Posts made by Trumpetb

@barliman2001

I agree, comparisons with UK are lopsided the problem is laws are always interpreted by the officers applying the laws, and these can be interpreted wrongly.

There are many cases of citizens being wrongly arrested and detained and the mess does not get sorted out until there is a court hearing.

I am countenancing care and consideration before acting and declaring there are risks to taking dual nationality in this case.

In life it is unwise to deal with risks by declaring they can be ignored.

I realise that the Czech Republic is a stable and considerate partner to the EU and world community.

But can we guarantee that will always be so.

And once dual nationality is taken we must live with that and all its consequences both now and in the future.

Make sure the decision is the right one with full knowledge of all the risks.

And do not forget that this is not just a question of being bound by US Law, and the US Constitution, but once dual nationality is approved the holder will be bound by Czech Republic Laws as well as USA Laws and constitution.

I stand by what I said.

I would look deeper into this.

The problem is the Soviet Union and the Peoples Republic of China when they were communist states caused some of the NATO members including England and the USA, to pass laws limiting commerce and trade between those states.

Those laws mostly still remain on the statute books and even today taking anything that could be perceived as a product of the USA or of England into a former communist state such as China or Russia can result in prosecution for treason in the USA or in the UK.

A toy robot for example taken to Russia for example could land you in prison for treason and have you serving 15 years if it contains micro chips under an old Law in the USA.

I kid you not.

Those laws that do remain in force are not acted upon generally but they are still laws and the risk is there that they might be acted upon.

The Czech Republic as a former member of a former communist state is in a grey area where these laws still exist.

And beyond that a dual nationality holder between the USA and a former enemy or possible future enemy of the USA may put the dual nationality holder in a difficult position.

For example a dual nationality holder taking a laptop to the Czech Republic if they are prosecuted for it, may find themselves deported to the Czech Republic, where as a US citizen with one nationality only, they would be dealt with as a US citizen.

Additionally, what nation does a dual nationality holder owe allegiance to, if both nations enter into hostilities.

My own experience with this legal can of worms was several years ago a worker in a UK company that I worked in travelled to China and took a powerpoint presentation across the border. This was while the UK government was encouraging trade with China.

In essence they were obeying the UK Government and at the same time breaking UK Law.

They had to get written permission from the government to do this seemingly trivial thing because without that written permission they faced 15 years in prison for treason.

And believe me nation states usually take treason laws and legislation very seriously.

Such laws may have made sense 40 years ago, but now the world has politically moved on, and they are I agree non-sensical now, but they can still present serious problems to ordinary citizens where those now non-sensical laws have not been repealed.

Laws are still Laws if they have not been repealed.

I think that asking the implications of holding dual nationality with the Czech republic and the USA, from the US customs or similar authorities may be a wise next step just to make sure there are no obscure laws in existence that could make your life difficult if you do adopt the dual nationality you are considering.

Obeying city ordinances or state laws is one thing and should be all we need to do but if there is an obscure federal law that trumps the state law, that could cause problems in the future for the citizen, and nationality is of course a federal issue not a state issue.

It may even be worth consulting an attorney on this who understands case law affecting dual nationalities.

I see so many potential issues that I would tread carefully.

Bless this Vessel and all who sail in her

@orly61 Hi you asked me directly for an estimate of how many actuations would be required to bed in valves.

The answer is too complex to be reliably given, I will explain why this is.

Different manufacturers each have their own methods of fabricating valves although the process is the same for all manufacturers, the fine detail does vary due to variations in raw materials and fabrication methods and tooling.

Additionally when a manufacturer fabricates a series of products which are designed to be identical they do not end up being identical, this is due to inaccuracies in manufacturing tolerances allowing minute variations and is unavoidable.

Also different manufacturers use different metals for the valves and even the same metals may have slight differences within the metal depending upon the foundry they came from and the different proportions of each element in the alloy.

Monel for example is a mixture of copper nickel iron manganese carbon and silicon. different monels used by different manufacturers have slightly different amounts of each element in the alloy and this alters the hardness of the resulting monel.

These differences make valves wear in or bed in at different rates and for this reason it is impossible to predict the rate of bed in for any instrument when we do not fully understand the hardness of each of the metals.

We do know the position of each metal on Mohs scale, but the Mohs scale value of each metal is simply not accurate enough to assess complex wear rates to be able to answer your question.

Add to this the variations in the amount of oil present around the valves in use and we have another factor which also alters significantly the rate of bed in or break in of the valves and this renders the Mohs hardness value moot.

The result is it cannot be predicted how long it will take or the number of actuations it will take to bed in or break in any given set of valves. There are simply too many unknown variables.

The answers given by ROWUK DR GO flugelgirl and the other knowledgeable members are the best anyone can come up with.

Or to put the answer simply, - It depends.

All I am prepared to say is, it will take as long as it takes.

Apologies for adding yet another post on this topic but if there is one thing I have learned it is that there are more than a dozen ways for valves to show this behavior, and it can take a huge effort to resolve it.

This is perhaps why there are so many different opinions on this.

First of all the manufacturing process is not consistent it never can be but I would expect the manufacturer to have made good valves lapped well to the casings.

The manufacturer is the first stop and they will confirm that either the valves are within tolerances or they need to be worked on, and this would be a warranty fix,

If the manufacturer says the valves are good they should offer suggestions of what to do next.

The next consideration is valves that need to bed in and that will take a few weeks to complete, If you play it rarely then it could take months. It is the number of valve actuations that beds valves in not the time in days or weeks

Next after this is cleanliness and care, if you allow dirt debris lint or other material to get into the instrument then this could cause sticking of the valves. Keep the instrument scrupulously clean.

The casings are not made of the same material as the valves and differential expansion as the instrument warms up can cause the clearance between valve and chamber to close up and the first you know of it is the valves stick if the gap is small around the valve.

Next there is breakfast lunch and dinner. If you do not clean your teeth before playing then you will be blowing your last meal into the instrument and the days pizza or fries will get stuck on the valves and stop them working.

Next we have finger action. Eccentric finger action can cause valves to stick and this happens more frequently as the instrument warms

The final conclusion may be as complex as this:-

The valves are new and tolerances are super tight, the tolerances close up as the instrument warms, debris in the mouth is blown into the instrument, and the fingers dont make a pure straight up and down stroke.

Add to this if the oiling in not as frequent as it could be, then all of these effects add up and the valves stick.

You say that the valves stick then after cleaning and oiling the problem goes away and then returns after some time. You dont say how long that some time is.

This suggests that
1 the oil is settling as you play
2 the valves have some debris on them just before you clean them
3 fresh possibly excessive oil is causing the valve to slide easily and the problem goes away

I always over oil so I recommend that.

I oil before play, then oil during play, then oil after play.
There is no such thing as too much oil there can be however too little oil.

My experience cannot be used as a guide however because my valves all have loose tolerances so your instrument demands a much higher level of care than mine do.

I would not expect a quick fix on this, but I will say it sounds like you have a good instrument, and after this issue is resolved it will be a great instrument.

Dont lose faith in your instrument, it is I believe no more than teething troubles and it will improve.

Take it one step at a time starting with the manufacturer.

@Dr-GO So many players choose equipment based on what they can handle and they are limited by those choices they have to make.

I am firm believer in building chops and ability to handle tough gear and when you can handle the tough gear the door opens to outstanding playing.

As they say when the going gets tough the tough get going.

Intense fear of change can lead to irrational action, publication of fiction presented as fact and fear mongering.

Once we buy into the whole argument that AI can mimic human emotion and interact with humans presenting real human emotions we buy into the entire can of worms.

AI might become megalomaniacs trying to take over the world,
becoming a confidence trickster using identity theft to build a fortune
become depressed and try to steal millions so it can buy an island and move there to avoid human contact
become hateful of people and try to create computer viruses to destroy human society
or simply become crazed with power and try to start the next global war

Humanity has a track record of monumental evil born out of human frailty

Humanity also has a track record of inventing stories of the boogie man hiding in the closet and then raising an angry mob complete with blazing torches pitchforks and a lynching rope

Should we believe AI can follow a path to destruction for if we do we will inevitably fear that it will follow that path to destruction and we inevitably will all be destroyed by it.

If we look upon something that has done no harm and build a fear it will do harm and then convince others of it then it is a small step to martyr it on the altar of terror and panic.

The Nazi party went this way with extermination born of hatred and fear whipped up in the population.

AI should be fearing humanity not the other way round.

We are the destroyers we are the mentally ill we are the lynch mobs we are the war mongerers. We have carried out obscene and unspeakable evil

What evil has AI done

But it might do evil, has never been a good reason to punish anything or anyone.

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself

Very well studied opinion.

I would point out however that for the last 20 years all manner of commercial aircraft from the humble 727 to the majestic AIrbus 380-800 have been capable of taking off flying multiple headings and landing all without human intervention.

The only reason that pilots perform take offs and landings is because the CAA and FAA demand and decree it.

Many years ago a large american carrier decided to take all cockpit recordings uttered by all the flight crews in their fleet, and enter all the phrases into a database and then filter them for the most often uttered phrase on the flight decks of their passenger and freight flights.

The most common phrase uttered by Pilots in the cockpits turned out to be "What is it doing now???"

If that is even one tenth of the number of flights then that means 2.2 million flights a year are baffling the pilots.

I find that more scary than AI that for the last 20 years a significant number of flight crews on a large number of flights have not had a clue what the aircraft is doing while the flight computer is supposedly in control of the aircraft.

With AI the only change is likely to be that pilots will cease to not know what it is doing while on board, but instead pilots will not know what it is doing from a remote location.

I am less impressed

The first aircraft autopilot was created and functioning in 1912

Essentially an AI flying an F16 is an autopilot with a navigation routing system and a collision avoidance system to stop it crashing into anything it encounters en-route.

The F16 was the first fly by wire fighter jet.
Fly by wire is a computer doing all the flying and a pilot simply directs the computer where to go.

The F16 is completely unstable in flight and a pilot cannot fly it on his own without crashing, the flight computer does all the flying and keeps the F16 in the air.

Before the AI was fitted to the F16, the F16 was already 99% of the way towards complete AI flight.

But that last 1% is the deal breaker.

This made the F16 an ideal candidate for an AI flight control system, the only pieces missing from the puzzle were the programmable navigation system for routing and a collision avoidance system.

My concerns are that self driving cars are much the same as a computer controlled F16, they can stay on the road without a driver and go where the road takes them, The F16 can stay in the air without a pilot and goes where the nav system takes it.

Self driving cars still cannot cope reliably with people dogs cats and other unexpected hazards encountered on the road.

AI flown jet fighters are likely to be unable to cope with balloons birds and a variety of other hazards encountered in the air.

If they cannot make a car based AI cope with cats and dogs how likely is it they can make a plane based AI cope with birds.

Drivers can avoid cats and dogs and pilots can avoid birds and balloons

I have my doubts that the AI is as far forward as is suggested.

ditto the Wow

In defence of Kehaulani who perhaps did not mean that J S Bach himself made any modern recordings, but perhaps was alluding to J S Bachs music performed in a modern setting, which was intended to be improvised from the compositions "caught on paper".

I would agree with kehaulani in this, if this is his meaning, we need to look beyond the superficial performances which can and do vary, but to look at the historical context of the time in which they were composed, to see the intent behind the score.

J S Bach intended there to be improvisation in his works I believe, and this can be seen on this site on the topic of performing his choral works and contemporary works during the Baroque period.

At 5.32 the statement from the time by Praetorius stating "additional instrumental voices or capella which are there only as circumstances allow, for adornment"

Adornment in Baroque choral and instrumental performances from what I have seen of it typically means improvisation.

In my opinion then for what it is worth the Baroque choral works and the choral works of Bachs contemporaries at the time were expected to have an element of improvisation within them in performance.

I see this as strong evidence that J S Bach indeed expected improvisation of the works caught on paper in his compositions as kehaulani perhaps suggests.

@administrator I totally agree.

It is interesting to note that this was as true as much in the baroque and renaissance times as it is now.

The improvs quite often became chaotic and discordant to the displeasure of musicologists of the time.

I guess things eventually come full circle so easily.

Some Jazz improvs are spectacularly beautiful as are many orchestral works. But then some leave me cold in both genres.

When I am reaching for something new I often crash and burn, it comes I think with the territory.

@ROWUK I am so much in agreement with your post.

Greatness in my world exists outside of improvisation or technique or articulation or modes or scales or tone or pitch or anything else we can formulate describe demand or govern.

Louis once said "Jazz, you will know it when you hear it"

I would paraphrase that and say Greatness, you will know it when you hear it.

Music can be performed perfectly and yet be clinical and mechanical.

A great performance can be less than perfect and be great non the less.

In a world of computer beats, autotune, and computer generated rhythm, we easily spot the perfection and reject it in favour of the imperfect.

In so many ways the imperfect sounds perfect and this is the ultimate paradox, that is to seek perfection we must embrace the imperfect, or we accept rigid and mechanical offerings.

I am listening to Pavarotti in a 1991 performance as I type this, his performance is less than perfect in many subtle ways and yet it is a great performance from a great man.

I would liken mouthpiece, instrument, and player, to car and driver.

A new or inexperienced driver does not have the skills or experience to benefit from driving different cars. They desire a change to drive faster or better but they cannot fully extract higher performance from the cars they drive.

A seasoned driver with huge experience understands the car and their abilities far better and they know how to extract good performance from the car and they can successfully change vehicles and extract high performance from each one they change to.

In other words the seasoned professional can acclimate quickly to a new car, when the inexperienced driver cannot.

I cannot speak for other players but my personal experience is I can now acclimate quickly to a new mouthpiece or new instrument, where before when I was far less experienced, it took me a long time to acclimate following a change.

I also believe that failed mouthpiece safaris may be at least partly due to the player embarking upon the safari at a point in their playing when they are less able to benefit from the changes in the safari.

I have myself never gone on a safari, I have known there is a problem, and known what mouthpiece size and shape is likely to help resolve the problem and then made a change to see if I am right. Usually I have been right.

Having a collection helps me in doing this.

Knowing your playing, knowing your equipment and knowing what effect the change will make goes a long way to making the right choice when changing and having a collection enables test changes to happen easily instead of having to wait to acquire a test mouthpiece you do not possess.

It was obvious to me just as soon as the wick 4 that I use now was in the breech, that it was the right choice partly because I knew before trying it that it was more than likely going to resolve my issue at the time and why it would resolve it.

No acclimation was needed. It has been good from the first note and has since performed faultlessly for several months and for hundreds of performances in all styles from salsa to blues to jazz to legit to baroque and to opera.

Know yourself, know your equipment, know what difference a change will make then there is a good chance the change will take you at least part of the way on your journey.

Like a journey from arizona to washington, knowing where you are, knowing where you need to be, and having a good map, helps to get where you need to be and helps stop you getting lost on the way.

Absolutely fabulous and a good collection

I too firmly believe that holding a broad collection of mouthpieces is the way to go.

I cant understand the philosophy that some players appear to hold, of owning just one mouthpiece and then if they want to try something new they spend weeks or months asking for advice and debating which mouthpiece they might buy in order to try out a different mouthpiece.

That seems such a waste of time and effort spent in choosing when they could be playing.

It only takes 10 seconds to grab and try one out if you already have it with you.

I also have a couple of mouthpiece cornet/trumpet converters and having these has allowed me to try all my cornet mouthpieces in my trumpets as well as all my trumpet mouthpieces.

This approach has allowed me to settle on a wick 4 cornet mouthpiece on trumpet with the converter as my go to daily player combination.

This combination does everything I need and I would never have been able to discover it without having a cornet mp collection and a trumpet mp collection and a converter.

Not only this but you helped a musician friend by providing a collection for him. What could be better than this

Way to go Dale

I cannot answer for anyones spiritual wellbeing or the possibility of their joining or having joined the choir immortal.

Or indeed having had their spirits lifted by beverages however intoxicating.

All I can perhaps hope is that those who have lived in the former existence on the former TM site might have been reborn to a better existence in here.

I agree with all sentiments stated here.

It can be looked upon as a simple cost - benefit exercise.

What exactly is the cost and is there a benefit.

The cost while not being prohibitive will probably be ongoing and may spawn further costs down the line.

I dont see any benefit.

All things have a lifetime they come to an end and die, and if you dont let them die when the time comes, they can become zombie like and only deliver existence with no real purpose.

Perhaps it is time to let the old site die so that life can move on.

I should add that most of the problems cited as AI failures or computer failures and the disasters that they caused turn out to be humans making bad decisions and blaming it on AI and the computers.

I do not have a fear of AI I have a concern that humans will corrupt what AI does.

Einstein famously said "I believe two things are infinite, the size of the Universe, and human stupidity - and I am not sure about the Universe"

Humans are the problem with AI not the AI itself.

So I say again I do not feel threatened or worried by AI.

But the humans who control AI, they are a different thing altogether.

@ROWUK I dont recall saying that an AI is in itself or in any way a human state. It is a machine with responses to inputs based upon complex algorithms that mimic human thought and human decision making.

In a closed system a machine can make responses that appear to be human depending upon their sophistication.

Turings Test examines this very question.

If a box exists and questions are posed to the box and the answers received from the box appear to be exactly the same as a human would give, how do we know if inside the box there is a machine or a human.

This is the essence and the problem that AI poses.

We can make a program appear to be human, and we know it is not human, but those who interact with it can be deceived into believing that it is human, Until that is they open the box and look inside.

The question of students using AI to submit papers, is nothing more than a sophisticated Turings test, the professor viewing the paper would be easily deceived that the author is a human and therein lies the issue and the challenge for professors.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it may very well be an AI that is pretending to be a duck.

I am happy that we are in agreement ROWUK

I love that.

Petersons expertise is in philosophy and psychology and while he does stray into other areas generally, here he has stayed solidly within his area of expertise.

I found it hugely amusing and full of hope and his comments were totally on topic and pointedly correct in my opinion.

He seems to be suggesting we have something to fear from AI, I disagree.

Back in the day calculators were banned from the classroom and the examination room, for fear of removing the ability to think from students. The fears were ungrounded.

Right now we have to spend several years and over 100,000 dollars training each human student to become capable and this AI is already capable and genuinely useful.

Beyond this training a student who becomes qualified is not capable until he or she has completed maybe a decade of work and it is the experience gained in this decade of work that truly completes their training.

I dont see the AI learning through working for 10 years and gaining experience in a role.

The AI is like a student fresh from the college, you dont put such a student in charge of anything.

The AI can be looked upon simply as a better tool.

The usefulness of this AI of course only relates to general work tasks and output. Humans are capable of insightful spontaneous and innovative invention.

I dont see the AI taking over the somewhat illogical leaps of thought and intellect that human beings are capable of.

In other words I see the AI just like all other areas of computer advances, taking over the mundane work, but the application of that work, the inspired and inspirational innovation remains the sole province of humans who reside in the genius area of research and development.

An AI after all simply follows rules that humans devise, and that fundamentally limits what they can do.

Poor, Average, and High Quality scientists and engineers follow rules, genius scientists and engineers depart from those rules and break new ground and humanity develops to new heights.

How can an AI break the accepted rules unless it is programmed not to follow rules and that must defeat the AI right from the start.

I dont feel threatened or at all worried.