Sticking with the general topic of the article last week, the Wagner tuba, today we have an oddity, a Wagner tuba mouthpiece.

Exhibit “A” is this Mirafone Decker model T Wagner tuba mouthpiece from the 1980s. It is solid nickel silver (which is somewhat unique in itself–it is not plated) and very cool looking, turned to look like a miniature tuba mouthpiece with a horn rim and stem.

It fits and works well on our ASU Mirafone Wagner tubas, with a shank well sized to the instruments, but as I note in the text of my book on the Wagner tuba,

While the appearance is rather different, aside from outer shape, the mouthpiece itself is the equivalent of a large horn mouthpiece. This model works very well on Wagner tubas, but no better than any other similar sized horn mouthpiece with a well fitting shank.

I also have a Mirafone Decker model D descant horn mouthpiece that is made from the same blank shape and it also works well on our tuben. I do love the look, but standard horn mouthpieces really do work fine, speaking generally, on Wagner tubas. This photo shows that cup and also the Wagner tuba mouthpiece from the rim end.

While this particular model is long off the market, it should be mentioned that Wagner tuba mouthpieces are still made; for example Moosewood has a WT model listed, #6 bore with a deep cup.

To hear a Wagner tuba and learn more about my book/E-book on the topic see this article.

There is a point when a more advanced horn player really needs a more advanced horn to keep progress going forward. That point is when you really need to try some horns. And that point is also the point were, for many, there are no great local options to try horns.

There are basically two options besides testing the instruments of friends or teachers. There are dealers (some advertise here in Horn Matters, some don’t) that carry a good stock of new and used horns. Go visit them; it is well worth the investment of your time and energy. The other good option is to go to a horn workshop or other horn event.

The International Horn Symposium is always the best, but there are many other good options such as for example the Southeast Horn Workshop or the Mid-South Horn Workshop. Most event hosts list in the event website what dealers will be there for this very reason, as a big reason to attend an event is to shop for horns.

At Horn Matters we have a handy list of upcoming horn workshops here:

• http://hornmatters.com/horn-related-events/

When you get there, how do you test the horn? I have a few suggestions in this article, be sure to review it before you do any testing.

• http://hornmatters.com/2013/10/on-testing-a-new-or-used-french-horn/

There are options. Visit a good dealer or go to a workshop and focus on testing horns well as described in the link above, it is really worth your time to do so.

Which is better, warming up with drone pitches from a pitch generator or watching a tuner? If you have the time and location to do so drone pitches are superior.

I have went though phases on this over years of playing. Right now my practice is centered around a trio recording project with my colleagues Douglas Yeo and Deanna Swoboda. In relation to that, I have been experimenting with horns and mouthpieces, with part of that forced on me by my body developing a sensitivity to metal mouthpiece rims (more here). All this change of equipment has left me feeling less secure than I would like about my pitch production.

Then last week John Cox, Principal Horn of the Oregon Symphony, came through Phoenix. We were able to have him in for a master class at ASU and I was able to chat with him as some length, a real treat. One memorable thing he shared was about his warm-up. He is very consistent with his warm-up (at home, prior to an orchestra service) and makes extensive use of drone pitches on a pitch generator, to make sure he is setting up pitch production correctly.

Thus inspired, I have gone back to a warm-up with much more use of drone pitches. The reasons why they are better for working on pitch production include:

• with no pitch reference things can feel right but be rather out of tune,
• with a tuner alone you can see what is right, but
• with a drone pitch you have to listen and can feel what is right on a deeper level,
• and you do need to train being right on pitch, especially so if you are a lead voice.

In some situations warming up with a drone pitch is not practical (such as right before an orchestra service on stage!), but for sure there is value in any other situation.

One example of this type of routine may be found in my packet of technique exercises (PDF). There are several exercises I like a lot of this general type in The Brass Gym, and many exercises can be adapted to use with drones. Give it a try, your pitch control will improve.

That all being said, a final tip would be some horns are just easier to play in tune than others. If you have done all the right things in terms of drones and training but pitch is still an issue it is time to think about changing your horn. Even among horns I own I can tell some are better than others for ease of playing in tune, and actually the two most expensive ones are the easiest to play in tune. Food for thought.

This past few months has been productive and interesting in terms of practice and equipment. Two things drove this. One was being forced to change mouthpieces due to allergic sensitivity (more here). The other is an upcoming recording project.

I had settled in and was playing for a couple years a horn that is comparable to a custom Geyer horn, a Willson, seen on the chair in the photo. What I found in rehearsals with the trio was that it felt a bit too bright for the context, the trio being with tuba and bass trombone. And part of the project I was thinking I would need to play on the triple but I could not find a mouthpiece I liked for it.

Without going blow by blow on the whole thing, I ended up also getting out and seriously trying two other horns that were available to me seen in the photo, an ASU owned vintage Hoyer (East German era) double and also my big double, a Paxman 25AND. I also had to really work around the mouthpiece issue as each horn seems to focus in best on different mouthpieces.

The conclusion is that I am playing the recording later this month and in May on my triple, a Paxman model 83, with a Moosewood BA mouthpiece, but also using the big Paxman double this week to play extra horn with the Phoenix Symphony with a Moosewood B-14 mouthpiece, both with the same Moosewood Delrin (plastic) rim. Both horns are feeling great and I look forward to 6th horn on Mahler 5!

And I will have more notes and tips related to the recording coming soon, but for a flavor of what we are working on check this article for more.

As noted in a very recent article, I have several horns I can and do use regularly. One common adjustment made on horns is to add “dimes” to the valve levers, to meet your fingers better (more here). 

But you also have a thumb. Going back to the triple again for a recording project I noted the thumb valve is really not quite the right place for my best technique. Some horns have adjustments built in, but triples often not so much, the space is really tight with the two thumb valves and in my case two thumb valves and an extra button for the stop valve.

In this case, when I first purchased this Paxman model 83 I hit upon gluing a piece of plastic tubing on the F/Bb change valve to position it  bit better. I played the horn full time for several years that way, then went back to a double as my main instrument, I was no longer often playing first horn. In that time frame I took the tube off and switched the horn stand in Bb, which I think was how the fine folks at Paxman thought most people would set the instrument up. In Bb I think the thumb valve position as delivered is quite good.

I set the horn to stand in Bb for some time for use in solo and chamber music, but I need it to stand in F for “real” horn playing, my brain stands in F! Coming back to it from double and needing to hit full technique on a variety of music I added the tubing back again as seen in the photo.

The tubing is available at anywhere that sells hardware. I cut the section of tube needed to cover the lever with a sharp hobby knife. As a model railroader my glue of choice is Walthers Goo, available at any good hobby shop that stocks model trains. It is a great contact cement that I have used to fix many mutes as well. Follow the instructions on the tube; I also clamped it on the valve for several hours as you don’t want the tube falling off! Most of the other valves on this horn are string action and have a bit more adjustment built in – but the F/Bb change valve is mechanical.

This general technique of gluing on a piece of tubing is an easy fix toward getting a problem valve in the right position and also completely reversible if you wish to remove the tube later. Alternately, you can affix something else. I have on a prior instrument added a layer of cork to a thumb valve and a student I had at one time had mounted a block of wood on a thumb valve paddle to build it up.

The overall point being you have some options, there is no need to suffer along with feeling you can’t quite reach a valve optimally.

San Diego Symphony hornist Doug Hall is hosting a regional horn workshop next weekend, but his name is also in the news if you read The Horn Call. On page 46 of  the May, 2014 issue is an article titled “Doug Hall’s ‘Pay it Forward’ Gift to a Young Horn Player” by David Axelson. It was of particular interest to me as I now teach at Arizona State the horn player that received the gift horn facilitated by Hall.

While it is not stated in the Horn Call article, the article there is reprinted in full from an article that you can also read online, originally published in the Coronado Eagle & Journal (link here). The short version of this is that Hall got an idea to rebuild a horn that had been a old rental horn, very beat up and literally saved from the trash by a former member of the San Diego Symphony, George Cable. It is a pre-war Knopf horn, and the article (well worth reading at the link above or in The Horn Call) details how a number of other people became involved with the rebuilding effort including Darby Hinshaw, George McCracken, Eric High, Bill Holcombe, and Bruce Roberts.

The photo, received from Hall for this article, is of when the horn was presented to my student, Jackie Fazekas, who is seen with Cable and Hall.

This is where I enter into the story of this instrument in a small way as well. I was very excited to play the horn when it arrived in Arizona and found it had a really nice sound (classic Knopf/Geyer) and played well generally but was very sharp and the high Bb was not very good at all.

We puzzled over this in a number of lessons. I knew for sure the main slide needed extended. Jackie obtained some tube from Hall to extend the slide, and realizing that it could probably be extended so far as to use dedicated extenders I started seeing what I had around that would work as extenders. I ended up offering her, temporarily, the extender slides off the stop valve on my Paxman triple and then, the last week of classes, carved out time to make extenders using the tubing from Hall (I have just enough horn building experience to be dangerous! See this article for an example of my work).

So add one more person to the list of people involved in getting this vintage horn back in shape and note that now the high Bb is pretty stable, the horn plays in tune, and the sound is still really nice.

And going back to the first sentence of this article, The Southwest Horn Convention is this coming Memorial Day weekend in San Diego! If you are in the area be sure to attend, there will be tons of horns to try and a very interesting selection of guest artists and sessions. More info here:

• http://www.southwesthornconvention.com/

And thank you again to Doug Hall not only for the photo above but also his efforts to “pay it forward” and invest in the future.

If you follow the horn and use Facebook you probably have noted that Houghton Horns has a new line of horn mouthpieces coming out soon (more here). While they are a Horn Matters advertiser, I was following the development of this line for other reasons and was very interested to see the H3 model as I did help (in a small way) with the development of this mouthpiece.

Keeping up with Internet trends is one of the things we strive to do with Horn Matters, so first up is my “unboxing” video (direct link here), which if you know me you will I think find humorous as well. It was not in any way a paid endorsement, just was a fun way to check out the new mouthpiece. More details and impressions follow the video. [UPDATE: And, proving that it was not a paid endorsement, I managed to mispronounce Houghton, they say it as "how-ton." Sigh.]

The Houghton H3 is inspired/based on a classic design, the old Schilke FARKAS MODEL, produced before Farkas became associated with Holton. I am a fan of the design and posted an article on the original FARKAS MODEL mouthpieces (here) a few years ago. In short, Farkas arrived at this design through intensive, hands on trial and error.

Thousandths of an inch matter in mouthpieces, so while the old “block letter” mouthpieces are similar to the Holton MC, it is a lot better mouthpiece. At least some of them!

The original mouthpiece varied a bit over the production run which is said to have been only about 1,000 units. I own two of these. The example on the left in the photo is the one I mention in the video, that I won Third Horn in Nashville playing on it, so it is special to me. Sadly, it never really fit any successive horn well as the shank is somewhat undersized, which seems to have been the standard size made of this. The example on the right is one I picked up later. It never felt as good, and I suspect the main culprit was the rim which is wider with a narrower inner diameter (and too doughnut-like for me), but undoubtedly other dimensions are out of spec as well if examined very closely.

Derek Wright was much more intimately involved with the development of this model. A DMA grad from the horn studio here at Arizona State, he knew of my interest and that I had examples, so I loaned both of them. What I hoped was having both they could figure out what was better and worse between the two examples and, combined with other examples and experimentation they could arrive at a design that exceeded the original.

My initial impressions of the new H3 are extremely favorable. It has a big sound and they corrected the shank size issue, it fits standard, modern horns much better than the originals. The H3 certainly plays better than the originals I supplied.

The rim is based on the rim of the example I favored of the two and feels great. The only difference is the inner diameter is just a bit larger on the H3. I am very interested to try this rim again after the years, the initial impression is very good and I believe I can play successfully on stainless steel. I have been playing on Delrin most of the past year, as I seem to have developed an allergy to silver and gold rims (more here). 

The biggest change and “X-factor” element is the mouthpiece itself being stainless steel. Materials impact things and I suspect the bigger sound I notice is directly related to the use of stainless steel (and possibly also the difference of outer shape and weighting).

In the even bigger news category, besides being offered with a screw rim (you can use any Houser rim, and really most any screw rim made in the USA on this cup) you can also purchase it at a more affordable price as a one piece model.

I like the sound it produces on initial impression quite a lot. You will have to hear it in a room to decide but this is a very fine mouthpiece.

The bad news is these have not yet shipped to the general public. I know I have students interested to try it but sorry, I am busy trying it! But they will be shipping out by the end of October and this model I think is an extremely interesting one that will generate some sales.

Many years ago, at the home of Philip Farkas, I held in my hands a copy of the mouthpiece of Dennis Brain. Farkas was actually at one point (before his association with Holton) working with Schilke and Brain to potentially market a copy of his mouthpiece. My main memory is the small inner diameter and the thin rim. These two elements are parts of the puzzle of all that made his playing great.

Farquharson Cousins was a student at the Royal Academy of Music at the same time as Dennis Brain, playing alongside Brain a number of times. In the second edition of On Playing the Horn he recalls,

Dennis Brain’s mouthpiece was, by modern comparison, a small affair. The old silver threepenny bit (which hornplayers used to carry as a measuring device) would not even lie in the cup, but stood, so to speak, half out of it. This I verified on several occasions as Dennis sometimes experimented with different mouthpieces, but (let me hasten to add!) always the same rim. (The type that used to be known as the ‘Busby’ mouthpiece – named after Tom Busby, a well known London horplayer of the 1920s).

This mouthpiece above would appear to have that same rim, and came to Arizona associated with the Hawkes piston valve horn owned by Arizona State University (more here). It is marked Hawkes & Son London with the letter B stamped on side. The inner diameter is very small and would only suit someone with quite thin lips. It fits the crooks on the Hawkes horn well and tightens up sound production, but does not fit a modern horn, especially not one made for a European shank mouthpiece such as the Alexander horn later used by Brain.

The second photo shows the rim compared to the more modern rim of a Holton XDC. Where the differences come in has to do with sound and sensitivity. It has a small sound but is at the same time very sensitive and must have fit his unconventional embouchure very well.

The above is a portion of the text of a lecture-recital presented at the 2011 International Horn Symposium in San Francisco. A full article version of the session is in preparation. The reference on the information that Farkas/Schilke planned to sell a copy of his mouthpiece is from the Nancy Jordan Fako book on Farkas. For more on the horns Dennis Brain played and on the IHS session I presented see this article.

One question that comes in periodically is about a type of double horn that seems to have been constructed to have the valve slides in the wrong places.

I first ran into one of these back when I was in high school and indeed they do look a little odd. The first one I saw was an old Sansone, but you are just as likely to run into an old Holton, their “pre-Farkas” model.

For example this instrument, the photo being linked from the very interesting horn-u-copia site. Look closely, the Bb horn valve slides are “on top,” they are in the slots where normally you put the F horn valve slides. And the F horn slides are “below” in the place where normally the Bb valve slides are. I think the general idea was that this design was easier to get the water out of the valve slides.

It is somewhat arbitrary which “side” is built as the top, but we all know that the F side is usually on top, for aesthetics.

If you put the slides in “correctly” for a standard double horn these horns won’t play remotely in tune. If you are testing a double horn and this is the case, consider that it might be one of these vintage horns.

To see what you have if you are not sure, pull out for example the first valve slides, push down the first valve, and see where the air comes out with the thumb up and down. If it is this design it will be clear pretty quickly.

Perhaps some maker will revive this design? It would stand out from the crowd and, in terms of water removal, it is not necessarily a bad idea.

One common question relates to the “A” valve seen on most single Bb horns and descant horns. The central question would be “what is the purpose of placing the horn in the key of A?”

Normally valve is usually used and tuned to be used as a stopping valve, such as in this prior article:

• The Stopping Valve: The Best Invention Ever

I have noted that when I show students how a stopping valve is used on a single Bb horn or a descant horn they are often quite impressed. What is great is that you can tune it to put your stopped notes right in place, there is almost no reason to play stopped notes out of tune with a stopping valve set correctly. Why this feature is not more commonly seen on double horns probably relates to weight and complications of construction.

That all being said, there is another potential use of this valve. Let’s say you are playing a work in E with a fast technical passage, such as La Gazza Ladra overture by Rossini.

What you would do is depress the valve so that it takes your horn down a half step (from Bb to A) and then you can play in E as if you were in F, with your normal fingerings. So instead of fingering a B scale you finger a C scale but it sounds a half step low, as a B scale.

So back to the Rossini excerpt, you would with the A valve down finger the passage with the relatively simple finger pattern of a C major figure instead of having cross fingerings to deal with. This can also be accomplished on a double horn with slide extenders; Schmid horns are set up so you can accomplish this effect with the slides as constructed, in fact.

If the prospect of de-tuning your horn into an A horn does not make sense, don’t worry about it too much. It probably helps me that I studied a lot of natural horn along the way to be able to visualize playing a valved horn in a key other than nominally in F.

But the stop valve feature is still really worth having! Check it out if you never have before.

I have seen the following meme go around Facebook several times:

As a horn teacher I have to say this meme, while it sounds like good advice, is very wrong.

Sure, long tones are important, but only to a point. Yes, it is a skill to master. But essentially they are weight lifting for your chops. They end up being a part of many warm-up routines. The reality is I rarely work on long tones after the first minute or so of my warm-up routine. It is not as though you can’t achieve the same effect of training your lips by playing real music.

A mouthpiece change however can make HUGE differences in every aspect of your playing. It can take you from sounding like a good student to a pro in literally an instant. It can improve your tone, your high range, your low range, your endurance. Everything.

I really worry about teachers who don’t actively work with students to search out a better horn and a better mouthpiece, as both hugely impact the ability to reach a high level on the horn. Telling students to do long tones in this instance is just lazy teaching, ignorance. Some horns really need a European shank mouthpiece to focus the high range, for example. There are so many variables to balance and you can only get there through thoughtful, guided testing.

In short, no teacher can inspire your high Bb to speak better if it is just a bad note for your combination of horn and mouthpiece, and long tones alone won’t get you to the highest level of horn playing either. You need the right equipment.

And mouthpiece choice is a topic I think most horn students intuitively know is an important one, as one of the most popular article series ever posted on this site is the below by Bruce Hembd, on choosing a French horn mouthpiece. Get reading, there is a lot of information on the topic in Horn Matters.

• Part I: The Rim and Preliminary Thoughts
• Part II: Cup, Throat and Bore
• Part III: Weight, Plating and Shopping Tips

One common question is that some models of horn seem to be built rather sharp, as in the main slide needs to be pulled quite a ways, perhaps so far that it is pulled as far as possible and you are still sharp. Why?

It could be your playing, but there are other factors that are part of it.

Issue 1 — Old School Designs

I am not going to name brands in this article, but some of the classic horn designs are often reported to be quite sharp, which I would agree with. Among the many possible reasons for this are two major factors:

1. They were designed originally to be played with a rather covered hand position and
2. They were designed to be played with a rather deep and large bore mouthpiece

To point 1, as a student in the early 1980s I was actually somewhat shocked to first hear live performances by a couple of the older, big name players of that day. They used rather covered hand positions of a type rarely heard today. A more covered hand position sounds “darker” (more muffled, really) and results in a lower pitch level for the horn.

To point 2, the large mouthpieces used in the past are not nearly so often used today. A deep mouthpiece with a large bore produces a lower overall pitch level on a horn, and a shallow mouthpiece with a small bore produces a higher overall pitch level.

The combination of these two factors has left these classic horns of older design history playing sharper and sharper in a modern context. Time has seen the horn world trend toward smaller mouthpieces and more open hand positions, aiming for a tone with more clarity and presence out in the hall.

Issue 2 – Horns Aimed at a European Market

Second, the horn market is international, and most areas outside the USA are not playing at A=440. A horn that is made in and for an area where A=442 is standard will need to be pulled out a good bit to produce A=440. Some instruments will accommodate this pitch issue better than others in terms of slide lengths.

And More …

It should also be mentioned that an older horn with leaky valves may get a bit wonky for pitch, valve rotations need to be right, no objects stuck in your horn, oral cavity shape, etc.

Know what your slides do!

And even a very good horn, if played with a mouthpiece that does not fit right or suit the horn, may have strange pitch tendencies.

This article is obviously not comprehensive, but will hopefully relieve a bit of stress if you feel your horn is constantly sharp. In short, while there could be some production problem on your end of the horn, if it is persistently sharp it is not necessarily your problem, you may need to either pull out more in general or, if that is not an option, get a different horn. Be sure in any case to try other horns and have others try your horn to know better what the tendencies are you are fighting.

For more on tuning your horn see this article.

One of the perennial favorite articles in Horn Matters is on the topic of Kruspe or Geyer. Both terms reference the names of classic horn makers (Kruspe still being in business), but both terms in a sense have also become generic terms. How makers work out their individual horn designs will vary a bit, there is no one successful Kruspe or Geyer design but rather many subtle variations on themes.

Which brings us to the topic of Knopf or Geyer. Conventional wisdom is they are similar horns, and many use the terms interchangeably. The essential visual difference is the Knopf has the tube come out of the first valve at an angle and the Geyer has this tube straight across the instrument.

A good place to see a lot of horns is the ever-useful Horn-U-Copia website, the source of these photos. First up is this image of a Knopf horn, and about the maker I would note right away they are still in business (website here). Which is probably why makers don’t often refer to their instruments as being Knopf-style instruments, as Knopf still sells them! Horn-U-Copia dates this instrument to around 1960, but the Knopf family goes way back as a maker of horns of this type to the early 20th century and has been making brass instruments in Markneukirchen, Germany since 1852. Presently this type of instrument is their Model 16.

Then we get to Geyer. According to his bio in the IHS website, German native Carl Geyer (1880-1973) “became an apprentice instrument maker at age 15 in Markneukirchen” and

While working in a music store in 1903, he saw an advertisement in a Leipzig newspaper that Richard Wunderlich was seeking a horn maker because musicians in Chicago were forced to send their instruments to Germany for repairs. Geyer immigrated to the US and arrived in Chicago in 1904. He worked for Wunderlich until Wunderlich retired during World War I.

In 1920 Geyer opened his own workshop to help meet the great demand for American-made horns. His Chicago shop was widely known for both his distinctive horns and his repair service. In 1955, at age 75, he sold the business but continued working for the new owner until he was 90.

The horns he was famous for were ones of this design, again seen in this image from the Horn-U-Copia site. Visually you can see a few dimensions are a bit different. The Knopf pattern opens up the space where the valve mechanism is a bit more so it can potentially be a bit better for valve action. There are also a lot of other dimensions subtly different, the most visible being the leadpipe length and the overall wrap. Where you would notice the latter is fitting the horn in a case; often Geyer-style horns need a little larger case than a horn inspired by the Knopf version of this wrap.

With those two classic makers described, it is worth noting also that their products varied a bit over the years of production. Which brings us to the topic of “almost” Geyer or Knopf horns, there are many ways to vary the basic wrap and still be visually similar, especially at a distance. Every maker has their own take on how to best address specifics of design toward getting the best result.

If I had to pick one I would tend to pick Knopf if only for the elegant look of the bend going into the first valve. This does not get at the topic of which is better though, as honestly both types can be great. Try them both! In the end it is all about the build and the way the maker has worked out the various small dimensional differences toward making a product that meets their expectations.

And for another article getting at the above topic that is one of the most frequently read in Horn Matters see Thoughts on ‘Quality’ and an Overview of Trusted Brands in French Horns.

A major long term interest of mine is the valved horn in the 19th century. It was a time frame dominated by single horns built to take crooks — instruments that are very different than those generally used today.

Richard Strauss noted in 1905 (in his annotations to Berlioz’s Instrumentationslehre) that “horn players now use almost exclusively the horns in E, F, high A and high B-flat…,” continuing that

Generally, the players of the first and third horns use the horn in high B-flat for almost all pieces in flat keys and the horn in high A for all pieces in sharp keys. The players of the second and fourth horns use horns in E and F.

The full quote and citations may be found in this article (scroll down). The central point to grasp is, in the era before the double horn (invented in 1897!), many high horn players by the late 19th century had adopted the single Bb horn and low horn players were still using the single F. In some places it clearly became basic to the division between high and low horn playing, as they played different types of horns.

In the USA today reality is the division between professional high and professional low horn players is minimal, especially in terms of players preparing for auditions. The general expectation is that any really good horn player can play anything. Every professional needs to be a master of every part of the range.

That clearly was not the case in the 19th century. An interesting passage in Fergus McWilliam, Blow Your Own Horn!, 2nd edition, sheds light on the situation back then (and today, still, in some places).

There is a long tradition, most notably but not exclusively in Germany, of teachers classifying their students as either high or low hornists and streaming them accordingly….

This writer has even heard it argued that low hornists should “know their place” and not aspire to things beyond their reach. I knew one section leader who quite openly forbade the low hornists from warming up above g2, claiming that such ambition would not only endanger their low range capabilities but also upset the hierarchy of the section….

Particularly in Germany, too many young players seem to accept their classification quite willingly and are required to abide by it for the rest of their professional lives.

Which brings us back to Strauss and the two types of horns at that time. One of my goals over many years has been to make a recording on a 19th century style horn. I had one made for me by Richard Seraphinoff way back in 1997 (more on that horn here), and periodically return to it and think about rep and finally making that solo CD.

It is a challenging instrument to play. In short the low range is great but the upper range is kind of like playing natural horn but worse! The articulations are by a degree even harder to control, especially toward the top of the staff. It takes great attention to detail to produce good tonguing in that range – tonguing is much easier in the upper range of the Bb horn. Careful mouthpiece choice is also part of the puzzle of higher range F horn articulations.

Recently I saw a link to a source of PDF music from the Eastman Sibley Library. If you follow the link (here), they really have some interesting music and I noted in particular a group of solos by Müller (or Mueller, better known today for his horn etudes), and also a (low horn) sonata by Fritz Spindler. [These are also on IMSLP.]

The bottom line is these pieces work very well on my instrument in F and provide some musical evidence of the high/low horn split in that time frame. I think we generally tend to look at solos of this type (if we look at them at all) as solos for “younger” players with weak high ranges, at least from our USA perspective, as again we think a good player can play anything. But actually these works are quite idiomatic for a low horn player on a single F horn, as they hardly go to the top of the staff and tend also to not have a lot of articulations right at the top of the staff. Plus, when they do have articulations in that range they tend to be lighter, thus less likely to be obvious double/split sounding articulations of the type the instrument is prone to produce. It is a very different writing style when compared to some of the better known works of the period (like Strauss 1), which are much more idiomatic for a high horn player on a single Bb.

I am enjoying getting even better in touch with the “vibe” of the 19th century valved horn in F and the “low horn” solos of that time frame that suit the instrument. Be watching for updates: this may be the year I finally make that period instrument CD.

Continue to Part II

One exciting development in the horn world is that Paxman has not only expanded their product line but also has expanded their dealer network. In particular, a store local to me in Arizona, Milano’s Music, just received their first shipment of horns from Paxman, including Paxman Academy and Paxman Series 4 double horns.

Many people have said that it was only a matter of time until the Chinese brass instrument makers figured out how to produce very good French horns, and that time is clearly now. Paxman has been working for a number of years now with Chinese maker Briz, who only produces French horns (website here, in Chinese). While Briz is a new manufacturer (founded in June of 2000), Paxman itself has been producing horns since 1945 and needs no introduction as a leading maker of high quality horns. Clearly Paxman and Briz have in this partnership developed a very fine line of horns that it is time to be highly aware of.

In recent years I have had two brief encounters with the Chinese Paxman horns, both mentioned previously in Horn Matters. I was “particularly interested” at the Australia IHS symposium in the single Bb Paxman Academy horn, and at the UNT IHS symposium I was “very impressed” by the Paxman Academy double horn.

And that brings me to my brief trials this week here in Arizona. My overall first reaction is this: these are very solid horns.

I will start with the Paxman Series 4. This model was, according to their website, introduced in 2008. It is priced somewhat below that of the very comparable Yamaha 667 and Hoyer G-10 models, and first impressions make clear that the Series 4 horn is a contender!

The very first impression of any horn is how it feels in your hands. At this point a brief aside is appropriate. About 15-20 years ago I tried my first Chinese double horn at a show. It was terrible in basically every way. It was very heavily constructed (a tank!), the mouthpiece did not even fit in the receiver correctly (!), valves felt bad, harsh sounding, etc. It simply screamed out that it was a cheap, poor quality instrument. In contrast, the Paxman Series 4 horn gives every first impression of being an excellent horn. The instrument looks to be well designed and constructed, and I immediately liked the feel of the quiet, string action valves very much and the weight and balance.

At Milano’s I was able to test it comparing it with a Hoyer and a Yamaha side by side. The Paxman feels more like the Yamaha in terms of “feel” in the hands — the ergonomics of the left hand are very good, and the overall weight is similar — and the sound is also generally similar. That said, and maybe I have been conditioned a bit as an owner of three Paxman horns, but it really has the look and feel of being a Paxman, with no feeling of it being “cheap” in any way.

The wrap is what is sometimes called a “modified Geyer” wrap. I think the only real plus the Yamaha and Hoyer have compared to the Series 4 horn is I suspect that they will prove easier to remove water from, as this type of Geyer wrap has the extra “knot” (loop) of tubing on the F side rather than the more open F side of the traditional Geyer/Knopf design. High and low the horn plays well, with a very solid high Bb. This would make an excellent instrument for a strong intermediate player or a serious amateur. I have had a number of people come audition for me at ASU — potential performance majors! — who were playing horns that were clearly not nearly as good that cost more. In total this is a horn that really cannot be ignored at the price point.

The other horn I tried is the Paxman Academy double, also known as Paxman Series 3. The horn is generally similar to the Series 4 horn already described, but has a slightly different wrap (look at the the F horn tube coming out of the first valve slide on both horns) and it sells for just over half as much as the Series 4. It also looks to have also been built very well. The sound is not quite as good as that of the Series 4 but still compares favorably to instruments sold for twice the price — it does not have the shrill, harsh edge I associate with a very cheap horn.

On the example I tried the high range was quite free with a fine high Bb but the low range was somewhat unresponsive (while the Series 4 horn was very good high and low). A possible factor on this is the slightly simplified wrap that eliminates that more rounded bend on the F horn. But being aimed at younger students I am sure that was probably the right business decision from the makers, to set the horn up to favor the high range and save a bit on construction costs.

As with the Series 4 the ergonomics of the left hand are excellent with the same, quiet string action valves. This horn is definitely one to consider for school program purchases, as if played back to back against traditional USA brands this horn will certainly not disappoint. The only “negative” I could see is that it is not as heavily made as some other horns intended for a school market. In terms of playing qualities this is a plus, but I suppose it might dent more easily? But a horn built like a tank is no fun to play and sounds like a tank, I think Briz/Paxman made the right decision in not using overly heavy/thick materials on this instrument.

Series 5 is the top level instrument in the line of Paxman/Briz horns and is their newest model, described here in the Paxman website. I have not had the opportunity yet but I very much want to try one of these. It has what I have been told is a “more complex tone,” of the type we associate with a fine custom horn. The Series 5 horn hits a little higher price point and is built on a more open pattern very similar to the venerable Paxman 20. From what I am hearing this model is one that a professional really would consider playing, it is that good. I look forward to the opportunity to try one!

To repeat one point, both of these horns appeared to me to be very well made, and both models have been in production now for a while. If Briz maintains this level of quality, these horns and their related horn production will certainly be seen more and more worldwide.

One other final note on the horns and my testing. For my trials I had a Laskey G cup mouthpiece and a similar Moosewood BA mouthpiece with a European shank available to me. These horns work well with a standard shank mouthpiece, no European shank is necessary, the horns playing better with the standard shank. Yet another good decision on the part of the maker in relation to our market in the USA.

There are now several dealers of Paxman Academy horns in the USA and it is to be hoped that there might be even more by the time new horn sales pick up for dealers in the fall. It is also worth noting that other Briz branded horns are sold directly in the USA through at least one dealer (Google it, they produce a Kruspe wrap model as well), and then there is also the Pope-Balu Briz Alliance horn that was recently introduced that I would very much like to try too, a Knopf wrap horn. Based on my brief observations with the Paxman-Briz horns this maker is positioned to sell in the coming years a large quantity of horns in the USA. I feel there is certainly a market for these horns — if the number of locations where you can try one in person expands — and at the price points they hit the days of the traditional USA band instrument makers may be numbered. The fit and finish and the playing qualities combine to make these horns an excellent value.

Photos from Milano’s Music website, with permission

It took over two months but at this point I am fairly comfortable with playing a period single F horn.

In part I of this series a topic was my being inspired by the discovery of forgotten horn repertoire that I think has potential — quality works aimed at low horn players of the late 19th and early 20th century who still used single F horns. The horn solo works we usually perform from that era strike me as being centered on high horn players and more suited to single Bb (and later double) horns.

Part II of this series addressed among other things the mouthpiece issue. Besides just learning the music a big part of the puzzle has been figuring out the horn and mouthpiece question. I can’t right now say for sure I won’t adjust things further, but I think I have them.

After quite a bit of serious practice I am back on the horn that was made for me by Richard Seraphinoff, described in part I. The alternate instrument I tried was a King F horn that Seraphinoff helped me convert to take crooks, also mentioned in part II. Each instrument has a personality and individual intonation issues, more so than on modern horns. The bottom line at the moment is the Seraphinoff has better valves (especially in slurs vrs. valve changes) and overall it sounds better, it has a bit less of that rough natural horn edge (“bubbles”) on the articulations. A very German horn perfect for the German music on the recording.

(So what is better about the valves exactly? It has to do with “clicks” when the valves move, the way they affect the flow of the airstream blowing through slurs. For more on where I learned to use the term “clicks” in this context, and for an explanation of “bubbles” see this article.)

Of the mouthpieces I have (mentioned in part II), the modified Atkinson H-10 did well on the King conversion horn, and is seen on the Seraphinoff in the photo, but I am leaning toward the Moosewood LGC being the mouthpiece of choice on the Seraphinoff horn. Sound has a bit more “life” and it is easier to play.

(Easier to play? The reason this is an element is kind of along the same lines as the typical discussion in the Horn People group about Geyer/Knopf design horns compared to Kruspe/8D type horns. If you are going to play a horn for hours week after week you need something that plays easily, especially as you get older, rather than expending great physical effort to produce some idealistic sonic concept. On one mouthpiece the horn is a bit more “smoky” and on the other it is more in focus. A topic for a different article, but relevant to current equipment choices for this recording project, as I need to record everything in a three day window of time.)

So the plan as of now is to use the Moosewood LCG on the Seraphinoff horn for the recording. And I now have recording dates set in early July, the recording project will happen! I also have nearly all the literature picked as well. I will hold off on describing it for now to be sure nobody else records them first to undercut my profits (LOL). But seriously, rep is about 90% picked now, almost all of it has never been recorded before and I feel certainly deserves to be performed more often. More on the repertoire as we get closer to the recording date.

UPDATE: I also now am using mostly the E crook described in an earlier article, from when I was preparing to perform this same horn on a recital. Never underestimate the power of a change of crook, it does help sort the overall intonation out better. The only thing that worries me is I have to have the horn main slide pushed in nearly all the way with this crook; I hope the recording studio is not overly cool, it could cause problems.

As part of ramping up toward the F horn recording project (series starts here) I realized that the crook I was using certainly left the main slide too close to pushed in all the way to be comfortable – and the venue for the recording is going to be cooler than my home, likely I won’t be able to push in enough to get the horn up to pitch. Not acceptable!

Crooks are an interesting part of the equation with any horn that takes crooks. The topic came up in this article a few years ago as well. I came up with five combinations of crooks/couplers that put me in F with at least ¾ inch of tuning slide showing, as seen in the photo.

The winner? It is the one at the top in the photo, the smaller double coil crook with the ½ step coupler. That crook was a cousin to the one I had been using and has similar playing qualities but as a bonus has a better high range. So with that I think I have the setup set! Recording next week. Now my practice focuses on intonation….

Also, while not formally part of this series, see this article for a few notes on working on articulations and accuracy on the F horn.

To kick off a series of short reviews this summer, first up is the Kelly 6V mellophone mouthpiece in lexan plastic. A few years ago I reviewed their horn mouthpieces, and it bears repeating right off that the MC horn mouthpiece, especially in the crystal material, is surprisingly good. Likewise, the mellophone version also is quite good compared to a standard, metal example of this type of mouthpiece.

Fact: legions of horn players play the mellophone every summer and fall in the United States. One of the first things we have to cope with as a group is the topic of mouthpiece choice. I have a longer article from a few years ago on options over in Horn Articles Online, and in this review I will touch as well on comparisons between some of those options and the Kelly 6V.

First off, why use a plastic mouthpiece? There are two big reasons. One would be metal allergies, discussed further in this article. The other is temperature. One vivid memory from my freshman year of high school was the football team advanced to state, the band went, it was COLD and my mouthpiece was so cold, and finally my valves froze. A plastic mouthpiece won’t solve the frozen valves but it will make for more comfort at the lip contact point.

In the photo are seen a lineup of mouthpieces you could use on a mellophone. Left to right, we have the Jupiter hybrid horn/mellophone mouthpiece (reviewed here), the Kelly 6V, the IYM M-2, a DEG Mello 6V, a Curry 1HTF, and a Kelly MC with a mellophone adapter. Note that I have placed them in order by overall length.

Of course the is some ideal length for any mouthpiece in relation to an instrument, but what it is exactly for Mellophone I could not tell you. I can tell you the Kelly 6V is a little shorter than the DEG 6V which I think is pretty standard for this type of mouthpiece. Comparing these two directly my initial impression is the Kelly has a better sound and plays better. Of course it still has that “third trumpet” sort of sound typical of mellophone rather than a horn sound. The Curry 1HTF is not really a mellophone mouthpiece but is commonly used, it has a bit bigger/better sound, and then you get to the other options all of which have a more Flugelhorn related tone.

The rim on the Kelly 6V is a trumpet rim with a lot of cushion, similar to that on the DEG 6V but I feel a bit more rounded. Would not be my personal first choice (I would rather play something like the Jupiter hybrid in terms of the rim) but seems to be the type of rim that brass techs for marching bands and drum corps think have to be on a mellophone mouthpiece.

To close, the Kelly did in fact work well on my test instrument, a King. These are certainly worth a look. With the horn mouthpieces I found the colored mouthpieces had a deader tone than the crystal mouthpieces, so on horn I would say go with the crystal version, but the colored ones may be worth more of a look on mellophone, they should cut a bit more of the harsh edge out of the tone.

Another item that arrived for review not long ago was Monster valve oil.

Backing up, horn players typically use three or four types/grades of oil on their instruments. This “Ask Dave” article explains the topic further, but in short you need:

• light oil for the valves
• heavier oil for the bearings
• slide grease

And, if your horn has mechanical linkages on the valves:

• ball joint linkage oil

The Monster line (website here) includes three grades of light oil (original, faster, and smoother), slide grease, and “slide oil.” The last item, while seeming to not be a product you could use on a horn (it is for kick slides on a trumpet), it is a heavier formulation and I found it worked well as a bearing oil (although it would be easier to use as such if it was in a needle point bottle).

I have given the line a good trial on various of my horns. It works well, and in particular the slide oil effectively quieted the noisy bearings on my 19th century style single F horn used on my recording project last week (series starts here). I also like the slide grease quite a bit.

Exactly how Monster oil compares to Hetman for example I can’t really say, I am not a chemist. The interesting side point I think is how the line is presented compared to others that horn players more typically use. Hetman comes across as being a bit more scientific in nature, and of course they have products that are aimed specifically at rotary valve use with needle point bottles. On the other hand, I know horn players who like to use Fat Cat oil because it has a kitty on the bottle. I don’t think any one of these three brands is the best, but you certainly give a bit different impression to your friends and colleagues if you have oil with a kitty on it compared to oil with a monster on it or oil in a white and green bottle.

Finally, I would mention that Monster oil has also produced a series of “Brass Chats” videos, part of their marketing but also a service to the brass world. Check them out here, this video below being a great teaser.

Back almost five years ago I posted a brief review of a product called “finger pads.” These are sold as an alternate to soldering dimes on the valve paddles (more here) when they can’t be adjusted into a comfortable position.

Those finger pads, truth be known, were/are probably clarinet thumb rest pads but sold in sets of three for use by horn players. The negatives for me after extended use of these was that they were not quite tall enough and they tended to work off the end of the valve paddle.

Then, just a few weeks ago, I picked up a tip from the Horn People group that there was another woodwind product to try as finger pads for horn; Saxophone palm key risers. They come in sets of three and can be obtained very inexpensively. So I bought a set.

When they arrived I was a little worried they would not fit on the valve paddles, but I did manage to carefully push them on. They are a tight fit, but remember that the clarinet thumb rests tend to work off? These won’t work off as I play for sure. Someday the rubber material may fail, but hopefully they will last for quite some time.

To the second photo, the other big plus with these are they are taller than the height I was getting with the thumb rests as finger pads. The height is roughly that of three dimes and on this horn certainly I need that much extra height with my big hands. These will be staying on this horn.

I should note as well that the pads extend the valves to a point as well. If you need to change the valve paddle position, and have an instrument such as this one with mechanical linkage valves that can’t be adjusted easily, this is a product certainly worth trying, especially if it would take stacks of dimes to adjust the height properly for your hands.