Re: Practice Mutes vs. Performance Mutes


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Klaus on May 31, 2001 at 06:11:08:

In Reply to: Practice Mutes vs. Performance Mutes posted by Santos Godineaux on May 31, 2001 at 05:28:35:

For tubas I only have practise mutes. But I know quite a number of performance mutes from my other brasses.

The purpose of a practice mute is to seal off the direct air escape from the bell. The air then is lead through the chamber of the mute, which can be internally damped by means of soft textile fibres. The air finally escapes through rather small openings.

The performance mutes generally should not be seen as mutes per se. I see them mostly as devices intended to change the relative balances of the various components of the overtone spectre. The result is perceived as a more or less radical change in sound.

Miles Davis played with a quite characteristic harmon mute sound, which I especially remember from his "Time after time" recording. Technically this sound was muted, but it was really intense, almost piercing in quality.

Even if the harmon mute (and the stopping mute for French horn) like the practising mute seals off the direct air escape from the bell, this is the exception among performance mutes.

These mostly only use cork strips to keep themselves in place in the bell.

Some mute makers use the same shapes and materials for straight mutes and practise mutes. The only differences being in the amount and placement of the cork, And in the hole/no hole situation.

Lots of players have changed the original function of such mutes from preformance to practise. Or vice versa. But it takes time to cut cork and let the glue dry. So this can not be done on the fly.

It there are mutes that can double for practise and performance, I would want to learn about them, too.

What I, until now, have seen and heard from multiple purpose mutes for other brasses, might qualify as friendly towards ones purse. But not towards ones ears.

Klaus


Follow Ups: