@administrator There are fixes for the intonation issues on Bach C Trumpets. My mid '70s 229 CL is VERY in tune. No alternate fingerings needed. My modifications were extensive.
Ivan from Jaeger trumpets visited a while back. He also knows what to do. We had a great time playing duets. I still have not managed to visit him in south Germany yet, but I will be in his area this summer and will make the effort.
@administrator The Monette Raja C is unlike either.
my Bach 229L C has a very even tone over the whole range with the typical Bach core. The only real issue is that there is a specific volume where the instrument jumps from "creamy" to "screaming". This volume is "loud" but NOT consistent over all of the registers. When I practice repertory with the Bach, I target this issue to prevent accidentally becoming too obnoxious on stage.
My Heckel rotary Bb has a dark and resonant low register, a very clear and articulate midrange and a bright high register. The sound holds together at any volume.
The Monette is a completely different animal. It can be played with core to fuzzy, dark to bright anywhere in all of the registers. Above all however is the "thickness" of the tone that creates more sum and difference (resultant) tones with other instruments than any other of my horns. I would say that it is more colourful BUT puts more pressure on the second trumpet to blend.
The most fun is when in a section with multiple heavy Monette horns. I have 2 ensembles with this state. Life is easiest there.
The change in timbre is based on the cylindrical to tapered proportions as well as the specific partial being played.
Many modern piston trumpets have been homogenised for a generally even tone. Rotary trumpets are not so "homogenised" and even a change in register creates a change in tone. Composers like Bruckner, Mahler, Strauss and Wagner even composed for the unhomogenised state.
There is no time restriction for talent. Any quality can crop up from any country at any time. No one really can plan birth, experience and opportunity. Irrelevant question.
I think that everyone that makes "improvisation" a requirement to be a great trumpeter does not understand what "greatness" truly is!
There are many "strengths" that qualify for greatness. I do not think that Bud Herseth was a lesser trumpeter just because he did not perform combo gigs. I do not think that Miles is greater just because he improvises.
Greatness in my world comes from exceptional performance, preferably over a long time. Exceptional performance very much can be "only" being the solo trumpet in a symphony orchestra - a leader musically and dynamically (Bud Herseth, Bill Vacchiano as two examples). Exceptional performance can also be what Maynard did - keeping a live band afloat in the most difficult of times and inspiring generations of musicians that played in his band. Exceptional performance can be Pops - creating the base for many musical things taken for granted today. Exceptional performance can be Bachs own Gottfried Reiche - who inspired Bach to create some of the most awesome trumpet parts ever written.
I very much do agree that there are many fine but mediocre performances due to the lack of understanding the genre. The Metropolitan Opera Orchestra recently released a Gabrieli recording that is an example of such playing. Great players missing the point - and proving that there are modern groups of musicians that offer the same or less than the Philadelphia/Cleveland/Chicago recording from the 1960s.
I can very much appreciate what "non improvisors" have to make them great. I can also appreciate those dedicated to period style and performance practices (in Jazz, Commercial or classical genres). I do not understand the need to limit the term "great" to artificial requirements submitted by those not anywhere near greatness.
This is the soprano low F-Trumpet that I am talking about:
It takes a "standard" Bb trumpet mouthpiece, preferably with a deep cup. The historic mouthpiece often had a thin "cookie cutter" rim.
Don't worry about me or my behavior. There are those members that I just will no longer engage. They were difficult at TrumpetMaster and certainly have not improved here. Sometimes I wish that there was a member or theme block feature like on Facebook.
I am not sure that moderating or policing produces different results. The truly technical blogs define moderating as submitting text and after approval of the moderation team, the text is published for others to see. This requires a team to make judgements about everything. Not really suitable for us here.
Moderation can also be moderators interacting with members - publicly or behind the scenes through PM.
Policing is after the fact. The damage is done, but what damage is that (other than members leaving)? Locking threads leaves the content for everyone in the future to read and draw opinions upon. I only wish that there was a solution to make stuff more easily searchable.
I firmly believe that the problem is the sense of "protection" behind a keyboard. Much of what is posted would NEVER be said face to face.
I am in full support of Elmar.
My recipe is being ready when luck comes by my way.
One has to ask where the bot has collected all of its "wisdom". For that hand, the same could apply to real people that are active on social networks.
@dr-go Your post is not even worth a comment.
One of the things that drives me nuts are members with an "absolute" opinion that is contrary to practice throughout the whole world. You have disqualified yourself again.
Mr. Vizzutti was a year ahead of me at Eastman in the 1970s. He is entitled to his opinions, just like everyone else. He is far from an "average" talent and what works for him is not necessarily a recipe for anyone else.
The joke as far as I am concerned is the Buzz=bad. There is simply too many successful players using it to ignore. That does NOT make buzzing universally good or bad. It certainly does warrant research. It also warrants civil behavior - one of Elmars major concerns.
I am out. I do not feed the trolls - with or without a Dr title!
The F trumpet is not popular because of one reason: security. That is the main reason for the ever shorter instruments most used today. Our standard Bb trumpet today used to be called the "high Bb trumpet" by the F trumpet players. They criticised the smaller horns for their "tone".
My F trumpet is in tune. Due to its length however, it does not blend in a section of modern Bb trumpets. The tone is dramatically different.
Perhaps this is the "wrong place" for this comment, but it certainly fits with Elmars caution.
I see basically 4 reasons why people interact online:
The first 3 are easily identified and generally lead to community development. The 4th is not always as clear cut as we would like - especially because people of various levels of development do not use or understand the use of certain words. Additionally there are the internet snipers that post nothing except that a previously stated position is "all wrong" - but offer no contrary position. Finally there is the academic arguer that plays devils advocate regardless of the position. At the end of the day, only the fourth reason causes any reason for concern. At TrumpetMaster, putting a user (or users) on a temporary vacation after adequate warnings solved the problem. The issue for me is transparency.
In this particular thread we have the first 3 reasons in abundance. If someone were to come and generally trash buzzing or trash not buzzing (like perhaps Mr. Vizzutti did), we would have adequate proof that they have left the realm of reality. The admin first reaction could be a PM warning. Repeated discourse would lead to escalation management.
If someone makes an 8 page post like a doctoral thesis, it would be better placed outside of the thread but with a link.
The biggest problem with the human state is its inconsistency. If any teacher had embouchure, range, technique, tone and musicality solved, there would be a lot more spectacular players. Where are they? I believe that no teacher has all of the corners covered and that is why we can accept that there are multiple possibilities to manipulate our own states - making each path as unique as the person following it.
Now, we could define a theme: "Most favorable practices" that would apply to a lot of use cases. Breathing exercises, scales, intervals, patterns, longtones, slurs all belong in this group. Then we could create the theme "warmup" which certainly will be more diverse than the above (and in my view, buzzing of any type belongs here). Warmup is different than most favorable practice as there is not universal acceptance to what the word means and represents.
Oh boy is this thread a can of worms.
In my view, there are many paths to bliss and even more to hell. What we thought that we understood is one of the major character deficiencies in people that can not get space between them and concepts. Lead trumpeters that are VERY convinced that their success is unique often have trouble with other concepts. I also would not recommend that fortunate, excellent players mess with (their own) success.
I will maintain that there are as many "extremely successful" players with and without buzzing. That is enough for me not to damn one side or the other. I would guess that there are also a great deal of players getting everything wrong, but they can only be cited as bad examples.
Up until a couple of months ago, I never buzzed (55 years). Three years ago I had an accident that has now lead to 100% implants and dentures. With my old routine and new teeth, I was able to get the basics back, but things above the staff were elusive (although previously range never was an issue). Since 6 weeks, I have a steady free buzzing program and my tone, articulation and range are coming back at about a half tone every 2 or 3 days. The targeted free buzzing may not be the only way, but 10-15 minutes per day have certainly done wonders for me in getting a grip on embouchure geometry.
Now, I consider Al Vizzuttis' rant to be "mostly true". The exaggeration however is that occasional buzzing will change/hurt our concept of tone. We are creatures of habit. If we do 5 minutes of buzzing per day and an hour of normal practice, what are the odds that buzzing would kill that? In my case 15 minutes of buzzing and 2 hours of practice seems to be a great mix. The targeted buzzing has built strength much faster than my standard routine did. I do not consider my "tone" to be the focus of buzzing. Maybe it is just teaching an old dog new tricks when the old ones don't work anymore. I don't know or care. I am now playing at a level (again) that gets me rebooked. Buzzing has no cost of business. I am sacrificing nothing.
I was fortunate that the accident and aftermath all happened in the Covid era where there were hardly any gigs.
There is such a thing. I have one (not for sale) made in the 1870s. Occasionally they pop up. A friend of mine has a similar Heckel F. They are NOT the alto instruments however. They have the same bore and bell as a soprano Bb trumpet.!
I think that Dotzauer still builds them.
IMG_1298.JPG
I would insist that the major difference between many "older" cornets and trumpets is the mouthpiece and attitude of the player. If someone wants a killer 50s Martin Committee for cheap, buy the cornet and get a good tech to change the mouthpiece receiver to trumpet.
All reasonable colleagues will have no issue!
3 valve piccs can work IF we have an half tone extension for the third valve (1+2+3 should give us the low concert D with the A tuning). Then all of the D major baroque stuff works. I have a 3 valve rotary pic and it is my go to instrument for baroque literature in D or Eb when I play modern horns.
@trumpetb Lengthy posts can be very useful when covering material that can not be reduced. I often complain about a tendency to simplify complex issues because the root cause is to manipulate instead of achieve better common understanding. In addition incorrect use of "science" as a supposed solution often leads to "lengthy" posting with no real resolution.
Your last post actually covers many issues (and I don't know why):
In my view, communities develop based on whatever level of communication that the community members gravitate to. The interest to post is based on the individual expectations. If the general tone (of the community) is lengthy, those interested in the topic give up after a while. If the general expectation is no longer than necessary, a different mix of posting occurs.
In my view, the issue of springs is very interesting with great need for mythbusting. As disposition and actual understanding the material leads to different courses of action, there is a lot to talk about. That has nothing to do with certain members tendency to post a lot of words.
Some really long posts for a simple original question about where to get stiffer springs. Even in Germany, Bach only seems to offer 2 versions: light and standard. Third parties have other parts that can not be compared by the on line description.
https://www.austincustombrass.biz/high-speed-valve-springs-for-trumpet/
https://mouthpieceexpress.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=19850&osCsid=fnopp4r1ndjgh4loulpf415524
https://thompsonmusic.com/product/high-speed-valve-springs/
@trumpetb I am in my late 60s and have been playing for over 50 years.
My Bach C229 was purchased in 1974 and still has the original springs
My Monette Raja C was built in 1989/1990 and still has the original springs
My Selmer Radial 2° Model 75 was built in 1974 and still has the original springs
My Selmer Radial 2° D trumpet was built in 1978 and still has the original springs
My Heckel rotary Bb was built in 1938 and still has the original springs
My Getzen 4 valve flugelhorn was built in the 1970s and still has the original springs
The rest of my horns are similar. They ALL get played a lot but do not need stretching or replacement. That being said, my horns do go to a technician every couple of years for a checkup and chemical clean (no ultrasound bath). My suspicion is that the spring gets blamed for valve dirt, distortion and damage because stretching is a supposed "cheaper fix".
I will not deny that there are causes to replace springs, but I see little to no reason to ever stretch - unless the valve has exceptionally long throw (like old Benges). Stretching to fine tune tension simply has no benefit.
The short throw of typical trumpet valves does not cause excessive wear on spring tension. If the valves are regularly cleaned and oiled, the spring has a very easy job and as I noted above, lasts for decades with no hit in performance.
As I previously posted, stretching the spring does unpredictable things to K - the tension. No general statement can be made except that the stretching was not worth it.
I guess that we will get no agreement, so let us agree to disagree. Every stretched spring experiment that I know about (with my 55+ years of playing there were a few), have not improved anything. Sticky valves remained sticky, the valves were never faster and more often than not, the scraping noise from bent springs. Pages of irrelevant math do not change the basic premise, so why argue? I have all of the stuff to measure and document the changes (I train our employees and customers to operate and service thermal cutting machines where we use springs in various functions), but have no interest as I have never had a positive experience related to the trumpet or our machines.
I would further advance that springs do not increase playing speed as our fine motor activity is what it is and the quality of the valve lubrication is the deciding factor and very much subject to environmental factors (temperature, aerosols, stroke angle when depressing the valve).
In my world, stiffer springs are for calming the brain of certain players, not increasing performance.
I am always amazed at how smooth and light the action of my valves are after a „maintenance“ by technicians that I trust. I am anally retentive about cleanliness next to godliness when applied to trumpet valves, but still, they apply magic, not springs. They also are very adament about not stretching.
