The pitch is always somewhere down the players throat?

[hbcrandy]

Also, what really most affects the intonation and sound quality of your instrument is the brand of valve oil that you use. But, that can be a topic to be dissected in another Tubenet thread.

[timothy42b]

As players, what is the point of this discussion? Pitch is in your ears. Listen, play in tune and quit worrying about the minutia. Though I am not an Arnold Jacobs student, I admire his philosophies and teaching methods. I am told that he had a phrase for what I am trying to get across here, paralysis by analysis. As players of our instruments, all we have to know is what we do to successfully perform. The rest is unnecessary and will stifle your artistry.

Yes because one size truly fits all and all players have identical learning styles.

[Donn]

Well, if anyone's learning style depends on the acoustical physics of note production inside the mouth, throat etc., that's ... most unfortunate. But "as players", we're also entitled to take an interest in this stuff, that's all. There's nothing to worry about, it's just in the interest of science. We will get the occasional missionary peddling physical theories like this as a breakthrough insight, but as acemorgan pointed out, it can be scientifically valid or not, that isn't essential to whether you can get something out of trying it.

[iiipopes]

As players, what is the point of this discussion? Pitch is in your ears. Listen, play in tune and quit worrying about the minutia. Though I am not an Arnold Jacobs student, I admire his philosophies and teaching methods. I am told that he had a phrase for what I am trying to get across here, paralysis by analysis. As players of our instruments, all we have to know is what we do to successfully perform. The rest is unnecessary and will stifle your artistry.

Well, yes, but remember that the purpose of pedagogy is to be better at producing the articulation, tone and pitch desired in order to successfully perform. I see this thread as a pedagogy thread. It is worth talking about, since not all players learn in the same manner, as timothy42b's satire so aptly points out.

[hbcrandy]

As players, what is the point of this discussion? Pitch is in your ears. Listen, play in tune and quit worrying about the minutia. Though I am not an Arnold Jacobs student, I admire his philosophies and teaching methods. I am told that he had a phrase for what I am trying to get across here, paralysis by analysis. As players of our instruments, all we have to know is what we do to successfully perform. The rest is unnecessary and will stifle your artistry.

Well, yes, but remember that the purpose of pedagogy is to be better at producing the articulation, tone and pitch desired in order to successfully perform. I see this thread as a pedagogy thread. It is worth talking about, since not all players learn in the same manner, as timothy42b's satire so aptly points out.

As the holder of a bachelor's degree in psychology and years of successful experience as a private performance teacher, I fully understand that everyone's learning styles are different. I address those issues with more simplistic techniques that will elicit the required end result. When we were first taught to drive an automobile, most of us were not required to know the mechanics and physics of the inner workings of an internal combustion engine. We were taught the following:

- This is the brake pedal. This stops the car's motion.
- This is the gas pedal. This makes the car go faster and slower depending on how hard it is pressed.
- This is the ignition key. This turns the engine off and on.
- Etc.

...and with practice we became a skilled drivers.

The same is true for musical performance. From the pages on Arnold Jacobs in the book, "A Season With Solti", Mr. Jacobs said that when he studied human bodily function and worked with his laboratory equipment, he "put on his researcher's hat" When he was conducting a private lesson with a student, he "put on his teacher's hat". When he was on stage with the tuba in hands, he "put on his performer's hat". The first two hats required more in-depth thought than did the last. When wearing his "performer's hat" he heard the music in his head, trusted his body to do, automatically, the things he had practiced for years and sang the music with his instrument.

[peterbas]

deleted

[NCSUSousa]

Hi

Read an article talking about the demise of the old Boosey and Hawkes and saw this comment by Dennis Wedgewood " Even a basic knowledge of physics & acoustics is enough to know that the pitch/length of a brass instrument doesn’t start at the mouthpiece. Ignoring ‘end correction’ of the bell, and ambient temperature, the Pitch/length is always somewhere down the players throat."

Anyone care to elaborate on this? The down the throat bit in particular

According to what I've read on the physics, here are the basics, with some of my own opinions added:
The resonant harmonic series of a tuba (or any brass instrument) behaves like a pipe with a single closed end. For comparison, a flute behaves like a pipe with both ends open. The flute makes sense - it has a hole at each end when all pads are closed. Interestingly, the flute is the ONLY wind instrument that behaves this way and it's the only one where the players mouth is not making a seal to the mouthpiece. UNSW has some info on their physics papers on their website that go into all of this with more detail.

Assuming you can accept that physicists are doing the math right on that concept, here's the follow-up question: If the tuba is behaving like a pipe closed at one end, then where is it closed? It can't be at the bell, so it has to be somewhere between your lungs and the mouthpiece. Also, it's not at the mouthpiece - your vibrating lips and the air column are passing through that point. If the pipe resonance is determined purely by the instrument and mouthpiece, then the tuning slide would be unnecessary.
As for the concept that it's in the throat - I can accept Wedgewood's suggestion that it's in the throat. It's not a logical stretch to suggest that your vocal chords would make an excellent reflection point. Maybe it's further into the lungs. Who knows? To me, there has to be a measurable explanation about why tuning slides have their typical length of adjustment for different instruments.

Functionally, what does it all mean for a tuba player?
Two impacts:
First - how open or closed you make your oral cavity can impact tuning from note to note. This matches what is taught about mouth shape while playing.
Second - You can't just pick up someone else's instrument (tuned for them) and presume that the tuning slides are set to the locations that work FOR YOU. Of course, there are going to be exception cases where people similar enough to you that it will work - my dad and I are similar enough that we can swap instruments and not need to change any slide positions at all.

The impact for designers/manufacturers is a little more of a problem. If they're designing a new instrument, then they have to figure out how much tube to include or cut off (and where in the bugle to make those changes) during the design process so that it is in tune with itself across the harmonic series with different people playing it. It certainly explains why some instruments are commonly modified, like the 'EEb' tubas Wedgewood was criticizing. If the player who did the play testing during design wasn't in the middle of the physical range for typical players, then the instrument could end up either horribly sharp or flat for players who typically need either significantly more or less tuning slide that the player it was designed around when they play.

[peterbas]

deleted

[Donn]

It can't be at the bell, so it has to be somewhere between your lungs and the mouthpiece. Also, it's not at the mouthpiece - your vibrating lips and the air column are passing through that point.

Try it, if you will. Get out your tuba, or brass instrument of your choice, and play a nice easy note while altering your oral cavity as much as you can without closing off the air stream.

Your mileage may vary. For me: no difference in pitch.

What's interesting is that I can hear a pitch change, but it's a different tone inside my mouth. Weird harmonics like a jaw harp or didgeridoo. It's natural that there's a sound in there, with all that going on. It just isn't the tuba air column sound, as really should be fairly obvious if you consider that the lips are closing ("beating") during the sound production*.

(* I recall some controversy as to whether they're always beating, but even if you don't believe the high-speed photography proves that, I think it's fair to say that they can beat and produce essentially the same kind of sound.)

[timothy42b]

It can't be at the bell, so it has to be somewhere between your lungs and the mouthpiece. Also, it's not at the mouthpiece - your vibrating lips and the air column are passing through that point.

Try it, if you will. Get out your tuba, or brass instrument of your choice, and play a nice easy note while altering your oral cavity as much as you can without closing off the air stream.

Yes, that's what I find also, on an easy mid range note.

Now try an octave higher. Say, for me on trombone, in the G to C (both above middle C) range on trombone. Notes that are within my playable range but high enough to need some concentration. I can use a vowel sound in the tee area and hit notes cleanly, tah or taw and chip them ever time, while keeping everything else set the same.

An octave lower I'm not going to chip it but it's going to sound thin.

Vowel sounds are repeatable ways of altering the oral cavity, and while I don't notice much change in response in an easy range, I do in high and low ranges.

[Donn]

while I don't notice much change in response in an easy range, I do in high and low ranges.

Change in response? Does that mean the pitch is different, or are we on a new subject here?

I tried a higher note, and if anything, the pitch sagged if I did anything that interfered with air delivery, but otherwise, same as lower note - no effect on pitch. Possible effect on tone, but likely that's inside my head (physically.)

The whole question of where exactly the internal component of the pipe is, ought to make a person suspicious - it's the mouth? no, the mouth and the throat ... and the bronchial tubes and ... The tone is generated at your lips, and that's your end of the pipe.

[peterbas]

deleted

[anotherjtm2]

No sound in the vacuum of the cathode ray tube.
You would be going deaf off the silence.

The beam deflection coils on the neck of the tube can be sensitive to sound.

[MaryAnn]

What I always say to the analysis is paralysis guys is that for some of us, thinking about these things and understanding them is FUN. It does not get in the way of playing the instrument; it's like knowing how an engine works doesn't keep us from driving the car. It's a separate thing from driving the car, and both can be fun depending on the individual.

As for throat, I remember someone sometime somewhere got into a big deal about formants and drove everyone crazy insisting that it was a major breakthrough for everyone.
And Fred Fox at a workshop a couple years ago was changing everyone's tone for the better by messing with vowel shapes.
When I was studying oboe, I had a natural very high range; I did that by doing with my throat what I would do to sing those pitches. So I don't know how men with bass voices play high on the oboe. And I don't know how little bitty women play pedals on the tuba, but both can.

[Donn]

I have a frog in my throat!

[peterbas]

Deleted

[peterbas]

Deleted

[peterbas]

deleted