean well, but I dont think they are right. You have found success with the way you are doing things. and from what I gather, you probably grew up playing like this so your facial muscles have developed a certain way or "style." It's like playing the piano from a young age, people will tend to grow longer faster fingers that are distinctive to piano players. If you try to change to downstream, you may find success, but it will be much more of a wall than trying to work on the areas you feel you need to improve in. Perhaps there is merit in trying to learn to play downstream as well just to see what it's like or to develop a new skill, but plenty of players have reached great heights playing upstream.

Downstream vs upstream to me is like right handed vs left handed. Both are equally valid and exist. Perhaps there are more downstream and right handed people than the opposite, but that doesnt mean upstream is inherently bad or will restrict you. There may be certain qualities that are more naturally inherent in downstream or upstream playing, but don't let that stop you. Lots of great upstream players exist. Perhaps because they aren't in as large numbers as downstream is a direct correlation to much less proper documentation on how to develop certain things as an upstream player.

Honestly, I would suggest tying to find people who are upstream players themselves and see if they have any insight on how to improve the areas you are looking in.

You know what'll really hold you back? Trying to force yourself into an embouchure that simply doesn't fit your facial structure.

My suggestion would be to take a couple lessons with Doug Elliott. He can look at how you're playing now and give you advice on what, if anything, you need to change to move forward.

Some teachers try to get everyone to use a "conventional embouchure". They do this in good faith; after all, it works great for them and for the majority of their students, why wouldn't it work for you?

I was an upstream player and I switched after taking a lesson with a high profile player.

I wish that I had not.

Hi .

I think that being an upstream or a downstream player it is an even more " absolute" thing that being left handed or right handed.
I have met some left handed who have learned to be both , but none that could switch between both upstream and downstream at will .

I do not think that one can decide whether to be an upstream or a dowstream player ; I guess that it is an attitude that conforms the nature of our physicality.

I suggest to OP do not switch at all ; rather , to have good informations about his own embouchure , to have same lessons with D . Elliott , as others already suggested above.

Regards
Giancarlo

I was an upstream player with a smile emboushure. I changed that to downstream with an emboushure that is balanced and focused, but since I come from a "smile" emboushure what I did felt more puckered. The feeling of pucker has stayed and the feeling of "smile" is very little, but I can feel many face muscles are in use. I like to picture my emboushure as a ducks bill. Something that protrudes slightly into the mouthpiece but it's not only a forward position because the mouthcorners are anchored as well and that area is very firm. This is different compared to the "stretch" I felt in my mouthcorners when I played with the old "plain" smile emboushure.
I have no Idea why I played that smile-emboushure upstream when I was 16, anyhow I think the smile was the real bad part. Upstream or downstream isn't at all as severe of a problem. Not sure it even is a problem since there are very good examples of players who play very well upstream, but in my case I had both issues and I changed both.

/Tom

I will mention that there are a VERY few cases where a switch actually is a good idea. I can determine that in a lesson. Some people can play very well being upstream, but with limitations. I always try to eliminate the limitations. By testing various things, I determine how your embouchure functions best, and then get it working. I do all of thst in just one lesson.

Watrous payed upstream, and did pretty well

dershem wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 2:52 pm Watrous payed upstream, and did pretty well

As a very "high placement" player, I'm pretty sure he was downstream.

dershem wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 2:52 pm Watrous payed upstream, and did pretty well

Watrous was absolutely not an upstream player, I'm afraid. Dick Nash is, though.

If you are an upstream player, switching to downstream to play better is like forcing yourself to be left handed if you are right handed to have better penmanship.

Or better yet, switching to writing with your left foot.

harrisonreed wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 8:27 pm If you are an upstream player, switching to downstream to play better is like forcing yourself to be left handed if you are right handed to have better penmanship.

Or better yet, switching to writing with your left foot.

On the other hand, if all this time you've been writing with your left hand and it turns out you're a righty, well, perhaps a switch would be beneficial.

Just want to acknowledge that there's a possibility, even if it's slim, that the OP is a natural downstream player who has been playing upstream just because that's how he started playing at the very beginning and no one corrected him. Probably not, but...??

He said he found out "definitively". I assume that means that an angel appeared to him in the night and gave him the news!

"Fear not, for I bring you tidings of great joy -- for you are definitively an upstream player."

And there was much rejoicing.

AndrewMeronek wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 3:11 pm

dershem wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 2:52 pm Watrous payed upstream, and did pretty well

As a very "high placement" player, I'm pretty sure he was downstream.

Defining "upstream" as the upper lip being the anvil and lower lip being the hammer (if you get the metaphor), Bill was upstream. Defining it as how you hold the horn, he was not.

Except "upstream" refers to neither the horn angle nor "anvil and hammer," whatever that reference is about that I don't get.
"Upstream" is when the stream of air exits the lips in an upward direction.
If there's more top lip in the mouthpiece, as in Watrous's chops and most players, the airstream will be downward or "downstream."

"Upstream" and "downstream" are broad categories that are only part of the story.

dershem wrote: Sat Apr 05, 2025 8:29 pm

AndrewMeronek wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 3:11 pm

As a very "high placement" player, I'm pretty sure he was downstream.

Defining "upstream" as the upper lip being the anvil and lower lip being the hammer (if you get the metaphor), Bill was upstream. Defining it as how you hold the horn, he was not.

Bill was the downstreamiest player I've ever seen. He had more of his upper lip in the mouthpiece than anyone I know of. Barely any lower lip in the mouthpiece. I think his upper lip did virtually all the work so that would make it the "hammer," if I'm understanding the metaphor.

If I did it correctly the above embedded video should start right on Bill Watrous's embouchure lip smearing up from middle Bb up two octaves. When you watch it you can see that Watrous's embouchure is definitely downstream.

As far as a hammer/anvil analogy goes, it's a little imperfect since both lips do vibrate. But if you watch the whole video you'll see that the predominant lip vibrates with more intensity while the other lip (with more rim contact) serves as a more stable surface for the other lip to vibrate against. So in Watrous's case, you could make the analogy that his upper lip (more active) is the hammer and the lower lip (less active) is the anvil. I've never heard this analogy before.

Dave