Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1080137 Posts in 71467 Topics- by 19047 Members - Latest Member: The Dark Bone
Jump to:  
The Trombone ForumHorns, Gear, and EquipmentMouthpieces(Moderators: BGuttman, Doug Elliott) Who in their right mind plays a Bach 1 1/2G ??
Pages: 1 ... 77 78 79 80 81 [82] 83   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Who in their right mind plays a Bach 1 1/2G ??  (Read 332630 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
bigbassbone1

*
Offline Offline

Location: Los Angeles, CA
Joined: Sep 7, 2012
Posts: 910

View Profile
« Reply #1620 on: May 18, 2017, 04:35PM »

Whatever. But believing those sounds don't come from American players is very funny indeed.


Sure. I don't really care if its funny. I just care about good sounds from good players in good ensembles. What I hear from top tier American orchestras sounds fantastic. Fortunately, enough other people do too, and trying to take what I can from those sounds and incorporate them into my own playing certainly hasn't hurt me thus far.

I think its funny that you dont sound open to the idea that maybe what we are discussing is subjective. There is not one worldwide bass trombone sound.
Logged
bonesmarsh
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: May 22, 2007
Posts: 2171

View Profile
« Reply #1621 on: May 18, 2017, 04:41PM »

I was going to save this for a PM to Chris. But since some folks here need a final word on the 1 1/2G subject, here it comes:

The only person who can truly check what I am about to say is Doug Yeo. Mr. Kleinhammer, and Van Haney aren't here to ask, and the story is about 35 years old. I studied with Van a bit in '81 and '82 and he told me a lot. This story I have been sitting since then. Van and Kleinhammer did R&D for Holton, and their paths would cross in Chicago when Van Haney was in town doing promo stuff for Holton ( or King) and teaching a bit there.

At the time, early 1980s, Mr. Kleinhammer told Van Haney the following thing: Mr. Kleinhammer was playing huge, larger than Schilke 60, mouthpieces at the time. Kleinhammer told Van Haney that he thought that if he had stayed on a Bach 1 1/2G sized mouthpiece he could add another 10 years to his career. But, he'd been playing on huge mouthpieces so long, and the demands were so great, that a shift back to a smaller mouthpiece was out of the question.

Mr. Kleinhammer lasted another 6 or 7 years in his position. But, he did regret his switch to the huge mouthpiece. Only his students at the time could verify this, but I did hear it from Van Haney personally.

Even Mr. Kleinhammer wanted to stick on his 1 1/2G.
Logged
Fridge
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Jul 29, 2009
Posts: 179

View Profile
« Reply #1622 on: May 18, 2017, 05:52PM »

For examples that you've asked for, please listen to the postings from Joe Stanko. The examples ARE Ed Anderson in the Cleveland orchestra.

Eddie Clark
Logged
bigbassbone1

*
Offline Offline

Location: Los Angeles, CA
Joined: Sep 7, 2012
Posts: 910

View Profile
« Reply #1623 on: May 18, 2017, 07:15PM »

For examples that you've asked for, please listen to the postings from Joe Stanko. The examples ARE Ed Anderson in the Cleveland orchestra.

Eddie Clark


You mean the bass trombone sounds overbearing in those recordings? Im confused....
Logged
kbiggs

*
Offline Offline

Location: Vancouver WA
Joined: Jun 9, 2006
Posts: 1358

View Profile
« Reply #1624 on: May 18, 2017, 11:09PM »

It's important to remember that sound engineering often plays a part in how loud or soft the trombones (in particular) sound in a recording. The CSO brass, IIRC (I believe from a Crisafulli interview) were generally dissatisfied with the recorded sound in Orchestra Hall during the Solti era.

Similarly, listen to some of the recordings from Orchestra Symphonique du Montreal. The brass, particularly the trombones, can sound very loud, perhaps too present in some of these recordings. Yes, it's exciting to hear a very loud trombone sound in some passages, but I think that we have to pay close attention to the quality of the sound in context with the volume of the rest of the ensemble. That is, I believe the recording engineers would occasionally boost the volume a bit in these recordings to add some excitement.

The Cleveland Orchestra recording with Ed Anderson might also be a place where the trombones were "turned up" in selective spots, and "turned down" in others to allow the strings and winds to be heard. The trombones can be heard playing loud, but the volume that is heard in the record, the "sizzle" of a fff, is lowered. Sometimes, the quality of the sound in a recording is more like forte, but it can end up sounding fff, and sometimes the opposite. Engineering and the conductor's discretion can really alter the finished product.

Please don't misinterpret this. I enjoy the big, loud, and sometimes overpowering sounds like the Cleveland recording, the Shostakovich 7 with CSO, and OSM recordings with Dutoit. But I personally take recordings with a grain of salt. The true test is live sound. Otherwise, take time to listen with headphones. Really listen to the sound in context.

***

Back to the 1 1/2G, I think all the examples mentioned and posted demonstrate that is possible to have a big, beautiful sound using "small" equipment or "large" equipment. The most important element is concept: what do you want to sound like? The player then has to decide whether equipment is helping or hindering in the quest for that sound. If it's helping, then... well, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. If you believe your equipment is hindering you, think again, then practice some more.

Bigger is not necessarily better, only different. Some achieve excellence with "small" equipment, some with "large." ("Small" and "large" being subjective terms, like "overpowering," "massive," or overbearing"). Both come with costs. Again, what do you want to sound like, and can you do that with a "small" mouthpiece? A "large" one?
Logged

Kenneth Biggs
Bass & tenor trombone
_______________
I have known a great many troubles, but most of them never happened.
  -- Mark Twain
blast

*
*
Offline Offline

Location: scotland
Joined: Jul 26, 2001
Posts: 6945
"Bass/Contrabass trombone, Scottish Opera."


View Profile
« Reply #1625 on: May 19, 2017, 12:50AM »

82 pages ago I simply tried to put up a case for not dismissing the Bach 1 1/2G as a viable orchestral mouthpiece. All this time later the debate is more interesting than ever. I have been on a MV 1 1/2, then, with doubling on contra, decided to jump onto the larger end of Doug's bass line... the 116 rim with J, L and M cups as needed. Still sounded like me, but a different version of me. You can hear this setup on the 'Wallace Collection' recording of Malcolm Arnold's Symphony for brass.... not that it tells you much about how I actually sound, as has been pointed out. I was perfectly happy with the mouthpiece.... then another MV 1 1/2G came my way and back I came ! Meanwhile, my students all seem to be going to the Bach 2G.... with no direction for me. The 2G is a big deal here because of the great British players that have used them and the great players presently using them.
We are now way on from a simple consideration to the complex issues of tonal concept and national variation of concept.
If this makes young and old think about sound, it is a good thing, whatever their conclusion is.

Chris Stearn
Logged

Still cannot think of anything better to do. Back on an old 1 1/2G again !
ronnies
*
Offline Offline

Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: Jul 18, 2016
Posts: 111

View Profile
« Reply #1626 on: May 19, 2017, 03:56AM »

Meanwhile, my students all seem to be going to the Bach 2G.... with no direction for me. The 2G is a big deal here because of the great British players that have used them and the great players presently using them.

My teacher uses a 2G in his Shires bass.  He's currently recording the Brahms symphonies using an 88H and a 5G (I think he said 5G) for the bass part.

Ronnie
Logged

--
Slowly getting back into it...
blast

*
*
Offline Offline

Location: scotland
Joined: Jul 26, 2001
Posts: 6945
"Bass/Contrabass trombone, Scottish Opera."


View Profile
« Reply #1627 on: May 19, 2017, 04:39AM »

Whatever. But believing those sounds don't come from American players is very funny indeed.
That would be Rob ?

Chris Stearn
Logged

Still cannot think of anything better to do. Back on an old 1 1/2G again !
bonesmarsh
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: May 22, 2007
Posts: 2171

View Profile
« Reply #1628 on: May 19, 2017, 05:13AM »

Thanks for the meaningful words, Chris.

To further the thing I began about Kleinhammer telling Van Haney he wished he had stuck on a 1 1/2G- in an ITA masterclass Mr. Allen Ostrander at the same time spoke to us in the class, of finding it difficult to maintain his competence on his 2G, after waking one morning age 40 and feeling things slip a bit. And of his need to daily do lots of playing outside the orchestra to keep his chops up. And that was on a 2G at age 40.

Mr. Ostrander did another 25 years in the NY Phil, retiring at age 65, but holding on daily to the hard work he did to maintain his chops on a 2G.

As for a 5G on bass parts? The supplied mouthpiece with Olds bass trombones when George Roberts began, the #20, was about a 5G size.
Logged
wgwbassbone
*
Offline Offline

Location: West Hartford, CT
Joined: Jan 19, 2007
Posts: 1781

View Profile
« Reply #1629 on: May 19, 2017, 07:12AM »


Sure. I don't really care if its funny. I just care about good sounds from good players in good ensembles. What I hear from top tier American orchestras sounds fantastic. Fortunately, enough other people do too, and trying to take what I can from those sounds and incorporate them into my own playing certainly hasn't hurt me thus far.

I think its funny that you dont sound open to the idea that maybe what we are discussing is subjective. There is not one worldwide bass trombone sound.

I obviously have not made myself clear-one of my faults for sure.
I DO believe there are different trombone sounds. I work in a "town" where players use every combination imaginable. We as players each gravitate towards a certain sound of our choosing. For years I played on a huge mouthpiece and an instrument with Thayer valves. I jumped on the Thayer bandwagon in 1987 along with everyone else and lived with my setup for almost 15 years. Worked for me at the time. I've evolved as a player through the years and realized that I don't need all of that and have happily played what I play for the last 10 years or so.
My specific point to sound concept, I.e. "massive overbearing sounds". America is ground zero for producing players with massive overbearing sounds compared to other parts of the world. Bass players playing without lead pipes started here. Tenor players using bass size pieces and bass slides started here. Continues here. Is it what's necessary?? To those who do it maybe. But the trombone world these days is run by orchestral players with major jobs and other great players who do not run in those circles are forgotten about by the average freelance or student trombonist. For those of us(bass trombonists) who listen to George Roberts, Paul Faulise, Dick Hixon, Tony Stud, the list goes on and on, there is much to be gained today from listening to their sound. It doesn't mean that you have to imitate it but you can take the basics and learn from there. The definition of Core has even changed. Core, to my ears, is the thick middle of the sound which around that you grow the sound. I hear certain players today speak of core in their sound and I don't hear it. I hear round with hollow in the middle. My ears hear what they hear.
Has anyone one a major symphony gig in the last number of years on a 1 and 1/2G in America? Not that I know of. Doesn't mean that they couldn't. They don't because most orchestral players don't use them. We imitate, we do what others do. Not all 1 and 1/2G pieces play the same. For those of us who live with them we know the difference between and big sound and a fat sound. For those who say the 1 and 1/2G inhibits the low register I laugh. I know players who can play it down using a 1 and 1/2G. Maybe you do, maybe you don't.
In the end it comes down to the sound concept in your head. You can give 2 players identical setups and they'll sound different. Why? I think you know why. That was my point. But maybe I've confused some more.  Don't know
Logged

Holton TR 180 MV 1 and 1/2G
tbathras
*
Offline Offline

Location: Southern Maine
Joined: Jul 15, 2013
Posts: 961

View Profile
« Reply #1630 on: May 19, 2017, 09:12AM »

...snip...  For those who say the 1 and 1/2G inhibits the low register I laugh. I know players who can play it down using a 1 and 1/2G. ...snip...

You know, I was thinking about that the other day and then it dawned on me. French horn.  Sarah Willis.  She can crank in the bass 'bone register on a m'pc just slightly larger than a trumpet's.

Now there's some food for thought.
Logged

"Remember, your trombone is not a weapon!" -Ben van Dijk
Ellrod

*
Offline Offline

Location: North
Joined: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 6204

View Profile
« Reply #1631 on: May 19, 2017, 10:46AM »

One night I got compliments on my great bass trombone sound and  I was playing my .525 trigger horn with a Schilke 51.
Logged
bigbassbone1

*
Offline Offline

Location: Los Angeles, CA
Joined: Sep 7, 2012
Posts: 910

View Profile
« Reply #1632 on: May 19, 2017, 02:17PM »

I obviously have not made myself clear-one of my faults for sure.
I DO believe there are different trombone sounds. I work in a "town" where players use every combination imaginable. We as players each gravitate towards a certain sound of our choosing. For years I played on a huge mouthpiece and an instrument with Thayer valves. I jumped on the Thayer bandwagon in 1987 along with everyone else and lived with my setup for almost 15 years. Worked for me at the time. I've evolved as a player through the years and realized that I don't need all of that and have happily played what I play for the last 10 years or so.
My specific point to sound concept, I.e. "massive overbearing sounds". America is ground zero for producing players with massive overbearing sounds compared to other parts of the world. Bass players playing without lead pipes started here. Tenor players using bass size pieces and bass slides started here. Continues here. Is it what's necessary?? To those who do it maybe. But the trombone world these days is run by orchestral players with major jobs and other great players who do not run in those circles are forgotten about by the average freelance or student trombonist. For those of us(bass trombonists) who listen to George Roberts, Paul Faulise, Dick Hixon, Tony Stud, the list goes on and on, there is much to be gained today from listening to their sound. It doesn't mean that you have to imitate it but you can take the basics and learn from there. The definition of Core has even changed. Core, to my ears, is the thick middle of the sound which around that you grow the sound. I hear certain players today speak of core in their sound and I don't hear it. I hear round with hollow in the middle. My ears hear what they hear.
Has anyone one a major symphony gig in the last number of years on a 1 and 1/2G in America? Not that I know of. Doesn't mean that they couldn't. They don't because most orchestral players don't use them. We imitate, we do what others do. Not all 1 and 1/2G pieces play the same. For those of us who live with them we know the difference between and big sound and a fat sound. For those who say the 1 and 1/2G inhibits the low register I laugh. I know players who can play it down using a 1 and 1/2G. Maybe you do, maybe you don't.
In the end it comes down to the sound concept in your head. You can give 2 players identical setups and they'll sound different. Why? I think you know why. That was my point. But maybe I've confused some more.  Don't know


Thanks for clarifying  Good!
I agree with pretty much everything you said there, I thought in my own posts I had made clear that I also thought that much could be gained from listening to George Roberts and those that play in a similar fashion..... I just believe that is also true for modern players on big gear also. I don't think either should be dismissed.

Yes, I am aware that the no leadpipe, tenor on bass mouthpieces etc... basically came from America. I take issue specifically with the phrase "massive overbearing sounds". Whilst of course there is some crazy loud playing that comes out of America I dont think the top level players go too far with it. They can play big, but they pick their moments, they still blend with their colleagues and are aware of what else is going on in the orchestra. I think its inspiring. I didn't say it before buy I did roll my eyes when I read that "massive overbearing sounds" aren't heard in europe. I dont think I personally would ever use that term, but some brass bands that come from the UK get closer to that than any American orchestra I have ever heard. I have even heard some orchestras in europe where the bass trombone specifically will play in a way that makes them really stick out of the texture like a sore thumb. Its not overbearing, but to me its usually pretty unpleasant to my ear. I would rather hear a slightly more diffuse sound that bends with the others rather than one that rips through 70 odd musicians on stage. I am aware that is subjective though, and not necessarily what others hear.

I am very aware that the low register is accessible on a 1 1/2G. I was fortunate to study with a fantastic player who played a 1 1/2G for his entire career and he had a very strong low register. I have also been very fortunate enough to have done some study with Michael Mulcahy who Im not totally sure what size mouthpiece he plays, but it is definitely a tenor one and he has unbelievable control of his low register. What I was trying to say is that PERSONALLY, whilst I dont dislike those sounds and other bass players that choose that kind of gear, I find the sounds that inspire me most come from players on generally bigger gear. Who knows? I may change my opinion one day.

I suppose one thing I also dislike is that especially on somewhere like here it is difficult to convey tone and intent down in writing. A lot of posts I read on here (by no one in particular!!!) that talk about players using 1/2 G's and smaller mouthpieces (bass and tenor) read a little as though they do so because they have reached some sort of higher understanding of some kind of elitist sound that can only be understood by those who play small gear. Some posts read a bit like, anyone who doesn't understand the 1 1/2G just isnt a good musician. Perhaps I am not clever enough, but I dont get it. What I have seen stem from there,  are young players who get reasonably small gear and misunderstand the kind of sound they should be making with their equipment. Where I come from, I see so many players playing small gear saying "I just want a more compact sound" and "I dont really like that big American sound concept". What usually happens here is that these players (younger ones in particular) Get incredibly aggressive sounds that stick out regardless of who they play with, irrelevant of a loud or soft dynamic. They usually dont understand that even on smaller gear a low register is possible and sometimes required so they tend to not be able to play very low at all. Where I come from, these players get frustrated because no one will hire them. They are hard to play with. Then they tell themselves that the reason they cannot find work is because everyone is too big gear focused. The players that make small gear work, have put in the work. There are problems that come with playing the 1 1/2G, just like there are different problems that come with playing a schilke 60. I dont believe that playing a 1 1/2G is easier like many seem to suggest, for reasons I have made in various posts, you still need to work. I also do not think it gives a superior sound, just different.

Whats that saying about using what works and you?  :D
Logged
blast

*
*
Offline Offline

Location: scotland
Joined: Jul 26, 2001
Posts: 6945
"Bass/Contrabass trombone, Scottish Opera."


View Profile
« Reply #1633 on: May 19, 2017, 03:11PM »


Thanks for clarifying  Good!
I agree with pretty much everything you said there, I thought in my own posts I had made clear that I also thought that much could be gained from listening to George Roberts and those that play in a similar fashion..... I just believe that is also true for modern players on big gear also. I don't think either should be dismissed.

Yes, I am aware that the no leadpipe, tenor on bass mouthpieces etc... basically came from America. I take issue specifically with the phrase "massive overbearing sounds". Whilst of course there is some crazy loud playing that comes out of America I dont think the top level players go too far with it. They can play big, but they pick their moments, they still blend with their colleagues and are aware of what else is going on in the orchestra. I think its inspiring. I didn't say it before buy I did roll my eyes when I read that "massive overbearing sounds" aren't heard in europe. I dont think I personally would ever use that term, but some brass bands that come from the UK get closer to that than any American orchestra I have ever heard. I have even heard some orchestras in europe where the bass trombone specifically will play in a way that makes them really stick out of the texture like a sore thumb. Its not overbearing, but to me its usually pretty unpleasant to my ear. I would rather hear a slightly more diffuse sound that bends with the others rather than one that rips through 70 odd musicians on stage. I am aware that is subjective though, and not necessarily what others hear.

I am very aware that the low register is accessible on a 1 1/2G. I was fortunate to study with a fantastic player who played a 1 1/2G for his entire career and he had a very strong low register. I have also been very fortunate enough to have done some study with Michael Mulcahy who Im not totally sure what size mouthpiece he plays, but it is definitely a tenor one and he has unbelievable control of his low register. What I was trying to say is that PERSONALLY, whilst I dont dislike those sounds and other bass players that choose that kind of gear, I find the sounds that inspire me most come from players on generally bigger gear. Who knows? I may change my opinion one day.

I suppose one thing I also dislike is that especially on somewhere like here it is difficult to convey tone and intent down in writing. A lot of posts I read on here (by no one in particular!!!) that talk about players using 1/2 G's and smaller mouthpieces (bass and tenor) read a little as though they do so because they have reached some sort of higher understanding of some kind of elitist sound that can only be understood by those who play small gear. Some posts read a bit like, anyone who doesn't understand the 1 1/2G just isnt a good musician. Perhaps I am not clever enough, but I dont get it. What I have seen stem from there,  are young players who get reasonably small gear and misunderstand the kind of sound they should be making with their equipment. Where I come from, I see so many players playing small gear saying "I just want a more compact sound" and "I dont really like that big American sound concept". What usually happens here is that these players (younger ones in particular) Get incredibly aggressive sounds that stick out regardless of who they play with, irrelevant of a loud or soft dynamic. They usually dont understand that even on smaller gear a low register is possible and sometimes required so they tend to not be able to play very low at all. Where I come from, these players get frustrated because no one will hire them. They are hard to play with. Then they tell themselves that the reason they cannot find work is because everyone is too big gear focused. The players that make small gear work, have put in the work. There are problems that come with playing the 1 1/2G, just like there are different problems that come with playing a schilke 60. I dont believe that playing a 1 1/2G is easier like many seem to suggest, for reasons I have made in various posts, you still need to work. I also do not think it gives a superior sound, just different.

Whats that saying about using what works and you?  :D

Quite a tome... thank you for your thoughts. I own the 'massive overbearing' trade mark and take full responsibility. It is how I hear some playing. The 'get it ' thing about the 1 1/2G I would stand by.... You CAN get it, if you want... but it is not an easy option. Not a good musician if you don't 'get it' ? Of course not... there are GREAT musicians playing in what we tend to call the modern American style... James Markey comes to mind, though there are many others, like my friend John Rojak... and monsters like Dave Taylor, who I have spent many enjoyable hours with.  1 1/2G easier ? No way in any sense.... only in that if you want that sound, it does it. Lets not look at how kids fare on different mouthpieces... we are more into the 1 1/2G in professional settings here.

Chris Stearn
Logged

Still cannot think of anything better to do. Back on an old 1 1/2G again !
svenlarsson

*
Offline Offline

Location: Enskede, Sweden.
Joined: Sep 15, 2001
Posts: 4518

View Profile WWW
« Reply #1634 on: May 20, 2017, 03:16AM »

I still have a couple of 1 1/2G mpc in my studio, sometimes I put one of them in one of my horns. The sound I make with this mpc:s is great. It is not really the size, it is something in the design I believe.

So why do I not play the mpc?

To me (playing small tenor, large tenor, sackbut of different size, tuba, euphonium) using many sizes of mpc:s, the 1 1/2 G would take some more practise time them I could afford. Now I play Laskey 85 GM, more easy form me, not to big not to small. Maybe if I only played the basstrombone I could still be on 1 1/2G.
Logged

Kanstul 1662. Bach 45B. Kanstul 1555. Besson Euphonium. Kanstul 66-S Tuba. Sackbuts in F/E/Eb Bb/A
And several horns I should sell.
savio

*
Offline Offline

Location: Norway
Joined: Aug 10, 2006
Posts: 5075

View Profile WWW
« Reply #1635 on: May 24, 2017, 01:01PM »

Some pages back my few words made an explosion here, but really an interesting one! The words was if the 1 1/2 have a future in the symphony orchestra. The conclusion must be it has a future since many orchestras around in fact have players on that size today.

My other words was that George Roberts kind of made the direction for bass trombone sound. Even for orchestra players. I think he did.... Don't know

All you young players, Chris told that not all development is necessary progress. I agree so much. That's why many orchestra players went away from the bigger, bigger, even bigger trend...development in 1980/90.

I was told by one young member their generation dont listen George Roberts, or even know his name. Well, now all of you young players have the opportunity, go to iTunes and buy the album "Makin whoopee" with Nelson Riddle. The most fantastic musicianship and sound on bass trombone ever made. ITunes changed the name on that album and added some more songs with George Roberts on bass trombone. Check it out! Mt Vernon 1 1/2g and the best sound he ever did

Do I say the 1 1/2 is the best choice, or is better than everything else? No, but it is still a good alternative in all scenarios. Not necessarily best.

There is some few things all you younger players must understand;

1. No mouthpiece size is better or worse than another, but there is a size that is more right for each one of us. Could be any size...

2. Its easy to believe bigger mouthpiece is same as bigger or better sound, for some it can be true, for some a bigger mouthpiece can even make you sound smaller or worse. The same with a 1 1/2 size.

3. Sound concepts can not be described, only captured bye listening. And it should be personal. So listen as much or many as possible, then make your own sound consept through practice and still listen every bass trombone player there is.

4. This is my personal thoughts, but sound is the most important thing after all when we play trombone. Musicality, rhythm, intonation......yes yes, but sound is essential for our instrument.

5. Sound needs lot of time and work to develop, in the end it is us that make the sound. Not the mouthpiece.



OK fellow bass players, as our mother tried to learn us all, be good to all and do our best everywhere  :(  Good!

Leif
Logged

Bass Trombone - Conn, Holton
Posaunus
*
Offline Offline

Location: California
Joined: Feb 20, 2014
Posts: 686

View Profile
« Reply #1636 on: May 24, 2017, 02:41PM »


OK fellow bass players, as our mother tried to learn us all, be good to all and do our best everywhere.

Leif


Leif,

Thanks for your insight and advice!   Good!
Logged
savio

*
Offline Offline

Location: Norway
Joined: Aug 10, 2006
Posts: 5075

View Profile WWW
« Reply #1637 on: May 26, 2017, 04:56PM »

Leif,

Thanks for your insight and advice!   Good!

You are welcome! But I really think there is something in that phrase... ;-)

I forgot one point in my last post;

6. There is of course no magic mouthpiece or size we all can use to make our playing better. We are all different and that's why we should use different gears.

7. Is the Mt Vernon magic? No it isn't, but it have a special sound.

Leif


Logged

Bass Trombone - Conn, Holton
slideorama

*
Offline Offline

Location: Dallas, TX
Joined: Apr 17, 2002
Posts: 902

View Profile
« Reply #1638 on: May 26, 2017, 05:28PM »

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LojZ3A696U0

Christian Jones, in his right mind.
Logged

Michael Lawson
Dallas/Ft.Worth, TX
Terraplane8Bob
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Oct 9, 2011
Posts: 68

View Profile
« Reply #1639 on: May 26, 2017, 09:02PM »

I'm sorry to jump into this debate as late as I have and I hope my comments on two specific issues will be useful.  One regards the credentials of a highly regarded mouthpiece, the Bach 1 1/2 G, and the other, our habit of judging performers by recordings. A posting about a dozen or so posts back mentioned recordings that influenced the writer and I'd like to address that.
  I still vividly remember hearing my instructor at The Eastman School of Music, Donald Knaub [RIP], play his Reynolds "Contempora" bass trombone for the first time.  My fledgling musical heart jumped at the possibility of EVER producing such a glorious sound on ANY instrument, brass or otherwise !  I found out later that he did it using a Bach 1 1/2 G and never reconsidered it until this recent thread regarding the passe' reputation of this otherwise perfectly functional device.  Don had suffered a calamitous event when working a construction job during his early years as a student.   A scaffold collapsed, sending the end of a long plank directly into his face, breaking off his front teeth and tearing his "chops" to shreds.  He credited his dentist for reconstructing his damaged embouchure to the point that he was able to become the fine virtuoso that he was as a bass trombonist.  His ability to draw such an amazing sound from the instrument was only unusual because of his difficult recovery, not anything to do with the Bach 1 1/2 G. I recall him raising his upper lip to show me the large lump of scar tissue that remained after the passing years.  I remember thinking, "Holy Mackerel !  If he can do what he does after THAT, I certainly can do better than I think I can" !  Every iteration of a number of mouthpieces that I had custom built in the following years by Giardinelli was definitely based on that old standby, the Bach 1 1/2 G.  To this day I really haven't moved SO far away from it, being presently enamoured of the "Wedge"  1G.  I'm still in the neighborhood, just living in a different house !
   My second observation is about recordings.  I've been an audiophile since the term was coined.  I learned much of the orchestral literature through recordings.  NOT "files" --- NOT "CDs" --- but analogue vinyl.  It was, and still is, the medium through which the most information is imparted musically.  Digital information is remarkable in so many ways : The incredibly "black" background from which the sound emanates, the amazing ability to manipulate the information through digital programs that address any whim of your imagination and a detachment from the ills of mechanical reproduction [speed control, wow & flutter, etc.]. I will concede that analogue reproduction requires equipment of unerringly precise and un-colored characteristics to achieve this "nirvana", but it is there.  It is quite necessary to evaluate your impressions of any recorded ensemble with skepticism.  I became a recording engineer after having a career-changing injury that kept me away from the bass trombone for over 20 years.  It was a natural move that combined my love of audio with my love of brass playing.  The outcome of the proceeding history is that I knew what I wanted to hear and admired recordings that achieved the naturalness that I'd learned to identify as a musician.
    Recording engineers are a curious lot.  Some have a technological background requiring a mathematical mind, some have a simple love for all things musical and others have an actual musical background, having trained to be a musician and aware of what sounds realistic and what doesn't.  We have become accustomed to so many manners of trickery in what we listen to and cannot really know what really happened at the event because the manipulations involved can create a totally different impression of what actually happened.  One recording that comes to mind was of The Chicago Symphony London recording of the Mahler 5th Symphony with George Solti conducting.  It was an odd sounding recording which, it was later discovered, was "pressed" out of "phase".  That means that every positive sound wave was actually a negative sound wave.  Think of playing a trombone by inhaling through the trombone instead of exhaling and you'll have the idea.  Any sound on that recording was immediately deprived of its "impact" because "high points" became "low points" etc.  Just imagine yourself, intent on learning the secrets of your favorite orchestra by listening to it "backwards" !!  Combine major screw-ups like that with the "editorial-ism" of the recording engineer who can strongly influence your impressions by merely the choice of the particular microphone that he uses.  I recall recording sessions with Deutsche Gramophone during which "engineers" strolled the recording stage, changing not only the microphones, but the placement of them while referring to "The Book" ["Das Buch"] which told them which microphone to use in which situation and how far away to place them from the respective instruments.   When questioned as to why they were doing this, the reply was. "It's in the book" !  All the more reason, in my opinion, for a musical background to be required [which the DG engineers may have even had] for people involved in the recording arts !
   I'm getting to the real point here, which is that if you want to hear the "real thing", it is paramount that you actually hear "the real thing".  I concede that there are many fine recordings out there and don't denigrate them in any way, but they are definitely in the minority.  The "sizzle" and "whoomph" that we hear and by which we are delighted, are in no way what we, as musicians, need to hear to inspire our moving forward in a performance career.  Live music is really the avenue to follow.  Let the "interpreters" do what they will to what you produce, but cling to live music.  It's the REAL thing and is what you find so appealing in the mate you choose, the favorite beer you drink and the trombone you choose to blow. The REAL thing ! Just sayin' ----  Cheers to all !!   Bob
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 77 78 79 80 81 [82] 83   Go Up
Print
Jump to: