TromboneChat

How does one play a large valve (ie Trubore or Axial) well? I enjoy the openness of the Trubores in the high range and like how smoothly the transition is between is between the Bb and F side. However, I was told that I should play rotors because Trubores have virtually no resistance and requires more air. I was thinking about replacing my TY with TYS because seamed tuning slides supposedly add more resistance. How should I approach this?

ThePousane wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 10:59 am ... I was told that I should play rotors because Trubores have virtually no resistance and requires more air. I was thinking about replacing my TY with TYS because seamed tuning slides supposedly add more resistance. How should I approach this?

Who "told" you this bit of folklore?

If your setup "requires more air" – then provide more air! There are several low-resistance valves (as well as more traditional rotors) that play wonderfully. You'll have to find what works for you (if you can afford to experiment), or adapt to what you have.

Time to man up!

If you want resistance (which some people do), then you can avoid those valves. But try them first and don't paint yourself into a corner.

What helped my resistance problem ( more of a preference ), was a change in tuning slide and leadpipe. Those are easier and cheaper to change. However I modify my horn after a lot of research and before I even start with research I focus practice time on what I want to change. Where I am now with my playing I’m convinced anything that needs to be fixed can be by more practice.

Burgerbob wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:20 pm If you want resistance (which some people do), then you can avoid those valves. But try them first and don't paint yourself into a corner.

Let me rephrase this better. I don’t mind the lack of resistance from the valve. In fact I prefer it that way. However, my teacher prefers that I play a horn that has a valve that compresses the air. The question I guess I should ask is if in the case of a Trubore or even Axial, where the air isn't being compressed through valve, where does the compression occur?

FullPedalTrombonist wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:42 pm What helped my resistance problem ( more of a preference ), was a change in tuning slide and leadpipe. Those are easier and cheaper to change. However I modify my horn after a lot of research and before I even start with research I focus practice time on what I want to change. Where I am now with my playing I’m convinced anything that needs to be fixed can be by more practice.

I agree with you 100%. I feel like swapping to a tuning slide and lead pipe that has slightly more resistance would help more than changing the valve. Plus, I Can still get the easy, open in high register I get from from Trubores, something that to me takes a bit more work on rotors.

The question I guess I should ask is if in the case of a Trubore or even Axial, where the air isn't being compressed through valve, where does the compression occur?

Generally speaking with "compression" you are talking about how much air leaks. A Thayer valve often leaks like 10% more air than a rotor because of the way it seals so it just has less "compression". No tuning slide will make a Thayer valve leak less air. A straight horn essentially has 100% compression unless there was a major issue with construction because the receiver is 100% soldered to the tube. A rotor leaks less air than a Thayer so a Rotor still lacks the "compression" of a straight horn just not as much as a Thayer valve. I don't know what the compression ratio is on a Tru-bore. Generally speaking, I want to say a rotor has like 90% compression and a thayer might have 80% but I have no idea where I saw that nor if it's actually true.

Note that "compression" is necessarily correlated with "resistance" from a perception standpoint. When you speak of "resistance" there's no objective way to measure that and so some players - like myself - find that a lack of focus actually feels like resistance; others (probably the majority) find that too much focus feels like resistance. Similarly, some horns seem to work well with rotors and others with other valves.

I switched from a Trubore to a Rotor myself (Bach 42 rotor put on a Shires), but the horn itself has changed drastically compared to what I started out as. It was initially similar to a VNY; it had a Bach 42 bell and a TW47 slide w/ Trubore. That setup worked well but as I mentioned, over the years I changed it. Now its a 2RVET7, seamed yellow TS, 42 rotor, and a T47LW. So literally not a single component is the same. Generally speaking, I find that the "Bach" style horns tend to play better with the more "open" (for lack of a better term) valves like Trubores or Thayers. And more "Conn" style horns work better with Rotors or Dual bore rotors. By YMMV and depending on the overall setup that might be totally 100% off.

That all said, I love seamed tuning slides on my Shires. They project very well for my particular setup. I wouldn't necessarily start there though. I personally would start by evaluating the leadpipe. Or perhaps even your rim/mouthpiece. I find that when I play a too-small-for-me rim, it feels very similar to what I'd call "resistance". Get that right and it makes tremendous difference on any horn. That, of course, depends on your professor hopefully knowing how to guide you through the process (and also assumes that they have not yet already done that and have already figured that out).

If your own playing/mouthpiece are in working for you, the leadpipe can make an otherwise decent horn not so good. If you have a "Bach"ish horn (one piece bell, maybe on the heavy side, all yellow brass slide etc.) maybe consider trying something closer to the "1" or "1.5" side. If you have more of a Conn instrument (two piece bell, maybe on the lighter side, maybe red brass, and possibly a little nickel on the crook) maybe try something closer to the "2.5" or "3" side of the leadpipe spectrum. Ideally people in your studio, your professor, or local community members might have these types of things lying around. If that doesn't work... sure maybe consider bigger more expensive components. Be warned that it's quite a rabbit hole. And changing one thing can lead to unintended effects that then may require changing something else. If you are okay with that, welcome to the club of fellow gear-heads. But if you want to avoid that, you might even consider just going to a convention and trying horns and maybe even doing an outright swap.

ThePousane wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:48 pm ... my teacher prefers that I play a horn that has a valve that compresses the air. The question I guess I should ask is if in the case of a Trubore or even Axial, where the air isn't being compressed through valve, where does the compression occur?

Perhaps the terminology isn't ideal. A valve doesn't "compress" the air, it (and the tubing / bends associated with it) simply provide increased flow resistance to the air passing through the attachment passage. Some players are happy with this higher resistance; others claim it restricts the sound through the F-attachment (though it may indeed require mare airflow to create the same sound level). Your teacher is apparently one of the former. I happen to like "open" valves, but am also comfortable with the old classics.

Perhaps there is something about your playing that encourages your teacher to direct you to high-resistance valves; perhaps it is simply his personal prejudice. In any case, it is usually advisable to follow your teacher's suggestions.

Matt K wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 3:04 pm

The question I guess I should ask is if in the case of a Trubore or even Axial, where the air isn't being compressed through valve, where does the compression occur?

Generally speaking with "compression" you are talking about how much air leaks. A Thayer valve often leaks like 10% more air than a rotor because of the way it seals so it just has less "compression". No tuning slide will make a Thayer valve leak less air. A straight horn essentially has 100% compression unless there was a major issue with construction because the receiver is 100% soldered to the tube. A rotor leaks less air than a Thayer so a Rotor still lacks the "compression" of a straight horn just not as much as a Thayer valve. I don't know what the compression ratio is on a Tru-bore. Generally speaking, I want to say a rotor has like 90% compression and a thayer might have 80% but I have no idea where I saw that nor if it's actually true.

Note that "compression" is necessarily correlated with "resistance" from a perception standpoint. When you speak of "resistance" there's no objective way to measure that and so some players - like myself - find that a lack of focus actually feels like resistance; others (probably the majority) find that too much focus feels like resistance. Similarly, some horns seem to work well with rotors and others with other valves.

I switched from a Trubore to a Rotor myself (Bach 42 rotor put on a Shires), but the horn itself has changed drastically compared to what I started out as. It was initially similar to a VNY; it had a Bach 42 bell and a TW47 slide w/ Trubore. That setup worked well but as I mentioned, over the years I changed it. Now its a 2RVET7, seamed yellow TS, 42 rotor, and a T47LW. So literally not a single component is the same. Generally speaking, I find that the "Bach" style horns tend to play better with the more "open" (for lack of a better term) valves like Trubores or Thayers. And more "Conn" style horns work better with Rotors or Dual bore rotors. By YMMV and depending on the overall setup that might be totally 100% off.

That all said, I love seamed tuning slides on my Shires. They project very well for my particular setup. I wouldn't necessarily start there though. I personally would start by evaluating the leadpipe. Or perhaps even your rim/mouthpiece. I find that when I play a too-small-for-me rim, it feels very similar to what I'd call "resistance". Get that right and it makes tremendous difference on any horn. That, of course, depends on your professor hopefully knowing how to guide you through the process (and also assumes that they have not yet already done that and have already figured that out).

If your own playing/mouthpiece are in working for you, the leadpipe can make an otherwise decent horn not so good. If you have a "Bach"ish horn (one piece bell, maybe on the heavy side, all yellow brass slide etc.) maybe consider trying something closer to the "1" or "1.5" side. If you have more of a Conn instrument (two piece bell, maybe on the lighter side, maybe red brass, and possibly a little nickel on the crook) maybe try something closer to the "2.5" or "3" side of the leadpipe spectrum. Ideally people in your studio, your professor, or local community members might have these types of things lying around. If that doesn't work... sure maybe consider bigger more expensive components. Be warned that it's quite a rabbit hole. And changing one thing can lead to unintended effects that then may require changing something else. If you are okay with that, welcome to the club of fellow gear-heads. But if you want to avoid that, you might even consider just going to a convention and trying horns and maybe even doing an outright swap.

I had a #2 lead pipe on my Shires (very Bach-like). I tried a #1 and it works fantastically. I will evaluate how the seamed tuning slide affects the response once it ships. Thank you

ThePousane wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 10:59 am How does one play a large valve (ie Trubore or Axial) well?

The same way you get to Carnegie Hall: practice, practice, practice.

However, I was told that I should play rotors because Trubores have virtually no resistance and requires more air.

This is something on the order of nonsense: should we all give up our straight tenors and play an instrument with a rotary valve (which the Trubore actually is, but I digress) because our gooseneck has virtually no resistance and requires more air?

Personally, I've found the less mass you hang on the horn the more responsive it feels. All other things being equal, I prefer a Bb tenor to a Bb/F tenor, and a Bb/F bass to a Bb/F/D bass.

Your mileage will vary.

I had a #2 lead pipe on my Shires (very Bach-like). I tried a #1 and it works fantastically. I will evaluate how the seamed tuning slide affects the response once it ships. Thank you

If you wanted to tinker a little more on that front, you can also get a 42 leadpipe for not much to try. It's basically the only reasonably priced part of the instrument lol It would be friction fit but it would give you an idea of how it plays and you can get a collar for it if you like. It's closer to a Shires 1.5 pipe and obviously works well for a lot of players. Although a lot of players also yank the 42 pipe and put something else in there so not perfect!

My teacher prefers that I don’t play on a 1 or 1.5 lead pipe because “none of the other students play one.” It looks like I will just have to conform to what he wants and swap my handslide, valve, and tuning slide. Thank you all for your suggestions. I will look forward to going back to my current setup after I leave.

ThePousane wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 3:30 pm My teacher prefers that I don’t play on a 1 or 1.5 lead pipe because “none of the other students play one.” It looks like I will just have to conform to what he wants and swap my handslide, valve, and tuning slide. Thank you all for your suggestions. I will look forward to going back to my current setup after I leave.

Just out of curiosity, what school are you attending?

Am I the only person who feels like axial valves have more perceived resistance than normal valves? I feel like I get way better compression on an axial.

Maybe I'm equating being able to push more air and get more compression as being able to give me better resistance.

ThePousane wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 3:30 pm My teacher prefers that I don’t play on a 1 or 1.5 lead pipe because “none of the other students play one.” It looks like I will just have to conform to what he wants and swap my handslide, valve, and tuning slide. Thank you all for your suggestions. I will look forward to going back to my current setup after I leave.

That sounds like a bogus program to me. What is the point of even attending if you are following the teacher's advice but not really trusting it, and planning on abandoning it when you leave? Maybe the advice is bogus. Maybe they are a good teacher. That's besides the point. Shouldn't you be listening to a teacher whose advice you trust, and be getting feedback that you can use and take with you into the future?

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:57 pm Am I the only person who feels like axial valves have more perceived resistance than normal valves? I feel like I get way better compression on an axial.

Maybe I'm equating being able to push more air and get more compression as being able to give me better resistance.

I think you may be. The Axial results in less acoustic impedance than any other valve design. The only thing more open is a straight horn. Because the pipe is so open you can probably push a lot of volume through it.

You are the player, even as a student. Play the valve you get the best result with. I am an old fart, I don't like to play tru bore or axial because I am so used to plain rotor valves. But many of my students did play axial. I think you can get used to both axial and trubore when you are younger, years and years with the rotor made me really adopt to them.

Basbasun wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:07 am You are the player, even as a student. Play the valve you get the best result with. I am an old fart, I don't like to play tru bore or axial because I am so used to plain rotor valves. But many of my students did play axial. I think you can get used to both axial and trubore when you are younger, years and years with the rotor made me really adopt to them.

This is how I thought of it as well. While I am on the younger side for sure, when I went to the Shires factory to get fitted, I remember starting out with horn resembling my Bach 42 (Vintage New York Bell, standard rotor, TX tuning slide, TB47). When it came to finding the right valve, the standard rotor and Trubore were at the top. I ended up being fitted with Trubore because I was told that my setup with Trubore had a nice, balanced sound. I was also told during the fitting process that if I didn’t like the way it felt, I could have the valve swapped with the standard rotor and rebuild from there. However, I enjoyed the response of the Trubore. To me, axials were too open (and I didn’t like how they play), rotors were more on the resistant side (but something I could get used to), but Trubores were just right. Why was that the case? I don’t know. I thought it was the fact that I played a straight horn for 8ish years and only played a rotor horn for about 1.5 years out of those 8. Whatever the case is, I think it would make the most sense for me to have an input on equipment and do the necessary adjustments.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:57 pm Am I the only person who feels like axial valves have more perceived resistance than normal valves? I feel like I get way better compression on an axial.

Maybe I'm equating being able to push more air and get more compression as being able to give me better resistance.

No you are not;I actually often find the same thing and I think its for the same reason as you indicated.

Unless there is an issue with your sound, I would not go down the route of tweaking with the equipment. Also I don't understand why your teacher has an issue with certain lead pipes ( I hope he doesn't do equipment checks at the start of lessons). If the overall setup work and you sound good on it then equipment should not be an issue.

Carolus wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 4:24 am Unless there is an issue with your sound, I would not go down the route of tweaking with the equipment.

Also I don't understand why your teacher has an issue with certain lead pipes ( I hope he doesn't do equipment checks at the start of lessons).

If the overall setup works and you sound good on it then equipment should not be an issue.

"Tweaking with your equipment" is probably a blind alley that you will likely have to back out of later.

It's especially telling that you were fit for your trombone – by some of the world's leading experts at that sort of thing – at Shires. You've probably got a good setup.

You are in high school. And being manipulated. Surely your teacher doesn't expect you (or your parents) to purchase an entirely new trombone (or at least the expensive parts of it) just to satisfy his/her narrow preconceptions. This becomes a significant (and unnecessary) economic challenge as well as a pedagogic / musical issue. Perhaps it's time to stand up for yourself! Please share this information with your parents.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:01 pm That sounds like a bogus program to me. What is the point of even attending if you are following the teacher's advice but not really trusting it, and planning on abandoning it when you leave? Maybe the advice is bogus. Maybe they are a good teacher. That's besides the point. Shouldn't you be listening to a teacher whose advice you trust, and be getting feedback that you can use and take with you into the future?

Posaunus wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:38 am You are in high school. And being manipulated. Surely your teacher doesn't expect you (or your parents) to purchase an entirely new trombone (or at least the expensive parts of it) just to satisfy his/her narrow preconceptions. This becomes a significant (and unnecessary) economic challenge as well as a pedagogic / musical issue. Perhaps it's time to stand up for yourself! Please share this information with your parents.

Those are extremely strong accusations to be throwing around without knowing anything about the OP, the teacher, or the school, beyond what the OP has stated, without having heard the OP play (unlike the teacher), and without knowing whether or not "none of the other students play one" is the teacher's complete, and only, rationale or if there was more to the conversation that the OP didn't include in his/her summary that casts the teacher's words in a different light. (Wouldn't be the first time a poster under-reported a conversation. That's not a shot at the OP's veracity; that's simply a recognition that reports of "what he said" are necessarily summaries, and therefore incomplete, in both the content and the wider context of the full statement, as well a colored by the reporter's preferences and biases.) What if the teacher had said, "I think you're going to find a 1 or 1.5 too tight and too focused. See if you can borrow one to try before you go out and buy it, but none of the other students play one"?

I doubt anyone would react well to having their character attacked by a bunch of people who've never met them based solely on a single post that may well under-represents something they've said. I know I certainly wouldn't, and I doubt you would either. Given the nature of on-line communication, maybe I'm expecting too much, but I would HOPE that—at least here on TC—members would extend the same presumption toward the motives and competence of others—including others who are not members of the forum but whose purported words and actions are reported in these pages—that they rightly expect others extend to them.

What is all this fretting? Let me rephrase what I said, then:

That sounds like the wrong program for the OP. Considering they are saying that they will just bear with the program until they can graduate and plan on immediately changing everything back to what they liked before. What is the point of spending money and attending a program that you feel that way about? Which is to say, exactly what I said before. That sounds like a bogus program to be taking part in, if it's not something the OP plans on following. A program is not just a teacher - it's the student too. An exercise program isn't just the plan, it is how you execute it. You could have the best program in the world, but if you don't believe in it and follow it, it's no good. Based on what I read in the OP, which is all we have to go on here, I stand by what I said about the program, including the student's execution of it.

I don't think I said anything negative about any person, especially anyone's character, and certainly did NOT make any accusations, so please don't put words in my mouth. I think all I said was, "sounds bogus, you're in a program you don't want to follow, maybe it's bad advice, maybe it's good, but that sounds like a bad fit for you, OP".

sungfw wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 7:41 am

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:01 pm That sounds like a bogus program to me. What is the point of even attending if you are following the teacher's advice but not really trusting it, and planning on abandoning it when you leave? Maybe the advice is bogus. Maybe they are a good teacher. That's besides the point. Shouldn't you be listening to a teacher whose advice you trust, and be getting feedback that you can use and take with you into the future?

Posaunus wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:38 am You are in high school. And being manipulated. Surely your teacher doesn't expect you (or your parents) to purchase an entirely new trombone (or at least the expensive parts of it) just to satisfy his/her narrow preconceptions. This becomes a significant (and unnecessary) economic challenge as well as a pedagogic / musical issue. Perhaps it's time to stand up for yourself! Please share this information with your parents.

Those are extremely strong accusations to be throwing around without knowing anything about the OP, the teacher, or the school, beyond what the OP has stated, without having heard the OP play (unlike the teacher), and without knowing whether or not "none of the other students play one" is the teacher's complete, and only, rationale or if there was more to the conversation that the OP didn't include in his/her summary that casts the teacher's words in a different light. (Wouldn't be the first time a poster under-reported a conversation. That's not a shot at the OP's veracity; that's simply a recognition that reports of "what he said" are necessarily summaries, and therefore incomplete, in both the content and the wider context of the full statement, as well a colored by the reporter's preferences and biases.) What if the teacher had said, "I think you're going to find a 1 or 1.5 too tight and too focused. See if you can borrow one to try before you go out and buy it, but none of the other students play one"?

I doubt anyone would react well to having their character attacked by a bunch of people who've never met them based solely on a single post that may well under-represents something they've said. I know I certainly wouldn't, and I doubt you would either. Given the nature of on-line communication, maybe I'm expecting too much, but I would HOPE that—at least here on TC—members would extend the same presumption toward the motives and competence of others—including others who are not members of the forum but whose purported words and actions are reported in these pages—that they rightly expect others extend to them.

Well sungfw, both harrisonreed and Posaunus have a valid point (using what’s given and what they know ). It doesn’t make sense for a teacher to tell me I can’t play X valve or Y leadpipe because it doesn’t fit their sound concept or “none of the students play one.” It also doesn't make sense how I spent over an hour getting fitted, yet it isn’t good. Doesn’t sound realistic or true imho. Suggestions are one thing, but outright rejection without experiment is just ridiculous

The reality of the situation is that college degrees are extraordinarily inflexible and are often geographically bound, particularly for music programs. And particularly if you don't want to go way into debt. And even good or great professors aren't always a great match for an individual student. Professors are people too, and are susceptible to having egos, just as naive students are although usually to a lesser degree. College students are college students, after all.

In my undergraduate I didn't want to leave because it would have cost me tens of thousands of dollars more but I wasn't a great match for the professor; there were some personnel changes during the summer prior to accepting which would have meant transferring and therefore already declined scholarship money etc. Which isn't to say the guy I studied with wasn't great for other students, although at the time he was pretty green, the two of us weren't a fantastic match for one another. In hindsight, I wouldn't accept 100% of that responsibility but I would say that I definitely exacerbated the problem by not being particularly smart about disagreements, similar to this one. I say all that because I later returned to the same school for a business bachelor and later business masters degree and played in his ensembles during both degrees and outside of the direct 1:1 lesson environment, we got along quite well.

With all that said, assuming that the professor is 100% in the "wrong" and that transferring isn't an option, whether or not these are true, because honestly, the advice is really not all that different. Just be smart about your interactions with the professor. Is he going to check if you have a 1.5 pipe every lesson? Weird flex, but okay, swap in a 2 for your lessons. If he wants you to swap out expensive parts of a horn, you need to have a serious talk about money. That's a lot to ask for. I had a friend who had a professor make a similar request and it caused quite a rift in the relationship but the person never mentioned to their professor that the request was not feasible because of their financial situation. Once that person pointed out to the professor that, the professor gifted that student a trumpet. In this case it frankly was warranted, they were playing on a student model and it was really holding them back.

Most important, network is insanely important. I would suggest never saying anything with even a hint of negativity about your professor behind their back, in public or in private. The exception to this would be harassing or discriminatory behavior, of course. I had to have a meeting with the dean because a different professor (not the trombone professor) was illegally discriminating against me. But this isn't illegal (insofar as I can tell) discrimination. Its likely a concerned professor who thinks they have the solution to a problem you have, not a professor who is attempting to sabotage you.

ThePousane wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 3:30 pm My teacher prefers that I don’t play on a 1 or 1.5 lead pipe because “none of the other students play one.” It looks like I will just have to conform to what he wants and swap my handslide, valve, and tuning slide. Thank you all for your suggestions. I will look forward to going back to my current setup after I leave.

I had a similar experience in college, only on tenor. I went against my applied trombone professors demands. Sold my f-attachment horn, and bought a straight horn. I knew what I wanted to do with my music. I was dropped from ensembles that I wasn't enjoying anyway and concentrated on jazz/pop/ rock/ studio playing. I never looked back.

Your professor seems as closed minded and tyrannical as mine was. See if another prof will take you on.

Matt K wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 11:29 am The reality of the situation is that college degrees are extraordinarily inflexible and are often geographically bound, particularly for music programs. And particularly if you don't want to go way into debt. And even good or great professors aren't always a great match for an individual student. Professors are people too, and are susceptible to having egos, just as naive students are although usually to a lesser degree. College students are college students, after all.

In my undergraduate I didn't want to leave because it would have cost me tens of thousands of dollars more but I wasn't a great match for the professor; there were some personnel changes during the summer prior to accepting which would have meant transferring and therefore already declined scholarship money etc. Which isn't to say the guy I studied with wasn't great for other students, although at the time he was pretty green, the two of us weren't a fantastic match for one another. In hindsight, I wouldn't accept 100% of that responsibility but I would say that I definitely exacerbated the problem by not being particularly smart about disagreements, similar to this one. I say all that because I later returned to the same school for a business bachelor and later business masters degree and played in his ensembles during both degrees and outside of the direct 1:1 lesson environment, we got along quite well.

With all that said, assuming that the professor is 100% in the "wrong" and that transferring isn't an option, whether or not these are true, because honestly, the advice is really not all that different. Just be smart about your interactions with the professor. Is he going to check if you have a 1.5 pipe every lesson? Weird flex, but okay, swap in a 2 for your lessons. If he wants you to swap out expensive parts of a horn, you need to have a serious talk about money. That's a lot to ask for. I had a friend who had a professor make a similar request and it caused quite a rift in the relationship but the person never mentioned to their professor that the request was not feasible because of their financial situation. Once that person pointed out to the professor that, the professor gifted that student a trumpet. In this case it frankly was warranted, they were playing on a student model and it was really holding them back.

Most important, network is insanely important. I would suggest never saying anything with even a hint of negativity about your professor behind their back, in public or in private. The exception to this would be harassing or discriminatory behavior, of course. I had to have a meeting with the dean because a different professor (not the trombone professor) was illegally discriminating against me. But this isn't illegal (insofar as I can tell) discrimination. Its likely a concerned professor who thinks they have the solution to a problem you have, not a professor who is attempting to sabotage you.

Thanks for your take on this. However, I’m actually in high school. Personally, I may just end up going through a process similar to yours. I also have a scholarship that essentially says I have to major in music in order to use the money. This is binding unless I say that I have lost interest in majoring in music. With this situation going on, I am 50/50 on leaving the scholarship (which I can do and I have plans to major in STEM). The committee at the top responsible for making decisions for the scholarship told me that they are on my side of the argument because I am the one who earned the scholarship, not the teacher.

The thing with disagreements though is that if the teacher wants me to play a certain line differently because the styling wasn’t good in their opinion, I wouldn’t argue about that because at least it was played and the teacher could listen. In this case, one of the few times I gave my take on how I felt about something, I was rejected immediately and forced to comply. What made me end the argument is the fact I didn’t want to throw anymore scholarship + parent’s money away for lesson time that was used for my teacher to lecture me without seeing the complete picture. Since then, I told him I would undergo the switch, which calmed the overall situation.

Also, I don’t know if I came off negatively or not, but I was just curious on why how a valve would be “to big” for someone. IMHO, if it takes a bit more air, I’ll just give it more air. Swapping is actually not really the issue, it’s the choice of action and not taking into account what I think/feel. My horn temporarily has a TX tuning as my TYS will be coming in soon. I am not going to assume that when I get the TYS it will solve my problems, however it is also not a valid argument if there was a comparison that was 3/4 of the way complete was judged as mediocre. Who knows, maybe when I get my TYS, I get a sound with my horn that we both like. Who knows, since I believe the horn we used to experiment with aWays had a #2 leadpipe, I may like the #2 better, maybe not. Due to COVID-19, I haven’t seen my teacher in person for weeks. As the days pass, I am looking more and more into just leaving my teacher’s studio and the scholarship program as whole. Depending on who things go, I may or may not get to play in the ensembles my teacher leads. Look, I honestly just want to get past this situation as soon as possible. If that means leaving a scholarship program, losing out on private lessons and chamber music, and changing my projected major around 180 ° so that everyone is happy, so be it.

bigbandbone wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 12:20 pm

ThePousane wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 3:30 pm My teacher prefers that I don’t play on a 1 or 1.5 lead pipe because “none of the other students play one.” It looks like I will just have to conform to what he wants and swap my handslide, valve, and tuning slide. Thank you all for your suggestions. I will look forward to going back to my current setup after I leave.

I had a similar experience in college, only on tenor. I went against my applied trombone professors demands. Sold my f-attachment horn, and bought a straight horn. I knew what I wanted to do with my music. I was dropped from ensembles that I wasn't enjoying anyway and concentrated on jazz/pop/ rock/ studio playing. I never looked back.

Your professor seems as closed minded and tyrannical as mine was. See if another prof will take you on.

What I find so interesting is that if I went out and got a straight neck pipe, chances are that the results would be nearly the same. As said earlier, the Trubore allows for the air to pass directly through the valve without deviations. So is my teacher essentially saying that I can’t play a large bore straight tenor? That doesn’t quite make sense to me.

You are likely aware of this, but just make sure you aren't weighing too much on something that is a sunk cost. Its a business term that basically means money that is already spent cannot be unspent so future decisions should start from their current point in time not from an imaginary point in the past. So if you purchase a car you later realize you can't afford, you (basically) have two options: sell it for a loss or find a way to increase revenue. It sounds like you are appropriately taking that into consideration because of your mentioning of leaving, but just wanted to mention that because of your mentioning of losing scholarship money etc. you don't want to weigh too heavily on the amount lost but rather how much you can gain from staying or leaving from this point in time. That's probably not the clearest way of representing but hopefully it comes across right.

I will say as someone who did kind-of what you did, but much later in life, you probably aren't making a mistake. I really, really liked trombone and probably could have made a career out of it but in hindsight if I had jettisoned the scholarship money and went into STEM earlier, I'd probably have been even happier. I studied music well past deciding not to make a career out of it and until a few months ago with the birth of my first child was a pretty active performer, professionally.

That all said, if you like performing generally that sounds like a tremendous opportunity lost. You might want to consider what your ultimate goal is. If the goal is to only be as good as a trombonist as you can be to the exclusion of other skills, it might be better to just take lessons with someone else and spend the balance practicing and making your own ensembles etc. Your choice of college can also influence this tremendously.

If, on the other hand, you are there because you want to get better at music and pick up other skills, you might want to stick around. If you aren't familiar with it, check out the pareto principle. The basic idea is that "for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes." In other words, think about other skills you can learn from this program. For example, networking (...and working with difficult people) is a skillset that will benefit you no matter what field you major in. If you shift your focus from exclusively "getting better at the trombone" to both getting better AND networking you might learn a valuable lesson about how to work with people like your professor etc. Again, if this is an abusive situation that completely changes the dynamic. Its still possibly a useful skill but I would never recommend someone deal with abuse for the sole sake up putting up with abuse. BUT I can 99% guarantee you that if you're in high school, you have room to grow with regards to your communication.

You might also be able to work on leadership and negotiation too, such as in the chamber ensembles etc. More focused skills that aren't as applicable but are also really fun are composition/arrangement, music theory, and music history. I think if I would have done that when I was majoring in music I would have been a better rounded individual for sure and frankly the quality of my playing probably would be better, but certainly it wouldn't have been much worse. That said, I also sought out other mentorship - Doug Elliott here in particular really helped set me straight playing-wise.

Which, speaking of, if you ever need any advice about STEM stuff, drop me an email. I'm happy to talk to you or group of your peers about what I do in the field, what jobs are available, what you can major in, or even how to juggle doing both STEM stuff and music at the same time.

Also, I don’t know if I came off negatively or not, but I was just curious on why how a valve would be “to big” for someone.

You didn't directly say anything negative, as far as I can tell. I was mostly warning you against doing it. That's a lesson I learned personally. Nothing ever good comes of it. It was a stupid habit of mine that I kicked a long time ago. Some people default to the teacher for myriad, often good, reasons. Although interestingly enough, if you were to have said your band director wanted you to buy a Bach 42 for marching band that guy would have been dumped on by everyone. Including me. Some BDs have very... interesting... opinions

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 8:14 am I don't think I said anything negative about any person, especially anyone's character, and certainly did NOT make any accusations, so please don't put words in my mouth. I think all I said was, "sounds bogus, you're in a program you don't want to follow, maybe it's bad advice, maybe it's good, but that sounds like a bad fit for you, OP".

Just so we're clear: what you said was:

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:01 pm That sounds like a bogus program to me.

You can't call a program "bogus" without impugning the integrity of the people leading the program, which absolutely is saying something negative about those people's character. It's one thing to say that you think the advice on offer or requirement is bogus, or to say that you think the program isn't a good fit; it's another thing to call the entire program "bogus," especially based solely on the unsubstantiated as far as you know claim of one individual.

ThePousane wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 10:12 am
Well sungfw, both harrisonreed and Posaunus have a valid point (using what’s given and what they know ).

No, ThePosane, they don't: there are always at least two sides to every story, so while they have indeed formed and expressed opinions based (solely) on your side of the story, without knowing (or, evidently, trying to find out) the other side (your teacher's) of the story, there is no way to determine whether or not their conclusions ("point") are valid.

As I wrote upthread, you wouldn't like it if a third party to post a very incomplete, report of something you said or did that reflected badly on your character and competence. Were that to happen, I suspect that you would want people to withhold judgment or critical comment until they had heard your side of the story rather than rushing to judgment, as I suspect harrisonreed, Posanus, and all the rest of us would if it were to happen to us. If we want others to give us the benefit of doubt, we need to set the example by extending it to others first. What is comes down to is this: "Treat people like you want to be treated." It really is as simple as that.

It doesn’t make sense for a teacher to tell me I can’t play X valve or Y leadpipe because it doesn’t fit their sound concept or “none of the students play one.”

It does if they're aiming for a certain sonic quality in an ensemble and you're not capable of achieving it on that particular combination of equipment at this stage of your development. [NB: I'm not saying that that is the case; only that it's could be the case, and that, if it is, it's a legitimate reason for such a requirement.] While that would likely be overkill for a HS (unless you're talking about something like the NC School of Music) or most undergraduate settings, it is, nevertheless, a defensible stance.

It also doesn't make sense how I spent over an hour getting fitted, yet it isn’t good.

Here's the thing: the requirements for ensemble playing are different that those of solo playing: in ensemble playing, blending with one's section mates and the rest of the ensemble is paramount; in solo playing, distinguishing one's "voice" from that of the ensemble is paramount. While an accomplished player may be able to make one leadpipe, or even one horn, work in both settings, most not only have multiple leadpipes, but multiple horns (and for some multiple mouthpieces), and pick and choose which to play based on the character of the music and where they "sit" in the overall sound texture. It is at least conceivable that when you were getting fitted for your Shires, the auditors prioritized sonic characteristics more appropriate to solo playing. [Again, not saying that was the case, only that it's conceivably so.] Given that, is it possible that, from the podium and out the audience, your sound doesn't quite blend with the rest of the ensemble, even though it sounds fine from behind the bell?

Doesn’t sound realistic or true imho. Suggestions are one thing, but outright rejection without experiment is just ridiculous

I'm tempted to say, "Welcome to the real world," because in the real world, employers and clients will occasionally dictate not only the work to be done, how it must be done, and not just the specific tools to be used, but the specific brands, models, specifications, and vendors from whom the equipment on which the work is done must be purchased as well. (The Berlin Philharmonic Horn section, for example, requires section members to play Alexander horns.) The requirements may not appear to make sense, and you may well be able to accomplish the task by other methods on other equipment more quickly and less expensively. You can try to negotiate, but if the final spec book says, "Do it this way," you do it the way the spec book says. Not doing so can not only get you fired: if you're a freelancer or a subcontractor, it can get you blacklisted from being hired in the future. It's called the Golden Rule of Arts and Sciences: them that's got the gold makes the rules."

While it does sound like your teacher didn't (or hasn't) done a good job of explaining his or her rationale, it does not necessarily follow that the requirements are arbitrary, nonsensical, or ridiculous: it may simply mean that the teacher is a poor communicator. (Whether or not someone who's a poor communicator should be a teacher, if that is the case, is a different question).

Matt K Edit: Fixed formatting

In the "real world" of the Berlin Philharmonic, the person dictating instrument choice would also be paying you a six figure salary, if not outright providing that instrument, which somewhat changes the dynamic.

Looking back at OP's original post, the teacher's complaint seems odd. I agree that we should hear the rationale for what he's told the OP. Now if OP had an instrument which did not fit the requirements of the Studio; to wit a large bore tenor with F valve, it there might be a problem to be cured with new equipment.

I agree with Sungfw that we really need to understand the rationale for the teacher's request.

Them that gots the gold make the rules lol. How many music degrees have pauperized the student? Complete opposite situation.

Matt K wrote: ↑Sun Mar 29, 2020 9:49 pm In the "real world" of the Berlin Philharmonic, the person dictating instrument choice would also be paying you a six figure salary, if not outright providing that instrument, which somewhat changes the dynamic.

In the specific case of the Berlin Phil, the BP does NOT provide instruments, except for percussion and keyboard instruments (and even in those cases, percussionists are required to provide their own sticks/mallets, and keyboard musicians are expected to have their own instruments at home in order to be able to practice away from the Philharmonie). Individual musicians are required to obtain their own instruments, whether through purchase, rental, or loan: a datum that is readily discoverable in various interviews and profiles on sites like the Digital Concert Hall, Sarah Willis Horn Hangouts, Youtube, and other media.

The larger point is that dictation or restriction of equipment choices by employers is not an uncommon practice, nor is the requirement—prevalent in the blue collar world, and increasingly common in the white collar world—that employees purchase the necessary ordinary tools of their trade at their own expense.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:20 am Them that gots the gold make the rules lol. How many music degrees have pauperized the student? Complete opposite situation.

Clearly, the metaphor went completely over your head.

The larger point is that dictation or restriction of equipment choices by employers is not an uncommon practice, nor is the requirement—prevalent in the blue collar world, and increasingly common in the white collar world—that employees purchase the necessary ordinary tools of their trade at their own expense.

The larger point is that the teacher is not the OP's employer.

Matt K wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 1:24 pm The larger point is that the teacher is not the OP's employer.

If ThePousane's story is at all accurate (which I admit we cannot know for sure), the teacher appears to be out of line if he/she did request that the student make expensive modifications / replacements for the perfectly satisfactory professional-level equipment he showed up with. It's one thing to suggest another mouthpiece; entirely different to demand a change in valve or even something more expensive. Understand that we're talking about a high school student here! This has nothing to do with "fitting in" to a large professional ensemble. (And by the way, in which professional ensembles do all the trombonists play the same instruments?)

I have communicated off-line with the student, and know a bit more of the story. I'm not personally attacking the teacher (whose identity remains anonymous), but I am very critical of his approach if it resembles what ThePousane has described in his posts or his personal correspondence to me. But ... I do remain open to the possibility that ThePousane has misinterpreted what he is being told and is therefore over-reacting. (There are indeed two sides to every story.) If so, my apologies to the unnamed teacher.

And as Chris Stearn (FOSSIL) wrote on another thread:

"I make sure that my students are playing really nice equipment that suits their concepts....then we forget about it.
The soft machine adapts, the hard machine doesn't.
Chris"

I'd like to have had Chris as my teacher!

sungfw wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 1:20 pm
Clearly, the metaphor went completely over your head.

This is such a strange hill to die on. In what world is this teacher, assuming we are getting an accurate story, not out of line? Remember... High school student.

I've had teachers prefer that I be on a certain brand, maybe, but not down to the valve and leadpipe I'm using. And that's as a master's student.

A High Schooler going into college is going to change A LOT as his ability improves.

There may need to be changes to the equipment, but generally this is needed after some development and will probably be apparent even to the student.

Emory Remington used to insist his students play a Conn 88H. I don't particularly think this is appropriate, even though the 88H (Elkhart in his day) is a great instrument. John Coffey used to disable his student's trigger to force him to learn the straight horn and not rely on the trigger for C's and B's. Once the student was able to command the straight horn, Coffey would re-enable the trigger.

sungfw wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 1:20 pm

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:20 am Them that gots the gold make the rules lol. How many music degrees have pauperized the student? Complete opposite situation.

Clearly, the metaphor went completely over your head.

(Imagines the teacher paying the student...)

... ...

Sorry, SungFw, couldn't help that one. I must've hit a nerve with my initial comment, but I didn't mean to. All we had to go on is the OPs words, and no one's name (therefore reputation) had been put out. I think we're all going to be OK. I'll give a little, and say that I should've said that the execution of this program seems pretty bad, not just the program itself, which also seems pretty dopey.

A teacher of high school students shouldn't be worried about equipment beyond "is the slide good and fast, is the mouthpiece a good fit, does it have a valve (or not), and have I taught you proper maintenance?". They definitely shouldn't be stressing their student out with equipment issues beyond that, if the student is happy with their gear.

Having high schoolers conform on equipment is straight up a dopey practice, IMO. I've had students in high school get different mouthpieces, get their slide, etc, fixed, and in some cases get a basic horn with an F attachment. Never in my days would I have a student changing valve types or leadpipes in high school unless those things were broken. Just a pretentious attitude for a teacher at that level to take, since no one's future career is at stake in that development stage, and none of those students would be at the point where they could make objective decisions about gear changes.

sungfw wrote: ↑Sun Mar 29, 2020 9:41 pm

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 8:14 am I don't think I said anything negative about any person, especially anyone's character, and certainly did NOT make any accusations, so please don't put words in my mouth. I think all I said was, "sounds bogus, you're in a program you don't want to follow, maybe it's bad advice, maybe it's good, but that sounds like a bad fit for you, OP".

Just so we're clear: what you said was:

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:01 pm That sounds like a bogus program to me.

You can't call a program "bogus" without impugning the integrity of the people leading the program, which absolutely is saying something negative about those people's character. It's one thing to say that you think the advice on offer or requirement is bogus, or to say that you think the program isn't a good fit; it's another thing to call the entire program "bogus," especially based solely on the unsubstantiated as far as you know claim of one individual.

ThePousane wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 10:12 am
Well sungfw, both harrisonreed and Posaunus have a valid point (using what’s given and what they know ).

No, ThePosane, they don't: there are always at least two sides to every story, so while they have indeed formed and expressed opinions based (solely) on your side of the story, without knowing (or, evidently, trying to find out) the other side (your teacher's) of the story, there is no way to determine whether or not their conclusions ("point") are valid.

As I wrote upthread, you wouldn't like it if a third party to post a very incomplete, report of something you said or did that reflected badly on your character and competence. Were that to happen, I suspect that you would want people to withhold judgment or critical comment until they had heard your side of the story rather than rushing to judgment, as I suspect harrisonreed, Posanus, and all the rest of us would if it were to happen to us. If we want others to give us the benefit of doubt, we need to set the example by extending it to others first. What is comes down to is this: "Treat people like you want to be treated." It really is as simple as that.

It doesn’t make sense for a teacher to tell me I can’t play X valve or Y leadpipe because it doesn’t fit their sound concept or “none of the students play one.”

It does if they're aiming for a certain sonic quality in an ensemble and you're not capable of achieving it on that particular combination of equipment at this stage of your development. [NB: I'm not saying that that is the case; only that it's could be the case, and that, if it is, it's a legitimate reason for such a requirement.] While that would likely be overkill for a HS (unless you're talking about something like the NC School of Music) or most undergraduate settings, it is, nevertheless, a defensible stance.

It also doesn't make sense how I spent over an hour getting fitted, yet it isn’t good.

Here's the thing: the requirements for ensemble playing are different that those of solo playing: in ensemble playing, blending with one's section mates and the rest of the ensemble is paramount; in solo playing, distinguishing one's "voice" from that of the ensemble is paramount. While an accomplished player may be able to make one leadpipe, or even one horn, work in both settings, most not only have multiple leadpipes, but multiple horns (and for some multiple mouthpieces), and pick and choose which to play based on the character of the music and where they "sit" in the overall sound texture. It is at least conceivable that when you were getting fitted for your Shires, the auditors prioritized sonic characteristics more appropriate to solo playing. [Again, not saying that was the case, only that it's conceivably so.] Given that, is it possible that, from the podium and out the audience, your sound doesn't quite blend with the rest of the ensemble, even though it sounds fine from behind the bell?

Doesn’t sound realistic or true imho. Suggestions are one thing, but outright rejection without experiment is just ridiculous

I'm tempted to say, "Welcome to the real world," because in the real world, employers and clients will occasionally dictate not only the work to be done, how it must be done, and not just the specific tools to be used, but the specific brands, models, specifications, and vendors from whom the equipment on which the work is done must be purchased as well. (The Berlin Philharmonic Horn section, for example, requires section members to play Alexander horns.) The requirements may not appear to make sense, and you may well be able to accomplish the task by other methods on other equipment more quickly and less expensively. You can try to negotiate, but if the final spec book says, "Do it this way," you do it the way the spec book says. Not doing so can not only get you fired: if you're a freelancer or a subcontractor, it can get you blacklisted from being hired in the future. It's called the Golden Rule of Arts and Sciences: them that's got the gold makes the rules."

While it does sound like your teacher didn't (or hasn't) done a good job of explaining his or her rationale, it does not necessarily follow that the requirements are arbitrary, nonsensical, or ridiculous: it may simply mean that the teacher is a poor communicator. (Whether or not someone who's a poor communicator should be a teacher, if that is the case, is a different question).

Matt K Edit: Fixed formatting

Well sungfw, I understand that there are 2 sides to the story, and maybe I should explain to the best of my abilities to craft my teacher’s take of what happened. I brought my horn (at the time with a #2 leadpipe) to the teacher and played a line in my solo (no warmup or anything/haven’t played the whole day, if that even matters). The teacher than said the sound was not his taste (a bit on the broader side and he likes a more compactness) and that I would be better suited on a valve with more resistance. I tried asking the teacher if switching the leadpipe and/or tuning slide would work (I also that it isn’t possible to make a valid conclusion because my complete setup has a seamed tuning slide, which was unavailable at the time). The teacher said that it can be worked out. A day later, I experimented with a #1 leadpipe and found it good, a bit tight, but usable. When I tried the #2, it took a bit more air, but still usable. Therefore, I made the conclusion that a 1.5 might suit me better on the horn. The next time I went in to the teacher, I was able to compare a standard rotor version of my horn. Before I played it, I was asked what leadpipe was in my horn, to which a replied #1. I also told the teacher that I plan on getting a 1.5 to test with because my likings seem to fall between leadpipes #’s 1 and 2. The teacher told me I can’t play a 1 or 1.5 because “all of the students play #2 or larger, and I wouldn’t be allowed to play one if I still wanted to be his student” (keep in mind, this is without me even playing a single note on my horn with a #1 in it). After swapping leadpipes, the teacher wanted me to play different etudes (specifically Rochuts) at ff and glissed to prove to me that the Trubore takes more air than a rotor (for some reason, the teacher doesn’t prefer the tenors in the studio to play valves that take more air). At the end of the session, I was given 2 choices, swap the Trubore and TB47 or leave the studio. I attempted to tell the teacher that I felt that the high register was a bit more secure on Trubore and how I liked the response it has up there. I also asked if there things I could practice to get a bit more air capacity and a better sound and that I could work on it and if there improvements, I can save everyone the hassle and cost of swapping parts. I got the same ultimatum of do as the teacher says or leave. I said I would do it. There. That’s how things went.

Another thing you said was how “wouldn't like it if a third party to post a very incomplete, report of something you said or did that reflected badly on your character and competence.” The thing is, I’m not saying the teacher is bad in character or incompetent at all. If you look at my original post, you can see how the conversation began as a discussion about how to play a “big valve.” My teacher told me how he doesn’t play valves like that, but that shouldn’t be an indicator of what his students play, just his personal preference that the teacher was entitled to have. However, I’m being denied that right of preference, which I don’t know about you, seems that is quite uncommon, especially since personal preference gets 0% in the consideration process of picking certain part(s).

Finally, to your point on ensemble playing/employment, I have yet to play the horn in an ensemble or see my teacher again (due to COVID-19) and I am not employed by the teacher, as others have said. The student-teacher relationship is only bounded by a scholarship, which I am allowed to drop at anytime, which also leads to another thought.

After reading Matt K’s response to my previous post on potentially leaving my scholarship, thus allowing me to end lessons with the teacher and keep my horn, I really did begin leaning towards the fact that maybe it isn’t the right path to go down. When Matt said he made a similar decision later in life and that leaving the scholarship, studio, and binding agreement to go major in music in order to major in STEM (which I’m very interested in) would most likely not be a mistake, if I were to do it. This really makes me think because now I have to make the choice of putting my trust and reliance in the scholarship and teacher or my gut/personal feeling. Although I feel like it would be a potentially harmful situation to leave, for these past few days I have been feeling more and more confident on just leaving the scholarship, studio, and teacher. Plus, the worst that can happen is not being allowed to play in the ensembles my teacher observes, which is minimal in scopes of the gains. As of now, I’m really leaning towards cutting the rope.

Matt K wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 1:24 pm

The larger point is that dictation or restriction of equipment choices by employers is not an uncommon practice, nor is the requirement—prevalent in the blue collar world, and increasingly common in the white collar world—that employees purchase the necessary ordinary tools of their trade at their own expense.

The larger point is that the teacher is not the OP's employer.

No, the larger point is that the OP is learning some things about how things can be—and, at times, iare—outside the cocoon that is academia and about the nature of the relationship between titular superiors and subordinates. If a student is playing in a school ensemble led by a teacher and the teacher has the authority, by virtue of his or her position, to determine a student's continuing participation in the ensemble and whether or not a student receives credit for participation in the ensemble (and if so, the level of credit, i.e., grade), the teacher IS, for all intents and purposes, the OP's employer within the context of the educational setting.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:07 pm (Imagines the teacher paying the student...)

... Yeah, it went over my head ...

I'd attempt to explain it to you, but the fact that you either fail to grasp or are unwilling to acknowledge the possibility of there being other, non-financial, transactions between a teacher and a student shows that I'd simply be wasting my breath.

sungfw wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:46 pm I'd attempt to explain it to you, but the fact that you either fail to grasp or are unwilling to acknowledge the possibility of there being other, non-financial, transactions between a teacher and a student shows that I'd simply be wasting my breath.

Haha, you need to calm down and be happy. My goodness gracious. You're almost taking what we've said to the OP personally.

Maybe it’s time for a break and read the Blast AKA thread.

The silver lining with this horrible situation going on is you do have some time to think about it, at the very least. I don't know what your work load is like now but if you haven't dipped your toes into the programming side of STEM and you have some spare time you can always spend some of the spare time you may have now to try it out to see if you like doing it. I actually didn't really find a technology that I loved using until after my undergraduate when I accidentally stumbled on Python; I did database administration / devops type stuff until then. Now I'm about 50% programming / 50% dev ops/systems administration. A really good resource if you want to try programming is Automate the Boring Stuff by Al Sweigart; its an easy introduction into programming concepts that teaches with stuff that you've possibly done before with other technologies (like how to automate some Excel type stuff with Python) and just other very applicable stuff. I was taught programming in a very abstract fashion and would have been much better served with the practical side first.

Matt K wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:48 pm The silver lining with this horrible situation going on is you do have some time to think about it, at the very least. I don't know what your work load is like now but if you haven't dipped your toes into the programming side of STEM and you have some spare time you can always spend some of the spare time you may have now to try it out to see if you like doing it. I actually didn't really find a technology that I loved using until after my undergraduate when I accidentally stumbled on Python; I did database administration / devops type stuff until then. Now I'm about 50% programming / 50% dev ops/systems administration. A really good resource if you want to try programming is Automate the Boring Stuff by Al Sweigart; its an easy introduction into programming concepts that teaches with stuff that you've possibly done before with other technologies (like how to automate some Excel type stuff with Python) and just other very applicable stuff. I was taught programming in a very abstract fashion and would have been much better served with the practical side first.

It seems like my best option is to leave and just go on to STEM. I plan on doing some sort of engineering and have a loads of courses such as chemistry, physics, calculus, and stats I need to get through, all while this situation is going on. The sooner I leave, the more time I have to focus on what I’ll need for college I suppose.

ThePousane wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:30 pm It seems like my best option is to leave and just go on to STEM. I plan on doing some sort of engineering and have a loads of courses such as chemistry, physics, calculus, and stats I need to get through, all while this situation is going on. The sooner I leave, the more time I have to focus on what I’ll need for college I suppose.

Oh yeah, that's heavy on the "E". Stats is super hot right now; who knows where it'll be in a few years but if you like that at all its super transferable to a lot of fields.

ThePousane wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:30 pm It seems like my best option is to leave and just go on to STEM. I plan on doing some sort of engineering and have a loads of courses such as chemistry, physics, calculus, and stats I need to get through, all while this situation is going on. The sooner I leave, the more time I have to focus on what I’ll need for college I suppose.

Don't try to solve your arguments with your teacher by asking some bunch of people on the internet. I assume you have parents?

Nothing adds up here, there's obviously something else going on. - please don't explain it, just talk to your parents about it.

If you can't talk to your teacher, talk to your parents. I can't believe you're coming to the internet to get this kind of advice.

If thePosaune's parents don't understand what's going on, maybe a discussion with a college advisor.

I had a similar situation back when I was in High School (late Pre-Cambrian Era) and I chose STEM -- particularly Chemical Engineering. I found that Engineers eat better than musicians. There are lots of opportunities to play outside of work. And you can pick and choose the gigs you want to play.

In fact, I know a few Music majors who wound up leaving music for a "day job".