Posts made by 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.

@Dr-Mark

The reference you posted appears at first glance to be a site requiring considerable examination. Multiple artists have made statements. By posting that site it seems to me (and of course I could be wrong) that you'd like to see the concepts found in Stevens-Costello to be corroborated elsewhere. Okay fine but check this out.

Perhaps 50% of Stevens-Costello rests in one very simple concept. One which I'll get to in a minute. A totally gut easy one to understand and yet one which you'll almost never see posted or spoken of anywhere else. Herein lies a serious problem. Let's say that the concept (from Stevens) that I'm about to state is as easy to understand as a statement like this,

"Most fires need oxygen in order to start and sustain combustion".

Who would disagree? (okay technically you can also burn something with pure fluorine gas too but this is so rare as to almost be irrelevant). But here is the statement which I think comprises about 50% of Stevens-Costello. I'll start with a common quote from Roy Stevens. Something he was well known for saying.

"You can't play on your teeth".

There it is! Granted that the statement of Roy Stevens requires additional explanation. However from my background it is dead accurate and on the money.

The number 1 factor hammered in over & over in the Stevens Costello book is that the upper lip must be exposed to air. Occasionally Stevens uses the word "lip" in plural. His point however mainly refers to the way that the upper teeth can get in the way of the production of sound.

We can't see our teeth when we play. Both pairs form what is called the "Two Aperture Theory". To my mind it's less of a "theory" and more of a concrete fact. The lips form one aperture and the teeth the other. If the teeth close too much OR the upper lip doesn't set slightly below the upper teeth? The sound MUST always cut-off as one ascends into the upper register.

This explains why so many trumpet players can't play above a concert pitch high C. I once chatted online with a distinguished pro. Someone well known for his upper register. Not a major star but a lot of us would know of him. He absolutely insisted that his upper lip did not descend down past his upper teeth. He even further continued that his upper lip stayed even with the rim of the mouthpiece.

I responded that what he said may be so but I'll bet that just as soon as he sets his embouchure and places even a mild amount of mouthpiece contact pressure on his lips that at this point at least some small portion of his upper lip was remaining free to accept the force of air through it. Indeed there could be considerable variance in the amount of upper lip needed to receive the air flow. Perhaps the described fellow had a very elastic texture in his upper lip. As such only a small portion of it needed exposure to air.

But you can take Roy's statement to the bank. No trumpet player can produce a tone without first exposing his upper lip to air. Much of the Stevens system is locked up in this simple observation. It's not rocket science and doesn't require a blue ribbon panel to issue a peer review.

In fact before I switched totally over to the Stevens embouchure I still found it very helpful. Crucial in fact. In order to blow in connected registers up to high G.

Good luck all.

@Dr-Mark
Any of the recordings of Roy Roman or Phil Driscoll are indications of the Stevens embouchure in action. Roy's office wasn't a recording studio. More like a repair clinic. There aren't many of Stevens recordings even on his tribute page. One of the inherent problems in understanding the system comes from the high, wispy statics being produced right at the beginning of the study. The natural assumption people make here is that "the high notes are something that can be learned over night". Wrong!

Costello and Stevens were both emphatic about this. They stated very clearly that the only reason to start out in the double to triple notes is just to make darn certain they are there. Once the student begins to sustain these extremely high notes he then has conclusive proof that he's setting his embouchure correctly.

In my own case I only rarely play notes above high G in practice. Although I've only been on this system a little over four months I'm observing incredible improvement pretty much every day. My goal is to get solid in the middle register. Just like I once was before my injury in Aug '18.

Initially I played the statics every day. However as soon as I could work the embouchure down into the middle register I spent most of my practice time between third space C to D/high C. Only venturing up to high G or A once a day or so. In fact the only reason I blew those high notes was just to make sure they were still there. As this assured me that I still was forming the embouchure CORRECTLY!

The work we do on high notes is largely a test. We're working to make sure that we don't drop our jaw. Or play in a loose, flabby embouchure setting.

There will always be lots of opposition to the Stevens-Costello system. Particularly by those who understand it the least. As the system takes a radical departure from the "evolutionary approach". Stevens-Costello insists that the student prepare himself to play the complete range of the instrument. While the evolutionary method does not.

In the evolutionary method the development of range is left purely to chance and the odds aren't very good are they? Some will succeed. Obviously Maynard Ferguson and Wayne Bergeron are a couple guys who did. However they and those similarly gifted represent perhaps just 1% of the rest of us who struggle.

Instead of leaving range development to chance Stevens-Costello treats the trumpet in a way similar to the demands we place on a clarinetist. Even fairly early in the reed player's development he is taught the fingerings and way to play notes above high C. Not so the evolutionary approach for trumpet players..

Since the average teacher is unaware of even the most basic fundamentals of range production he is absolutely unable to guarantee that his approach will result in the student learning the complete range of the instrument. Plus it is far easier to teach a beginning student the lower register. However by doing this the teacher is inadvertently sealing his student's fate. The odds show that the great majority of trumpet players will never play the complete range on the horn.

Once I discovered why I personally was having a tricky time learning the Stevens system I was finally able to take corrective measures. I needed a different mouthpiece from that I'd previously been accustomed to.

Presently I've got a fine tone on the Stevens system. And like any trumpet player who's only been on a totally new embouchure for a short time I'm still developing accuracy and confidence. However with my upper register in place? All that remains for me to do is to start "hollowing out the rest of the log". I've learned the lower and middle registers before. A long time ago in fact. It's a comparatively simple thing to do. I largely just need to remember to maintain the structure of the embouchure without receding or closing my jaw. It's almost becoming a cinch.

And one of the many fringe benefits to the Stevens system is that the transition to the extreme upper register is virtually seamless. You know that really tricky to slot A/High C? Well it's just another note above high Con the Stevens thing. In fact the high A is about as far up the scale as I practice daily. Because the mere ability to play this note tells me that I've got the embouchure right.

Previously on my receded jaw embouchure I had a Dickens of a time playing the high A. This is one of the various indications of a "limited embouchure".

@Sound-Advice

I forgot to list the various musical uses of the "trippa" notes.

Some of these are Youtube videos.

At Maynard Live at Knott's Berry Farm on "Pagliachi" he plays a beautiful and incredibly exciting E/double C at the last note of the piece. An incredible climax to a superb performance. Both band and soloists.

Search "Bud Brisbois, Hang On Sloopy"
Bud twice picks off a terrific F/Double C. Bud also recorded a set of cool duets inc "Higher Meyer". Cleanly pooping an F and G over double C.

Maynard hits a triple C# on some live recording of "Conquistador".

Cat Anderson featured on many "trippa notes" on "The Louis Bellson Explosion" album.the main features of Cat found in the charts are,

"Intimacy of the Blues" &
"Groove Blues"

The liner notes on the album describe Old Cat this way on "Intimacy for the Blues"

"The first solo is by Blue Mitchell but it is UNMISTAKABLY CAT who finishes out the recording".

@Dr-GO

Above and beyond entertainment value? I agree there isn't any need to play a triple C. With perhaps a few exceptions I'll list at the end. But to quote William Costello (from the book)0

"A man who can lift 200 lbs over his head will surely have no trouble lifting 150 lbs. Or even less so 100 lbs".

It's a loose quote but pretty accurate.

If we compare the "200 pounds" to the triple C?
Then the double C is analogous to the 150 lbs. And yes I've seen and played lead trumpet parts with double C's and notes close around it.

Unfortunately for me the way my chops used to be programmed only allowed me to JUST BARELY be able to play double C. In other words I was like the man who could just barely lift 150 lbs.

Now had this been my only problem I'd have been fine with it. However that "150 lbs" took EVERYTHING that I had physically. Comparing it to the double C that is.

And after playing that double C I wasn't worth much to the band afterwards. Because I had expended most of my reserve energy.

In the Stevens-Costello method we set the embouchure to be able to blow this double C from the very start. Beginners learned the embouchure and started out making little "statics", squeaks or "cyclonics" come out of the horn. Just wispy little tones. Some people catch on right away. Others like me take longer. I had to make a mouthpiece change (larger) to pull it off.

We shoot for high G at first but accept the high C. Resting often because tired chops can not learn much and the whole process of playing while exhausted produce bad habits.

Soon as we get a wispy little high G we continue gaining control and range. I continued above the high G until I could sustain a few notes above double C. Like an E or F/double C. At this point?

I knew that I was setting my embouchure as directed by Stevens-Costello. Because if I hadn't done so I wouldn't have been playing so high to begin with!!. THAT'S PART OF THE TEST! The goal of starting out playing extremely high notes is not necessarily to become a screech player BUT AS A CHECK TO PROVE THAT WE'RE PLAYING CORRECTLY!

That was last November. Soon as I could get notes in or around double C I took this same embouchure and worked it down to my concert B flat tuning note. NOW I started playing conventional exercises. It is at this point where I can't really fail.

Because we all know that building a middle register is far easier than building an extremely high register. And the low register is much easier than the middle one. Our teachers all started us out in the middle and lower registers when we were kids because,

A. Teaching lower tones is far easier than playing high ones.
B. Our teachers never knew any better.

This is what Roy Roman calls the "Evolutionary Method". And again WE ALL WERE TAUGHT THIS WAY.

The main problem with the evolutionary method is that only a small fraction of those playing this way will ever develop the complete range of the instrument. This is because only a small % of trumpet players have teeth, lips and jaw etc that automatically place their embouchure in the CORRECT position to allow extreme range.

One of my own beliefs, outside of the Stevens System is that perhaps these lucky few also have a particularly elastic surface on their upper lip. The part that vibrates on their lip is well suited to sustaining a vibration in the extreme upper register.

Not so for the rest of us. Our chops USUALLY tend to be incorrectly set up to allow extreme range. So we mash the mouthpiece into our chops. Our range has a ceiling. Usually we're limited to a High C to D area. I was a little luckier and had a workable and nice sounding G/High C.

But it was so hard to blow! And difficult to just "sit on" for any length of time.

If you remember only ONE THING about the Stevens-Costello method it is that we demand that our teeth NOT GET IN THE WAY OF THE LIP/AIR intersection!!!

So many trumpet players do not understand this! Way back when I was in the road I decided that although I didn't have the time to convert my chops completelyover to the Stevens-Costello system that never the less I was at least going to KEEP MY UPPER LIP IN A POSITION WHERE MY TEETH DIDN'T BLOCK IT FROM VIBRATING.

What a freakin eye opener that was! PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF THE FOLLOWING. PLEASE BELIEVE ME!

Back on the road playing 5 nights/week plus rehearsals & travelling. It all took a toll on my chops. While I didn't need to play any high F's and G's on my gig I still had trouble with endurance and power up to High C and D. The singers demanding that I play louder.

Well that took a lot out of me. I tried all sorts of ways to conserve my strength but then I remembered the number 1 point in Stevens-Costello. Roy Stevens said,

"You can't play on your teeth".

Meaning that most of us do not leave enough upper lip below our upper teeth. In order that is to sustain a vibration in the upper register. We're always fixated upon our lip position on the mouthpiece. Forgetting of course that our upper teeth are equally important. The teeth act like the other "bookend" to the teeth. I guess that another term could be called the other clamp on a vise.

If our teeth cover too much of the upper lip? The tone will usually cut off somewhere as we begin to ascend into the upper register. Or the tone can grow weaker.

So right then and there I decided to DROP MORE OF MY UPPER LIP BELOW MY TEETH!!!

Almost immediately after consciously pushing my upper lip down a tad my strength to blow high C and such more than doubled. I could BLOW the roof off of the room throughout my whole range!! A high C and D felt like nothing. I could blow them at will, all night long and loud as hell. The guys in the band loved my new way of playing. This meant better job security and a more friendly atmosphere in the band.

Granted that my "practice room range" didn't increase. Nor would it because I hadn't converted completely over to the Stevens-Costello design. Like I'm doing now. My sound (back then) had a serious ceiling around a high G. But at the time it hardly mattered.

So I can see why people have questions about Stevens-Costello. A working musician probably shouldn't expect to convert completely over to Stevens-Costello. However he can still pick & choose those universal elements that may support his existing limited embouchure. As I just described.

Back to work now!
I'm from among the lucky few who aren't.much affected by the endemic. Being retired and hsve a small business that largely comes to me thank Gid. So I have plenty of time to convert over to Stevens-Costello. This is my fifth month into it. And am progressing nicely.

But I want to share a caution to all!

My right, front incisor broke off in August of 2018. Due to roughly 46 years of jamming for my high G's and whatnot. Thus my old way of playing was history. I couldn't play trumpet for crap.

Now had I fully converted to Stevens-Costello at a younger age ? I might very well have saved that tooth. Incidentally my Stevens-Costello embouchure is completely unaffected by tooth loss. While on my old embouchure?

My former way of playing is ruined.

@Kehaulani

Oh poop. UNT just sent me a response to my request for a PDF file of the first edition of the Stevens Costello book.

"Sorry but we can not fulfill requests from non university patrons at this time".

I may follow up with a phone call next week. If indeed they have staffers able to take calls. Granted that it's understandable that during the pandemic crisis the school would be cutting back on such services. However one of the purposes of UNT has always been to provide as much music related literature as possible.

In fact the whole life works of Don Ellis's compositions is on file at UNT. Don's intent was to donate his creative works to UNT for the specific purpose of music education. That and as a free resource for other musicians and bands.

Naturally it disappoints me that UNT isn't exactly living up to the intent of Ellis's donation.

My last resort will be to clean up my office. As somewhere buried in poorly organized junk are the last pages of the described first edition.

@Kehaulani said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

Unfortunately, I am now more confused.
What's the difference (briefly) between the "Stevens-Costello book Vol. 1, Vol. 2" and "Embouchure Trouble and Self Analysis, or the Stevens-Costello "Fabulous Embouchure Technique"?
http://stevens-costellochops.com/

https://www.amazon.com/Embouchure-Self-Analysis-Stevens-Costello-Technique-Complete/dp/1469955911/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=stevens-costello+trumpet&qid=1586015694&sr=8-1

You're asking me to be brief? Good luck with that.
I'm very familiar with the,
"Stevens Costello Triple C Embouchure Technique and Embouchure Self Analysis".
Is the original, first edition. Published in 1971. 188 pages long.

The other two are partial reprints of the first edition. As I said earlier my copy of "Embouchure Trouble & Self Analysis" just arrived in the mail a few days ago. It was a partial disappointment. As it is only 111 pages long. Obviously some pages are missing. Inc my favorite technical exercises I'd hoped to find.

I have recently written North Texas State zuniv music library. As their website indicates a file of the first edition. Hopefully they'll send me a PDF. As they once did some 20 years ago.

That's abt as "brief" as I'm capable of.

@Kehaulani said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

Does the introductory material contain any new or in-depth material? I'm still wondering what it's value is over the original.

I might as well use your post as a chance to make a correction. Here goes.

There is little if any "new material" within the 2nd edition. I did however make a HUGE ERROR in an earlier post. As THERE ARE A GREAT NUMBER OF PAGES MISSING IN THE NEW EDITION!!!

This kinda saddens me because these held the more advanced technical exercises. Some if which were creative and well written. They actually interested me. I'm going off my memory here Kehaulani so bear with me. But as I recall the original 1st edition text went up t o page 188. Whereas this 2nd edition stops at 111.
I'm personally not without some recourse here because buried among my keepsakes, books and related utter accumulated JUNK lie at least 70 or so photo-copied pages of the original text. I received these 20 plus years ago from an old friend who buggered a librarian from North Texas State Univ. yeah another long story.

So please accept my correction and apology. Remember,

I've only had this book a couple days. And it was only just tonight as I set down to practice my favorite exercise on page 134 - 136 that I realized that these were cut out of the new edition.
As I recall the second half of the book contained not only exercises but much of Mr William Costello's original text. So I'm both partly disappointed here and partly pleased. There's certainly enough positive information here in the book to keep me happy. I've even directed my student Matt to buy the book. He's a pretty good fit for the system. Esp when compared to me. I have to work a little harder at the system than some.

So PLEASE TAKE NOTE!
The 2nd edition is missing a significant portion of the book's second half.

@Kehaulani
It's not substantially different. Other than one or two "forwards" or comments from related authorities discussing Roy Stevens (or his predecessor William Costello) it is word for word the same as the 1971 first edition. As I said (above) the only and I mean ONLY changes to the text occur in the title. Which p's me off a trifle. I'm a purist I guess. To repeat,

The original, 1971 first edition title was,

"The Stevens- Costello Triple C Embouchure Technique and Embouchure Self-Analysis".

Yet fer some reason the 2006 SECOND edition just says,

"Embouchure Trouble & Self Analysis".

Which I don't like. For starters? It's too negative. Why insert the word "trouble" into a self-help book? "Oh my God I'm having embouchure TROUBLE". This is the way the brain thinks.

As for me? I personally don't care because I was going to buy the book anyway. Regardless if they titled it "Fractured Fairy Tales" or "Tales of Robin Hood". It's still some of the best reading for trumpet that I've ever seen. This'll be my third copy I've worn out.

Originally the only way that Roy Stevens advertised his system was in a really tiny ad in "Downbeat Magazine". A buddy of mine from Central Mass caught the ad and bought the book. Later taking lessons direct from Roy Stevens waaay back in the day. Otherwise I'd never have heard of it.

This friend excelled rapidly. Developed a consistent G/DHC soon afterwards by following the book as best he could. But my friend was and may still be a total fanatical trumpet geek. He soon burned out his throat from a nasty neck puff issue. I mean the guy would blow double Cs all day long and it really put a load in his larnyx. Or rather his "Adam's Apple". It was an ugly neck puff unlike the more common full throat "bullfrog" like puff. Like the one that I used to have.

But my friend is kinda on the short side. Whereas those cats with the full sized puffs are taller folks like me. Im six ft five in and if I let it? My throat would swell out to close to 20 inches in circumference. As did Bill Chase's neck puff. Or his veritable "Italian twin" Lin Biviano.

Bill and Lin used to so closely resemble each other in size, hairstyle and even playing that we folks from around Boston (which was the area where they're both from!) used to say they were "separated at birth".

I got to ask Bill about my own neck puff when I was still a pup. About seventeen years old in 1972. A precious memory lemme tell ya. So I went to a brass clinic in Andover, MA that autumn. During the Q & A time I told Bill that I was concerned about my neck puff.

Well the irony here was that at the time I had no idea that Bill had one of the biggest neck puffs in the business. He told me,

"My neck just goes out".

Like there wasn't anything that he could do about it. So using his guidance I continued to allow my own throat to expand when I played in the upper register for another 25 years. Then I finally hurt myself but fixed it fairly quick with some isometric exercises designed to both identify and strengthen those throat muscles which can prevent an expanding neck.

But back to the book. Probably the most fascinating thing I've learned about the book in more recent years is that its editor "Dr William Moriarty" is still alive! Or at least he was alive when the 2nd edition was published in 2006. Also, Moriarty was the real author of the book. He did all the typing and editing anyway. Working directly off of Roy Steven's dictation. He explains this in the very last video found on the "Roy Stevens Tribute Page". That video is among the most instructive ones I've ever seen and that's even including all the truly good videos published by Roy Roman. Also on same page

@Dr-Mark
Okay when I have more time I will re-read your post and quote. At this point I wanted to bring up a piece of news that trumps even the words you posted.

First thing this morning I found a copy of the re-released or 2nd edition of the Stevens-Costello Triple C Embouchure Technique in my mailbox!!! (:. I can't describe how pleased this made me. Not that I hadn't seen it before. As I had studied it while in college. On the side. Not part of my curriculum which was pretty standard college or conservatory type of study.
And I had once picked up a free PDF file in the late 90s from a generous music librarian from N Texas State.

Comments: although the 2nd edition changed the title? The text is still the same. The new edition calls itself,

"Embouchure Trouble and Self Analysis"

However the first edition was titled,

"Stevens- Costello Triple C Embouchure Technique and Embouchure Self-Analysis".

Small matter the title change. And even though I'd used the original title when I'd asked Allan Colin to ship the book? He knew exactly what to send. Because after all,

Allan knew Roy Stevens personally and Roy only wrote this one book. But if anyone has question about what the hell the correct book is? Either title should work. Esp if you order from Allan at Charles Colin such as I did.

Now! To get to the belly of the beast. Disclaimer:

I don't take any issue with those who follow the "tongue arch for range theory". Aka "syllables" such as Aaah, Eeee Iiich" etc. When I once played Maggio? I used the syllables. My range was pretty good. Above average.

Then when I changed over to Stevens? I did not use syllables. This is where I currently am. Going into my fifth month of Stevens system.

But please allow me to quote the old dog Roy Stevens himself. Page 15, second edition, QUOTE!

"I am vehemently opposed to the 'common ground argument' of the (EEE) action of the tongue for the upper register combined with the relative jaw motion because:

A. Raising the tongue to the EE position raises the floor of the oral cavity and thus cuts the oral cavity approximately in half.

Result 1: Vibration is inhibited and muffled in the smaller chamber, leaving a smaller, basic sound to be amplified by the instrument.

Result 2: EEE position of tongue prevents cheek muscles from fighting or resisting air column in the mouth cavity because the air column doesn't reach the cheek muscle. Lip tensions therefore become strained.

Result 3: EEE position of tongue causes air leakage through nasal passage, reducing needed compression at the lips (I would say that 100% of the players that articulate EEE leak air through the nose at the peak of their range"...

End quote of Roy Stevens up to that point...

Okay I'm going to stop here for the time being. In part because Stevens goes on for about another 300+ words. And also because while I agree that on the Stevens method it's simply unnecessary to use syllables or a tongue arch? I don't see the described activity as being quite the "boogie man" who Stevens claims it is.

I've also posted the statement because it does tend to plainly show that at least one method of playing the trumpet has produced some incredibly strong high note trumpet players who indeed have never found it necessary to utilize a mouth cavity restriction. In other words,

We know for a fact that Roy Stevens 4 to 5 octave range (not using pedal tones!) And Roy Roman's similar range didn't require a mouth cavity restriction. Nor did numerous first call union trumpet players out of New York City going back to the 1930s thru 1970s.

Again,

These statements from Stevens do not necessarily invalidate you from using syllables on your method. Although the chances may be that the raised tongue is anathema to Stevens-Costello.

Lastly,

I'm not in complete agreement with some of Stevens reasoning related to the loss of space in the oral cavity due to raising the tongue. I do not necessarily think that moving the tongue upwards reduces the sound or tone quality. I feel this way because air is very "slippery". It can travel through much smaller spaces than water. We can compress air but not water. In fact my main argument against the "faster air" concept is that you may wag your tongue high & low all day long but the air will just sneak around the side of the tongue.

As for what the tongue arch really does?

I believe that by arching the tongue a trumpet player is inadvertently applying a small tongue pressure to one or both lips. That this application of tongue pressure secures a boost of support to one or both lips. Being slightly strengthened? A more stable upper register appears.

However the trumpet player mistakes "cause for effect". Probably because when we whistle we often change the pitch by a tongue arch. However this involves a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SET OF PHYSICAL PARAMETERS.

The tongue arch for range theorists are correct in stating that their tongue does help them. However their explanation is incorrect.

In the final analysis I consider their reasoning moot. Or maybe their explanation is moot. As the "why" really doesn't matter..

@Dr-Mark
I agree that a video would be preferable. That said I've never challenged the concept of those who are happy with their usage of the tongue arch. It's a non-issue to me. If it works for you and you like it? Great! More power to ya.

As perhaps you may have noticed I'm in a major rebuilding phase. Since suffering a nasty dental mishap about 20 months ago I've now taken on the Stevens system approach full time. Frankly my chops have much to learn but they are learning very fast. After I changed over to Stevens last November it was like I was ten years old and never played the trumpet before. My chops actually felt a little numb like they did when I was in the 4th grade beginner trumpet class.

Little things like merely articulating a top line F natural was very tricky. I'm still kinda weak there but again, improving rapidly. My conservative estimate of my recovery is that by the end of this summer I oughta be able to produce a credible video. Then by the following summer I should play about as well as I once did before the injury but with a more secure upper register. That and better ease of playing.

As it stands now I'm going through much of the same exercises as I did in college years ago. Back when I was studying the more conventional or "Evolutionary Process" as described by Roy Roman. Roman isn't completely opposed to the conventional or "evolutionary approach". And he says so in his videos. What does appear to greatly concern him are the multitude of trumpet players whom he claims are held back by playing "incorrectly".

And therein lies a term that probably upsets more brass teachers than anything or anyone else. However Roman certainly has the chops to back it all up. He also has the personal history of someone who had terrible chop problems but was swiftly fixed by the Stevens System. A year after starting he found himself. Playing for kings.Or at least the President of the United States. Roy Roman's resume is thus impressive as Hell. In other words he was just another one of the multitudes of "duffers" who couldn't play high F to save his life. But through proper coaching directly from Roy Stevens he soon became the utter monster player whom he now is.

In fact if you want to see a video of someone who does not use a tongue arch in any register? The best reference I know of are the Roy Roman videos. Either the ones shown on You Tube or better yet the "Roy Stevens Tribute Page". Sorry, can't paste links but you'll find it.

Roman describes himself as applying "90% of the Stevens-Costello system" in his method. However to my knowledge he's actually 100% into it. Everyone really ought to watch those videos. Extremely impressive. And you wouldn't have believed how powerful the students who studied seriously with Roy Stevens were. They were so strong it made a friend of mine almost cry. He wanted to give up playing for a brief period lol. Those cats who studied with Stevens were like a whole row of Rashan Ross types. Virtually "sitting on double C's" with triple C capacity.

If someone infers that I'm a cocky SOB? All that I can say is that you're entirely mistaken. The last thing that I wanted to do was stir up the old contentious issue of whether the tongue arch works or not. However when you view the Roy Roman videos you're seeing the man play all three and a half of his octaves with no discernable tongue arch movement at all I think that Roman mentions this. However I don't think that he tells his students to not use the thing. Or at least he doesn't make a big deal out of it.

In my own life I've tried various chop systems. This recent change to the Stevens will surely be my last. If only because I can't play any other way. It also only uses about half the energy to blow a high F as my former Maggio type setting did.

When I used to blow on those puckered "Downstream" embouchures I did employ a tongue arch. In fact I used a raised tongue movement on both of the puckered receded jaw setting AND a more forward jaw setting. As both puckered out systems actually were helped by the movement of my tongue during the execution of interval changes. Particularly when slurring.

About a little over a week ago I ordered another copy of the "Stevens-Costello Triple C Embouchure Technique and Embouchure Self Analysis" Colin Brass has it for sale. And I gave Allan Colin my credit card number. Nice guy. We chatted a but. Very knowledgeable. He actually knew Roy Stevens back in the day. Well after my complete book comes i will copy and paste what Stevens said about the tongue arch. That's a promise.

"All paths end in a tie". Maynard

PS: I've had to carve a different kind of mouthpiece to get the Stevens System to finally work for me. That and make good substantial progress. However the mouthpiece I made doesn't look so good on the outside. Not on camera. So I've invested considerably in a lathe and a drill press. The drill press because I prefer a couple of asymmetric little "diivots" on the piece. Also?
Y
I like the bottom edge of my piece flat. Like close to straight across from "7 o'clock to 5 o'clock'. Then I like the top of my piece a tad deeper than the bottom. The squared off portion on the bottom makes it easier to locate the preferred position of the mouthpiece on my chops. Also, its a Very large inner rim dimension on a slightly shallow cup. And with a well rounded but narrow rim contour. My guess is that others would hate it. And yet I've learned so much from it. Just as soon as I build a duplicate mouthpiece in brass and it looks better? Eye appeal and all that PLUS aftsr II improve a little bit more? I will look into hosting a video. Thank you.

You may feel free to accept or reject any idea or concept of mine as you will. I'm the last person who wants to appear like a dictator. I'm just saying that I'm finally having the time if my life I can't wait for tomorrow because I want to practice even longer and better. Each new day brings better results.

Winner of nine Grammy awards, Herb Alpert turned 85 years old today. Herb and his Tijuana Brass actually out-sold the Beatles in US record sales during the year of 1966. His A & M record label eventually sold to Sony Entertainment for 3/4ers of a billion dollars.

Excellent taste. Truly great tone. The best compliment to hear is when somebody compares you favorably to good ol Herb's golden tone. I was lucky enough to live and listen to him back in the day..

@Dr-Mark

At one time I both developed the "syllables for register" technique. Maggio spent a lot of time developing these principles in his book. And the Maggio system was my first book I studied related to high note development.

Initially I found it helpful to use a different syllable when changing from low to the middle register. Particularly when slurring those kinds of intervals found in bugle calls. Ie
Low C to G or third space C
Second line G to third space C & E top space. Again, this all applied to when I used the Maggio model of embouchure.

Other places where I'd used a tongue arch movement was when playing some of those tricky Baroque style trills. As is common in Bach and even the Haydn Trumpet concerto. Like the one that trills in between the D natural to E natural above. I'd sorta "wag my tongue" in concert with the finger movement and this helped me perform the trill. Mercifully I soon got an E flat trumpet that changed the interval a fourth lower to just A natural to B nat. Regardless, when I played the Maggio system I would use syllables in the lower and middle registers. In order to facilitate distinct interval shifts. However as far as using it in the extreme upper register?

Not so much. By the time I'd hit a high C or better I then reasoned that my horn, mouthpiece and embouchure already had a lot of resistance. Plus blowing say an F above High C just seemed to involve keeping my vibrating surfaces loose, the other related embouchure/face muscles FIRM and putting a ton of air pressure behind all of this. It seemed both unhelpful and illogical to raise my tongue just because I was playing above the staff. Maybe I'd use it a bit while trying to copy Bill Chase's fantastic "shakes" but otherwise? I never employed it for a register change.

Then while early in my college career I ran into another music major who'd studied directly with Roy Stevens. His name was Richard. He and I worked together. Sharing notes and ideas. I admired his infinite range. As he played a solid G/double C with his horn RESTING ONLY ON THE PALM OF HIS HAND!

And he admired my big sound on high F and G. I believe that my friend played loud enough for most ensemble work. Even lead. But it wasn't commanding. Not at the time. I heard tell that he eventually fixed all of this and became a good lead player. With endless endurance and infinite register.

Way back when he told me that Roy Stevens did not use the tongue arch or syllables. Richard went on to say that after he had switched over to the Stevens method that he too found no value at all to raising his tongue. Instead of doing this he just did as Roy directed him and merely raised the pressure of air in his lungs. That and then firmed up his mouth corners simultaneously. Or he'd raise the air pressure and mildly close his teeth.

The closure of teeth in the Stevens system is largely discouraged except as absolutely necessary. 1/4 of an inch separation can take the Stevens system player from Low C to E/high C. That's what I was told and the book directs. Only when well above high C does the Stevens embouchure require a slight jaw closure and the teeth become separated by 3/16ths of an inch.

I've been mentoring a young man on lead playing and just a couple weeks ago we had him experiment with the Stevens system. OMG! The boy seems a darn good fit for it. He's not just squeaking "statics" or "cyclonics" as the book directs but actually popping some fine high notes. However?

He tends to close his teeth when playing above High C. The tone always cuts out of course. The Stevens system is about identifying defects in embouchure and air supply. Then correcting them. So I had my young friend play his G/high C again & again until he stopped closing his teeth. Once he conquered this natural mistake? He started blow high G's at will. Up nearly another octave too. Not bad for a chop system he had never tried before last Valentine's Day!

As per my own relationship with Stevens? I too have found the tongue arch absolutely unnecessary. Not even helpful.
Best regards all!

@Dr-Mark
Okay I'm going to offer just one rebuttal on the tongue arch for range and or trilling idea. Not that I expect to change your mind. As that's a little like taking sides on a contentious political argument. So I've found. Tongue arch for range practitioners are an adamant lot. I don't want to take issue with them because for the kinds of embouchures they use? Tongue arch seems work pretty well.

Facts and science won't sway a person who's mind is already made up anyway.

So feel free to use your tongue any way you like. However in the Stevens system I've found that it does not work to any significant degree. I've chatted with other Stevens system practitioners who've said the same thing too. At present Roy Roman, one of the most distinguished artists who both uses and advocates Stevens does not speak of the tongue arch.

Roman is smarter than me and is wisely avoiding mentioning the tongue arch. Probably because he doesn't want to enter into contentious debate. However I know for a fact that he doesn't use it. Because Roman is an exact follower of Stevens-Costello. It has worked extremely well for Roy since he changed to it back in the 1970s.

And I know for a fact that Roy Stevens considered the constriction of the mouth cavity by the tongue to be anathema to his method. He even once described the tongue arch as possibly contributing to my neck puff. Although I later disproved that theory to at least my own satisfaction.

I know that when I used to play Maggio on receded jaw chops that syllable use had some value for my production of lip trills and interval changes. But having crossed over into the world of Stevens-Costello? It is of no help. It's just not necessary. If I want to execute a lip trill I move my jaw ever so slightly up and down. Another way to quickly occilate a pitch is to "shake" the horn slightly at the mouthpiece.

Roy Stevens used to walk over to his students and perform a test to see if they'd gotten a good start. Remember in the Stevens method one plays a specific way. Not much room for personal changes. So Roy would first direct his student to blow a high C.

This a fairly easy thing to do on his method. While sustaining this high C Roy would put his hand on the mouthpiece receiver of the student and move it up and down slightly. All during this maneuver the student would continue holding the high C. Making sure not to stop the air. What Roy was listening for was to check if his up & down movement on the mouthpiece would make the sustained high C turn into a trill. Or conversely if it would cut the whole tone off.

If the tone cut out? The student was doing something wrong. But if instead the up & down movement changed the tone into a lip trill?

The student had passed his most important test. In fact one cat who was highly well trained at turning a physical movement of the mouthpiece into a shake or lip trill was Louis Armstrong. That guy was a classic example of the Stevens system although he probably didn't know it. Lots of gifted trumpet players use the Stevens system naturally. Brisbois obviously one of them. As was Roy Stevens himself.

According to Dr William Moriarty "Roy was a self-taught trumpet player". Having said that? Stevens also understood that his natural method aligned very well with the concepts launched by his predecessor William Costello. Obviously the method wasn't called "Stevens-Costello" at first but only the "Costello method". In fact you'll still hear a few oldtimers like Bobby Shew refer to it by name. Bobby calls it "a Costello thing" over on that Bud Brisbois tribute page at Seley Music.

Again I'm hardly the best example of a Stevens system player but this is largely because I've only recently found the missing link to the Stevens system. Had I found this missing element forty years ago? I probably would have had a far more successful career than I did.@8

@Dr-Mark

The tongue arch matter has been s contentious issue among the trumpet community almost since valves were invented. I don't wish to enter into the arena of that discussion except to say that the Stevens Costello book does not advocate any arch or purposely raised tongue in it's system.

I agree that by closing the jaw it will automatically raise the tongue. This isn't however anything more than a natural product of physics. Also Stevens was adamant about not closing the teeth excessively. The majority of playing in the system uses a 1/4 inch separation of the teeth. And this separation stays very close to constant except when the Stevens type of player soars well above high C. Here the gap closes first to 3/16ths an inch. Then while hitting the triple register closes to 1/8th.

Stevens students are taught to be very aware of the proper separation of their teeth and check it frequently in a mirror often clipped onto a music stand. In order to gauge the separation a wooden coffee stirrer is the favorite "dipstick" of measure.

The student works with his mirror often. Learning to freeze his jaw in position after playing upwards glissandos. Then with his jaw held in same place as it was while he was playing? Checks his teeth gap with the coffee stirrer.

I'm a big fan of coffee anyway. Often brewing a batch during my warm up. Like now fer instance.

Another beauty of Stevens system is how easy it is to change register. Without the closing off of the teeth the tone stays free and easy. At first we work mostly on the proper formation of the embouchure. One of the ways that I know mine is correct is because I do not need to close my teeth until playing notes significantly above high C. All the notes from third space C to high E (three ledger lines) are played with that 1/4 inch gap between the two rows o f teeth. It's a gas. No tongue arch required.

My own experimentation with the tongue arch occurred back when I was young and playing a receded jaw Maggio "syllable" system. Perhaps a tongue movement really. is necessary in the receded jaw setting. Prior to shifting over to the Stevens approach I had worked with syllables

"Ahh" "Oooh" "Eee" and "Iiiiich" for a number of years . While I did have good range I didn't have great range. Since shifting iver to the radically different Stevens approach I've found a tongue arch to have no effect on producing intervals at all.

@Dr-GO
"MD" as in "medical doctor".

Took me a minute of being puzzled before I could figure out why you thought I was discussing Maryland. A place which oddly enough was where I started playing trumpet. But it's been 50+ years since I left.

Then it dawned on me! You inferred that I meant "MD" the 'state OF'. No. I just meant "doctor".

@Bob-Pixley said in Ed Tarr, RIP:

Just heard that Ed Tarr passed away this morning. Great trumpet historian and natural trumpet pioneer/performer of our time.

Very sorry to hear this. Actually I'm kinda stunned. Because I'd very recently thought about him after not thinking of him much since college. In fact I'd done a wikipedia search on Tarr only this past weekend. Just to see if he was still among the quick.

His natural horn was fantastic. As was all that he did. And who could forget that "cookie cutter" piece he was using back in the 1970s? I used to think that the Schilke 22 was difficult to support but Ed played a No 24!! An artist model. Those Germans like the roar of that "Teutonic sound".

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

@Sound-Advice said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

I have never posted any rude, derogatory or mean statements about another musician in my life.

---

Wow! that is nothing like me. Musicians tend to piss me off quicker than most categories of people.
I've had musicians say "That's hate music" when I listen to Marylin Manson,
I've had musicians call me a freak because I can play in the upper register.
I've had musicians tell me to use a "bigger mouthpiece"
I've had musicians I've hired show up for a show drunk, or wearing flipflops to a fancy gig.
I've had musicians say that what I'm listening to isn't music.
I've had musicians say "I don't like Country Music"
I've had musicians say that music theory is to music as sausage is to food. I like sausage, but I don't want to see how it's made.
I've had musicians call something an improv solo when all they did was to read and play the transcribed solo of someone famous.
I've fired an elephant's bodyweight in musicians who would show up unprepared for a show or wouldn't play stuff the way I told them to.
I've used every derogatory term, slur, and or cuss word to describe, admonish, embarrass, belittle, or simply insult the army of asshole lackluster musicians (and or their Mothers) who feel their knowledge is God given.
Yep, musicians tend to piss me off faster than most groups.

Mark, MD.
Glad we've got some doctors on the forum.

The key word referenced in my statement is "never POSTED" any derogatory, hurtful remark etc. With the described qualifier my words are basically true. I don't blast someone while online.

But back when I was on the road? Now that's another story. Hell some of the guys would have vicious arguments right on stage. With audience present. Once in a while I'd refuse to turn the other cheek. Our own drummer who talked back to my wife. Told her the "shut up"... Dec 1977 just before Christmas gig.

Popped the stupid guy in the eye. Not such an unusual response. Except that I was driving all of us thru the Pocono mtns at the time. Strangest feeling. Sure scared the other riders half to death. We were ALMOST on the black ice at the time.

Being to my right, and since I'm right handed I just backhanded the old boy a number of times. Right in his nose wham bamm bamm bam BAM
Think I broke his glasses. But his was the absolute DUMBEST action I've ever seen someone do before. Hint:

"Ya just don't insult a man's wife while in his presence".

The condition leaves the married man no other option except to tag the offender a good one. Had I just resolved the matter amicably? I'd have never heard the end of it from my wife.

@FranklinD
I'm going break one of my rules and respond to a fairly obvious troll post. To the gallery, this post of Franklin's is what's called a

"Concern troll post". Let's call his type a C/T for short.

The C/T fakes concern for the well being of the world but his true goal is to demonize the individual whom he's having a hissy fit with. From his words which I'll only do him the honor of reading once I've decided that he fits the definition of the "concern troll" like he wrote the book on it.

As if I had the influence to poison the well of discourse here? He flatters me. I couldn't possibly have so much power.

And as for a "dangerous obsession for high notes"? This is a term I've heard applied over the decades at various times. Almost always delivered by someone who either doesn't like high notes played on the trumpet OR someone who's never played a solid F/high C in his life.

And other than taking Franklin to task here (which I must assume several others have likely done before in response to his negativity) I have never posted any rude, derogatory or mean statements about another musician in my life. And even in this particular post I believe that my words while perhaps firm or maybe even a bit stern are certainly not inappropriate. Nor personal etc.

What we're seeing from the old boy here is called "projection". He attempts to cleanse his own being by wiping his own dirt off on me.

Hey folks,

Feel free to accept or reject ANY idea of mine. Take what you want and leave the rest. Or leave all of it. Just like a taco with too much "savage jalapeno sauce" poured over on it". But like I said, if I were a gambling man I would bet money that this poor guy has never played a decent lead trumpet part in his life. To this I think that we can blame at least in part the evolutionary or conventional approach to learning trumpet.

In the evolutionary approach the student is taught the lower and easier tones first. He and even his teacher not understanding that the student's individual progress will likely result in a severely limited range. Why? Because his chops will resemble what Bill Moriarty would call and compare to a poorly assembled clarinet mouthpiece, ligature and reed.

Some trumpet students will succeed with the evolutionary approach. Yet this is due largely to the way they bring their mouth, jaw and lips into the process. They will unknowingly follow a correct application of physical law.

More likely however will be that the young trumpet player will fall into the rut of a limited embouchure setting. As most do including even myself up until just this past year.

Now it does take more concentration for the student to learn the Stevens embouchure. No doubt about it. And perhaps some shouldn't try it although I'm not sure exactly here. As if we trace my own progress we find a person with functionally dead chops late just this past year. Yet from just some patient work over the past four months the Stevens method has allowed me fantastic progress. From little squeaks to an apparent 3 & 1/2 octave range and growing rapidly day after day.

Is a lousy four months such a huge sacrifice? And what about a comparable person using the Evolutionary method of long tones, low notes and it's emphasis on articulation. Would this person be any more advanced in his technique than I'd be iver the same four month period?

Perhaps he'd be a little better at articulation. Because Roy Stevens used to discourage excessive tonguing on his beginners. Due to the young embouchure not being strong enough to retain it's structure. And what is the likely downside of the evolutionary approach?

A lifetime of mediocre range. I have no problem with trumpets who have no desire to play in the upper register. Obviously I know many of them. As I'm sure that you do too. After all Herb Alpert outsold the Beatles in 1966. At least in record sales inside the USA. He never ventured much above high C.

Yet Herb also lost his chops circa about 1970. I heard that he went to study with Carmine Caruso for a spell. Didn't or couldn't play for a considerable period of time. And Herb didn't burn his chops out playing high notes either. Because he couldn't play them.

So the risk of harming oneself exists much more in playing the Evolutionary system than it does Stevens. It a method where only the minimal amount of mouthpiece contact pressure is ever applied in practice.

But after all is said and done? I probably should have just ignored our Concern Troll. As I'm sure everyone else here does too. Franklin I feel no animosity towards you at all. In fact?

I feel very sorry for you. Cheer up buddy. Join a church. Or take an exercise class. Get a better perspective on the world than the sad one you display.

@Kehaulani said in Lifetime quest finally paying off!:

This is also a part of The Balanced Embouchure, called "Roll In".

My question is, In the Steven's system, does one use this Roll-In embouchure for all tessituras or does one use it only for high notes?

I have a mild disagreement with the roll-in procedure associated with Stevens Kehaulani. But this is true of all books directing the usage of a roll-in.

It's my judgement that all rolling in done with the upper lip must be done prior to starting the air. Because if one tries to roll in the upper lip "on the fly" so to speak?

The tone diminishes substantially. In fact it'll often cut out at the moment the upper lip tries to roll in! I've tried this many times yet never been able to sustain a quality tone.

Yet the lower lip does and can roll-in on the fly! That said? I don't use much lower lip roll in on the Stevens embouchure. Because it's becoming so doggone efficient that using much of a lower lip inversion tends to be excessive.

Basically I just push more air pressure and firm my mouth corners and up we go!. This works to about high D to E flat/high C (not concert pitches but for the B flat horn btw).

Above high D? I keep mouth corners as firm as they were and JUST SLIGHTLY CLOSE TEETH by my jaw movement. Was only yesterday that I noticed this. My teeth were following the Stevens system directives perfectly. Staying open about 1/4 inch apart until lifting the pitch to high D.

This was a most liberating moment yesterday. It just then dawned on me that without a doubt I was certainly catching on to the system. That everything Stevens-Costello ever said finally made sense.

But as per exactly how much roll in the book prescribes? Give me abt a week to answer that query. As i had to order a new copy of Roy's book from Colin Music just yesterday.

Roy Roman describes a roll-in in his Stevens system videos. Only he uses the term "invert the lips". And he makes the same mistake that I think plenty of others do by suggesting that "both lips must roll-in" while the air is already blowing.

Indeed I'm certain that only the lower lip can perform that inversion after the sound has been begun.