INFORMATION TO U SE R S
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, som e thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of com puter printer.
T he quality of th is rep roduction is d e p en d e n t upon th e quality of th e c o p y subm itted. Broken or indistinct print colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In th e unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning a t the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
Bell & Howell Information and Learning
300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600
AN ANALYSIS, CLARIFICATION, AND REVALUATION OF DONALD REINHARDT’S PIVOT SYSTEM FOR BRASS INSTRUMENTS
by
David Ray Turnbull
A Research Paper Presented in Partial Fulfillment o f the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor o f Musical Arts
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY May 2001
___ ®
UMI
UMI Microform 3001298
Copyright 2001 by Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
AN ANALYSIS, CLARIFICATION, AND REVALUATION OF DONALD REINHARDT’S PIVOT SYSTEM FOR BRASS INSTRUMENTS
by
David Ray Turnbull
has been approved March 2001 . Chair
u
Supervisory Committee ACCEPTED:D ^ ^ S th e
s
-u <
Dean, Graduate College^ \
Donald Reinhardt discovered and cataloged different brass embouchure types and established the correlation o f these types to different dental structures. He published the results o f his research in Donald S. Reinhardt’s Pivot System for Trumpet in 1942 and The
Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System in 1973.
Two problems are evident with Reinhardt’s published research. The first problem arises with his attempt to describe a phenomenon that takes place at a brass player’s embouchure—specifically, the embouchure mechanics involved in ascending and descending on a brass instrument. He coined the term “pivot,” which led to many misconceptions and misunderstandings, and frequently resulted in a dismissal o f Reinhardt’s “system” and a general disregard for his research-including his valuable embouchure classifications. A solution to the problem with “pivot” is the substitution o f the term “track,” a much more accurate term. The central incisors o f both the top and bottom teeth form a type o f track, and it is on this track that the vertical pushing and pulling o f the lips and mouthpiece occur as a unit.
The second problem with Reinhardt’s work has to do with the organization o f his diagrams o f basic dental structures and the mouthpiece placements associated with each.
DonaldS. Reinhardt's Pivot System fo r Trumpet contains diagrams that depict various
aspects o f the different embouchure classifications, but cross-referencing is necessary and sometimes difficult for the reader. Reinhardt’s lengthy second work, The Encyclopedia o f
the Pivot System, has a thorough text, but the diagrams lack the size and detail needed for
full comprehension.
The present study provides a solution to these problems by providing detailed photographs o f the predominant dental structures and o f actual trumpet players exhibiting different embouchure types. The photographs clarify Reinhardt’s work and provide new insights into understanding the brass embouchure. They illustrate that dental bite generally affects mouthpiece placement but does not necessarily affect tracking. When coupled with related research, the photographs show that the position o f the central and lateral incisors affects both mouthpiece placement and tracking.
IV
I will forever be in debt to my wife Marsha, for without her support, I would not have been able to accomplish any o f this. Special thanks go to my good friend Rene Bernard. His willingness to answer so many questions about Reinhardt was invaluable. Thanks go to Elmer Krai, Christopher von Baeyer and Louise Barber. They were extremely helpful when it came to advice on style and content. Thanks also goes to the following ASU faculty members: Richard Strange, J. Samuel Pilafian, Daniel Perantoni, Robert Spring, James DeMars, and Jerry Doan. I will always remember Gail Eugene Wilson for his special help. Finally, I would like to extend a very special thanks to David R. Hickman for helping me bring many o f my hopes and aspirations to fruition.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES... viii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION... 1
Background... 1
Statement o f Purpose... 8
Rationale for the Study... 9
Questions to be Answered... 9
Limitations... 11
2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE... 12
Introduction... 12
Use o f Photography to Study Brass Embouchures... 13
Use o f Electromyography to Study Brass Embouchures... 19
The Instrumentalist: Brass Anthology... 20
Central and Lateral Incisors Related to Embouchure... 22
Summary o f Literature Review... 25
3 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE DIFFERENT EMBOUCHURE TYPES 27 Research Procedures... 27
Types I and IA ... 28
Types II and HA... 37
Types HI, IIIA and LLJLB... 46
Types IV and IVA... 59 vi
4 SUMMARY... 68
Upstream and Downstream Embouchures... 68
Oddity o f Type IV and IVA Embouchures... 70
Tracking and Mouthpiece Placement... 72
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
L Front View o f a Type I Dental Structure (Even B ite)... 29
2. Right View o f a Type I Dental Structure (Even Bite)... 29
3. Left View o f a Type I Dental Structure (Even B ite)... 29
4. View of a Type I Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 30
5. View o f a Type I Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)... 30
6. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f a Downstream, Type I Embouchure 30
7. View o f a Type I Embouchure Playing C4 (Concert B-flat 3)... 31
8. View o f a Type I Embouchure Playing C5 (Concert B-flat 4 )... 31
9. View o f a Type I Embouchure Playing C6 (Concert B-flat 5)... 3 1 10. Front View of a Type LA. Dental Structure (Even B ite)... 33
11. Right View of a Type LA Dental Structure (Even B ite)... 33
12. Left View o f a Type LA Dental Structure (Even B ite)... 33
13. View o f a Type LA Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 34
14. View o f a Type LA Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)... 34
15. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement of an Upstream, Type IA Embouchure 34
16. View o f a Type LA Embouchure Playing C 4 ... 35
17. View o f a Type LA Embouchure Playing C 5 ... 35
18. View o f a Type LA Embouchure Playing C 6 ... 35
19. Front View o f a Type LI Dental Structure (Underbite)... 38
20. Right View o f a Type II Dental Structure (Underbite)... 38
viii
21. Left View o f a Type II Dental Structure (Underbite)... 38
22. View o f a Type II Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 39
23. View o f a Type II Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)... 39
24. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f an Upstream, Type II Embouchure 39 25. View o f a Type II Embouchure Playing C 4... 40
26. View o f a Type II Embouchure Playing C 5... 40
27. View o f a Type II Embouchure Playing C 6... 40
28. Front View o f a Type DA Dental Structure (Underbite)... 42
29. Right View o f a Type HA. Dental Structure (Underbite)... 42
30. Left View o f a Type HA. Dental Structure (Underbite)... 42
31. View of a Type DA Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 43
32. View o f a Type DA Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)... 43
33. View of the Mouthpiece Placement of an Upstream, Type DA Embouchure.... 43
34. View of a Type DA Embouchure Playing C 4 ... 44
35. View o f a Type DA Embouchure Playing C 5 ... 44
36. View o f a Type DA Embouchure Playing C 6 ... 44
37. Front View o f a Type ID Dental Structure (Overbite)... 47
38. Right View o f a Type ID Dental Structure (Overbite)... 47
39. Left View o f a Type ID Dental Structure (Overbite)... 47
40. View of a Type ED Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 48
41. View of a Type ED Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)... 48
Figure Page
42. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f a Downstream, Type IH Embouchure.. 48
43. View o f a Type III Embouchure Playing C4... 49
44. View o f a Type III Embouchure Playing C5... 49
45. View o f a Type IH Embouchure Playing C6... 49
46. Front View o f a Type 1HA Dental Structure (Overbite)... 51
47. Right View o f a Type IDA Dental Structure (Overbite)... 51
48. Left View o f a Type IDA Dental Structure (Overbite)... 51
49. View o f a Type IDA Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 52
50. View o f a Type EIA Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)... 52
51. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f a Downstream, Type HIA Embouchure... 52
52. View o f a Type IDA Embouchure Playing C 4... 53
53. View o f a Type IDA Embouchure Playing C 5... 53
54. View o f a Type IDA Embouchure Playing C6... 53
55. Front View o f a Type DTB Dental Structure (Overbite)... 55
56. Right View o f a Type DIB Dental Structure (Overbite)... 55
57. Left View o f a Type 111B Dental Structure (Overbite)... 55
58. View o f a Type DTB Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 56
59. View o f a Type DIB Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)... 56
60. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f a Downstream, Type DIB Embouchure... 56
61. View of a Type DIB Embouchure Playing C 4... 57
x
62. View o f a Type IIIB Embouchure Playing C 5 ... 57
63. View of a Type IDB Embouchure Playing C 6 ... 57
64. Front View o f a Type IV Dental Structure (Overbite)... 60
65. Right View o f a Type IV Dental Structure (Overbite)... 60
66. Left View of a Type IV Dental Structure (Overbite)... 60
67. View of a Type IV Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 61
68. View of a Type IV Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)... 61
69. View of the Mouthpiece Placement o f an Upstream, Type IV Embouchure 61 70. View o f a Type IV Embouchure Playing C 4 ... 62
71. View o f a Type IV Embouchure Playing C 5 ... 62
72. View of a Type IV Embouchure Playing C 6 ... 62
73. Front View o f a Type IVA Dental Structure (Overbite)... 64
74. Right View o f a Type IVA Dental Structure (Overbite)... 64
75. Left View of a Type IVA Dental Structure (Overbite)... 64
76. View of a Type IVA Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 65
77. View of a Type IVA Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)... 65
78. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f an Upstream, Type IVA Embouchure.. 65
79. View o f a Type IVA Embouchure Playing C4... 66
80. View of a Type IVA Embouchure Playing C5... 66
81. View of a Type IVA Embouchure Playing C6... 66
82. Left View of a Type IV Dental Structure (Overbite)... 71
Figure Page 83. View of the Mouthpiece Placement o f an Upstream, Type IV Embouchure 71 84. View o f a Type IVA Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 72 85. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f an Upstream, Type IVA Embouchure.. 72 86. View o f a Type DA Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)... 73 87. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f an Upstream, Type HA Embouchure.... 74
xii
INTRODUCTION
Background
In the field of brass pedagogy, the subject of the player’s embouchure continues to be a source o f debate and confusion, so much so that, according to Roger Dane* “Theories on positioning the embouchure are very inconsistent. The complex nature of this subject causes some teachers to refrain from an educational discussion of the matter.”1
Differences of opinion on mouthpiece placement are also abundant, as the following two contradictory examples illustrate. Bailey and others state that: “Unfortunately, there is no ‘magic’ spot on the lips to place the mouthpiece. The
mouthpiece should be centered over the aperture.. . . For most, this is directly centered on the lips both vertically and horizontally. The mouthpiece should be placed so that equal amounts fall on both the upper and lower lips.”2 However, Zom insists that: “. . . the inside rim o f every brass-instrument mouthpiece is placed on the player’s lower lip line.. . . The amount of upper lip encompassed by the rest of the mouthpiece w ill vary with both players and mouthpieces.”3
1 Roger Dane, Theories on Embouchure and Breathing: An Analytical Investigation into the Functions fo r Sound Production on the Trumpet (Masters th., University of Louisville, 1983), 4.
- Wayne Bailey and others, Teaching Brass: A Resource Manual (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1992), 25.
2
Other sources o f informatiom on the subject o f mouthpiece placement make safe generalizations. Keith Johnson says that: “as a general observation, most trumpet players appear to use slightly less upper thain lower lip, although there are certainly some veiy successful exceptions to this.”4
Yet the common sense appnoach to the discussion o f mouthpiece placement is the one that considers the differing physical properties o f each individual. This single factor accounts for a vast number o f differ-ences. Charles Colin concludes that: “. . . wherever the mouthpiece feels most comfortable. and the lips vibrate most freely,. . . is the correct placement. Lip formations o f every player are as different as the individual. . . . Therefore it is obviously foolish to say that th e best placement is ‘half and h alf.”5 Finally, Rafael Mendez, among the greatest o f trunnpet players o f the twentieth century, seems to agree. In Prelude to Brass Playing he conltributes to the common sense approach:
As to the amount of'mouthpiece on each lip, there can be no hard-and-fast rule. One player will get his best results from half on each lip; one will find that more mouthpiece on the upper lip suits him; another will use more on the lower lip. It is important that you adopt a position that is natural to you. This will be determined largely by the shiape o f your mouth and teeth.6
Although the shape o f the imouth and teeth (the dental structure) determines the natural placement o f the mouthpiecee, only two significant sources o f information on this subject exist: one is by William A. Fsfund, currently on faculty at the University o f
Northern Colorado-Greeley; the otbier is by the late Donald S. Reinhardt. Pfund’s research
4 Keith Johnson, The Art ofTrurmpet Playing (Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1981), 64. 5 Charles Colin, Vital Brass Not&s (New York: Charles Colin, 1967), 7.
6 Rafael Mendez, Prelude to Brazss Playing (Boston: Carl Fischer, 1961), 35.
deals primarily with mouthpiece placement and its relationship to the position o f the maxillary incisors, while Reinhardt’s research classifies mouthpiece placement and its relationship to dental bite.
Reinhardt’s work is the more compelling. In the opinion o f many, the foremost authority on the subject o f brass instrument embouchures was Donald Reinhardt (d. 1989), a highly respected trombone player and brass pedagogue. For nearly fifty years hundreds o f professional brass players sought his insight and instruction. Reinhardt was one o f the first to discover upstream and downstream embouchures (i.e., air splashes in the cup above or below the throat o f the mouthpiece respectively).7 He also discovered and cataloged different brass embouchure types and the correlation o f these types to different dental structures, published in his books Donald S. Reinhardt’s Pivot System fo r
Trumpet: A Complete Manual with Studies (1942) and The Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System fo r all Cupped Mouthpiece Brass Instruments: A Scientific Text (1973). In both
books he documents four basic dental structures and the mouthpiece placements associated with each.
Two problems are evident with the presentation o f Reinhardt’s research in his books. The first problem arises with Reinhardt’s attempt to describe a phenomenon that takes place at a brass player’s embouchure—specifically, the embouchure mechanics
7 Rene Bernard, long a student o f Reinhardt’s, demonstrated this phenomenon at a clinic. Several trumpet students performed using a transparent mouthpiece. The air and saliva o f downstream players exited the aperture, splashed into the cup o f the mouthpiece below the throat, and spiraled
counterclockwise around the cup into the throat o f the mouthpiece. The air and saliva o f the upstream player exited the aperture, splashed into the cup o f the mouthpiece above the throat, and also spiraled counterclockwise around the cup into the throat (Rene Bernard, Trumpet Clinic, University of Kansas, March 11, 1991).
4
involved in ascending and descending on a brass instrument. He coined the term “pivot,” but it is a poor choice because it does not accurately describe this natural event. The term has led, instead, to many misconceptions and misunderstandings, one o f which is tilting the instrument down to ascend and up to descend. Attempts to apply such a misguided
technique have been counterproductive, and have resulted in a general rejection o f Reinhardt’s “system” and a virtual disregard for his research—including his valuable embouchure classifications.
The second problem has to do with his diagrams o f basic dental structures and the mouthpiece placements associated with each. Donald S. Reinhardt's Pivot System fo r
Trumpet contains diagrams that depict various aspects o f the different embouchure
classifications, but cross-referencing is necessary and sometimes difficult for the reader.8 Reinhardt’s lengthy second work, The Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System, has a thorough text, but the diagrams lack the size and detail needed for full comprehension.9
As stated above, many brass players have the idea that the term “pivot” refers to the mechanical tilting or tipping o f the instrument to change registers, a reasonable perception. “Pivot” is defined as “. . . the action [underline added] o f turning about, oscillating, or balancing on or as if on a pivot.”10 When playing a brass instrument tilting or tipping the instrument in this manner increases the pressure on one lip while decreasing
8 Donald S. Reinhardt, Donald S. Reinhardt’s Pivot System fo r Trumpet: A Complete Manual with Studies (Bryn Mawr: Elkan-Vogel, Inc., 1942), 8-11.
9 Donald S. Reinhardt, The Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System fo r all Cupped Mouthpiece Brass Instruments: A Scientific Text, aug. ver. (New York: Charles Colin, 1973), 202-203.
10 W ebster’s Third New International Dictionary, 1993 ed., s.v. “pivot.”
the pressure on the other. But because this destroys the hermetic seal and produces embouchure problems, most players avoid such a maneuver.
Roger Dane’s thesis illustrates this misinterpretation well. He states that: Another theory is the system of pivoting the mouthpiece in different registers. This pivot system was popularized by Donald Reinhardt and is
personalized with a system of categorizing types of dento-facial [s/c] groupings. Basically it is a tilting of the horn downward in the upper range to lessen the pressure on the top lips [sic] and vice versa. This system is indeed controversial and Delbert Dale . . . expressed gratitude for the short life o f the pivot system.11 In his thesis, Charles L. Isley, Jr. similarly misinterprets the “pivot:”
A great many brasswind teachers subscribe to a pivoting o f the mouthpiece while changing registers in playing. Outwardly, this method would appear to be a change of mouthpiece angle. Actually, the pivot accompanies a movement of the jaw, and is necessary to maintain the ninety degree angle of the mouthpiece as
described above.1"
Dane and Isley both interpreted “pivot” as a tilting or tipping of the instrument. Reinhardt, however, intended “pivot” to mean a vertical movement of the mouthpiece and lips on the face of the front teeth:
The PIVOT [sic] pulls or pushes the performer’s lips into the path of the air column, so that the air column will cause the lips to vibrate over the entire range of the instrument.. . . The PIVOT is controlled by pulling down or pushing up the lips on the teeth with the rim of the mouthpiece. The outer embouchure and the mouthpiece move vertically (some with slight deviations to one side or the other) as one combined unit on the invisible vertical track o f the inner
embouchure; however, the position o f the mouthpiece on the outer embouchure must not be altered in any way.13
11 Dane, Theories on Embouchure and Breathing, 33.
12 Charles L. Isley, Jr., A Theory o f Brasswind Embouchure Based Upon Facial Anatomy,
Electromyographic Kinesiology, and Brasswind Embouchure Pedagogy (Doctoral diss., North Texas State University, 1972), 89.
6
Another common misconception (not attributed to Reinhardt’s work) is the notion that all brass players “pivot” down to ascend and up to descend. Wayne Bailey
erroneously asserts that “the mouthpiece and trumpet should pivot down slightly when ascending in range and pivot up when descending.”14 A. Keith Amstutz makes the same assertion in his dissertation: “In the commonly held theories about instrument pivot, the angle between the face o f the mouthpiece and the line determined by the lower teeth and the tip o f the mandible increases as the pitch ascends and decreases as the pitch
descends.”15
Bailey and Amstutz advocate a downward motion to ascend and an upward
motion to descend. (It is interesting that Amstutz fails to resolve an unanticipated problem when he discovers that the instrument pivot o f subject 9 in his study was the reverse o f the anticipated tendency.)16 But Reinhardt himself states that while many brass players pivot down to ascend, some individuals pivot up to ascend.
It is obvious to see that the use o f the term “pivot” is a problem. Rene Bernard describes a moment late in Reinhardt’s life when the teacher admitted the need for a different term: “Reinhardt stated that the use o f the word ‘pivot’ was one o f the worst mistakes he had ever made. It did not accurately describe the phenomenon that was taking place.”17
14 Bailey and others, Teaching Brass, 25.
15 A. Keith Amstutz, A Videojluorographic Study o f the Teeth Aperture, Instrument Pivot and Tongue Arch and Their Influence on Trumpet Performance (Doctoral diss., University o f Oklahoma, 1970), 29.
16 Amstutz, A Videofluorographic Study, 41.
17 Rene Bernard, interview by author, 16 April 1991, Olathe, KS.
One solution to the problem with “pivot” is the use o f the term “track,” a much more accurate term. The central incisors o f both the top and bottom teeth form a type o f track, and it is on this track that the vertical pushing and pulling o f the lips and mouthpiece as a unit occur. To make this effective “. . . an adequate mouthpiece pressure must be employed against the lips to provide the all-essential grip.. . . the position o f the mouthpiece on the outer embouchure must not slide or change and permit multiple embouchures to form.”18 Some individuals “track down” when ascending while others “track up” when ascending; therefore, two distinct “tracking classifications” exist.
Throughout the rest o f this document, the term “track” will replace the term “pivot.” The use o f this new term should help eliminate misconceptions and misunderstandings, and reverse the general disregard for Reinhardt’s research, most importantly the embouchure classifications.
Donald S. Reinhardt's Pivot System fo r Trumpet contains three sets o f diagrams:
the first illustrates four classifications o f dental structures, the second shows the difference in direction o f the airstream between upstream and downstream players, and the third displays what he calls the playing base or foundation o f upstream and downstream
players.19 However, the reader has to compare and contrast the three sets o f diagrams and can easily become confused by the task o f cross-referencing necessary to identify
individual type classification. In 1973, Reinhardt sought to rectify this problem by
18 Reinhardt, The Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System, 194.
8
combining the three sets o f diagrams into one composite set. In The Encyclopedia o f the
Pivot System, Reinhardt depicts the nine different embouchure types (four standard types
and five subtypes). In this later text, the ability to determine standard type classifications is easier than in the first volume, but determining the subtype is still difficult, largely due to diagrams that are hand-drawn and too small.20
Statement o f Purpose
This study proposes a solution to the lack o f clarity in Reinhardt’s work by
providing detailed photographs o f the predominant dental structures and o f actual trumpet players exhibiting different embouchure types. Three sets o f photographs are necessary. With the aid o f lip retractors, the one set captures the dental bite o f each individual (i.e., overbite, underbite, or even bite); with the aid o f an embouchure visualizer, the second set illustrates the mouthpiece placement o f each individual; and finally, the third set
demonstrates the tracking used by each individual. Controlled photographic
documentation was accomplished by taking three separate photographs o f each individual playing the concert pitches o f B-flat 3, B-flat 4, and B-flat 5 on his or her instrument.
20 Reinhardt, The Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System, 202-203.
Rationale for the Study
Reviving and bolstering Reinhardt’s discovery and documentation o f different brass embouchures is important for the purpose o f aiding teachers and students. Furthermore, detailed photographs o f trumpet players exhibiting different embouchure classifications should be useful as a guide for the beginning student andi as an instructional aid for students suffering embouchure problems. Instrumental music teachers often try to initiate trumpet instruction with a mouthpiece placement using one-thirsd top lip and two- thirds bottom lip. While this is beneficial for some, it leads to failure fo r others.
Photographs illustrating the different embouchure classifications should help instructors find a more accurate mouthpiece placement for each student based on individual dental bite.
Students with embouchure problems should benefit from the derailed illustrations o f the different embouchure types because the photographs can aid the student in
determining if he or she needs an embouchure change. In many instances, a lack o f air support is misinterpreted as an embouchure problem. However, if the sfrudent does need to modify mouthpiece placement, the photographs should help determine tthe most
appropriate position based on dental bite.
Questions to be Answered
This study addresses three specific questions. First, why do individuals with perfectly even dental bites use an extreme mouthpiece placement? Second, why do some
10
embouchure types track up when ascending while others track down? Third, why do many individuals track at an angle?
The first question concerns Reinhardt’s discovery that successful players with an even dental bite use a lip ratio o f 85 to 15 percent. According to Bernard, less than six percent o f the population have this kind o f dental structure.21 Reinhardt states that these people “are rare in that they possess perfectly even teeth, upper and lower, meeting flush when the lower jaw is in its natural position.. . . The oddity. . . is the feet that they must either place their mouthpieces very high on their upper lips (Type I), or very low on their lower lips (Type IA). It seems that anything resembling a half and half placement never works out for either o f these types.. . .”22 What possible reason is there for this?
The second question concerns Reinhardt’s discovery that some embouchure types track up when ascending while others track down when ascending. At first, one might guess that this oddity has to do with whether the individual is an upstream or downstream player. This, however, is not the case. After examining Reinhardt’s research carefully, it becomes apparent that some downstream players use “tracking classification one” while others use “tracking classification two.” Upstream players use only “tracking classification two.” Specifically, Reinhardt concluded the follo wing classifications:
PIVOT [TRACKING] CLASSIFICATION ONE
This is the performer who while ascending pushes his lips up to a slightly higher position on his teeth (toward his nose) with the rim o f the mouthpiece, and while descending pulls his lips to a slightly lower position on his teeth (toward his chin) with the rim o f the mouthpiece.
21 Bernard, interview by author.
22 Reinhardt, The Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System, 204-205.
PIVOT rTRACKINGl CLASSIFICATION TWO
This is the player who while ascending pulls his lips down to a slightly lower position on his teeth (toward his chin) with the rim o f the mouthpiece, and while descending pushes his lips to a slightly higher position on his teeth (toward his nose) with the rim o f the mouthpiece.23
A third question regards tracking at an angle. According to Rene Bernard,
Reinhardt found that most brass players do not track in a perfectly vertical motion, but at a slight angle: “A typical example is for a trumpet player to track down and slightly to the right while moving the lower jaw a little to the left.”24 Why isn’t tracking a perfectly vertical motion?
Limitations
This study is limited to the clarification and enhancement o f Reinhardt’s research, specifically, his discernment o f the different embouchure classifications and their relation to different dental structures. Any discussion concerning the manipulation o f dental structure as an enhancement to trumpet performance is beyond the scope o f this
dissertation. Therefore, any discussion o f orthodontics, removables, bonding, the removal o f wisdom teeth, plaster casts, or reconstructions is not included.
23 Reinhardt, The Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System, 199-200. 24 Bernard, interview by author.
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Introduction
Sources containing information on the brass embouchure are so numerous that an attempt to review all o f it would be overwhelming and unnecessary for the purposes o f this dissertation. Therefore, the field has been narrowed to include books, articles, and dissertations that (1) use some type o f photography to study the brass embouchure, (2) discuss or address the mechanics o f the embouchure (i.e., tracking or pivot), and/or (3) discuss or address mouthpiece placement in relation to dental structure.
Surprisingly, a fair amount o f literature using photography exists. Still pictures and videotape are used the majority o f the time, while the use o f X-rays is limited to only a few o f the studies. Electromyography (a process that measures muscle use) was used in several studies to observe mechanics. Worth mentioning are three articles published by The
Instrumentalist', like most o f the literature mentioned, they address more than just one o f
the three aspects o f embouchure. An intriguing set o f studies exists concerning the
position o f the central and lateral incisors and their relation to mouthpiece placement. This particular set o f studies is exciting in that, when coupled with Reinhardt’s research, it provides totally new insights into the mechanics o f the brass embouchure.
The Use o f Photography to Study Brass Embouchures
Philip Farkas, former Principal Horn with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, was one o f the first to use photography to study the embouchure. Farkas published two books on the subject, The Art o f Brass Playing (1962) and A Photographic Study o f 40 Virtuoso
Horn Players ’ Embouchures (1970). The Art o f Brass Playing is a treatise on the
formation and use o f the brass player’s embouchure and is probably one o f the most well- known books on the subject. It contains specific information on embouchure function, mouthpiece placement, and lip aperture. Farkas provides photographs o f the embouchures o f the entire brass section o f the Chicago Symphony Orchestra [CSO], Three photographs o f each player are included, one o f which shows the position o f the mouthpiece on the lips through an embouchure visualizer; the other two show the player playing the instrument. Embouchure mechanics are discussed with an emphasis on formation, advocating a smile and pucker. No discussion o f tracking takes place.25
One section o f the book discusses mouthpiece placement with a division into subsections for each member o f the brass family. Farkas notes that the best position o f the trumpet mouthpiece is one-third upper lip and two-thirds lower lip based upon “. . . the rule o f the best known trumpet teachers,” who include “. . . Arban, St. Jacome, Vincent Bach and Max Scholssberg.”26 When reviewing the photographs o f the CSO trumpet section, one discovers that two o f the four trumpet players use more top lip in the
25 Philip Farkas, The A rt o f Brass Playing (Bloomington: Brass Publications, 1962). 26 Farkas, The Art o f Brass Playing, 33.
14
mouthpiece than bottom. Farkas does not account for this, and no correlation is drawn between the player’s dental structure and the position o f the mouthpiece.
In A Photographic Study o f 40 Virtuoso Horn Players ’ Embouchures Farkas provides the reader with 120 photographs o f 40 different professional hom players’ embouchures. This book, while limited only to the depiction o f the hom embouchure, is much more valuable to the understanding o f embouchure mechanics. Each player was asked to play the written pitches C6, C5, and C3. The player was then asked to produce the same pitches on an embouchure visualizer for photographing. The direction o f the airstream is carefully indicated by an arrow, which consistently shows the airstream directed towards the throat o f the mouthpiece for the low register and towards the rim o f the mouthpiece for the upper register. One subject o f the study worth noting exhibits an upstream embouchure with a lip ratio o f 15% top and 85% bottom.27
The illustrations in this second book by Farkas help prove that the airstream splashes into different areas o f the cup for different registers o f the instrument, as theorized by Reinhardt:
In order to assist in the creation o f the fester, tenser lip vibrations for the production o f the upper register, the air stream strikes just short o f the lower mouthpiece rim. Conversely, the slower, less tense lip vibrations for the production o f the lower register are assisted by the air stream striking just short o f the throat (hole) o f the mouthpiece. Thus the striking area for the air stream follows the contour o f the mouthpiece cup, toward the rim to ascend and toward the throat to descend.28
27 Philip Farkas, A Photographic Study o f 40 Virtuoso H om Players ’ Embouchures (Bloomington: Wind Music Inc., 1970), 10-11.
28 Reinhardt, The Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System, 191.
Farkas does not make any correlation between the player’s dental structure and the position o f the mouthpiece. He does admit that “. . . there is no one correct, set way in which a hom player must form his embouchure.. . . There are as many different
embouchures as there are players.”29
Another o f the early studies to use photography to study the brass embouchure is by John Haynie. Haynie made the “first attempts at using an image intensifier
(fluoroscope) attached to an instant replay videotape recorder.”30 Attention was drawn to specific areas o f technical performance: jaw action, teeth alignment, tongue arch, pivot [tracking], mouthpiece pressure, and tongue position during articulation.
X-ray and a video recorder were used to film fourteen performers. Haynie’s findings are as follows: (1) those with an overbite thrust the bottom jaw so as to align the upper and lower teeth, with one subject actually pulling in his jaw; (2) the teeth and jaw aperture open and close for the low and high registers respectively; (3) arching o f the tongue is used to affect the pitch being played; (4) the pivot [tracking] appears as either a change in mouthpiece angle or as a tilting o f the head; (5) mouthpiece pressure increases as one plays higher and louder with all fourteen subjects using more pressure for a C6 when setting for the note than when slurring up to it; and (6) the tongue touches forward in the mouth when articulating low notes and back in the mouth when articulating high
29 Farkas, A Photographic Study, iii.
■>0 John J. Haynie, “A Cinefluorographic (changed to video) Presentation o f the Physiological Phenomena Influencing Trumpet Performance” (Unpublished research report, North Texas State University, 1967), 2.
16
notes. Haynie also concluded that multiple tongue placements differ when the subject is speaking than when he is playing.31
This discussion o f mechanics undoubtedly provided new information to the world o f brass pedagogy. The findings concerning tongue placement are especially important, while the information concerning tracking provides nothing new other than proof that it is an important function o f brass embouchure. Unfortunately the study includes no
observations about mouthpiece placement and dental structure. Admitting that his was not a complete work, Haynie offered it “as a starting point on behalf o f better trumpet
pedagogy.”32
Like Haynie, Keith Amstutz studied several aspects o f trumpet playing using photographic techniques. His dissertation, A Videofluorographic Study o f the Teeth
Aperture, Instrument Pivot and Tongue Arch and Their Influence on Trumpet
Performance, is important for its contribution to instrument pivot [tracking]. While no
conclusions are made regarding the interaction o f teeth aperture and mouthpiece placement, Amstutz does help support the “pivot system” as defined by Reinhardt. He points out that: “during trumpet performance the teeth aperture, instrument pivot, and tongue arch function in a consistent manner and have a direct effect on trumpet
performance.”33 In addition, he observes:
The predicted tendency for instrument pivot was demonstrated by the performance o f the trumpet players in the research. The angle o f inclination between the face o f the mouthpiece and a line determined by the face o f the lower
31 Haynie, “A Cinefluorographic (changed to video) Presentation.” 32 Haynie, “A Cinefluorographic (changed to video) Presentation.” " Amstutz, “A Videofluorographic Study,” 36.
teeth and the base o f the mandible increases as the pitch ascends and decreases as the pitch descends. The natural instrument placement angle for the middle register ranged from parallel to the line between the teeth and mandible to an inclination o f 21 degrees. The average angle o f inclination was eight degrees. There was a marked increase in the degree o f pivot in the upper register over that o f the lower register.34
The observation is not surprising, considering that the face o f the front teeth is generally rounded, and that most o f the population has an overbite. Tracking will generally produce a change in the angle o f the instrument. O f interest in the Amstutz study is a subject for whom the instrument pivot was the reverse o f the anticipated tendency. Amstutz failed to resolve the dilemma and eventually ignored it.35
In 1973, another significant study o f the brass embouchure was undertaken by
Daryl Gibson. He used X-ray, cinefluorography, radiography, spectrography, and electromyography to investigate physical changes that take place during trumpet
performance. These changes were in the areas o f embouchure, air flow, trumpet angle, and fecial muscle usage.36 After careful analysis, Gibson concluded that: “the hypotheses that there is no measurable embouchure change inside the mouthpiece ring while playing from a Low C to a Double High C can be rejected as a result o f analyzing the data.. . ,”37 Gibson discovered that the lip ratio in the mouthpiece changes depending on the register being played. Furthermore, his measurements o f the change in trumpet angle reinforce Reinhardt’s research, and prove again that a mechanical process takes place in the brass
34 Amstutz, “A Videofluorographic Study,” 41. j5 Amstutz, “A Videofluorographic Study,” 41.
36 Daryl R. Gibson, “A Photographic Study o f Twelve Professional Trumpet Embouchures while Playing from the Low to the Extreme Upper Register” (Ph.D. diss. University o f Minnesota, 1973).
18
embouchure. Gibson, however, does not make any correlation between dental structure and mouthpiece placement
One final photographic study is that of Walter Myers. In his 1979 dissertation he sought to: “compare photographically upper and lower lip inversion o f two contrasting trumpet embouchure techniques, to determine and compare air flow direction as
influenced by these embouchure techniques, and to compare graphically the strength of partial tones . . . as generated by each embouchure system.”38 This study is somewhat confusing because it is difficult to discern the difference between the two embouchure techniques. Myers states that:
Two basic embouchure systems appear to have pervaded trumpet
performance. One embouchure encouraged more horizontal air flow direction and was characterized and apparently influenced by less upper lip inversion and more upper lip overlap. The other embouchure encouraged downward air flow direction as influenced by less upper lip inversion and more upper lip overlap.39
Both air flow directions are influenced by “less upper lip inversion and more upper lip overlap.” Can this be a misprint? Myers may be trying to further the work done by Robert Weast. In Brass Performance: An Analytical Text o f the Physical Processes, Problems
and Technique of Brass, Weast defines and makes more sense out o f two embouchure
systems: “The more horizontal air stream uses more upper lip inversion and less upper lip overlap, and the less horizontal air stream uses less upper lip inversion and more upper lip overlap.”40
38 Walter J. Myers, “A Photographic, Air Flow Direction, and Sound Spectra Analysis of Two Trumpet Embouchure Techniques” (Doctoral diss., University o f Missouri-Kansas City, 1979), ii.
39 Myers, “A Photographic, Air Flow Direction, and Sound Spectra Analysis,” ii.
40 Robert D. Weast, Brass Performance: An Analytical Text o f the Physical Processes, Problems and Technique o f Brass (New York: McGinnis and Marx, 1962), 36.
After clearing up this possible misprint intended to support Weast, the study by Myers seems to shed new light on embouchure mechanics; however, further analysis proves it to be only a comparison o f upstream and downstream embouchures. Myers observes that “trumpet performers who use more [upper] lip inversion, and who employ more horizontal air flow direction tend to produce partial tones o f greater strength within the tonal spectra o f selected frequencies and intensities.”41 The reason for this is simple: when the upper lip is inverted, there is more lower lip overlap. This puts more lower lip in the mouthpiece than upper lip, creating an upstream embouchure. This, in turn, means there is less upper lip vibrating in the mouthpiece, resulting in a brighter sound.
The Use o f Electromyography to Study Brass Embouchures
Two significant studies used an electromyograph to study the brass embouchure. Elmer White and Charles Isley both completed their respective studies in 1972. White’s work sought to determine electromyographic [EMG] potentials (muscle activity) o f certain fecial muscles as well as mouthpiece pressure used during trumpet performance. Measurements were made during performance in different registers and at different volumes. Nine advanced and nine beginning players were administered various tests while EMG potentials were measured. There are no surprises in the statistical information,
20
which confirm that more mouthpiece pressure is used while playing in the high register than in the low register.42 N o parallels to Reinhardt’s work can be drawn.
Isley used electromyographic kinesiology to study the brass embouchure. Like Amstutz (see pp. 16-17 above), Isley observed movement in the embouchure that supports the “pivot [tracking] system.” He notes that: “The higher the tone to be played, the nearer the rim o f the mouthpiece the air is to be directed, whether up or down. In the middle register, the air is directed toward the center o f the mouthpiece.”43 In terms o f mouthpiece placement, Isley draws the following conclusion: “The mouthpiece . . . is centered
horizontally opposite the largest part o f the incisal aperture [the distance between the upper and lower incisors].”44 Isley’s study is, therefore, one o f the first attempts (other than Reinhardt’s) to make some correlation between a player’s teeth and mouthpiece placement.
The Instrumentalist: Brass Anthology
The Instrumentalist, a publication intended for high school and college band
directors, combined all previous articles on the subject o f brass instruments into a book entitled Brass Anthology. This 1969 anthology contains numerous articles on the brass embouchure, three o f which are particularly germane to this study: Douglas Smith’s “The
42 Elmer R. White, “Electromyographic Potentials o f Selected Facial Muscles and Labial Mouthpiece Pressure Measurements in the Embouchure o f Trumpet Players” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1972).
43 Isley, “A Theory o f Brasswind Embouchure,” 134. 44 Isley, “A Theory o f Brasswind Embouchure,” abstract.
Brass Player’s Pivot,” and Vincent Malek’s “Embouchures o f Professional Trumpet- Comet Players” and “What About Brass Embouchure?”
Although Smith does not discuss mouthpiece placement and dental structure, he does address tracking: “. . . this motion [tracking] can be seen in rank beginners as well as in seasoned professionals, and many who do it well know absolutely nothing about it.”45 He goes on to define the “pivot” as “the tendency o f a brass player’s instrument to tilt slightly up or down when he changes registers.”46 This observation is understandable, since the trumpet tends to look as if it is tilting when the mouthpiece and lips track up and down on the face o f the teeth. Two X-ray photographs are included, but they are small and o f extremely poor quality, and prevent careful analysis or conclusion.
In ‘Embouchures o f Professional Trumpet-Comet Players,” Malek classifies the embouchures o f fifty-two professional trumpet players according to lip thickness, eveness o f teeth, jaw position, moist versus dry lips, placement o f the mouthpiece, and shaving. The conclusions drawn are very general and no discussion o f mouthpiece placement or tracking takes place.47
Malek’s “What About Brass Embouchure?” is more detailed, and he again
analyzes the physical structure o f the lips, teeth, and jaw. Concerning dental structure he specifically includes the following:
Its position [the jaw] when relaxed determines the occlusion or
malocclusion o f the teeth. In dental terminology there are several classes o f
jaw-45 Douglas Smith, “The Brass Player’s Pivot,” Brass Anthology (Evanston: The Instrumentalist, 1969), 450.
46 Smith, “The Brass Player’s Pivot,” 451.
47 Vincent Malek, “Embouchures o f Professional Trumpet-Comet Players,” Brass Anthology (Evanston: The Instrumentalist, 1969), 163.
22
tooth formations. Mainly, they are: (1) Normal: normal jaw recession, regular teeth. (2) Class I, Neutroclusion: normal jaw recession, irregular teeth. (3) Class H, Distoclusion: marked jaw recession. (4) Class HI, Mesioclusion: protrusion o f the jaw.48
It is interesting that Malek classifies both overbite and underbite but omits even bite altogether. In terms o f mouthpiece placement, he makes no unusual observations; his conclusion is simply that: “serious malformations are incompatible . . . with fine
performance on trumpet or comet.”49 Additionally, he draws no significant conclusions on the position o f mouthpiece placement in relation to dental structure, nor does any
discussion o f tracking take place.
Central and Lateral Incisors Related to Embouchure
Some very interesting studies have been conducted by William Pfund who, for the past thirty years, has studied the relationship o f tooth or teeth position to mouthpiece placement. His conclusions in The Trumpeter’s Pedagogical Guide are simply that it is advantageous to center the mouthpiece over a protrusion or overlap o f the central and/or lateral incisors. He states that a player should:
Locate the center o f the malocclusion that best facilitates playing and always consider the protrusive angle o f the teeth. There must be a protrusion for the lip to vibrate efficiently. Frequently the lower jaw’s position must be altered to accommodate this. In the case o f two malocclusions in the same jaw select the position that produces the easiest and most natural sound.50
48 Vincent Malek, “What About Brass Embouchure?” Brass Anthology (Evanston: The Instrumentalist, 1969), 187-188.
49 Malek, “What About Brass Embouchure?” 188.
50 William A. Pfund, The Trumpeter’s Pedagogical Guide (Eaton: William A. Pfund, 1992), 20.
Pfund became interested in this area of study after becoming acquainted with the work of brothers Matthew and Edwin Shiner, both recently deceased. Professors emeriti at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, the Shiners conducted research that led them to believe that there was a relationship between tooth formation and success in brass performance. Unfortunately, while none of their research was ever published, their work did stimulate similar research by others, including Richard Giangiulio,51 William
Lieberman and Robert Jones,52 and Karl Sievers,33 who worked directly with Pfund. By far, the most in-depth study was that of Sievers, who states that “it is possible that there is a relationship between maxillary incisor formation and high register prowess for the trumpet player.”54 He also disagrees with the main school of thought concerning dental structure and efficient brass playing: “Traditional pedagogy states that large, even upper teeth are preferred, with more recent theories preferring almost anything but even upper teeth, suggesting that those whose upper teeth plane possesses a ‘high point’ have the advantage.”53 His theory is based on data gathered from numerous trumpet players at the 1995 International Brassfest in Bloomington, Indiana. This information also led Sievers to conclude that three types o f dental formations lend themselves to a more successful upper register. He states that:
51 Richard C. Giangiulio, “The Role of Orthodontics in Correcting Selected Embouchure Problems,” Journal of the International Trumpet Guild (October 1979): 20-21.
52 William B. Lieberman and Robert C. Jones, “Dental Appliances as an Aid to Brass Playing,” The Instrumentalist (October 1971): 52-54.
53 Karl H. Sievers, “Relationship Between Maxillary Incisor Formation, Practice Habits, and High Register Prowess for the Trumpet Player: Insights from Three Perspectives” (Doctoral diss., University of Missouri-Kansas City, 1997).
54 Sievers, “Maxillary Incisor Formation, Practice Habits, and High Register Prowess,” ii. 55 Sievers, “Maxillary Incisor Formation, Practice Habits, and High Register Prowess,” ii-iii.
24
These three upper incisor arrangements that are thought to enhance success in the upper register are teeth which: (1) have a space between the two upper incisors (and perhaps elsewhere in addition to this space); (2) come to a point at the center junction o f the two upper incisors, teeth may or may not overlap; or (3) are even and without space, but are relatively short vertically.56
Sievers worked closely with William Pfund to discover more information relating mouthpiece placement to dental structure. After an interview with Pfund, Sievers wrote:
The guideline in assessing the relationship o f students’ teeth to their
trumpet playing is to place the mouthpiece and angle the mouthpiece so as to take advantage o f a high spot in the plane o f the upper teeth if present. As with others who advocate these concepts, he believes that there should be absolutely no concern if such a mouthpiece placement results in an “o f f center” set-up, just so it is not to an extreme, or such that the center o f the lip is outside the mouthpiece. Pfund believes strongly that the advantages o f this concept are undeniable, and that in all cases the trumpeter benefits from employing these concepts. He cautions that without consideration o f other requisites such as correct breathing, correct
embouchure, intelligence, correct practice habits and musical ability, focusing on teeth arrangement alone will not yield success.S7
The two articles mentioned above by Giangiulio and Lieberman and Jones lend more insight into why this occlusion o f the central incisors is advantageous. Giangiulio says that “the upper teeth.. . . project the vibrating surface o f the lip forward inside the mouthpiece, enabling the top lip to respond to the air passing over it.” He further concludes that “the ideal position for the upper central incisors is usually in an obtuse angle, whose mildly pointed center is at the front o f the mouth.”58
Lieberman and Jones state that “the upper or maxillary teeth should be
56 Sievers, “Maxillary Incisor Formation, Practice Habits, and High Register Prowess,” 9. 57 Sievers, “Maxillary Incisor Formation, Practice Habits, and High Register Prowess,” 23. 58 Giangiulio, “The Role o f Orthodontics,” 21.
positioned . . . in order that the lip might vibrate freely. . . [and they] note that the mesial labial or the ‘vee’ formed at the midline o f the two upper central incisors would bear the brunt o f any mouthpiece pressure allowing the lateral portions o f the lip to vibrate with more freedom than if the entire surface were flat or in some other equally poor or less comfortable position.”59
The work by the Shiners, along with the publications o f Giangiulio, Lieberman and Jones, Pfund, and Sievers indicate a direct correlation between dental structure and
mouthpiece placement. No discussion o f mechanics (i.e., tracking) occurs. The only illustrations used are those in Pfimd’s book, but they are very simple drawings that indicate the proper mouthpiece angle in relation to any overlaps o f the incisors.
Summary o f Literature Review
The vast majority o f the related literature seems to agree on three aspects o f the brass embouchure. First is the belief that the position o f the mouthpiece varies for each individual. Second is the conclusion that the airstream splashes toward the throat o f the mouthpiece for lower frequencies and toward the rim for higher frequencies. Third is the idea that a mechanical action takes place in the embouchure when changing registers. All three o f these conclusions support Donald Reinhardt’s research. More interesting, for this study, is the research initiated by the Shiners that produced the notion o f centering the mouthpiece over a protrusion or overlap o f the central and/or lateral incisors.
26
The work by the Shiners, Pfund, Sievers, and others is concerned primarily with the relation between the position o f incisors and mouthpiece placement. Reinhardt’s work is concerned with the relation between dental bite and mouthpiece placement. When comparing the work in both areas, a stimulating question arises. I f it is advantageous to center the mouthpiece over a protrusion or overlap o f the central and/or lateral incisors, is it then also advantageous to track from a protrusion or overlap in the upper incisors to one in the lower incisors and vice versa? I f so, this may provide an answer to the question o f tracking at an angle posed earlier in the first chapter.
PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE DIFFERENT EMBOUCHURE TYPES
Research Procedures
As stated earlier, the main purpose o f this study is the compilation o f detailed photographs o f actual trumpet players exhibiting the different embouchure types as described by Donald Reinhardt. Reinhardt’s definitions o f the embouchure type
classifications are used, and three sets o f photographs o f each type are provided. With the aid o f lip retractors, the first set shows the dental bite o f each individual (i.e., overbite, underbite, or even bite). With the aid o f an embouchure visualizer, the second set shows the mouthpiece placement o f each individual. Finally, the third set shows the tracking used by each individual, accomplished with three separate photographs o f each individual playing the concert pitches o f B-flat 3, B-flat 4, and B-flat 5 on his or her instrument.
It is intended for these detailed photographs to lead to insights and answers to the following questions (mentioned previously): Why do individuals with perfectly even dental bites use an extreme mouthpiece placement? Why do some individuals track up to ascend while others track down to ascend? The third question, which may already have been answered after the review o f the related literature, is why do many brass players track at an angle and not in a perfectly vertical line?
28
Types I and IA
“Types I and IA are rare in that they possess perfectly even teeth, upper and lower, meeting flush when the lower jaw is in its natural position.. . . The oddity o f the two Type I groups . . . is the fact that they must either place their mouthpieces very high on their upper lips (Type I), or very low on their lower lips (Type IA). It seems that anything resembling a half and half placement never works out for either o f these types.. . . Type I places the mouthpiece with more on the upper lip than on the lower.. . . Type I may come trader either o f the two PIVOT CLASSIFICATIONS [see pp. 10-11 above], . . . Type IA places the mouthpiece more on the lower lip than on the upper.. . . Generally speaking, the Type IA comes under PIVOT CLASSIFICATION TWO [see pp. 10-11 ab ove].. . -”60
60 Reinhardt, The Encyclopedia o f the Pivot System, 204-205.
Figure 1. Front View o f a Type I Dental Structure (Even Bite)
Note: Upper and lower teeth meet flush when the lower jaw is in its natural position.
Figure 2. Right View o f a Type I Dental Structure (Even Bite)
Note: Upper and lower teeth meet flush when the lower jaw is in its natural position.
Figure 3. Left View o f a Type I Dental Structure (Even Bite)
30
Figure 4. View o f a Type I Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)
Note: In this subject’s case, no malocclusion exists between any incisors o f the top teeth.
Figure 5. View o f a Type I Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)
Note: In this subject’s case, no substantial malocclusion
exists between any incisors o f the lower teeth.
Figure 6. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f a Downstream, Type I Embouchure
Note: In this subject’s case, no substantial malocclusions exist between the
incisors o f the top teeth, so the mouthpiece is placed in the center horizontally.
o f the two pivot classifications (see pp. 10-11 above).
Figure 8. View o f a Type I Embouchure Playing C5 (Concert B-flat 4)
Note: This particular subject tracks down to ascend.
Figure 9. View o f a Type I Embouchure Playing C6 (Concert B-flat 5)
Note: This subject tracks straight down to ascend
32
Even though the subject in the preceding photographs (Type I) has a significant amount o f upper lip in the mouthpiece, he plays with a surprisingly bright tone quality. He also plays in the upper register easily, but he has some trouble in the lower register.
Mouthpiece placement may have something to do with this. The subject’s airstream exits rather close to the mouthpiece rim, facilitating the upper register but making the lower register more difficult to obtain.
Figure 10. Front View o f a Type IA Dental Structure (Even Bite)
Note: Upper and lower teeth meet flush when the lower jaw is in its natural position.
Figure 11. Right View o f a Type IA Dental Structure (Even Bite)
Note: Upper and lower teeth meet flush when the lower jaw is in its natural position.
Figure 12. Left View o f a Type IA Dental Structure (Even Bite)
34
Figure 13. View o f a Type IA Dental Structure (Maxillary Incisors)
Note: A substantial malocclusion exists between the right central and right lateral incisors.
Figure 14. View o f a Type IA Dental Structure (Mandible Incisors)
Note: A small malocclusion exists between the left central and left lateral incisors.
Figure 15. View o f the Mouthpiece Placement o f an Upstream, Type IA Embouchure
Note: In this subject’s case, the mouthpiece is placed to the right o f center,
taking advantage o f the malocclusion that exists between the right central and right lateral incisors o f the top teeth.
Figure 17. View o f a Type IA Embouchure Playing C5
Note: This embouchure type tracks down to ascend.
Figure 18. View o f a Type IA Embouchure Playing C6
Note: This subject tracks down and to the left to ascend while the jaw moves to the right.
This may be because o f the small malocclusion that exists between the subject’s left central and left lateral incisors o f the lower teeth.
36
The subject in the preceding photographs (Type IA) plays with an extremely bright sound. He also has difficulty playing in the upper register. The Type IA sets the
mouthpiece rim so low on the top lip that it has a tendency to come into contact with the vibrating area. This is especially noticeable when ascending into the upper register. As the Type IA tracks down to ascend, the mouthpiece can accidentally slide down on the top lip causing the rim to interfere with the vibration. The sliding may be minute, but it can be enough to impede the vibration entirely. Playing with a dry top lip helps this embouchure type tremendously.
