First off, I wish to sincerely thank Paul Navarro for joining this discussion. I've always been fascinated with the history and evolution of our instrument, the players, teachers and makers, and we are fortunate in this day and age to have a resource such as this list to discuss all aspects of it. My passion started in high school and my colleagues at the time, both in the Delaware Valley and at IAA shared the interest in all things horn that I had. Though the only resources we had were the Morley-Pegge book, the Gregory book, Birchard Coar's two theses and the Farkas book, the fires of passion were lit for life in many of us. It is remarkable the amount of information, not to mention performance (either as a listener or participant) and educational opportunities that are available now. I get a bit troubled at times today when I don't see the same interest, beyond what "they" are doing, in students. I hope that posts here can help kindle that interest in them and others who read them. The horn is a noble and beautiful instrument with a great history. I feel personally that it is a privilege to work in this business and I value the friendship and camaraderie that seems to run universal in our small, yet worldwide, community. It is up to us, as horn players and music lovers, to assure that its existence continues well into the future. I feel that is essential that we build upon the traditions of the past in order to guarantee that this happens. Yes, sometimes there is controversy, even acrimony, amongst us but I think that this is human nature and not really a bad thing as it shows evidence that passion is present! I think that we are all looking for the same "truths" and there is most certainly misinformation out there that could use correction. I believe that all are entitled to their opinions and I am always relieved when someone corrects me on a point of misinformation that I hold as true. That said, I'm going to work this week on lead(mouth)pipes. There is a point we can discuss, similar to the French sometimes associated with horn. What is the proper term for the first length of tubing? Inquiring minds want to know. I have a stock Kruspe lead(mouth)pipe that Walter ordered from them at some point. I will guess it's from the 60's and it's all finished and ready to be installed. I also have my old brass Kruspe, my main instrument through HS. Carl Geyer himself dated this horn as WWI vintage. Walter used cerrobase to fill leadpipes, then cut the pipe apart and measure the mold. I really don't want to do that to this pipe or my horn! I will try the plastics I've been experimenting with for bending and see if I can get a decent mold of those tapers for precise measurement. If Paul, or anyone else, has accurate measurements of Kruspe pipes, I'd like to see them. I understand the comment about "gravy" in the sound and I'm curious to pursue that aspect further. My bell research is on going at this point. I am working on a way to easily and quickly measure the thickness of a bell flare throughout the flare. I may or may not succeed at this but I think I can engineer a device to do it. Building it may be the real problem. Otherwise, it's just the old dial gauge, calipers and guesstimates. I may also invest in a Rockwell hardness tester. It only makes a small dent, but I'll sell those bells as seconds. (Just kidding!) Walter and I always shared the view that the sound of the horn was its most important attribute and I do think the bell flare is the most important piece of the system in that regard. Paul's description of what's involved in horn design and building is right on the mark. I took on this business because there were no acceptable offers for it forthcoming when they decided to retire and sell it. I also needed a job in "retirement" and I did not want to teach full time in a university. Walter said if no one wanted to continue, he was going to destroy all the spec sheets and mandrels and auction off the machines and equipment. I just could not let that happen! It's my goal to keep what they did going at this point and to make improvements wherever I can in both the design and manufacturing of the instrument. I also have to pay bills, make payroll and pay taxes, so I do need customers in order to survive. I'm not ashamed to promote what I do and I sincerely want to help people play their best on whatever equipment they have. Back to work! KB In a message dated 2/2/2008 1:01:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
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. **************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025 48) _______________________________________________ post: horn@music.memphis.edu unsubscribe or set options at http://music2.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
