Tonsils?

[sc_curtis]

Ok, I have heard the weirdest and strangest thing today:

I overheard a fellow brass player telling someone that they can get a bigger sound if they had their tonsils removed!

Has anyone ever heard of this? This sounds so ridiculus!

[Chuck Jackson]

The only possible plus could be less restriction in the air flow in the throat, but I think this is the same as a pistons/rotor, lacquer/silver debate. The time spent debating it could be better spent practicing. No "Magic Bullet" in this one.

Chuck

[tubeast]

Yup. Seems like it.
There was a discussion on this a few months ago, but I didn´t really care to check the archives.

If one was concerned about air flow resistance, it would be wiser and more efficient to increase the mouthpiece´s bore, as THAT is the narrowest part of the horn.

I tried this on an old raw brass MP. Results:
bore 9.5 mm, cylindrical
ring diameter: some 34 mm

As I increased the cup size in the process (Dad was a woodturner and had suitable hand held tools), the material is rather thin. (about 1 mm at places)
It never worked on the F, but I´ve come to use it on the CC with some success. (Pirates of the Caribbean just longs to be taken down an octave). Doesn´t work well above g in the staff, though.

[Haugan]

Actually, there IS a potential difference BEYOND just the possibility of a GREATER AIRFLOW. Your sound quality and pitch are not just the product of what happens AT and BEYOND (toward the bell) the vibration of your lips. The shape of your interoral cavity (as well as the configuration of your throat and lungs) have dramatic influence on the quality of your sound as well as pitch. This is one of the reasons that two different players may set the tuning slide on any given tuba in a completely different place to achieve the same pitch. Until you consciously or unconsciously "synchronize" your INTERNAL function with your EXTERNAL (the lips and beyond) you won't be using your full potential for resonance. By doing it (whether consciously or not) you will get a sound that can best be described as having a "vocal" quality, not just a static "drone" or "foghorn" sound (however cultured or cutivated they may be). One of the marks of this "vocal" sound is the presence of a full spectrum of overtones. Arnold Jacobs excelled at this, and "THE" Gabrielli recording done with Chicago, Philadelphia, and Cleveland orch. brasses is a good place to make observations, not only in Jacobs but from MANY of this "pool" of great brass players. Manually (trying to "feel" or "control") the success of this internal function is difficult; it is best achieved by adopting the "ideal" of a vocal quality as part of your "sound concept" and simply working TOWARD producing a sound that incorporates that quality. When done properly, not only will your sound "sing", but you will find that it takes FAR LESS AIR to produce tone than you previously thought possible. Ironically, the best way to "make this happen" is to deliver more air towards the embouchure than seems necessary, not by "blowing harder" but by making an attempt to INCREASE the RATE of flow while DECREASING the PRESSURE. This increase flow/decrease pressure concept is the cornerstone of Arnold Jacobs' later teaching; He confided to me very late in his life that he could have spared us "all the machinery, gizmos, and external stimuli" he had used on "all of us" (earlier students) had he discovered/realized how effective the simple flow/pressure analogy worked to achieve the "like" results. That is not to say that we (earlier students) "missed out" on the essence of his teaching; it was simply an ongoing developmental process, he continued to "learn how to teach" as we "learned how to play". John Taylor (editor of Arnold Jacobs: Song and Wind) once emphatically remarked to me (referring to Bob Tucci's period of study, which predated John's) that "When Bob studied with Arnold, he was still teaching EMBOUCHURE!" in an attempt to "date" Tucci's period with "The Master". (Those who knew Jacobs' later teaching know how little emphasis he placed on embouchure awareness, altogether) That would have been @< 1960. In my period (1971+) It was "Wind and Song". Brian Frederiksen (author of "Arnold Jacobs:Song and Wind") was around when "Wind and Song" became "Song and Wind". For the last 10 or so years he taught, there was a little "post it" note stuck on the music stand in Arnold's studio in Chicago's "Fine Arts Building". On the note were two parallel vertical lines, one @ 1/2 in. long, the other @ 2 in long. I often wonder how many hundred people were helped by those two simple lines; instructed by that friendly, resonant, cultured voice: "See those two lines there?"... "One represents flow / one pressure". "You're doing this: (too much pressure / too little flow) . Reverse the lines! THAT'S it - see how simple it is?" He had a way of ALWAYS making it simpler. A basment full of medical equipment, reduced to two simple lines in just over 40 years. Another example of Jacobs' "magic" at making things simple.

[Michael Woods]

Couldn't have been said better.

Bravo

[iiipopes]

You can think of it in electrical terms: increase amperage while decreasing voltage.