Sound at the mouthpiece vs out front

[Peach]

This is probably a topic far better done face to face but...

I've heard quite a few very good players talk about the need to sound pretty ugly to the player (for want of a better term). As I understand it, If you're sounding very round and dark from behind the mouthpiece, you run the risk of sounding dull and lifeless 'out front'.

Can anyone add to this at all with any tips for players looking for the 'right' sound? Is it just a case of recording yourself and/or using trusted ears in the hall...?

Clearly I need a few lessons again. Back when I was taking regular lessons my teacher rightly concentrated on sound, pitch and line.

Cheers,
MP

[bort]

Is it just a case of recording yourself and/or using trusted ears in the hall...?

Well, it's definitely this, for sure. I think it also helps to hear another player up close and far away, for a similar comparison.

I think the overall answer is "yes," but it's probably a little more complicated than that. The #1 rule though in anything is that it has to sound good out front, and no one out there cares what it sounds like to you.

I also think this comes with familiarity to the tuba as well. You just got your Gronitz(?), right? I think there's a decent adjustment period where you learn what how your physical actions transfer to sound and output. I'm finding that with my Willson this summer, which is the first real time I've played in a large ensemble with it. Willsons are notorious for being light on player feedback, so the "sound at the mouthpiece" factor is hard to discern. It's more like "how hard do I feel like I'm working" instead of "how rough does it sound"? Last night, I think I really cleared a hurdle -- with a smaller (less loud!) group, I was able to hear myself better in the ensemble and in the room, and really understand the basic concept of "do this and it sounds like that."

Not sure if this quite helps answer your question, but maybe it's partially helpful? I think that playing a different tuba in an ensemble takes a little getting used to, and like everything else, will help you gain that sense of control and automaticity you need to feel comfortable.

[windshieldbug]

I've put low brass ears I trust out in the hall whenever I've wanted back to back comparisons. I can tell you for certain that there is a difference between what the player hears/the sound in the immediate vacinity and the sound heard out in the hall.

But above all, it's the conductor's ears that matter!

[Jay Bertolet]

The only real hard evidence I can offer the OP is acoustical theory. That being the notion that sound waves of the fundamental pitch you're producing have the most energy and, therefore, projection. This specifically relates to overtones versus fundamental. If your sound is primarily fundamental, it will project more and up close, that effect will be more penetrating. A sound with lots more overtone component will sound better up close but maybe won't carry as far into the hall.

I have a real life example of this in my own equipment. My Rudy 4/4 CC is a very fundamental sound sort of instrument. I always found that horn very hard to listen to up close but out in the hall it sounds very different. One of my teachers had a similar horn (an old King rotary valve CC) and he noticed the same thing. He used to joke with me that this was how he knew the horn was projecting well. If it was unpleasant to listen to up close, it was perfect for the big hall and ensemble.

[Donn]

I'd be interested to know what he might have meant by "unpleasant to listen to up close" - if we're talking truly unpleasant or just falling a little short of one's ideal.

Seems to me that everyone here is talking about ensemble blend as much as distance. Though they're somewhat related, as the distant observer is equally close to all instruments, when the player is much closer to his or her own. For the tuba, low partials are naturally of great interest (though I would have said not so often the fundamental), but in my experience with loud ensembles of a less refined nature, there's really room for only one instrument down there (and if you're lucky it isn't percussion.) Everyone else is working with their equipment to produce a more strident tone - focusing energy into somewhat higher partials - in order to carry over the percussion and other general din, maybe because for the same amount of input energy the higher frequencies are more effective.

[PaulMaybery]

There are certain elements that give a tuba sound its presence in a large hall. The first that I think of is the compression/release from the tongue that gives a note its "head." In chamber music this might seem a little on the rough side. I also think of a locking of the tone/pitch so that it really pushes the instruments above and then simply and insistently, and without mercy drilling one's note through the orchestra. I had the same teacher as Jay and identify with that remark. Jake also had comments about orchestral/large hall performance as well, that sort of touched on the same idea. Even Fletcher commented about how he felt that artistry in tuba playing was merely an illusion and that we are really in the basement shovelling coal into a furnace. But for John at least, he could pull his horns in when playing chamber music. John also felt that some horns, that had an uncommonly sweet and pretty sound, did not have the "nastiness" needed for larger orchestra work. That last quote was direct from JF.

[tubapress]

I like to keep it simple. Create the greatest most perfect sound and musical product in your head first. Then project that amazing sound out to the back of the hall. The rest will take care of itself. The by product may very well be a less refined sound up close, but you can't create a great sound out front by creating an ugly front up close. Think of sending all of the resonance out into the hall.

[The Bone Ranger]

I believe your suggestion has some merit.

I've studied with some professional orchestra low brass players who definitely didn't sound as "pretty" as I expected whilst having a lesson with them in a small practice room for the first time. A little more "grit" or "rub" in the sound than I was expecting. From a distance though? Incredible, lively, projecting sounds, be it a small recital room or a large concert hall.

I think that the "grit" is a factor in projection into a hall, and also in how your colleagues perceive your sound.

A tenor trombone playing work colleague of mine recently switched from a Conn-style trombone to a Bach-style trombone. When playing alone, to my ears, his sound is now a little less pretty (still gorgeous though) and a little more rustic, but from the bass trombone chair in our band, I can now hear him much more clearly. Attacks are easier to hear, and there's just something about the structure of the sound that makes it easier to hear him, at all times, from a few feet away.

The prettiest I ever sounded on bass trombone, up close at least, also resulted in me being the least comfortable I'd ever been in ensemble playing. I had to make some changes to my approach and my equipment pretty quickly to ensure I kept getting work in town. I've been mindful of this when making equipment choices ever since, and when I'm fortunate enough to get some time alone in a large performance space, I'm always quick to blow a few notes to see how my sound is responding in the hall.

So no real answers from me, just observations. Developing your own, unique sound, is a lifelong process, and how you apply all of these elements, and in what proportions, make up your signature sound. A strong concept of how you want to sound, coupled with big air and big ears, will get you much of the way there.

Good luck on the journey!

Andrew

[cambrook]

I think this issues varies quite a bit due to the acoustics of the particular hall. I'd offer one comment to Peach's original post:

I've heard quite a few very good players talk about the need to sound pretty ugly to the player

I don't think you need to sound ugly up close, but depending on the acoustics/ensemble/repertoire it may be that in order to sound good out the front you have to be prepared to not worry about the sound under the bell. Without consciously thinking about it I'm sure I play with a slightly different approach when playing with a small group in a reverberant church than with a large orchestra in the concert hall.

YMMV of course, and I agree with Peach that it's one of those things better discussed over a beer.
(even if he didn't actually say "over a beer")

[The Bone Ranger]

Given "a sensitive and musical bass trombonist" (ha! ...but I'm actually lucky enough to work with two or three of them), I prefer "regular" bass trombones (Bach...Conn...etc.) to these new "super" bass trombones.

Recently, a fine bass trombonist (age: mid-30's...a conservatory-trained player) who I work with occasionally sold his "cannon" bass trombone and bought an Elkhart Conn "Minick" 62H in astonishingly fine condition. (wow...quelle improvement)

The "regular" ones' (as I'm echoing the previously-stated Bone Ranger sentiments, I suspect) are sonically easier to interpret.

Bass trombonists seem to be slowly moving back in a more "classic" direction, sonically speaking. Many of the "cannons" of which you speak are exceptionally easy to play, even top-to-bottom, have silly-easy low range, and will take as much air as you can give it. The "feel" of these types of instruments can be alluring. You can feel it ringing in your hands, and the near-field sound can be big, lush and warm, and flexibity and facility is excellent. All of this is very addictive. Do they make a player overlook things like projection, or how it responds when playing with other musicians? Perhaps. Which brings us to:

I must wonder if some of the really fine bass trombonists feel the same way about NOT over-the-top size tubas vs. over-the-top size tubas...(??)

I think, in a similar fashion to my words above, this is where big tubas can be tempting. You can feel it ringing in your lap, the light fittings in your practice room are resonating, it sounds like an organ up close. It's giving you lots of great feedback when you're playing, but equally important is whether the people around you are getting the sonic information they need/want, depending on whether they are paying of playing, of course...

Without consciously thinking about it I'm sure I play with a slightly different approach when playing with a small group in a reverberant church than with a large orchestra in the concert hall.

The professional concert band in which I make my living recently performed in one of the finer acoustics in my home town. Our usual venues are often, um, less-than-resonant, so this was a real treat. But for the first 5-10 minutes of our sound check, I was thinking "Oh god, this might be horrible!" We sounded hard, maybe even harsh. But almost magically, the sound transformed, and the performance ended up being one of the finer gigs I've played, and I have the recording to prove it. Not a word was uttered by a conductor or a player in order for these adjustments to occur, but these fine players simply listened and adapted, and the end result was beautiful.

YMMV of course, and I agree with Peach that it's one of those things better discussed over a beer.
(even if he didn't actually say "over a beer")

Seconded. Does it count that I was drinking one while typing?

Andrew

[swillafew]

I had some mentoring from a percussionist of all people (a really good one) and he assured me the percussionist is the person with the worst ability to perceive his own sound just because of proximity. He was speaking more of high frequency energy but we make some of that too.

[Rick F]

"The professional concert band in which I make my living recently performed in one of the finer acoustics in my home town. Our usual venues are often, um, less-than-resonant, so this was a real treat. But for the first 5-10 minutes of our sound check, I was thinking "Oh god, this might be horrible!" We sounded hard, maybe even harsh. But almost magically, the sound transformed, and the performance ended up being one of the finer gigs I've played, and I have the recording to prove it. Not a word was uttered by a conductor or a player in order for these adjustments to occur, but these fine players simply listened and adapted, and the end result was beautiful.".

I sure wish the group I played in could do this. We're scheduled to play in a large theatre this October which can seat 2200 patrons. The acoustics are great so I'm a bit concerned.

[Jay Bertolet]

Rick, are you doing a performance in Kravis? I hope so, the acoustics there are really great. Enjoy!

[Rick F]

Rick, are you doing a performance in Kravis? I hope so, the acoustics there are really great. Enjoy!

Hi Jay. Yes we are. We were invited as part of their 25th anniversary along with a choir. I played there once before many years ago with a brass quintet—sitting on a wing of the stage accompanying a large hand-bell choir. This was so long ago that Landres Bryant (now a tubist with "President's Own) was there with Dreyfoos H.S. orchestra.

I understand that when Kravis Center first opened the acoustics weren't all that great. They had to make some adjustments of some sort... maybe on the ceiling.