I finally have evidence of my high quality of play

trumpetb

Member
Many years ago I made a curry from spices and after many long minutes of my creative genius it was ready.

It proved so vile that I had to bin it rapidly. It was disgusting.

I then gave up and went to a takeaway.

The takeaway tasted just as vile and that monstrosity joined my creation in the bin.

I have since then basked in the knowledge that I can truly make a meal to the same quality as restaurant meals and that particular professional chef. I am justly proud of my ability to reach the standard of a professional chef.

I have more recently longed for the day when I will be able to play to the standard of a professional musician, and I have laboured long and hard on the task.

I now know that I can play to the standard of a professional musician and I attach the proof in a link to a site that has recordings of professional musicians at work. This is not me playing in the link, I can only wish it were, - such control, such lyrical beauty, it does however confirm to me that I can indeed sound very much the same as this maestro of the trumpet, although the twiddly bits are still a challenge to me.

I can go to my maker now satisfied at my progress and rest in the knowledge that I have conquered yet another fundamental skill.

Sit back and enjoy


peace at last.
 
Last edited:

trumpetb

Member
My post was of course heavy sarcasm. My reference to my exceptionally poor cooking I had hoped to be a giveaway in this.

People do love what I do however so I must be doing something right the question is what. Nobody in their right mind could like the utterly awful recordings they make of my playing so the recordings cannot be realistic or anywhere near realistic.

I am working on setting up a small home recording studio so I can make some faithful recordings for my own development and self improvement.

I have no practice area and no acoustic chamber no audio interface no mic no cables. I have a DAW and a computer and nothing else, that is all, and that is not enough to make even passable recordings.

I have heard a great many truly appalling recordings of my playing made by members of the public and in every single case they sound so woeful I want to throw up. I do not yet know the reason why they are so appallingly bad (although I could hazard a guess). I am not into guesswork however so I need to discover what is going on and rectify it.

I have to say musicians call my playing beautiful and I think they must be good judges, - they are musicians, so my playing cannot possibly be anything like the recordings of my playing.

I refuse to be assessed based upon bad recordings.

It is more than likely the very cheap equipment, the lack of any care in making the recordings that they make, and that they have no understanding of how to make a recording. They simply do not care what the recording sounds like as long as they have it recorded and they can shove it into facebook for their 8,000 "friends" to have a chuckle at.

There is a reason why professional musicians refuse to allow audiences to make phone recordings from their seats of their concerts and it is not a copyright issue or a merchandising issue it is simply a quality issue. Musicians do not want to sound like rubbish and I am the same.

After recording me the people who record me claim it was a great recording, but then when challenged about that they then reluctantly admit that in reality the recording sounded nothing like the sound they heard in real life. so there is no truth reality or faithfulness in any of these recordings made on cheap equipment. I have taken to refusing when they ask me if they can record me but many just record me anyway. We have to live with that.

They always use a cheap phone with a 2 dollar mic in it, hand held in the open air, pointing it in the general direction of the trumpet from any old distance, and then it is just dumped raw into a phone recording app made for recording a speech voice at very low bandwidth. Totally incapable of capturing 99% of the instrument tones. Is it any wonder that that the 1% it can record sounds so appallingly bad.

It takes something like the quality of a £5,000 to £10,000 recording studio setup in the hands of a competent sound recording engineer who knows how to mic a trumpet using a high quality DAW and a mixing desk to record these instruments properly. I know you can get an MXL R77 for £260 but you need a room with acoustic decoupling and it can cost £1000 to acoustically damp just one wall so that is £6,000 right there for all 4 walls, floor, and ceiling, and with the rest of the gear you wont see much change from £10,000 to create a decent home studio properly with all good quality equipment.

I could give you a breakdown of exactly why only 1% of a trumpet or cornet is recorded on very cheap gear but that would take up too much room. If you want I will give you the information I have and how in theory to make it perform better, I would prefer to successfully do it first.

It is a thorn in my side as you can imagine there must be hundreds of recordings of me by now and not one of them is any good, except maybe for one recording but lets not go there.
 

Jack E

Well-Known Member
My post was of course heavy sarcasm. My reference to my exceptionally poor cooking I had hoped to be a giveaway in this.</QUOTE>
Don't worry, trumpetb - I'm receiving you loud and clear. It did remind me of a record made many years ago, under the names (I think) of Jonathan and Darlene Edwards - but actually made by Jo Stafford, who other singers said had a very fine voice, accompanied by her husband Paul Weston on piano - and he was a very accomplished player. What became a bunch of LPs actually started out as Jo and Paul larking about to entertain friends at parties - and then, like Topsy, it just "growed and growed!"

One of the songs they murdered, with malice aforethought, was called 'The Last Time I saw Paris'. From start to finish it was liberally adorned with notes being just a hair's breadth off pitch, or off tempo - but as a reviewer put it:
"Anyone can sing off key, or be off tempo, but to do it that consistently on every track - and only ever being out by just enough to set your teeth on edge - you have to be damn good!"


And he was right, because of the way anyone who has made a serious effort in music has had it dunned into them from Day One to be accurate on both - so to deliberately be off goes against all instincts and training. It's like a skilled cabinet maker trying to make a botch of a job; he just can't bring himself to do it.

People do love what I do however so I must be doing something right the question is what. Nobody in their right mind could like the utterly awful recordings they make of my playing so the recordings cannot be realistic or anywhere near realistic.

I have heard a great many truly appalling recordings of my playing made by members of the public and in every single case they sound so woeful I want to throw up. I do not yet know the reason why they are so appallingly bad (although I could hazard a guess). I refuse to be assessed based upon bad recordings.</QUOTE>
And so should we all. If Joe and Josie Public want to make abysmal recordings of musicians with their iPhones, or take badly focused pictures looking like the subject has a lamp post sticking out the top of their head, or make video recordings for Youtube in which they wave the camera around like a flag, making viewers feel sea-sick, that's their problem, not yours!

It is more than likely the very cheap equipment, the lack of any care in making the recordings that they make, and that they have no understanding of how to make a recording. They simply do not care what the recording sounds like as long as they have it recorded and they can shove it into facebook for their 8,000 "friends" to have a chuckle at.

There is a reason why professional musicians refuse to allow audiences to make phone recordings from their seats of their concerts and it is not a copyright issue or a merchandising issue it is simply a quality issue. Musicians do not want to sound like rubbish and I am the same.

After recording me the people who record me claim it was a great recording, but then when challenged about that they then reluctantly admit that in reality the recording sounded nothing like the sound they heard in real life. so there is no truth reality or faithfulness in any of these recordings made on cheap equipment. I have taken to refusing when they ask me if they can record me but many just record me anyway. We have to live with that.

It is a thorn in my side as you can imagine there must be hundreds of recordings of me by now and not one of them is any good, except maybe for one recording but lets not go there.

I can only sympathise; the only 'recording and feedback' I've had, as such, is my tutors listening to what I play, showing me where I'm going wrong, and explaining how I can correct the fault - the point being that their 'recording equipment' is a very sensitive pair of ears, and the finest analogue audio computer in existence; the human brain.

I've never had anyone record me in the way you described - for which I'm deeply thankful! - but I do have a parallel curse, in that anyone who takes a picture of me makes me look either blind drunk, or drugged up to the eyeballs, or so half-witted that nobody with a lick of sense would trust me with even a plastic picnic knife, let alone something as lethal as a sharp pencil :mad:

Mind, they're still better than those my mum took with a Brownie box camera when I was in short trousers. They made me look like a hooligan who was blackballed from joining the local Borstal Sports & Social Club . . .

Ho hum, and best regards,

Jack
 

trumpetb

Member
There is a phenomenon called selective hearing and another phenomenon selective vision Jack.

What do we see when we look at an object.

We see the object within a vista, the eyes see the object in sharp focus and the rest of the scene is blurred and the brain recalls the other objects in the scene when our eyes first saw them but when we first saw them our eyes were hunting around and saw separate slices of the scene each one in sharp focus.

In other words if a scene is of a car a house a fence a tree our eyes hunt around focusing and refocusing seeing all things in sharp focus so each object is individually seen in sharp focus but when looking at the tree only that tree is in focus and everything else is blurry but when looking at the car suddenly the car is in focus and the tree is now out of focus. This is normal.

But what the brain next does is quite clever. The brain recalls all the sharp images of the tree the car the fence the house and assembles them into a single scene in which all objects are in focus, We are aware of them all but only really see the single object we are looking at and the rest of the scene is filtered out and our recollections of them are used by our brains. This is what picasso was trying to reveal. His assemblages of slices of people, an eye here and ear there, and all in a kind of juxtaposition, show us the mechanism of seeing and in fact they allow him to successfully depict a three dimensional object like a head on a two dimensional field like a canvas.

Picasso paintings are in this manner closer to reality than any of titians or da vincis works can ever be because they show us what we see not what we think we see. People think when confronted by a picasso that these slices are what the artist saw as a single view but they are instead the slices he saw at different times when looking all rammed cleverly together.

When I look at a face I dont see a face none of us do we see an eye then we then see a nose then we see an ear then we see a chin and the subject is usually moving slightly so we all see heads in tiny slices like mini picassos and the brain filters them and assembles them into the one single image that we "see" when we look at a face.

Not everyone sees in this way the more observant among us see more pragmatically and look at things more intently like a scientist deconstructing things I think artists look at things in this way because they learn to deal with reality and not accept prejudicial recollections of things seen in the past.

We musicians are artists and we hear things differently to the way non musicians hear things. Selective hearing works in a similar way as selective vision we only hear what we listen to so as long as the thing we listen to sounds good the rest are out of "focus" and we dont pay real attention to the rest. As we learn to listen we start to truly hear the rest.

I loved the concert the violins were out of time the clarinets were out of tune the oboe was in a different time zone to every one else and the dynamics of the Horns were of their own making so to speak but my god the trumpet player sounded regal and brilliant and I was moved to tears. Well done you have just ignored everything except the trumpet.

We walk a fine line between brilliance and obscurity. fine nuances like attack, articulation, solid air support, all add up to make perfection when done well and make abysmal when done badly, and the difference is very slight and difficult to hear at the business end where we play.

This is the importance of listening that teachers tell us we must do. The quality of the listening dictates the quality of the playing and that is because we only hear what the brain allows us to hear just as we only see what the brain allows us to see. And if we cannot hear the slight imperfections of inflection we cannot correct them.

A man suffered a brain injury this is a documented case. His brain injury made him unable to "see". He could physically see ok but could not "see" what he saw. When walking along the street he would see a child and think they were a stump, and when confronted by an actual stump would "see" a child and try to have a conversation with the stump.

We are governed by our brains and it is they and not us who are in charge and to truly be in charge we have to wrestle control from them and start truly listening and truly seeing. And if we cannot do this by some means or other then we are doomed to forever be just another amateur blowing sophisticated raspberries and never fulfil our true potential.
 

Product tMP members are discussing

Top