Recently received was a question from Pierre-Antoine Tremblay (website here). He had very recently recorded Reinecke’s 1906 Trio for horn, clarinet and piano on period instruments. Before turning to the questions, his video of the first movement is below. Hit play, check it out! The period horn offers a unique sound (video direct link here).

This work is one that I would actually noodle around on when practicing for my 19th century horn project (described in a series of articles starting here). It seems to me very suited to being played on a single F horn — it feels great on the period valved horn. Pierre-Antonie asked several things in his note, one being about a possible Gumpert-Reinecke connection and another being possible use of Kruspe horns by Gumpert. He had noted “the obvious [connection,] that they were colleagues both at the Gewandhausorchester and at the Conservatory.” Certainly Reinecke could have been thinking of Gumpert, but aside from that obvious connection I don’t know that the trio is associated with any horn player, he worked with many, and Gumpert had been retired from performing for several years by 1906. Theoretically for example Reinecke could have been thinking of B. Ed. Müller, who was second horn in the Gewandhaus Orchestra and is best remembered today for his etudes, or principal hornist Arno Rudolph. As to horns and Gumpert, I can only offer what his student Anton Horner stated in 1956:

[Gumpert] had no use for the B-flat horn which was coming into use in Germany at that time; but he did advocate changing crooks or slides to G, A, and B-flat horn for some compositions. For instance, he played the Siegfried solo on the B-flat horn, and the slow movement of the Second Beethoven Symphony on the A crook; also played the Mendelssohn Nocturne on an E crook. The old German conductors like Reinecke in Leipzig, Bühlow [sic] in Berlin, and others would not tolerate the thin, harsh quality of the B[flat] horn, unless the composers called for that quality in their compositions, when they wrote for the G, A-flat, A, and B-flat horn. Of course, we, of today, think these restrictions are splitting hairs, but that was the opinion that prevailed in those days. I know that in many orchestras, when there were auditions for vacant positions, B[flat] horn players were not even considered. But eventually, B[flat] horn specialists were considered, when such excellent players as Preusse in Frankfurt proved and demonstrated its advantages [Horner, 91].

That quote is from a longer article that may be read here. That his nephew was working with Kruspe to develop horn designs is a decent indication that Gumpert might also have been a Kruspe player, but I don’t have any further evidence, the question is so far as I know open.

And also note: Reinecke is cited by Horner as a being among “old German conductors” who “would not tolerate the thin, harsh quality” of the B-flat horn, who preferred the F horn. Again, it really seems to be the instrument he has in mind for the his chamber music works, this photo showing the instrument used by Tremblay.

Check out the video above and the following movements, it is very well done and really gives the flavor of what the F horn sounds like. The sound is not quite what you would imagine, there is a bit of a wilder quality to the sound in the upper register that adds something really. Once you adjust to it in fact a double or triple horn does sound duller. I believe this same tonal difference will come across in my recording project as well, which is in editing at this time. More on that soon.

And to close, a special bonus recording, which I was pointed to by reader Jay Anderson after my recent article “Will the real B. Ed. Müller please stand up?” (see the comments there). Recorded in 1904, it includes two of the Leipzig players I mentioned above, B. Ed. Müller and Arno Rudolph, second and first horn respectively with the celebrated horn quartet of the Gewandhaus Orchestra. Oh but to hear this group live, but the old recording gives a good hint of their sound and it is so interesting as well to realize that you are hearing the playing of one of the writers of classic horn etude materials! There is a missed note at 1:51 (probably the third horn), and the general level of playing also reminds us that things have come a long way for the horn in the last 100 years. (Video direct link here).

Photo source: YouTube

When I was starting this series (here) I was really just beginning to firm up ideas toward this recording project, having had a long interest in doing a period instrument recording. Now, with the first edits done, I am feeling really excited about where it is and about the repertoire chosen.

So what is on the CD? The music is all public domain and on IMSLP (composed between roughly 1860 and 1910), and I think all worth a closer look by the horn players of today. Recorded on the CD, in alphabetical order:

Serenade, Op. 20 – Louis Bödecker
Sonata, Op. 7 – Hermann Eichborn
Resignation, Op. 16 – Charles Eisner
Lied ohne Worte, Op. 2 – Oscar Franz
Gondellied, Op. 15 – Karl Matys
Am Abend, Op. 71 – B. Ed. Mülller
Melancholie, Op. 68 – B. Ed. Mülller
Nocturno, Op. 73 – B. Ed. Mülller
Wiegenlied, Op. 69, No. 1 – B. Ed. Mülller
Lied ohne Worte – Josef Richter
Sonate, Op. 347 – Fritz Spindler

These were the best works out of a larger group I considered. The works that did not make the cut, for those very curious, were:

Zwei Phantasiestücke, Op. 35 – Louis Bödecker
Fantasiestücke, Op. 3 – Carl Eschmann
Andante, Op. 14 – G. Goltermann, arr. Fr. Gumbert
Fantasie, Op. 117 – Carl Haslinger
Cavatina, Op. 85, No. 3 – J. Raff, arr. Fr. Gumbert
Fantasie Heroique, Op. 25 – Heinrich Gottwald
Romanze – Arnold Krug
Lied ohne Worte, Op. 109 – Felix Mendelssohn, arr. Franz
Andante, religioso, Op. 74 – B. Ed. Mülller
Fantasie (on themes of Weber), Op. 66 – B. Ed. Mülller
Gebet, Op. 65a – B. Ed. Mülller
Romanze, Op. 182, No. 1 – J. Raff
Stimmung, Op. 11, No. 1 – Alfred Rasmussen
Cavatine aus Der Freischütz – C. M. v. Weber, arr. Oscar Franz

Last week I spoke to the horn studio at ASU about the project, and one sentence and thought that struck me is worth sharing to close this segment of the series. What I told the studio about the F horn I used was more or less this –

The intonation on this horn is terrible! I bet 1/3 of the notes are out of tune. I had to put arrows all over the place in the music.

I got the horn out again after the studio class and really sat down to play it with a tuner and my goodness it is really out of tune in comparison to a modern double horn. BUT: the CD is not! Four months of hard practice, I had the horn pretty figured out and was feeling pretty used to it. The CD has very good intonation, but there is one note that was quite sharp that at times you can tell I am covering the bell a good bit more than normal to bring it down. I think it in the end adds a little charm and color to the already colorful sound if a period single F horn. Buy the CD and you can decide for yourself!

It should be close to being released in about a month, be checking back for more.

Equipment is a topic that has come up quite a few times in Horn Matters.

Still though, I can be as excited as the next person to finally break through and get an equipment issue sorted out. Last week a new mouthpiece arrived with some others I had bought for students to try. But this one was purchased for me, a Houghton H-2 cup in brass. I knew it would be similar to the Houser San Francisco cup I had used on other horns some, in particular I liked how the SF cup made my smaller Geyer style horn feel but not sound, it had a brittle sound on that horn, at least for me and my embouchure setup.

But backing up, I made my original two solo CDs (Canto and Les Adieux) playing on a big Paxman 25AND, seen here when it was shiny and new. I loved that horn, used it for years, I had absolute confidence in my intonation and it was the most ergonomic for my left hand of any I have owned. But I had switched to other horns as my primary instrument, and then when I changed over to using a plastic rim (due to metal allergies, more here) I never could get it to feel right on any mouthpiece I could use on it. A little stuffy, a little unfocused. It was a puzzle that I was getting close to giving up on — I was considering selling and moving on.

But then the Houghton H-2 arrived and the horn is back! Totally back. Not stuffy. Not unfocused. Due to some magical combination of the cup itself and the fit of the mouthpiece into the instrument.

With that sorted out then the other horns I have quickly fell into place too. My Paxman triple feels great on the SF cup (it has a slightly larger shank, a three piece model — somehow I had not used it on this horn previously) and the Geyer style horns I use work best on Moosewood. Horn playing suddenly has became a lot more fun again as the horns I use regularly all feel more dialed in and in focus.

While this specific mouthpiece may not work for you at all, there is an underlying truth that happiness can be a new mouthpiece, the right one can dial everything in and the wrong one leave you feeling like it is you that can’t play. The fact is that you can visualize great tone and articulations all day and not ever get them if you are on the wrong mouthpiece. Don’t give up on the search.

I won’t be to the IHS event this summer and I am sure a lot of readers won’t make it either. I have presented at these events a number of times, and would offer these two brief podcasts as glimpses of what you might see at a horn symposium.

First up is a very concise version of an actual presentation I gave at the 2011 International Horn Symposium in San Francisco, which is also described in this article.  As noted there,  the session description as submitted was as follows:

While all serious students of the horn have heard recordings by the legendary horn soloist Dennis Brain, most listeners have never heard horns very much like the horns he performed on live in a room. This session in a lecture-recital format will focus in on the equipment he used during his performing career.

A longer format version of this, an article with plenty of footnotes, was published in the February, 2016 issue of The Horn Call.

Another topic I have presented about several times at workshops is the Wagner tuba. At one event I had some pushback from a European player, they felt that playing the Wagner tuba was a religious experience and it should only be used to play actual orchestral works such as The Ring or Bruckner symphonies (after I had demonstrated playing a duet in the style of Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass!). This second video podcast pushes back at that with another miniature presentation, “Fun with the Chinese Wagner Tuba.”

The review of the Chinese Wagner tuba I reference in the video may be found here.

Both of these podcasts and many more can be accessed here on YouTube, and always be watching for more episodes.

Triple horns and mouthpieces are the topics of two conversations with Gabriel Kovach, Principal Horn of the Phoenix Symphony. Lots of people dream of designing their own horns and mouthpieces, and he has had the opportunity to do so, committing a lot of time and energy into development of new models of both, as we read in his current Phoenix Symphony bio,

Recently Mr. Kovach has begun the exciting process of developing his own line of French Horn mouthpieces, through master craftsman David Houser at Houser Mouthpieces. And, after the culmination of a 2-year project, a newly designed Triple Horn with master horn builder Jim Patterson at Patterson Hornworks. It is this combination that Mr. Kovach uses on stage and in concert.

Back in 2013 we featured a print interview with Kovach on designing the triple horn with Patterson (here), but our podcast conversation here sheds more light on the thinking behind everything and the actual process.

Following development of that design he worked with Houser to develop a mouthpiece to better compliment the triple horn he had developed. Our conversation ranges out from there into a variety of mouthpiece related topics.

Thanks again to Gabe Kovach for these enlightening conversations, and for even more episodes of the Horn Notes Video Podcast check here on YouTube.

Concluding for now the summer series of video podcasts are the topics of testing horns and mouthpieces and developing a new line of mouthpieces with guest Derek Wright.

One thing many horn players are looking for and genuinely need is a better mouthpiece. Derek received his DMA as my student at Arizona State, but has been working these past few years for Houghton horns. One thing he had the opportunity to do at Houghton Horns is be instrumental in the development of their new line of mouthpieces, which personally I feel are a great product. In particular the one piece stainless steel models are revolutionary at the price point. As described in their website,

The entire line was designed by Mark Houghton and Derek Wright, and manufactured by Dave Houser. All are made of surgical-grade stainless steel, and come in 3 different models which are available in a variety of configurations. The intent was to create a line of mouthpieces that addressed the needs of real-world players by combining proven design concepts with the latest in technology and materials. Ultimately, the emphasis was on balance, focusing on the versatility and functionality that most modern players require. Between the three models, any horn player–high or low, orchestral or commercial, solo or section–should be capable of finding a Houghton mouthpiece that provides a sense of comfort and identity.

In the first video we also speak about mouthpieces generally, in particular getting to the topics of different inner diameters and stainless steel. The second video is on a closely related topic, that of trying mouthpieces and horns. The conversation includes a number of insights on mistakes people often make when upgrading or looking to upgrade their equipment, valuable tips for horn players of all levels!

And I should mention that for the Houghton H3 mouthpiece I was instrumental in encouraging the design, as explained in this article. Thanks again to Derek Wright for joining us and sharing his perspectives on these two important topics, and for even more video podcasts check here on YouTube.

I recently had the opportunity to try a custom horn by Jerry Lechniuk and was surprised how little there was online about this maker of the recent past, one I knew of for many years through a couple players I worked with back in Rochester.

Jerry Lechniuk (pronounced “lesh nick”) did not produce a lot of horns, but he is a significant figure as he functions as a bridge between Carl Geyer and Steve Lewis (who worked with Lechniuk before his passing). This quote from the Schilke Loylist website (quoting information from Karl Hill) lays the connection out clearly. Lechniuk was

… an immigrant from the Ukraine. He had spent time in a concentration camp during WWII. Upon his release, Jerry immigrated to Manchester, England. He had a friend who had a repair shop there and with the brass band phenomenon there was plenty of work…. He worked there for 2 years and then emigrated to America. He came to Chicago and began working with Carl Geyer in approximately 1948. He worked for Carl for about 10 years….

But then Geyer sold his shop and Lechniuk worked elsewhere in the Chicago area. Returning to the quote,

In about 1964 or 1965 he came to work for Renold Schilke, the best I can recall as a repairman of French horns. In the early 70’s Jerry began to develop a French horn that was built around Yamaha parts with Jerry designing the critical tapers. He made 23 double horns, 2 B flat horns and 2 natural horns. He passed away from a massive stroke at the age of 58. There was one unfinished horn on his bench which Steve Lewis finished before leaving Schilke.

In short, he saw a need, had the skills, and started making custom Geyer style horns. The instrument seen here is number 12, and his design choices are evident. Most typically today Geyer style horns are made with a change valve that is smaller and rotates 120 degrees rather than 90. The valves look like they are the Yamaha valves as mentioned in the quote. Another notable detail is that this horn has a separate Bb horn tuning slide (seen in the second photo), a nice feature only rarely applied to Geyer style horns today.

The example I was able to try for several extended practice sessions plays very well, it is a professional instrument, certainly well crafted, the intonation is great, and it is all original. There is a thread on Horn People that also speaks to the Jerry horns where it is stated that he made 17 complete double horns (the serial numbers go to 117 — not sure if this number conflicts with the 23 double horns stated in the Hill quote) and then there is a final one, mentioned in the Karl Hill quote, horn “17 ½” and known as the “Jerry Lewis” horn, as it was completed by Steve Lewis.

Lechniuk horns are desirable instruments and rare due to a life cut short. We kind of forget what a golden age of horn production we live in today, back in the 1970s there were very few people making custom horns and now not only are they plentiful but also the top level factory horns (typically smaller makers) are built essentially at the same level of quality! Jerry Lechniuk helped forge the way to where we are now, and I have enjoyed the chance to learn more about him and try one of his unique instruments.

At the end of my recent article looking at Lechniuk horns I commented that

We kind of forget what a golden age of horn production we live in today, back in the 1970s there were very few people making custom horns and now not only are they plentiful but also the top level factory horns (typically smaller makers) are built essentially at the same level of quality!

When I think back to the 1980s, when I was studying the horn very hard, too many horn players were playing on junk compared to what you can buy new now. We made them work, but really there are quite a variety of high quality instruments available today.

Last year I had an article published in the May issue of The Horn Call, “A 1982 Horn Right Hand Position Survey: Tips, Notes, and More.” The article summarizes the raw data left me from a survey done in 1982 by one of my ASU horn professor predecessors, Ralph Lockwood (more here). One item in that survey was a question that asked what kind of horns and mouthpieces the respondents used. Of the over 100 responses (mostly from professionals [orchestral players and professors], with responses from the USA, Europe, and Asia) the overall result reported in the article was that in 1982

The Conn 8D was number one by far with 40 instruments reported, the nearest competitor being Alexander with 15 double horns reported. Horns are listed below by frequency of ownership.

• Conn 8D
• Alexander double
• Holton
• Geyer
• Conn 28D
• Alexander descant
• Kruspe
• Paxman descant
• Lawson
• Lewis

Today, if you did a survey of a similar group of players would you find this same result? I think not, and I doubt any pro would want to go back to the choices we had in the 1980s either. We are in a golden age.

You want me to stop missing notes? I need a new mouthpiece

I’ve been feeling down about the election and need a new mouthpiece to cheer me up, #moremouthpieces #nevertoomanymouthpieces

The plating is wearing off my XXXX! You want me to get an allergy? I need a new mouthpiece

I am developing a metal allergy! I need a new mouthpiece

I discovered that I need a European shank mouthpiece for my horn. Also, it will help me stop missing notes. I need a new one

There are amazing deals on mouthpieces for black Friday! I’ll be saving money in the long term if I buy one now

Mouthpieces are the best investment, they are doing better than latinum! They are my retirement plan. I need more. We all need more

My lips are too fat! I need a bigger mouthpiece

My tone is too dark! I need a new mouthpiece

My tone is too bright! I need a new mouthpiece

My tone is too diffuse! I need a new mouthpiece

My tone is too focused! I need a new mouthpiece

I hate my sound! I need a new mouthpiece

How do you feel about innovation? There are some amazing, innovative things going on in mouthpieces –stainless steel, lots of new designs– I want to support this innovation that is changing lives!

My low range is not speaking well! I need a new mouthpiece, low horn is the key to all happiness, or do you just want horn players to feel depressed?

My horn feels stuffy, I need a new mouthpiece, it will fix all my problems

How do you feel about supporting the arts, and small businesses in the arts? One great thing we all could do would be to buy more mouthpieces

I can’t hit high notes! I really need a new horn, but a mouthpiece would be cheaper

I need to try a XXX super rim to improve my endurance! And it will help me stop missing notes, do you like hearing me miss notes? Don’t you like music?

Why no, I don’t have too many mouthpieces, you should see how many my teacher/colleague/friend has! Honestly, they need an intervention, but I know when to stop before things get out of control, I’m not there yet

Oh, and I need a quad mouthpiece case to carry mouthpieces in my horn case

Not everyone out there is a fan of tuners. This fall I have been working on a specific warmup routine to improve intonation, and I do recommend the use of tuners as tools for improving intonation.

But before going there, it is worth mentioning of course that playing against drones and tracks of any kind are really helpful. I enjoy going back to The Brass Gym for horn for this reason (more here on this publication).

Objectively though, you know having a physical device that tells you if you are in tune is also a very helpful thing. One suggestion that I have found useful is to have more than one tuner handy. This may sound extreme, but at home I have three I regularly use, reduced down to two when teaching.

The one I like the best for general use is the least sensitive one, my “old standard” Korg CA-1. What is good about this is it gives the “green light” over a wider range of pitch, you can be slightly high or low by several cents and still get the light. Why this is good is that in reality intonation in a group is more about being real close to begin with and making small adjustments by ear to make it better (this is why drones are so useful for working on pitch as well).

The next one I use a lot is the Tonal Energy tuner app, on my phone. It has a happy face that only becomes happy over a slightly more narrow range. There is much to be gained by aiming hard at that smaller target, especially during practice. But it still has a bit of a target, and you get the partial happy face when you are close. (For more on this tuner and even more notes on working on intonation see this article from a few months ago).

The final tuner I use is an older Seiko ST757 that has no face or green light, it just gives you exactly how many cents you are off from perfect. And you will be off from perfect virtually all the time, it is incredibly difficult to play every note exactly in tune with equal temperament. But there is a time to really beat yourself up a little, you need to be clear about tendencies and work them out.

In relation to that last point, there is one final thing to mention for today. Intonation with yourself is a function of two things. One part is you and how you blow your horn; the other part is how your horn is set up in terms of slide positions and overall design. If you blow it very differently than the way it was designed to be blown it won’t play exactly in tune. Presumably the horn, if made correctly, can be played in tune; presumably the people the builders worked with could play it in tune as constructed with the slides in some reasonable positions. But if you really can’t figure out how to get it set up and to blow in tune, maybe the problem isn’t you — it may simply be time to get a different horn — and tuners will make that decision clearer to you.

To conclude: besides the use of pitch comparison with drones or tracks in your practice, it is also well worth owning several tuners as tools toward the goal of better intonation and better horn playing.

In a very recent Horn People discussion there was a topic posted related to triple horns, more specifically to the question of if the high F side tone color sticks out. My contribution to the thread was this:

As someone who has not only published a book on descant and triple horns and also has recorded an entire CD on a single F, yes, I can certainly hear the high F side being used. Making the CD (“Rescued!”, on Summit Records, recently released) really emphasized the tonal side to me. That said, I think a triple horn is great playing a position in an orchestra, your conductor is sadly probably only going to note if you are missing notes. But to win that job I am inclined to think you still would be better off playing a double with a descant for certain excerpts.

There are at least three big elements you hope your horn provides to you, and you need all of them: accuracy, intonation, and tone. It is quite a puzzle to sort out on a high level.

Accuracy

A brief but related aside. Right now I am reading a book, Performing Under Pressure (2015). In it early on the topic is brought up of clutch artists in sports, people that seem to do best under pressure. Statistically this is actually only an illusion, they are not performing any better than normal, just their normal is really good.

I think we tend to forget that element in accuracy on the horn. You have to have “normal” at a very high rate of accuracy all the time.

People look to equipment to help. My experience would say that a triple horn is more accurate than a double horn.

Or is it?

Yes, you have the shorter tubing of the high F side. But also you now have a heavier horn. The issue being you have that weight to blow through and that results in some perception of loss of responsiveness. Mouthpiece choice can help this, a shallower cup is a better acoustic match to the shorter horn (more on that here).

As an experiment, I would challenge readers to try playing a light single Bb for a change and a trial. You may not like the sound — it is lighter/smaller — but you likely will feel it is harder to miss notes on, it is so light and responsive.

If you don’t have access to a quality single Bb, try the “trick” at the back of the Farkas book, take all your F horn slides off and also the valve caps and try your horn. It will feel different; more responsive, easier in the high range, the tone will be lighter, and you will likely feel more accurate.

Intonation

A professional horn needs to play well in tune with itself. Which is more of a challenge to the horn maker the more sides you put on a horn.

Really worth noting is that as built now many/most European horns are set up to favor the Bb horn. This would include horns of every type: standard double horns, triple horns, and double descant horns. I touched on this slightly in my recent intonation article, but maybe not directly enough. It has to do with tapers. U.S. brand horns were and are F horn centric, with tapers geared to the horn being more even across both sides with good low range F horn intonation. European players generally play more Bb horn than we do, so if the F horn is a little funky for intonation it is not as big a deal to them, opting on a design level for a better Bb side. For me and my preferred fingerings, however, I need a low F side with reliable intonation. This issue is often a problem with triple horns, but you can feel it on doubles too.

Not to mention that high F tapers on a triple horn are quite compromised from a theoretical ideal due to having to use a common bell and partial leadpipe with two other sides of the horn. Fortunately, you tend to only use the high F side above the staff so it is manageable.

Tone

Back to the original question posed in Horn People, certainly you can hear the difference of sound on the high F side. If it is a negative or not to your conductor is a good question. If you miss less notes and still play in tune they likely don’t care that the sound has a little bit lighter color. But it can be heard.

The overall tone tends to be different for triple horns too, due to weight. Part of why this stands out is due to a horn design pendulum having swung. Back in the 1980s when I was a student heavy horns were a big thing, such as the Lawson, with other makers also picking up the idea to a point, to better match instruments to a school market (as in, they might have been tanks but didn’t dent as easily). Now several makers are working in the opposite direction, toward even lighter horns with smaller, lighter valves. The result is new horns maybe are not as light as a natural horn, but they are lighter than the old standard horns we had been used to.

Everything impacts tone, and when you add a bunch of tubing (think triple horn) it will certainly change the sound spectrum.

Stepping back a second, the F horn has a characteristic sound on a single F horn, one I have explored in depth. The F side of a similar double horn sounds different, due in part to the extra weight of the Bb horn tubing and different tapers. The F side sounds yet different on a triple horn, with yet more additional weight and further altered tapers.

Take all that weight away from say a double or triple horn, would the sound be better? Actually, there is a point where some weight is probably a good thing. Having played a lot of F horn, I enjoy the response of the lighter single horn, but I don’t think the upper range on the single F horn sounds in a way that could ever work in an audition today (other than for the Vienna Philharmonic!), there is a raw quality to the sound, and you are certainly more prone to miss notes. Probably it is conditioning too, but for me the Bb horn simply sounds the best in high range.

Conclusions?

It is not going out on a limb to say as of 2016 the double horn remains the best compromise for most players. Specifically, I think it will overall sound better in an audition than a triple when compared back to back and can be played just as accurately by a good player. Maybe I am a little old school, but I still feel that a double horn and a descant horn is a great pair of instruments for getting the job (if you can figure out a way to get the two horns to the audition) — there are several excerpts that really work best on a descant (Brandenburg, Queen Mab, etc.). And students: don’t write off the descant, triple horns have a lot of buzz now, but a descant is a great tool on the right excerpts. But with that all said, a triple can potentially “do it all” and is a great thing for when you have the job. Check my E-book out for even more on the topic.

(And don’t totally write off the single Bb as an option either, the pendulum of horn design is swinging, how far it goes only time will tell).

This past weekend the 2017 edition of the Southwest Horn Conference was held at Phoenix College in, you guessed it, Phoenix, Arizona. There are a lot of angles you could explore in any report on an event like this, but this time around I would like to focus on some of the things I saw that were new or at least will be new to many readers.

To start, one thing that was extremely refreshing to me, having attended quite a number of regional conferences at this point, was that the featured artists invited by Rose French were not artists that have been featured at events previously. They were Mark Houghton (son of the owners of Houghton Horns) and Zachary Smith, both members of the horn section of the Pittsburgh Symphony. Also notable was that they both performed works on the final concert (for example) that are hardly ever performed at horn workshops but worth hearing. Houghton performed the Canticle III of Britten, and Smith performed William Schuman: Three Colloquies. Both were performed beautifully, and Smith joked that his might be the first workshop performance ever of this work. He might be right; it was, to say the least, a work that serves as a great advertisement for triple horns!

Turning to horns, one horn I was excited to try was the actual prototype of a new Paxman model, the 27 which is a Geyer style horn. This will be a horn to watch, as they tweak and refine the design, and it is a horn that will be I think well received in the US market.

Of course there were many others to try. I spent quite a bit of time playing the Patterson Geyer and Knopf models myself, but liked a lot of horns in the room really. This is such a golden age. There are so many good horns out there, with Chinese (Briz) horns in particular rising in quality.

And then there are mouthpieces. I did see a lot of people playing on Houghton mouthpieces (which I play), but for sure there were mouthpiece sales being made on the Osmun table, Atkinson had his new line of mouthpieces available (the most interest was in his Geyer model), and Balu had actually sold out of his most popular new models by the time I talked to him.

Besides trying things in the sales room (!), I also presented a session related to the MRI horn studies, judged the solo competitions, conducted the ASU horn ensemble, did a master class with high school students, led a group warmup, and performed! An exciting and interesting weekend with so much to see and hear.

Speaking of things to hear, another great thing was the variety of music heard, well beyond the typical “jury piece” and student recital rep most are familiar with. Bravo to all! It was a fun workshop.

To close, a few words on trends in the horn world. The big, general one is toward better equipment. I think back to say the 1980s when I was in college, so many people were playing then on horns and mouthpieces that, when you look back, they were really not that good. I hate to be too specific on negatives here, but there are brands and types of horns and mouthpieces that were used widely in the recent past that have really fallen out of favor with advanced students and pros (not to mention enthusiastic amateurs). The fact is that back then the better, older horns were wearing out (and probably had funky intonation and borderline ergonomics), and new production horns were becoming very geared to a school market. Selling a horn at a price point and not denting easily became goals above the goal of really playing and sounding great. And, if it looked like a mouthpiece it was a mouthpiece! We really expect something better now, and there were many flavors of “better” available to try in the vendor room. The final thought being, if you are one of those older players that is reluctant to try new things, you really do owe it to yourself and your students to give some new products a try. Get to a workshop, talk to some vendors, be open minded. It will be worth your time.

For a few more thoughts on the topic of equipment and trends, check out this recent episode of the Horn Notes Video Podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXZ5GJzRjjc

A topic that comes up periodically is piston valves, as in why are they not used on horns? They actually have been; a couple examples were featured in this prior article in fact. Those two horns have one big problem, the angle of travel of the valve, it is not very comfortable.

Conn among others saw that problem and made a type of piston valve horn seen in the USA. Rumor I have heard is that these were made in part to fulfill military contracts, because they had standardized on piston valve brass instruments. True or not, I don’t know.

This horn was recently loaned to me for an extended period by one of my predecessors at ASU, Ralph Lockwood, who is an enthusiast for piston valves on the horn. This instrument is a Conn, and from the serial number was made in 1916.

The notable part is the angle of the valve cluster, seen clearly in the second photo. This allows for a much better direction of travel for the valves.

Also in the first photo you will see it has an Eb slide, but also that the slide allows extra pull to take the horn down to D easily.

So how does it play? Really pretty nicely. What you seem to gain with the piston valves is a very smooth transition between notes, there are basically no “clicks” or “bumps” when you move the valves between notes. I talk a bit more about this in this article.

As noted in the first of the linked articles, piston double horns have been made but piston valves really are problematic with them needing to be really long to support the two sets of slides, and the angle issue as well to render the instrument playable. They will, I think, always be a rarity, but a most interesting one. Thanks again to Ralph Lockwood for sharing this horn for an extended trial.

Some horn players are very averse to change, but changes have to be made! One exciting type of change is getting a new horn — which I just did! This type of change can be a special challenge to players who are coming from a big horn like an 8D to a smaller horn such as the popular Geyer style horns. Trying them can even be difficult.

But let’s say that the shopping is done, the deal is made, you have the horn. What next? I just did this, so while your experiences will vary, the following has been mine.

I had been playing mostly for several years a Geyer style horn, a Willson (more here). What I liked about it was it was responsive and free blowing, professional sound, a great high Bb too, but there were some things I did not like (ranging from being for someone with a smaller left hand to other playing concerns), and in the end I just desired a better horn of the same general type to use, ideally, for the remainder of my career.

I had been trying to sell my big Paxman 25AND for nine months, but got it back from Houghton (it was on consignment — the Willson is there now), and I took the plunge and ordered a Patterson model R Geyer, seen here, after trying the model pretty thoroughly at the recent Southwest Horn Conference.

Part of the process of this switch was that I would be, for a time, back to playing the Paxman as my main horn. As I often tell people, the big Paxman is a great horn, I made my first two solo CDs playing on it, but it takes about two weeks to get used to. It is a very big horn (I call it my 5/4 size horn! Half-inch tubing on the F side and the big “American” bell), it needs some major air and takes strong articulations. I don’t think it tests well for that reason and, of course, the market for big nickel silver horns is tanking, and this is not just big but really big.

There is an important side point worth mentioning at this point in this discussion. Contrary to what some people say and think, I don’t think horns “break in” at all. What happens is YOU break in! Your playing subtly adjusts to accommodate the different horn, and in the case of my big Paxman I knew from experience how long it takes to get used to it.

Part of that process of “breaking you in” is dialing in the new horn with the mouthpiece choice. Even the best horn will feel “stuffy” with the wrong mouthpiece (even if it was the right one for your previous horn!).

I got the new Patterson horn near the beginning of our spring break, exactly two weeks ago today. In short what I was using as a mouthpiece on the big horn did not pan out as working or sounding good on the Patterson. I had been playing a Houghton mouthpiece (made by Houser) and worked through my Houghton and Houser mouthpiece options, first with a limited selection at home and then with the larger selection in my office.

The useful point I would make to readers is that what I discovered was that my Patterson plays best with a “plus 1” shank.

So what does that mean? This is one area where horn mouthpiece options have improved immensely over what we had back when I was a student. Houser in their system offers five different options as to the external taper of the shank, three of which are seen in this photo. On the right is the “0” option, which fits in a standard amount. In the middle is the “1” option, which sits in the horn less distance — 1 MM less to be exact, as seen by the tape position. The one on the left is the +2 size, which sits out of the receiver 2 MM further than the standard version. Each shank is progressively a little bigger in diameter, in other words.

For me, on this particular horn, the standard shank size works OK but I feel the +1 size brings the high range into focus. The +2 size, however, goes too far, the sound gets a bit barky and harsh on this horn.

The point of all this being not that horn players are neurotic (OK, maybe we are a little), but rather that most of the differences described above are actually in the thousandths of an inch range — yet they are very perceivable as you dial in a new horn.

A final point being that I know I am also changing my default style of articulation a little, essentially softening it to match the horn. Not to the extent that I had to when making my period horn recording (more here), but still it is the same general change. Saying it another way, when first coming off the big horn I sounded a bit barky on every mouthpiece I tried, I was hitting the notes too hard.

Thus, part of the “breaking in” process is not only finding a mouthpiece that brings things into focus but also my adjustment to the way the new horn responds. A process that took me — two weeks!

Which is all to say that you are part of the equation, the horn is part of the equation, and the mouthpiece is the final part that you can alter toward getting the sound and feel you desire. I am very happy with the horn, I should have upgraded in this direction years ago….

Looking ahead, there will be an article soon related to that last thought. I wish a horn of this quality and type were available back when I was a young professional player in the early 1990s, we have come so far in terms of horns and mouthpieces.

One thought I have heard (and have repeated myself) is that this is a “golden age” for the French horn. Or is it?

Before getting to some thoughts on this topic, I would like to quote a passage from an article to set the context of the discussion, from, believe it or not, Model Railroader magazine. The horn is not my only interest (no!), and notably they recently passed their 1,000th issue (since 1934). One featured article in that special issue was “The Future of Model Railroading,” and under the topic of “barriers” we read that

There are two barriers to advancement in our hobby. Technological and manufacturing capability certainly is one, but it plays much less of a role than you might think. We already have the technology to produce some game-changing products and systems. I think the biggest thing holding the hobby back is complacency with the status quo. It’s a lack of demand for superior products. This isn’t my own gut opinion, but rather feedback I consistently hear from manufacturers and leaders in the hobby.

Horn players are not usually so direct, but “complacency” and “lack of demand for superior products” are exactly our problems too. We won’t see the potentials of the future of the French horn until we address complacency and demand superior products. I have several examples in our French horn world that I want readers to consider.

One generally positive “real talk” topic would be the horns of today compared to the 1980s. Back then, honestly, a lot of horns used even by professionals were not real good. My two own major professors played horns a professional would never consider using today; Verne Reynolds at Eastman played a stock King Eroica (!) and Michael Hatfield at IU played a Lawson upgraded Holton 180 with a drilled-out Holton mouthpiece! Your only options back then were tired old Geyers and Kruspes (often with real issues — bad notes, bad intonation, bad ergonomics), factory horns by the likes of Conn and Holton (“sounds like a Holton” was not typically made as a positive comment), and also the very heavy and distinctive (but well made) Lawson horns, now off the market for some time. MANY grad students back then were playing Holtons and the like. We don’t see that today!

I recently purchased a Patterson Geyer, and frankly it was impossible to buy a horn of this quality level in the 1980s, with a beautiful sound and no funky notes! The technical advancement is that now many makers are capable of making horns far over the level of traditional factory horns. We have wonderful new options today, including even strong products from China. If you are a teacher still recommending that your students use horns and mouthpieces like people used in the 1980s you need open your eyes and take a good look at the world we are in now. Especially in the world of mouthpieces, it is SO much easier now to buy a mouthpiece that is vastly better than the options of the recent past. CNC lathes are wonderful machines, and when you have experienced the higher level products available now you really can’t go back to a generic mouthpiece.

But still, today we also have some of the worst horns and mouthpieces ever sold out there on the market. That there is a demand for the very cheap horn is understandable, but poorly made products undercut the entire horn community today. Students now really could all be playing horns and mouthpieces that are vastly better than were typically used 50 years ago. This is a huge problem. To move the horn forward we must all demand and expect better products! Closely related to that, teachers must be aware of how these new products will help their students play easier and better. Not all are aware.

Another type of product holding us back would be publications about horn playing. The Art of French Horn Playing is iconic and often referenced, but, objectively, it is very dated. While the warm-up may be OK, a surprising percentage of the content could easily be argued to be factually incorrect.

Let that last statement soak in for a second. It is a touchy subject, but one that experienced teachers know is true.

Too many people out there are very complacent in regard to horn reference materials and need to expect something that reflects recent advancements. Our understanding of the mechanics of horn playing really is vastly deeper now than it was in 1956. I wrote a LONG series of articles related to this very point, presented as the University of Horn Matters horn pedagogy course (it starts here). Maybe I was too subtle in it, and the series is probably too long. Based on the comments I read in the Horn People group (on Facebook) it is clear that old thinking dominates our horn world. I hope I have my students thinking deeper, but many people seem very complacent to just stick with old information. They don’t seem to even check Google to see if anything might have moved forward a tad.

For a specific example of this, I did a three-part video interview with Peter Iltis of the MRI horn studies, and while these studies are truly ground breaking and game-changing, the videos of that interview have really not had nearly the views they should have received by now. Curious about what you missed? More info here.

The only book to date to seriously make an attempt to use the MRI horn information to move horn pedagogy forward is the third edition of the Eli Epstein book. If you have not considered the implications of the MRI studies you need to! Curious to learn more? My review of his book is here.

A final big topic area I would like to point out, that the horn world is entirely too complacent about, is technical materials for horn study. Our typical etude materials are, you guessed it, dated and stuck in the 19th century. Of course, it seems like there are no options besides Kopprasch? Actually, there are surprisingly few choices from the past 90 years published for the horn, certainly not many at all that are easily purchased. I have attempted to fill this gap even myself with a series of contemporary etudes (an E-publication, more here), but the bottom line I have concluded is that it seems virtually impossible to get teachers to use new materials (or buy E-publications, either). It really is past time to give serious consideration to teaching from some different materials. In my own case, one possible solution I see is to make more use of contemporary solo horn literature, something I plan to explore in my teaching going forward.

One final specific example of complacency would be beginner methods for the horn. There is a huge need for something better, but my conclusion is that it probably won’t ever happen. Why? Because if you spend all the time to write and publish a great new beginning method, in the end, you will hardly sell enough copies to be worth your time. The market seems extremely complacent and happy enough using Pottag-Hovey or Rubank. They do get the job done — but seriously, some teachers need to wake up and demand superior products to teach from.

One supplemental publication you could try to use, if you dare to try to use something new with beginners, might be The Horn Player’s Songbook by Rose French. Have not heard of it? I talked to the author about it in this podcast.

Before I close, in the category of “breaking news” as I write this article, Jeffrey Agrell has a large new book just out that clearly is aimed, at least in part, at addressing the general topic of complacency with existing horn study materials. More on Horn Technique: A New Approach to an Old Instrument may be found here. It is time to move horn pedagogy forward. I hope to review this publication in the not too distant future.

So, what is our future? I do have hope, the potential for a lot of interesting and superior products for the horn is upon us, this really is a golden age! But there is not nearly enough awareness of the need, this is a huge problem. I know I will be exploring ways to promote recent advancements beyond the confines of Horn Matters, and in particular I personally want to explore further the entire topic of using technology better to solve problems in horn playing. How about you?

Since doing the interviews with Peter Iltis (MRI horn) last summer (more here) I have been pondering a related topic, horn intonation and vowel shapes.

It is very easy to see them in the MRI videos; the vowel shapes change with range and dynamic. The thought to project forward in relation to intonation goes something like this:

1. A new model of horn is designed to play in tune by a maker working with fine players.
2. Those fine players have a way they do thing in terms of oral cavity shapes, and the new horn is made to play well for them.
3. For a buyer to play that same horn in tune, they need to use a similar approach to oral cavity shapes.
4. And how did the fine players arrive at their approach to begin with? Because the horns they played as students required that same general approach to oral cavity shapes…

I believe that some of this is brand specific due to variations in how the people the maker worked with play, but still the general approach to vowel shapes in horn (and brass) playing perpetuates itself over years.

For a concrete example, if in the high range a potential buyer uses more of an “eee” position than the horn is designed for it will be sharp. If less, it will be flat. Exactly how even very fine players approach this will have to do with what horn they are accommodated to playing.

Of course, in relation to the high range the first step is to check the relative intonation of the F and Bb horn, there is an optimal pull to all the slides! A little more on the topic is here:

• Putting the Slides Right

But some horns are just wonky, they have construction issues like blobs of solder or really funky leadpipes or whatever that lead to intonation issues. That is why, to conclude, it is always a good idea to have a fine player check any instrument for major issues. It might not be you in other words, it could be the horn — but also you need to play it in the same manner as a would a fine player to achieve correct intonation.

A group of questions came my way related to my Rescued! CD, released last year. The first answer has to do with the horn I used, and the rest I think you can figure out the questions from the answers. For best audio quality check out the actual CD, but if you want to get the flavor of it the whole CD is (legally) now on YouTube as well.

1. So what Rick Seraphinoff did was essentially use his best practices as a natural horn maker to build a horn for me with a somewhat larger bell than he would use normally, building the horn to be convertible as a natural horn or a valved horn. It is patterned in layout after the horn illustrated as a natural horn and as a valve horn in the Kling Method. It is inspired by mid to late 19th century practices and built using the practices of that time, but not specifically copied from a particular instrument. He actually built this for me when I was in Nashville, I have been planning a project of this type for quite a long while.

2. One key to the recording was I spent about four months working on upper range articulations on that horn, playing other instruments as little as possible. Mouthpiece and crook choices were really important, along with carefully refining my articulation point.

3. Pitch is A=440

4. The original musical sources are all on IMSLP. Only three works recorded are available in a modern edition so far as I know. This actually gets to the process of making the CD as well. I found about 20 unknown or hardly performed works on IMSLP that had had some potential, to my knowledge only one having been previously recorded. I worked on all of them with the pianist and we narrowed it down to the works we felt were the best. The only one that I know of another recording of is the Oscar Franz work.

[Links to the music of all the works may be found in this article.]

5. The piano is a smaller modern piano. The recording was made in a studio using the piano available there. I wish I could tell you how many feet long but it was in any case not a large concert grand piano like we have in concert halls at ASU.

Last year a topic touched upon in an article was that of “clicks” and valve changes. In that time frame, I started taking some really extensive notes on the topic — and the notes, honestly, got out of control, so much so that there is no way to develop a full article. But it remains an important topic to consider as you think about what elements make for a great horn.

One thing I have observed is every horn with rotary valves seems to have clicks of some sort on at least a couple note connections, if you really search for them. The cause of the clicks is what I learned from a maker are acoustical “transients” that may occur at the beginning of a note. Makers work to manage these through brace placement, etc., but they are also impacted by mouthpiece choice too. These transients will occur at different places on horns of different designs.

Horn making, in short, really is a black art. Below are some bullet points on the topic from my notes, hopefully of help as you consider what exactly makes a great horn.

• One horn I loved [Knopf wrap] except for the connection between F-G on the bottom space. Huge click there, if fingered on the F horn! But using Bb horn fingerings there was no click at all.
• But that big click was not as noticeable with different mouthpieces.
• Some clicks reflect slight synchronization issues of the fingers, usually thumb and third valve not moving at the same time. (As in going from 2 to T23, F# to G# for example)
• Another horn felt hopelessly clicky on any mouthpiece I tried and I have a lot. But then I found one that made it play beautifully! Clicks? Almost totally gone. It was amazingly striking. Horn went from almost unusable to very usable.
• Meanwhile, another horn I liked was terrible on that same mouthpiece, very clicky.
• Had a very interesting time comparing Knopf and Geyer wrap models made by the same maker. They had used the same tapers and the same valve maker on both horns but the difference in sound and playing quality feel was fairly substantial. And entirely attributable to the overall wrap and brace placements, including the soldered longer joints in different spots
• “Connections” seems to be the term that works best with my students. They can feel when they are better or worse, if there is something that breaks the connection they can feel it relatively. Notes that are connected well are the opposite of notes that have distinct clicks between them.
• I see people audition on strange, poor choice mouthpieces all the time. Jupiter mouthpieces, Holton, Bach even. Their teachers have really let them down. I can always pull out a mouthpiece that feels vastly better for them to try.
• Mouthpiece receiver fit can make a huge difference in terms of clicks too.
• Looking at horns from this angle, the topic of note connections has changed some of my general thinking on horns for sure. Not only should the horn with better connections sound better but you should be more accurate on it as well.

BONUS: Editing this article I was intrigued by the note that led to the bullet “Another horn felt hopelessly clicky on any mouthpiece I tried and I have a lot. But then I found one that made it play beautifully! Clicks? Almost totally gone. It was amazingly striking. Horn went from almost unusable to very usable.” It was a mouthpiece I used in the past — for quite a few years, actually — but I knew when tried most recently with the new horn I felt that the intonation was really goofy, going very flat in the high range to be specific. But my enthusiasm in those notes intrigued me, so I got it out again. High range very flat — initially! But actually I got used to it in maybe ten minutes, intonation returned to normal and things feel like home. A week later it still feels nice, like the old friend it is, and I like the extra smoothness it gives. So I will keep experimenting, and the point to make to any reader that has made it this far into this topic is that some mouthpieces may feel goofy initially but might just be the solution if you give them a chance.