Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1089047 Posts in 71992 Topics- by 19326 Members - Latest Member: analyssalovesmusic4
Jump to:  
The Trombone ForumTeaching & LearningPedagogy(Moderators: JP, Doug Elliott) The Dark Ages of Trumpet Pedagogy -- Thoughts?
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: The Dark Ages of Trumpet Pedagogy -- Thoughts?  (Read 3317 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
TromboneMonkey

*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Aug 16, 2009
Posts: 2385

View Profile
« on: Dec 23, 2016, 09:01AM »

Facebook
Brad Goode
THE DARK AGES OF TRUMPET PEDAGOGY
22 minutes ago · Public
THE DARK AGES OF TRUMPET PEDAGOGY

Brad Goode

In the early days of the twentieth century, trumpets were built with high impedance. The idea behind the design of a fine instrument was that it should produce the greatest resonance with the least physical effort.
Merri Franquin was the first Professor of Trumpet at the Paris Conservatory. He was instrumental in the design of the original valved high trumpets, and many of the early virtuoso solos were composed for him. In his method book, “Complete Method for Modern Trumpet”, he advocates for the development of control and efficiency. He even suggests that the trumpet requires so little air that the player should not inhale before producing a note; the air already present in the lungs being sufficient.
Many of the great American classical performers of the early twentieth century studied and employed Franquin’s method, including George Mager, Roger Voisin and Adolph Herseth. Of course, the great French virtuosi, such as Maurice Andre and Guy Touvron acknowledge the Franquin method as the best.
American trumpet pedagogy first arose from the great cornet soloists of the Band Era, such as Jules Levy and Herbert L. Clarke. These teachers also advocated soft, controlled practice and the regulation of a small, well directed airstream.
Other popular systems arose which advocated lip buzzing, such as the “Non-Pressure System” of Eby. Contrary to myth, this book did not actually suggest playing without mouthpiece pressure, but discussed development of a firm, resistant embouchure that could compress the air into a small stream and more readily withstand, or balance the pressure of the mouthpiece on the lips.
Perhaps the most comprehensive method developed in the United States was the “Pivot System” of Dr. Donald S. Reinhardt. Reinhardt spent years observing the playing habits and movements of many players, and developed a classification system based on the correct movements for 4 basic physical “types”. By understanding and following the movements for one’s type, the player could easily manipulate the instrument without resorting to strain. Many of his students rose to the top ranks of recording artists on both trumpet and trombone.
As the equipment changed, becoming more open during the 1950’s and 1960’s (see “The Lost Art of Trumpet Design”http://www.bradgoode.com/Blogs/2/60...) players began to have more difficulty with control, endurance and range. The high impedance trumpets were replaced with instruments that lacked the proper resistance and balance to be played easily.  As the playing community began to suffer, a new brass pedagogy arose. These methods called for either the use of large quantities of airflow and support or for isometric exercises that pushed and strained the muscles of the face. Brass playing entered the dark ages, as the old pedagogy of efficiency, ease and control was replaced with a quest for air power, physical strength and mind-over-matter philosophy.
The teachers of that era are, to this day, revered as infallible experts, despite ample evidence that their methods and theories have caused many players to injure themselves, and have rarely achieved the types of successes in students seen by the earlier methods. It falls upon our generation to reexamine this subject and to bring brass playing forward, out of the dark ages.
Logged

-John
Doug Elliott
Lord of the Rims

*
*
Online Online

Location: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: Mar 12, 2005
Posts: 6743

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: Dec 23, 2016, 10:18AM »

The emphasis on power instead of finesse coincided with the invention of electronic amplification.  There's probably no going back in genres that require that competition.
Logged

www.DougElliottMouthpieces.com
XT LexanN104,C+,D2, Williams 6, K&H Slokar alto, K&H Slokar Solo .547 open wrap
bonenick

*
Offline Offline

Location: Antalya, Turkey
Joined: Nov 29, 2016
Posts: 813
"Life is change. Growth is optional. Choose wisely."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: Dec 23, 2016, 10:27AM »

Bigger sound does come with a price...both in trumpet and trombone, which is hardly a surprise...
Logged
robcat2075

*
Offline Offline

Location: Dallas, Texas
Joined: Apr 19, 2009
Posts: 6424

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: Dec 23, 2016, 11:31AM »

What changed in the horns? Is it just the bore size?
Logged

Robert Holmén

Hear me as I Play My Horn


Get your Popper, Dotzauer, or Kummer play-alongs!
bonesmarsh
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: May 22, 2007
Posts: 2222

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: Dec 23, 2016, 12:12PM »

In The Instrumentalist Magazine ( for music educators) about 15 years ago there was an incredible article by Charles Geyer. He took Vince Cichowicz's chair and sat next to Bud forever.

Geyer spoke of the need to play trumpets as close to the renaissance ideal as possible so that the brilliant trumpet sound was not lost. That meant playing the Bb horn ( longest commercially available one) with as many valves as possible to keep the ration of cylindrial to conical as high as possible.

So, to put that in a concrete way-- take the note Bb below middle C. To make it as renaissance/baroque and brilliant trumpety as possible you'd want to play that on a Bb trumpet with valves 2+3. Not a C trumpet with valve 1 only. Or open Bb trumpet.

The analogy of trombone to trumpet pedagogy only slightly stands.
Trumpets remain cylindrical as you add valves, because the bore remains constant and regardless of how many valves you press it remains the same bore-- or could.

The more slide you use on a trombone the more conical to cylindrical tubing you are using.
A trumpet with 1+2+3 pressed is still cylindrical tubing. Even more cylindrical.
A trombone in 7th position is more conical, because the outer hand slide is of a larger bore than the inner hand slide.

On dual bore horns the only analogy you could use is an analogy to the extinct cornet.

If you want to go back in time, to correctly get an even close analogy of trumpet pedagogy, you'd have to dig into something like an extinct sub- .490 bore horn with a sub 7" bell. Coincidentally that is where you'd find the beginnings of the great pedagogical trumpet method books as well.
Logged
bonenick

*
Offline Offline

Location: Antalya, Turkey
Joined: Nov 29, 2016
Posts: 813
"Life is change. Growth is optional. Choose wisely."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: Dec 23, 2016, 12:41PM »

Why the cornet should be extinct? Or do you refer to the cornet à bouquin (cornetto) of the renaissance?
Logged
bonesmarsh
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: May 22, 2007
Posts: 2222

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: Dec 23, 2016, 01:20PM »

Yes, bonenick. The cornet is not extinct. I am unaware of any significant design changes to the instrument that was the precursor to the modern trumpet, and the instrument now played in brass bands.

Of course, there are myriad versions of the cornet now floating around the jazz world, the flumpet for example. But as for the thing that Louis Armstrong played as a boy, or Brits blow in modern brass bands?
I am always looking for a few answers. Are cornets as changed now as the modern trombones are changed now?

I've played in serious Brit style brass bands, and hung out for many decades with Salvation Army folk. But I've never asked if their cornets differ from their grandparent's cornets.
Logged
bonenick

*
Offline Offline

Location: Antalya, Turkey
Joined: Nov 29, 2016
Posts: 813
"Life is change. Growth is optional. Choose wisely."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: Dec 23, 2016, 01:29PM »

Cornet-trumpets are a slippy territory. And combinations many. We get trumpets that sounds like cornets, Cornets that looks like trumpets, most recently rotary valves with piston trumpets style leadpipe and cornet like wrap  Pant Variations are many and the difference are rather subtle. It is a question for a trumpet builder.

http://www.trumpetmaster.com/vb/f131/difference-between-trumpet-cornet-do-you-86143.html
Logged
TromboneMonkey

*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Aug 16, 2009
Posts: 2385

View Profile
« Reply #8 on: Dec 23, 2016, 01:36PM »

Interesting thoughts.  A .485 with a 7" bell, the Bach 6, is what Bach considered to be the perfect design for the tenor trombone.  Coincidence?
Logged

-John
bonesmarsh
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: May 22, 2007
Posts: 2222

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: Dec 23, 2016, 01:38PM »

Also-- before any decisions are made: trumpets are the soprano equivalent of the TIS trombone.

Trombones are now tuning-in-the-bell. TRrumpets are STILL tuning-in-the-slide.

Trumpet bells are conical.
Trombone bells are cylindrical.
Logged
bonenick

*
Offline Offline

Location: Antalya, Turkey
Joined: Nov 29, 2016
Posts: 813
"Life is change. Growth is optional. Choose wisely."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: Dec 23, 2016, 01:56PM »

Also-- before any decisions are made: trumpets are the soprano equivalent of the TIS trombone.

Trombones are now tuning-in-the-bell. TRrumpets are STILL tuning-in-the-slide.

Trumpet bells are conical.
Trombone bells are cylindrical.

BM,

That's not universaly true. I have a tuning bell trumpet and that's not a novelty. Conn if I remember correctly was making a trombone style tuning slide on the bell crook, more recently Schilke has used a different style (with a trail) tuning slide (I have the same on my trumpet). The difference of how much of the tube is conical and how much is cylindrical is a big discussion. There are many cornets and trumpets that have a similar feature in a different wrap.
I don't question the similarity between trumpets and trombones.

Recently (few years ago) Monette made an instrument...something between Cornet and something else (in low Key of G) - an excerpt of its description: "In order to get true, "constant pitch center" from low F# to double C, the shank size of the mouthpiece ended up LARGER THAN THAT OF A BASS TROMBONE!" . The instrument is called SATTVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYXRLkuC-6w

Many inovations have been made in both trumpet and cornets and anything between, but more of them are rather subtle.
Logged
timothy42b
*
Offline Offline

Location: Colonial Heights, Virginia, US
Joined: Dec 7, 2000
Posts: 12367

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: Dec 23, 2016, 01:58PM »



Geyer spoke of the need to play trumpets as close to the renaissance ideal as possible so that the brilliant trumpet sound was not lost. That meant playing the Bb horn ( longest commercially available one) with as many valves as possible to keep the ration of cylindrial to conical as high as possible.

So, to put that in a concrete way-- take the note Bb below middle C. To make it as renaissance/baroque and brilliant trumpety as possible you'd want to play that on a Bb trumpet with valves 2+3. Not a C trumpet with valve 1 only. Or open Bb trumpet.


No, wait a minute, I'm not sure that's right.  Natural trumpets in the Baroque area and I think in the Renaiisance were twice the length of modern trumpets so they could play in the upper partials.  An 8 foot trumpet in C, for example, was common - in the Baroque era vents were added to tune notes. 

It seems to me that an instrument twice as long would likely play more mellow rather than more brilliant. 
Logged

Tim Richardson
bonenick

*
Offline Offline

Location: Antalya, Turkey
Joined: Nov 29, 2016
Posts: 813
"Life is change. Growth is optional. Choose wisely."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: Dec 23, 2016, 02:04PM »

Timothy is right, I haven't spotted that one. The original discussion was about Franquin and efficient trumpets. Till certain point acoustic efficiency was what was searched for. But then we got into search for broad and rather fluffy sound, which is exactly the opposite. Which is better is rather subjective. If you want to get more sound with less efforts than you end up with rather light sounding instruments.
Logged
bonesmarsh
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: May 22, 2007
Posts: 2222

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: Dec 23, 2016, 02:18PM »

You have to dislocate your "trombone brain" and engage your "tuba brain" for this one to comprehend the theory:

A trumpet pitched in low F, or C, the length of a modern French tuba in C, or euphonium in C, or valve trombone in C ( Hello Juan Tizol!!),  is more brilliant comparatively speaking. The proportion of straight cylindrical tubing to conical/ bell tubing is more cylindrical in a low C trumpet.

A euphonium is almost all conical in it's length. Very mellow. Huge bell compared to a trumpet.
A bass trumpet pitched in C/Bb, with a tiny bore, would be brilliant in comparison.

Same length-- but the trumpet is cylindrical ( one bore right up to the bell flare) compared to a conical bore ( no straight horn without increase in bore).

****
It gets murky after a while mentally.
Euphoniums are relatively easy to play by amateurs. Just point, and blow.
Trombones are much more difficult.

After a while you have to introduce the theory that the two most air consuming instruments in the wind world are the flute-- and the modern bass trombone.


Logged
bonenick

*
Offline Offline

Location: Antalya, Turkey
Joined: Nov 29, 2016
Posts: 813
"Life is change. Growth is optional. Choose wisely."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: Dec 23, 2016, 02:31PM »

Again wrong. Most trumpet leadpipes are conical, not cylindrical. Some look cylindrical for different reasons - Twin Tube leadpipe for example. The mp receiver may also deceive you. Once it gets to the tuning slide it gets normally cilyndrical. I am not sure why would you take any brass instrument bell for a cylindrical...?
Logged
MrPillow
Organologique et plus!

*
Offline Offline

Location: Newport, RI
Joined: Jan 14, 2008
Posts: 1583

View Profile
« Reply #15 on: Dec 23, 2016, 02:34PM »

Also-- before any decisions are made: trumpets are the soprano equivalent of the TIS trombone.

Last I checked, soprano TIS trombones were the soprano equivalent of TIS trombones.
Logged

King 3B/F Silversonic - King 608F - Holton Paul Whiteman Model
Torobone

*
Offline Offline

Location: Toronto area
Joined: Sep 7, 2009
Posts: 2178

View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: Dec 23, 2016, 02:34PM »

Most serious trumpeters I know own several trumpets, one or two cornets, a flugelhorn, and other stuff including piccolo trumpets, pocket trumpets, post horns, orchestral trumpets in C or D, Eb soprano cornets, slide trumpets, etc. Throw in a garden hose, put them all in a handy little cart, and you have Johnny Cowell ready to perform his history of the trumpet demo.

Trumpets have gone through at least as many evolutions in the 20th century as the trombone, mostly getting bigger in bore size. The same with cornets.
Logged

Martin Hubel
Yamaha 891Z & 830 Xeno bass (both played regularly) , '74 Bach 42B, Yamaha 322 bass
sfboner

*
Offline Offline

Location: SF Bay area, CA
Joined: Jan 28, 2007
Posts: 3333

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: Dec 23, 2016, 02:40PM »

in the Baroque era vents were added to tune notes.

No.  Vent holes in natural trumpets are entirely modern.

"One contention, presented during an historic brass conference, in support of an earlier compromise to the natural instru- ment, was that “they were surely experimenting with fingerholes in the early eighteenth century.”26 Although this contention is supported neither by documentary nor artifactual evidence (and is countered by two centuries and more of glorious, intricate, challenging, and idiomatic music ostensibly written for the natural instrument), a further supporting observation was made that “examples of such instruments have simply failed to survive,” thus invoking the intangible as a defense."

http://www.historicbrass.org/portals/0/documents/journal/1998/hbsj_1998_jl01_001_barclay.pdf
Logged
boneagain
*
Offline Offline

Location: Richmond, VA
Joined: Aug 4, 2007
Posts: 2074

View Profile
« Reply #18 on: Dec 23, 2016, 02:41PM »

...
The more slide you use on a trombone the more conical to cylindrical tubing you are using.
A trumpet with 1+2+3 pressed is still cylindrical tubing. Even more cylindrical.
A trombone in 7th position is more conical, because the outer hand slide is of a larger bore than the inner hand slide.
...

Are you certain that bore change is counted as conical even if it is taken back?  Except on a few very odd trombones, the inner slide reduce back down.  This produces a discontinuity in the horn, but I have not seen any research that indicates that the slide behave conically.  It certainly PLAYS differently, but I've always assumed that was because of the discontinuity in stepping twice between inner and outer.

I have not seen any pulse reflectometry clarifying this point either way.

I HAVE seen stuff indicating that a dual bore slide DOES behave more conically.

I have also seen stuff indicating that maintaining the taper that preserves the related Bessel function of the flare all the way to the bell nut makes a difference in the behavior of the bell, but that the rather extreme difference in functions describing bells for conical and cylindrical instruments makes more of a difference, regardless of things like TIS.

Curious....
Logged

Dave Adams
Staunch admirer of all who still make a living at this!
bonenick

*
Offline Offline

Location: Antalya, Turkey
Joined: Nov 29, 2016
Posts: 813
"Life is change. Growth is optional. Choose wisely."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: Dec 23, 2016, 02:44PM »

Forgive my ignorance, what's TIS?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Up
Print
Jump to: