Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Trumpet Discussion' started by Sethoflagos, Mar 30, 2015.
Yes. So the frequency values are C3 = 1, G4 = 1.5, C4 = 2, E5 = 2.5, G5 =3, C5 = 4.
It isn't to avoid practicing--it is in order to avoid cleaning house, doing dishes, trimming the lawn and filling bird feeders....
As technical authority for the monitoring and regulation of oil & gas export metering for Nigeria, I do have some experience of how to make physical measurements.
What I'm presenting here is just raw data as it comes, without any manipulation, not even correcting figures that I'm pretty sure should be remeasured. It is natural and correct to be sceptical, but I've described the apparatus and the method in sufficient detail for anybody to repeat it. If you truly believe my data to be unreliable, then replicate it yourself and share your results. The truth will out.
Actually, I had no prior opinion on what these pressure/pitch/volume relationships would look like. And I'd no prior "theory" about it that I might wish to prove. I'm actually surprised how neat and reproducible the data is.
I'm also surprised how difficult it is to find a significant difference between 4 instruments which many people have told me vary considerably in resistance. Mouthpieces, yes. I can see some differences there. But the trumpets, no. Not yet anyway.
Several things need to be investigated here. If the amount of air is consistent (big if) the pressure goes up for a reason. If the horn is less efficient at higher frequencies (a not so big if) we must work harder to maintain loudness - pressure goes up. If faster flapping of the lips means a less lossy way of creating tone, the pressure goes up.
What happens when the player clamps the aperature open?
I maintain that what we perceive as loudness is not necessarily what comes out of the front of the bell. Leakage through the bell is a BIG part of the feedback - especially on lighter horns.
We can get an approximate air flow value from the time taken to exhaust a lungful (which is fairly easy to measure).
Just so everybody can join in on the fun: A DIY U-tube Manometer for Measuring Pressure in Fluids | AIMS Education Foundation
Thinking about it, this probably isn't a big issue for what we're doing because of the way acoustic energy works. I'm sure I wouldn't be too far out if I estimated my pianissimo at 40 dBA ("babbling brook") and fortissimo at around 105 dBA ("table saw"). That 65 dB difference represents three million times more acoustic power for ff over pp spread over a lung pressure range of only a few inches water gauge. So even if our personal judgments of what acoustic power constituted a particular dynamic differed by a factor of 10 (10 dB), or even 100 (20 dB), the impact on measured lung pressure for a particular individual would be very small indeed.
Both Stuart and I were surprised how stable these pressure measurements were for ourselves. And yet our reported figures show some significant differences between each other. My guess would be that these differences are "fingerprints" of our individual playing technique, embouchure use and (seemingly) mouthpiece choice. If I were in the business of teaching brass, I'd be getting very interested in the possibilities of this as a diagnostic tool. You ask about a "clamped open aperture"; maybe this would show a characteristic fingerprint. Maybe a high piece pressure embouchure a different one.
We need more data!
Cool Beans! Thanks VB!
I know exactly where you're coming from on this, Dr Mark. In my warped view of the universe, it's the point where the terms "standard deviation" and "affinity for sheep" become synonymous.