Talk:Trumpet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Other languages WikiProject Echo has identified Trumpet as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Serbian language Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Braces: A Trumpet Nightmare!

Attention all trumpet players!!! It is inevitable. I shall need to get braces soon. I strongly believe braces are an incarnate of Evil. In any case, I recently was told that electric tape can be used to protest lips and teeth from the cutting braces. I was told that it cushions better than wax and is thin enough as not to excessively puff up lips and make it impossible to play (like rubber stoppers). I need advice; please, any trumpet players, come to my aid!!!


its not really that bad...when i first started i had braces and i had barely any trouble...but when u play for a long time it does tend to hurt a little and they do leave imprints in ur lip...but other than that..its no big deal. =)

Personally, I'm not sure if the article talk section is appropreate for this, but whatever. Personally, I just dealt with it. Build up some scar tissue, and *practice*! You want to be able to keep your upper register, and you want to build up the tissue quickly. I know I don't practice half as often as I should, and my playing has suffered for it. Also, I occasionally have to adapt to subtle changes in my embouchure, after a major change. Make sure you're playing with a good embouchure; I play with my trumpet slightly to the left of my face, and it can sometimes obstruct air flow. Good luck! Eltargrim 07:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

You should make an account and pose your question at www.trumpetherald.com. I'm sure you will get a much more detailed response there. --Sully2302 20:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I used a product called Brace Aid - not sure if they still make it. It bascially makes a rubbery mold that covers the front braces of your upper teeth. It snaps right in and kind of looks like a wad of gum over your braces. I still had to adapt my embouchure when I got braces and when they were removed. But I figure I would have had to do that anyway and Brace Aid made it a lot less painful. Hoof Hearted 20:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shofar: A trumpet?

Is it proper to call a shofar a "trumpet"? The words are different in Hebrew (the metal one is called chatsotsrah). I would call a shofar a horn, not a trumpet. -phma

I tend to agree, however the ram's horn was mentioned in the piece on trumpets from Easton, so I just added the bit about the contemporary use of the shofar. As far as I know, it can go. Danny

[edit] List of great trumpet players

I've taken out Paolo Fresu from the list of "great tpt players". I absolutely do not want to offend anyone, and I am aware that such a list can be a pretty stupid thing sometimes (eg the Famous Canadians debacle!). Nevertheless, I am in no doubt that Paolo Fresu is, at least, less famous and established than the others on the list, contentious though it may be, and I think his presence here could be misleading to some readers. I did check this with an online group of trumpet players and had no response suggesting I am wrong. I would be delighted to debate this further. And of course the listing for Paolo Fresu is still there in the C20th brass instrumentalists list, which is linked from Trumpet, but makes no claims regarding fame. -- Nevilley 19:34 Nov 13, 2002 (UTC)

Oh dear more fame contention. I have removed Chuck Mangione - he's done lots of good things, and yes I did rush out and buy "Feels so Good" when it charted, but he just isn't an all-time great player like Armstrong or Andre. Really I think this concept of the "famous list" is a pretty dodgy one. If people want to list Mangione (and, say, Herb Alpert) they need a separate category, with some tactful way of saying "trumpet players who have achieved commercial success and fame without anyone seriously claiming they were 'great artists'". And then we'd get trouble with that, and Marsalis haters would want to maliciously list him there, and so on ...<sigh>. It would probably be hard to even agree on three "famous/great" players to list here , and with every one you add, it gets more difficult ... Nevilley 08:10 Nov 15, 2002 (UTC)

I agree with you on the last one, but you go to far here... Your standards sound pretty hight to me!!!

I feel that having a list like that is difficult to justify, after all, whether a trumpet player is great or not completly depends on opinion, not the type of things that belong in an encyclopdeia. Bfissa 20:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I think this sentence should be deleted - it has some value, but not much, and is an invitation to silliness. I just added a link to List of trumpeters to the end of the article, which seems more encyclopedia-worthy and generally useful. For now, I'll put Wynton back (someone just replaced him with Lee Morgan - I'll leave Lee in) and I'll think about it some more and wait to hear any vociferous objections before removing. Special-T 23:36, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Mangione is primarily known for his fluegelhorn playing, not his trumpet playing. TheScotch 07:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The list of "instruments the trumpet is higher than" has become stupid, and "respectively" was even more stupid and has been zapped. Whoever added this stuff cannot have read what they said.

[edit] Bible reference

I don't want to offend anyone, but why is there a section regarding the Bible in a page about trumpet? It may be appropriate in a brief history of the instrument to mention, but its own subheading? I thought that much of the concept of Wiki was a neutral point of view; while the section doesn't necessarily proselytize, it seems to go out of its way to endorse. I respect the process here and won't mindlessly snip where I've not participated, but I think it's an important issue to discuss. -- Lundmusic 02:48, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Interesting point. I am not a religious person but I have no problem with the biblical references at all. The bible is after all an important literary work, whether you believe in it or not, and informs LOTS of other cultural ideas. Indeed the way that the bible, and religion in general, talks about the trumpet (and other musics) has a direct bearing on how music is written for them and how they are perceived right down to the present day. We wouldn't have all those Tuba Mirum moments in classical music, to name but one example, without religion. It's also directly relevant to the history of the instrument because it's one of the places where we can read about trumpets and trumpetlike instruments in ancient times - and there aren't too many of those! I also can't agree that the text endorses - as I see it it merely reports. So I would oppose any move to take this content out. On the other hand, if you wanted to broaden it by making it into "the trumpet as a culutral reference" or some such then great - adding in other literary or religious or artistic or whatever connections, that would be terrific. In that way we would broaden the content of the encylopaedia without throwing away any existing content, which I always think is a great way to work! :) PS I signed your edit above for you as I am splitting the paras in order to reply threadwise (is that a word?), hope this is OK. --Nevilley 07:47, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Also, from an editor's standpoint, the section on the harmony instruments could be cleaned up. That is, a whole subheading devoted to bass/flugel/C/D/Eb/pic/slide or perhaps separate brief pages for each? I'd be more than happy to help create some pages for the harmony instruments. -- Lundmusic 02:48, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I agree, it could be tidied up. I am not sure about the expression "harmony instruments" which is perhaps a rather specialized meaning and not one I would use - I do not see them that way, just as other trumpets, with the exception of bass and slide instruments which are - um - just weird! Also, you have the slight problem if trying to do an "other versions" section that you have to specify a "standard version" to diverge from. As the article implies this would seem to be the Bb piston valve trumpet but you might, unless wording very carefully, encounter some probems with people for whom this is not the case. I'd be very unhappy about splitting them into separate pages as there isn't really enough content at present - how does an Eb differ from a D and a C for example - answer = "not much"! :) So I feel they would be better kept in one place so that you come here to read about trumpets and you get the whole lot. But some restructuring to get variants into a different subhead or something, yes, that might be very good and help structure and clean up the article. Go for it! --Nevilley 07:47, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Re: "I signed your edit above for you as I am splitting the paras in order to reply threadwise (is that a word?)". Well, I'm pretty sure paras is not, but at first I supposed it a word not in my vocabulary, and I had to read your sentence three times in order to determine that you meant paragraphs. The time you saved omitting a few key strokes is a fraction of the time I wasted trying to make sense of your sentence. TheScotch 08:03, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Gosh. And then you wasted yet more of your life, and many more keystrokes, moaning utterly trivially about a more-than-two-year-old message. What bizarre behaviour. This does not help the article. I respectfully suggest you try to channel your energies into productive editing. JuniorJetKaptain 10:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

No more keystrokes than you just wasted, and no less productive than your inflammatory and insulting remarks, which I'm afraid I don't find the slightest bit "respectful". As it happens, it took me far less time to write what I did than it took to make sense of paras. As it happens, this person specifically asked about his diction. As it happens, wikipedia in general moves very slowly, such that the date is essentially irrelevant. TheScotch 07:18, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I am delighted to see that I have made you think a bit. Please go on doing it, as it is good for you. Please don't bother to respond as I will not see your response, ever. I'm just enjoying the slow hiss of deflating pomposity. Thank you, and goodbye. JuniorJetKaptain 18:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cornet/flugelhorn/trumpet

I tried to tidy up the bit where it tries to explain about cornet and flugelhorn and their similarities and differences. It's probably gone far enough trying to differentiate them in this article and may well need a separate article to try and tie it all together, and to which other articles could refer, rather than just doing it as an almost-aside in this article. Also, it would be a good idea (with no disrespect intended) if this bit were only edited further by individuals who really understand the issues. Recent edits around the trumpet/cornet/flugelhorn issue reveal a certain amount of misinformation or guessing: the state from which the sentence has just been changed was not good and not accurate. The relationship between these instruments is not one that can be written about by someone with vague ideas about the pitch and shape. 82.35.17.203 15:15, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Trumpet range

Not sure I would agree with high C (written) being the accepted top note. Any big band lead chart will go higher than this, at least to D and often to F. A lot of classical music has broken above C; just off the top of the head, New World Symphony (C#), Shostakovich 1 (D), Mahler 6 (at least C#). Probably at least the fact that many scores call for notes higher than C should be mentioned. --User:Chinasaur

it says "the usually accepted "top" note is a written C (sounding Bb) though even higher notes are attainable and extremely high notes may be heard played by jazz and other specialist trumpeters." I can't see what's wrong with this. You have to give some idea of what is a normally accepted range and this is: it is what is usually quoted in orchestration books etc. Of course higher notes are often played - the article clearly acknowledges this. But it would be wrong to say that the normal accepted range goes any further than this because then you will have misinformed people writing very high notes for school students who've been playing two years and saying yeah, the top G is OK, it's in an encyclopedia. The professional range is a different thing but the article covers the situation perfectly clearly and does not need changing. 138.37.188.109 07:29, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have a suggestion... Why don't we write the fingerings in for the higher notes and write a note that says that the "above C" notes are not ment for band people in their early years of playing their instrument... Like me... Ved 01:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC) TRUPET


I think the new change by Chinasaur meets the requirement - mentions the higher stuff but doesn't encourage baby composers to write it too often! It's an improvement. :) 82.35.17.203 12:20, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Guys, uh since we already fixed the fingerings, shouldn't we delete our "talk"? Other people might log on and see our discussion and start yapping about double high C is as high as a sane trumpet player would go, and try to mess some stuff up.

[edit] Photo

Leave your political beliefs out of this. US military images are public domain, and this is a particularly high-quality image. Try finding a non-military professional photograph that can be used on Wikipedia. I cropped the image down to just the musician (there was an American flag in the background) and even cropped out the patch on his arm, so there is nothing to identify him as American. Even the medals do not necessarily indicate that he's a soldier. The photo adds something by showing the method used to play a trumpet. If you want to change the caption to de-"Americanize/militarize" the article, feel free to, but I don't see any legitimate reason for removing the image outright. – flamuraiTM 09:33, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

It is not a good image of a trumpet player! That's why. Have you actually looked at it at all? 138.37.188.109 10:45, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Why isn't it a good image of a trumpet player? What are your criteria for a good image of a trumpet player? – flamuraiTM 11:11, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
I am so sorry but I am out of this debate, and will not be tempted back into it. Please do with the page what you will, with my best wishes.
In passing I might add that the new photo, from another user, of a German trumpet, whilst nice, is uninformative in its present form, and unbalances the article, visually. It's been inserted as if it is the most important thing there - certainly it should be in the article but not like that. Also, the article text needs to explain about piston vs rotary valves - I can't believe we forgot to do this! Sure you can find them by following the link to [valve] but it should say in the article about these valves and what they mean. Having done that, it would then make more sense to explain the rotary trumpet in those terms, not just call it German, which is FAR too narrow. To be honest I'd rather go back to the USAF guy at the top than have the rotary there the USAF one was much better laid out and made sense visually in the article as a whole!
But, as I say, I am out of here. I should not have started editing this article again and now I am stopping, permanently. Sorry about the outburst before: I feel I am right in principle but I should not have been rude. Bye! 138.37.188.109 13:02, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] the fingering chart

An organ player recently wanted to understand the trumpet a bit better, so I gave him a fingering chart and weekly lessons until he could get to high C. Seeing this section stub, I formatted it to match here, and added other curious combinations that sometimes give me trouble. I can understand if someone wants to move it to something like Trumpet (fingering) but just wacking it and leaving the "Instruction" section still as a stub is pathetically short-sighted. Go ahead and IMPROVE the chart instead? Come ON now. Should there be a Trumpet (instruction) page?

I originaly did the fingering chart(s) in Finalé; where is an appropriate place to upload that type of file? --Connel MacKenzie 06:07, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

I think all you people are nuts. High C is not that hard of a note to hit at all. I think it's perfectly acceptable to say a lot of people can reach higher. When I was in high school I was playing high E, and when my instructor was in high school he was up to between G above high C and double high C. Yes, he was crazy, I'll give him that, but high C is really not that bad. All someone has to do is listen to Maynard and try to play it. I practiced the opening of Birdland until I finally reached the G. It took a few weeks, but eventually I got it. Now, playing D above C, along with high E come naturally. To play high you must practice though. It isn't going to fall from the sky. While it is true that some players are so called "blessed" with natural chops, the majority, and by majority I mean 98% of us, need to practice consistantly. In addition to practicing, one must also be careful to warm down just as much as they warm up. In doing this you will soothe the muscles and, in turn, not damage them beyond repair. There are a few tips that can help someone play high, including breathing deeply from the stomach and blowing into the horn with force. The faster the airspeed, the higher the pitch. All in all, I really don't think its such a bad thing to say more people can play above high C regularly because if you put in the time and really want to achieve the notes, you will get it. 66.227.151.159

Um, I was trying to say I only gave him a few weeks of basic instruction - just enough to get him started. --Connel MacKenzie 06:30, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Changes

I just reworked the text in several pages to what my experience as a trumpet player has taught me as correct. There were a number of factual errors here and there that needed to be excised or corrected. (Among them, "trumpeteer" is not a correct name for a trumpet player.) And while it may seem like the loudest in a band, it is not the instrument with the technical capacity to BE the loudest, and we shouldn't make that claim.

Other edits:

  • Assorted typographical/wikification catches.
  • I added some stuff on mouthpieces, but there's really a whole lot more that could be said on them if anyone's in the mood.
  • The cornet paragraph was nonsense — "in a different family to both of their two separate families" has now been made comprehensible.
  • The section about types of trumpets now much more clear, I think.
  • The debateable claims about range have now been rendered in factually correct, NPOV language as best I could muster
    • Previous discussion is correct that it's ridiculous to claim high C as the top of the instrument — that's just where beginning method books stop their fingering tables. They do so because the top register isn't as easily accessible or as frequently used. But it's still there! In practice, written music for a standard Bb trumpet almost never calls for anything beyond an A above the staff, hence "3 octaves above F#" is a reasonable description of the standard range.
    • Info on pedal tones added
  • Re: "" and Arban's copyright issues....I completely agree, as I have a 1940s copy of the book as well as a more recent one, but it's not really relevant to the article what Carl Fisher does with the text.
  • Fingering notes vastly improved - it's not really important how to finger things with the third valve slide out (since no one really does that!) but I've added to the table a list of common alternate fingerings. These really stop being relevant in the last octave of the table, but that's explained as well, along with the theory behind valves.

LoudNotes 18:43, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

Why is trumpeter an improper name for a trumpet player?--HistoricalPisces 17:35, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

In reference to HistoricalPisces's question, the intro text, in the past, listed trumpeter, trumpeteer, and trumpet player as possible names. LoudNotes was objecting to trumpeteer, not trumpeter. The current article no longer uses the word trumpeteer. --Dbolton 20:45, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Is this a political corectness debate?--HistoricalPisces 17:35, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

In my band I call 'em: " Hey! you with the short horns!" to differentiate tham from the trombones who are addresses as "You with the long horns"--Light current 20:17, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
I changed the word "person" to read "A musician who plays trumpet is called..." Ezratrumpet 03:17, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

the list of fingerings chart should include the concert notes, possibly in te same bar where the Bflat notes are listed.

[edit] Light Current edits

I didnt realise the page had been largely blanked before I started editing. Mind you, thought it was a bit strange that there was so little info on page. When I realised and tried to revert to older version, the Wiki wouldnt let me. Anyway alls well that ends well!--Light current 20:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Trumpet in D?

I always thought there was an even higher trumpet that the one in C. ie one in D. It was apparently used on one of the Beatles Sgt Pepper album tracks (Penny Lane?). Im not a trumpet player so Im not sure about this, but if it does exist then we should mention it.--Light current 20:13, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Confirmed. Trumpets have historically appeared in many keys - all depends on length of the tubing. Ezratrumpet 03:17, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
This is correct but it was covered by the article anyway. Penny Lane was played on a Bb piccolo, or possibly an A.

[edit] Split notes

The term "split note" needs a brief disambiguation for people like me (the link to Split leads way off-track!). At Keyed trumpet would one of you pros (this is a terrific article!) fix the typo over the "introduction of the valved trumpet in 18213" which led me here in the first place? Thanks! --Wetman 09:52, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flat signs

Over the past year or so, I've noticed that B♭ has been switched to Bb and back again multiple times. Such activity, although minor, seems counterproductive and it might be a good idea to build some consensus.

Possible pros and cons:

  • B♭ uses the correct flat sign character but may not be displayed correctly by some (generally older) computers
  • Bb uses the lower-case "b" as a less typographically-correct substitute for the flat sign

--Dbolton 23:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I hadn't thought of that problem. If the browser-display issue is the only one, I think it's best to use the unicode. It seems that Unicode is common and accepted on Wikipedia. I tested a few browsers -- the flat symbols work on Safari and IE 5.2 for Mac OS X, and the latter is from 2001. They didn't work in some really old classic Mac OS browsers (IE 5.1 and Netscape Communicator). If this is a problem maybe there would be some way for Wikipedia to automatically translate Unicode for browsers that don't support it (e.g. by inlining images as is done for \frac{math}{expressions}). --Nethgirb 05:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I hadn't tested any browsers (other than the one I was using) when I made the statement above. I just tried viewing the page using IE 6 on Windows XP and discovered it has problems with the flat signs. Unfortunately, this (admittedly outdated) software is used by almost 80-90% of web surfers. Your suggestion of automatically translating unsupported unicode characters is worth investigating, but I wouldn't know where to begin! Any thoughts? --Dbolton 07:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know that that's broken in IE. Is it all IE 6's or just your configuration? If all or most IE6's are broken then I suppose it's best not to use the unicode. -Nethgirb 12:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I did the last round of flat-sign insertions. Didn't realize there might be a problem. Apologies if it resulted in confusion rather than clarification.Special-T 14:57, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


Seems like another round of 'change the flat sign to lower-case b' has happened in a recent edit. I am not tech/browser savvy - has there been a reasonable practice agreed upon for this issue? Special-T 15:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Another place this issue has been raised is Talk:Accidental (music)#Viewing Problems. This issue was not fixed in IE 7.--Dbolton 04:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Either use B♭ or B-flat, not Bb. A "b" is not a flat symbol, nor is a "#" a sharp symbol. – flamurai (t) 05:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
For reference: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (music)#Flats and sharps--Dbolton 08:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Additional information

Personally I think that we should add a section, or another article at the very least, about how the trumpet is used in orchestra's and bands. If we were to do another new article I think we would need to do all of the insturments and how they are used in a band or orchestra for music.Trmptplyr 07 22:40, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Instruments mentioned

I think that someone should write those articles on the various cousins to the trumpet, like the "Slide Trumpet" link that goes to a site that says that this article dosen't exist. Personally that was really anoying going to another article about something I didn't know about only to find that the article didn't exist. But we need someone who knows the insturment to do it, preferably a player of the insturment. They generally know all sorts of unknown and unique facts and information.Trmptplyr 07 22:41, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Remove fingering chart?

I added an explanation of fingerings and an image of the overtone series to illustrate. I propose removing the fingering chart below it - I find it to be a confusing way to illustrate this information. I don't want to just remove such a large chunk of information from an article without anyone else's input, though. Thoughts?Special-T 21:51, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I think it should now be removed. (I put it there initially, restored it the first time it was removed, but now it just looks silly.) --Connel MacKenzie 22:42, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

OK - I'll do it. Thanks for responding. Special-T 22:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I added the fingering table to the image's description page. For accessibility reasons, it's nice to have a text equivalent of information-critical images. --Dbolton 00:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vote against "chops"

Including a definition of the slang term "chops" in this article seems tangential and unsupported. It is also inaccurate as written. I removed it a while ago for those reasons, but it's back; I don't want to just remove it again if there's a consensus that it has value (I'm also 'assuming good faith'). In my experience (which I guess falls under 'original research'), the word "chops" refers to playing ability on any instrument, so the definition here is inaccurate. Also, original research concerns (is there any reference for this usage?), plus this piece of info doesn't qualify as an established fact about the trumpet. I defer to the consensus. Special-T 16:46, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

In the trumpet world, in addition to playing ability, "chops" does also mean the muscles around the lips, if that is the phrase you are referring to. dfrankow 22:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, that's one usage (among many), but, again - references? relevance? does it belong in this article? Special-T 14:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I am not familiar with the Wikipedia nicities. :) I'm not sure how to judge relevance. It doesn't seem terribly important, I guess. It is a part of the "trumpet" world, albeit a small part. And references? I am fairly sure I've read things in Wikipedia with no refs, but I don't know what the standard should be. Presumably there aren't many refs exactly because of this debate we're having. That is to say, much slang lives outside official sources unless it is popular enough that newspapers decide to make a human interest story out of it. dfrankow 16:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to remove it - it's a very general term that means "ability", so it's misleading to just drop in such a specific definition here. If it gets put back, I surrender... Special-T 15:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] excerpt list

I don't think it's a good idea to include a list of excerpts. It's too specific for an encyclopedia, and could get out of hand. – flamurai (t) 16:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't see the problem yet. As a non-orchestral trumpet player, I'd be interested in this list. dfrankow 21:54, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Slide Trumpet =? Soprano Trombone

If anyone knows whether these two instruments are indeed identical, please visit Talk:Trombone#Slide Trumpet =? Soprano Trombone. Thanks. ×Meegs 22:16, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Not Well-Known Books?

I have removed books that I don't recognize. I don't claim to be THE authority, but I fear people are just advertising their books. Here is what I took out. If several people vouch for their importance to the trumpet community, then put some back.

  • Campos, Frank Gabriel (2005). Trumpet Technique. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195166930.
  • Robert Getchell and Nilo Hovey (1976). First Book of Practical Studies for Cornet and Trumpet. WARNER BROS. PUBLICATIONS U.S INC.
  • Harnum, Jonathan (2006). Sound The Trumpet : How To Blow Your Own Horn. Sol-Ut Press. ISBN 0-9707512-7-3
  • McLaughlin, Clint (2003). How The Chops Work. Dallas, Texas http://www.BbTrumpet.com
  • McLaughlin, Clint (2002). The Pros Talk Embouchure. Dallas, Texas http://www.BbTrumpet.com
  • James Ployhar (1972). I Recommend: A Complete Warm-Up Technique Book Designed to Improve Fundamental Musicianship. WARNER BROS. PUBLICATIONS U.S INC.
  • Tarr, Edward (1988). The Trumpet. Amadeus Press. ISBN 0931340136.
  • Yanow, Scott (2001). Trumpet Kings: The Players Who Shaped the Sound of Jazz Trumpet. San Francisco: Backbeat Books. ISBN 0879305408.


[edit] =

It is more than likely fair to remove those books as none are really the age of some of the master books. Arban is over 100 years old, Clarke pub 1912, Schlossberg pub 1937... over 70 years old but you left the Jerry Callet book and it is way less known than many that you removed. Clearly in the slightly less than 4 years it has been out it can NOT be on par with books like The Art of Trumpet Playing by Farkas, Encyclopedia of the Pivot System by Reinhardt, Maggio Method for Brass by MacBeth, Trumpet Technique by Delbert Dale, Prelude to Brass Playing by Mendez, Systematic Approach by Gordon. And even though none of these are on the list here; they are included in every college library when Trumpet Secrets is not in any of them.


This page suffers from FAN addicts. People who have been helped by a teacher or a book and now believe they are great. This is not a bad thing but why exclude any teacher or book if this is the basis for inclusion here?

Either the books have to be WELL known or they don't. Now it is still half and half.


I would add Richard Dundas' book on 20th century brass instruments as it has pictures and company info on ALL US made Brass in the 20th century. Many consider it to be a worthy book.

Edward Tarr was on the board of directors for the International Trumpet Guild for many years and is one of; if not the best known trumpet authority in Europe. (His seat was taken by N. Young this year.) True it may be hard to justify an 8 year old book but you did already allow a 4 year old one.)

Frank Campos has also been on the ITG board many years and is a college professor as well as a known player. I have no doubt that with the knowledge and people he knows it WILL be on a par with some of the others but as 1 year old book it wouldn't be well known.


Speaking of book ads this is still on the trumpet page: "A recent book, Sound The Trumpet: How To Blow Your Own Horn by Jonathan Harnum covers a wide range of material, particularly for students without access to individual instruction. The trumpet is not an instrument that is easily self taught. As with other wind instruments, it is easy to develop improper technique which inhibits a player's success and can even prove injurious."

Okay, I removed the Harnum thing. As for the other points about what is and is not authoritative, please jump in and remove non-authoritative and add authoritative. The Colin book was revised in 1980, so it is older than that. I would keep it. However, feel free to remove the Callet. I agree that Farkas and Gordon are great. The others I've not heard of. Also, there are 2 sections on books now, and they should be combined. I put them next to each other, at least. dfrankow 17:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ==

[edit] Advertisement

What whould I do with the sections about lesson books? They sound like an ad to me too. ['frαs.ti] 12:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fingering on chart

The following was added to the article by Hippo92blue (talk • contribs), which I removed and am moving here for further discussion.

A High E on a b-flat trumpet is not the 1st and 2nd valve, but open. Also , a high D# on a b-flat trumpet is not the 2nd valve alone, but the 2nd and 3rd valve together. And finally, the last fingering scale, with all 3 valves, is completely messed up.

It appears to be in reference to Image:Special-T trumpet overtone series.png. Thoughts? --TeaDrinker 22:29, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

The article might not clearly state which fingering is most commonly used for certain notes, since many notes can be produced with more than one fingering (as when a note exists in more than one overtone series). High E is indeed open, just like top-space E. The text accurately states this (notes above high C are fingered like the notes an octave lower). Of course, top-space E is also in the 1-2 valve overtone series, and that may not be clearly stated anywhere. D#, however, is 2nd valve alone. Only the lowest D# is 2-3. The 1-2-3 valve chart is accurate. Check this out on any fingering or overtone chart for a valved brass instrument. BTW, 'high C' refers to the C two ledger lines above the staff, not third-space C - not sure if this is another source of misinterpretation. Special-T 01:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
The author of this article probably didn't mean to cause confusion. Now, I must butt in... High E (top space E) can also be played as 1-2. It is simply an alternate fingering. Such as second line G can be played as 1-3 and First space F# can be played as 1-2-3 like the Low F#. Alternate fingerings are used in warm-ups to cause less movement in the fingers causing less work having to be done.

[edit] Orchestral Excerpts Section

Would someone be willing to collaborate with me on the orchestral excerpts section? I am new and inexperienced with Wikipedia, however, I have ample knowledge to give this section of the article a much-needed overhaul. My information is based off of BSO CSO and ClevelandSO audition rep. lists, and Philip Norris' "Top 50 Orchestral Audition Excerpts for Trumpet". If I provide a list, would someone be able to help me with formatting? Thanks. --Sully2302 20:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Instruction and Method Books vs. Selected Method Books?

I see no purpose for having these two seperate sections, and I feel that the ladder should be removed. Comments? --Sully2302 22:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

yeah, I agree. -- FrostytheSnowman 'sup? 00:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Marching band

It seems to me that trumpets are an important part of a Marching band, yet this article makes no mention of this. Is it OK if I addd something? Force10 18:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

If you think you can make an article better, go ahead! See Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages--Dbolton 02:46, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial link?

Does anyone else think that www.BbTrumpet.com is pretty much just a commercial site? Special-T 02:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "The trumpet is the highest brass instrument in register, above the,..."

"The trumpet is the highest brass instrument in register, above the,..."

Thank You.

Wondrous,... for persons who can decipher that phrase. Do we need articles that discourage reading in the first sentence?

Hopiakuta 23:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of trumpets as a comedic sound effect

Is there a specific term for that trumpet noise made in comedy (perticularly traditional comedy) when a disparaging event takes place; y'know, that "wah waaah waaaaah" noise? - 85.210.152.124 04:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Not that I know of. The mute that helps make this effect is indeed called a wah-wah (sometimes). If you gave me a verbal instruction just like your sentence above I would know exactly what you meant. I suppose you could shorten it to "typical wah-wah comedy sting" or something but I don't know the "official" term. In many cases the tpt player would have it communicated to them as a piece of written-down music so it would all be encoded in there. It would be something like a descending scale in shorter notes (crotchets/quarter notes) leading to a low note which is longer (semibreve or whole note), maybe G F E D C# (the last notes has to be "wacky" usually). Then before the passage it would be written "wah-wah" or "harmon" (or sometimes "tin") to tell the player what mute to take, and each note would have either "wah" written over it or sometimes "+ - 0" showing closed>open which is what you do over the end of the mute with your L hand. Finally there might be some other tonal effect on the long last note as well, perhaps a growl or flutter tongue. Again, this is probably more information than you needed, so I will return to my crypt and pull the lid shut once more. Best wishes, ex-user 82.45.248.177 22:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Caption confusing

I may have found a typo in the piccolo trumpet caption:

Piccolo trumpet in B♭, with swappable leadpipes to tune the instrument to B♭ (shorter) or A (longer)

– flamurai (t) 05:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Seems accurate. Shorter tubing = higher pitch. Special-T 20:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I took the photo and wrote the caption, or at least the original one. It's correct and I am not sure what the possible error is that you perceive. (But feel free to clarify in case I can help.) What the picture shows is a Selmer picc in Bb. Beside it, for comparison, are separate leadpipes in Bb and A. They are roughly lined up so you can see the approximate effect on the length of the instrument when you change them. The Bb pipe in the picc, and the A pipe on the cloth, are both by Blackburn - if you look closely at the big version of the photo you can see Blackburn's fish logo on them. The Bb pipe on the cloth is the original Selmer. For some bizarre reason (it's only a little tube, right? :) ) the Blackburn pipes enhance the performance of this trumpet to a baffling extent! I now *never* use the Selmer pipe. Before Blackburn hit the market with their Selmer-replacement pipes, people sometimes used to take a Selmer G piccolo pipe and cut it down for A on the same grounds - that it was much better than the original. The general perception was that the Selmer A and Bb pipes were cruder than the Selmer G and the Blackburn, which seemed to be more thoroughly designed.
This is probably a bit more information than you wanted. Sorry! :) Love to all ... long-gone ex-user 82.45.248.177 22:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
PS If from this you guess who I am please just shush ... let sleeping dogs lie! :)

[edit] on merging with sop. bugle

hi. I'm working on cleaning up drum and bugle corps related pages, particularly instrumental issues. The soprano bugle page was orphaned, and it seems more helpful to slightly expand the description of trumpets in the key of G (also called sopranos) on this page and to merge the two. any objections or thoughts?--C.lettinga 12:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

beyond my expertise but if the sop bugle actually IS a trumpet I;d say yeah fine, but if not, I'd say keep it separate or seek a more appropriate home for it. It must be possible to establish a technical definition which nails the question is it or isn't it - I hope? 82.45.248.177 22:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I think that we should split the piccolo trumpet into a new article.

Saxophones have a page for all eight levels of differently-pitched saxophones. Why not trumpet? It seems logical to me. —Captain538[talk] 03:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. The picc article would be tiny (haha) and would either have to refer back to this article the whole time, or would need to replicate much of the content of this. It really is just another tpt, with some special characteristics. It would be hard to know where to draw the line - would you have separate articles for piccs in Bb, A, G and C or F? How about trumpets in D, Eb, C, Bb, A? Too much complexity, I feel - keep it in the article - it's all the same thing: they are just not separate enough. Saxes are a different case (ahaha) and I am happy to concede that it might work there - but does not work here. 82.45.248.177 22:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Serbian article

I invite a speaker of the language to improve this article using data from the Serbian one, as indicated at the top of this page. If this doesn't happen soon then I suggest the tag is deleted, as there's no evidence that it is doing good. If you look at the Serbian article you will see that it is a tiny fraction of the size of this, has one picture and a range diagram ... it's very very hard, with the best will in the world and without wishing to be in the least rude about other-language wikis, to see how the Serbian article is likely to be a rich repository of information that this English article really ought to have. The system is flawed in that it allows this tagging without justification or end date so it will just sit there for ever, doing no good, unless it is either acted on positively or removed. If the former doesn't happen, I intend to do the latter, but please feel free to comment either way. Best wishes 138.37.199.206 10:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/r/u/Talk%7ETrumpet_5ca7.html"