Posted by Klaus on February 14, 2003 at 19:45:55:
In Reply to: Re: Problem note on my Getzen posted by JoeS on February 14, 2003 at 17:21:55:
I wonder a bit over your reply, Joe.
Of course I have heard of exactly two complaints about the 9th partial before this one. One was general, the other one was specific.
The general one was about Bach small bore Strad trombones, that cannot play the high Bb in 3rd position as a 9th partial. Allegedly a fault acknowledged by the Bach company. And complained very much by upper range big band trombonists.
The specific one was about a YEP 641, that had had a custom made (by Yamaha) 12" bell mounted before the introduction of the YEP 642. This instrument is (was?) owned by the most known euph player over here. Steven Mead had tried that instrument, while being on tour here, and had found that the open 9th partial was hardly there as a speaking note.
When I met SM the next day and he learned of me having a YEP 641 (which I had not brought), he immediately asked about its 9th partial. My reply was, that this note was one of the best ones on an overall very good instrument. That high C comes out very responsive and projecting. Actually the two chromatic steps above that C are the only notes, where I have to apply alternative fingerings. They are fingered 2+3 and 1+2 as 12th partials, rather than 2 and open as 10th partials, because these 10th partials are slightly dull and flat.
If the 9th partials on the Bb as well on the F side of my Conn 28D had not been stellar notes (also as fingered derivatives), that instrument had been worthless. The midrange Bb side is too dull for me, so I play the F side up to the open ninth partial before continuing chromatically with the 9th partial of the Bb-side fingered 2+3.
This approach needs regular and dedicated practise. So I do actually not agree with the advise given down the thread, that the Getzen 9th partial problem should be solved by relaxation.
If the note speaks for a short period, then it is there. If it then starts to split or roll, then most likely because unfortunate acoustic properties have some sort of back-pressure/phase-shift/or-whatever happen. I know that from the French horns. For me the only solution has been to have a very firm air support counteracting that sense of resistance.
I also will have to disagree with the suggestion, that a shallow mouthpiece should be used. If an instrument has notes, that present extraordinary resistance on certain notes, then one should not introduce yet another resistant factor right in front of the lips. My personal solution of a PT-50 with an opened-up backbore might be a bit too far to go, but it points towards a direction.
We all know Joe'S liking of fanning fanatic fundamentalists for a fiery fluctuation of funny forwardings of focusedly frenetic points of view, so please just read me as the laid back presenter of Joe'S true ideas, as he would have told them, had he not had this fondness for fanning fanatic fundamentalists for a fiery fluctuation of funny forwardings of focusedly frenetic points of formal focal dysFunctionality.
Friends, phlease forgive for a foray far into a foreign form of putting phonetics into a fingered form. I feel sure of Joe'S forgiving for my phelpsing around.
Klaus