Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Trumpet Discussion' started by B15M, Oct 22, 2005.
This makes sense to me. So if a water key can make a difference maybe a stop can
You were at Interlochen, right? I remember you being a monster player. We may have met a few times as I was good friends with Jeremy Garnett (I still am). Anyways, everything you are saying makes a lot of sense, especially when you wrote
Different strokes for different folks, as you say.
I really do feel an eveness throughout when I play my Monette. I don't notice a difference in sound between valve combinations. For example, when I'm playing correctly, my C# below the staff has the same quality and resonance as my G above the staff. Now, I can do the same thing on a Bach, but for me its a lot easier to do on a Monette.
Also, for me it is a lot easier for me to get evenness at all different volumes on a Monette. Try this, Eric: play a middle G on your Bach, beginning as softly as you feel comfortable and crescendo to as loud as you can play? Do you feel yourself adjusting to keep the pitch and tone quality consistant? When I do that on a Monette, I don't feel myself adjusting nearly as much as I do when I do the same excercize on most non-Monette instruments.
If you want to know how much small details matter, ask Manny (or any other top player who plays Monette) about valve caps and o-rings. It sounds crazy, but the tension (tightness) of the valve caps makes all the difference in the world.
A few years ago I had a lesson with Schlueter in the summer. I wasn't playing that well, and he asked to see my horn. He played it and didn't sound as good as usual either. He then asked me how long it had been since I had replaced them and I said maybe 6 weeks. He said that was too long, replaced them, adjusted the tension in the caps and tried it again. This time he sounded like a million bucks, and when I took it back I felt my whole body open up and eveything got easier.
So, to go back to what I said before, details matter. I think Yamaha (and Bob Malone) have realised. You can tell it when you play their horns. As you look at the evolution of their lines, there is only subtle refinement between one generation to the next, yet their instruments have greatly improved in the last decade.
I don't think Bach realises this. I also don't think a lot of the manufacturers that are copying Monettes realize this (Taylor, Edwards, etc). To me, new Bach products seem misguided... The megatone mouthpiece? Yes, more mass changes the way it plays and sounds, but to me its worthless unless the mass is carefully calculated. Adding mass onto a standard mouthpiece until it looks like a Monette just doesn't make sense to me.
So thats it. It sounds like a lot of hocus-pocus, and there might even be witch-craft involved, but for me (and many others way more accomplished than I), it works.
PS Maybe this should be it's own thread, but I saw on your website that you're getting a Melk conversion on your B-flat. I've been thinking about doing the same. Have you gotten it yet? Also, what did you send him and what is he using from your old instrument. Thanks.
I think I'm with you on this one. I just took a look at my Monette and couldn't find anything in the difference between the thickness of slides.
One thing you should know about Monette instruments is that Dave's designs are not patented. In much the same way as Coke and Pepsi, Dave keeps his lead on the market through trade secrets. If someone found out exactly what makes a Monette trumpet so special, they could start mass producing them and Dave couldn't do a thing about it. Therefore, it's in his best interest to not make it readily apparent what makes his instruments so special. Similarly, if you found Coca-Cola's special formula, you could start making the stuff and Coke would have no legal recourse.
PS. I just realized that the Google toolbar on my browser has a spell check on it. Everyone reading my posts should now send google a thank you note.
I don't know how you would know if the smaller slides were a little thicker.
I can't imagine a test for that because they might not be the same thickness from the start to the end.
As for as tightening the bottom cape, it makes a big difference in how the trumpet plays.
Ok, heres a long one....
Don't worry about getting "spanked." For the most part, this is a pretty civil forum. I would respond to everything now, but I've get a friend who needs to get picked up from the bus station. Soon though.
PS. ARGH!!! I'm spending too much time on trumpet master... Must get fresh air!!!
I feel like I just keep having this conversation over and over.
Since I haven't had any lessons with Charlie Schlueter I can safely assure you that, yes, indeed, changing the tension via the heavy valve caps on a Monette trumpet. The heavier they are the more finnicky they are, as well, about pitch. You can believe me or not but those are the facts.
People go around putting on weighted valve caps on conventional instruments, don't get the same results or, worse yet, haven't the faintest idea how to adjust them for a susbstantial difference in intonation and pronounce the process as silly or, better yet, yoga-induced psycho-babble.
Manufacturers make heavy mouthpieces that basically result in heavy mouthpieces and tout them as Monette clones. Heavy bells, this and that. Is there some effect? Yes. There has to be. But it's all accidental mish-mash, not creative design based on the logic of resonance. No, I don't know what all Dave thinks about when he designs these horns. Even if I did, do you think I'd talk about it on some trumpet forum. No, I wouldn't.
I guess I felt compelled to answer because of the "Laugh Out Loud" smiley that accompanied one of your quetsions about adjusting the caps. As in "C'mon, you can't REALLY believe that, can you? It's all in your head."
To continue to play the conventional stuff would have meant, for me, using the same old false fingerings on Petrushka, Mahler 1 through 10, The Ring Cycle... you name it. It would have meant putting the Pitch Finder on all my horns as I did when Jack Holland was still alive. Bottom line is that my taste for the sound of the trumpet in an orchestral setting has changed. I prefer a sound that is closer to what trumpets sounded like in the days of Mahler, Strauss, Debussy, Sibelius, Franck, Schoenberg, Saint-Saens, Tchaikovsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Wagner, for example. It's not quite like that but I think a Monette trumpet goes further to capture that romantic sound than the bright, cutting instruments so often heard today.
By the way, the only conductor that tried to fire Charlie was Ozawa. Marriner certainly didn't. Szell didn't . I can't speak about the MD in Kansas City. The last quality of sound I would have ever assigned to Charlie was bright, by the way, Even when he played Bach. Yeah, he played too loud but bright? I don't recollect that sound being a part of his qualities.
Please don't think I'm mad or anything like that. Please don't, I'm not at all. I just wanted to respond to some of the points you made until Jimi gets back from his running around.
Okay: put on your musicology hat!
What do all of those composers have in common, as far as their trumpet writing? That's the key to the point I was making.
(Cue Jeopardy music)
They wrote for very long trumpets. Low F, low E, Eb, that sort of thing. These instruments had an ultra-rich sound with TONS of overtones, but they must have been beasts to play, especially in the upper register.
Mahler definitely preferred the sound of the low F trumpet over the newer Bb trumpet.
I donâ€™t see how a Monette or any other modern trumpet compares with these instruments at all. Just because a monette sounds different than a conventional trumpet wouldnâ€™t necessarily mean it is more similar to what the composers back then heard.