TubeNet

But I'll put it here anyway because it could be interpreted as casting aspersions. Which is not the intent....anyhow, I stumbled upon a video interview of a local horn (not tuba) player whom I know and like (video from quite a while back) in which she discussed having taken lessons from Jake when she was still a teenager. She talked about how he impressed upon her that she should not think about how to play but her body would just do it. He demonstrated this by tossing a pencil to her when she was not expecting him to, and she of course caught it. He used that to point out that she didn't have to think about how to catch the pencil because her body knew how to do it; all she had to do was concentrate on the end result, the pencil in her hand.
She, however, as a pro, could never play high. Never. She always has positions as 4th horn. Well into her 40s. I took a lesson from her once and "got nuttin" which was the usual for me. I do remember her saying "WILL YOU JUST STOP DOING THAT?" at one point. Like, that was, um, not helpful.

Well, later on, the orchestra got a new bass trombone player, she and he got married, and in fairly short order she could play the horn's entire range and sounded immensely better than she had before. Her husband obviously was able to teach her how to play the instrument, and pretty quickly too.

Fire away.

He threw a mouthpiece at her. It's what Jake should have done...

Are you suggesting there may still be hope for me yet??

I'm on my bandwagon that it is only natural players who find technique all by themselves, who do not have to be taught technique. The rest of us, who cannot find it on our own, need to be taught. The one concept that was absolutely correct was that concentrating on how you are doing something, to excess, will lead to trouble. But that does not imply that not concentrating will result in being able to play the instrument will magically ensue.
My friend who recently got to spend time with the Berlin Philharmonic horn section, said they said that "whatever works for you" is your technique. However, many need a teacher to show them the places to look because they do not magically appear.
Example: Roger Lewis, bless his heart, states really clearly how to play the range on tuba. He doesn't throw a pencil or a mouthpiece at you but actually puts in easily understandable words how an embouchure works.

Disagree because you missed my point. The point being, that your assumption is that the body/mind will somehow innately find all branches on the tree to wander up in search of the goal. Maybe some of those branches are behind the trunk, and the seeker does not know they exist, consequently has no idea they are there to investigate. They can clearly hear what is wrong (and btw I have zero problem with range on tuba) but are not aware of all the branches available to investigate. That is the job of a GOOD teacher, who is someone who is not there just to encourage and get paid for it.

I have a tuba playing friend who cannot play pedals, which for most of us are the easiest thing to get out the bell. However, he can play pedals on a trumpet. I keep trying to get him to meet up on Skype so I can show him how to do it. It's clear to ME that he is tensing his corners, otherwise he would not be so able to play pedals on a trumpet but not on a tuba. He needs a teacher who can tell him what physical things to try that he has not yet "naturally stumbled across" in his many years of playing.

She says there are "natural players" who do well on their own, and they can be your 1st generation teachers (if they also have that ability.)

I don't know if she means there really is an inherently "natural player", vs. inherently not natural player. The term suggests that - "natural player" sounds inherent, not just luck - but someone who's taught a lot of young people might have a better sense of whether it's true, if there does seem to be a type of individual where you can just say, "okie dokie, keep working on it" and they'll move along on their own. Or if it seems like everyone is about equally likely to run into technique trouble, and it's just coincidence when some actually do and others don't. I'm guessing more likely the latter.

I should add, there are a lot of areas of human endeavor that depend on intuitive insight, that puts you on the path to some understanding, when that path couldn't have been found by any rational reckoning. How you know to look for that branch when you couldn't see it. It's highly valued in the currently popular software programming profession - and one of the reasons people are starting to look at "micro doses" of LSD as a better-than-coffee way to perk up your intellect. Not that I'm suggesting anything, certainly not in Arizona anyway.

And so there is a belief system conflict, not unexpected. Some people have all the right answers for everything. I like to live in a way that continues to look for more and more answers, no matter the topic.

The implication is that those who practice more, get better. Those who find what to practice, and then practice it, should get better. Those who can't find that thing that needs practicing, will not be able to practice it, not knowing it is there and not discovering it on their own. I have never understood the closed-minded attitude I see so often here.

Mary Ann, with all due respect, I agree with bloke. As a teenager, I had trouble with high range and endurance when I played trumpet in concert band. Then my last year at band camp at the regional university, I got to play co-lead in the jazz band section with one of my best friends. To have each other encouraging each other that week, I played higher, longer, and with better musicality for the jazz band portion of the band camp than I ever have, before or since.

A similar thing happened recently in my community band: no baritone/euphonium players showed up to play last season. So I bought the American-style baritone in my signature and covered the part, with mixed success. I was trying too hard. Once I got my confidence and the positive interactions of the director and the rest of the band, I relaxed into it and range, stamina, musicality, etc., are not an issue anymore. Will I make the "President's Own"? Well, no. I am a weekend warrior at this point, at best. But I know how to make the part fit the context of the piece and the rest of the band. I am still the only bari/euph player.

Yes, I agree with bloke. MaryAnn, I do understand your point. It is not always a practice issue. But it is not a "natural player" issue, either. It is a combination of having talent and perseverance, and a focused, moderate approach to the instrument, with occasional proper professional help as the need arises. Two quotes to ponder. The first is Edison:
""Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration."

The second is President Coolidge:
“Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan Press On! has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.”

Now, what does that have to do with anything? It is a balance: the balance between proper focused practice over the course of years, if not decades; relaxing into the horn and not being so tense the player counteracts the talent and the effort expended to play musically; and getting a good teacher that can point out what needs to be pointed out from time to time. On the last item, when I got the baritone, I immediately contacted a friend of mine whose undergraduate degree is in music education with emphasis in elementary band and fitting students to the proper horn, and who is also a brass player. This was to make sure I was approaching the instrument correctly, with the subtle differences acknowledged compared to trumpet the octave up and tuba the octave down for embouchure, breath support, etc. Then I got to work. But at one point in the last year, I worked too hard and overstressed my embouchure. I had to take a break and be a little easier on myself. So each person has to find their own balance of talent, work, internal fortitude, external help, and the focus on the music. The experiences that help a player find that balance can be from anywhere.

iiipopes wrote:Mary Ann, with all due respect, I agree with bloke.
...
Yes, I agree with bloke.
...
It is a combination of having talent and perseverance, and a focused, moderate approach to the instrument, with occasional proper professional help as the need arises.
...
and getting a good teacher that can point out what needs to be pointed out from time to time.
... So each person has to find their own balance of talent, work, internal fortitude, external help, and the focus on the music.

It seems to me you do not agree with bloke, as expressed in this thread. Nowhere does he mention professional help, a good teacher, external help. If you put in the time, if you pay attention, if you really want to succeed, then success shall be yours. It's Maryann who's been saying you'd need a teacher at times.

And I guess conversely, when success is not yours, then you must have not put in the time, or not paid attention like you should have, or not really given yourself permission to succeed or something (I think we're tacitly assuming that persons under discussion are mentally and physically adequate.)

My personal opinion is, that's baloney, but it's close to the truth only because 1) you can tell what you're doing a lot better than a teacher can, so you're in a better position to teach yourself, 2) people who are highly dependent on teachers don't make it very far, so they tend to be poorly represented in the population, and 3) bloke doesn't specify how long it might take for his program to achieve results, so there's no definition of failure - you might be snatched away from this mortal life before you finally figure out how to play, but that's covered under "putting in the time." I personally represent all three.

Nature vs. nurture.

Mans inhumanity to man.

Good vs. Evil.

Anything else??

Donn wrote:

iiipopes wrote:Mary Ann, with all due respect, I agree with bloke.
...
Yes, I agree with bloke.
...
It is a combination of having talent and perseverance, and a focused, moderate approach to the instrument, with occasional proper professional help as the need arises.
...
and getting a good teacher that can point out what needs to be pointed out from time to time.
... So each person has to find their own balance of talent, work, internal fortitude, external help, and the focus on the music.

It seems to me you do not agree with bloke, as expressed in this thread. Nowhere does he mention professional help, a good teacher, external help. If you put in the time, if you pay attention, if you really want to succeed, then success shall be yours. It's Maryann who's been saying you'd need a teacher at times.

And I guess conversely, when success is not yours, then you must have not put in the time, or not paid attention like you should have, or not really given yourself permission to succeed or something (I think we're tacitly assuming that persons under discussion are mentally and physically adequate.)

My personal opinion is, that's baloney, but it's close to the truth only because 1) you can tell what you're doing a lot better than a teacher can, so you're in a better position to teach yourself, 2) people who are highly dependent on teachers don't make it very far, so they tend to be poorly represented in the population, and 3) bloke doesn't specify how long it might take for his program to achieve results, so there's no definition of failure - you might be snatched away from this mortal life before you finally figure out how to play, but that's covered under "putting in the time." I personally represent all three.

There is a concept in law at the appellate court level called a "concurring opinion." A judge may agree with the result, but set forth an entirely different rationale for getting there. My post was a "concurring opinion." Without making it personal, I will only comment on one of your points - putting in the time. I play avocationally, not professionally. So by definition, the horn has to take a back seat to the day job. Some years ago, on a different instrument, when the day job was not doing so well, the avocation became the profession for a time. Yes, I did put in the time. Yes, I was able to self-critique, and I got many gigs with substantial remuneration as a result. There are other times when the solution to the issue at hand is not so apparent, so just like a person goes to a doctor for an ailment or an accountant for tax advice, it is proper to go to a music professional occasionally for help. So to sit in judgment as your post does, with excerpts out of context, is out of line.

bloke wrote:Sure, students can learn to self-evaluate from year-after-year of being taught specific pieces, but I would offer that teaching someone to teach themselves is more efficient - and more valuable. Again, when someone desires something strongly enough, they will pursue it until they figure it out for themselves (though sure, this may not be the fastest/most-efficient way - as others have likely figured it out many time before)...but history is jam-packed full of examples of people figuring things out for themselves.

So as to not read less (or more) into your post than is there, and just to try to ground this at some practical level, you're saying that when we desire to be able to play tuba in a particular way, in terms of tone & articulation and such, we can count on achieving that result on our own without instruction, within a reasonable fraction of a normal life span, if only the desire is strong enough.

Do you appear to understand what Mary Ann was talking about?
No.

Of course, I'm no mind reader myself, but I think I "resemble that remark", in that I went through a period of much frustration with technical matters relating to the simple production of notes in the normal range. That was early in my career as a tuba player, when it would have enhanced my possibilities a lot if I could have made reasonable progress. I don't know if a teacher could have pulled me through it, all I know is that I was spinning my wheels.

I set it aside and went with reeds for a while. You might say that if I had "enough" desire, I'd never have given up like that, but it seems to me that's the first thing I did right. Some years later I picked it up again, and it's going a lot better. Luck, choice of instruments, reading about the stuff Elliott and Wilk do on embouchures, legal marijuana, who knows, but it now feels like when I work on it, I get results. But a lot of opportunity goes by in 30 years. To the extent that your "you can do it" philosophy may be true technically, practically it seems like baloney to me.

I've always heard this type of statement

bloke wrote:.........a large bureaucracy - with a formal hierarchy"...or "a village"...or something...is......necessary for "progress" to occur........

as recognizing that different people have different talents, abilities etc., and when all these different people get together and pool their talents, everyone is better off. For example, if a bunch of us got together and someone had to cook, we'd want bloke to do it, not me. I'd help clean up, since I can do that without causing food poisoning

WRT teachers, as much as some would like to think otherwise, some teacher-student relationships do work better than others. Think back to when you were in school. Do you remember certain teachers who connected with you better than others? I certainly do. OTOH, some of my fellow students didn't like some of these same teachers, but did like others who weren't very interesting to me. So yes, a "good teacher" for one student might not be so good for another.

Indeed, and if you have some difficulty that you can't figure out with your tuba playing, maybe the best thing to do would be to just reflect on the shining examples that have come forth from bloke-patch. Heaven help us if we as a nation became so effete as to look for help from tuba teachers, thus corroding what's left of the self-reliant strength that has enabled America to throw off tyranny.

Since this is still reasonably reasonable, I know of quite a few horn players who, when introduced to the Balanced Embouchure development system and who had an open mind, suddenly had a high range that no amount of practice over many years had been achieved, because the concept of rolling in the lips (as Roger Lewis has stated in slightly different terms here a couple a times) had simply never been introduced. They kept hearing "use more air" which accomplishes nothing, after a certain place in range is reached, except more volume, because the vibrating surface just isn't going to do what is being asked. "Natural" players are able to "just find this" while others need to simply be shown. These natural low players, to a person, were using more and more pressure on a rolled-out embouchure to try to play high, and it just didn't work. I even had one teacher (one of the "use more air types") show me free buzzing a high C on horn, and yep, he was rolling in and DID NOT KNOW IT. And maybe would have even denied it even if shown in a mirror. I can play a high C easily now by rolling in, but do not have the drive at my age and with dystonia to incorporate that smoothly into my range. Had I been shown that simple concept at or near the beginning, I'd be more than a most excellent low horn player. Luckily for me, I really enjoy 2nd and 4th horn and would probably choose them anyway. Nobody's going to "win" this argument, as expected.