Research Context
The majority of printed works on trumpet mouthpieces tend to be of a short, restricted nature and generally tend to lack depth and detailed description. Nevertheless, the literature related to this topic does embrace a range of formats and approaches: from dissertations at Masters and PhD level to short articles in magazines, from information and advice sheets from teachers and mouthpiece manufacturers, to sales brochures from mouthpiece companies. The various publications may be categorised as follows:
- Academic works
- Articles written for magazines - general or biographical articles written in popular magazines
- Material in books and journals - specifically devoted to the subject
- Bibliographies
- Sales brochures from mouthpiece companies
- Advice documents from mouthpiece manufacturers
- Teaching materials, for example tutor books
In addition to the publications related directly to brass instruments and more particularly trumpet mouthpieces, there are works on various subjects that intersect with and inform this study. The means by which these are associated with the subject varies considerably; in some cases the links are obvious, in others they are rather tenuous. Whatever the nature of the association the publications need to be seen as part of the overall literature as theyprovide a means of placing research into a wider context.
Bibliographical guidance to literature, especially that in dissertation and article form,is provided by Mark F. Fashman’s Brass Bibliography: Sources on the History,Pedagogy, Performance, and Acoustics of Brass Instruments(Fashman 1990).Academic studies related to acoustics, soundscape and the physics of sound, offer insights into the production of sound, its resonance and reception which have informed this consideration of the design and use of mouthpieces. Although not directly referred to in this thesis, the work of John Backus (1977) provided background reading on the properties of musical sound, how it is generated, how it behaves and how it is reproduced.Backus deals with specific groups or families of instruments in order to describe how sounds are generated on all musical instrumentsIn the early part of the research this was essential as it provided me with a more thorough understanding of the properties of sound. Particularly important in this respect was the explanation provided on the properties of sound in the higher frequencies and how it is affected by lower frequencies. Since this thesis is concerned with trumpet tone it was important to examine how sound is heard and what may affect the accuracy of hearing. Schafer (1969) and Tagg (1992) discuss how the noise in society, especially in the work place, is affecting hearing and, in certain cases, how it is leading to deafness, an issue that is especially relevant to this thesis. Additionally, promotional leaflets from Siemens (1999) make reference to hearing loss over specific frequencies.
A number of studies focus on the use of listening tests (e.g. Collins, 2002; Lacasse, 2000; Dibben, 2003; Tagg and Clarida, 2003;) and since a listening test is included as an important major part of this thesis these works have provided useful insights in the writing of this work. In the planning of this thesis it was important that consideration was given to responses from a non-technical perspective (i.e. the general listener). With this in mind the discussion by Dibben (2003) of how audiences hear musical sounds were particularly important.
Since teeth formation plays ‘such a vital role in playing a wind instrument’ (Powell 1991:653) dental problems are a major area of concern for trumpet players and consequently for mouthpiece designers too. The problems appear to stem from the fact that what may be regarded as perfect teeth formation by a dentist may actually prove not to be the most ideal for brass playing. From stories that circulate amongst brass players it appears that in order to improve their playing a number of trumpeters have visited dentists in order to have a gap created between their front teeth. Bobby Shew confirmed the accuracy of these stories (personal communication 2002). In discussing dental issues Twanette Morehead (1991:651) confirms that ‘dentists have long been aware of the relationship between musical instruments and the teeth and mouth’. Porter (1967:3) acknowledges a ‘clear need for an understanding of the dental requirements of players of wind instruments’ and dental problems for brass players have been further recognised and discussed by Jacobs (1939) and Hunt (1948). Essential background reading and information on teeth formation, jaw shape and facial muscle formation was provided by Jacobs, Hunt and Porter.
The production of musical instruments requires precision engineering as in terms of trumpet mouthpieces the slightest variation in size can have a considerable effect on sound production. As Phyllis Stork confirms ‘altering any of these components by as little as three thousandths of an inch can dramatically alter the playing results of a given mouthpiece for a particular player’ (Stork 1999:4). Several authors give a detailed account of issues concerning the engineering of trumpet mouthpieces. These include Fitzgerald (1953:136), Malek (1953), Wilcox (1957: 219) Menke (1985:97-122), Tarr (1988:), McLaughlin (1995: 28-39) and Rohner (1991:75-80 and 95-97).
Academic work relating to various aspects of the performance and design of brass mouthpieces is relatively scant. However, a number of doctoral and masters theses do focus on this subject, most of which are concerned with various experiments involving the use of scientific equipment. The works originate almost without exception at universities in the USA. These dissertations fall into four types: (i) studies in trumpet tone (Myers, 1948; Kober, 1957; Hallquist, 1979, Kusinski, 1984), (ii) studies in measurements of mouthpieces (Malek, 1953; Hoffmann, 1955), (iii) studies of embouchures and dental problems (Jacobs, 1939; Hunt, 1948, Malek, 1953), and (iv) studies in structure of brass instruments (Goodwin, 1981). All four types of dissertation listed and consulted as part of the research have links with this thesis and provide important references. However, there are important and fundamental differences between this thesis and the four types listed above. Although making reference to tone, embouchure, dental problems and listener’s categorisation of tone and construction of brass instruments, this thesis is concerned with how the demands of trends within music (including the increase in trumpet range) may have affected trumpet tone through changes in mouthpiece design. With the exception of three of the dissertations consulted (Hallquist, 1979; Goodwin, 1981; Kusinski, 1984) all were published well before the 1970s when the range increase was perhaps at it most noticeable. Consideration and comment on the effects of increased range is therefore naturally excluded from the theses by Jacobs, Myers, Hunt, Malek, Hoffmann and Kober.
Kusinski (1984) focuses on the effects of mouthpiece design on listeners’ categorisation of trumpet tone. In addition to referring to various definitions of trumpet tone he provides a summary of the explanations on mouthpiece functions by the major mouthpiece designers and manufacturers. Kusinski explains the use of ‘tone quality adjectives’ (Ibid.:18-20) and how they relate to the literature survey in his work. The research findings of Kusinski are however somewhat limited as he used only one player performing one excerpt of music. Furthermore, the tests carried out only involved one cup shape and one manufacturer’s design. Kusinski acknowledges this limitation in his research and recommends that ‘further investigation in fine timbre discrimination might use several players performing many melodies to test performer and excerpt effects on listeners’ categorisation of trumpet tone quality.’(Ibid.:86). He also recommends further investigation into how timbre is affected by altering other design features; for example, mouthpiece throat sizes (ibid.:87). Kusinski acknowledges that different results in listeners’ responses may have been achieved by using mouthpieces by other manufacturers (ibid.:87). He concludes, that listeners could not categorise trumpet tone qualities performed on mouthpieces with different cup depths or with different backbore shapes (ibid.:85). Furthermore, within the scope of his investigation he concludes that the perception of trumpet tone quality is unaffected by performing experience or by the lack of it.
This thesis takes up some of Kusinski’s recommendations. For example, it includes the findings of a listening test that involved the use of a range of mouthpieces from various designers and included recorded excerpts of a wide range of melodies. However, the thesis also challenges Kusinski’s conclusions relating to the inability of listeners to categorise trumpet tone, especially in respect of the effects on tone brought about by changes in the depth of the mouthpiece. This thesis argues that listeners are not only able to detect changes in trumpet tone but that they also show a preference for certain types of trumpet tone.
A number of writers (Balliett, 1989:171; King, 1992:138; Seymour, 1995:50; Catalano, 2000:33-35; Hasse, 2000:32 & 78) make passing reference to the playing styles and performance codes of trumpeters. However, during the course of this research no work was found that contained detailed discussion on how performance codes influence the design features of a particular instrument. Given that the relationship between player, instrument and the music is of considerable importance in this thesis, the absence of discussion on trumpet player’s personalities, other than in social ways, represents a serious weakness in the available literature.
It is striking that despite the obvious benefits of such reference material for trumpet players at all levels, the focus of those dissertations in existence does not appear to be directed, in the main, towards benefiting trumpet players themselves. The huge number of trumpet players around the world who have a profound interest in the trumpet mouthpiece provide a massive readership for any properly researchedmaterial on the subject. More importantly, the information contained within these various works could be useful and effective in generating a positive effect on the many areas of uncertainty associated with the design and use of mouthpieces. However, this appears to be an opportunity that has not yet been taken. Not only do the subject areas tend to exclude musicians and music making but the areas of research to which they relate are concerned more with the science of sound than the social phenomenon of music. No dissertation on the mouthpiece appears to exist that includes discussion on how the pressures placed on trumpet players by the musical trends of the twentieth century may have affected design.
The Instrumentalist Journal, Jazz Educators Journal and Journal of the Acoustical Society of America provide the vast majority of the technical information. These journals are basically‘reading forthe brass player’ in which many aspects of trumpet mouthpiece design are discussed by a range of authors from various parts of the music industry. The kind of issues discussed in these journals includes: ‘Studies of cup-mouthpiece tone quality’ (Kent and Lazure, 1959:130), ‘An Experimental Study Of Trumpet Embouchure’ (Henderson, 1942), ‘Diagnostic Procedures for Determining Trumpet and Mouthpiece Selection’ (Moorehead Libs, 1991), Rupture of the Orbicularis Oris in Trumpet Players’ (Planas, 1982), ‘Trumpet Modifications and Repair: Mouthpiece Gap’ (Blackburn, 1979), ‘The Trumpet Receiver Gap: An Acoustical Study’ (Fleisher, 1982) and ‘Diagnosing Embouchure Problems’ (Faulkner, 1961). Of all the materials consulted in relation to this research, these proved to be the most valuable in terms of the wide array of issues on mouthpiece design that they discuss.
The majority of reference books that discuss the trumpet are either of a very general nature or are made in connection with the history of the instrument. Few of these books provide any detailed comment with respect to mouthpieces. Educational guide books such as Scott (1960:98), Snell (1997:74) and Dunscomb and Hill (2002:252), for example, whilst offering useful information on the instrument make only passing reference to mouthpieces. Exceptions, however, do exist as Baines (1993:22-23) and Tarr (1988:17, 80) provide some detailed information on mouthpieces and their functions. Additionally, Menke (1985:119-123) provides an insight into the design of mouthpieces from the sixteenth and seventeenth century.In recognition of the importance of mouthpiece design, Levinson (1999:143) comments:
In the chronicling of Harry James’s greatness as a trumpet player, the importance of the Parduba mouthpiece, that he favored, has been over-looked… (Levinson 1999:143)
Despite the shortage of technical details in books, they do nevertheless provide a rich source of information on topics such as the biographical details of players, comments on musicians’ personalities, advice for instrumental teaching, selection of the right instrument and the representation of the trumpet within films.
A significant role in the literature on the mouthpiece is played by commercially produced promotional material. Success for any company with a product to sell depends on good advertising and good marketing. The mouthpiece business is no exception. However, due to the small percentage of the population to whom the sales are directed, there is perhaps even more pressure placed on the marketing methods. Leaflets and brochures from mouthpieces companies, often impressive in both content and appearance, are therefore crucial in terms of generating sales. This form of literature is intended for, and directed at, anyone considering purchasing a new mouthpiece, and for such a person there is certainly no shortage of models to choose from or leaflets to consult. These brochures are almost always high quality, glossy and colourful publications showing impressive looking instruments and mouthpieces. They usually contain endorsements by at least one well-known player. For example, in the case of Yamaha (America), comments are provided by Bobby Shew, Mike Vax and Randy Brecker. The brochures also contain descriptions of the range of mouthpieces available from that company, accompanied by a brief statement of the characteristics attributed to each mouthpiece. Additionally, most company brochures contain a statement as to what makes their mouthpieces so special.
The main problem with these company leaflets, from a research standpoint, is that their principal purpose is to promote the company concerned as producing the best products on the market and in so doing they regularly credit their mouthpieces with quite an amazing array of performance characteristics. Potential customers are thus faced with confusing and often conflicting advice. A few examples of the promotional writing typical of this material will suffice:
It is an extremely powerful mouthpiece that sizzles and screams (The Brass Wind Catalogue 1999:54)
Has power with less resistance to provide a bright tone (Black Mouthpiece Catalogue. n.d. )
Provides good endurance with a brilliant tone (Schilke Company Catalogue. n.d:10 )
These comments appear in the brochures of different mouthpiece companies and yet despite the strength of their claims, the following statement appears in the brochure of another mouthpiece company:
Remember – a mouthpiece will not give you something you don’t already have (Curry Company Catalogue n.d.)
In searching for information on the performance of mouthpieces, if the above comment is accurate then it is becomes even more difficult to assess a design based on the description provided by brochures.
Whilst accepting that company brochures are too biased to be able to offer a true appraisal of the differing mouthpieces they are, however, useful as indicators of perceived audience / customer demand. In this respect they provide an index of the qualities that customers are searching for, or at least the qualities that manufacturers repeatedly isolate as having great importance. With this in mind, frequently used words such as sizzle and bright are incorporated into an audience test that forms an important part of this thesis. Additionally, it is recognised that words such as ‘scream’ and ‘brilliant’ form an important part of the vocabulary used by trumpet players.
The wealth of material on the subject of trumpet mouthpieces, while encouraging to a researcher, is also, however, problematic in many ways. Not only are the vast majority, in quantitative terms, produced by mouthpiece companies promoting their product as the best, but much of what that material contains demonstrates conflicting advice and information.Thus, mouthpiece company leaflets provide many problems in terms of the background reading associated with this research. In many cases it has been difficult to separate accurate facts and good advice from sales talk, as for example, when a company declares its product as:
Engineered like no other mouthpiece (Curry Company Catalogue n.d.)
This is complicated by the fact that the information contained in the leaflets is provided by renowned authorities on mouthpiece design. One naturally assumes the information to be, therefore, reliable. Furthermore, it is probable that all the claims made in respect of mouthpiece performance are accurate but that they depend on the player and the playing situation.
The technical nature of the language used in these publications is, at times, difficult to understand and occasionally rather intimidating, for example:
Mouthpieces designed on a fully-fledged 3D CAD/CAM programme that creates arc-to-arc geometry for clean, accurate toolpaths, resulting in cups that need no sanding or hand finishing (Curry Company Catalogue n.d.).
Lead Sleeve enhances slot lock and tone quality without adding resistance in the upper register. (Curry Company Catalogue n.d)
Now that we have lines, arcs, points and angles to describe the mouthpiece we will not be using the same terminology as other makers. The cup begins at r2 or r5 depending on the presence of L1 (GR Technologies).
Next take the Venturi (#4) and subtract it from Receiver 1D. Then multiply it by 1.5. Example , Venturi is .345" and Receiver is .385. Subtract .345 from .385 and divide it by 2, you now get an effective leadpipe wall of .020, multiply it by 1.5 = .030". Now add the .125 and .030 and you get a Zero Gap of .155" (GR Technologies Company Catalogue).
Despite the bias that is evident in company publications, considerable use was made of the information that they contained.
Trumpet tutor books consulted such as Langey (1909), Arban (1907), Wright and Rounds (n.d), and Colin (1980) are generally consistent in the information, exercises and studies that they provide for trumpet players. For example, they each provide basic exercises for beginners, scale, slur and flexibility exercises, plus advanced etudes. However, there is an obvious absence of written explanations on any of these technical issues. Although universally accepted by teachers and players alike, (Carter personal communication 1997, Grieg, personal communication 1998, King, personal communication 1999) as being excellent tutor books, they provide very little reference, if any, to mouthpieces. Additionally, with the exception of Colins (1980) they refer to top C as the uppermost note of the trumpet range.