Talk:Embouchure: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Sodium (talk | contribs)
mNo edit summary
Larry_Sanger (talk)
No edit summary
Line 62: Line 62:


You obviously know a great deal more than me about this, and I think a lot of your reply would be useful in the entry. However there are still problems, which I am sure will be resolved. The technique is "correct" in the sense that modern musicians use a mis-translated form. However it is not right to call the technique definitively correct, as in the article. Even if the most commonly used embouchure originated out of a mistranslation, the majority of players have not switched to the original form--it must have something going for it. For the same reason, the reason for a player's greatness is subjective. If everybody agreed that it was down to the embouchure then, again, wouldn't all the players of today switch to it? -- [[sodiumtheperson|sodium]]
You obviously know a great deal more than me about this, and I think a lot of your reply would be useful in the entry. However there are still problems, which I am sure will be resolved. The technique is "correct" in the sense that modern musicians use a mis-translated form. However it is not right to call the technique definitively correct, as in the article. Even if the most commonly used embouchure originated out of a mistranslation, the majority of players have not switched to the original form--it must have something going for it. For the same reason, the reason for a player's greatness is subjective. If everybody agreed that it was down to the embouchure then, again, wouldn't all the players of today switch to it? -- [[sodiumtheperson|sodium]]

----

Yes, djmush1, with all due respect, I think you've missed the point. You might, for all we know, be perfectly justified in believing that this embouchure is, in some sense, "correct." But Wikipedia has a neutrality policy: [[neutral point of view]]. Since many brass players would evidently disagree with you that this technique should be unequivocally described as "correct," we shouldn't say it is--it's not our place to instruct them that it is! --[[LMS]]



Revision as of 20:13, 5 January 2002

Some text in this article doesn't make complete sense, maybe resulting from the use of embouchure for a technique as well as the mouthpiece.


When the article states that the reason brass players do not use the "correct" embouchure it attributes this to the technique being "lost with the passage of time." But it then details the correct procedure, and lists a player who teaches it. (Just one teacher in the entire world who teaches it?) If this is the "correct" technique why do other players not use it?


Also surely the reason "few (if any) players (students or professors) ... play with the qualities of the great players of the past century" is subjective, maybe they were just better players? -- sodium


Yes, this is puzzling. We can infer from the information supplied in the article that it is not written from the neutral point of view: supposing, as the last sentence says, that there is only one person in the world, Jerome Callet, who is teaching the allegedly correct technique, and supposing (reasonably) that other music teachers are very concerned about what "correct" embouchure might be and that they try to teach it, we can infer that the other music teachers would disagree that the technique described as "correct" is, in fact, correct. Hence, our describing it as "correct" is decidedly biased!


So, how shall we fix the article? --LMS


Word! I am glad that I inspired some debate about this!

I realize that I could written much more; my hands were getting tired! Maybe I need a new typing embouchure!!!


To respond:

Lost w/ the passage of time:


The original trumpet method books 1st translated into English in the beginning of the century were two: 1-Arban's, and 2-St. Jacome's. The French language includes a slight "lisp" in the pronunciation of the syallable "tu." In French, "tu" is pronounced "thu." Say "thu" and see where your toungue is. Voila, as they say, between your teeth! However, "classical" players in the US who started using these method books translated it as "tu." This syllable makes the toungue shoot forward and then receded. Arban states in his book "The phrase "coup de langue" {strike of toungue} is a misnomer; the toungue does not strike anything." The correct action is more like spitting; Miles Davis refers to it as "spitting a piece of rice off of your toungue" in his autobiography. In fact, as a beginner brass player, it is easier to produce a tone right away saying the syllable "tu." It is more difficult as a beginner to learn to play w/ the toungue through the teeth; it is even more difficult to change from behind the teeth to through the teeth!" Most of the "jazz" (big band) players played with the through the teeth embouchure. This method was passed down through big bands, r&b bands, chitlin circuit, etc. Once all of these opportunities were lost, and "jazz" players started going to "music schools" instead of getting into road bands (late 1960's, early 1970's) was this method truly lost for the most part, as jazz players started learning the classical technique of the mistranslation of the origignal method books. Most of the great players played by "feel"; they could not explain what they were doing; they simply did it. Maynard Ferguson could not teach his own son the trumpet!


What makes a player great? One must listen to recordings of the players whose names I mentioned. You may then listen to recordings of Dave Douglas, Roy Hargrove, Tim Hagans, and make your judgement. There is really no question. It is not a matter of saying, oh, Charlie Shavers was a "better player." There is a physiological reason why he was able to do what he did on the horn. Roy Hargrove is an incredibly MUSICAL person; his limitation is the physics of how he plays the horn. Listen to a record of Roy's, and then listen to one of Nicolas Payton, and hear the difference in sound, attack, range, intonation, etc.


I'm sure you can find other people other than Jerome Callet who can teach this. But: good luck! I never have! Like I said, most people that play like this claim to play "by feel." The subject is just not talked about. People are afraid to talk about trumpet embouchure, and those that do, almost never can play like the people I mentioned in the article.


In addition, Wynton Marsalis, the "leading authority" on trumpet nowadays, also plays with his toungue through his teeth, but his equipment (too large a mouthpiece and too heavy a horn), unnecessary tension in the corners of his mouth/lips, and use of too much air, hold him back from entering the ranks of the truly great players of the 20th Century (innovation also has been used as a measuring stick before as well!......)


I hope that clears up some questions you had; feel free to post or email others to


<djmush1@juno.com>


djmush1



You obviously know a great deal more than me about this, and I think a lot of your reply would be useful in the entry. However there are still problems, which I am sure will be resolved. The technique is "correct" in the sense that modern musicians use a mis-translated form. However it is not right to call the technique definitively correct, as in the article. Even if the most commonly used embouchure originated out of a mistranslation, the majority of players have not switched to the original form--it must have something going for it. For the same reason, the reason for a player's greatness is subjective. If everybody agreed that it was down to the embouchure then, again, wouldn't all the players of today switch to it? -- sodium


Yes, djmush1, with all due respect, I think you've missed the point. You might, for all we know, be perfectly justified in believing that this embouchure is, in some sense, "correct." But Wikipedia has a neutrality policy: neutral point of view. Since many brass players would evidently disagree with you that this technique should be unequivocally described as "correct," we shouldn't say it is--it's not our place to instruct them that it is! --LMS