Whisiting

Discussion in 'Trumpet Discussion' started by anthony, Feb 10, 2012.

  1. anthony

    anthony Mezzo Piano User

    561
    79
    Mar 3, 2009
    You ever noticed when you whistle that on the higher
    notes ur tongue is up higher nearest your top teeth &
    when you whistle low it's closer to your bottom teeth ....
    Just saying "Anthony
     
  2. Al Innella

    Al Innella Forte User

    1,189
    84
    Aug 9, 2007
    Levittown , NY
    That's the idea behind using syllables for different registers.
     
  3. anthony

    anthony Mezzo Piano User

    561
    79
    Mar 3, 2009
    You mean all these years I've been playing trumpet
    and didn't know it !
    Wow I'm a natural ..
    .hahaha just some humor to break up the day Thanks Anthony
     
  4. leftmid7

    leftmid7 Mezzo Piano User

    619
    84
    Sep 21, 2010
    Franklin, TN
    yeah, there's a whole 'school' on upper register playing with the tongue arched up to get the air moving faster. I myself can't seem to do it. I just use lots of air and push from the abs.
     
  5. Local 357

    Local 357 Banned

    633
    240
    Jul 1, 2011


    Yes and it apples ONLY to whistling. Your observation being fairly normal and common.

    But in response this is where the pseudo "scientists" put up some of the most ill founded remarks in the trumpet business. I watch them discredit themselves these days with mixed feelings. On one hand they need to be taken to task for inaccurate methodology. On the other they just seem pitiful.

    They have compared two distinctly different activities with wholly different physics and crammed them both in the same nutshell.

    In reality whistling produces far less resistance than trumpet playing. Therefor the constriction in the mouth cavity can affect pitch and timbre. While with the trumpet the pressure is built up inside the mouth cavity. any restriction prior to release is less noticeable on sound than a fart in a hurricane.

    What happens when you move your tongue inside the mouth cavity while playing the trumpet is that you inadvertently affect the hold the lower and/or upper lips have on the aperture tunnel. That is all and yet this may be a positive effect. While it FEELS like you are constricting the air such as happens during a whistle this is not the effect that it produces.

    Regardless of whether you believe the actual physics or not you may or may not find any benefit to a tongue movement inside the mouth. As to whether you will or not?

    This is decided by the nature of your embouchure. Some will find louder high notes by pushing their tongue somewhere forward. Others will not.

    In the meantime anyone who promotes the CAUSATION of range, register or interval change as a result of mouth cavity constriction is not someone to be relied upon for general knowledge on the subject. he is as wrong as water falling uphill and provably so. At least to those of us with open minds.
     
  6. Ed Lee

    Ed Lee Utimate User

    8,040
    2,035
    Aug 16, 2009
    Jackson NC
    The only trumpet advantage I see to whistling is to study/whistle the music before I play it on the trumpet. Yep, a completely different set of factors between the two in technique.
     
  7. Phil986

    Phil986 Forte User

    1,094
    329
    Nov 16, 2009
    Near Portland, OR.
    Local, as far as I know, and in everything that I have read on trumpet physics, the physics are restricted to what happens in the resonant tube and "outside" of the aperture. The aperture is the on/off valve. How to manage the aperture is a matter of physiology and all these other things that are not themselves "physics." I do not know of anyone credible who disputes the physics of what happens in the resonant tube. Whatever we do with the mouth and air column has the exclusive goal of making certain things happen in that resonant tube and these things are not a matter of debate at all. It boils down to having the on/off valve opening and closing more times per second to obtain higher notes. Do you dispute that? Physics are not a matter of belief. Declaring to an audience "whether you believe the physics or not" is the equivalent of saying "whether or not you believe that the Earth is round."

    How to make things happen on the trumpet, as it translates into actions we can conceptualize in our brains, is another story altogether. If it works for some to visualize a narrowed oral cavity obtained by raising the tongue then who cares whether or not the perception is accurate, as long as the on/off valve opens and closes faster over a second? Those for whom it won't work will move on to another way of visualizing. If you tell them that little spirits inside the mouth bang faster on microscopic gongs and it works, once again who cares? That will not change the actual pysics inside the horn and yield a result, what's not to like?

    I'm not sure I see who you have a beef with. If you have a rational., reproducible system that works better than Reinhardt, Maggio, Gordon or whomever, formulate that system into something coherent, publish the book, train some instructors and have at it. You keep claiming something that sounds like you have figured it all out and you know better than all the aforementioned names together; build it into something useable for all.
     
  8. larry tscharner

    larry tscharner Forte User

    1,465
    657
    Apr 30, 2010
    dubuque iowa
    You know I got the same feeling when I first started reading this. If it were that simple then why doesnt everyone already know it? If playing trumpet were as easy as whistling then everyone would do it! Does anyone know the specific facts of the old quote..."you just put your lips togrther and blow"? Wasnt it Humprey Bogart that said that?
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2012
  9. Local 357

    Local 357 Banned

    633
    240
    Jul 1, 2011

    Respectfully, I do not propose a "system" per se so much as an effort to bring to the table a greater over-all understanding of the general physics related to trumpet playing.

    The model of what I use when teaching is that of tubist Arnold Jacobs whom the insiders will report didn't write anything down at all!

    Jacobs insisted that he saw "very few problems with embouchure" among his students and peers. That the problems his students had "were almost always matters of respiration" ie breathing/air support.

    Of course Jacobs was a tuba player. As such he may have been slightly less understanding of problems with the chops and physics that trumpet players go through. The trumpet is more difficult than the trombone or tuba. However i have noticed that even among trumpet players there rarely is a need to screw around with embouchure changes. So basically the old man had it right on the money maybe 98% of the time.

    When dabbling in the category of what i call "Deep Embouchure Analysis" (for want of a better term i settled with that) I still realize that most trumpet players needn't concern themselves much with the physics. Only upon trying to develop notes above High C or so does the need to have this knowledge increase.

    Where i have issues with others is when they claim inaccurate physics and promote it as if it has some kind of validity. Typically this has to do with the "tongue arch for range" theory though it can encompass other ideas too. Even in this area i suppose my contempt towards their deficient methods isn't all that useful.

    The fact is that whether someone properly understands what a tongue movement is really doing it probably doesn't matter all that much. If one restricts his mouth cavity and feels he is helping his range? OK fine. Wear a lucky rabbits foot too if you want. In fact what really happened was that his tongue inadvertently applied pressure on his lower lip. This supported the embouchure in such a way as to allow a better sounding high note.

    So he feels that this is a cause and effect result due to mouth cavity constriction. It's a forgivable incorrect conclusion and of no real consequence to his own playing. He simply shouldn't label his conclusions as "scientific". Because they aren't.
     

Share This Page