Thanks in advance!
tom
So what's the question?
Jim Donaldson
Denver Colorado
JFDon...@aol.com
The Schilke Loyalist
http://www.dallasmusic.org/schilke
> I looked at the Wild Thing and it seems to be what I want but
> I am not sure I want to spend that kind of $$$.
> Any thoughts or ideas?
I find that the free blow and large bell-throat are easy for me to work with
and give me the sound and flexibility I want. The people who like them tend
to REALLY like them, and there is a certain perception of the WT by some as
a sort of be-all, end-all, Acme Of Trumpet Evolution horn. However, as with
anything else, it's a matter of personal taste and other designs work better
for other people. The Wild Thing is a very nice, well-made trumpet, and
their price is not out of line for a high-end professional instrument. But
they simply aren't everyone's cup of tea. Bottom line: try one and see what
you think!
Greg Evans
I don't know about others, but I found the Wild Thing too big for me. It
depends what you're after. Oh, and depends to a certain extent what kind of
gigs you do. Would you leave a Wild Thing on a stage with a bunch of
wedding drunks? I wouldn't!
What are you looking for that your Bach doesn't give you? Not wishing to put
you off the Wild Thing which is a fine horn, but there's plenty of others
out there for less.
R.
"TomM in NY" <tomm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040604135036...@mb-m19.aol.com...
Tom.....I have found that trumpet players grow into the horns that they
need. Every time you practice, put a dollar, or a quarter into a jar, and
every time you earn some money playing at a gig, put a couple of bucks into
the jar, and by the time you find that you really want a new horn bad
enough, you will have enough money in the jar to buy it.
flip IS a great guy . call him.
there are different slides that make the horn a little smaller if you
prefer . ( helps to ease into the big horn ).
but in the end you will love the large slide and sound of this horn.
there is also a Jazz slide that is great for lead playing.
overall a great all around horn.a the Letterman show we have to play
with all different kinds of groups. this horn is very versitile and
adapts to different moods .
try one.
ALAN CHEZ
trumpet-late show with david letterman
> at the Letterman show we have to play with all different
> kinds of groups. this horn is very versitile and
> adapts to different moods .
Alan brings up a good point that I forgot to mention. This may be a big
horn, but it isn't just for playing balls-to-the-wall loud screamin'. It
can also be played very quietly and still sound rich, warm, and full. But
again, it pays to match the horn to the player!
Bob Bouffler
ALAN CHEZ <thech...@erols.com> wrote in message news:<Gxxxc.3621$Y3....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>...
So did you ever get one?
This is a question that nobody can answer but yourself. You are the only one
who knows what you like/dislike, and what you can afford. There are some
people who are unhappy unless they are playing their $10,000 Monettes. There
are others who make their living playing beat-up Olds trumpets they bought
in a garage sale 20 years ago for $40.
> There are others who make their living playing
> beat-up Olds trumpets they bought in a garage sale 20 years ago for
> $40.
>
I'd like to meet those players.
One of the ways that premium horns excel is in the intonation of the
partials (with themselves), e.g., how close all of the open notes are to
in tune with each other. Same for each of the six valve combinations.
A cheap horn that doesn't have some clinkers in this regard is a rarity.
--
John Miller
email domain: n4vu.com; username: jsm(@)
mind you I am waiting on a 8310z at the moment hopefully be with me by the
end of April. I thought I might review it for the ng for information so what
would people like to know ....
Robin
"pyoung" <pyo...@mfire.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9631D556162...@216.168.3.50...
I take a back seat to no one in pursuit of bargains, but I'd rather
spend my time trying to find a good horn cheap than trying to find the
elusive excellent cheap horn (some brands of which are doomed by design
never to rise to the mediocre).
Funny thing...I was visiting just this afternoon with a pro buddy who
has shelved his Benge in favor of a Rudy Muck to gig with (about as much
invested as yours).
> not dissimilar I played the Lords Mayors show in London (live audience
> c 750, 000 TV audience c 4,000,000) on a £33 Rudy Muck trumpet I got
> on ebay...
>
> mind you I am waiting on a 8310z at the moment hopefully be with me by
> the end of April. I thought I might review it for the ng for
> information so what would people like to know ....
I played through college and my navy band audition on an Olds Ambassador,
which I still have. I play on a custom horn now, but still occasionally
use the Olds for some gigs.
cd
--
The difference between immorality and immortality is "T". I like Earl
Grey.
But it's not. All you have to do is play a horn where the octaves are
out of tune to realize that.
See the following for an explanation of trumpet intonation an engineer
can appreciate:
http://www.dallasmusic.org/schilke/Brass%20Clinic.html
--
Noah
The reason mine was so cheap was the lady I purchased it from had it as an
ornament on her mantlepiece and did'nt even know it played - I took a risk
and got a bargain. I have seen similar models go on ebay for over £165 ($350
perhaps)
Robin
"John Miller" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:d3741i$ear$1...@n4vu2.n4vu.com...
But this article is basically just, "Hand waving". There are no numbers, or
formulas in the article at all. There are no drawings, or explanations of
where the instrument needs to be tapered, and where it needs to be conical
in cross section. Therefore, there is no real physics in the article. On
inspection of my various trumpets and flugelhorns and cornets, I cannot find
any variation in the internal diameter of the pipes anywhere except in the
bell area, where they obviously grow larger in diameter, and some of them
have a smaller leadpipe than the general bore elsewhere. To me, the
differences are mainly to improve the ease of manufacturer, rather than to
achieve better intonation. - Of course, I could be wrong, but the burden of
proof must be on the manufacturers of multi thousand dollar instruments in
order to get my money, not the other way around. I have yet to see the
inside of a good horn factory....I would love to see where they taper the
tubing in accordance with some formulae for some particular section of the
horn in order to achieve some better intonation of some particular note or
notes. Until I do, I refuse to believe in magic. I am sorry if I am a
skeptic, but it is the way I have been brought up, so there isn't much I can
do about it.
> But this article is basically just, "Hand waving". There are no numbers,
or
> formulas in the article at all. There are no drawings, or explanations of
> where the instrument needs to be tapered, and where it needs to be conical
> in cross section. Therefore, there is no real physics in the article.
You are right. I played Schilke's in the '60s when they were the new thing
on the block and one of the complaints about Schilke was that he was making
public statements about horn design and construction that were generally
viewed as not be credible. For example, I was told by Tottle (well known
Boston area instrument repairman and Bach modifier) that Schilke claimed at
a conference to have made a trumpet for a working professional with a bell
only 3 mil thick.
Most instrument design remains artisanship, not engineering. The design is
a series of compromises that different designers and different players would
make in different ways.
Flip Oakes, father of the Wild Thing, says that he spent years fiddling with
trumpet parts until he happened to hit on the particular combination of
pieces that makes the WT. It wasn't designed on paper or in a CAD program.
I have a WT with several different tuning slides. I can demonstrate in a
blindfold test near 100% accuracy in distinguishing between the #1 and #2
tuning slides quickly and by playing in any octave and technical style the
auditor may request. The difference between those slides is that the #1 is
a constant 0.470" throughout while the #2 is tapers continuously from 0.464"
to 0.470". I also have the J-1 tuning slide which is the same as the #1
except that it does not have a brace. I can demonstrate in a blindfold test
about a 2/3 rds accuracy in distinguishing between the 1 and the J-1 when
playing in my highest octave. These difference are real and I can reproduce
my blindfold test results for anybody that wants to vist and observe for
themselves.
(I also get more worn out by the end of a long rehearsal or concert when
using the J-1 -- although this perception is not done blind. I prefer the
way the J-1 performs up high and can't tell any difference down low. I like
the looks of the J-1 better. So, I have no negative mind set that would
have caused my non-blindfold knowledge to affect the degree of tiredness I
experience. Nevertheless, I acknowledge that pschological factors could be
work with respect to tiredness. Maybe I just had an off night the first
time I used it and that has created a mind set that is self reinforcing.)
Again, Flip doesn't have an explanation based in formulae and he doesn't
claim to have one. He only has the results of years of tinkering that just
happen to work very well. To a certain extent, it's a shame that Schilke
and some others claim to have reduced it all to a science because they in
fact have not and their claims leave them subject to complaints like yours,
which in that context are justified.
But, let me tell everybody that is interested: I've played both heavy and
"light" Monettes and they are very different. I don't like them. Although
I left music school for career in law and as a result can buy any trumpet
made, I don't buy that brand because it does play differently and has
characteristics that I do not like or want. The fact that no one has a
program that can predict how and why Monettes are different does not change
the equally valid fact that they are different.
The Wild Thing is also different, although not to the same extreme. I like
it.
Tommy T.
Can the 'perfect' horn be TOO perfect where it's unforgiving? It's one
thing to play a horn that comes alive when the player is 'on', but how
about those days when the same player is not in optimal condition at
the time? Is the horn itself going to let the player coast a bit, or
will the horn highlight what might sound bad as a result of the
player's shape? While people might argue about the bad workman blames
his tools notion, it goes without saying that few players feel good at
all times. Hence, is the 'perfect' horn going to be a help or a
hindrance?
Well, it'll certainly take away any excuse you might have for making a
mistake......
To be perfectly frank, this horn overwhelms every horn I've ever played
along side it.
A whole section of WT's could literally blow down Jericho's walls.
But, the one drawback I encounter is when I'm playing anything but lead
in a section. Then, I really have to hold back so as not to overwhelm
the rest of the section.
The other drawback is trying to get a sizzling, piercing sound.
Granted, I have only the #1 and #2 tuning slides, and perhaps should try
some of the other models.
Overall, I've owned and sold so many horns that I lost track, but the WT
will be the very last horn I will ever sell. It really is one
magnificent horn, especially for solo work, and it won't tire you out as
fast as some of the smaller bore horns.
The ratio of effort to sound on the WT is, without a doubt, better than
any horn I've ever played.
Best Regards,
Mike Terry
JR
"El Lippo" <beaglebob6192@(nospam)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:bijk511umlulomp5t...@4ax.com...
> I've played my WT almost continuously for the past 5 years, in almost
> every conceivable circumstance.
Man - your lip must be either very tired, or made of steel by now!
:)