Free buzzing

[Erik_Sweden]

Hi all,

When I free buzz, I'm able to buzz down to C2, there it stops.
Question is: will my normal playing be better if I can free buzz whole my playing range?
If yes, do you change embourechure?

/Erik

[Doug Elliott]

I think it's unnecessary and potentially a bad idea to freebuzz the bottom of your range. It's nearly impossible to do it without changing away from the way you would (or should) play that range on the horn. When you push everything forward to an unnatural puckered position the way most players would buzz low range, it's in effect training the muscles to hold a wrong position that has no relation to way you should play.

I use freebuzzing in my teaching to fix a lot of problems, and it works extremely well if done correctly.

[Erik_Sweden]

Thanks Doug

[happyroman]

Arnold Jacobs was not a fan of free buzzing, although a few of his more advanced students, including Pat Sheridan and Gail Williams, both did it. Pat said in his interview on TubaPeopleTV that he would do only a few minutes of free buzzing at a time in order to work on firming his corners, to which Jake did not object.

Mr. Jacobs always taught that one should buzz with either a mouthpiece or a practice rim. The purpose was to isolate the muscles of the embouchure inside the cup. He explained that the lip muscles consisted of the large thick muscles that form the obicularis oris. Interwoven in these are tiny, delicate muscles that form what he called a basket weave structure. He said it was these muscles that are primarily responsible for shaping the lip through retraction, protraction, elevation and depression. It is this change shaping that results in the lips being able to vibrate at different frequencies.

Mr. Jacobs believed that excessive (and/or incorrect) free buzzing could result in the overdevelopment of the larger obicularis oris muscles and that could cause them to overpower the more delicate muscles that are primarily responsible for shape (and pitch) change. He also taught that in order for these small, more delicate muscles to be developed properly, one needs the light pressure of the rim against the lips. This is what isolates the muscles inside the cup of the mouthpiece.

So, the bottom line is that free buzzing can be helpful in small doses. But it's like taking aspirin for a headache. Taking one or two is fine, but taking the whole bottle can cause a lot of problems. If you are going to free buzz, it would be a good idea to know exactly why you are doing it, and work with a teacher like Doug to make sure you are doing it correctly in order to benefit from it.

[Doug Elliott]

Freebuzzing is in some ways like lifting light weights. Just like any weight training or other exercise, you do it for a small amount of time and move on to something else. Done correctly, it's great to gain control - it's not so much about strength. I disagree with Jacobs about using a rim to isolate the muscles. The major benefit of freebuzzing CORRECTLY is that you learn to isolate the vibration yourself, and control a position that vibrates easily and efficiently.

[happyroman]

Freebuzzing is in some ways like lifting light weights. Just like any weight training or other exercise, you do it for a small amount of time and move on to something else. Done correctly, it's great to gain control - it's not so much about strength. I disagree with Jacobs about using a rim to isolate the muscles. The major benefit of freebuzzing CORRECTLY is that you learn to isolate the vibration yourself, and control a position that vibrates easily and efficiently.

I forget the exact language that Mr. Jacobs used, but there was more to using a rim or mouthpiece than simply isolating the muscles inside the cup. The fine, delicate muscles that are responsible for the change in shape are more easily "activated" (for lack of a better word) by the slight pressure of the rim. The placement of the mouthpiece against the lips allows these delicate muscles to function more efficiently.

The issue that concerned Mr. Jacobs was one where the large muscles of the obicularis oris could become overdeveloped with respect to the more delicate muscles if one did too much free buzzing. It is this out of balance condition that he wanted to avoid.

[Doug Elliott]

I still think he was wrong. I have found that most players who try to freebuzz use a completely wrong embouchure formation, and that's the problem. Do it in a way that I consider "correct" and it only helps, there are no negative effects at all.

Of course there's "if one did too much free buzzing.". If you drink too much water you'll drown... That's not a reason not to drink water.

[happyroman]

NM

[2ba4t]

I well remember John Fletcher's free buzzing. When the oboe played her A for the band to tune to, he (with an entirely innocent face of course) 'free buzzed' precisely that A at pitch on his lips then slid a little sharp and flat in imitation of the strings tuning in. Free buzzing is logically the best way to train your lips and ear. Of course you cannot free buzz low notes because the lips are moving too slowly. Beware trying this in public.

The muscular anatomy is easy to research. The different muscles are automatically finely tuned and will co-ordinate whatever their 'sizes'. I have not found a physician who understands Mr Jacob's concern but he was an ultimate teacher and wanted to and did achieve his goals with his pupils through such explanations. The same applies to the emphasis on breathing and all the physical training.

Different pitches require different embouchures. This is not heresy - it is common sense. Just play C1 and then each C upwards and note your lips. C5 is a rolled-in mass of muscle with the mouthpiece [conceptually] touching only the skin outside your lips. C1 is a flapping slow frequency pout.

The more muscle mass pressing the bottom and top lips against one another, the tighter the compression. If you roll in both lips as tightly as possible even more surrounding muscle is brought into play. Thus altissimo notes become easier because the tighter lips must vibrate faster - more frequently - at a higher frequency - ergo - high notes.

But the sound is thin and screamy (as in jazz lead trumpets). So there is a journey of training and compromise.

Bottom line - in MHO, the more you can achieve without your horn, - sight singing, free buzzing, correct breathing, physical fitness, eating pizza - the more you can do when you have it

[Erik_Sweden]

Thanks. Next time I eat pizza, I will see it as tuba training

[brendanige]

I enjoy free buzzing, in all registers. I find it helps with efficiency of buzz.

[2ba4t]

I was being entirely serious, most honourable Erik Sweden.

If you eat pizza whilst actually playing the tuba, even the most incredibly-expensive, super-heavy-ugly-shape mouthpieces do not respond very well. If you eat the pizza first, you can be intelligent, logical and honest with yourself and use an ordinary, reasonably priced mouthpiece which does not look like a school bus, weigh a ton and advertise your gullibility and insecurities.

However, I have now developed the first pure cheese mouthpiece. The Parmesan version has the hardest sound, the Camembert a lovely soft one - especially if left at room temperature for a month. [Actually, I read somewhere that at the Great Exhibition 1851 in London there was a cheese cornet!!]

Scientifically speaking, cheese is as good a Helmholtz resonator as brass, silver, titanium, gold or wood. And note how all the manufacturers have now produced identical mouthpieces of every type to cover all the bases - (sell more snake oil).

Mission statement - refute false mythologies, save money and nerves - just blow it out of the bell.

Try this for horror, nightmare stuff - 1) We were told not to rely on warming up at all. If it was cold you just held your hand over the mouthpiece to warm it up a little. 2) No one should hear or notice your breathing - you are not swimming - you are performing. 3) stop being self-aware - get on with it. Ah, the good old days before medicine, electricity, washing . . .

[peterbas]

[Deleted

[2ba4t]

I am a little more confused than normally. I thought this had been entirely dealt with in several other threads and innumerable sites on acoustics and physics on the web. Perhaps you are just kidding with me - however ... once again ....

With respect, as I understand all that I have researched, there is nothing connected with playing brass instruments that could be called in any way 'air compression'. No air is ever compressed. No air is used to 'fill' the horn or 'make the note in the horn'.

Yes, we feel air moving and we squeeze it through our lips but that is only because we have no other way of making them buzz. As we push it from the lungs it has to go somewhere after activating the lips - so it drifts through the horn. But the sound comes from our lips' buzz making a series of minute jolts to the molecules standing still in the standing still air in the horn filled with still air. When those jolts (sound waves) 'hit' the outside world's higher air pressure just beyond the bell most of them are bounced back and create a series of matching jolts back in towards you to hit your lips in perfect synchronisation with the next series of jolts they have created by hitting your lips. Some escape to make the sound our ears pick up when the escaping sound waves jolt the receptors in them.

Within our bronchial tubes, throat and mouth the air is indeed compressed as we push up with the abdominals and diaphragm whilst we are restricting its escape with our lips. Further, if we narrow its path by raising the tongue we compress it even more, enabling higher notes. This compression - like the thumb on the hose pipe - makes the air travel faster making the lips vibrate faster. Faster is more frequently - i.e. more - higher frequency - higher pitch. Actually, against our expectations, scientists will tell you that the narrower the escape route, the greater the speed but the lower the pressure - but leave that to Venturi and Bernoulli and others who understand these things and whose name ends with 'i'.

The only way to make the lips into vibrators is to compress them. The tighter the compression the higher the note as above. All great brass players have incredibly powerful face muscles, developed over years of hard practice - to enable this. They 'never' press the lips against the mouthpiece but only against each other.

So, inside the mouth we have indeed air being manipulated, 'squeezed', forced through narrowing passages and expelled extremely fast from the lungs. Yes, inside the mouth we have the Venturi effect of a gas being forced to travel faster as its containing tube narrows until it hits the lips for that triple high C whatever. But the moment it hits the lips the Venturi effect is over - so forget the nonsense and well meaning mythology of Venturi effect inside the mouthpiece or horn.

The shape of the mouthpiece greatly affects the behaviour of the jolts travelling through the molecules within it. Thus we can hear the difference between a huge deep cup and a shallow, jazz-screamer style cup. For that look up Helmholtz resonators. The actual body of the mouthpiece and its mass must be utterly irrelevant unless you are selling them. The vibrations of the body of the resonating tube - mouthpiece and horn - have no bearing whatsoever on the sound. The difference lies in the inner dimensions and shape. This has been proven again and again.

Please research and correct me.

[Doug Elliott]

Most of that is correct but not all.

You start out with
"nothing connected with playing brass instruments that could be called in any way 'air compression'. No air is ever compressed"

and then later talk about

"Within our bronchial tubes, throat and mouth the air is indeed compressed as we push up with the abdominals and diaphragm whilst we are restricting its escape with our lips."

Make up your mind.

Then:
"The only way to make the lips into vibrators is to compress them."

Well no. I don't have time to get into it right now.

[peterbas]

Deleted

[timothy42b]

The outside world isn't at a higher pressure, the static pressure is equal in the tuba. Think about it, how would it be possible to pressurize (or vacuum) a tube when it's got a hole in it the size of the bell.

Some years back I tried to measure pressure inside the mouth, just past the mouthpiece, and outside the bell with a homemade water tube manometer. Obviously the units are inches of water, and the conversion is 1 inch water = 0.036 psi.

Using a trombone, and the mouthpiece into a tee fitting that went into the receiver, and lots of duct tape, the results were 13 inches of water inside the mouth, 1 inch past the mouthpiece, and of course 0 at the bell. It isn't easy, but also not super hard to play with a length of aquarium tubing in through the corner of the mouth.

If there is no differential pressure there is no air movement. The differential pressure of 12 inches between mouth and receiver pushes air through the embouchure and mouthpiece throat. The differential pressure of 1 inches moves air down the 9 feet of trombone tubing.

Those are relative pressures. The absolute atmospheric pressure is about 407 inches of water, so you can see the largest pressure inside the trombone is 408, and inside the mouth is 420. This is not a high pressure system no matter what note you play.

I wish people would not use the term compression. Some use it thinking about air pressure, some use it for lips, and some for some nebulous third concept.

[peterbas]

Deleted

[timothy42b]

There is no air movement needed to get a standing wave. The air molecules only move locally to propagate the pressure wave.

Yes, yes, we all know that, but it's not relevant.

None of us play regularly on a horn with a diaphragm preventing air from going down the tubing. Air (and water, and electricity, and lots of things) move because there is a pressure differential and a resistance. Think back to E = i R.

Air would not move past the lips and cause them to vibrate if the mouth were not at higher pressure than the horn (though the difference is small). Air would not move from the receiver of the horn to the bell if the receiver were not at higher pressure than the bell (though the difference is tiny).

And on topic, free buzzing does require air to move from inside the mouth to outside, and that requires that the inside of the mouth be at a slightly higher pressure than the outside. I don't know of any way to seal the lips with a diaphragm and still free buzz.

[peterbas]

Deleted