kctrump

Derek,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It is very enlightening.

KCtrump

Derek Reaban

I posted this on the other site. Just wanted to include it here as well.

Don,

I did a little research based on your recommendation. I looked up the Fletcher-Munson Loudness Curve. Very interesting stuff!

Based on the Sprectral Analysis that was presented in the "Visualizing Resonance" topic, I decided to use that diagram as a starting point. I penciled in my impression of what I learned from the F-M Loudness Curve on my diagram and showed this "high point" at 30-50 feet from the player on stage. This high point represents the sensitivity of human hearing between 2-5 kHz.



In my digram, Point A is the sound just as it comes out the bell. The fundamental of the sound is the most present here. As the sound decays over distance, all of the frequencies decay equally. However, the human ear perceives frequencies between 2-5 kHz MUCH better than the fundamental.

So, Point B shows that the overtones that exist in a players sound (say between 2-3 kHz) will be heard more prominently by a listener. If a player has a mature sound, with lots of higher frequencies present in the sound, this sound is what will "project" to the audience.

This would clearly explain why a player with a "less complex" sound would be heard clearly in a small radius around the player (mostly the lower frequency fundamental), but since the higher frequencies are "less strong", the sound is not perceived well at a distance. The player with the "complex" sound, can play the fundamental at a softer perceived dynamic in a small radius around the player, and even though this sound decays more quickly than the other player, the energy in the higher overtones gets picked up at a distance.

Comments?

I'd love to hear them, because this is just my impression so far, and I haven't yet down my experiment (had to cancel my lesson today due to last minute birthday preparation for my son's big day tomorrow).

W Scott

Just a comment, or observation. What we, as players, are dealing with here are two different concepts:

The first concept is that of a centered, resonant, 'in-tune' note. However we achieve that (and the James Thompson video is the best example I've seen) the sound that comes out is going to be rich in overtones, it's going to project and it's going to sound good to an audience. To us, though, it's going to sound very brilliant and crystalline. Put two players side by side, one has lots of overtones and one doesn't. The player with the overtones is going to be heard best by the audience. O.K., so that is the 'sound package' that we want---centered, resonant and in-tune.

The second concept is what we DO with the sound package in terms of dynamics. I haven't heard much on these threads about this aspect. I'm a bit worried that some of our young or new players are going to think that once you get that resonant sound, all you have to do is play at 'MF' for all occasions and 'voila', successful playing! Not so fast...

We take the 'sound package' and can then use it, all the way from PPP to FFF, even ripping right over the top of a band if need be. However, with a resonant sound, this takes less work and less air (usually), but more control over the airflow and what your chops are doing. James Thompson touched on this a bit in his video presentation showing that his FFF really isn't that loud but carries better becuase it's centered and resonant. My experience has been that to play louder is tougher because you're pumping out more air. A bigger or thicker stream of air is harder to center and keep control of than a smaller one. If you blow too hard, trying too hard for volume, you lose control and the sound package begins to fall apart---which gives that 'splatter' effect to the sound.

What do you think about the dynamic part of the package, Derek?

Bill

ecarroll

Bill,

Very good observations.

Here’s my $.03 (adjusted for inflation): dynamic should serve the espressivo of the music. A player that has developed a free, released, resonance has a tool in his/her belt that will best serve the composition at hand. This might take the shape of a silken pianissimo or a thundering fortissimo.

A note to the young or new players following this thread: our sound /technique is a means to the end, not an end itself. It’s all about bringing the largest possible range of expression to the music that we’re performing.

Best from sunny LA,
EC

Derek Reaban

Ed,

Well, I managed to make the sound experiment project happen this weekend. I’ll have to say, this is one of the biggest projects that I have undertaken in quite a while! It’s been really nice to have the Olympics on while I’ve been doing this “analysis” work. I would have been watching them anyway, and instead of sitting on the couch, I’m tapping away on the computer with the TV on. Not too bad!

Friday I ended up taking a vacation day because my Wife’s Parents were able to come up from Tucson and they had volunteered to help us with our citrus trees. This is the time of year that we have to get all of the fruit off them and do our big pruning project (before they bloom). We have 8 trees (2 grapefruit, 2, lemon, and 4 orange). We ended up getting about 40 bags of fruit, and lined the street with citrus branches! Whew, what a way to spend my vacation.

It took us about 5 and a half-hours to finish and we were done by about 3 PM. I had plenty of time to get cleaned up, gather everything that I needed for the project, and get a short warmup before I drove to Benny’s house for my 4:30 PM lesson.

After arriving at Benny’s house, he had to find his microphone and charger cord for his mini disc player. While he did this, I played a few notes and then got my pencil and tape measure out to make some measurements of the room:

Here’s a picture of the room set up:

Derek Reaban

After some technical difficulties in figuring out how to record on Benny’s MD player, we were just about ready to start. I spent some time to give Benny an overview of the idea of my “sound experiment”. I showed him my picture and told him my premise about what the microphone would be “hearing” at our ears versus the microphone at the other end of the room.

Then I gave him an overview of what we were going to be playing. I’ve been thinking about this for the past week, and I decided that the best way to be consistent would be to play some standard exercises from the James Thompson Buzzing Basics (BB) book (#5, #11, and #12) while listening to the recorded tracks on my iPod and earphones. I also had scheduled a standard orchestral excerpt (opening to Pictures at an Exhibition).

The one last detail before we started was to write down some details about the project:

Horns and Mouthpieces used for Buzzing Basics exercises:

Benny:

Mount Vernon Model 37 Bb Stradivarius (S/N 26,XXX)
Park-Hagstrom 24 Throat, Schmidt Backbore

Derek:

Elkart Model 37 Bb Stradivarius (S/N 154,XXX)
Monette B1-1 (I think with an 18 throat)

For the excerpt (since my Monette is in the shop for the next 6 weeks), we used his new Yamaha Chicago Model C trumpet. What a great instrument!

Last details: It was 64F for the high temperature, it was cloudy all day, we started recording about 5:10 PM, and the lesson was in Tempe, Arizona.
I played first. The close microphone was just to my right side (a little more than an arms length away) and the microphone across the room was exactly 26 feet from my bell. I played very well and feel that this is a very representative snapshot of my playing. Benny sounded great as usual, but this is the first time that he had read through the Thompson exercises while hooked up to an iPod. He was a VERY good sport!

A brief description of the exercises is probably worthwhile for those of you that aren’t familiar with the book. BB#5 begins on a low C half note, slurs up to a second line G half note, and then up to a whole note 3rd space C, and then 4 beats of rest. This pattern continues down chromatically to Low F. The dynamic begins at p on the low C and crescendo to a mf on the 3rd space C.

BB#11 is in eighth notes with the last note being 3 and a half counts long. I’ll try to include a sound clip here if I can figure out how the putfile.com site works. The pattern is all open harmonics, starts on 2nd line G, goes up to 4th space E, down to low C, and then up to the top of the staff G. It continues down chromatically to a starting note on low C.

BB#12 is in eighth notes as well, with the last note being a half note. All open, low C, 2nd line G, C-G up an octave 3 times, and then down slurring down to a low G and ending on a low C. Then continues up by half steps to a starting note on a 3rd space Bb.

Derek Reaban

With that description out of the way, I looked through all of the data and decided that I would show a picture of what the High C (from BB#11) looked like. This considers a picture of the note at the “close mic” and the “far mic” for me and Benny.

Click here to listen to Derek playing High C (close microphone)




Click here to listen to Derek playing High C (far microphone)





Benny playing High C (close microphone):




Benny playing High C (far microphone):





While those pictures are very interesting (especially if you’ve had a chance to play with the Audacity program), a little analysis is in order to really understand what you’re seeing. Once I had the Frequency Analysis, I exported the data to a text file. This included the frequencies with the corresponding dB values. I quickly discovered that the frequencies were always the same in the text files, so I had to pick out the frequency of the fundamental pitch (like A440 Hz), and the figure out what each of the overtone frequencies were for the notes. You will understand this when you look at the next picture:




You’ll notice right away that I was playing my C at 931 Hz and Benny was at 941 Hz. 931 Hz was not a value that was specifically called out in the exported text file, so I just pulled in the frequencies that were closest to 931 and 941 Hz. I show the Decibel levels at the close mic and the far mic for both me and Benny. My fundamental was quite a bit louder than Benny’s (we didn’t have a way to standardize our dynamic – which didn’t really matter). You will notice that I was a little louder at the close mic but quite a bit louder at the far mic. In the Freq Diff (Frequency Difference) column, I show Benny’s sound magnitude minus my sound magnitude. This simple means that when there is a minus in the Freq Diff column I was louder than Benny. When the value in this column is positive, he was louder than me.

To make it very simple, I color-coded the results. When you see BLUE, I was louder for that specific frequency range and when you see YELLOW Benny was louder. It is very clear from this analysis that Benny is ringing all of the overtones above the High C MUCH stronger than I am. Does this surprise anyone?

Even though I don’t show the individual Frequency Analysis snapshots (you wouldn’t believe how long it takes to compile all of this data!!!!), I want to show the spreadsheet analysis that I did for several other notes for comparison:






I pride myself for my sound, and I’ve worked very hard to cultivate a vibrant sound model in my daily practice sessions. This snapshot shows that compared with a fantastic symphony player, I occasionally can get a note off that is REALLY GOOD. If we had a college or high school player in the mix for comparison, I think the difference in vibrant, resonant tone quality would be MUCH more apparent.

I’m still amazed that a note which can sound as loud at my ears or louder than another player with great carrying power (as confirmed by the microphone) but fail to get out to the hall. I’ve known this now for quite a few years, and this experiment simply verifies my sound impression from behind the bell.

Derek Reaban

We chose to play Pictures at an Exhibition on Benny’s Yamaha Chicago. This is where Benny shined! It’s no surprise to me that his Pictures would look different than mine on the Spectral Analysis. But, HOLY COW! His plot was like artwork for every note! The notes were all so well defined, and look at the “size” of his sound compared to mine at the Far Microphone!


Click here to listen to Derek playing Pictures (1st 10 Seconds) (close microphone)




Click here to listen to Derek playing Pictures (1st 10 Seconds) (far microphone)




Benny playing Pictures (2nd D) (close microphone):





Benny playing Pictures (2nd D) (far microphone):




And here is my analysis of that 4th line D:




Aaaahhhh. It’s 1:40 AM. I’ll finish this tomorrow and try to get those sound clips figured out. Then you can get a feel where I fall between Hack and Herseth on the Pictures excerpt.

Derek Reaban

I’m not sure how many of your have checked out how impressive the differences are between Benny’s Pictures excerpt versus mine in a side by side comparison.

Click on these links that will open up separate windows:

Derek: http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y19...uresFarMic.jpg

Benny: http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y19...uresFarMic.jpg


Arrange these windows so that you can see the full 10-second recordings (with Derek’s window on top and Benny’s window just slightly below - you'll have to click and drag one of the windows), so that you can see the shape of the overall phrase.

At about 8 and a half seconds there is a breath and this is represented by a thin line on the plot. Now look at the four notes just before this breath. This is the first time that I had played Benny’s trumpet in quite a few months, and I didn’t line up my intonation very well on those last four notes (especially the 2nd line G). Look at those notes compared to Benny’s! Wow! Missing the center of the note do to intonation is EXTREMELY clear. Imagine if I would have seen this plot, buzzed it on my mouthpiece to assure I was hearing it correctly, and then played it again? I’m guessing this diagnostic tool could really help those of us who could use some extra ears to critique our playing.

I also can “see” Benny’s phrasing is different than mine on the second note (F) in the opening. I play the G as the stronger note in the phrase, and Benny plays the F (second note) as the stronger note in the phrase. Seeing this will allow me to make a conscious choice in my phrasing.

I really like the potential of adding some recording to my weekly practice and then “looking” at it (via the Audacity tool) for some constructive feedback before my weekly lessons.

Just something else to think about!

W Scott

What I find amazing and mysterious is that the 'spikes' on the right side of the picture are very low to almost nonexistent on the close up mic---for both of you.

Then, on the mic farther away, all of a sudden this area is filled in with 'spikes'---which I guess this area must be the overtones.

Even more strange is that this area of 'spikes' that has suddenly appeared doesn't lag behind the other area---it's equal in amplitude!

So, why didn't this area show up on the close up mic? If these are the active, overtones do they 'overshoot' the close up mic and not get picked up? But if they are that speedy/energetic, how then are they equal in amplitude at the mic farther away? You would expect that they would either be higher in amplitude or be lagging behind the slower wavees coming in as their energy would be dissapating.

WHERE IS NIC D. WHEN YOU NEED HIM!

This is an intriguing tool and a novel experiment. Any chance you could try an experiment like this in a really big hall---like the one you play in, Derek? I'd be curious to see what the results would be even outside of the hall---say place a mic just outside the wall of the building and see what it picks up.

I've got to get this program downloaded..........