The thread owner needs to clear some stuff up. Nothing makes sense.

@Kehaulani Yes, it is chicken and egg BUT you can have your cake and eat it too! I have a student with a reading deficiency. They can read a single line, but to move to the second line is almost impossible. We solved the issue by memorizing the last measure or two on one line and the first on the next. Confidence soars, reading quality goes up!

@GeorgeB For things at the limit of what I can play (recently 1st trumpet in the orchestra version of Rimsky-Korsakovs Scheherezade), my standard take is to completely memorize the difficult licks. Once I have freed up my eyes, they do not slow my fingers or tongue down any more!

This was recorded at Chappell Studios in London in 1975. https://www.discogs.com/de/Anita-Kerr-Hallelujah-Brass/release/7530512

It was part of a series Hallelujah Brass, Woodwinds, Guitar and Voices. They were recorded for a Nashville company Word Records. I found no link between Herb Alpert and Word or Chappell. He had his own A&M label. Anita Kerr was signed by Warner and Word so I doubt that they worked together as there are no credits on any of the albums. Anita worked with Karl Garvin (Nashville) on trumpet on a 1971 production.

@OldSchoolEuph I certainly agree that we do not have a common vocabulary. That is why I think starting with a checklist is a good idea. Then the words are standardized. It is no different than reading a wine or car review (where an admirable job on vocabulary has been done).

The more we have in common, the more bias becomes obvious.

@OldSchoolEuph #2 how easily the instrument speaks - can we produce a clean tone on a wisp of air in the lower, middle and upper registers. #7 and #8 are related. My reference for "core" is a Bach 229 CL with the H leadpipe. That instrument at "comfortable" volumes has much more core than halo. A Yamaha Xeno or Benge is exactly the opposite. Schilke instruments (except the HD) to me have little "core".

My goal would be to develop a common community language to talk about sound character and a test procedure so that we can read through "personal preference" and make the evaluation meaningful. Granted, there are thousands of parameters that we could test but my experience is that 10 simple tests are enough for first base. With decent base data, even comparison charts could be made from the raw data A Bach C trumpet could have variance in the perceived core from 7 to 10 points, a Xeno from 5-8 and a B1 Schilke, 1-3. I could imagine some having a tough time evaluating before the honeymoon/acclimation time is over...

@Dr-GO And as I mentioned elsewhere, pigeons also have other things that stick...

As far as Barlimans experience in that playing venue, on stage we get lucky sometimes, sometimes we lose - not being able to hear anything... That can be from a "dead" sounding environment (playing outdoors or in a conference room), or a very live environment with 6 seconds of reverb or more.

The trick is to not play more loudly when we are unsure/insecure...

I do not even trust reviews by top players. I know too many with a flavor of the month.

It would be cool if we had standard things to try and rate:

1. Octave intonation
2. how well it speaks at ppp in the low, medium and upper register
3. how well we hear ourselves indoors
4. how well we hear ourselves “outdoors”
5. pitch stability during a crescendo
6. pitch stability with a decrescendo
7. Proportion of core to halo (a lot of thought must go into this test)
8. relative loudness where the sound becomes “brilliant”
9. Stability of horn playability with various mouthpieces
10. Do certain notes “pop out”?
11. ergonomy

retest results after 3 months

Feel free to add additional tests. This basically outlines my procedure to buy a new trumpet. All my students learn this and we use it when buying the “second” instrument.

Everybody teaches themselves to play! A teacher can motivate and focus on things good for the player, but at the end of the day, it is the student that has to untangle what they have been told, sort it and apply it.

To become an expert, you need exceptional talent first - talent to keep your eye on the ball, talent to hear differences, talent to understand the differences and above all talent to know what we don't know.

I know that 2000-10000 purposeful repetitions gives us a "professional" level of repeatability for a specific task. I am not sure that we can assign hours however.