ABOUT "MAGIC" EQUIPMENT
After two score and five years (Alpha to Omega), a plethora of different horns, bells, leadpipes, alloys, and mouthpieces; two trusted colleagues independently told me: "Bob, you never sounded any different on any of them." Apparently, Gerry Pagano has had a similar experience. Then there's Steve Lukather . . . (turn the sound on – upper right)
However, there was one equipment change (a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away) that may have made a difference for me. It was near the Alpha of my career (names have been omitted – to protect . . . uh . . . me).
Up to that point I had been primarily a big band bass trombonist, playing “float like a butterfly, sting like a bee” equipment: a Larry Minick “skeletonized” Elkhart Conn 62H and a Mount Vernon 1½G. There were no tuning slides, not on the main horn nor the valve section, it had a light weight slide, a Burt Herrick leadpipe, and a thin annealed bell. It responded instantaneously – but it “lit up real good – real quick.” (“With great power comes great responsibility!”) Regarding tuning slides, Bill Watrous once inimitably announced, “I thought I was arrogant, I don’t pull my tuning slide – but he doesn’t even have one."
Interestingly (to me), Charlie Vernon plays a light weight instrument. So the notion that a heavy horn is best may not hold water. Now he does play a big mouthpiece . . . George Curran's Shires has a "lightweight axial-flow valve set" that "feels particularly broad and even-especially when both valves are engaged-allowing for a truly open low register and contributing to the instrument’s quick, easy response." Just a thought . . .
But I digress . . .
I had joined a very good, but not big league, symphony orchestra and the maestro was apparently unenthused with my fortississimo. After a few months on the job, a very, very, very, good friend quietly told me there was talk of replacing me – tenure wasn't even a twinkle in anybody's eye at that point. I approached the maestro who said, “no – not a different player – a different sound.” I said, “OK, I can do that, but I’ll need your help. I’ll need feedback to know if I’m on the right track.”
So . . . I ran out and bought a Bach 50B with 10.5-inch bell (if it looks bigger . . .) and a Schilke 60 mouthpiece. For the next couple months I asked the maestro after every rehearsal, “how am I doing.” The reply was invariably, “Uh . . . I wasn’t listening.” Also, the Union President told me he got the maestro out of bed and on the phone at 8:00 a.m. one fine morning and asked, “What’s this about Sanders losin' his lip?” I was told mumbling and stammering ensued. (That was about 35 years early – see dystonia and my story.) In the end, I kept the job. It’s good to have friends –and a Union!
Having been reliably informed that absolutely none of my veritable legion of variegate equipment had made any difference whatsoever, I now suspect changing the “sound in my head” was the prime factor. Equipment change can affect response, it can make various tessiture easier, it can facilitate timbre change, it can make your face more comfortable – it can be fun! But ultimately, the sound in your head will out – in time! (Branford Marsallis shares some wisdom here.)
I suspect, with both concept and equipment changes, what happened back then was my new FFFF sounded much like my old FF – but louder, and not so “lit-up” – OR – “like me through a bigger speaker” – but still fundamentally “like me.” (The bigger bell visual probably didn’t hurt – out front – either.)
However, the new set-up made it more work to “float and sting.” But my career (and the industry) took a more orchestral turn going forward so all was well. Now, in my dotage . . . uh . . . I mean retirement . . . my my concept is reverting and my Greenhoe is set up much like my old 62H.
However, there was one equipment change (a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away) that may have made a difference for me. It was near the Alpha of my career (names have been omitted – to protect . . . uh . . . me).
Up to that point I had been primarily a big band bass trombonist, playing “float like a butterfly, sting like a bee” equipment: a Larry Minick “skeletonized” Elkhart Conn 62H and a Mount Vernon 1½G. There were no tuning slides, not on the main horn nor the valve section, it had a light weight slide, a Burt Herrick leadpipe, and a thin annealed bell. It responded instantaneously – but it “lit up real good – real quick.” (“With great power comes great responsibility!”) Regarding tuning slides, Bill Watrous once inimitably announced, “I thought I was arrogant, I don’t pull my tuning slide – but he doesn’t even have one."
Interestingly (to me), Charlie Vernon plays a light weight instrument. So the notion that a heavy horn is best may not hold water. Now he does play a big mouthpiece . . . George Curran's Shires has a "lightweight axial-flow valve set" that "feels particularly broad and even-especially when both valves are engaged-allowing for a truly open low register and contributing to the instrument’s quick, easy response." Just a thought . . .
But I digress . . .
I had joined a very good, but not big league, symphony orchestra and the maestro was apparently unenthused with my fortississimo. After a few months on the job, a very, very, very, good friend quietly told me there was talk of replacing me – tenure wasn't even a twinkle in anybody's eye at that point. I approached the maestro who said, “no – not a different player – a different sound.” I said, “OK, I can do that, but I’ll need your help. I’ll need feedback to know if I’m on the right track.”
So . . . I ran out and bought a Bach 50B with 10.5-inch bell (if it looks bigger . . .) and a Schilke 60 mouthpiece. For the next couple months I asked the maestro after every rehearsal, “how am I doing.” The reply was invariably, “Uh . . . I wasn’t listening.” Also, the Union President told me he got the maestro out of bed and on the phone at 8:00 a.m. one fine morning and asked, “What’s this about Sanders losin' his lip?” I was told mumbling and stammering ensued. (That was about 35 years early – see dystonia and my story.) In the end, I kept the job. It’s good to have friends –and a Union!
Having been reliably informed that absolutely none of my veritable legion of variegate equipment had made any difference whatsoever, I now suspect changing the “sound in my head” was the prime factor. Equipment change can affect response, it can make various tessiture easier, it can facilitate timbre change, it can make your face more comfortable – it can be fun! But ultimately, the sound in your head will out – in time! (Branford Marsallis shares some wisdom here.)
I suspect, with both concept and equipment changes, what happened back then was my new FFFF sounded much like my old FF – but louder, and not so “lit-up” – OR – “like me through a bigger speaker” – but still fundamentally “like me.” (The bigger bell visual probably didn’t hurt – out front – either.)
However, the new set-up made it more work to “float and sting.” But my career (and the industry) took a more orchestral turn going forward so all was well. Now, in my dotage . . . uh . . . I mean retirement . . . my my concept is reverting and my Greenhoe is set up much like my old 62H.
"HERESY"
I am an equipment heretic. I believe all the material variables in trombone design are near-field (I'm not using the term precisely here) phenomena – they have no effect on the sound in the far-field. However, they impact what the player hears and feels – perceives – in and near their head – which affects how they play – and, consequently, what the listener perceives – "out there."
I believe we play a column of air that has a shape defined by its container. That shape has acoustic properties. A bigger or heavier bell, or a different alloy, will effect what the player perceives and the player will try to create “the sound in their head” in response to that perception. Perceive less sound – play louder – “projects better.” Perceive fewer high overtones – play brighter . . . etc. Mouthpieces and leadpipes are a slightly different matter – they contribute to the shape of the air column – and, therefore, it's acoustic properties.
My friend, Larry Minick, who may have invented "open-wrap," said of this invention, "I don't think it does anything, but they keep paying for it, so I keep making it." Humor may have been in play. He also said, "Science is involved, but it's mostly trial and error."
This topic is completely subjective – bordering on religion – with hordes of devoted disciples! To make it objective, empirical testing would be necessary – double-blind and level-matched. Both input and observation would need to be non-human. (But that's not gonna happen.)
Setting bias aside, human perception is notoriously unreliable. Neurologist (and amateur pianist), Frank R. Wilson, writes in Tone Deaf and All Thumbs: "After noting the variety of responses to the music . . . we might simply laugh and wonder if these two critics were present at the same concert." Doug Yeo's experience with the MRI machine is revealing. What our brain thinks we hear or feel – perceive – may not be entirely accurate.
All of the above said, trombone toys are fun! Happy players play better! Have as much fun as you can afford.
(I hear practice also helps.)
I believe we play a column of air that has a shape defined by its container. That shape has acoustic properties. A bigger or heavier bell, or a different alloy, will effect what the player perceives and the player will try to create “the sound in their head” in response to that perception. Perceive less sound – play louder – “projects better.” Perceive fewer high overtones – play brighter . . . etc. Mouthpieces and leadpipes are a slightly different matter – they contribute to the shape of the air column – and, therefore, it's acoustic properties.
My friend, Larry Minick, who may have invented "open-wrap," said of this invention, "I don't think it does anything, but they keep paying for it, so I keep making it." Humor may have been in play. He also said, "Science is involved, but it's mostly trial and error."
This topic is completely subjective – bordering on religion – with hordes of devoted disciples! To make it objective, empirical testing would be necessary – double-blind and level-matched. Both input and observation would need to be non-human. (But that's not gonna happen.)
Setting bias aside, human perception is notoriously unreliable. Neurologist (and amateur pianist), Frank R. Wilson, writes in Tone Deaf and All Thumbs: "After noting the variety of responses to the music . . . we might simply laugh and wonder if these two critics were present at the same concert." Doug Yeo's experience with the MRI machine is revealing. What our brain thinks we hear or feel – perceive – may not be entirely accurate.
All of the above said, trombone toys are fun! Happy players play better! Have as much fun as you can afford.
(I hear practice also helps.)