Here are some observations I would like to share in regards to some of
the recent postings on the horn list.
First of all, as to the Schmidt mouthpipe being called a a" narrow
taper "mouthpipe, I think that this is somewhat misleading terminology.
The generally accepted description by most makers of what is meant by
this, is a "slow tapered" mouthpipe. This means that the taper flares
out slower than a fast tapered pipe, which flares out sooner.
In practical terms, this means that, given two pipes that are 18 inches
long, starting with the small end measuring exactly the same , if you
measure both pipes at 3", then 6", then 9", the faster tapered pipe
will have wider inside measurements at these places than the slower
tapered pipe.
The mouthpipes used by Schmidt (yes, they had more than one taper),
were almost always slow tapered pipes.
As far as the Schmidt mouthpipe being copied by Geyer and Kruspe , I do
not agree with this.
Geyer had two basic tapers of mouthpipe.
One which he used for his Schmidt models and for replacement pipes for
Schmidt's, and another for his own Geyer models.
I actually have his templates for these mouthpipes as Carl gave them to
me when he retired.
The template for the Geyer is larger than the one for the Schmidt.
Carl also used a different taper for single F horns than he did for
doubles. He also modified the tapers in his mouthpipes depending on who
he was making the horn for, and according to what he thought were their
individual needs.
Kruspe also used more than one mouthpipe taper depending on the model,
and for most of the double horns, the taper was a fast taper for the
first (aprx.) 9 inches of the mouthpipe.
This was not the case for the pipe designed by Conn for the 8D ,
although Conn went through quite a lengthy period of experimentation
before settling on one design.
And some players thought that the early mouthpipes were superior in
playing characteristics.
As to the discussion of the alloy for German silver, Kruspe had small
amounts of tin and lead in their alloy, but it was not quite the same
as nickel bronze.
Walter Lawson told me that he choose nickel bronze because it was the
closest alloy to the Kruspe alloy that he could find.
One only has to look at the difference in color between the two to see
this.
As to Conn 8D bells as compared to most Kruspe bells, the German silver
alloy Kruspe used was harder than the alloy Conn used, but Conn also
had a tendency to over anneal the 8D bells to facilitate production.
This made the metal softer.
This certainly made a difference in the sound of the horns, but one
also has to consider the allocation of the metal thickness between the
two makers bells.
Conn bells were thinner in the throat area and then gradually were
thicker near the rim of the bell whereas with the Kruspe bells, the
allocation was reversed.
The Kruspe throats were thicker and the metal was thinner out towards
the end of the rim.
This makes a large difference in tone and response.
It is easy and tempting to generalize that what made the difference
between the horns was the metal composition.
That did play a big part in the difference, but one also has to
consider many other factors.
For example, if a horn weighs about 3/4 of a pound more that another
horn, the extra weight will also play a large part in the difference in
tone and response.
Kruspe used to thin the parts for their horns to make the horns
lighter.
Geyer sometimes used this technique depending on the weight of the
parts he had available to use.
If you look at many Kruspes with a strong magnifying glass , you can
sometimes still see the leftover file marks where the parts were filed
thinner- if they haven't been worn or buffed off.
This also played a part in the sound quality.
As to the special Kruspe sound mentioned, the faster taper in the
mouthpipe was believed by many to be a factor in this sound quality.
Geyer thought that this faster initial taper was in part responsible
for the what he called "gravy" in the Kruspe's sound quality.
Many players have changed the mouthpipes on their Kruspe horns in order
to help correct some of the intonation problems in the upper register
only to find that while the intonation was somewhat better, the sound
quality was diminished from the sound with the original mouthpipe.
Another factor concerning intonation problems with both the large bell
Kruspes and the large bell Conns is the necessary critical placement of
the hand position with a large throated bell.
A large throat in a bell lowers the upper harmonics and players using
horns with these bells have to make sure that their hand position does
not further complicate this by lowering the upper harmonics even more.
A great discussion of this is in Richard Merewether's book, THE HORN.
Another factor that plays a part in Kruspe's upper register note
placement is that the bells on most Kruspes do not have a gradual taper
to the end of the bell.
Most of the large bells have a large throat that tapers out very fast
in the last 3 to 4 inches immediately before the bell end.
This also demands a critical placement of the hand in the bell because
the player can easily put their hand too far into the throat without
being aware of it, again adding to further lowering of the upper
harmonics.
I think that generalizations, whether coming from players who would
like to convince others about which is the best horn to play, or makers
who would like to convince others that their horn is the best one being
made, could have a tendency to obscure the fact that there are MANY
different components that contribute to how a horn sounds and responds-
such as:
cylindrical bore
mouthpipe design and weight
first branch design
bell taper and allocation of metal in the bell
the type of metal used
the degree of hardness or softness of the metal
valve design
valve section weight
stress in the parts or assembly
overall weight of the instrument
on and on--
There are so many variables !!!
Each of the above, coupled with the makers sensitivity and knowledge as
to what effects what, plays a critical and vital part in the overall
characteristics of how an instrument functions, and needs to be
considered both individually as well as how they work together as a
whole when building or trying to improve a horn.
It would be nice if we could, but there is no way to simplify all of
this into "its the mouthpipe taper", or "its the bell size ", or " its
the metal".
If it were that easy, we would all have perfect or near perfect horns.
Paul Navarro
Custom Horn.
Lyric Opera of Chicago (ret.).
Adj. Professor of Horn, Indiana University.
.
t
________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! -
http://webmail.aol.com
_______________________________________________
post: horn@music.memphis.edu
unsubscribe or set options at
http://music2.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
