Breathtaking: An alternative approach to breathing for trumpeters

Danny Teong

Name: Danny Teong Main Subject: Trumpet, Early Music Performance Research supervisors: Wouter Verschuren, Susan Williams Title of Research: Breathtaking: An alternative approach to breathing for trumpeters Research Question: Breathing simultaneously through the nose and mouth: What are the benefits for trumpet playing? How can this technique be learned? Summary of Results: Breathing in trumpet pedagogy is a controversial area. Trumpet method books contain seemingly conflicting instructions, and breathing through the mouth and focusing on low abdomen breathing dominates conventional brass pedagogy. This research attempts to explore the teachings of Willem van der Vliet, a retired trumpet teacher, who presents an alternative approach of including the nose in the inhalation process. I have used interviews, surveys, and investigated scientific and esoteric sources to attempt to explain the breathing mechanism and to understand how and why Willem’s approach to breathing works, and how it can be learnt. Biography: Danny started playing the natural trumpet since 2011, and has freelanced with early music groups in the Netherlands and Germany. He is intrigued by the limitless rhetorical possibilities of early music and enjoys the portrayal of a singing trumpet via variations in articulation and sound colour. Danny is currently doing his master’s degree with Susan Williams in Koninklijk Conservatorium, with support from Adriana Jacoba Fonds.

Chapter 4

Summary of surveys of Willem's students

Findings

Structured surveys were conducted with Willem’s students who have studied with him for at least 4 years (similar to the length of time of study for a bachelor degree in music performance in the Netherlands) on a regular basis. With the exception of the author, the students surveyed have either a position in a major symphony orchestra or teach in a major conservatory. A trombonist was also surveyed.

In general, all the students found Willem’s ideas in breathing useful in their practice and performance. Almost everybody stated that this way of breathing has a relation to achieving a more resonant sound. Individual students also reported the following:

1. Clearer ‘attacks’
2. Increased ability to vary sound colours and hardness of articulation.
3. Increased endurance.
4. Better intonation.
5. Better connection with the body.
6. Better concentration towards music making.

All students still employ the aforementioned way of breathing at the point when the survey was conducted. 3 students, including the author, further said that this breathing method even has an effect in daily life, apart from the instrument.

The way that Willem’s breathing method was described varied wildly between each student. 3 students, including the author, went into great detail about how different areas of the body interact with the breath, with different focus. However, the tongue is a recurring body part in everybody’s description of breathing, interestingly enough.

All of Willem’s students who teach regularly incorporate Willem’s ideas into their teaching. 3 out of the 4 students who teach focus on the sound as an indicator to instruct their respective students. They seem to prefer to avoid giving out too much instruction to their students. The last student seems to adopt a physical-based approach, focused on developing the body for the breath, and subsequently the trumpet.

Further interpretation

There seems to be no question about the benefits of Willem’s breathing method, seeing that every student surveyed still practice it and found it useful in a variety of situations. Furthermore, all those who teach regularly make use of Willem’s concepts, which speak volumes of the effectiveness of Willem’s instructions.

The intriguing aspect arises from how each student understands and/or explains Willem’s breathing method. There are a lot of variations in each description, which means that everybody understands/knows the breath in different ways. However, considering everybody’s career success, it does not mean that one version is more ‘accurate’ than the other. To the author, this simply highlights the limitations of the written word, and that the experience behind the written word has to be expressed in person.

< Back Next >

Tip

Tip