What is louder -B flat or G??
Euphdog
Ryan
ps. Notabando, don't answer this
flatla...@my-deja.com
tremendous volume is required to reach the audience, the G bugle -
although not of the same quality construction as a professional Bb
trumpet - projects a robust sound to the stands (in the hands of a well
trained player), and the Bb trumpet sounds nasal and puny by
comparison." - Peter Bond, PR Brass Staff/New York Metropolitan Opera
Trumpet/DCI 1997 PBS interviewee, RAM Virtual Symposium, December 1997.
[from "The Quotable B-flat," recently re-posted].
Stuart E. Rice
ser...@juno.com
http://www.geocities.com/marchingresearch
The Association for Research in the Marching Arts and Sciences
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Vince Lamb
In article <20001205005822...@ng-fr1.aol.com>,
eup...@aol.com (Euphdog) wrote:
> My question is what is louder --B flat or G horns??
>
> Ryan
I've always maintained that G horns are louder. Here's an example that
I have used to support this. I used to attend University of Michigan's
football games. During the third quarter, they'd send out
their "Fanfare Band" which had about 24 brass (and 3 saxophones).
They'd play at me every game. They were loud but not as loud as
Northern Aurora, who also had no more than 24 brass in 1996.
University of Michigan's fanfare band had the advantage of the best
players in the band, "better" instruments, playing standing still, and
no judge in their face with a tape recorder. Northern Aurora had, on
average, less talented musicians, "worse" instruments, playing while
marching full speed, and competitive pressure--and they still blew an
equivalent-sized unit of the most famous marching band in the state
away!
FWIW, I've read a piece in Drum Corps World authored by Wayne Downey
(this was in spring 1999) that he measured Bb horns as being louder
than G horns. He never did say how he measured it and the conditions
under which he obtained his data. Given his predisposition to Bb brass
as real instruments as expressed in the DCWorld article and
DCI's "Brass Roots" video (if you have any doubts, watch the interview
of famous instructors of the 70s and 80s listen to his response when
someone called modern G bugles real musical instruments. His response
is "almost"), I wouldn't be surprised if he measured in a way that got
the results he wanted. IMHO, his assertion is as believable as the
reports that propellor planes were louder than the first generation of
jet aircraft. Yeah, right. I've listened to big prop planes (on the
order of a Lockheed Constellation)fly directly over me and to Boeing
727s take off directly away from me (at the Atlanta airport upon
arriving for 1984 DCI). The scream of the jet engines was much more
intense than the buzz of the props!
I've listened to Bb "bugles" and G bugles this year. The sound of Bb
brass is *bland* in comparison to G horns. It's like having Whitney
Houston sing a Led Zeppelin song (Thanks to Whitney Densmore for this
simile!). It loses that distinctive edge that makes the music
interesting. IMHO, G bugles have a tone quality that more closely
approaches that of a powerful choir of normal human voices than Bb
brass do. If you want to hear the sound I'm writing about, listen to
the Bulgarian National Women's Chorus for the sound I'm referring to--
absolutely in tune, but the tone quality of the voices has not been
rolled flat!
One more thing. In a DCWorld interview from either late 1997 or early
1998, George Hopkins described an experiment he carried out in a New
Jersey mall. He showed pictures of drum corps to the average shopper.
Everyone responded that he was showing pictures of marching bands. His
conclusion--drum corps should give up their distinctiveness and
acknowledge that they are really marching bands! Gee, that's like
asking the average European peasant from 1491 if the Earth is flat or
round. Most of them would have said it's flat. Never mind that it's
really round! I have an even lower opinion of George's survey and
conclusion than Wayne's assertion!
Vince Lamb
"In Sheep's Clothing"
flatla...@my-deja.com
Vince Lamb <vince...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>FWIW, I've read a piece in Drum Corps World authored by Wayne Downey
>(this was in spring 1999) that he measured Bb horns as being louder
>than G horns. He never did say how he measured it and the conditions
>under which he obtained his data. Given his predisposition to Bb brass
>as real instruments as expressed in the DCWorld article and
>DCI's "Brass Roots" video (if you have any doubts, watch the interview
>of famous instructors of the 70s and 80s listen to his response when
>someone called modern G bugles real musical instruments. His response
>is "almost"), I wouldn't be surprised if he measured in a way that got
>the results he wanted. IMHO, his assertion is as believable as the
>reports that propellor planes were louder than the first generation of
>jet aircraft. Yeah, right. I've listened to big prop planes (on the
>order of a Lockheed Constellation)fly directly over me and to Boeing
>727s take off directly away from me (at the Atlanta airport upon
>arriving for 1984 DCI). The scream of the jet engines was much more
>intense than the buzz of the props!
Reminds me - during 1983 I&E it was determined that a jet airplane was
decidedly louder than a bugle when one flew over the Orange Bowl (after
taking off at a nearby airport) during my on-field solo. This
according to judges, and the tape I heard afterward of my euph bugle
being obliterated by 2-3 minutes of before and after jet/stadium
reverb. I stupidly played right through it.
S.R.
ronho...@my-deja.com
That explains one of the reasons I've always like the Bulgarian Women's
Choir. And disliked jets!
RON HOUSLEY
Oskar the Goat
Right,
Chicago's brass is bland... lol... tell that to Gene (Pokorny) or
Charlie (Vernon). And I'm sure Phil Smith or Phil Myers of the NY Phil
would love to hear that opinion too... what a generalization... As for
the volume issue, I am willing to bet that any of one those guys, all
by himself, could stand on the 50 finals night and play as balls loud
as he does in Pines of Rome or The Great Gate of Kiev, and he would be
heard over the twelve corps on the field.
The instrument is not the issue here, it's the player and the
method of projection and technique that he/she is taught. I am not
partial to a key of horn unless it affects the sound in a certain
register. For example, the F tuba is used for solo and upper register
tuba playing because it is built to play in that register. Yes, G
bugles were "built" for outside playing, and they are more durable
(thanks to Don Taylor for the Ultratone II durability lesson as
demonstated on the cafeteria floor of Discovery Middle School).
However, it does not mean that they will project the sound any better.
Once again, that is all relative to the player's air speed, tone
quality, and awareness of intonation on the field. This whole Bb/G
business is getting out of hand, and it is contributing to the downfall
of our activity.
Here it is in black and white... if you don't like the sound of Bb
flat horns in drum corps, you have three options- One, go buy a hot dog
while a corps with Bb flat horns is performing... Two, endure through
what you believe to be a heinous violation in the rite and passage
of "drum corps..." Or laslty, go to DCA shows.
The rule change was to allow more corps to form and let more
people in on the activity, not to cater to the "big boys." Only when
the stoic upholders of a drum corps tradition that was dissolved long
ago (when military use of the drum and bugle corps ceased to be the
only place to see it) will the activity realize that this is a good
idea. I know that this will probably be ripped to shreds, but I do not
care, because this is the last that this newsgroup will ever hear from
me. Hey, it's only around ten people that actually get their posts read
and responded to (by each other), so why should the rest of us bother?
Happy marching, and I wish you all a fond farewell in peace and love...
Matt Ray
sbur...@hotmail.com
Oskar the Goat <cat_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> The sound of Bb brass is *bland* in comparison to G horns.
>
Methinks someone didn't read the previous post by Vince. He was
referring to the blandness that is heard on the marching field. I would
take a Bb trumpet in an orchestra setting over a G bugle anyday, but a G
bugle was designed and built for a football field.
> Chicago's brass is bland... lol... tell that to Gene (Pokorny) or
> Charlie (Vernon). And I'm sure Phil Smith or Phil Myers of the NY Phil
> would love to hear that opinion too... what a generalization... As for
> the volume issue, I am willing to bet that any of one those guys, all
> by himself, could stand on the 50 finals night and play as balls loud
> as he does in Pines of Rome or The Great Gate of Kiev, and he would be
> heard over the twelve corps on the field.
> Here it is in black and white... if you don't like the sound of
Bb
> flat horns in drum corps, you have three options- One, go buy a hot
dog
> while a corps with Bb flat horns is performing... Two, endure through
> what you believe to be a heinous violation in the rite and passage
> of "drum corps..." Or laslty, go to DCA shows.
>
> The rule change was to allow more corps to form and let more
> people in on the activity, not to cater to the "big boys." Only when
> the stoic upholders of a drum corps tradition that was dissolved long
> ago (when military use of the drum and bugle corps ceased to be the
> only place to see it) will the activity realize that this is a good
> idea. I know that this will probably be ripped to shreds, but I do not
> care, because this is the last that this newsgroup will ever hear from
> me. Hey, it's only around ten people that actually get their posts
read
> and responded to (by each other), so why should the rest of us bother?
> Happy marching, and I wish you all a fond farewell in peace and
love...
>
> Matt Ray
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
- Steve Burstall
"The meeting of two personalites is like the
contact of two chemical substances: if there is
any reactions, both are transformed" - Carl G. Jung.
Tom & Karen Peashey
the silver plated Bb's are close...
but overall volume and brilliance... G
but just remember - the whole controversy will be moot if no one makes G...
Tom
"Euphdog" <eup...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001205005822...@ng-fr1.aol.com...
mike_d...@my-deja.com
sbur...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <90ib5j$lj9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Oskar the Goat <cat_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
>
> Methinks someone didn't read the previous post by Vince. He was
> referring to the blandness that is heard on the marching field.
I think Matt did read the post. He also said this, about the outdoor
sound:
"As for the volume issue, I am willing to bet that any of one those
guys, all by himself, could stand on the 50 finals night and play as
balls loud as he does in Pines of Rome or The Great Gate of Kiev,
and he would be heard over the twelve corps on the field."
As for blandness, neither the BD, who I saw only on TV, or the Cadets,
who I saw live and on TV, sounded bland, IMO.
Mike
mike_d...@my-deja.com
that
> I have used to support this. I used to attend University of
Michigan's
> football games. During the third quarter, they'd send out
> their "Fanfare Band" which had about 24 brass (and 3 saxophones).
> They'd play at me every game. They were loud but not as loud as
> Northern Aurora, who also had no more than 24 brass in 1996.
> University of Michigan's fanfare band had the advantage of the best
> players in the band, "better" instruments, playing standing still, and
> no judge in their face with a tape recorder. Northern Aurora had, on
> average, less talented musicians, "worse" instruments, playing while
> marching full speed, and competitive pressure--and they still blew an
> equivalent-sized unit of the most famous marching band in the state
> away!
>
I'd hardly consider that an equal test. There are a few variables you
have to consider:
The crowd at the game makes far more ambiant noise than a crowd who are
there for the specific purpose of watching a DC show. Of course the band
musicians will sound softer playing over 70,000 screming football fans.
Also, those very fans will absorb more sound then the much smaller
audience at a DC show.
The timespan. How can you possibly compare a DC show in the summer with
a football game in the fall?
Technique/training. Possibly the band kids have a bit more problem truly
"letting go"; I know we are always trying to get our band kids to
project more outdoors. They are so used to listening and playing with
good intonation and blend/balance that they sometimes tend to hold back
a bit when we want them to pump it up.
Mike
Catherine
"Tom & Karen Peashey" <tpea...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> Louder? easy G... but it's close... metal has a lot to do with it
> and the silver plated Bb's are close...
>
> but overall volume and brilliance... G
>
> but just remember - the whole controversy will be moot if no one
> makes G...
Aren't you glad that so many people in DCI know so much better than the
fans?
I am told by a friend that all these 50-corps hornlines are
superfluous. 30 good horns used to be quite enough to make a great
hornline. As a member of the mean 18 - '74 VK - I heartily concur.
It's too bad that so many hornlines have already been emasculated in
the cause of "proper intonation", "blend" and "balance". Those
concepts are important, but I believe them to be currently misapplied.
Can I get a "G....G....G...."
-- Catherine
-- Catherine
LEG at cba
>people in on the activity, not to cater to the "big boys."
Matt,
If you seriously believe this, it is fine by me.
But I have to ask three questions:
1) Why in heck did Div II and III institute a moratorium on allowing Bb
instruments for a period of 2 years? (I'm not sure if it has been extended.)
2) Exactly how many corps have been formed due in part to the "any key brass"
rule?
3) How many corps have gone to other than the key of G and at what cost?
Larry Girard
(left out the quotes to remove any implied bias, which may or may not be the
case)
SopMan99
"Euphdog" <eup...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001205005822...@ng-fr1.aol.com...
LEG at cba
>(this was in spring 1999) that he measured Bb horns as being louder
>than G horns. He never did say how he measured it and the conditions
That's why it isn't a scientific study.
Here's a challenge for a physics or acoustics major -
Propose a study using an anechoic chamber, audio spectrum analyzer, and a sound
pressure (decibel) meter having a flat response from 10 Hz to 25 kHz. You
would also have to identify a way to control the volume and pressure of the
airstream being applied to the mouthpiece (perhaps flow and pressure sensors).
Then take the following instruments into the test facility and collect data:
Getzen G-D soprano bugle
Olds Ultratone G-F soprano bulge
King 2V Soprano bugle (G)
DEG 2V Soprano bugle (G)
DEG 3V Soprano (G)
Kanstul 3V Soprano (G)
A selection of 3 student model trumpets
A selection of 3 "intermediate" trumpets
A selection of 3 "professional" trumpets
DEG 3V trumpet/bugle (Bb)
Kanstul marching trumpet (Bb)
Then compile the data and prepare a report for publication. Of course the goal
of such an exercise is to determine the loudness of the tested instruments as
compared to a standard reference and each other, and what effect the presence
and amplitude of harmonics in the fourier series have on that loudness.
Looks like a pretty good senior project to me.
Larry "G"
Jason Lowe
G is louder.
Phrenchy
and get kicked, in the head, with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one
does, it never happens. Sorry, flatla...@my-deja.com, that's a dumb
question, skip that one.
> "Outdoors, where there is little or no reinforcing acoustic, and
> tremendous volume is required to reach the audience, the G bugle -
> although not of the same quality construction as a professional Bb
> trumpet - projects a robust sound to the stands (in the hands of a well
> trained player), and the Bb trumpet sounds nasal and puny by
> comparison." - Peter Bond, PR Brass Staff/New York Metropolitan Opera
> Trumpet/DCI 1997 PBS interviewee, RAM Virtual Symposium, December 1997.
>
> [from "The Quotable B-flat," recently re-posted].
that's an opinion, how about a decibel rating
--
Jason C Frith
Wad Squad '92-96
Crown '95
Email: <ja...@frith.com>
http://jason.frith.com
http://wadsquad.crushed.org
Phrenchy
get kicked, in the head, with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one
question, skip that one.
> I'd hardly consider that an equal test. There are a few variables you
> have to consider:
>
> The crowd at the game makes far more ambiant noise than a crowd who are
> there for the specific purpose of watching a DC show. Of course the band
> musicians will sound softer playing over 70,000 screming football fans.
>
> Also, those very fans will absorb more sound then the much smaller
> audience at a DC show.
>
> The timespan. How can you possibly compare a DC show in the summer with
> a football game in the fall?
>
> Technique/training. Possibly the band kids have a bit more problem truly
> "letting go"; I know we are always trying to get our band kids to
> project more outdoors. They are so used to listening and playing with
> good intonation and blend/balance that they sometimes tend to hold back
> a bit when we want them to pump it up.
>
>
> Mike
plus all the kids in the college band were drunk, hungover, or both
Phrenchy
the head, with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does, it never
> It's too bad that so many hornlines have already been emasculated in
> the cause of "proper intonation", "blend" and "balance". Those
> concepts are important, but I believe them to be currently misapplied.
what in the hell are you talking about?
Dan Scerpella
mine: When I marched Madison in 77 and 78, I was enrolled at UW Madison and
played in the marching band. The marching band numbered 212 of which about 170
were brass. It broke down something like this;, 60 trumpets, 50 trombones, 12
frumpet 18 baritone, 16 tubas.
I would state without the slightest hesitation that the entire UW marching band
standing shoulder to shoulder on the front sideline could not compare in
overall volume to our 56 G bugles. And its simply for this reason, bugles are
designed to play louder. The Nickel/chromium plated brass of a bugle is thicker
and better able to withstand and project high decibel sound. I am confident
there is a scientific way to quantify this.
I noticed this year that the Blue Devil soprano (oops I mean trumpet) sound
was warmer, more centered, and made for cleaner passages. But I found that
sound to not have the same impact as G bugles.
What's the point of having an opinion if you're not going to
cram it down someone's throat?
The Central Scrutinizer
dans...@aol.com (Dan Scerpella) wrote:
> designed to play louder. The Nickel/chromium plated brass of a bugle
is thicker
> and better able to withstand and project high decibel sound. I am
confident
> there is a scientific way to quantify this.
>
My guess is that the material plays a smaller role
in volume than the shape of the bore.
--
James A. Chappell http://www.amon-hen.com/jac
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it,
doesn't go away."
-- Philip K. Dick
Rod Gornto
lega...@aol.com (LEG at cba) wrote:
> >The rule change was to allow more corps to form and let more
> >people in on the activity, not to cater to the "big boys."
>
> Matt,
>
> If you seriously believe this, it is fine by me.
>
> But I have to ask three questions:
>
> 1) Why in heck did Div II and III institute a moratorium on allowing
Bb
> instruments for a period of 2 years? (I'm not sure if it has been
extended.)
That one would seem easy to explain, I think. What good would it do a
Div. II or III corps to de-stabilize itself, financially, just to equip
itself with brand-new brass instruments? Two years will give all Div.
II and III plenty of time to be able to fund the purchase of new
horns. How many Div. II/III corps have bought new horns in the last
five years or so? That could have affected this decision, also.
Granted, not all Div. I corps are solvent enough to buy new horns now,
so I suppose there is an issue of equality across the board. However,
I believe that this inequality is going to give us a very interesting
tableau of sounds to compare, over the next few seasons.
>
> 2) Exactly how many corps have been formed due in part to the "any
key brass"
> rule?
How long has the "any key brass" rule been in effect? All of two
years! I realize that we live in a world of instant gratification (the
internet, 500 TV channels, Home Shopping Network, etc...), but come
on! Have just a little patience and see what develops.
> 3) How many corps have gone to other than the key of G and at what
cost?
Five DCI open class member corps have made the conversion. Three
perennial finalists and two semi-finalists. The cost of these
conversions is most likely different for each corps, I would think.
That's just taking into account the different make-up of each line in
terms of instrumentation and the actual number of new horns purchased.
I can't wait to hear what Dean Westman does with 22 euphoniums and and
a french horn line at SCV. It will undoubtedly sound very different
from Blue Devils or Cadets. At least as much as BD's and Cadets' sound
differed from one another last season.
--
Rod Gornto
Aaron Frost
crass and not reach the stands. On the other hand, a player projecting a full
round tone quality will seem louder in the stands.
I listened to some cadets warmups from Napster. I was quite impressed with the
distictive sound of a Bb hornline (granted it was the Cadets). However, that
sound did not transfer over to the field. In an arc setting were the audience
could be a 10 - 15 feet away, the sound Bb is simply amazing. But on the field
- bland in comparison to G bugles.
Sure BD and the Cadets sounded great - but who could say they would not have
sounded better (and/or louder) playing G bugles? We'll never know.
Just my opinion that's all.
--
Aaron Frost
Blue Stars Baritone '00-??
aafr...@yahoo.com
adfrost.tripod.com
Vincent Ferrera
loudness, you need to compensate for the sensitivity of the human ear.
There might be a lot of physical energy at 25 kHz, but only bats would
hear it.
vf
LEG at cba wrote:
>
> >FWIW, I've read a piece in Drum Corps World authored by Wayne Downey
> >(this was in spring 1999) that he measured Bb horns as being louder
> >than G horns. He never did say how he measured it and the conditions
Tom
Why has no one compared the sound of the all brass finish G bugles used by
such corps as Bayonne Bridgemen or Memphis Blues... It DID make a huge
sound difference... not bad or good... just different...
And although Bayonne for one was wonderful... and loud... they would have
been louder (if volume means anything) with chrome horns...
I'm sure there are those who would swear by the mello tones of those
lines...
bottom line is good brass players are good brass players..
Tom Peashey
"Aaron Frost" <aafr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aafrost00-4CED6...@news.charter.net...
Stan Maddox
shifted, and the airport started routing traffic over the stadium area.
Naturally, a plane flew over during the most beautiful part of the closer.
Grrrrrr...
-- Stan, hating the Dolphins to this day
Stan Maddox
> care, because this is the last that this newsgroup will ever hear from
> me. Hey, it's only around ten people that actually get their posts read
> and responded to (by each other), so why should the rest of us bother?
> Happy marching, and I wish you all a fond farewell in peace and love...
... he says, as he takes his ball and goes home.
Buh-bye (wavie-wavie).
-- Stan
mike_d...@my-deja.com
ronho...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
> That explains one of the reasons I've always like the Bulgarian
Women's
> Choir.
Maybe it's just those foxy Bulgarian women you like!!! :-)
Mike
mike_d...@my-deja.com
Stan Maddox <slm...@macomb.com> wrote:
> The Geneseo Knight ran into the same problem in Miami that year... the
wind
> shifted, and the airport started routing traffic over the stadium
area.
> Naturally, a plane flew over during the most beautiful part of the
closer.
> Grrrrrr...
Was it a plane load of singing Bulgarian women?
:-)
Mike
Levi Boldt
> 1) Why in heck did Div II and III institute a moratorium
> on allowing Bb instruments for a period of 2 years? (I'm
> not sure if it has been extended.)
In general, Division II/III corps operate on a budget with much less
room for error do Open Class corps. Buying horns is a major financial
commitment for them and should be taken very seriously. A wait-and-see
approach was a very wise course of action for them to take.
There were two open questions that need to be resolved before Div II/III
corps would get multikey horns: Did the two multi-key corps last year
sound any better than those with bugles? This is the subject of debate.
Personally, I thought Cadets sounded a little thin in the lower voices,
but I didn't notice much of a difference with BD.
More importantly than that, are manufacturers willing to cut sponsorship
deals with drum corps to defray the increased cost of the horns? It
seems that they are, at least for the "big boys" that have tried it.
Whether manufacturers will be as generous with smaller corps remains to
be seen.
> 2) Exactly how many corps have been formed due in part to
> the "any key brass" rule?
None yet. There's been a moratorium, remember? I do know of at least one
fledgling corps in Michigan that is considering Bb as a possibility. It
will be a couple years before they are financially able to field,
though.
> 3) How many corps have gone to other than the key of G and
> at what cost?
To my knowledge, five corps have made the transition: Cadets, BD, SCV,
Spirit, and Kiwanis. (When I talked to Jeff Bridges this summer, he said
Crossmen might make the switch as well, but not before 2002.)
Cadets have a reduced-price deal with Yamaha. BD is fully sponsored by
DEG. I believe Spirit got their horns free through their association
with Jacksonville State University. I have no idea what SCV's and
Kiwanis's arrangements are.
--
Levi Boldt
"The distinction between the optimist and
the pessimist: an optimist is someone who
says, 'This is the best of all possible
worlds,' and a pessimist is a person who
says, 'You're right.'"
- Joseph Weizenbaum
Catherine
news:90j3c7$7sj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <20001205091415...@ng-fl1.aol.com>,
> lega...@aol.com (LEG at cba) wrote:
> > 1) Why in heck did Div II and III institute a moratorium on allowing
> Bb
> > instruments for a period of 2 years? (I'm not sure if it has been
> extended.)
>
> Div. II or III corps to de-stabilize itself, financially, just to equip
> itself with brand-new brass instruments? Two years will give all Div.
> II and III plenty of time to be able to fund the purchase of new
> horns. How many Div. II/III corps have bought new horns in the last
> five years or so? That could have affected this decision, also.
> Granted, not all Div. I corps are solvent enough to buy new horns now,
> so I suppose there is an issue of equality across the board. However,
> I believe that this inequality is going to give us a very interesting
> tableau of sounds to compare, over the next few seasons.
Yeah, a corps possibly destabilizing itself in order to participate in an
"experiment" which there appears to be a whole lot of disagreement on.
That's fiscally responsible - NOT! And if the "experiment" proves to be an
error, I suppose it'll be so easy just to repurchase all G horns. What a
load!
> > 2) Exactly how many corps have been formed due in part to the "any
> key brass" rule?
>
> How long has the "any key brass" rule been in effect?
A lot of years in band. Why don't we work with some of those drum corps
wanna-bes in an experiment so we don't have to bankrupt individual drum
corps? Let's allow whomever wants to foot the bill for all this research
donate a few lines of Bb instruments to a few marching brass bands and see
what they come up with.
> All of two
> years! I realize that we live in a world of instant gratification (the
> internet, 500 TV channels, Home Shopping Network, etc...), but come
> on! Have just a little patience and see what develops.
If you buy a cable system and don't like it, you're only out maybe a few
hundred bucks. We are talking about changing one of the last things - an
entire line of G horns - that helps distinguish corps hornlines. Many of us
ran out of patience when the "never three-valves" resolution was broken.
> > 3) How many corps have gone to other than the key of G and at what
> cost?
>
> Five DCI open class member corps have made the conversion. Three
> perennial finalists and two semi-finalists. The cost of these
> conversions is most likely different for each corps, I would think.
> That's just taking into account the different make-up of each line in
> terms of instrumentation and the actual number of new horns purchased.
> I can't wait to hear what Dean Westman does with 22 euphoniums and and
> a french horn line at SCV. It will undoubtedly sound very different
> from Blue Devils or Cadets. At least as much as BD's and Cadets' sound
> differed from one another last season.
As is always demanded of me, let's see the figures - after all, they're
nonprofit corporations...
-- Catherine
Idontwantoknow
In the words of another Usenet veteran:
"Ad-fuckin'-os and unsubscribe!"
Alan
>-- Stan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
sbur...@hotmail.com
> >(this was in spring 1999) that he measured Bb horns as being louder
> >than G horns. He never did say how he measured it and the conditions
> >under which he obtained his data. Given his predisposition to Bb
>
> That's why it isn't a scientific study.
That's why he's a music arranger and not a sound engineer. Wayne would
know how to arrange the music to make all the instruments work as one.
Doesn't necessarity make him an expert in acoustics. Now if Wayne wants
to work on a PhD......
Sounds like a great idea. I know Chuck did some Bb-G sound checking
when he was with Colts. Does anyone have what he came up with?
> Larry "G"
--
- Steve Burstall
"The meeting of two personalites is like the
contact of two chemical substances: if there is
any reactions, both are transformed" - Carl G. Jung.
LEG at cba
>when he was with Colts. Does anyone have what he came up with?
If I remember correctly, he got essentially the same results as Peter Bond and
others did.
Larry "G"
LEG at cba
>loudness, you need to compensate for the sensitivity of the human ear.
>There might be a lot of physical energy at 25 kHz, but only bats would
>hear it.
Agreed. That's why the inclusion of spectrum analysis is important. Also, we
must consider that the presence of a strong 25 kHz component will combine with
other components producing beat frequencies which may be audible. This would
be especially true if more than one sound source is used (i.e. a section of
trumpets or bugles).
Larry "G"
WRoe424922
my B Flat....she said, "THE G IS LOUDER!!!"....I'm talking her to the mall to
the Beltone center to get her fit with hearing aids...I already stopped the
inner ear bleeding...THANKS FOR THE HELP, HONEY!!!!!
Stan Maddox
> From: mike_d...@my-deja.com
> Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
> Newsgroups: rec.arts.marching.drumcorps
> Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 18:52:09 GMT
> Subject: Re: What is louder -B flat or G??
>
> In article <B6528E03.F345%slm...@macomb.com>,
> Stan Maddox <slm...@macomb.com> wrote:
>> The Geneseo Knight ran into the same problem in Miami that year... the
> wind
>> shifted, and the airport started routing traffic over the stadium
> area.
>> Naturally, a plane flew over during the most beautiful part of the
> closer.
>> Grrrrrr...
>
> Was it a plane load of singing Bulgarian women?
>
> :-)
>
> Mike
>
>
Levi Boldt
> It's too bad that so many hornlines have already been
> emasculated in the cause of "proper intonation", "blend"
> and "balance". Those concepts are important, but I believe
> them to be currently misapplied.
Ummm... you're joking, right? Please tell me you are. Should we just
crank up the volume and let the shrapnel fly, quality be damned? Sounds
like a great way to get fans back into the bleachers...
Intonation is a must, especially if you want volume. Hornlines that play
in tune are louder than hornlines that aren't, even if each individual
in the in-tune line isn't playing as loud as the corresponding
individual in the out-of-tune line. Pitch is a place, not an area.
Blend is a must. When I listen to a hornline, I want to hear the
hornline, not the hero in the baritone line that is overplaying his
compatriots. I've never been one to shy away from full volumes in drum
corps (feel free to ask Chuck Naffier about that), but I've never gone
so far as to say we shouldn't worry about a good sound.
Balance is a must. When I listen to Khatchaturian, I don't want to hear
sopranos overpowering the rest of the hornline. I want to hear the lower
parts. But when I'm listening to Latin Jazz, those lead sops had better
cut through over the walking bass line.
banger3b
for many years(as a lot of others reading this probably also have) and, in
my own opinion, playing against walls and in corners and such, I can
absolutely play the g horn louder(soprano). but come pretty close with the
b-flat horn(trumpet). using the same mouthpiece in both horns. again, this
is the opinion of MY ears only.
--
"the view is MUCH better from the field"
Rich D.
Evil Soprano....
Phrenchy <now...@man.comxxxnotmyrealaddy> wrote in message
news:B6526E5E.2A2FE%now...@man.comxxxnotmyrealaddy...
> flatla...@my-deja.com, Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud,
> and get kicked, in the head, with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no
one
> does, it never happens. Sorry, flatla...@my-deja.com, that's a dumb
> question, skip that one.
>
> > "Outdoors, where there is little or no reinforcing acoustic, and
> > tremendous volume is required to reach the audience, the G bugle -
> > although not of the same quality construction as a professional Bb
> > trumpet - projects a robust sound to the stands (in the hands of a well
> > trained player), and the Bb trumpet sounds nasal and puny by
> > comparison." - Peter Bond, PR Brass Staff/New York Metropolitan Opera
> > Trumpet/DCI 1997 PBS interviewee, RAM Virtual Symposium, December 1997.
> >
> > [from "The Quotable B-flat," recently re-posted].
>
> that's an opinion, how about a decibel rating
Jeff Mitchell
I've just conducted a scientific experiment and it's a tie! While lying
perfectly still on the floor, I set my Bb trumpet 6 inches from my left
ear and my G soprano 6 inches from my right ear and listened carefully
for 30 seconds. I then proceeded to reverse my ears, and listened for
another 30 seconds. With no doubt in my mind, both horns were equal in
volume.
Jeff
Jeff Mitchell
Tom & Karen Peashey wrote:
> lol.......
>
> you are a piece of work
I've been called worse, much worse!
The only "real" difference between instruments is length. There are trumpets
that resemble the bore and construction of G sopranos. The rest of the choirs
are all similar in design. It is THE PLAYERS that make the difference. Drum
corps brass players come to play with power and precision. Secondarily, it is
the method of instruction, the tradition of the activity, the expertise of
the brass staff members, and the need to play fff or even byfbo with 30+
percussionists.
It is NOT the instruments that are louder, it is the players that are busting
their butts all summer long to get that big, rich, full, wonderful sound.
Let's give the credit to people who deserve it and not believe it is in the
instrument. We all love drum corps and know how hard everyone works or has
worked in the past to produce that special, unique brass sound.
Jeff, waiting for summer
>
>
> "Jeff Mitchell" <JEFFMI...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:3A2DB09F...@prodigy.net...
DTaylor91
Well, of course she said the G was louder, she couldn't hear the Bb! :^)
Don Taylor
ronho...@my-deja.com
Mr. Norman is suspiciously absent from this dialog, which should be
right up his alley, ah, so to speak!
RON HOUSLEY
Kevin Gamin
> As for blandness, neither the BD, who I saw only on TV, or the Cadets,
> who I saw live and on TV, sounded bland, IMO.
I saw BD live in Erie. I thought the upper registers sounded thready,
thin, not as powerful. However, like most of the people in this thread,
this is an opinion.
Soembody did ask if there had been any decibel measurements for the two
types of horns. That would be an objective measure.
As for Cadets, I can't say if they were bland or not, but that first
power chord in the show was so WEIRD because I'd never heard a corps
play a chord in that key before. Almost disorienting.
--
Kevin "Gadget" Gamin
Toledo Glassmen 1992-1996
Empire Statesmen 2000
"Give me all that you've got then crescendo!"
Dave Ludwick Jr.
"The Central Scrutinizer" <rlrr...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:90j2o9$7b5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
The Central Scrutinizer
>
> Then why do fiberglass tubas sound like crap always?
>
I wrote smaller role, not no role.
>>
>> My guess is that the material plays a smaller role
>> in volume than the shape of the bore.
>>
--
James A. Chappell http://www.amon-hen.com/jac
"You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline. It
helps if you have some kind of football team, or some nuclear weapons, but
at the very least you need a beer."
-- Frank Zappa
Tom & Karen Peashey
you are a piece of work
BEARSENTE
B-flat sound was at the BD Precision West show. The corps was doing a final run
through in the afternoon before the show. So.. How did it sound and feel? It
sounded like the Dev's were playing behind glass wall. The sound did not
tingle my spine or touch my drum corps soul. almost a muffly sound. The B's do
not "energize" me the way the G's do. I know it's not technical for some of you
but it comes from the heart.
Parkland03
>2) Exactly how many corps have been formed due in part to the "any key brass"
rule?
i know of one in my area that just started and is using any keyed horns because
they can't affors to buy bugles. So yes right there is one corps. added to a
dying activity because of the "any key brass" rule
Rod Gornto
"Catherine" <cather...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Rod Gornto <rod...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:90j3c7$7sj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
OK. This is not an experiment, it's a rules change. Simple as that.
I didn't like the whole changeover idea at first, either. I've gotten
used to it. I'm not as upset about this change as some people,
apparently. You honestly believe that the rules congress would change
the any key rule back after only a few years time? Get real. This is
a drastic change. Give it time. Ten years, maybe? Plus, if you re-
read my response, Catherine, you'll see that I've acknowledged that all
corps aren't financially able to fund such a purchase at this time. I
wouldn't like to see any corps fall on hard times because they tried to
make the change immediately. Again, time is the key here.
> > > 2) Exactly how many corps have been formed due in part to the "any
> > key brass" rule?
> >
> > How long has the "any key brass" rule been in effect?
>
> A lot of years in band. Why don't we work with some of those drum
corps
> wanna-bes in an experiment so we don't have to bankrupt individual
drum
> corps?
Let's allow whomever wants to foot the bill for all this research
> donate a few lines of Bb instruments to a few marching brass bands
and see
> what they come up with.
What drum corps wanna-bes? To whom are you referring, exactly? All
bands? That part of your response was really patronizing to me, by the
way. I am completely aware what instrumentation most marching bands
use. Bands also utilize woodwinds and even electronics, in some
cases. As long as that stuff stays out of the drum corps equation, I
can live with the any key brass rule.
> > All of two
> > years! I realize that we live in a world of instant gratification
(the
> > internet, 500 TV channels, Home Shopping Network, etc...), but come
> > on! Have just a little patience and see what develops.
>
> If you buy a cable system and don't like it, you're only out maybe a
few
> hundred bucks. We are talking about changing one of the last things -
an
> entire line of G horns - that helps distinguish corps hornlines.
Many of us
> ran out of patience when the "never three-valves" resolution was
broken.
I wasn't trying to compare the purchase of cable to the purchase of a
line of instruments. I was comparing the need for instant information
and instant results that the information age has ingrained in us as a
society. Patience is the key. One year, two years, even three years
isn't enough time for ANYONE to form a viable conclusion about this
rules change. Oh, except that some people are and will always be
against it, for whatever reason. You don't think that execution and
literature also separate drum corps horn lines from marching band
lines? I suppose you were at the forefront of the argument against
that first one-valve bugle, too? Let's just start over and go
valveless! Gimme a break.
> > > 3) How many corps have gone to other than the key of G and at what
> > cost?
> >
> > Five DCI open class member corps have made the conversion. Three
> > perennial finalists and two semi-finalists. The cost of these
> > conversions is most likely different for each corps, I would think.
> > That's just taking into account the different make-up of each line
in
> > terms of instrumentation and the actual number of new horns
purchased.
> > I can't wait to hear what Dean Westman does with 22 euphoniums and
and
> > a french horn line at SCV. It will undoubtedly sound very different
> > from Blue Devils or Cadets. At least as much as BD's and Cadets'
sound
> > differed from one another last season.
>
> As is always demanded of me, let's see the figures - after all,
they're nonprofit corporations...
Considering the lengths that you've gone to not provide hard figures in
some of your recent postings, I think that you asking me for numbers
might be just a little hypocritical on your part, don't you? Besides,
what does knowing precise numbers tell you about the corps that have
made the change? Nothing. The fact that they've made the change and
are still fielding a corps is enough for me. If you want numbers, go
get 'em. I'm sure you'll find plenty.
--
Rod Gornto
flatla...@my-deja.com
Phrenchy <now...@man.comxxxnotmyrealaddy> wrote:
> that's an opinion, how about a decibel rating
Welcome to the wonderful world of drum corps research. :)
Stuart E. Rice
ser...@juno.com
http://www.geocities.com/marchingresearch
The Association for Research in the Marching Arts and Sciences
mike_d...@my-deja.com
states...@worldnet.att.net (Kevin Gamin) wrote:
> <mike_d...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > As for blandness, neither the BD, who I saw only on TV, or the
Cadets,
> > who I saw live and on TV, sounded bland, IMO.
>
> I saw BD live in Erie. I thought the upper registers sounded thready,
> thin, not as powerful. However, like most of the people in this
thread,
> this is an opinion.
>
And live, I thought that the trumpets sounded just fine (of course,
MHO).
> Soembody did ask if there had been any decibel measurements for the
two
> types of horns. That would be an objective measure.
>
Objective, yes, yet IMO totally meaningless information.
> As for Cadets, I can't say if they were bland or not, but that first
> power chord in the show was so WEIRD because I'd never heard a corps
> play a chord in that key before. Almost disorienting.
>
Sounded just fine to me. :-)
Mike
Rod Gornto
Sorry about that, Catherine. I stand by my opinion, however.
Sometimes, I can be a little disagreeable. I like a good argument as
much as anyone here, but I didn't mean to be so snyde. I just felt
that I had a few things to get off my chest. Thanks for listening.
kno...@rootcom.net
right up his alley, ah, so to speak!
>
> RON HOUSLEY
I'm waiting for some poster to come up with a viable definition
of "loud".
Then we'll talk shop.
DRUMGUY7683
have to say I loved the sound. I think it opened up more doors for brass
arrangers to be creative & when teched & cleaned it was a very symphonic sound.
I absolutely loved The Cadet's program. Musically brass to percussion it was a
beautiful program to listen to. And as always BD's hornline was a gas again.I
look forward to hearing more brass lines play with Bb instruments.
mike_d...@my-deja.com
Catherine <cather...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> I am told by a friend that all these 50-corps hornlines are
> superfluous. 30 good horns used to be quite enough to make a great
> hornline. As a member of the mean 18 - '74 VK - I heartily concur.
>
First it's "get rid of the pit" and now it's "get rid of 40% of the horn
lines".
I thought you wanted MORE folks to march, not less.
> It's too bad that so many hornlines have already been emasculated in
> the cause of "proper intonation", "blend" and "balance". Those
> concepts are important,
Than why place them in "quotes" as thought they are NOT important?
> but I believe them to be currently misapplied.
>
How so?
Mike
Michael Cahill
Oskar the Goat wrote:
> The rule change was to allow more corps to form and let more
> people in on the activity, not to cater to the "big boys."
Oddly BD and Cadets, after saying no Bb until 2001, went
with Bb in 2000 thanks to sponsorships. SCV has now
changed over as well.
But this isn't really about them? It's about the smaller
corps and kids who haven't joined yet?
Why do I doubt this?
> Only when the stoic upholders of a drum corps tradition that was
> dissolved long ago (when military use of the drum and bugle corps
> ceased to be the only place to see it) will the activity realize that this
> is a good idea.
By that point there won't really be a DC activity, there will be
a touring summer marching band activity.
> I know that this will probably be ripped to shreds, but I do not
> care, because this is the last that this newsgroup will ever hear from
> me.
I don't recall hearing from you before this. I'd offer
you a goat as a parting gift but it appears you already
have one.
Enjoy your retirement.
Regards,
Michael Cahill
Michael Cahill
Levi Boldt wrote:
> Ummm... you're joking, right? Please tell me you are. Should we just
> crank up the volume and let the shrapnel fly, quality be damned? Sounds
> like a great way to get fans back into the bleachers...
Oddly, yes.
The public at large is far less concerned with quality
of sound than you believe them to be. If you doubt this,
note what constitutes popular music - cross reference with
attendance at rock, metal, rap concerts vs. symphonic.
End result - quality of sound is roughly 1,887th on the list
of why 85% of people attend popular musical performances.
I think it's a bit naive or egotistical to believe drum corps
will change this by "educating" the audience with Bb horns.
> Intonation is a must, especially if you want volume. Hornlines that play
> in tune are louder than hornlines that aren't, even if each individual
> in the in-tune line isn't playing as loud as the corresponding
> individual in the out-of-tune line. Pitch is a place, not an area.
>
> Blend is a must. When I listen to a hornline, I want to hear the
> hornline, not the hero in the baritone line that is overplaying his
> compatriots. I've never been one to shy away from full volumes in drum
> corps (feel free to ask Chuck Naffier about that), but I've never gone
> so far as to say we shouldn't worry about a good sound.
Good sound is fine. Symphonic grade sound is drab outdoors in DC IMO.
Particularly when it influences the type of music chosen.
> Balance is a must. When I listen to Khatchaturian, I don't want to hear
> sopranos overpowering the rest of the hornline. I want to hear the lower
> parts. But when I'm listening to Latin Jazz, those lead sops had better
> cut through over the walking bass line.
Your ears are one in 1000 at best.
If I asked people on the street what they want to hear when
listening to Khachaturian 95% will respond "that he's cleaning
up that Chernobyl mess and getting rid of the nukes".
Regards,
Michael Cahill
Michael Cahill
kno...@rootcom.net wrote:
>
> I'm waiting for some poster to come up with a viable definition
> of "loud".
>
> Then we'll talk shop.
That part of a drum corps show where the horns get so loud
and intense you can't hear the people next to you screaming.
MC
W Souder
>another 30 seconds.
OWW! I'll bet that hurt. Did you swich them back, or are they still reversed?
Pax, Bill Souder l_P
slucas99
every time he responds to a post about multi-key brass instruments.
(Seeing how he is so interested in the marching arts and sciences,
......as long as they coincide with his own personal point of view.)
Certainly, Jeff Mitchell is as highly a respected person in the
drum corps brass community as is Peter Bond. As much as I respect
Mr. Bond, and the comment he made which you throw around so often,
it seems as if there are more than one authoritative opinions on
the subject. Gotta be fair now. :)
SL
In article <3A2DBE3B...@prodigy.net>,
JEFFMI...@prodigy.net wrote:
>
> The only "real" difference between instruments is length. There are
trumpets
> that resemble the bore and construction of G sopranos. The rest of
the choirs
> are all similar in design. It is THE PLAYERS that make the
difference. Drum
> corps brass players come to play with power and precision.
Secondarily, it is
> the method of instruction, the tradition of the activity, the
expertise of
> the brass staff members, and the need to play fff or even byfbo with
30+
> percussionists.
>
> It is NOT the instruments that are louder, it is the players that are
busting
> their butts all summer long to get that big, rich, full, wonderful
sound.
> Let's give the credit to people who deserve it and not believe it is
in the
> instrument. We all love drum corps and know how hard everyone works
or has
> worked in the past to produce that special, unique brass sound.
>
> Jeff, waiting for summer
Jeff Mitchell
Peter Bond did alter opinions on multikey brass after hearing Cadets and BD this summer. It was posted on RAMD a few months back. It certainly softens the 1997 opinion of nasal and puny, which was 3 years prior to the implementation of multikey. This opinion is based upon his actual observations and would be more a reliable indicator of his current position.
Jeff
I (still) see three problems with the multi-key move: 1) The gradual assimilation of drum corps by the band world, and the loss of their independence and identity (unique instrumentation & sound). This may be unavoidable for assorted reasons, but is at the root (I believe) of many of the "traditionalists'" complaints. It's more than just a knee-jerk thing.
2) The end of corps using the same instruments and competing with a "level playing field" (at least in this one area). Scores for tone, intonation, facility and accuracy being more the result of training and talent rather than differences in, or judges' preferences for, certain instruments.
3) Although obviously part of a larger topic, many "improvements" in the activity, while enabling top groups to do something new or achieve a more "professional" performance level, increase the financial burden for those who hope to be competitive (or force them to fold). Take pit instruments, for example. You don't have to have them, but no corps is going to get much of a percussion score w/o them. And are they ever expensive! Electronics have the biggest potential in this respect, while (to return to the topic) brass is comparatively small potatoes; soprano bugle: $700ish, pro trumpet: $1200 and up. Cadets and BD sounded better than I expected, though I personally still prefer the G sound (especially for BD). The above are issues that will not be settled or shown to be right or wrong in one season. They will all be played out (no pun intended) gradually, and of course I may be proven totally out-to-lunch. I am hoping here to show that the multi-key argument is not as shallow as it seems at first glance. Compared to world hunger, it's shallow. But then, so is drum corps. Peter Bond PR 71-77, 96-99 Professional (Bb!) low-note artist today.
flatla...@my-deja.com wrote:
In article <90mdj3$ru$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
slucas99 <loo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Gee, I wonder if Stuart would include Mr. Mitchell's comments
>every time he responds to a post about multi-key brass instruments.
>(Seeing how he is so interested in the marching arts and sciences,
>......as long as they coincide with his own personal point of view.)
>Certainly, Jeff Mitchell is as highly a respected person in the
>drum corps brass community as is Peter Bond. As much as I respect
>Mr. Bond, and the comment he made which you throw around so often,
>it seems as if there are more than one authoritative opinions on
>the subject. Gotta be fair now. :)
I'm sure there are, and I appreciate your point. However, Jeff
Mitchell's paper from that same forum, same year (1997) addresses "The
Evolution of Judging Performance."
(http://www.geocities.com/marchingresearch/mitsym97.txt)Thus, if I ever find myself in need of an authoritative opinion on
judging, I'll surely go looking for it with Jeff's remarks. Until
then, we're addressing volume, and you have the fortune of having two
different kinds of authorities offer their perspectives on the
subject. I cannot apologize for providing access to relevant research
contributions of others. Even when they happen to agree with my views.The fact remains that (1) a question was asked, and (2) an
authoritative opinion from an authoritative forum was given. The
exchange wasn't about respect or even fairness, but research. The only
problem with research is access. I hope I've been part of the solution
to that problem.
Stuart E. Rice
ser...@juno.com
http://www.geocities.com/marchingresearch
The Association for Research in the Marching Arts and Sciences
>JEFFMI...@prodigy.net wrote:
>>The only "real" difference between instruments is length. There are
>>trumpets that resemble the bore and construction of G sopranos. The
>>rest of the choirs are all similar in design. It is THE PLAYERS that
>>make the difference. Drum corps brass players come to play with power
>>and precision. Secondarily, it is the method of instruction, the
>>tradition of the activity, the expertise of the brass staff members,
>>and the need to play fff or even byfbo with 30+ percussionists.
>>
>>It is NOT the instruments that are louder, it is the players that are
>>busting their butts all summer long to get that big, rich, full,
>>wonderful sound. Let's give the credit to people who deserve it and
>>not believe it is in the instrument. We all love drum corps and know
>>how hard everyone works or has worked in the past to produce that
>>special, unique brass sound.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Aaron Frost
> I'm waiting for some poster to come up with a viable definition
> of "loud".
>
> Then we'll talk shop.
The point at which bad tone quality overwelms your horn, causing the metal to
rattle, solder joints to break, and your tongue to come slopping out of the bell
to lick the crowd.
But seriously, I think that "loud" is not a constant and it varies from person
to person. What I consider loud may not be that loud to some other people; or
vice-versa. I was at our state (WI) marching band championships for the first
time this fall. UW-Whitewater had a pretty decent sized band (they were the
hosts). Now when they cut loose, the volume was not even close to what I had
become accustomed to in drum corps (even from smaller corps). However, to a
crowd unacustomed to drum corps volumes, UW-Whitewater seemed loud.
flatla...@my-deja.com
SCVsoprano13
Catherine
Vincent Ferrera <vp...@columbia.edu> wrote:
> That would be a good way to measure sound intensity. But to measure
> loudness, you need to compensate for the sensitivity of the human
> ear. There might be a lot of physical energy at 25 kHz, but only
> bats would hear it.
>
> vf
>
> LEG at cba wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > Then take the following instruments into the test facility and
> > collect data:
> >
> > Getzen G-D soprano bugle
> > Olds Ultratone G-F soprano bulge
> > King 2V Soprano bugle (G)
> > DEG 2V Soprano bugle (G)
> > DEG 3V Soprano (G)
> > Kanstul 3V Soprano (G)
> > A selection of 3 student model trumpets
> > A selection of 3 "intermediate" trumpets
> > A selection of 3 "professional" trumpets
> > DEG 3V trumpet/bugle (Bb)
> > Kanstul marching trumpet (Bb)
I would also wish to see the results for other voices - contras, baris,
middle people. Many of us appear to feel that Bb horns are weaker in
differing sections. I'd also like to see a test that covers all the
ranges... Purely for scientific purposes...
-- Catheirne
PaNors77
>From: dans...@aol.com (Dan Scerpella)
>Date: 12/5/00 10:20 AM EST
>Message-id: <20001205102045...@ng-ce1.aol.com>
>
>I guess everyone has their opinion based on their own experiences. Here are
>mine: When I marched Madison in 77 and 78, I was enrolled at UW Madison and
>played in the marching band. The marching band numbered 212 of which about
>170
>were brass. It broke down something like this;, 60 trumpets, 50 trombones, 12
>frumpet 18 baritone, 16 tubas.
Cool, heh, when I was at Cal State Long Beach in 77-78 we had 57 trumpets,47
bones, and 15 tubas, not to mention 14-15 F.Horns,83 clarinets, 35+saxes,and
like 25 flutes,heh. It was certainly louder than any corps,lol.
>
>I would state without the slightest hesitation that the entire UW marching
>band
>standing shoulder to shoulder on the front sideline could not compare in
>overall volume to our 56 G bugles. And its simply for this reason, bugles
>are
>designed to play louder.
The Nickel/chromium plated brass of a bugle is
>thicker
>and better able to withstand and project high decibel sound.
Exactly!! I think the thicker material and thicker finish of the older horns
WAS the difference. I don't think the newer silver plated/vibratory horns
today are as loud as the older horns either because of this,IMO. Again,(from
older post) we have a silver plated 2 valve DEG out here in San Bernadino which
I compared to my Kanstul 1500A trumpet. Hands down, my thicker, bronze belled
trumpet was louder than this bugle,heh. Therefore, I think it IS the
construction and material rather than the key that affects volume/tone.
I am confident
>there is a scientific way to quantify this.
>
>I noticed this year that the Blue Devil soprano (oops I mean trumpet) sound
>was warmer, more centered, and made for cleaner passages. But I found that
>sound to not have the same impact as G bugles.
I would agree here too, but I think the seemingly weaker upper register sound
could be due to lightweight horns(compared to the old G's of 20+ years ago) and
players still not quite completely used to the resistance of their new
horns,etc. I remember MY jolt when coming off the old .468 bore American
Heritage(kanstul) horns back in the late 70's,etc.
Nice to be on topic again rather that politics eh? But I'm with ya on that one
too Dan.
Phil
78 Kingsmen-upper lead sop
75-77 Long Beach Junior Concert Band 1st trumpet.
pro player today
>
>
VKGARRY73
>But seriously, I think that "loud" is not a constant and it varies from
>person
>to person.
HUH? WHAT? SPEAK UP! I WAS IN DRUM CORPS!
VKG!!
I've got a PBS mind in an MTV world
><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>¸.
·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>
Remove "byte-me" from address to respond by e-mail
DRUMAJOR
><((((º> bubbled . . .
> HUH? WHAT? SPEAK UP! I WAS IN DRUM CORPS!
EAR PLUGS! TAAAKE OUT YOUR EAR PLUUUUGS!
flatla...@my-deja.com
"Shaun P. Hickson" <sphi...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>Who were the peer-reviewers who reviewed this "research".
Any RAMDers who happen to be reviewing/reading (and/or voting) the
paper as originally posted here in 1997 (when the forum was called
"RAMD Virtual Symposium").
>Or is it simply opinion
>(albeit highly educated opinion, no disrespect intended to Mr. Bond).
It was opinion, although based on what he and his colleagues observed
when the two instruments were demonstrated and compared side by side.
>This is like that asinine college activity called "debate", which
>basically amounts to scoring points with pieces of "evidence".
Better than DCI propaganda, though, don't you think? :)
>And spare me
>the rhetoric about research in the marching arts and sciences being
>less well-developed.
Done. :)
>This isn't a marching arts and sciences question, it's a
>physics one.
Sure (and unfortunately, the ARMAS link to the only available website
with bugle physics information I've found has gone "funny" within the
past several months - I wish now I had downloaded that information,
though I may have and can't find it).
For now, I only have a link to Mr. Mitchell's website, whose only
references I can find offhand on volume and conical bore issues are as
follows:
"The bugle was pitched in the key of G for primarily two reasons. The
first was the ease of performance as bugle calls employed the second
partial G, middle C, fourth partial E, and fifth partial G. On a G
instrument, these tones are produced freely without a much strain and
can be easily mastered by a novice. Secondly, the key of G produces an
instrument that has is capable of producing high volumes, which is
vital for battlefield usage."
Personally, I feel this misses the point that it is the instruments
conical bore proportion (debateable in the case of the soprano-range),
and not its key which gives the instrument a capacity for higher
volumes of sound. Mitchell continues:
"THE 20th CENTURY US REGULATION BUGLE
In the early 20th century the US military bugle was redesigned. It
became more cylindrical and it's bell shape and length closely resemble
the trumpet. This allowed the bugle to achieve greater power and to be
employed for increasing use as a musical instrument."
This I disagree with, as well as Bond and others, according to what I
have read. Other references of Mr. Mitchell can be read at his bugle
website:
http://pages.prodigy.net/jeffmitchell/bugle.html
>If you want research on physics go study physics. They
>actually have standards for research in their discipline.
Agreed. We need to have this matter properly settled, and we certainly
can't expect DCI to investigate the matter (particularly since their
having enfranchised the band instrument industry).
In article <3A2F09EC...@prodigy.net>,
JEFFMI...@prodigy.net wrote:
>Stuart,
>
>Peter Bond did alter opinions on multikey brass after hearing Cadets
>and BD this summer. It was posted on RAMD a few months back. It
>certainly softens the 1997 opinion of nasal and puny, which was 3
>years prior to the implementation of multikey. This opinion is based
>upon his actual observations and would be more a reliable indicator of
>his current position.
Thank you for providing the text below. I would discount this opinion
as not as reliable, being based on passive rather than active
observations (as was the case with Bond in 1997), but I'll be
interested to read and comment on it now.
>>I (still) see three problems with the multi-key move:
>>1) The gradual assimilation of drum corps by the band world, and the
>>loss of their independence and identity (unique instrumentation &
>>sound). This may be unavoidable for assorted reasons, but is at the
>>root (I believe) of many of the "traditionalists'" complaints. It's
>>more than just a knee-jerk thing.
Basically, I agree.
>>2) The end of corps using the same instruments and
>>competing with a "level playing field" (at least in this one area).
>>Scores for tone, intonation, facility and accuracy being more the
>>result of training and talent rather than differences in, or
>>judges' preferences for, certain instruments.
Again agreed (although the superiority of tone with non-soprano range
bugles ought to be more evident outdoors - I think confusion on this
point is greatly contributed to by holding I&E indoors). It could be
that Bb trumpets are the best and/or only argument for non-bugle brass
instruments in drum and bugle corps, though I don't feel this justifies
compromising the instrumentation. As Head Judge Turner mentioned 3-4
years ago, 'I don't feel drum corps instrumentation is inadequate.'
>>3) Although obviously part of a larger topic,
>>many "improvements" in the activity, while enabling top groups to do
>>something new or achieve a more "professional" performance level,
>>increase the financial burden for those who hope to be
>>competitive (or force them to fold). Take pit instruments, for
>>example. You don't have to have them, but no corps is going to get
>>much of a percussion score w/o them.
>>And are they ever expensive! Electronics have the biggest potential
>>in this respect, while (to return to the topic) brass is
>>comparatively small potatoes; soprano bugle: $700ish, pro
>>trumpet: $1200 and up.
Agreed. In the past Bond and I haven't always seen eye to eye on a
personal level, but we certainly seem to agree on these issues.
>>Cadets and BD sounded better than I expected, though I personally
>>still prefer the G sound (especially for BD).
"Softened" to be sure, but of course this nothing we could compare his
1997 observations with. Having watched the high camera tapes (PBS
still isn't interested in broadcasting Finals out here, apparently), I
can't really tell any difference, but then again, everyone and their
dog seem to be able to discriminate sound better than myself. Again, I
feel the Bb trumpet may be the best or only argument for non-bugle
brass. Perhaps someday the tonal inferiority of longer bell-front, Bb
instruments like marching trombones will be more apparent and call for
re-evaluation (or simplification, heaven forbid) of the decision to
embrace non-bugle brass.
>>The above are issues that will not be settled or shown to be right or
>>wrong in one season. They will all be played out (no pun intended)
>>gradually, and of course I may be proven totally out-to-lunch. I am
>>hoping here to show that the multi-key argument is not as shallow as
>>it seems at first glance. Compared to world hunger, it's shallow. But
>>then, so is drum corps.
Heh.
Thanks to both of you, Shaun and Jeff. I think this has been
productive.
Stuart E. Rice
ser...@juno.com
http://www.geocities.com/marchingresearch
The Association for Research in the Marching Arts and Sciences
LEG at cba
>could be due to lightweight horns(compared to the old G's of 20+ years ago)
>and
>players still not quite completely used to the resistance of their new
>horns,etc. I remember MY jolt when coming off the old .468 bore American
>Heritage(kanstul) horns back in the late 70's,etc.
That's exactly why I proposed testing a Getzen and Olds soprano. The
construction of the instrument (metal thickness, bracing, finish) all
contribute to the intensity of the harmonics.
Larry "G"
Jeff Mitchell
flatla...@my-deja.com wrote:
Mitchell continues:"THE 20th CENTURY US REGULATION BUGLE
In the early 20th century the US military bugle was redesigned. It
became more cylindrical and it's bell shape and length closely resemble
the trumpet. This allowed the bugle to achieve greater power and to be
employed for increasing use as a musical instrument."This I disagree with, as well as Bond and others, according to what I
have read. Other references of Mr. Mitchell can be read at his bugle
website:
Stuart,
You continue to use Bond to support your point of view without reference. In commenting on cylindrical and conical, it should be noted all modern brass instruments are both. That being said, it is very simple to determine whether more conical or more cylindrical proportion produces greater volume.
The flugelhorn is the most conical modern soprano brass instrument. The trumpet is the most cylindrical. There is no question as to which is capable of more volume.
Here is more of Peter Bond's writing on the subject;
The G bugle makes this powerful sound possible. What is it and how does it differ from a Bb instrument? I will confine my comparison to the soprano bugle in G and the Bb trumpet. There are theoretically two families of brasswinds (excluding saxophones): 1) Bugles (conical or tapering bore); including the french horn, flugelhorn, cornet, (true) bugle, tuba, etc., are characterized by a mellow sound, which blends easily. 2) Trumpets (cylindrical bore); trumpet and trombone, have a more brilliant, penetrating sound with greater projection. Modern instruments (except the slide trombone) are actually a blend or compromise of conical and cylindrical tubing in proportions which will give each instrument it's characteristic sound (or approximation thereof) with the best possible pitch tendencies. For example, a true cylindrical trumpet would be out of tune to our well-tempered ears, so a percentage of the tubing is tapered like a cornet, to bring it closer in tune. The soprano is actually an alto trumpet in G. The proportion of cylindrical to conical tubing is about the same as the modern Bb trumpet. The term bugle as it relates to DCI corps today is simply a nod to tradition. It's a big trumpet.
Now perhaps my reading comprehension has went south, but it looks
to me that Bond states the G soprano is a cylindrical instrument and that
they are more brilliant with greater projection, i.e. louder. It's a big
trumpet.
Thanks for plugging my website.
Jeff
Jason Lowe
wrote:
>Aaron wrote:
>
>>But seriously, I think that "loud" is not a constant and it varies from
>>person
>>to person.
>
>HUH? WHAT? SPEAK UP! I WAS IN DRUM CORPS!
>
>VKG!!
LOL, between playing in drumlines and loud hornlines I've lost double
the hearing.... what? huh?
Kevin Gamin
> And live, I thought that the trumpets sounded just fine (of course,
> MHO).
I think we can agree to disagree on this one.
>
> > Soembody did ask if there had been any decibel measurements for the
> two
> > types of horns. That would be an objective measure.
> >
>
> Objective, yes, yet IMO totally meaningless information.
Considering that one of the arguments is that Bb are not as "loud" as G
horns, this would be meaningful to some, though.
>
> > As for Cadets, I can't say if they were bland or not, but that first
> > power chord in the show was so WEIRD because I'd never heard a corps
> > play a chord in that key before. Almost disorienting.
> >
>
> Sounded just fine to me. :-)
It was fine: In tune and balanced, although the same reservations I
feel about BD's hornline apply to Cadets as well. What really through
me was the key it was in. It's kind of a reverse transposition effect:
You go to drum corps expecting to hear certain keys used because of the
nature of the instrument, but, when the instruments are changed, the
keys are changed, too. My ears were not expecting that at all.
Kevin Gamin
Stan Maddox
>> of "loud".
When a corps can make concrete bleachers hum.
-- Stan
Catherine
states...@worldnet.att.net (Kevin Gamin) wrote:
> > Sounded just fine to me. :-)
>
> It was fine: In tune and balanced, although the same reservations I
> feel about BD's hornline apply to Cadets as well. What really through
> me was the key it was in. It's kind of a reverse transposition
> effect: You go to drum corps expecting to hear certain keys used
> because of the nature of the instrument, but, when the instruments
> are changed, the keys are changed, too. My ears were not expecting
> that at all.
>
> Kevin Gamin
Hmmm... could someone be more correct and state-of-the-art than certain
other thought streams....
Could many of the "unlettered" fans and participants be sensing such
things intuitively, viscerally or in other ways gained through
experiences and emotions?
-- Catherine
Kevin Gamin
> Since DCI has legalized any key, it would be instructive for an enterprising
> corps to go the opposite direction and play instruments that were pitched
> even lower than G bugles.
Actually, I think BD went with F mellophones, so they would be pitched
lower than G bugles.
Kevin Gamin
WRoe424922
.....and wooden bleachers splinter!!!
Jeff Mitchell
It is always amazes me how my attempts to discuss issues with you turn into
a wrestling match with an octopus. :-)
The original thrust of this was my assertion that the bugle became more
cylindrical and trumpet-like when redesigned in the early twentieth century.
This made it a more powerful instrument. Several sources can be found that
verify this including Bond, who calls the G soprano bugle a big trumpet and
states that cylindrical instruments have greater projection than conical.
Nothing below leads me to come to any other conclusion, although as you
correctly point out, it is a rather complex issue.
When you cite Bond as a more qualified authority, it is truly an honor for
this old drum corps judge to be even mentioned as worthy of comparison.
Just as a question regarding planar analysis. Could it ever be done in the
same time frame that regular drum corps judging utilizes?
Jeff
flatla...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <3A3065B4...@prodigy.net>,
> JEFFMI...@prodigy.net wrote:
>
> >You continue to use Bond to support your point of view without
> >reference.
>
> When quoting Bond's Sympsium remarks, I rarely fail to refer to their
> source (RAM Virtual Symposium 1997). It is practical for me to do so,
> insofar as I have a vested interest in seeing Symposium research cited
> and promoted.
>
> However, if you mean "without context," I can only disagree.
>
> >In commenting on cylindrical and conical, it should be noted all modern
> >brass instruments are both.
>
> I think its fine for you to note that, though I believe it can confuse
> people. For myself, I would rather simplify the issue by using terms
> like "cylindrically biased," or "non-bugle" in reference to the Bb
> trumpet. I believe I have successfully refrained from calling bugles
> or trumpets simply "conical" or "cylindrical" in my writings. Thus, I
> don't believe you need to clarify their similarities for my sake. I
> believe we need to differentiate between trumpets and soprano bugles.
> That could be where Bond and I part company.
>
> >That being said, it is very simple to determine
> >whether more conical or more cylindrical proportion produces greater
> >volume.
>
> I see no statistics following that statement, so I suspect it is not as
> easy as you seem to believe, but you are free to express your opinion.
>
> >The flugelhorn is the most conical modern soprano brass instrument.
>
> That the flugelhorn is a "soprano" instrument infers an oversimplified
> relationship between soprano bugles and flugelhorns. The flugelhorn is
> not the same length as a soprano bugle and that affects its
> conical/cylindrical. The longer the instrument, the more obliged it is
> to cater to an increasingly conical bore, regardless of the acoustical
> context. Nevertheless, for purposes of effect, this ratio of conical
> bore can be increased or decreased with any given tubing length for
> reasons which may or may not be acoustically justified in outdoor
> settings.
>
> By virtue of its length, the flugelhorn is no more a true soprano voice
> than the trumpet (which I think of more as a mezzo-soprano). Further,
> the flugelhorn's tonal characteristics were not built by specification
> for outdoor acoustics, but constructed as a color of concert instrument.
>
> >The trumpet is the most cylindrical. There is no question as to which
> >is capable of more volume.
>
> But apparently need of clarification, since you provide no research on
> the matter. Bonds informal research finds a bugle 'projects a robust
> sound to the stands,' whereas a trumpet is 'nasal and puny in
> comparison,' out of doors (RAM Virtual Symposium 1997). As someone
> with more qualified and firsthand knowledge of the subject, I defer to
> him.
>
> >Here is more of Peter Bond's writing on the subject;
> >
> >>The G bugle makes this powerful sound possible.
>
> >>What is it and how does it differ from a Bb instrument? I will
> >>confine my comparison to the soprano bugle in G and the Bb trumpet.
>
> Bear in mind that this comparison has been noted by many for negligible
> differences in bore ratio which do not apply to other bugle voices, so
> again, we are inviting confusion on the subject for the rest of the
> bugle choir.
>
> >>There are theoretically two families of brasswinds (excluding
> >>saxophones):
> >>1) Bugles (conical or tapering bore); including the french horn,
> >>flugelhorn, cornet, (true) bugle, tuba, etc., are characterized by a
> >>mellow sound, which blends easily.
> >>2) Trumpets (cylindrical bore); trumpet and trombone, have a more
> >>brilliant, penetrating sound with greater projection.
> >>Modern instruments (except the slide trombone) are actually a blend
> >>or compromise of conical and cylindrical tubing in proportions which
> >>will give each instrument it's characteristic sound (or
> >>approximation thereof) with the best possible pitch tendencies. For
> >>example, a true cylindrical trumpet would be out of tune to our well-
> >>tempered ears, so a percentage of the tubing is tapered
> >>like a cornet, to bring it closer in tune.
>
> So far that resolves nothing as to the indoor versus outdoor merits of
> volume and tone quality. If you don't differentiate between indoor and
> outdoor use, you're really wasting your time in making an argument for
> any key instruments in an outdoor medium.
>
> >>The soprano is actually an alto trumpet in G. The proportion of
> >>cylindrical to conical tubing is
> >>about the same as the modern Bb trumpet.
>
> Despite the fact that the ratios are the same, the ranges are not. If
> their conical/cylindrical ratio is indeed virtually the same, then the
> G soprano bugle shows more conical bias within the context of its
> range, than the Bb trumpet.
>
> Higher instruments require more cylindrical tubing, and if the G
> soprano bugle has merely the same bore ratio as the Bb trumpet, that
> demonstrates, in the context of its higher range, a conical bias.
>
> >>The term bugle as it relates to DCI corps today is
> >>simply a nod to tradition. It's a big trumpet.
>
> This statement begs clarification. Is he referring to soprano bugles
> or all bugles as 'big trumpets'? Obviously, the ratio of conical bore
> in a contra bugle cannot be compared with that of a trumpet.
>
> Personally, I believe we are talking about sopranos here, and if Bond
> wants to compare its bore ratio to that of the Bb trumpet - despite the
> important factor of their difference in tubing length/range, then I can
> only conclude that Bond has (perhaps with good intention) confused the
> issue.
>
> Read outside the context of pitch, Bonds statement is misleading. His
> point may be different, but if the information is accurate, it actually
> infers that to make a given bore ratio of soprano-ish tubing into a
> trumpet (indoor instrument), you lengthen it to Bb. To make the same
> ratio into a bugle (outdoor instrument), you shorten it to G. And so
> it is.
>
> >Now perhaps my reading comprehension has went south, but it looks to me
> >that Bond states the G soprano is a cylindrical instrument
>
> I do not read that. I read that the bore ratio is similar to a
> trumpet, which means little outside the context of pitch. Again,
> within the context of the range of each, I don't believe we can
> construe the G soprano as cylindrical biased (a "trumpet"), with that
> much conical bore for even shorter tubing than the trumpet.
>
> >and that they are more brilliant with greater projection, i.e. louder.
>
> Out of doors, yes. Indoors, they are 'apocalyptic,' if I recall Bond
> correctly.
>
> >It's a big trumpet.
>
> ('Small' trumpet?). If it were a trumpet, it would require even more
> cylindrical tubing than the trumpet because it is shorter. What may
> sound like a trumpet indoors may not sound like a trumpet outdoors.
>
> Lets be taken seriously in our efforts to make music. Lets use
> instruments in the acoustical settings for which they are constructed.
> Lets use bugles outdoors, and trumpets indoors. That's my point.
>
> >Thanks for plugging my website.
>
> Welcome. Thanks for the feedback.
Mike Duffy
McRing E. Dingin'
Allan Murray
flatla...@my-deja.com
JEFFMI...@prodigy.net wrote:
>It is always amazes me how my attempts to discuss issues with you turn
>into a wrestling match with an octopus. :-)
I have no emoticon for that.
>The original thrust of this was my assertion that the bugle became more
>cylindrical and trumpet-like when redesigned in the early twentieth
>century. This made it a more powerful instrument. Several sources can
>be found that verify this including Bond, who calls the G soprano
>bugle a big trumpet and states that cylindrical instruments have
>greater projection than conical.
I don't really have a problem with any of that, except for the fact
that I don't believe it applies out of doors, and that is what I read
from Bond as well in his 'nasal and puny in comparison' remark about
the trumpet vs bugle outside.
As for the fact that they may be similar/virtually indistiguishable in
bore ratio, that fact would seem to undermine bond's assertion that a
soprano bugle is a trumpet. Conical/cylindrical bore ratios change as
an instrument gets shorter. Accordingly, if we were to say the G
soprano and Bb trumpet bore ratios were exactly the same, the shorter G
soprano bugle does forsake the greater cylindrical emphasis of the Bb
trumpet by virtue of its range.
The G soprano bugle defies the increased cylindrical emphasis its range
would otherwise oblige of it for the sake of outdoor sound quality. If
a G soprano were in fact a trumpet, it would need a *greater*
cylindrical proportion than the Bb trumpet because it is shorter than
the Bb trumpet.
This may not be relevant to your original point, but I find it
interesting nonetheless, and shocking in light of DCI's recent
decisions. Do the have some plan to move the entire activity indoors
that we're unaware of?
>Nothing below leads me to come to any other conclusion, although as you
>correctly point out, it is a rather complex issue.
And that's OK. However, I hope my statement above may persuade you to
re-evaluate the identity of the G soprano bugle as a bugle and
(especially true for the lower range bugles) an instrument constructed
for the outdoors, unlike the trumpet.
>When you cite Bond as a more qualified authority, it is truly an honor
>for this old drum corps judge to be even mentioned as worthy of
>comparison.
I do respect your historical knowledge.
>Just as a question regarding planar analysis. Could it ever be done in
>the same time frame that regular drum corps judging utilizes?
No. Particularly with today's shows. I'm not sure I could ever get to
that point, and I've tried it live.
When PA gets installed in drill software, however, it may be a moot
point, insofar as you will have a complete, objective, and accurate
measurement of the show, irrespective of its performance level. I
think ensembles should be rewarded for quality of their drill to some
extent. Thus, I think it is best to have PA stats on hand for judges
in order to empower them to fairly evaluate the quality of the
execution in context of the demand.
Whether this data comes from a computer or otherwise, it is important
that judges be able to explain what they see. Little do they realize
that for every show they observe, they make several PA-based judgements
about that drill. The GE Visual judge tends to reward drills with high
PA merit (within about 1 place of PA rankings).
If, in the course of written or verbal evaluation, these judges cannot
at least substantiate their scores and rankings with a few basic
observations on difficulty, complexity, or balance, they open
themselves up for criticism, their system of judging to distrust, and
those they advise to frustration.
Levi Boldt
> Accordingly, if we were to say the G soprano and Bb
> trumpet bore ratios were exactly the same, the shorter G
> soprano bugle does forsake the greater cylindrical
> emphasis of the Bb trumpet by virtue of its range.
Ummm... Stuart, a G soprano bugle is pitched a step and a half lower
than a Bb trumpet. So it's *longer* than a Bb trumpet by a couple
inches.
--
Levi Boldt
"The distinction between the optimist and
the pessimist: an optimist is someone who
says, 'This is the best of all possible
worlds,' and a pessimist is a person who
says, 'You're right.'"
- Joseph Weizenbaum
flatla...@my-deja.com
Levi Boldt <bold...@pilot.msu.edu> wrote:
> flatla...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > Accordingly, if we were to say the G soprano and Bb
> > trumpet bore ratios were exactly the same, the shorter G
> > soprano bugle does forsake the greater cylindrical
> > emphasis of the Bb trumpet by virtue of its range.
>
> Ummm... Stuart, a G soprano bugle is pitched a step and a half lower
> than a Bb trumpet. So it's *longer* than a Bb trumpet by a couple
> inches.
I stand corrected.
S.R.
flatla...@my-deja.com
OK, I don't know the difference between g and b-flat, and haven't
touched a valved bugle in almost 20 years. Nobody's perfect, right?
So who on this great newsgroup wants to get me a job as a corps
arranger?
Anyone? I'm waiting .... I'm really good, you know. Did I tell you I
went to Juilliard? I like music, too. And ... stuff. OK, I'll just
give you a minute to think about it.
Don't forget you can email me -
Stuart E. Rice
ser...@juno.com
Jeff Mitchell
flatla...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <3A328E57...@prodigy.net>,
> JEFFMI...@prodigy.net wrote:
>
> >It is always amazes me how my attempts to discuss issues with you turn
> >into a wrestling match with an octopus. :-)
>
> I have no emoticon for that.
You would need at least eight.
>
>
> >The original thrust of this was my assertion that the bugle became more
> >cylindrical and trumpet-like when redesigned in the early twentieth
> >century. This made it a more powerful instrument. Several sources can
> >be found that verify this including Bond, who calls the G soprano
> >bugle a big trumpet and states that cylindrical instruments have
> >greater projection than conical.
>
> I don't really have a problem with any of that, except for the fact
> that I don't believe it applies out of doors, and that is what I read
> from Bond as well in his 'nasal and puny in comparison' remark about
> the trumpet vs bugle outside.
>
The trumpet was formerly an outdoor instrument with the cornet being the
indoor.
>
> As for the fact that they may be similar/virtually indistiguishable in
> bore ratio, that fact would seem to undermine bond's assertion that a
> soprano bugle is a trumpet.
That, IMHO, would be the reason that it is a trumpet.
> Conical/cylindrical bore ratios change as
> an instrument gets shorter.
This is not true. The ratio of cylindral tubing to conical has nothing to do
with length. The trombone has the highest ratio of cylindrical tubing. It is
the same length as a euphonium which has more conical tubing. The tubing
ratios give each brass instrument it's unique sound. In the twentieth
century, trumpets, cornets, and bugles have seen their unique identities
merged. The ratio of tubing is now fairly standard.
> Accordingly, if we were to say the G
> soprano and Bb trumpet bore ratios were exactly the same, the shorter G
> soprano bugle does forsake the greater cylindrical emphasis of the Bb
> trumpet by virtue of its range.
The G soprano bugle is longer than the Bb trumpet by about 7 inches, not
shorter. My research indicates that the G soprano has more cylindrical
tubing than the Bb trumpet, in proportion of course. The leadpipe and bell
section are the same length as the Bb trumpet and the added tubing occurs
after the leadpipe and before the valve section. The leadpipe and bell
section are the only places were the conical, tapering of the bore occurs.
This adds more cylindrical tubing and could be responsible for it's more
suitable use outdoors.
>
>
> The G soprano bugle defies the increased cylindrical emphasis its range
> would otherwise oblige of it for the sake of outdoor sound quality. If
> a G soprano were in fact a trumpet, it would need a *greater*
> cylindrical proportion than the Bb trumpet because it is shorter than
> the Bb trumpet.
>
Stuart, it is not shorter. It is longer. The fundamental tone is a concert
G, therefore the tubing is longer than a Bb. The extra length of tubing is
equal to the 3rd valve section on a Bb trumpet which lowers the fundamental
a minor third. About 7 inches. in fact. You have your facts bass ackwards,
as a friend of mine was fond of saying.
>
> This may not be relevant to your original point, but I find it
> interesting nonetheless, and shocking in light of DCI's recent
> decisions. Do the have some plan to move the entire activity indoors
> that we're unaware of?
>
Not as shocking as your inability to correctly understand basic instrument
construction.
>
> >Nothing below leads me to come to any other conclusion, although as you
> >correctly point out, it is a rather complex issue.
>
> And that's OK. However, I hope my statement above may persuade you to
> re-evaluate the identity of the G soprano bugle as a bugle and
> (especially true for the lower range bugles) an instrument constructed
> for the outdoors, unlike the trumpet.
>
Trumpets were only let indoors in the late 19th century. Drum corps have
always played G trumpets as based upon the both tubing ratios and bell
design.
>
> >When you cite Bond as a more qualified authority, it is truly an honor
> >for this old drum corps judge to be even mentioned as worthy of
> >comparison.
>
> I do respect your historical knowledge.
Thank you.
>
>
> >Just as a question regarding planar analysis. Could it ever be done in
> >the same time frame that regular drum corps judging utilizes?
>
> No. Particularly with today's shows. I'm not sure I could ever get to
> that point, and I've tried it live.
>
> When PA gets installed in drill software, however, it may be a moot
> point, insofar as you will have a complete, objective, and accurate
> measurement of the show, irrespective of its performance level. I
> think ensembles should be rewarded for quality of their drill to some
> extent. Thus, I think it is best to have PA stats on hand for judges
> in order to empower them to fairly evaluate the quality of the
> execution in context of the demand.
>
In the old days of DCA, judges received the brass charts for use when
judging Content Analysis, so the idea does have a historical basis.
>
> Whether this data comes from a computer or otherwise, it is important
> that judges be able to explain what they see. Little do they realize
> that for every show they observe, they make several PA-based judgements
> about that drill. The GE Visual judge tends to reward drills with high
> PA merit (within about 1 place of PA rankings).
>
> If, in the course of written or verbal evaluation, these judges cannot
> at least substantiate their scores and rankings with a few basic
> observations on difficulty, complexity, or balance, they open
> themselves up for criticism, their system of judging to distrust, and
> those they advise to frustration.
>
Jeff
flatla...@my-deja.com
JEFFMI...@prodigy.net wrote:
> > >The original thrust of this was my assertion that the bugle became
more
> > >cylindrical and trumpet-like when redesigned in the early twentieth
> > >century. This made it a more powerful instrument. Several sources
can
> > >be found that verify this including Bond, who calls the G soprano
> > >bugle a big trumpet and states that cylindrical instruments have
> > >greater projection than conical.
> >
> > I don't really have a problem with any of that, except for the fact
> > that I don't believe it applies out of doors, and that is what I
read
> > from Bond as well in his 'nasal and puny in comparison' remark about
> > the trumpet vs bugle outside.
> >
>
> The trumpet was formerly an outdoor instrument with the cornet being
the
> indoor.
That would seem inconsistent with the idea of the horn being an outdoor
instrument. Then again, I'm unfamilliar with any relationship (or lack
thereof) between the horn and trumpet/cornet.
> > As for the fact that they may be similar/virtually indistiguishable
in
> > bore ratio, that fact would seem to undermine bond's assertion that
a
> > soprano bugle is a trumpet.
>
> That, IMHO, would be the reason that it is a trumpet.
(that aroma you're smelling is my words marinating).
> > Conical/cylindrical bore ratios change as
> > an instrument gets shorter.
>
> This is not true. The ratio of cylindral tubing to conical has
nothing to do
> with length. The trombone has the highest ratio of cylindrical
tubing. It is
> the same length as a euphonium which has more conical tubing. The
tubing
> ratios give each brass instrument it's unique sound. In the twentieth
> century, trumpets, cornets, and bugles have seen their unique
identities
> merged. The ratio of tubing is now fairly standard.
I don't know about merging (sure you don't mean 'sharing'?), but I do
know that juxtaposing slide instruments (which included the trumpet
early on) with virtual bugles like the euphonium isn't going to clarify
much. These instruments came about through different channels, and
regardless of their equal lengths of tubing, they still prospered in
different forums and developed for different purposes.
My own feeling is that the trombone sounds like shit outdoors, and the
euphonium is cursed indoors. I think that has something to do with the
former being highly cylindrical and the latter highly conical. As with
Bond's outdoor trumpet observation ('nasal and puny in comparison'),
this to me is another case for the fact that conical favored
instruments service outdoor acoustics more effectively, though they are
often used indoors for effects.
Conversely, I suppose I could expect DCI to be saying that cylindrical
favored brass sound best indoors, though they can be used in drum corps
for effects. Unfortunately, I found no such logic among their list of
arguments, beyond the 'we want more shit to play with' rationale (the
trumpet simply gets no functional consideration among the powers that
be).
Effects aside, the drum and bugle corps has prospered until now because
it used instruments which are favored by outdoor acoustics - bugles.
It was my understanding that higher range brass required more
cylindrical tubing for the upper frequencies. Lord knows when I'll run
across that reference again, but I think it needs to be considered.
> > Accordingly, if we were to say the G
> > soprano and Bb trumpet bore ratios were exactly the same, the
shorter G
> > soprano bugle does forsake the greater cylindrical emphasis of the
Bb
> > trumpet by virtue of its range.
>
> The G soprano bugle is longer than the Bb trumpet by about 7 inches,
not
> shorter.
Consider my words eaten.
> My research indicates that the G soprano has more cylindrical
> tubing than the Bb trumpet, in proportion of course. The leadpipe and
bell
> section are the same length as the Bb trumpet and the added tubing
occurs
> after the leadpipe and before the valve section. The leadpipe and bell
> section are the only places were the conical, tapering of the bore
occurs.
> This adds more cylindrical tubing and could be responsible for it's
more
> suitable use outdoors.
I need to rethink this.
> > >Nothing below leads me to come to any other conclusion, although
as you
> > >correctly point out, it is a rather complex issue.
> >
> > And that's OK. However, I hope my statement above may persuade you
to
> > re-evaluate the identity of the G soprano bugle as a bugle and
> > (especially true for the lower range bugles) an instrument
constructed
> > for the outdoors, unlike the trumpet.
> >
>
> Trumpets were only let indoors in the late 19th century.
Yes, but their late introduction into orchestral literature was due to
construction rather than acoustic issues. You couldn't play a tune on
them. They were like tympani, and quite impractical for their
commanding voices. Trombones got a good start because low range
instruments don't carry melodies often or well. Didn't work for the
upper range trombones except in brass choir settings, where there
weren't any violins around to show you up. Brass choirs (based on
trombone-type slide construction) found acoustic success by the 17th
century I believe.
> Drum corps have
> always played G trumpets as based upon the both tubing ratios and bell
> design.
Yes, but why that particular ratio? I believe we'll someday learn that
drum and bugle corps prospered playing bugles (relatively conical
emphasis) because they happened to be playing outdoors. And that ties
in with their military heritage, of course. Nobody wants to hear them
indoors (except drum corps head-bangers).
As a composer, you can play with conical tone colors in the horns and
low end brass (tuba, euph) indoors, but the cultured ear can't cope
with the acoustics of bugles indoors. You can write a bugle-type
effect in a concert composition for a cornet half-breed, but nobody is
going to whip out an army regulation horn in an orchestra. It just
doesn't sound the same indoors.
> > >Just as a question regarding planar analysis. Could it ever be
done in
> > >the same time frame that regular drum corps judging utilizes?
> >
> > No. Particularly with today's shows. I'm not sure I could ever
get to
> > that point, and I've tried it live.
> >
> > When PA gets installed in drill software, however, it may be a moot
> > point, insofar as you will have a complete, objective, and accurate
> > measurement of the show, irrespective of its performance level. I
> > think ensembles should be rewarded for quality of their drill to
some
> > extent. Thus, I think it is best to have PA stats on hand for
judges
> > in order to empower them to fairly evaluate the quality of the
> > execution in context of the demand.
> >
>
> In the old days of DCA, judges received the brass charts for use when
> judging Content Analysis, so the idea does have a historical basis.
That's a very valuable point. I appreciate it.
BroadwayBrass05
more in tune than the G horns. Even the best of best musicians struggle with
the crazy tuning problems on any G horn. The fact that drum corps horn lines
who are not neccassarilly made up of all musicians can play on horns with
better intonation, will naturally keep the line more in tune. This brings me
to my conclusion. Bb horns sound louder than G horns. The fact that you stay
in tune better on Bb is going to make any sound, sound louder. That is a
musical fact. So, I beleive that G horns are in reality the louder of the two,
but because of the fact that Bb horns play more in tune , they sound louder.
Until some geniuses can figure out how to make a better G horn, or until a
whole horn line is filled with the unique individual that can play the G horn
just as well as a Bb (this happens in some cases) I beleive this fact will
remain true.
flatla...@my-deja.com
broadwa...@aol.com (BroadwayBrass05) wrote:
>I think one thing we all must remember is that Bb horns will naturally
>play more in tune than the G horns.
Not if its a Bb bugle (just reading about a corps that used them way
back). But you have a good point, and I think manufacturers increased
the cylindrical portion for that reason.
>Even the best of best musicians struggle with the crazy tuning
>problems on any G horn. The fact that drum corps horn lines who are
>not necesarily made up of all musicians can play on horns with
>better intonation, will naturally keep the line more in tune.
Yes, but its a trade-off. There is a point at which a greater
proportion of cylindrical tubing will erode good tone. The control
which cylindrical tubing gives a horn is of little value if too much
makes it sound like crap.
Indoors, the tone quality is better preserved by the acoustics, so you
can have huge proportions of cylindrical tubing and the effect is a
"bright" sound (instead of "nasal," as is the case out of doors with
the same instrument).
At least this is according to my academic understanding of the issue
(which, as I have so competently demonstrated, may or may not translate
to reality).
>This brings me to my conclusion. Bb horns sound louder than G horns.
>The fact that you stay in tune better on Bb is going to make any
>sound, sound louder. That is a musical fact.
Agreed. But there is a point at which a greater proportion of
cylindrical tubing in an instrument will weaken a horn to the point
that it can't amplify much. That is why bugles are generally louder
than trumpets and trombones (with cylindrical emphasis).
In 1984 I instructed marching at the University of Utah and was able to
observe the band march halftime followed by the visiting teams ensemble
- the Air Force D&BC. The sound of the latter filled the stands with a
rich sound with little effort, and our band was down their busting
their ass to make their heavily cylindrical sound reach the ear.
>So, I believe that G horns are in reality the louder of the two,
>but because of the fact that Bb horns play more in tune , they sound
>louder.
Indoors that is true.
>Until some geniuses can figure out how to make a better G horn, or
>until a whole horn line is filled with the unique individual that can
>play the G horn just as well as a Bb (this happens in some cases) I
>believe this fact will remain true.
I will respect your right to express your opinion. However, I don't
believe bugles are made as poorly for outdoor playing as you might
think. In fact, I believe they are generally made better for that
purpose than instruments made by other manufacturers. And I can say
from firsthand observation that cylindrical biased instruments like
trumpets and trombones (which as you mentioned are pitched in Bb)
cannot project a quality sound as effectively as conical biased
instruments like bugles (which happen to be pitched in G).
Mike Duffy
> Bb by a McDuff!
>
Yo der McDude of the "SkinWhackers."
Got your Horns Up, EH!
McHo Ho & Ho
mike_d...@my-deja.com
states...@worldnet.att.net (Kevin Gamin) wrote:
>
>
> Considering that one of the arguments is that Bb are not as "loud" as
G
> horns, this would be meaningful to some, though.
> >
I guess I fail to see the problem, even if it WERE proved that Bb can
not be played as loud as G. I've never considered the pure loudness to
be all that important, esp as opposed to intonation and ensemble blend
and balance. It's the difference between the highs and lows of volume
that make the greatest impact, IMO.
> > > As for Cadets, I can't say if they were bland or not, but that
first
> > > power chord in the show was so WEIRD because I'd never heard a
corps
> > > play a chord in that key before. Almost disorienting.
> > >
> >
> > Sounded just fine to me. :-)
>
> It was fine: In tune and balanced, although the same reservations I
> feel about BD's hornline apply to Cadets as well. What really through
> me was the key it was in. It's kind of a reverse transposition
effect:
> You go to drum corps expecting to hear certain keys used because of
the
> nature of the instrument, but, when the instruments are changed, the
> keys are changed, too. My ears were not expecting that at all.
>
I agree that there might be different keys used, but why do you
(apparently) consider that to be a negative? .
Mike
James D. Burnell
would need to be pitched lower... or you'd need to test a mello line
playing F mellos and then the same passage using G mello bugles.
I don't know. I don't understand the physics of the thing totally, but in
my perception G horns are "louder", throatier, meatier, darker than
concert-pitch instruments, and I wonder if I would perceive that a whole
line that was pitched even lower than G would be even more so.
jim
"Kevin Gamin" <states...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:1elcehf.7e7kfd1n86fcwN%states...@worldnet.att.net...
BariMeNow
Bugle (not a trumpet) with a slightly more conical bore than concert
instruments...couldn't we take the best of both worlds???
Disclaimer: These views are not the official views of any band, drum corps or
anyone other than the writer. Any similarity to persons living, dead or undead
is purely coincidental.
Levi Boldt
> So why doesn't someone manufacture a G Bugle with better
> intontation or a Bb Bugle (not a trumpet) with a slightly
> more conical bore than concert instruments...couldn't we
> take the best of both worlds???
Mike, it's a simple question of economics. No manufacturer in their
right mind would invest precious R&D money into G bugles -- a product
with a target market that's incredibly small and financially strapped.
It just doesn't make good business sense.
However, I believe Deg has developed a Bb bugle through its relationship
with the Blue Devils. The market potential for this horn is much bigger:
every marching band in the country. If Deg thinks that it really can
convert the potential into actual sales, it's worth the R&D investment.
Dave Adams
> Catherine wrote:
>
> > It's too bad that so many hornlines have already been
> > emasculated in the cause of "proper intonation", "blend"
> > and "balance". Those concepts are important, but I believe
> > them to be currently misapplied.
>
> Ummm... you're joking, right? Please tell me you are. Should we just
> crank up the volume and let the shrapnel fly, quality be damned?
> Sounds like a great way to get fans back into the bleachers...
Depends on which fans you want back I guess...
> Intonation is a must, especially if you want volume. Hornlines that
> play in tune are louder than hornlines that aren't, even if each
> individual in the in-tune line isn't playing as loud as the
> corresponding individual in the out-of-tune line. Pitch is a place,
> not an area.
Levi, I want to make sure I'm not putting words in your mouth.
Are you claiming that intonation is an absolute thing? In other words, a
horn player is either perfectly in tune, or not at all?
Since you are training for a career in science, I would like to pose the
following questions for you. [I could spoon-feed you the answers, at
least for #1, but I think you will find this more interesting if you
determine them for yourself.]
Consider two groups of soprano players, all playing a middle-register C.
One group, consisting of half of the sops, is marching directly towards
the stands at 200 BPM taking full-size steps. The other group is
marching directly away from the stands at the same tempo and taking
full-size steps. (Assume that each ensemble is "perfectly" i.e.
discernably in tune with itself.)
1) What intonation difference (measured in cents) between the two groups
would be observed by someone sitting in the stands?
2) If the two groups above were playing in a horn arc and they had the
same difference in intonation, would the resultant sound meet your
standards for acceptable intonation?
<snip>
Looking forward to your analysis.
-Dave Adams-
flatla...@my-deja.com
Levi Boldt <bold...@pilot.msu.edu> wrote:
>I believe Deg has developed a Bb bugle through its relationship
> with the Blue Devils.
Do they call it a bugle? Anyone confirm?
S.R.
Levi Boldt
> Are you claiming that intonation is an absolute thing? In other
> words, a horn player is either perfectly in tune, or not at all?
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Currently, an "in tune" A above
middle C is considered to be 440 Hz. But it was only standardized at
that frequency in 1939. Before that, it was standardized at 435 Hz in
1859. Before that, there was no standard at all. So someone playing an
in-tune A prior to 1939 would be perceived as being slightly flat today.
Additionally, weird things can happen which make the sound entering a
listener's ear sometimes different than the sound coming out of the
bell. Such a case in point is below...
> Since you are training for a career in science, I would like to
> pose the following questions for you.
Actually, I'm studying Philosophy of Science, not science itself.
Three's a big difference.
> Consider two groups of soprano players, all playing a
> middle-register C.
I have no idea what frequency that is. Let's call it a concert A (after
1939) for simplicity's sake. 440 Hz. Let's also assume that they
overcome the flat tendency of the pitch on the horn and play the note at
exactly 440.0 Hz.
> One group, consisting of half of the sops, is marching directly
> towards the stands at 200 BPM taking full-size steps. The other
> group is marching directly away from the stands at the same
> tempo and taking full-size steps. (Assume that each ensemble is
> "perfectly" i.e. discernably in tune with itself.)
Assuming an 8-to-5 step size of 22.5 inches, the velocity of the
performers is:
(1 min/60 s)*(200 beats/min)*(22.5 in/beat)*(1 m/39.37 in) = 1.9 m/s
> 1) What intonation difference (measured in cents) between the
> two groups would be observed by someone sitting in the stands?
There will be some Doppler effect, but it's been four years since I took
any Physics class, so bear with me if I screw up.
f' = f((V+-Vd)/(V-+Vs)), where
f' is the observed frequency,
f is the source frequency (in this case 440 Hz),
V is the speed of sound in a medium (in this case, 343 m/s in air at 20
C, 1 atm and 0% humidity)
Vd is the speed of the detector,
and Vs is the speed of the source.
So for the sops moving away from the audience
f'= 440 Hz ((343 m/s)/(343 m/s + 1.9 m/s)) = 437.6 Hz
and for the sops moving toward the audience
f'= 440 Hz ((343 m/s)/(343 m/s - 1.9 m/s)) = 442.4 Hz
Now we know what the distortion is in Hertz (cycles per second). But you
asked for the distortion in cents. So here goes...
For any ratio n/p, the number of cents in the interval is
log(n/p)*(1200/log 2)
Therefore, the number of cents difference in the sopranos moving away
from the audience is log (440/437.6)*(1200/log 2) = 9.5 cents
And the number of cents off key for the sopranos moving towards the
audience is log(442.4/440)*(1200/log 2) = 9.4 cents
> 2) If the two groups above were playing in a horn arc and they
> had the same difference in intonation, would the resultant sound
> meet your standards for acceptable intonation?
By "same difference in intonation", I take you to mean that they're
actually playing at the observed frequencies above...
Since a half-step is 100 cents and the total difference between the two
groups of sopranos is 18.9 cents, they would seem slightly out-of-tune
with each other. Things get weird, since in practice a half-step isn't
always exactly 100 cents. But it's close enough for our purposes here.
Besides velocity, there are any number of factors that would distort the
observed frequency of a pitch even when the performer really is playing
at the right frequency: air temperature, air speed (wind), air pressure
(hornlines are sharp at DATR compared to Orlando), humidity, etc.
It is the performer's responsibility to correct for these things so that
he sounds in tune. It is the staff's responsibility to make them aware
of their tendencies and how to correct for them.
Here's my question for you, though. Is it still important for the
sopranos to play in tune from the observer's point of view? I still say
yes, it is. A performer's job is to sound good. He ought to sound in
tune, not overblow, etc. As we have seen, this is not always an easy
task. But it is a task that must be undertaken regardless of the
difficulties. I've never known drum corps folks to just give up on a
problem just because it's hard.
Kevin Gamin
> I agree that there might be different keys used, but why do you
> (apparently) consider that to be a negative?
I don't. It just sounded weird to my primarily G-tuned ears.
--
Kevin "Gadget" Gamin
Toledo Glassmen 1992-1996
Empire Statesmen 2000
"Give me all that you've got then crescendo!"
Levi Boldt
> <much snipped to try and avoid another excruciating head
> hurt...>
>
> But this sure sounded like "nothin' but net"...
> Great response...
Thanks, Ron.
I did cheat, though. I got the equations from an old roommate of mine
who happens to be a Math/Physics double major. It's been years since I
took any Physics, so there's no way I remembered it all myself.
After doing all that, I think I'll stick to Locke and Kant for a while
-- at least I know something about them...
DTaylor91
>So why doesn't someone manufacture a G Bugle with better intontation or
>a Bb
>Bugle (not a trumpet) with a slightly more conical bore than concert
>instruments...couldn't we take the best of both worlds???
Been done, it's prohibitively expensive. For example, Future Corps had a really
well made set of G sopranos built, but they were over $2000 each.
Custom built Bb's would cost even more.
Don Taylor