Major Breakthrough after Lesson with Pops

Discussion in 'Trumpet Discussion' started by afp, Jan 22, 2014.

  1. Dr.Mark

    Dr.Mark Mezzo Forte User

    920
    704
    Apr 5, 2011
    Hi gzent,
    You stated:
    "But not as smart as a pilot, remember ?!"
    --
    Now that's just naughty!
    I can imagine the headlines:
    Flyboy verses Sawbones in the trumpet grudge match of the century.
    But seriously, I still say "Thank you" afp for the info and "thanks" Gman for shedding light on a new way of doing things. I feel the fly in the ointment is/was the approach.
    Info good! quality of transmission, not good!
    Dr.Mark
     
  2. gmonady

    gmonady Utimate User

    18,129
    9,306
    Jan 28, 2011
    Dayton, Ohio
    Yes and it does, much better when I used more internal sets of muscle with the traditional buzz.

    Perhaps. Yeah. Really.

    Here I need to expand... I am not a poorly constructed single subject design. I have progressed much further with the pwhooo method than I had ever done with the buzz method. Dr.Mark, this is called in the Evidence-based Medicine world - An N of 1 study. An N of 1 study out-trumps a Randomized Control Study every single time.

    Dr.Mark, I teach the basics of science at my medical school in my "Clinical Decision Making" course at Wright State University. Read my above comment then read the McMaster's publication: Textbook of Evidence Based Medicine, Section on the N + 1 study, and you will better understand and appreciate that I am indeed, correct. So your homework assignment Dr.Mark is to read the McMaster's section on the N of 1 study and report back.


    Cricket it is. Read my above commentary. For me, buzzing IS overrated based on the best Evidence-based study design you can have, an N of 1 study that does in fact work well for me. And were do you think I have ever tried to sell this method to anyone in any of my above posts? I am just describing this method in case anyone would like to try it. Quit honestly, I am hoping no one here does try it, because it is my intent to one day, rule the entire trumpet world, Mwahhh... ha... ha... ha.. ha..
     
  3. gmonady

    gmonady Utimate User

    18,129
    9,306
    Jan 28, 2011
    Dayton, Ohio
    For quality transmission, choose AAMCO... Double A, MCO.
     
  4. gmonady

    gmonady Utimate User

    18,129
    9,306
    Jan 28, 2011
    Dayton, Ohio
    Still waiting for the flying monkeys!
     
  5. Dr.Mark

    Dr.Mark Mezzo Forte User

    920
    704
    Apr 5, 2011
    Hi Gman,
    As you know, The fundimental principles of EBM suggests that evidence alone is never a reason for clinical decision making:
    1. "What's the benefit/risk?"
    Is it worth the risk to forego buzzing and replace it with a methodology that's not well known.
    2."What level of inconvenience is caused?"
    Will switching to the new method cause a major negative distrubance in the overall way the subject precieves their playing ablilities?
    3."What's the cost?"
    N/A
    4."Subject's values and preferences"
    Is the new method frowned down upon by subjects that value and prefer the buzzing method.
    As for N of 1 studies:
    In the N of 1 RCT, patients undertake pairs of treatment periods in which they receive a target treatment in one period of each pair, and a placebo or alternative in the other. Patients and clinicians are blind to allocation, the order of the target and control are randomized, and patients make quantitative ratings of their symptoms during each period. The N of 1 RCT continues until both the patient and clinician conclude that the patient is, or is not, obtaining benefit from the target intervention. When conditions are right, N of 1randomized trials are often feasible, can provide definitive evidence of treatment effectiveness in individual patients, and may lead to long-term differences in treatment administration.
    --
    Now Gman,
    Did you follow the proper recipe for N of 1 in your study? Well, of course not. I don't think the patient can be the clinician and follow the rules of the plan.
    However, I do stand by my claim that someday after many trails (by more than 1) maybe phwooo will become an established way of doing things.
    Dr.Mark
     
  6. gmonady

    gmonady Utimate User

    18,129
    9,306
    Jan 28, 2011
    Dayton, Ohio
    Still waiting for the Monkeys....
     
  7. gmonady

    gmonady Utimate User

    18,129
    9,306
    Jan 28, 2011
    Dayton, Ohio
  8. gmonady

    gmonady Utimate User

    18,129
    9,306
    Jan 28, 2011
    Dayton, Ohio
    Dr.Mark not wrong at all. My job at the University and as an Associate Editor for the Annals of Internal Medicine's ACP Journal Club is to teach the world on the concepts of Evidence-based Medicine that expands the traditional concepts of research design toward a newer, more practical application of research evidence. As a PhD that received my initial training and degree in the 1980s, I really appreciate this newer approach.

    I have had very good luck with my claim and cannot wait for you the hear what I can do with this technique the next time we play at Little E's.
     
  9. Vulgano Brother

    Vulgano Brother Moderator Staff Member

    Age:
    60
    12,460
    7,037
    Mar 23, 2006
    Parts Unknown
    Flying monkeys use the "phew" method, and frankly, it stinks.

    [​IMG]

    When teaching a beginner, (or if Jennifer Aniston came by for coffee) I tell them to hold their lips together as in starting to say "pee," but articulating with "tee" and blowing to start the buzz. Gmonady's method does indeed start the buzz, and it is what I unconsciously use (but with the "tee" articulation). I suspect that afp and gmonady are talking about the same thing but from different directions.

    Then again, I'm just a trumpet player and not as knowledgeable about trumpet as people with a higher IQ.
     
  10. shooter

    shooter Piano User

    Age:
    46
    314
    74
    Jan 12, 2007
    VA
    As I play higher, I pronounce "too" which pushes my lips deeper into the mouthpiece.....gives me better traction so to speak. I guess, by the ending "oo", we are are essentially doing the same thing. I just never thought of it as not "buzzing". Looks like we are separated by interpretation only.
     

Share This Page