Lifetime quest finally paying off!

Kehaulani

You're pretty condescending, you know, Dr. Mark. I get it completely. Seeing something differently than you, doesn't mean that one is stupid. I just don't see redefining things.

You can't say airplane and mean the process of taking off, flying and landing, maybe experiencing some turbulence, en route. There are other words to describe it. But airplane is airplane.

@Kehaulani said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:
You're pretty condescending, you know, Dr. Mark.

I sent it as humorous but I'll take condescending if that's all you got.

I get it completely. I'm not stupid.

Whew! Are you sure? A college degree means a person is educated, it doesn't mean they are smart. I found the journal article good in that it caused me to think about something in a bit of a different manner.

I just don't see redefining things.

Whew! You do know that driving (verb) a car and looking at a car (noun) in the parking lot is different, right? You do know that flying (a process) a plane and looking at a plane (a thing) on the tarmac isn't the same thing, right? You do know that your mouth (a body part) is not the same as using it to play a trumpet (a process), right?

A word (even if its French) can have more than one meaning. It doesn't disrespect the original (first) meaning. Sometimes we are forced to adopt a new definition to an old word because of the way its used. Take the word "run". Most would say to use your legs to go faster than walking. How about a run in a woman's hose? Run for office? A running body of water? A run as in a valley? No I don't think you're stupid. I do think you're having a bad day as we all sometimes do, myself included.

Dr GO

@Kehaulani said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

You're pretty condescending, you know, Dr. Mark. I get it completely. I'm not stupid. I just don't see redefining things.

You can't say airplane and mean the process of taking off, flying and landing, maybe experiencing some turbulence, en route. There are other words to describe it. But airplane is airplane.

First, airplane is a bad example to use, as it's name houses the very processes as to how it takes off. By placing air under the plane of wings that allow it to take off, and with stability, fly and with skill to use the air under that plane to land. And, yes, I am sure I will get turbulence for calling you out on using this example.

Kehaulani, it's not about redefining as it is about applying basic definitions toward a more functional process. A definition is a word. If you just hang on the word, you may miss the ability to move forward to put that word, that term into application. Words can have more meaning behind them. This is what the article Dr. Mark referenced has done. Read the article, and you will see that point.

Case in point, the French take "la bouche", the mouth to amazing levels of social application. Why would application of the mouth be any different to the trumpet? In fact there are many French uses of words for "the mouth" which derives to the French etiology to their unique word embouchure in particular: l' embouchure - the mouth as an outlet. This goes beyond the concept of just mouth. An outlet for all that follows.

Let's re-frame this entire thread into the positive learning experience that it has become. An educational piece that put a lot of dimensions on methods toward a common goal in optimizing the embouchure, a functionality that has many dynamics at play.

Or you can walk away from it with charges of condescending, hammering people (that comment launched a triad of non-therapeutic discourse). If we step back and look at this thread with a positive view, we will have learned a lot about the embouchure. If you read it with a negative bias, one has learned absolutely nothing.

Sound Advice

@Dr-GO

I'm seeing some " re-inventing the wheel" type posts here. Granted my own have hardly been succinct. I do sorta gave an excuse for running on. In as much as I've finally found a direction which while very new to me. One which does seem to lead in the direction of having a much more efficient embouchure. This is very elating.l

And while the Stevens system is fairly involved it does have at least one very simple and logical directive. An idea that encompasses perhaps at least half of its value. As stated before, quote from Roy Stevens,

"You can't play on your teeth".

The flip side of this coin is that,

"The upper lip.must be exposed to air".

This a quote found not only in the Stevens book but also said by the book's editor Dr William Moriarty.

"The lip must be exposed to air/you can't play on your teeth"

Form an invaluable framework for embouchure. I used it before I even changed embouchures. Back when I was on the road. After applying this concept? Almost overnight I became able to blow the upper register that I did have at will. That and much more powerfully. The guys thought I'd turned into another trumpet player. Suddenly my job was much more secure.

I'm not going to mention names here but some of you guys have been fairly rude to me. I can easily take this as I wasn't born yesterday. Nor do I have a thin skin.

Further, I've stated, more than once that I don't expect everyone to agree with me or not. Even though the principle I just posted above is as simple as pie to understand. And that anyone who currently struggles to play trumpet will usually find that the proper application of Stevens "two aperture theory" will definitely make it much easier to gain the physical strength and ability to play trumpet. Or at least IMPROVE their embouchure efficiency.

Almost no major thought process even needs to go on above and beyond this simple concept. However the dissonance I'm seeing among some of the posters here, I hate to say is typical of the internet. Trumpet players like to think they know it all. I've seen examples here of what a major spiritual figure once tried to define with the metaphor of,

"Casting pearls before swine". He advising not to do this.

As such? I'm probably not going to discuss this issue much any more. After this new chop setting I'm developing really starts to take hold? I think that I'll mostly use forums like this to hawk mouthpieces and sell ideas and videos on. This is what most the pros do. I've talked to more than one or them who've privately said of trumpet forums in general, esp Trumpetherald in particular as

"Being full of idiots"

His words, not mine but the cat who made that statement has been a monster player since 1980. Put his kids thru college with just his professional trumpet playing. And I don't like to pin negative labels specifically on people. Even after they do it to me. I'll just close this post by saying that I've tried to hold my head high here. Meanwhile others sought to pull this topic down into the sewer.

Frankly you ought to feel ashamed of yourselves.

This post is deleted!

This post is deleted!

@Dr-GO said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

First, airplane is a bad example to use, as it's name houses the very processes as to how it takes off. By placing air under the plane of wings that allow it to take off, and with stability, fly and with skill to use the air under that plane to land. And, yes, I am sure I will get turbulence for calling you out on using this example.

It's not a bad example, in every linguistic theory the meaning of a word for a thing implies the function of the thing. Still there is a difference between the meaning of an "airplane" and of "to fly". It's simply senseless to call a table a process because you can eat at it, you can play cards at it, you can put a vase with flowers on it. All true, but in the end it's a table. To be more specific, Wittgenstein in his early work was searching for "das Ding an sich" but never really found it. So "things" without the functional environment simply don't exist in our linguistic system.
For "embouchure" means this that there is embouchure, the thing (with functional environment in its meaning) and, let's say, the forming of an embouchure, the process.

Case in point, the French take "la bouche", the mouth to amazing levels of social application. Why would application of the mouth be any different to the trumpet? In fact there are many French uses of words for "the mouth" which derives to the French etiology to their unique word embouchure in particular: l' embouchure - the mouth as an outlet. This goes beyond the concept of just mouth. An outlet for all that follows.

Same for this, you just fail to see that a word for a thing, the mouth, has a function to describe the mouth as a thing in the world, so the function of the mouth in the world. So "the mouth" implies indeed all the functions of the mouth but is not a description of the possible processes nor a process in itself.

Let's re-frame this entire thread into the positive learning experience that it has become.

I'm afraid I missed something but what did you learn, can you be specific?

Or you can walk away from it with charges of condescending, hammering people (that comment launched a triad of non-therapeutic discourse). If we step back and look at this thread with a positive view, we will have learned a lot about the embouchure. If you read it with a negative bias, one has learned absolutely nothing.

As I see it, Kehaulani only made one mistake: answering SA . As far as I remember, I never did (also speaking about TH). I am afraid we are otherwise going the Captain Kirk route, do we want that? In general, discussions are very difficult with SA cause of his attitude. His attitude is best described by a quotation of a famous Dutch writer: "Ik ben een god in het diepst van mijn gedachten", in translation: "I am a God in the deepest of my thoughts".

"If we step back and look at this thread with a positive view".

OK I'm in, but I did also read Rowuk's post here above and I have to say that his post offers, at least to me, a complete different and liberating view on the subject and by that more learning experience and a much more usable view on trumpet playing than yours and your comrades'. You chose to ignore him, that's your right but at the same time it is a little suspect, Rowuk is Rowuk.

And SA will never say anything negative about another except that he only cites anonymous "monster" players and other great authorities who call the populations of TH and obviously of this forum "idiots" but remember, these are NOT his words, he is nice like always, he only wants to help us with this quotation. Let's thank him for that.

GeorgeB

I have been following this thread because I found it mildly entertaining and only really took it seriously when Robin ( rowuk ) posted. Since then the entertainment value has gone down hill and I have a feeling Robin won't be making any new posts so my time here would be better spent on the process of playing my trumpet.
Ciao !

Dr GO

@FranklinD said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

@Dr-GO said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

I'm afraid I missed something but what did you learn, can you be specific?

First: get the anger out of your soul FranklinD.

Next: If you have the anger resolved, read my comments carefully that followed Dr. Mark's informative review reference. To be specific, I have learned that the embouchure is multi factorial and is a function not only of the anatomy of the lip but also the support around the embouchure that is both intrinsic and extrinsic to the lip.

Dr GO

@GeorgeB said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

I have been following this thread because I found it mildly entertaining and only really took it seriously when Robin ( rowuk ) posted. Since then the entertainment value has gone down hill and I have a feeling Robin won't be making any new posts so my time here would be better spent on the process of playing my trumpet.
Ciao !

GeorgeB. I so highly respect you and it is the gifted and deeply contributing members such as you that I have been trying to keep this discussion on tract as I do believe there has been much valuable information posted here, that I agree, has been clouded by the aggressive attacks.

Framing the picture is so important in seeing the beauty behind the piece, and I have been trying, since Robin's prompt to try to get this on tract. I am sorry we lost you, especially, as I do so respect your input as well. I am sure you however have chosen wisely to focus additionally on you process as this is the real secret as to how it's done. And to you my friend, Ciao! Stay healthy!

Dr GO

@FranklinD said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

OK I'm in, but I did also read Rowuk's post here above and I have to say that his post offers, at least to me, a complete different and liberating view on the subject and by that more learning experience and a much more usable view on trumpet playing than yours and your comrades'. You chose to ignore him, that's your right but at the same time it is a little suspect, Rowuk is Rowuk.

Once again FranklinD, we agree to agree on most of this point; however, one minor correction, I NEVER chose to ignore Rowuk. He has taught me a lot both here and on TM. To recap Rowuk's post, which I also agree with in its entirity:

ROWUK said:
*" - if there was ANY killer system, where are all of the killer players using it? All of the blah, blah about teeth, lips may work for a "few" but a disciple is usually the WORST person to have. They simply lack the holistic view of the world as it is.

The biggest joke is the so called opposition to the method. Just because we do not believe "Sound Advice" does not mean that we discredit Stevens or Costello. I generally oppose zealots of any color. Just let him have his rant on this thread. I really see nothing to discuss."*

My posts have been supporting the same concept. What works for an individual is the method that fits the individual. One size does not fit all. Beyond the brief educational snippets offered by Dr. Mark, there really is nothing else to discuss, which again, has been the direction of my commentary that tries to steer the discussion to: There are a lot of factors that influence our efficiency of playing and discussions limited to one method does not resolve the situation for the masses.

@Sound-Advice
You said that "The lip must be exposed to air/ you can't play on your teeth"

Here's a snippet from Steven's book;
EXERCISE 1, (Statics vibrations) The object of "statics" or "vibrations" is to create the proper lip contraction or grip necessary to play in the upper register. It must be accomplished in order to continue successfully with this technique. As illustrated on the previous page, lay the instrument flat upon the palm of the left hand with the fingers extended in such a way that with any excessive pressure, it will slide off. Then close your lips gently, (2) establish teeth aperture about 1/4th inch and bring jaw forward until bottom teeth edges are parallel to, or slightly forward of, top teeth edges, (3) invert both lips evenly in the direction of each other, sides parallel. Do not allow either lip to overlap the other. Lock the corners gently in their natural position. Do not pull the corners back and up or perform any other action that may contribute to any thinning of the lips. When this lip or playing formation is made, place the mouthpiece, preferably, a little less than half on the upper and a little more than half on the lower lip, and you are ready for these static tones. (Instrument is laying flat upon the palm of the hand. Try to avoid gripping the casing or any other part of the instrument. The weight of the mouthpiece on the lips during the palm exercises is more than enough to isolate the vibrating area and facing from the rest of the two lips.)

Here's where things seem to go sideways; You say "you can't play on your teeth".
and Stevens says "invert both lips evenly in the direction of each other".

If I curl in my upper and lower lip, my lip (upper and lower) will be touching the teeth.

You've cited Stevens a lot, and you've given no other evidence other than yourself. With that said, I'm glad whatever it is you're doing works for you, that's cool but with the sparseness of requested supporting evidence and the confounding nature of Steven's book that I just pointed out about the teeth and the lips (at least it seems to read confoundingly to me), it's impossible to for me to say; "This new way of playing is worth a second look"
My suggestion? Take six months and do your research. It should be noted that finding nothing is just as important as finding something. You might find that what you're doing has only very little to do with Stevens. Try to be as objective as you can which (if I were you) get someone that knows there way around a trumpet to monitor your behavior when you play. If you go this route, don't "puff up" your idea to the monitor. Just explain, don't sell. Be sure the monitor documents via pencil & paper their observations.
Play and keep the verbalizations to yourself "no talking about what you're doing unless asked" Your enthusiasm suggests something. Now, go and discover what that something is. If you were a biscuit, you'd only be half done. Get back in the oven and in six or so months knock us on our ears with what you've learned.
Good Luck and Get Busy

Anger? I am enjoying it. I am really afraid that the linguistic thing may be too specialized, sorry for that but it was not my idea to go that way. But I wish you all good luck with blowing on the teeth and the anchored tongue or not and the roll-in or roll-out. I prefer playing above fancy theories of quadruple C's. Saying that you agree with Rowuk is worse than ignoring him but dream on in peace.

@FranklinD said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

Anger? I am enjoying it.

Well, since you enjoy anger, then allow me to piss you off more than you anticipated you feckless turd.

Granted your screen name is Franklin, your photo suggests something different.
Why is it when you go past the farm, sheep line up at the fence and say "come baaaaaack."
When are you going to take out the garbitch?
When you were born, the doctor slapped your mother.
Is the short hand for Franklin "Dick?" It should be.
Is it true that your right hand got into a fight with your left hand for cheating?

Are you still enjoying angry? You might want to think twice about making snarky remarks about members that are trying to give a person (S-A) the benefit of a doubt and allow him the opportunity to pony up evidence. Don't mess with people that know how to embrace schadenfreude but out of decency, choose not to use it unless someone decides to get a little too snarky. We're all a little testy due to the quarantine. Play nice.

Dr. (?) Mark, do you really appreciate an answer? Read your own post above and think twice, you still can save your face.
Disclaimer: your answer can be used for diagnostic purposes.
Advice 1: never, never threaten, that's only for the weak.
Advice 2: writing on a forum is definitely not your thing, too soon you will go in the panic shaming mode.

GeorgeB

@Dr-GO
Thanks, Doc. Rest assured the respect is mutual. Like Dr. Mark said, we're all a little testy due this quarantine business. Right now I just rather play some music and see what my critic ( ME ) has to say. Trouble with ME is he never seems to be satisfied with my playing...

OK, maybe I was a little too hard in my answer to Dr. Go but I may have been obscured by the posts of his shadow Dr. Mark. On the other side, up to now I see no option to bring your posts, Dr. Go, in line with the fundamental and powerful critic of Rowuk. I am definitely not on the SA track and still thinks his ideas are at least, let's say, very particular. So I don't see a possibility for some synthesis between these, in my eyes opposite point of views.

@FranklinD, you stated;
Dr. Go, in line with the fundamental and powerful critic of Rowuk.

I've performed with Go and he doesn't need to be in line with anyone but Go. He could stand to be better looking (like me!) but he doesn't need my help, Rowuk's help, or yours. He does okay on his own. You know why? BECAUSE HE PRACTICES!
As for your comment "Dr. (?) Mark, I agree. True story; When I got my undergraduate, I thought I was the bee's knees. When I got my Master's I thought, "Damned I'm good!" When I got my doctorate, I realized how much I really don't know.
As for me threatening you (or anybody threatening you) It just hasn't happened and rest assured, I'd use the same verbiage to your face as I just did on the Internet.
Do you still like angry, Umpalumpa? Your posts are beginning to suggest otherwise.
Here's the thing. No one would listen to you when you rang the alarm bell about Sound-Advice saying that he was basically a hack. That made you angry when no one would listen.
I don't see S-A as a hack (I could be wrong). I see a guy that discovered something but is having a darned hard time explaining what he found. That's why I suggested that he take six months, do the homework and then come back and share what he learned.
I would suggest that the administrator lock this topic since its getting nasty and some of the comments are priceless.

@FranklinD said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

Read your own post above and think twice, you still can save your face.

Here's the problem, I'm having a battle of wits with an unarmed man. Hey, wait, you are a guy, right? I mean it's okay if you're not, just don't tell the sheep. That would be baaaaaaaad.

One of the problems of fora like this (and TH) is that people refuse to read any posts before answering them. So their 'answers' are in the blind.
My advice to you was free and could be very beneficial for you. But you prefer to play the donkey, I'll give you two hints: Madame Bovary or maybe echoplaxia. Your choice.
BTW nice that you try to defend Dr. Go who BTW can miss (in my view) your help as cholera. I think I can deal with him without any undefined noise from your side.
But why do you write S-A and I do write SA? Why the -? You can win a banana for the right answer.

Lifetime quest finally paying off!

@Kehaulani said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!: You're pretty condescending, you know, Dr. Mark.

I sent it as humorous but I'll take condescending if that's all you got.

I get it completely. I'm not stupid.

Whew! Are you sure? A college degree means a person is educated, it doesn't mean they are smart. I found the journal article good in that it caused me to think about something in a bit of a different manner.

I just don't see redefining things.

@Sound-Advice You said that "The lip must be exposed to air/ you can't play on your teeth"

Here's where things seem to go sideways; You say "you can't play on your teeth". and Stevens says "invert both lips evenly in the direction of each other".

If I curl in my upper and lower lip, my lip (upper and lower) will be touching the teeth.

@FranklinD, you stated; Dr. Go, in line with the fundamental and powerful critic of Rowuk.

@Kehaulani said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:
You're pretty condescending, you know, Dr. Mark.

@Sound-Advice
You said that "The lip must be exposed to air/ you can't play on your teeth"

Here's where things seem to go sideways; You say "you can't play on your teeth".
and Stevens says "invert both lips evenly in the direction of each other".

@FranklinD, you stated;
Dr. Go, in line with the fundamental and powerful critic of Rowuk.