Buzzing reply


From: James Sowinski <sowinski@iucf.indiana.edu>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 00:13:39 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Buzzing reply


Michael you started this one up again!

I do not believe I have ever seen anyone claim the lips do not buzz while playing a note with the mp attached to the horn. As pointed out by Woodward there are a number of published studies including pictures of the lips vibrating while playing on brass instruments.

However one can find descriptions in physics texts like the one by Benade that indicate there is a very strong influence of the resonating air in the horn affecting the lips and influencing their vibration. This accounts for the ease of playing on center. The horn helps the lips vibrate when playing a pitch centered to the horn.

I believe the point is then that one can in principle hold the embouchure with a low amount of tension on just the mouth piece and not get a buzz. Then when the horn is added the resonance of the horn will start the vibrations of the lips. My understanding is that Mr. Adam (just to get that thread going again) does not advocate mouthpiece buzzing because more tension is needed to get a buzz on a mouthpiece than on the horn. His students are taught to use the lead pipe because this has a resonance that can help stimulate the lips.

From the previous times we have run through this thread it seems there is a large range of how much different players focus on the buzz. At one end is the minimalist let the horn do it. At the other end is have complete control of the buzz. I know excellent players of both schools. One was my teacher for a while and an ex-Adam AI who taught me to go with the horn. I know another guy who can play any note without valves and sound pretty decent too.

James Sowinski


From: bobeye@nbserv2.dseg.ti.com (Robert Eye 0207949)
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 96 10:22:11 CST
Subject: Re: Buzzing reply

Sorry folks, I've gotta comment.

>From: Jon Pankin <jonp@realnetinc.com>
>Date: Wed, 06 Nov 1996 16:09:47 -0800
>Subject: Re: Buzzingreply
>
>Gotta agree with Prof. Mike on this one. When you buzz w/o a mp, you're
>doing something entirely different from playing your horn.
> To wit:
> 1. The aperture is completely dissimilar - there's no rim
> pressure to shape it.

That's right. You use your embouchure muscles to shape the aperture. The mp
pressure is just sufficient to seal the airstream (which increases ever so slightly as you ascend). However, I do not change the embouchure between the "free buzz" and playing when I put the horn to my face (unless you count the SLIGHT pressure to seal the airstream).

> 2. You must stretch the chops back in order to ascend - not
> recommended for proper embouchure development.

Not the way I was taught to "free buzz." You aim the airstream higher and use
the upper musculature to constrict the aperture. Higher pitch without thinning the lips. The stronger the muscles get the higher you can buzz - and play.

> 3. Try buzzing a double G - then audition for the "Joker" role
> in Batman 4.

Can't get there yet, but my teacher can (or comes damn close). Do you think they'll consider him for the part? 8-)

> 4. Is there an air column when you buzz? If not, how can there
> possibly be a direct connection between what raw, flapping
> chops are sounding and resonant pitches within the horn? Geez!

You bet there is an air column; tight and focused. The better the air support the better the buzz. The buzz weakens or stops when the support is not there.

Raw flapping chops when I buzz? Not mine. When I get a nice clear strong buzz, the tone just jumps out of the horn. Finding where the player/horn COMBINATION resonates is easier for me when the free buzz is on target. It was not on target for me when I used to use the mp to form the embouchure. Plus, it is easier to find the pitch center on those "off" days when I buzz first and try to center the buzz.

Using the free buzz technique to start my playing, and the embouchure that results (I believe this is like the "muscle" playing that Eddie Lewis referred to in a different thread) has given me
        better tone (more focused and centered, not spreading)

        easier to jump intervals (the intervals feel closer together)

        easier articulation
I've played both using the mp to make the embouchure and using the muscles to make the embouchure. For me, there is no comparison as to which is better. I am playing pretty close to as well as I ever did (I just started back last year after a 15 year layoff), and this time I don't feel like I am fast approaching the limits of my playing ability (as I did in college and playing A LOT). Every week shows improvement. YMMV.

Regards,

Bob Eye

From: TigerLewis@aol.com
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:21:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Buzzing reply

I'm troubled by the direction that this lip buzz thread is going. I've never had a problem with people who don't buzz. "To each his own", right? I would never say that all trumpet players MUST lip buzz. If you don't want the effects that lip buzz has on a player (good or bad), then don't lip buzz. It's your choice.

I respect a persons individualism. I know that different practice techniques cause players to play differently. If one of my students leaves me because my teaching goes in a different direction than what they want to go, I don't have a problem with that, never have. If they want to play like a Jim Austin (Houston area teacher) student, then they have the right to stop taking lessons with me and either study with Jim or one of his students. Jim Austin does not advocate lip buzz. I do. Neither one is wrong or right. They are only different.

I don't have a problem with this difference. But it seems that some of you do. Several of you have come right out and said that lip buzz is bad. I consider it an insult. Lip buzz works for lots of people. It's not bad. It just might not be consistent with the way you learned how to play or the way you teach. Just because you don't do lip buzz doesn't make it bad.

Someone commented that lip buzz causes too much tension in the lips and not enough in the corners of the mouth. Is there only one way to play???? Did I miss something? What makes you think that tense corners are right and everything else is wrong. I happen to play the other way around. My lips are always more tense than my corners. I consider tense corners wasted energy. It makes sense for me to do lip buzz because through lip buzz I learn to control that tension in the lips.

I don't ever put down someone else's approach to the trumpet (except the high note guys and I'm trying to chill out on that). Please don't say things are bad just because you don't do them and especially if you don't understand them.

Eddie Lewis

From: walterstr@fau.campus.mci.net
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 19:28:50 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Buzzing reply

I agree with you, Eddie; there are many ways to approach playing and teaching the trumpet, and most that have been around awhile have validity, at least in certain circumstances. I do have a question for you, and please understand this comes from a believer in both mp (w/BERP or w/o) and lip buzzing: do you have students start using a lip buzz if they have few or no tonal problems (in other words, they have a free sound, not constricted, with good pitch center and good projection)? I guess another way to phrase my question would be: do you use lip/mp buzzing for purposes besides those listed above?

From: RList58361@aol.com
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 21:03:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Buzzing reply

In a message dated 96-11-07 15:34:22 EST, you write:

<< Someone commented that lip buzz causes too much tension in the lips and not
enough in the corners of the mouth. Is there only one way to play???? Did I miss something? What makes you think that tense corners are right and everything else is wrong. I happen to play the other way around. My lips are always more tense than my corners. I consider tense corners wasted energy. It makes sense for me to do lip buzz because through lip buzz I learn to control that tension in the lips. >>

I must agree. I have found that lip buzzing strengthens and tightens the CORNERS.. This is a very good drill for those who need to firm up the corners. On the other hand, some people, myself included, needed to learn how to relax the corners somewhat, because of an over-tense emb. set-up. This tenseness gave me the same problem that an earlier poster this week wrote about; that is the poor tone and nothing above a high C or D. I didn't have time to respond, but he seemed to be worried about building up the corners and airstream velocity. ( if memory serves me correctly ). I found that when I stopped the buzzing and buzz walk routines, I was able to relax a little, and my tone, projection and range improved, by not blowing so hard. Before, I could play beyond double C, but the work was too hard. Dizziness and such. I definitely agree that buzzing is a great drill, but one needs to know when and how much to use it. For me, it was too much muscle before finesse. MOUTHPIECE buzzing during a break, or when the chops "kinda ain't working right", really sets up the feel and re-instates the playing sensations to the point that all is well after a few minutes of this. Basically, I feel that if your corners and set-up are flabby, try buzzing routines. If you tense up too much, lay off of them for a while. ( IMHO ).

See ya, Bob List, Baltimore.

From: TigerLewis@aol.com
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 22:10:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Buzzing reply

In a message dated 96-11-07 21:13:30 EST, Bob List writes:

<< I definitely agree that buzzing is a great drill, but one needs to know when
and how much to use it. >>

Good point. I hadn't thought to bring that up. Since my reasons for doing lip buzz are more mental than physical, I spend no more than about one tenth of my Practice Routine time doing lip buzz.

I have a friend who used to lip buzz too much. It got him into all kinds of trouble. He could buzz some amazing stuff, but he couldn't apply it to the horn. He spent all his time doing physical stuff and absolutely no musical stuff. Any of you who are trying out a new physical approach and having problems with it might want to keep this in mind. When you narrow your studies on the horn to only physical stuff, it takes everything that you're doing out of context. No matter what you are doing physically, even if you're starting over, you need to maintain your musical studies; etudes, solos,
transcriptions, excerpts and most importantly lyrical studies.


From: TigerLewis@aol.com
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 22:10:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Buzzing reply

In a message dated 96-11-07 19:37:13 EST, Tim writes:

<< do you have students start using a lip buzz if they have few or no tonal problems (in other words, they have a free sound, not constricted, with good pitch center and good projection)? I guess another way to phrase my question would be: do you use lip/mp buzzing for purposes besides those listed above? >>

Sometimes. It depends on their situation. When a fellow professional takes lessons with me, I give her or him the choice. I tell them what it's about and then give them the choice. Fortunately, I am not just a chops teacher. Some pros have come to me just for improv lessons or other non physical things.

On the other hand, I make all of my beginners lip buzz. I've had great success with my beginners and I think the lip buzz has been part of that.

I use lip buzz to teach a wide range of subjects form flexibility to articulation. I use the lip buzz as a model, not as a strength builder. So for the most part, I do have most of my students do lip buzz. The exceptions to this are those kids who just can't buzz and those that adamantly refuse to buzz. I am able to adapt my teaching to meet these different student's needs.

Eddie Lewis


From: "Matthew P. Woodward" <mwoodwa@ibm.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 96 08:50:26
Subject: Intonation and Buzzing

I came across an old post when I was hunting for that Smithers article that is relevant to the point I was trying to make about how buzzing can help intonation.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 12:26:05 -0600 (CST)
From: Matthew Perry Woodward <mpw0001@jove.acs.unt.edu>
To: Trumpet Listserv <trumpet@acad1.dana.edu>
Subject: C trumpet intonation

I just came across a very interesting article about the evolution of woodwind instruments since 1700, but I think much of the scientific information in the article transfers directly over to the subject of brass instrument intonation, particularly in light of the recent discussion regarding intonation on the C trumpet. To boil down some basic points of the article, I'll first summarize what the article says about intonation as affected by increases and decreases in the speed and volume of the air column, which translates musically into crescendos and diminuendos. As a player blows gently, there is a response peak in the instrument which is set up by the vibration of the air column through the instrument which is closest to the actual pitch of the given note in terms of cycles per second (Hz). As we increase the force with which we blow, this response peak is complemented by another response peak which is excited at a higher frequency; the tone fills out, but the two complementing frequencies produce a pitch in terms of Hz which is slightly higher than the absolute pitch. As we blow with even more force, a third excitation frequency complements the first two, and the result of these three interacting produces a tone slightly lower than the absolute pitch. This can be seen if, without making concious adjustments in lip compression, we blow softly but fully, then increase to a mf to f level, then increase more to ff or fff level, and observing what happens to the pitch of the note.

To explain in the words of the article: "Pianissimo playing normally gives a smooth, colourless, cooing sound. The relative placement of the remaining response peaks has no influence. The tone fills out as the player blows harder, but if the upper peaks are not precisely aligned in a whole-number relationship, the playing pitch will try to drift sharper or flatter during a crescendo as these upper peaks gain influence."

These are the scientific properties of the instrument. We all know from our playing experience, however, that we can compensate for these tendencies, which is more easily achieved on some instruments than others, both in terms of the manufacturer of the instrument and the key of the instrument. Again to quote the article: "These facts force us to recognize that at least some players are somehow able to alter the physics of the sound-production process itself in a manner that can at least ameliorate the shortcomings of an instrument . . . The player is himself possessed of an air column, extending from his lungs into his mouth, whose shape is susceptible to extensive modification at its upper end via motions of the mouth, tongue, and throat muscles. This air column can 'talk' to the reed on its upstream side of the reed in exactly the ways that a clarinet (or other woodwind) may 'talk' to the reed on its downstream side. A skillful player can arrange to put his own response peaks in positions that best collaborate with whatever is provided by his instrument. The player can also modify not only the reed's shape and volume (which function as a part of the basic air column), but he can also shift its own characteristic frequency of best response to align it usefully with some multiple of the playing frequency, so that it can participate stably in the cooperative generation of sound."

I hope we as trumpet players can see the direct correlation to our own instrument, particularly in terms of the modification of the air column through the use of what my teacher refers to as "vowel shape" on the interior of the mouth, as a means of altering pitches which are not acoustically in tune on a given instrument. The main point about C trumpets in particular is this: there does not exist a C trumpet that plays perfectly in tune, so it is our job to find an instrument that plays REASONABLY well in tune, and then through the modification of our air column as we play, we "talk" the out of tune notes into being in tune through emphasizing slightly different peak resonance relations than the instrument "wants" to play naturally. The player is
responsible for more of the intonation of an instrument than we often like to admit. If we can find an instrument that is close to being in tune, then although we must alter the instruments natural peak resonance on certain notes to get the notes to be in tune, the amount to which we alter these notes should be slight enough that the tone on the given note will not be destroyed. The instrument plays a certain way naturally, so it is our job as players to understand the relation between our vibrating air column and that in the instrument itself, and through conscious modification of this air column, to coax the instrument into playing in tune.

The article I refer to here can be found in the Galpin Society Journal, Number XLVII (March 1994). It is by Arthur Benade, and is called "Woodwinds: The Evolutionary Path Since 1700" (pp. 63-110). Lots of excellent scientific information is included, and it is articles such as these (the Smithers article falls into this category) that can help take a lot of the mystery out of playing the trumpet, and help us play in a more informed, deliberate fashion.

Matt Woodward

From: "Matthew P. Woodward" <mwoodwa@ibm.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 96 08:50:23
Subject: Scientific Explanation of Buzzing

I thought given recent discussion of buzzing, I would post a large chunk of an article by Donald Smithers and two other gentlemen (physicists, I believe) that appeared in Scientific American several years ago. Mr. Smithers et al seem to think buzzing is certainly not a myth, but an integral part of playing a brass instrument. If someone has the reference to this article (date, issue, pages, etc.) handy and could post it as a followup, I would appreciate it. I don't have my copy of the actual article with me here in Vienna, just the text from the scan I did on it. I would highly recommend not
only reading the entire article, but looking at the diagrams that are included in the article itself. Most libraries carry back issue of SI.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
excerpted from:
Playing the Barque Trumpet
Research into the history and physics of this largely forgotten instrument is
revealing its secrets, enabling modern trumpeters to play it as the musicians
of the 17th and 18th centuries did

by Don Smithers, Klaus Wogram and John Bowsher [SNIP] The last writer who seems to have had some firsthand experience with the daunting problems of playing the baroque trumpet was the 18th-century German musician Johann Ernst Altenburg. He wrote that trumpeters needed both theoretical and practical instruction "partly because of these missing and out-of-tune notes, but partly also because this instrument tends to remain a mystery, more so than other and contrived instruments.''
Recent scientific investigations--the first of their kind--have attempted to give some definition to the mysterious and to provide a body of data relevant to a better understanding of the technical difficulties of playing the fixed-pitch baroque trumpet the way it was intended to be played in countless works by Purcell, Bach, Handel and many other baroque composers. These investigations illustrate the inseparable union of science and practice.
Earlier studies tended to concentrate on the acoustical characteristics of the instrument. Little attention was given to the integration of the instrument, its mouthpiece and the player. To understand the mysteries of baroque-trumpet playing requires an examination of the dynamic interactions among all three components, inasmuch as it is now known that the player has an enormous effect on the sound production of an instrument, considerably modifying its acoustical outputs. Such variables as an individual player's lips, teeth, tongue, oral cavity and throat also influence the sound directly regardless of the particular physical characteristics of the instrument itself.
What occurs in the regions before (behind) and after (in front of) the vibrating lips is equally significant; the antevibratory and postvibratory environments are not mutually exclusive but interactive. In other words, the generation of a trumpet's sound is not entirely dependent on the region of vibrating air beginning in front of the player's lips and extending to the instrument's bell-flare termination. The vibrating lips set up regimes of oscillation in the air not only within the mouthpiece and instrument but also in the player's oral cavities. The way these resonances interact is now the subject of much study. The preliminary data make it clear that the interaction is a hitherto unexplained but important factor in the generation and control of certain notes, particularly in the middle and upper registers of the instrument.
For example, any skilled brass player knows that nimble manipulations of the tongue or the throat muscles, or both, on sustained notes make it possible to perform trills without recourse to any mechanical devices (valves or keys). Without ecessarily understanding the underlying theory, the practiced artist thus alters the postvibratory resonances, which in turn control what is then heard from the player and his instrument. So-called lip trills are therefore a misnomer: fluctuations of the resonances behind the player's oscillating lips (in the antevibratory regions) are sufficient to alter the dynamics of the postvibratory air column (within the mouthpiece and the instrument). Comparable effects can be generated by displacements of the vibratory apparatus itself, either by shaking the mouthpiece on the lips or by some movement of the lower jaw. Such methods are generally unsatisfactory, however. They cannot attain the kind of control that can be exerted by subtle fluctuations of the antevibratory resonances within the player's mouth and windway.
In contrast to all other types of musical instrument, brass wind instruments have no oscillator of their own. The sound is produced entirely by the vibrations of the player's lips, which in turn modulate the air contained within the entire system. This is why the influence of the player on such acoustical parameters as sound and pitch is highly distinct with these instruments.
The integration of player, mouthpiece and brass wind instrument can be represented by an analogous but simplified model of these three distinct components in an electrical diagram [see top illustration on page 112]. Theory holds that for a trumpet player's lips to oscillate, the total of postvibratory and antevibratory impedances should have equal magnitudes but opposite angles of phase. With an instrument this condition is easy to meet, and so the player can control the precise nature of the oscillation with small adjustments of the antevibratory impedances. When the player sounds his lips by themselves or with only a mouthpiece, however, the postvibratory impedances become those corresponding to free radiation or to
the mouthpiece. The player in this situation has to make major adjustments of the impedances to ensure that oscillation can take place. Simple estimates of the magnitudes involved emphasize how important the impedances under the control of the player are and how relatively unimportant the impedance of the instrument itself is.
The least understood parameter of brass-wind-instrument playing in general and of baroque-trumpet playing in particular is the dynamics of the player's lips. Since the lips make the principal (and initial) contribution to the generation of sound in any brass wind instrument, it is ironic and regrettable that the dynamics of the lip vibrations is poorly understood. What one must deal with in this analysis is the non-linear relation between the flow of air through an orifice and the pressure across the orifice.

[SNIP]

Next to the instrument itself, the mouthpiece is the most crucial element for playing a brass wind instrument. It is an integral part of the instrument, equal to it in importance for generating specific impedance maxima (the ratio of the pressure to the volume velocity at a given surface) and achieving a favorable intonation curve (the curve that reflects the values of the playing frequencies), particularly for notes above the sixth harmonic. The mouthpiece and the instrument therefore have to be matched. Moreover, as we have pointed out, the player is part of the total system, and so the
mouthpiece must be matched to the player as well as to the instrument. It is the interface between the two.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I could go through and somehow highlight the most pertient passages to this discussion, but I think they are relatively clear. This study at least shows that it is the vibration of the lips that produces sound on the instrument.

One point of debate could come from his statement, "When the player sounds his lips by themselves or with only a mouthpiece, however, the postvibratory impedances become those corresponding to free radiation or to the mouthpiece. The player in this situation has to make major adjustments of the impedances to ensure that oscillation can take place." Please do not ignore the statement concluding that paragraph, however:
"Simple estimates of the magnitudes involved emphasize how important the impedances under the control of the player are and how relatively unimportant the impedance of the instrument itself is."

Food for thought.