Why not the small bore for "legit" or classical style playing?

[ttf_Radar]

Quote from: bigbassbone1 on Feb 14, 2017, 07:19PMSomeone will know exactly, but with my limited knowledge i think dennis wick had a lot to do with it, promoting the 88h a lot. I would hazard a guess also that Basses becoming more of a seperate instrument and getting bigger would have had something to do with it.

I dont think its macho at all....  plenty of people think it blends perfectly well with trumpets and horns. Look at any big name orchestra for proof. Plenty of people also find large bore instruments easier to play than small. No machoism there....

I agree with you though that trombone players probably could swap instruments a little more depending on rep like trumpet players. Especially bass trombones. I think regularly using 2 or 3 would be cool.
I think Emory Remington working with Conn to develop the 88H, and his influence on his students at Eastman School Probably led to Dennis Wick's interest and use of the Horn in London and Europe.

[ttf_blast]

Quote from: Radar on Feb 15, 2017, 01:42PMI think Emory Remington working with Conn to develop the 88H, and his influence on his students at Eastman School Probably led to Dennis Wick's interest and use of the Horn in London and Europe.

It was the NYPO playing at the Edinburgh festival that inspired british players to look for the large Conn trombones.

Chris Stearn

[ttf_blast]

Quote from: Stan on Feb 15, 2017, 09:49AM@Dave

That's absolutely true.  Wick picked up Conn trombones, post-war, in the US.  There was an embargo in Britain following WWII that prevented the import of brass instruments to foster national industry.  The Besson trombones of that era weren't in the same category of the Conns, and so Wick helped several players smuggle Conn instruments into the country when the LPO did concert tours in Florida.  After the embargo, the British symphony scene had moved to Conn instruments and were hooked.

I still maintain that Wick and Remington, together, are largely responsible for the use of large-bore instruments in modern English-speaking orchestras.

Stan

I think it was the Philharmonia section that first attempted to bring Conn tenors back to the UK.  They were confiscated !!

Chris Stearn

[ttf_blast]

Quote from: BGuttman on Feb 15, 2017, 08:59AMFirst, Shires makes a nice 0.508" trombone and they have an F-attachment for it.  Apparently smaller bore instruments don't do so well in modular, so the smaller horns are not modular.

Second, if you are playing the higher trombone parts an F-attachment is not necessary.  In the "bad old days" they would offer a whole step or half step "trill valve" (still offered on some alto trombones).

You want to use a small bore in symphony?  Have at it.  But you need to play the large bore to win the audition; after that you can use what helps give the guy in front the sound he's looking for.

Denis Wick introduced the 88H into England to help replace some VERY small bore instruments used in English orchestras at the time.  They had a rather funny sound -- I think the term "piercing" would describe it.  The 88H coupled with a Bb/F large bore bass made the sound much more pleasant.

Bruce... your comments on the sound of British orchestras playing small bore trombones... are these based on hearing actual recordings ?

Chris Stearn

[ttf_Pre59]

Quote from: blast on Feb 15, 2017, 02:09PMBruce... your comments on the sound of British orchestras playing small bore trombones... are these based on hearing actual recordings ?

Chris Stearn

As a kid (in the early 60's) we got to attend free orchestral concerts (during class time!), and I can remember the thrill of hearing a brass section playing "vivid", in pieces like Scheherazade and Young Person Guide etc. That's never left me, heavy modern brass doesn't just doesn't have the range of colour that I like.

There, I said it..

 

[ttf_BGuttman]

Mostly based on Denis Wick's comments in "Trombone Technique".  And playing small bores myself (I have a sub-0.480" trombone).

You can make a nice sound on a small bore, but it's hard.  And I've heard too many comments on classifying the G bass as really a "percussion instrument".

[ttf_sf105]

I see the beginnings of a return from the era of the sound cannon. Firstly, there are several top-class period orchestras who are pushing into the romantic era: Age of Enlightenment, and Les Siecles for example. They're rediscovering the balance and quirks that orchestras used to have before everything got louder. I've also seen smaller bores at Covent Garden for some of the older works.

For me, the classic example is Berlioz's use of pedal notes. I've done the Grande Messe on a small tenor. It produced a wonderful rattle, with the harmonics picked out by the flutes. On modern big horns, you either get a vague glow underneath or, if you push the horn, destroy the back violas and swamp the flute notes. Neither seems right.

S

[ttf_blast]

Quote from: BGuttman on Feb 15, 2017, 02:23PMMostly based on Denis Wick's comments in "Trombone Technique".  And playing small bores myself (I have a sub-0.480" trombone).

You can make a nice sound on a small bore, but it's hard.  And I've heard too many comments on classifying the G bass as really a "percussion instrument".

That is Denis Wick justifying what he did in moving to the big instruments. There were indeed many benefits. You should listen to some pre war British orchestra recordings.... now a lost art... don't assume small instruments are inferior. I recently played on a recording that Ian Bousfield did of the Sache concerto on a small Sax trombone... nothing inferior there.

Chris Stearn

[ttf_ntap]

Quote from: cmillar on Feb 15, 2017, 07:16AMHere are are my 'sacrilegious' thoughts and observations (coming from me, a legit/orchestrally trained musician who has spent most of my career playing 'commercial, jazz, shows, rock, latin, etc. styles of music, with some great orchestral playing opportunities along the way. I've had great players as teachers, heard great players in all styles, and stand by what I say.)

(By 'best', I refer to the most 'life in the sound', the most inspiring blend of overtones, the most musicality for the given musical style, the most 'moving' to the audience (most of whom don't give a crap about what kind of trombone is being played, and are just using their ears)


My list of what 'moves' me and continually inspires: (I don't really know the rest of the world's players that much, except through recordings or live concerts as noted)



Most 'musically moving' orchestral sounds I've heard:

 - a NYC section of Jim Pugh, Ed Neumeister, and Dave Taylor. (2 small/medium bore tenors and Dave's bass trombone)
 - any LSO recordings with Denis Wick, principal (Conn 88H) or Ian Bousfield (Conn 88H ?)
 - 'ET' soundtrack with Lloyd Ulyate, principal (Bach 12); or most any LA studio film score recordings (mix of horns, from small Bach's and King's to Conn 88H's)
 - Vancouver Symphony Orchestra (when they had Gordon Cherry and Greg Cox playing Conn 88H's, and Doug Sparkes playing a Conn bass trombone)

(*..a thought... most of the world has been listening to 'orchestral music' through film scores recorded mostly in LA over the last 80 years. Most of those years the horns were all .495, .500, .508, .509, .525 in size. Only in recent years has there been a demand for 'large bore' horns (.525 or larger). Some of the most 'moving' music in the world has all been created with small or medium bore horns and their inherent sounds.)

 

'Most musically moving' classical/art music soloists sound (live or recorded):

 - Miles Anderson (Bach 12); Ian McDougall (King 2B+); Jim Pugh (Edwards .500); Ed Neumeister (King 3B); Christian      Lindberg (Conn 88H); Ronald Borror (Conn 88H, Bach 36B); Glenn Ferris (King 3BF)


'Most musically moving' show/pit players:

 - Bruce Eidem, NY (Bach 36); Jack Gale, NY (Bach 36), or all the many fantastic players in NY that have used King 3B's or Bach 16's and 12's


'Most moving' live/recorded sounds of miscellaneous styles that I've had the pleasure of hearing:

Urbie Green, NY (King 2B, Martin)
James Pankow, "Chicago" (King 3B, Yamaha 691)
Sam Burtis, NY (various small/med horns)
Birch Johnson, NY (Bach 12)
Keith O'Quinn, NY (Bach 16?)
the late Jerry Johnson, Toronto (King 2B, 3B, Yamaha 697z)
Al Kay, Toronto (Yamaha 697z, King 2B, Yamaha 646?)
Russ Little, Toronto (King's, Yamaha 697z)
Nils Landgren, Sweden (Yamaha 500/525)
the late Bob Stroup, Edmonton (hybrid .500 horns)
the late Dave McMurdo, Toronto (Williams 6)
Bob Livingston, Toronto (King 2B)
Mark Nightingale, London (small Rath)


BEST SOUND EVER Award:   the late, legendary Dave Robbins (Williams 6).

(*true story....when Don Waldrop, the great LA studio bass trombonist was visiting Vancouver, he came to a recording session of 5 trombones/rhythm section and helped 'tonmeister'. Dave Robbins was playing lead. Waldrop said he'd heard of the legendary Dave Robbins' time in LA, but upon hearing him live, Waldrop said he's never, ever heard such an amazing trombone sound, except for maybe Tommy Pederson or Lloyd Ulyate. And he'd heard some pretty awesome LA trombone players in his time there, to be sure.)
Dave had played lead trombone in the Harry James Orchestra, did LA studio work, played everything possible in Vancouver,Canada. He had also played with Denver Symphony, US Presidents Marine's Own Band, and more.


I love this post.  One of my biggest "wow!!" moments came when I was doing a bunch of all day graduation gigs sitting next to the masterful Larry Farrell and Birch Johnson.  These were kind of mind-numbing gigs, as we were doing 3-4 ceremonies back to back, but it was a lot of fun to play quintet and brass ensemble with a lot of amazing players. Hearing Bruce and Larry's "legit" sound and concept was truly incredible and eye opening.  I remember sitting next to Birch and leaning just past his bell (we doubled up on parts and switched off, because 45 minutes of you-know-what can get pretty tedious....) and realized he was playing with the precision, nuance, and character as some of the best classical players I have ever heard, all at a beautiful MF and perfectly blended with the trumpets.  It was one of those eye opening moments that totally changed my concept of sound using my small instrument.  Larry was the same way - the concept of time, attack, and nuance on each note was incredible.  These are both truly amazing players, and none of what I'm saying means that people who player larger horns can't do that, but they play the equipment they do for a reason.  It was a different experience.

I'm not going to get into any sort of debate about .547 vs smaller instruments - there is a time and a place for every size horn, or course.  I just wanted to share this experience as it opened my eyes to the type of nuance achievable on a small horn.  It's quite a different than nuance on a larger instrument, and is something still under the radar at a lot of schools, imo.  

[ttf_bonesmarsh]

To repeat a few observations again, from my years of study under Remington students:

Remington used the .547 88H because everyone was expected to play EITHER tenor or bass at Eastman. Nobody was going to specialize for a very simple reason: There were NO auditions. NONE. Gigs were by appointment. Personnel managers would call Remington and ask him to send a few students if they were ready.
You played a casual interview/audition. If you were selected you THEN bought a tenor or a bass.

Nobody studied jazz at Eastman because it was an education major school. You went there to become a school teacher usually. If you wanted to play jazz you went to New York City...and played jazz. Or sunk. Boom. End of the story. You didn't need an Ed. Degree for NYC to eat you alive.

You went to Eastman and stayed there until you had a M.Mus. to avoid the draft and avoid having your a** blown off in Viet Nam.

***
My garbled thought processes about The Chicago sound and Friedman?
Who cares what bell and mouthpiece Friedman uses if any job in Chicago only opens up every 30 or 55 years. If you're reading this, you're not practicing or gigging, and YOU won't get a gig anyway.

What I'd really like to see?
A .515 bore tenor trombone with an F attachment of .525 that you bought ONCE and played for 50 years. In community groups.
As it now stands?
You buy a .547 horn. You don't get a gig. You quit. You're frustrated.

There is a corresponding comment about the jazz world that goes with the term "Legit"-- if you are in a room of wildly different temperatures that you are used to you grab and A from the pianist, adjust for room temp and say loudly : "Close enough for jazz."

A lot of truth in this thread.
The longer you play the more truth you read in this thread.

[ttf_Stan]

Quote from: bonesmarsh on Feb 15, 2017, 04:44PM...You buy a .547 horn. You don't get a gig. You quit. You're frustrated.

A lot of truth in this thread.
The longer you play the more truth you read in this thread.


I thought about this all night long.  I studied with a Van Haney student, and Van Haney was a Remington student.  For four years, I was made to feel like my sound just wasn't good enough because it wasn't big enough, dark enough, had too much brightness, etc.  When I graduated and started actually teaching in schools, I didn't have nearly enough time to practice, and so the dual-bore 88H with an open leadpipe I'd played while practicing 4+ hours a day in college just got bigger and bigger and bigger.  I finally decided I just wasn't ever going to be a "good" player, because I didn't sound like my teacher had wanted me to sound, and I sold the horn and picked up something smaller (a Bach 36C) from a forum member.

10 years later, I'm still playing that Bach 36 with a 6.5-sized mouthpiece, and I'm getting called to play everywhere that's NOT a symphony orchestra.  Giving up the moose-horn, moving to something smaller, and embracing MY sound let me be a musician first and a trombonist second.  In the real world, I've never had any problems with blend or carrying power using a smaller horn.  I work less and I get a bigger sound for my effort. 

My point is that I absolutely think universities do a disservice to trombone players by pushing the idea that they MUST have a .547" tenor.  If anything, the "jazz" horn is the optional horn in most trombone studios, and that's just screwed up thinking.  Why are we shaping our students to be symphony players on big equipment when THAT'S the specialization.  Playing in community bands, brass bands, brass quintets, and the entire jazz universe are what's common, and all of those things work better on a smaller horn.

I used to think it was because manufacturers didn't offer decent medium-bore trombones, but that's no longer true.  So I think the real crux of this thread isn't WHY NOT use smaller trombones in orchestras, but instead WHY use large-bored instruments in anything BUT a 70+ piece orchestra?

Stan

[ttf_Pre59]

Maybe it's time to look outside of the US for ideas in tbn manufacture. Smaller bores, ("smaller"and not small.. ) tone rings, heavier bells, possibly unsoldered, etc etc.
My K+H which IS a small bore, plays bigger than any 2B that I've owned, and that's not to say that I'd recommend it for orchestral work, but I find it interesting to see how manufacturers elsewhere, especially in the countries where much of the orchestral repertoire originated approach this topic.

[ttf_bonesmarsh]

Stan, I also studied with Van Haney students and I studied with Van Haney for a bit. He taught for almost 50 years I would say. He taught A LOT.

Don't convince the trombonists to change- convince the committees and other musicians to accept a different sound. ( Here is the dirty secret that you and I already know, Stan, it is THE SAME SOUND. STILL a trombone. Well, duh!)

Now. Spend another sleepless night considering the repertoire of the modern symphony orchestra. Possibly 90% of their repertoire. Written in a period of not much longer than 50 years, no more than a day of horseback riding from Vienna.

Now-- do some more "sleepless math." To my ears the height of big band jazz happened with the Blanton-Webster version of the Duke Ellington Orchestra in about 1940, about 75 years ago. Go back from 1940 for another 75 years and you're into the 1860s and 1870s.

Things do change. But they do change slowly. And they will change.

[ttf_cmillar]

Quote from: bonesmarsh on Feb 15, 2017, 04:44PM
What I'd really like to see?
A .515 bore tenor trombone with an F attachment of .525 that you bought ONCE and played for 50 years. In community groups.
As it now stands?
You buy a .547 horn. You don't get a gig. You quit. You're frustrated.


A lot of truth in this thread.
The longer you play the more truth you read in this thread.



In the 'community band' scene (at least in North America) you do have all these trombone players hanging onto their .547 horns and playing in community bands, either because they're still 'hoping to get that big gig in the sky', or else they've just never been exposed to people playing different horns (other than what their teacher or band leader made them play in university or college.)

Trouble is, most community players don't play at a professional level and don't stay in shape well enough to really do justice to a .547 bore horn.

Result... they sound terrible, unfocused, out of shape, don't have any range, poor articulations, and they sound like a euphonium/tuba section instead of a trombone section.

Does that inspire the audience? No.
Does that make someone (who knows what trombones can and should sound like) want to arrange or compose for a community band? Not in my case.

I've had to decide against writing for a couple of 'community groups' in different places I've lived because the musical result just isn't worth all the composing/arranging time you put in to write music.

Ever heard a community group play a Sousa March on a section of large bore horns and stir the audience into a frenzy? Really? You have to be in a military/service band getting paid to play all day to sound halfway decent in most concert band music on large bore horns. The players have to be on top of their game and in shape.... and, they have to be very musical to pull it off.

Point being... yes, why not use smaller/medium bore horn if you're not in the exclusive huge orchestra scene? Please! You can stay in shape, have more fun, have a better trombone sound, and even please an audience (or, an arranger/composer who wants to hear a real trombone sound in his music!)

British Brass Bands have the right idea. Nimble trombone playing from equipment that is meant to be nimble. (...unless there'a a current trend in England towards lugubrious horns in brass bands?) Something for North America community concert bands to learn from. There's a lot of great concert band music that requires 'nimbleness'.... Gershwin medlies, John Williams medlies, Holst Suites, Sousa, etc.

Nothing worse than hearing out of shape, part-time trombone players on large bore horns in a concert band.

Just doing my part to 'stir up the pot'!

[ttf_harrison.t.reed]

So.... if the reason you are against using a large bore is because, for whatever reason, you don't practice and you have no endurance to play equipment that is too big (the aforementioned 88H with dual bore .547-.562 slide), then it makes sense to use something like a 36B to teach kids. But if you are trying to teach at a college level to students who want to win jobs, it would sound like an excuse.

I think that the dual bore (ie .547-.562) tenors and the so called "chicago style" tenors with single bore bass slides have taken it too far. I was issued a chicago tenor and it is beyond difficult to play, not because I don't practice, but because it's so diffuse!

However, saying that pushing large bore tenors is wrong because they are too much to handle is ridiculous. The classic 88H with a 5G mouthpiece is very reasonable. You can even use the .525-.547 slide on that and it works very well.

Using amateur bands as examples to support the use of small bores isn't very relevant since the OP wanted to know about their use by professionals.

[ttf_BillO]

For some reason comments like:

QuoteDoes that make someone (who knows what trombones can and should sound like) want to ...
bother me.

What are trombones supposed to sound like?  Really?

Most of the orchestral music and even solo works for trombone were written by people that had an entirely different sounding instrument in mind than anything we have today.  I can assure you Mozart was not thinking of a Bach 16 or a Conn 6H when he wrote his famous requiem.  Beethoven was not thinking of those horns either either when he wrote his 5th symphony.  Even my Conn 2H, which I am sure most of you would not agree as sounding 'like a trombone should' has far too modern a sound when compared to the hardware of 200 years ago.

I can certainly agree that Beethoven and Mozart were not thinking about the sound of a Conn 88H either.  However, the sound of the trombone has evolved, and the sounds made by large bore instruments are just as valid a part of that evolution as any other type of modern trombone.

I wonder if the trombonists of 200 years ago were whining about the 'modern' trombone of that time not sounding like a sackbut?  Probably 

[ttf_bonenick]

Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Feb 16, 2017, 06:45AMBut if you are trying to teach at a college level to students who want to win jobs, it would sound like an excuse.
I guess that also depends on the jobs they are aiming at. At college I was aiming a symphonic trumpet gig....at present play very random symphonic gigs...it would have been useful I wasn't that "focused".

[ttf_cmillar]

Just saying that a good trombone sound has some 'life' in it.

Whether it's big bore, small bore, medium bore, sackbut, alto, etc.

So, it's incumbent upon all of us that know what a good trombone sound is (from probably being fortunate to have played with, studied with, and heard great trombone sounds) to never 'settle for less' in our own teaching and musings about music.

That's it...let's not settle for life-less sounds.

There's enough lame music and attitudes in the world. Let's not contribute to it as trombone players!

People have to play whatever horn suits the gig. It's up to the conductors, music critics, fellow musicians, arrangers, composers, teachers, etc. to help keep up the standards of 'life in music'....otherwise, we might as well resort to more software-sample based brass libraries even more and more. It's not always a matter of budget. Sometimes, you get a better sound with a great sample library!

So, let's cheer for live music with 'life' in it!

[ttf_Edward_Solomon]

I still use smaller bore instruments in orchestral performance. There is a clear reason for doing so, especially when it comes to French music, which cries out for a lighter approach that doesn't come easily with large bore instruments.

Both British and French music before 1950 requires smaller bore instruments and the difference when you hear it is enormous. Listen to pre-1950 performances of Elgar, for example, and the strikingly incisive quality of the brass is quite a contrast to the more restrained Germanic sound we have accustomed to hearing, even though it is anathema to what the composer would have heard and wanted.

I occasionally use a set of these trombones for British works, swapping the G bass for a third tenor in French music:

Olds Standard tenor and B&H Imperial G/D bass trombones

I also use German Romantic trombones, which make a very different sound from modern instruments. They pair a medium or small bore slide with a large bell to produce a remarkably suave, warm sound, which retains the same timbre throughout all dynamics. They are very well suited to repertoire that requires this very disciplined approach (and which is notoriously more difficult with modern instruments), e.g. Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Brahms, Schumann, Mendelssohn.


German E♭ alto, B♭ tenor, and B♭/F tenorbass trombones


German E♭ alto, B♭ tenor, and F bass trombones

The greatest problem in using smaller bore instruments in the modern orchestra is the tendency to blow them too hard. The entire approach to dynamics has to be reviewed and recalibrated. They can work very well in a concert orchestra in the right hands and produce arguably better results in context than large bore instruments. Little wonder that orchestras such as that of the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden, indulge in the use of smaller bore instruments for 19th century French and Italian opera due to the lighter texture that results.

[ttf_bonesmarsh]

Ed,

   Your points are entirely correct. And proven by decades of satisfied concert goers continuing to support the ensembles the historically accurate instruments perform in.

But there is one glaring omission: Where do the students of today find these instruments to prepare themselves to play on? Once again the .547 trombone will likely be the only instrument prepared by a candidate to audition for a job in one of these ensembles. And there is the problem.

A NEW middle ground has to be provided for the student of tomorrow.

[ttf_MoominDave]

Quote from: cmillar on Feb 16, 2017, 06:29AMBritish Brass Bands have the right idea. Nimble trombone playing from equipment that is meant to be nimble. (...unless there'a a current trend in England towards lugubrious horns in brass bands?)

The tenor trombones in use in British brass bands tend to be unanimously 88H or equivalent .547", and have been since the 70s/80s. Bass trombone the usual .562".

Though these tend to be played with quite a bit of 'crackle' to create tonal contrast, the sound is a long way from what it was in the days of peashooters.

[ttf_Stan]

Quote from: bonesmarsh on Feb 17, 2017, 04:59AMBut there is one glaring omission: Where do the students of today find these instruments to prepare themselves to play on? Once again the .547 trombone will likely be the only instrument prepared by a candidate to audition for a job in one of these ensembles. And there is the problem.

A NEW middle ground has to be provided for the student of tomorrow.

And I think that's the crux of the issue.  Why do so many players use large tenors in classical settings?  Because their teachers demand that they buy large tenors in college.  I ask again, why is the small bore tenor the specialty horn in trombone studios across the land and the large-bore "tenor" the standard?  How many people in music education programs want to be orchestral trombonists?  How many high school players looking for a new horn want to be orchestral trombonists?  If somebody, somewhere, had said to me at 20, "Here.  Buy this Bach 36.  You'll play it for 30 years in all kinds of different idioms and it will fit right in.  It won't take as much air, as much daily practice, or as much effort to make a GREAT sound," then I would have said OK, bought it, and practiced on it.  Why doesn't that conversation happen more with our students?  

[ttf_John the Theologian]

I knew George Krem when he was the trombone teacher at the University of Iowa and also principal trombone in the Cedar Rapids Symphony.  George related to me that the section would make decisions about the equipment used.

When they played Beethoven's 5th, for example,George played 1st on alto, the 2nd used a small bore and the 3rd used a large bore tenor.  George said that this gave a more authentic sound.

Of course, he also told me that the whole section would play into the stands during rehearsal and then play normally during performances.  He said that the conductor-- a string player-- never caught on.   That allowed them to take advantage of the wonderful acoustics of the Paramount Theater that the CRS played in.

The bottom line is that perhaps more symphony sections should be that flexible.

[ttf_MikeBMiller]

I think it goes even beyond college. I was trying to sella Yamaha YSL 356 last Spring and a friend of mine who plays trombone and teaches at a local HS basically told me that the band director there, who is also a trombone player (or was anyway) makes his kids buy large bore horns to play in the HS band, which I think is just nuts. I have watched these guys practice marching band occasionally and they have kids marching with Bach 42s.

[ttf_Matt K]

Quote from: Stan on Feb 17, 2017, 07:42AMAnd I think that's the crux of the issue.  Why do so many players use large tenors in classical settings?  Because their teachers demand that they buy large tenors in college.  I ask again, why is the small bore tenor the specialty horn in trombone studios across the land and the large-bore "tenor" the standard?  How many people in music education programs want to be orchestral trombonists?  How many high school players looking for a new horn want to be orchestral trombonists?  If somebody, somewhere, had said to me at 20, "Here.  Buy this Bach 36.  You'll play it for 30 years in all kinds of different idioms and it will fit right in.  It won't take as much air, as much daily practice, or as much effort to make a GREAT sound," then I would have said OK, bought it, and practiced on it.  Why doesn't that conversation happen more with our students?  

It depends on your definition of a 'great sound.'  My large bore Shires sounds great, I wouldn't ever trade it for a Bach 36. Because it gives me the sound I want. I very much dislike the Bach 42 marching band section. But that 'problem' is very much the exception to just about every middle and school I've been to throughout the PA, WV, nothern VA, and MD regions where a full 90% of the students are on an assortment of YSL354s and $100 Wal-Mart horns.  In both the universities I went to, most of the students weren't interested in learning commercial or jazz idioms and, for them, the music they did play was done 'best' from their perspective on a large bore instrument. So why was the small bore horn considered the specialty horn? Because it was a specialty to the students.

[ttf_bonesmarsh]

MattK,

You haven't quite given us all the information we require to fully understand your reply.

Did you fully try the .525 Shires trombones before you chose to purchase a .547 version?
Have you owned a Bach 36, or spent appreciable time on any .525 horn, for comparison purposes?
Did you have any second opinions as you play tested horns, before buying a .547 Shires, as to what sounded best while you played?
What sound concept are you personally chasing? Is is ONLY a replication  of another player of a .547 trombone?


************
Stan,
 Upon further reflection, based on your own observations, Van Haney might indeed be the culprit. He won both principal in Philadelphia, auditioning for that job on a Conn 70H. And he won second in New York again auditioning on a Conn 70H.
For the record, when he won both jobs in that miracle week in 1946, even the principal trombonist of the NY Phil Mr. Pulis, only owned one horn and one mouthpiece-- a .522 bore straight Conn.

( Van Haney had to play Pulis' smaller Conn later to prove he could blow a tenor for a committee......there were ZERO .547 horns for sale in New York City in 1946. ZERO)

So, in '54 Remington needed a face to sell, and the chops to blow, to determine the characteristics of a new 88H, and cough up a mouthpiece to match. Calling Van Haney! Van Haney did both. And just like kids today use Joe Alessi as the template for everything they do, thousands of kids adulated Van Haney as what was possible on an 88H. If you worked hard enough you could play in the NY Phil! Or Philadelphia!

[ttf_Matt K]

Quote from: bonesmarsh on Feb 19, 2017, 09:08AMMattK,

You haven't quite given us all the information we require to fully understand your reply.

Did you fully try the .525 Shires trombones before you chose to purchase a .547 version?
Have you owned a Bach 36, or spent appreciable time on any .525 horn, for comparison purposes?
Did you have any second opinions as you play tested horns, before buying a .547 Shires, as to what sounded best while you played?
What sound concept are you personally chasing? Is is ONLY a replication  of another player of a .547 trombone?


************
Stan,
 Upon further reflection, based on your own observations, Van Haney might indeed be the culprit. He won both principal in Philadelphia, auditioning for that job on a Conn 70H. And he won second in New York again auditioning on a Conn 70H.
For the record, when he won both jobs in that miracle week in 1946, even the principal trombonist of the NY Phil Mr. Pulis, only owned one horn and one mouthpiece-- a .522 bore straight Conn.

( Van Haney had to play Pulis' smaller Conn later to prove he could blow a tenor for a committee......there were ZERO .547 horns for sale in New York City in 1946. ZERO)

So, in '54 Remington needed a face to sell, and the chops to blow, to determine the characteristics of a new 88H, and cough up a mouthpiece to match. Calling Van Haney! Van Haney did both. And just like kids today use Joe Alessi as the template for everything they do, thousands of kids adulated Van Haney as what was possible on an 88H. If you worked hard enough you could play in the NY Phil! Or Philadelphia!

Yes, I played a 525 Shires for most of the year I spent in graduate school then moved to the other extreme of playing the same bell section with a 562 slide for the better part of half a year. I switched to a 508/525 as well for another six months after I decided not to pursue a career full time. At that point, I picked up a TW47G slide and about six months later swapped it out for the slide I currently have on that bell section: a T47LW.  Each time I had switched equipment, I had several players that I had been actively playing with for at least two months, and in the case of this final slide for several years, listen to me (and actually swap the slides for me so I wouldn't know what I was playing).

At various times I've owned a Bach 36, 36B, YSL645, 3BF+, YSL446, and King 607F.  Actually, the horn I played the longest at this point is that YSL446 before switching to a Xeno 8820 my junior year of HS.  I played the 446 for the better part of 7 years during development and was quite glad to switch to the Xeno when I did. Ultimately the Xeno wasn't for me, but there weren't many options where I lived (new Bach 42, Conn 88, or Xeno basically) - bearing in mind this internet thing was still fairly new and there wasn't that much activity going on even if I would have known other things existed. The Xeno was an order of magnitude easier for me for the things that I used it for, and now when I compare other's Xenos, my current Shires setup is an order of magnitude easier than the Xeno. Obviously my impresion is not universal or nobody would play a Bach 36 and in reality its quite popular. I remember Ron Baron coming to my university and sounding quite good on his, in fact, and it was clearly his choice to use it since it meant carrying three horns with him on his tour.

Initially, I was chasing after a 1960s CSO sound when they were all on half-basses. As time has progressed, I stopped trying to emulate and that's what led me down the paths that I did.  I would pick something out and really love the sound of it. Then months down the road, I'd find something else that I'd like the sound of better. So on and so forth. I haven't done that in quite some time now though; around 2 years. Maybe I'll find something else that I like better later.  If that happens, then I'll switch again. Hasn't happened in awhile though.

As it relates to students: bear in mind most of what they do in universities (for better or for worse) is a large ensemble and a small ensemble, both of which exclusively play classical idioms probably most of the time.  Given that, I don't think its particularly surprising that there are so many exclusively large bore players and why small bore horns are the "specialty."

[ttf_bonesmarsh]

Thanks, Matt K. That is exactly the type of informed information we need in this thread. Lots of empirical evidence and evidence based on years of personal experience. Thanks for the clarification.

It might not contribute a lot to the thread now, but years from now a new crop of players will cough this thread up again. Thanks.

[ttf_Stan]

And in the spirit of coughing up stuff for the future, I'd like to present the following:

If you are a music education student, and you want to be a teacher or a businessman or an administrator or ANYTHING that isn't a trombonist in a symphony orchestra (or you teach such students!), there will come a time in your life that you can't practice 4 hours a day anymore.  There will come a time in your life where you might get in 4 hours a WEEK in practice.  And then, dear future students, when your time is short and your body is aging, you'll start to realize that your .547 tenor is an air hog that doesn't project well at quiet volumes and that lacks clarity at the mezzo-blah dynamic of the community band you'll be playing in.  And you'll wish you'd listened to that thread on TTF when these guys told you that smaller horns were easier to play.  Because yes, they're easier to play.

I've played professionally, semi professionally, and been the ringer in amateur groups for 15 years.  When I hung up my Pro hat, I got a .525 and ran with it.  It's not a solution for everybody, but I guarantee it's a solution for more than would like to embrace it.  I'm looking for a horn that I can ignore for a couple weeks at a time, pick it up, and hit a mf entrance that projects to the back wall with absolute clarity.  Just IMAGINE what modern orchestras would sound like if the heavy hitters played on horns like that.  Maybe we'd lose our reputation for killing viola players?

Stan

[ttf_William Lang]

honestly it's the pedagogy and not the horns.

nuance, depth, style, and character can be achieved on any instrument.

[ttf_bigbassbone1]

Yeah..... I dont agree with the idea that small bore trombones are "easier" to play at all. I think telling someone that small bores are easier to play is just as stupid as telling someone they will get a "fatter" sound with a bigger mouthpiece.

I agree, its the pedagogy, not your instrument. There will absolutely be some players that are suited to playing small bore more than large. If that is you, and on a smaller bore you can make a sound that impresses an orchestral panel, all the more power to you! That would be impressive. Personally I think that would be really hard to do for most players.
There are definitely players that find everything about bigger instruments easier to use. I am ine of them. Its one of the reasons i play bass. There are plenty of things on small bore trombones that I find incomparibly more difficult than large tenor or even bass.

[ttf_greenbean]

Quote from: bigbassbone1 on Feb 20, 2017, 10:32AM...
There are definitely players that find everything about bigger instruments easier to use. I am ine of them. Its one of the reasons i play bass. There are plenty of things on small bore trombones that I find incomparibly more difficult than large tenor or even bass.

I am in this camp.  For me, everything is easier on bigger horns.  But I suspect that if I played only small- or medium-bore horns it would be fine.

[ttf_harrison.t.reed]

It's getting pretty preachy from practice deprived preachers up in here.

I really think someone who is making the big bucks in an orchestra would have implemented the small bore for everything solution if it actually solved everything. But it only solves some things...

So that's why most trombonists getting paid real money use a variety of instruments. ...

And they usually use large-bore....

Because they are professionals and practice. ...

I have met a few teachers who do the Bach 36 thing because they do about 50/50 lessons between commercial and "legit" genres. But the one or two I know doing this still practice religiously and would opt for a large bore in a paid "legit" gig.

[ttf_bonesmarsh]

As usual Stan is 100% correct. Thanks, Stan.

This thread will benefit from a bit of context-
As most ( if not all) modern students are brow beaten into owning .547 horns, there are very very few used .525 or smaller horns left used to purchase.

If fewer .547 horns were sold, and more smaller horns sold (over the past 50 years) there would be more quality smaller horns to be found used. And more of them would find their way into the hands of professionals and their students. Their PROFESSIONAL students as it were, because if you never get a full time paid position you then remain a student of the horn.

A second important point: Horns are expensive. Regardless of whether a professional ( semi-pro especially) chooses to play a smaller horn--- if they bought ONE horn, just one, a .547 horn, they have to play the s*it out of it for everything. Because they spent a small fortune on their spanking new .547 boutique horn-- and they can't admit they made a mistake, or really wanted to play a smaller horn. Because they can only afford ONE boutique horn. ( I know these players. Personally.)

I really liked Stan's thought that it takes 4 hours a day, minimum, to stay in top shape on large gear-- large for a tenor, or large for a bass. And there is a very very small window for any player top enjoy the LUXURY of consistent practice.
Eventually just try and tell a spouse you need 4 or more hours a day to yourself to work on something you just haven't quite mastered yet. See where that gets you. And if you should have children? Children cost money, time and effort.

Think about that nice tiny 25 year span when you have to steal time to even get a decent shower for yourself while kids are being raised.
Four hours a day to practice? And another 4 hours on TTF keeping up with the peanut gallery here? That's a full time job,a full time job without a cent coming in to feed spouse or family.

Read the bios of a lot of the posters here-- either unemployed wanna-bes, or the retired and semi-retired whose kids have left and the trombonists now have the luxury to have a coffee and read the madness here.

Time to grab some more tea, myself.

[ttf_DaCapo]

My point exactly. Let's turn the wheel! Too many frustrated students, and too few MUSICIANS who play the trombone. If the TTF is not for hungry students who wanna learn and make a difference. Then who is it for really?...

[ttf_bigbassbone1]

Quote from: bonesmarsh on Feb 20, 2017, 03:47PMAs usual Stan is 100% correct. Thanks, Stan.

This thread will benefit from a bit of context-
As most ( if not all) modern students are brow beaten into owning .547 horns, there are very very few used .525 or smaller horns left used to purchase.

If fewer .547 horns were sold, and more smaller horns sold (over the past 50 years) there would be more quality smaller horns to be found used. And more of them would find their way into the hands of professionals and their students. Their PROFESSIONAL students as it were, because if you never get a full time paid position you then remain a student of the horn.

A second important point: Horns are expensive. Regardless of whether a professional ( semi-pro especially) chooses to play a smaller horn--- if they bought ONE horn, just one, a .547 horn, they have to play the s*it out of it for everything. Because they spent a small fortune on their spanking new .547 boutique horn-- and they can't admit they made a mistake, or really wanted to play a smaller horn. Because they can only afford ONE boutique horn. ( I know these players. Personally.)

I really liked Stan's thought that it takes 4 hours a day, minimum, to stay in top shape on large gear-- large for a tenor, or large for a bass. And there is a very very small window for any player top enjoy the LUXURY of consistent practice.
Eventually just try and tell a spouse you need 4 or more hours a day to yourself to work on something you just haven't quite mastered yet. See where that gets you. And if you should have children? Children cost money, time and effort.

Think about that nice tiny 25 year span when you have to steal time to even get a decent shower for yourself while kids are being raised.
Four hours a day to practice? And another 4 hours on TTF keeping up with the peanut gallery here? That's a full time job,a full time job without a cent coming in to feed spouse or family.

Read the bios of a lot of the posters here-- either unemployed wanna-bes, or the retired and semi-retired whose kids have left and the trombonists now have the luxury to have a coffee and read the madness here.

Time to grab some more tea, myself.

There are heaps of quality small bore trombones. I dont think that is an issue at all.

If you are not practicing, doesn't matter what size your horn is, you simply will not sound good. Sounding good takes time on any size trombone.

Sure there are plenty of posters who think they are more qualified than what they actually are, but there are also players who cannot be bothered regularly updating their bio on this site and who do not like talking about the professional auditions they have won.... I know I dont like bringing it up, and I have my reasons. Doesn't mean their opinions aren't valid. You pick and choose what works for you. I have read some garbage on here from posters who claim to have the bio to back up what they are saying, as well as gold from posters who have said something really insightful even though they are not professional.

The danger of the Internet is that its very difficult to gage tone over text, how someone interprets something that is said and how they intrepret it from text can vary wildly. Bonesmarsh, some of your posts come off very closed minded and almost aggressive. Im sure that is not your intention though.... enjoy your tea.

[ttf_BGuttman]

Quote from: DaCapo on Feb 20, 2017, 04:11PMMy point exactly. Let's turn the wheel! Too many frustrated students, and too few MUSICIANS who play the trombone.

You and we are not in a position to "turn the wheel".  If you want a job in an orchestra you will need to pass an audition.  To pass that audition you need to play a large bore.  Once you have that job you can try to use whatever you think is appropriate.  If you are too radical for the orchestra, you will have to pass another audition at another orchestra.  It's the way of the world and you won't get any points for charging at the windmills.

[ttf_Steven]

Quote from: DaCapo on Feb 20, 2017, 04:11PM Let's turn the wheel! Too many frustrated students, and too few MUSICIANS who play the trombone.

I don't  know what is meant by "too few MUSICIANS who play the trombone".  Conservatories are not hurting for trombone applicants.  When daughter was applying to conservatories, trombone and flute were the only wind instruments frequently requiring a prescreening recording before applicants got an audition. 


Quote from: DaCapo on Feb 20, 2017, 04:11PM If the TTF is not for hungry students who wanna learn and make a difference. Then who is it for really?...

TTF is for anyone who finds it worth their time talking trombone with others who think it is worth their time.  Certainly plenty are hungry students who want to learn and make a difference. 

[ttf_bonesmarsh]

Just to make sure I'm not really so far out of the loop as I think I am--I just checked the Yamaha website and there isn't a top level .525 horn from Yamaha. 35 years ago there were a pile of 6XX series bones in both .525 and .547. A few high profile European soloists began the wave toward the .525 Yamaha. They were fantastic horns. And even better players.

Now there are not comparable Xeno .525 models.
Does Conn/King still make a .525 bore horn anymore? I don't think so.

Once again, we're stuck with boutique .525s ( which cost the same as a .547) or a Bach, which is now considered an entry level horn.

I'm not trying to be close minded. I've just been playing long enough to see the beginning of a wave toward smaller bones completely smashed and buried in another 35 years of large bore horns.
For all of the benefits that an internet should give to a student, the one benefit reading print on a screen will never give a student is the opportunity to try and fail repeatedly in a reality world, where rehearsals and gigs are done in real time and played by live humans.
You can debate in print the merits of any horn-- but just take one to a rehearsal and see if anyone notices any difference.

[ttf_DaCapo]

Revolution!!

[ttf_harrison.t.reed]

Haha DaCapo. Is your teach still insisting you buy a large bore?

[ttf_ChadA]

Quote from: DaCapo on Feb 20, 2017, 04:11PMtoo few MUSICIANS who play the trombone.

I know the competition is tight, but for me, the statement above takes the cake for most absurd thing I've seen posted here in a good long while.  What a bunch of hogwash.  There is some stunning musicianship being displayed by trombonists in all genres on all size horns.  If you're not hearing any of this, then you're not trying very hard.

[ttf_bigbassbone1]

DaCapo,

If you feel so strongly about it then nothing you read here will convince you otherwise. I would love it if I heard about you in 10 years winning auditions and getting high level performance opportunities on a small bore trombone. And as I keep saying, I believe its possible, I just think it would take a LOT more work than you realise. But by all means, start the revolution. Practice hard and convince everyone that you are on to something that can really make a difference. Come back to this thread in 10 years and tell everyone how you went! If you are successful im sure it would be an inspiring story 

[ttf_ChadA]

Before we get started, here's where I'm coming from.  I'm not trying to brag, just add context to my statements.  I'm a classically trained musician with degrees from a very good school.  I teach full-time at the university level.  I play in a professional orchestra, sub frequently in one of the top 10 orchestras in this country and play in several professional, classically oriented chamber groups.  I also sub in a couple of local big bands.  So everything I post is colored by my experiences and preferences and may not apply universally.  Your mileage may vary, see store for details, etc.  

I'd be very happy if some would stop painting with such a large brush. Some people seem to think all .547 horns sound the same (cue the "slide euphonium" quotes!:)).  So not true.  There is as much variety in .547 horns as any other size bracket, from light, nimble early-to-mid century designs to overly heavy, somewhat dull 1990s flavors that are less popular than they used to be (thankfully, in my opinion).  If you think a well-played Elkhart 88H with a Remington mouthpiece sounds like a late 1990s Edwards heavy setup, then you're not listening very closely.  Someone can sound tubbier on a .525 horn than a .547 horn if their approach to playing isn't properly put together.  People can sound perfectly light, colorful, and pleasant on .547 horns.  Some people, like me, sound better on .547 horns.  Some people, like me, generally prefer the kind of sounds that are most easily made on a .547 horn.  That's my opinion, which is just as valid as other opinions in this thread.

For classical music, the .547 sound spectrum has become the preferred one, with all the variety that comes from the diversity of .547 horns, meaning it's hardly as uniform and monolithic as some would have us believe.  No one measures bore at auditions, so no one will know if you have a .525, .547, or .562 slide.  They will know if your sound it outside of the expected range of norms.  So play what you sound best on.  Just play with a sound that fits modern orchestral concepts if you want a modern orchestral job.

My everyday tenor is a .547 horn.  My main bass is a .562/578 dual bore horn.  No, I don't practice 4 hours a day.  I don't have time for that.    My tenor plays lighter and less tubby than previous horns I've owned.  I've downsized my bass over the years, too.  I know .562/.578 is huge for some people, but I used to have axial flow valves on there, a heavier bell, and a more open leadpipe.  Regular rotors, a lighter bell, and tighter leadpipe make the horn easier to operate without compromising my sound.  It works for me, but some people like bigger or smaller horns.  More power to them.  I also have an 8H with a .525/.547 slide that I'd take to an orchestral principal audition in a heartbeat.  Whatever works.

For my college students, their path and playing determine what horns I recommend.  For classical performance majors seeking a classical career, we're going to look hard at .547s since it usually yields the the type of sound that fits modern expectations.  I have yet to find a classical performance major who finds a .547 horn too big.  But if I had a classical performance major who sounded best on a .525, I wouldn't bat an eye at them buying it.  For ed majors, we'll still look at .547s since their ensemble directors expect a modern classical sound, but I'm open to other horns if it fits better, too.  As others have pointed out, teachers and other people who may not get to play every day might benefit from slightly smaller horns. Or not. Whatever works.

As long as our music education continues to focus on Western art music (dead Germans and Austrians primarily), the modern classical sound spectrum will be most easily achieved on .547 horns for most people.  All the .525 lovers need to keep in mind that at some point the world of playing was dominated by smaller horns than .525 and .525 was probably thought to be too big at some point.    If the TTF existed in 1940s maybe we would have had .495 vs. .525 threads instead of .525 vs .547...

[ttf_DaCapo]

Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Feb 20, 2017, 05:06PMHaha DaCapo. Is your teach still insisting you buy a large bore?
Nah, I told him purple Pbone or nothin...

[ttf_Posaunus]

Quote from: bonesmarsh on Feb 20, 2017, 03:47PM
I really liked Stan's thought that it takes 4 hours a day, minimum, to stay in top shape on large gear-- large for a tenor, or large for a bass. And there is a very very small window for any player top enjoy the LUXURY of consistent practice.
Eventually just try and tell a spouse you need 4 or more hours a day to yourself to work on something you just haven't quite mastered yet. See where that gets you. And if you should have children? Children cost money, time and effort.



I know quite a few working professionals, who successfully make their living playing 0.547" bore trombones, who do NOT practice 4 hours/day to maintain their chops.  (a) They don't need to, and (b) they don't have time in their busy lives. 

I myself play a variety of trombones, small-bore to medium-bore to large-bore tenor to bass, and enjoy mixing them up - and find that it's just playing as much as I can (but certainly less than 4 hours/day) that keeps me in shape, not playing only my large-bore trombones. 

[ttf_Pre59]

Quote from: bonesmarsh on Feb 20, 2017, 04:48PM
I'm not trying to be close minded. I've just been playing long enough to see the beginning of a wave toward smaller bones completely smashed and buried in another 35 years of large bore horns.


"One Trombone to Rule Them All", then?

 

[ttf_bonesmarsh]

ChadA,

 Your longer most recent post it thoughtful, well reasoned and shows a logical argument based on several decades of your own successes in your field.

But your argument also outlines the problem we're discussing here. Problem? Perhaps not a problem-- more likely a trend lasting some 65 years. You quite clearly write that you make the choice of instrument with the student. So, the student will always do what the teacher wants. Of course they will.
YOU recommend their instrument. And who will the student trust?-- their own inexperienced self, or a successful professional? End of that argument for "free will" given freely to the student.

It is a fallacy. The student is free to play whatever they choose as long as they are phenomenally successful with their choice. But if they know how to play already, then they are not a student. A vicious circle.

I tried the one-trombone-to-rule-them-all thing. I did buy a loaded Rath R3 with alternate lead pipes and the separate valve and the whistles and bells. I bought the yellow bell, instead of the red I adored and loved, because I needed a commercial horn.
   Well, my awakening came one day when I played a dixieland gig back to back with a dance job with a small jazz ensemble. I played the dixie strolling gig on an Olds Ambassador and the dance on my R3. I almost heaved from the effort of filling the R3 for three sets.
   I sold my R3.
 I kept the Ambassador.
I bought two more Ambassadors to cover my a**.

Why didn't I keep the Rath R3 for orchestral work? Because the orchestra I sub in has a principal who plays a Shires .547 42B clone. I wasn't allowed to. Harrumph. Here is a surprise-- that principal plays a Bach 36 a lot of the time and a smaller .508 Yamaha a lot of the time. His Shires was a GIFT and he has to trot it out to please the family who will ask why he isn't playing the expensive horn they bought him.

[ttf_blast]

If you want to audition for an orchestra the default is, and has been for many years some kind of .547 bore tenor. That's it. End of. When you get past the audition you could be asked to play a smaller bore instrument... it's in our contract at the opera... we had a player trial on a Bach 16m and win the job.... just the rep he got. On the job people often play smaller gear to get nearer the sonic truth... more than 20 or 30 years ago...

Chris Stearn

[ttf_Stan]

@Chris

Precisely.  That's the world we live in.  The crux of this thread, however, is why do we live in that world?

I was a musicologist before I moved to administration, and I still connect the dots like this:

-Smaller bores were the standard everywhere EXCEPT Germany, where slightly larger bores and bells have been a norm since the turn of the 20th century.  Slightly larger.
-Remington and his students pushed the large bore tenor in the US.  As mentioned, a huge (disproportionate?) number of orchestral players took their training from Remington or his students.  That means they brought large-bore instruments into the orchestras.  That meant basses needed to get bigger too. 
-Conductors, orchestrators, and composers working in orchestras or training in conservatories became exposed to large-bore tenors as the norm, and began to expect those instruments as the norm. 

And that right there is why not small bore for "legit" or classical style playing.  A self-sustaining cycle of larger and larger instruments, bred in music schools and expected by conductors precisely because their training taught them to expect larger instruments.

The byproduct?  As a musicologist who specialized in earlier instruments, I can tell you fairly definitively that we have completely destroyed the concepts of brass balance and blend that every composer from Schutz to Stravinsky ever intended.  Most orchestral music written for a trombone was conceived for an instrument that makes very different sounds at very different dynamic levels than today's large bore tenors.  That's just a fact.  Better sounds or worse sounds?  That's totally subjective. 

Riddle me this:  Orchestras are typically smaller today than in 1905.  So why are the trombones so much bigger and capable of producing so much more sound than they were in 1905?

I will absolutely stand by my assertion that today's best trombone players make great sounds in spite of larger intruments, and not because of them.