Subject: TROMBONE-L Digest - 22 Oct 2002 to 23 Oct 2002 (#2002-102) There are 34 messages totalling 1907 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos (12) 2. gig bags 3. Research Request 4. Repertoire (6) 5. Edwards Bass trombone For Sale 6. MARKETING (was calgary symphony) (6) 7. Mars Music closing 8. modern classics (was Re: [TBN-L] Calgary Philharmonic Demise - Sad) 9. modern classics (was Re: [TBN-L] Calgary Philharmonic Demise -Sad) (2) 10. Henry Cabot 11. CONTRAPUNCTUS #1 by Bach/Wean for sale 12. Gordon Cherry Complete Low Brass Excerpts ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 15:09:01 +0000 From: "J.c. Sherman" Subject: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos I’m sure that in the past this subject has been thoroughly exhausted in the past, but since I’m sort of new here, I want to raise this question anew to see what “peers and ears” think. WARNING – THIS IS LONG… but I would really like some feedback. A friend and myself have been researching and prototyping Contrabass trombones for the past year and a half. We both had different needs for one, but even trying to define the instruments has been a task. We began by thinking a “real” bass trombone was in G, F, or Eb, and a “real” Contrabass trombone had to be in CC or BBb. A “real” Cimbasso was in CC or BBb. Right? But heck,, why get one at all? Do we really need something bigger than our dual-bore, twin-Thayer, 10 ½ inch bell basses? What do you use a “Contra” for? We decided there were four basic uses for the Contra: 1) Italian Opera. This is where you want the largest possible Trombone for the fourth part, often marked “Cimbasso” or “Trombone Basso” or some such. It fills the role of the Tuba, and a tuba is often used for the role. However, conductors wanting an authentic touch (not to mention better balance in the score) will not want a Tubas sound, and prefer a brighter, yet still present sound. Right? 2) Wagner, et al. There are a few other composers with this orchestration, but Wagner asks for a Contra to be under the Trombones, the bass of that section, but with a Tuba also present, so it cannot usurp that role. It must have presence and brilliance too, but must be part of the Trombones when the Tuba(s) come in. A different instrument, right? 3) A “True bass”, and this is the most troubling role. A Bass in Eb, F, or even G has been used throughout history, yet no such instruments are made today, except under the name of “Contrabass Trombone”. Some authentic small- bore G basses (my friend’s is .485 bore) can still be had, but they do not balance to a modern section at all. “Pseudo” F Contras have the reverse problem, being a little on the large side to be used as a bass. However, any time your principal player pulls out an alto, you find yourself looking at your bass and wondering “is this right.” And finally, dare I mention the glissando from Bartok’s “Concerto for Orchestra”? Heck; almost no one makes a full length F slide… 4) The chamber music, or the “wouldn’t it be cool” category. “Wouldn’t it be cool to have a Cimbasso/Contra as the bass of a quintet, instead of Tuba or Bass Trombone?” “Wouldn’t it be great to play in a Trombone choir with a Contra?” “Wouldn’t it be cool….” it’s a large category! There are a lot of “if-onlys” in here too (“if only I had a Contra I’d get more gigs”, etc.) I, for one, hate tuba in a Verdi or Puccini Opera. It’s simply wrong to my ears. To make matters worse, our local Opera Orchestra recently (after consulting with me?!) bought a 4 valve F Bass Trombone from Cerveny to fulfill this role. So I still had to hear Verdi sounding weird to my ears, plus I had to be ticked off at the choice of instrument in the pit, since the sound from that horn is so light. The rest of the section buries it! I wanted a Cimbasso for playing that music the way my ear hears it, and (if need be) to loan it to the opera if I wasn’t there myself. For me, Problem 2 was not as big an issue. In any situation requiring a “Wagner Contra”, I could make due with a Cimbasso. More preferably, I could borrow a Miraphone in the area, which I’ve done before Problem 2 was especially important to my friend. He wanted a flexible instrument, perfect for as wide a range of possibilities as one may encounter. He wanted a Contra for Wagner, Puccini, and additionally needed to be able to play glissandi in various contemporary and studio works. As a freelancer, the odds of my being asked to perform any of the Bartok glissandi were slim, and showing up to any rehearsal with a “true bass” would undoubtedly limit the number of times I would be called back. As a regular member of an orchestra, however, my buddy was desperate for a “Wagner Contra”, but he also had a keen interest in the Bartok gliss. He might actually be asked to play it! Ultimately, I built a Cimbasso in BBb (soon to be chopped to C) out of UMI parts, and it was just used for Tosca, and it’s exactly what I wanted, except that it is real tricky to play (hence chopping some tubing out for CC). We are in the midst of building a dual-bore BBb contra for my buddy, as well as a “Bartok Valve” attachment for his Edwards. But I am whole unsatisfied with my cimbasso for anything but Italian opera. It’s not what I would like in to hear in our trombone quintet or other slide stuff. Here’s the question – is an F “contra” by Thein, etc. or an Eb double slide instrument a la Dick Tyack really a contra? I am thinking of making one, but I am unconvinced at this point it really qualifies. You could argue that a Bass has moved up to Bb, so the “contrabass” should move up as well. But who here agrees with this? Is a valved, cylindrical instrument in F a “true” Bass Trombone, or a Contra? Is it a Cimbasso? What is a Cimbasso? Is a double slide instrument in Eb, built with the intent of playing Contrabass and Cimbasso parts a Bass trombone or a Contra? I realize that the intent of the maker and musician can play a key role in defining an instrument. But is there any way to nail these questions down Here’s what I think – let’s see if you agree: - Cimbasso: A cylindrical “brass bass” instrument, usually without a slide, functioning in the deepest registers of the brass section and the orchestra, with a tone perceptibly brighter than a Tuba, and with a largely cylindrical bore profile, similar to a Trombone. Thus, any BBb or CC valved instrument manufactured with that name counts. Ophicleides and Eb Tubas of old could be included historically (Hmmmm…). Cimbassos in F by Lätzsch, Kalison, Meinl Weston, and Rudolf Meinl, Cimbassos in Eb by Meinl Weston and Rudolf Meinl, the Miraphone BBb Contrabass Trombone, and any custom BBb instruments with that size bell, we agreed, made an excellent Cimbasso - Contrabass Trombone: A Trombone, usually with a slide and pitched in F, Eb, CC, or BBb, designed to serve as the bass of the Trombone section beneath a contemporary Bass Trombone. So this would include any Cimbasso of Cylindrical Bore profile, though maybe not always a favored choice; any BBb or CC slide instrument by this name would qualify. The well known, custom Thein double-slide Eb instrument owned by Dick Tyack would fit, and modern instruments we began to accept with this definition included the Alexander “Cimbasso”, and all Lätzsch, or Thein slide instruments in F - Bass Trombone: a Trombone, pitched in Bb, G, F or Eb, usually with a slide, designed to serve as the bass of the Trombone section But this sort of includes, for us, many of the instruments marketed as Cimbassos or as Contrabass instruments. Tyack’s style of double-slide instrument has familiar positions (same as alto), but I would think a much bigger bell would make the determination of whether it’s a contra or not. An F instrument seams to be all things, and can even play the Bartok gliss if you get a double slide or (very challenging) a long single slide. But what would you guys (and gals) sitting in a section want to hear? I know many of you have run across various contras in your playing, whether playing it or sitting next to it. Am I even off track with a cumbersome CC Cimbasso? Can one instrument satisfactorily “do it all”? HELP! I’ve reached the point of confusing myself! Thanks for reading this, and any answers, advice, or input you can provide would be much appreciated. Sincerely, J.c. Sherman ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 08:14:41 -0700 From: Randy Fendrick Subject: Re: gig bags Thanks for all the help re: a new gig bag! -Randy Fendrick- Bakersfield Symphony Orchestra Southside Chicago Seven ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 09:28:16 -0600 From: Phil Burton Subject: Research Request Thanks to all of you who responded to my request. Phil ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:32:33 -0400 From: Chuck De Paolo Subject: Repertoire > Frankly I see no purpose -- no value in human jukeboxes, no matter whether > they are play today's top-40 cover tunes or the top 40 from the > 1800s. Guitar picks or bows -- it doesn't make any difference. If you are > just regurgitating the old hits, you are a jukebox. I think this is a little over the top. Regurgitating? Come on. What about Picasso? Michaelangelo? Shakespeare? Shall we scrape up this "puke" into a plastic bag and toss it into the dumpster behind the art museum/library because it too is old? Following your logic, you would have us perform a piece for a few months and then burn the scores and erase the tapes since it's no longer "new." There is absolutely a place for orchestras that perform standard repertoire. So many artists and musicians climb so high in the ivory tower that they seem to forget that art actually does serve a purpose beyond innovation and provocation. Art also has a beauty element, no less important, and a great part of society actually has the gall to care about that! Furthermore, the jukebox analogy is flawed in that a jukebox is not capable of musical interpretation. Yeah, some ensembles may go through the motions when performing a Mendelssohn or Brahms, but most do not. I'll listen to the Philadelphia Orchestra perform such "cover tunes" any day of the week. > I don't think this serves any important public purpose, and I get angry > when I see grants going to orchestra companies that aren't trying to > broaden the public interest. Interesting. So, what I'm hearing is that the public, who is providing the grant money in the first place, doesn't know what it wants? Perhaps a Central Musical Planning Board staffed by experts can make those decisions for all us ignoramuses in the teeming masses. But isn't that what the National Endowment does? And don't they routinely get "in trouble" for funding bleeding edge "art" that make most of the public upset? In general, I think public grants go where the public wants them to go. Not every time. Not every place. But generally, yes. An orchestra or any other arts organization who does not garner public support through its programming hardly deserves to be on the public dole. I guess that makes me a republican? Yikes. ---Chuck ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:43:48 -0400 From: Eric Dregne Subject: Edwards Bass trombone For Sale Greetings listers, I am looking to sell an Edwards Bass Trombone that I purchased about 5 years ago. Here are the specs: E-B454 Double bass valve section (7908173) with bell no. 1335CF. E-B454-2 bass dual bore slide with B1, B2 and B3 leadpipes It is a 9 1/2" gold brass bell (unlaquered. The rest of the horn is laquered), It is a fantastic horn, but I recently was able to purchase the horn I always wanted (Bach 50 with original Ed Thayers on it) and now need to sell the Edwards. I have had other bone player friends play it and agree it is in outstanding shape. I got the horn back from the shop and it looks absolutely mint. the bell was buffed and shined and looks laquered and the 3 dents and minor mute dents were taken out. The horn comes with a Pro Tec case. I am asking $2600 for it. If you know anyone that is interested, please contact me at: swingetc@hotmail.com If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. I've had a couple of inquiries on this but have not heard back. If you get this and you already responded please drop me another line and let me know if you are still interested. Thanks a bunch, Eric M. Dregne ========== The preceding e-mail message (including any attachments) contains information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. ========== ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:49:22 -0500 From: Mike Switzer Subject: Re: Repertoire nobody should be trying to paint a picasso or a michelangelo... no problem having shakespeare's works performed because there are plenty new and contemporary plays being produced simultaneously... it's only trouble when tradition and the canon (it happens in jazz too...look at wynton, or that sad pbs documentary) take precedence over living breathing arts (produced by living breathing artists)...there are lots of beautiful 20th century pieces to my ear, and I'm sure going into the 21st century there will be even more... by not supporting living composers symphonies assure that the downward trend in attendance will continue and make it unlikely that a new breakthrough piece or movement will come about... Mike Switzer "Seek and learn to recognize who and what, in the midst of the inferno, are not inferno, then make them endure, give them space." -Italo Calvino -----Original Message----- From: Trombones and related issues forum. [mailto:TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU]On Behalf Of Chuck De Paolo Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 10:33 AM To: TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU Subject: [TBN-L] Repertoire > Frankly I see no purpose -- no value in human jukeboxes, no matter whether > they are play today's top-40 cover tunes or the top 40 from the > 1800s. Guitar picks or bows -- it doesn't make any difference. If you are > just regurgitating the old hits, you are a jukebox. I think this is a little over the top. Regurgitating? Come on. What about Picasso? Michaelangelo? Shakespeare? Shall we scrape up this "puke" into a plastic bag and toss it into the dumpster behind the art museum/library because it too is old? Following your logic, you would have us perform a piece for a few months and then burn the scores and erase the tapes since it's no longer "new." There is absolutely a place for orchestras that perform standard repertoire. So many artists and musicians climb so high in the ivory tower that they seem to forget that art actually does serve a purpose beyond innovation and provocation. Art also has a beauty element, no less important, and a great part of society actually has the gall to care about that! Furthermore, the jukebox analogy is flawed in that a jukebox is not capable of musical interpretation. Yeah, some ensembles may go through the motions when performing a Mendelssohn or Brahms, but most do not. I'll listen to the Philadelphia Orchestra perform such "cover tunes" any day of the week. > I don't think this serves any important public purpose, and I get angry > when I see grants going to orchestra companies that aren't trying to > broaden the public interest. Interesting. So, what I'm hearing is that the public, who is providing the grant money in the first place, doesn't know what it wants? Perhaps a Central Musical Planning Board staffed by experts can make those decisions for all us ignoramuses in the teeming masses. But isn't that what the National Endowment does? And don't they routinely get "in trouble" for funding bleeding edge "art" that make most of the public upset? In general, I think public grants go where the public wants them to go. Not every time. Not every place. But generally, yes. An orchestra or any other arts organization who does not garner public support through its programming hardly deserves to be on the public dole. I guess that makes me a republican? Yikes. ---Chuck ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:55:47 -0500 From: Mike Switzer Subject: MARKETING (was calgary symphony) After reading the write-up of the adams piece I am really bummed I didn't get to hear it, but you know what? I had no idea it even existed until after it was performed... I'm a relatively well-informed literate fellow, but I don't follow the orchestal world at all and had no idea this piece was being had been commissioned, much less was performed. And let me say right now, if there was a good dvd, with a good surround mix, composers and conductors commentary, adjustable angles, and behind the scenes looks at the creation of the piece and rehearsals I'd slap down $30-40 bucks for it right now...that is money waiting to be made. Do symphonies not make any money off recording? Isn't having recordings out there some of the best marketing? anyway, what I originally started to say here is that there needs to be some radical rethinking in the way (and probably the where) symphonies are promoted... I don't know waht the answer but I shouldn't have been able to avoid hearing about the adams piece... Mike Switzer "Seek and learn to recognize who and what, in the midst of the inferno, are not inferno, then make them endure, give them space." -Italo Calvino ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:26:31 -0600 From: Dennis Clason Subject: Re: Repertoire > I think this is a little over the top. Regurgitating? Come on. What about > Picasso? Michaelangelo? Shakespeare? Shall we scrape up this "puke" into a > plastic bag and toss it into the dumpster behind the art museum/library > because it too is old? Following your logic, you would have us perform a > piece for a few months and then burn the scores and erase the tapes since > it's no longer "new." Joni Mitchell (a somewhat talented painter and balladeer) said, "The difference between being an artist and being a musician is that no one ever asked Van Gogh to paint another Starry Night..." The context was a 70s concert in L.A., someone in the crowd was shouting for JM to sing "Circle Game." Other pop musicians have made similar statements -- I heard an interview with James Taylor, in which he estimated that he's sung Fire and Rain in performance at least 2500 times. So, here's hoping there's still some room for live music. At the same time, I understand how James Taylor and Joni Mitchell could tire of their most popular creations. Dennis ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 18:32:56 +0200 From: Howard Weiner Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos At 15:09 23.10.02 +0000, J.c. Sherman wrote: >I’m sure that in the past this subject has been thoroughly exhausted in the >past, but since I’m sort of new here, I want to raise this question anew >to see >what “peers and ears” think. WARNING ­ THIS IS LONG… but I would really like >some feedback. Ok, here is some historical background that I posted to the list four years ago: The term "cimbasso" has been the source of much confusion. A recent article by Renato Meucci, "The Cimbasso and Related Instruments in 19th-Century Italy" Galpin Society Journal 49 (1996) sheds much light into the cimbasso darkness. The name: The origin of the name is not known. Meucci writes: "There can be no doubt that the terms "corno basso" and "cimbasso" were synonymous. However the difference rested in a distinction of terminology: while _corno basso_ was academic, found only in treatises and theoretical works, _cimbasso_ was everyday musicians' jargon used in scores and tutors. I wish to advance here the theory that the term _cimbasso_ derives from an abbreviated form of _corno basso_ (or perhaps _corno in basso_) originally written _c. basso_ or _c. in basso_, whence _cimbasso_. This is indirectly confirmed by the lack of consistency in spelling, which varies from _cimbasso_ (most frequently) to _simbasso_ and _gimbasso_, with abbreviations such as _gibas_ found in manuscript scores and documents." What is or was a "cimbasso"? A manuscript from c. 1832 describes the _cimbasso_ as "a kind of serpent but of different shape, having a similar range and able to play in all keys." The original "cimbasso" was thus a wooden instrument (though some were apparently also made of metal) in bassoon form, with a cup mouthpiece. Meucchi's article shows several contemporary illustrations (with fingering charts) and also a photo of one of several surviving museum instruments. In the course of the 19th century, the "cimbasso" was supplanted by the ophecleide (both keyed and valved models), this in turn by the bombardone and pelittone (perhaps best described as forerunners of the tuba). The hitch is that all these instruments were also referred to as "cimbasso"!!! Then in 1881, a valved contrabass trombone was built at the request of Verdi, who didn't like the sound of the "bombardon." He felt that the bombardon didn't blend well with the trombones. The new instrument became known as the "trombone contrabbasso Verdi." It was for this instrument that Verdi wrote the parts in Otello and Falstaff. For those who want to know more, I highly recommend Meucchi's article. The "Alexander cimbasso" is a whole different story. In the 1950s and 60s there was a fellow here in Germany, Hans Kunitz by name, who developed a sort of (slide) contrabass trombone. He gave his invention the name "cimbasso" because he was conviced that it was the instrument Verdi intended when he designated "cimbasso" in his scores. (I am aware of the chronological problems inherent here, but most people have unquestioningly accepted Kunitz's assertion. I'm just reporting.) In any case, Kunitz was also active as a writer on instruments, publishing a series of books on "Die Instrumentation" (Breitkopf & Haertel) still available today. In the volume dealing with the trombone he propagated, among other questionable things, his "cimbasso" as the true bass of the trombone family. Although it has to be obvious to any half-way informed reader that Kunitz was making things up as he went along, his writings on the trombone form the basis for much of German trombone scholarship even today (MGG, MGG2). That's also the reason for the misnamed "Alexander/Thein/Kalison/ etc. cimbasso," which is simply a contrabass trombone [actually a bass-contrabass to use German terminology, i.e., a bass in F with an attachment for BBb or C, analogous to "Tenorbassposaune" for a Bb tenor with F attachment]. Howard -- Howard Weiner weiner@privat.toplink.de http://www.odilia.ch/howard-weiner If vegetarians eat only vegetables, what do humanitarians eat? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 12:42:31 -0400 From: mpurdy@JWPEPPER.COM Subject: Re: Repertoire Not to get on either side of this discussion but I might point out that Van Gogh did indeed paint another Starry Night. Same inspiration but a whole 'nuther view. This is not uncommon and could be viewed as a jazz musician playing a standard tune the way they feel it today. Or an orchestra taking another go with another conductor at a particular composition to get at some point of emphasis that might color another hearing of it. I think what Joni Mitchell might have been reacting too was the request that she perform Circle Game as she had recorded it rather than give her current view of the content of Circle Game. The public might find it difficult to accept that she may have exhausted what she had to offer with that tune. And yes, artists tend to revisit past inspiration when they have some new view of it rather than reproduce the same brush strokes on demand. Sorry for stating the obvious but it felt good to get that out of my system. Mike Dennis Clason cc: Sent by: Subject: Re: [TBN-L] Repertoire "Trombones and related issues forum." 10/23/02 12:26 PM Please respond to Dennis Clason > I think this is a little over the top. Regurgitating? Come on. What about > Picasso? Michaelangelo? Shakespeare? Shall we scrape up this "puke" into a > plastic bag and toss it into the dumpster behind the art museum/library > because it too is old? Following your logic, you would have us perform a > piece for a few months and then burn the scores and erase the tapes since > it's no longer "new." Joni Mitchell (a somewhat talented painter and balladeer) said, "The difference between being an artist and being a musician is that no one ever asked Van Gogh to paint another Starry Night..." The context was a 70s concert in L.A., someone in the crowd was shouting for JM to sing "Circle Game." Other pop musicians have made similar statements -- I heard an interview with James Taylor, in which he estimated that he's sung Fire and Rain in performance at least 2500 times. So, here's hoping there's still some room for live music. At the same time, I understand how James Taylor and Joni Mitchell could tire of their most popular creations. Dennis ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 09:44:10 -0700 From: Steve Gamble Subject: Re: MARKETING (was calgary symphony) Mike, A person spewing such caustic blather should at least be well informed. It doesn't bolster your case to admit that you don't follow the orchestra world AT ALL. Did you expect the NYPhil to come knocking at your door? Steve Gamble, Librarian Tucson Symphony Orchestra 2175 N. 6th Ave. Tucson, AZ 85705 sgamble@tucsonsymphony.org 520-792-9155 x118 520-792-9314 fax 520-991-7056 cel -----Original Message----- From: Trombones and related issues forum. [mailto:TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike Switzer Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 8:56 AM To: TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU Subject: [TBN-L] MARKETING (was calgary symphony) After reading the write-up of the adams piece I am really bummed I didn't get to hear it, but you know what? I had no idea it even existed until after it was performed... I'm a relatively well-informed literate fellow, but I don't follow the orchestal world at all and had no idea this piece was being had been commissioned, much less was performed. And let me say right now, if there was a good dvd, with a good surround mix, composers and conductors commentary, adjustable angles, and behind the scenes looks at the creation of the piece and rehearsals I'd slap down $30-40 bucks for it right now...that is money waiting to be made. Do symphonies not make any money off recording? Isn't having recordings out there some of the best marketing? anyway, what I originally started to say here is that there needs to be some radical rethinking in the way (and probably the where) symphonies are promoted... I don't know waht the answer but I shouldn't have been able to avoid hearing about the adams piece... Mike Switzer "Seek and learn to recognize who and what, in the midst of the inferno, are not inferno, then make them endure, give them space." -Italo Calvino ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:09:53 -0400 From: mpurdy@JWPEPPER.COM Subject: Re: MARKETING (was calgary symphony) Steve: Right on! Notice of this composition and the NYPhil performance was preceded by a lot of media attention out side the music world including articles in New York, The New Yorker and Time magazines. I think I recall hearing clips of the NYPhil preparing the piece on NPR but might have dreamed that so I'll mention it but not use it as an example of looking for content in the right places. I find that most people that complain this stuff is hard to find or ignored tend to make no effort to dig for sources that will keep them informed. Gee, what got into me? Mike Steve Gamble cc: Sent by: Subject: Re: [TBN-L] MARKETING (was calgary symphony) "Trombones and related issues forum." 10/23/02 12:44 PM Please respond to Steve Gamble Mike, A person spewing such caustic blather should at least be well informed. It doesn't bolster your case to admit that you don't follow the orchestra world AT ALL. Did you expect the NYPhil to come knocking at your door? Steve Gamble, Librarian Tucson Symphony Orchestra 2175 N. 6th Ave. Tucson, AZ 85705 sgamble@tucsonsymphony.org 520-792-9155 x118 520-792-9314 fax 520-991-7056 cel -----Original Message----- From: Trombones and related issues forum. [mailto:TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike Switzer Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 8:56 AM To: TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU Subject: [TBN-L] MARKETING (was calgary symphony) After reading the write-up of the adams piece I am really bummed I didn't get to hear it, but you know what? I had no idea it even existed until after it was performed... I'm a relatively well-informed literate fellow, but I don't follow the orchestal world at all and had no idea this piece was being had been commissioned, much less was performed. And let me say right now, if there was a good dvd, with a good surround mix, composers and conductors commentary, adjustable angles, and behind the scenes looks at the creation of the piece and rehearsals I'd slap down $30-40 bucks for it right now...that is money waiting to be made. Do symphonies not make any money off recording? Isn't having recordings out there some of the best marketing? anyway, what I originally started to say here is that there needs to be some radical rethinking in the way (and probably the where) symphonies are promoted... I don't know waht the answer but I shouldn't have been able to avoid hearing about the adams piece... Mike Switzer "Seek and learn to recognize who and what, in the midst of the inferno, are not inferno, then make them endure, give them space." -Italo Calvino ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 19:20:11 +0200 From: Ben van Dijk Subject: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos Hi Mr. Sherman, Here is some text I brought into a discussion on the OTJ forum a while ago. Hope it is of some value for you. (I like to add some thoughts on this topic myself. First of all, I think the contrabass trombone deserves his place in the trombone family, both in the symphony orchestra but also in the trombone ensemble repertoire. In Germany almost all big orchestra's and all Opera houses make use of the contrabass trombone. There are some great players in these orchestras. Some symphonic works with original contrabass parts are; The Alpine Symphony - R Strauss Canticum Sarcrum - Stravinski. 3 Symphony - Glinka Gurrelieder - Schoenberg many works by Krenek,Henze and Bernd Alois Zimmermann have contraparts. Varese,Ligeti, Boulez and Schnitke make use of the contra very often. Believe me, there is much more. In the Opera repertoire there is even more written for the CBT. Most of these parts are playable on the bass trombone but the special sound of the contra ads so much to it. In 1998 I made a solo tour through the USA and played with the trombone sections of Chicago, Cleveland and New York. (see my site at http://www.basstrombone.nl/default.asp?subj=tours&tour=usa1998en ) We played orchestral repertoire with the CBT as an extra and the reactions of those sections were unanimous positive about the extra value of this beauty. About the different contrabasses available, I like to say, there are some very good instruments on the market. In my opinion only the Latzsch and the Thein are the ones with that special sound a contrabass needs. No tuba sound, just a big, wide (with centre), flexible sound that makes the trombone section so full. Most of the others I have played, and I think I have played them all, sound to much similar to the bass trombone or to the Tuba and do not add something special to the trb section. I know the Thein and Latzsch Contrabass trombones are quit expansive but let's be honest, a Ferrari costs also more then a Deawoo. Beside that be happy you don't play the bassoon. If you have interest to hear me on the contra, listen to my CD "Nana", where I play with the New York Philharmonic trb-section 2 Bruckner Motets. There is also a great Ring de Nibelungen compilation out on RCA with my former orchestra on which I play the contrabass trombone. (see information at: http://home.soneraplaza.nl/qn/prive/h.devlieger/discography.htm ) ) "Sherman writes" 1) Italian Opera. This is where you want the largest possible Trombone for the fourth part, often marked “Cimbasso” or “Trombone Basso” or some such. It fills the role of the Tuba, and a tuba is often used for the role. However, conductors wanting an authentic touch (not to mention better balance in the score) will not want a Tubas sound, and prefer a brighter, yet still present sound. Right? My Idea: I don't think you are completely right when you say you want the largest possible trombone here. Don't forget Verdi writes for rather small, mostly valve trombones and a too big sound is not what most conductors want for Verdi. I think the Cimbasso, as we know it today, like Thein or Lätzsch make today is the best for the Verdi repertoire. In Otello and Falstaff you can use the contrabass trombone in F when you are able to play it in a lighter style then the German repertoire. "Sherman writes" 2) Wagner, et al. There are a few other composers with this orchestration, but Wagner asks for a Contra to be under the Trombones, the bass of that section, but with a Tuba also present, so it cannot usurp that role. It must have presence and brilliance too, but must be part of the Trombones when the Tuba(s) come in. A different instrument, right? My Idea: I think I made my opinion clear in the OTJ discussion. "Sherman writes" 3) A “True bass”, and this is the most troubling role. A Bass in Eb, F, or even G has been used throughout history, yet no such instruments are made today, except under the name of “Contrabass Trombone”. Some authentic small- bore G basses (my friend’s is .485 bore) can still be had, but they do not balance to a modern section at all. “Pseudo” F Contras have the reverse problem, being a little on the large side to be used as a bass. However, any time your principal player pulls out an alto, you find yourself looking at your bass and wondering “is this right.” And finally, dare I mention the glissando from Bartok’s “Concerto for Orchestra”? Heck; almost no one makes a full length F slide… My Idea: You might take a look at the Bartok-valve section the Thein brothers made for me some years ago. http://www.thein-brass.de/index_en.php You can find a picture in the instrument contents. With this device it is very easy to play either the concerto for orchestra gliss or the glisses used in Bartoks Miraculous Mandarin. "Sherman writes" 4) The chamber music, or the “wouldn’t it be cool” category. “Wouldn’t it be cool to have a Cimbasso/Contra as the bass of a quintet, instead of Tuba or Bass Trombone?” “Wouldn’t it be great to play in a Trombone choir with a Contra?” “Wouldn’t it be cool….” it’s a large category! There are a lot of “if-onlys” in here too (“if only I had a Contra I’d get more gigs”, etc.) My Idea: Yes it is cool to play the contra in trombone choir music. We use it a lot here in Holland when we play trombone ensemble music and it works great. For some older styled music I think the contra would fit perfect in the Brass quintet but it should not be in the way. If you are interested, the Theins make a combination instrument where you can change the contrabass trombone into a Cimbasso as we use it today. They made one for the Opera in Paris. All the best, Ben van Dijk Basstrombone Rotterdam Philharmonic Rotterdam Conservatory Royal Northern College of Music, Manchester www.basstrombone.nl ben@basstrombone.nl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:41:13 -0400 From: Stephen Troy Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos At 03:09 PM 10/23/2002 +0000, J.c. Sherman wrote: >2) Wagner, et al. There are a few other composers with this >orchestration, but Wagner asks for a Contra to be under the Trombones, the bass >of that section, but with a Tuba also present, so it cannot usurp that role. >It must have presence and brilliance too, but must be part of the Trombones >when the Tuba(s) come in. A different instrument, right? In the Ring music dramas, the contra can indeed usurp the tuba role. According to the full score, the contra seldom plays along with the tuba; when the tuba plays with all 4 trombones, the 4th part is usually marked to be played on a regular bass trombone (note: the score is marked this way, the 4th trombone part usually isn't). When the tuba doesn't play along, the 4th trombone part often switches to contra to be the true "bass" voice. Sort of a cylindrical vs. conical thing: the contra functions as the bass of the trombones when it is used, and the tuba is more often used as the bass of the horn/Wagner tuba section. Steve Troy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:35:15 -0500 From: Mike Switzer Subject: Re: MARKETING (was calgary symphony) sorry.. didn't see anything caustic about my blather...or particularly blatheriffic about my causticity... I'll work on that... ;) if the symphonic world wants a new or growing audience, then yeah, maybe they should knock on my door, or advertise on buffy, or something... I said I didn't know what the answer was, but if they had managed to get info about the piece to me, I would have been interested...sorry if that seems caustic or blathering... ask yourself why someone interested in modern music both improvised and composed wouldn't folllow the orchestra world at all, and if you are willing to put at least some of the responsibility for that on the orchestra world and not just all on me, maybe you will come up with some interesting answers that could help expand your audience... or you could just continue to talk down to folks like me who would like to be engaged by what you are doing, but aren't yet... Mike "Seek and learn to recognize who and what, in the midst of the inferno, are not inferno, then make them endure, give them space." -Italo Calvino -----Original Message----- From: Trombones and related issues forum. [mailto:TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU]On Behalf Of Steve Gamble Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 11:44 AM To: TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU Subject: Re: [TBN-L] MARKETING (was calgary symphony) Mike, A person spewing such caustic blather should at least be well informed. It doesn't bolster your case to admit that you don't follow the orchestra world AT ALL. Did you expect the NYPhil to come knocking at your door? Steve Gamble, Librarian Tucson Symphony Orchestra 2175 N. 6th Ave. Tucson, AZ 85705 sgamble@tucsonsymphony.org 520-792-9155 x118 520-792-9314 fax 520-991-7056 cel -----Original Message----- From: Trombones and related issues forum. [mailto:TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike Switzer Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 8:56 AM To: TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU Subject: [TBN-L] MARKETING (was calgary symphony) After reading the write-up of the adams piece I am really bummed I didn't get to hear it, but you know what? I had no idea it even existed until after it was performed... I'm a relatively well-informed literate fellow, but I don't follow the orchestal world at all and had no idea this piece was being had been commissioned, much less was performed. And let me say right now, if there was a good dvd, with a good surround mix, composers and conductors commentary, adjustable angles, and behind the scenes looks at the creation of the piece and rehearsals I'd slap down $30-40 bucks for it right now...that is money waiting to be made. Do symphonies not make any money off recording? Isn't having recordings out there some of the best marketing? anyway, what I originally started to say here is that there needs to be some radical rethinking in the way (and probably the where) symphonies are promoted... I don't know waht the answer but I shouldn't have been able to avoid hearing about the adams piece... Mike Switzer "Seek and learn to recognize who and what, in the midst of the inferno, are not inferno, then make them endure, give them space." -Italo Calvino ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:47:43 -0500 From: Craig Parmerlee Subject: Mars Music closing To whom it may concern, see http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/local/sfl-zmars23oct23,0,7288456.story?coll=sfla%2Dbusiness%2Dfront ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 21:10:20 +0200 From: Simon Bailey Subject: modern classics (was Re: [TBN-L] Calgary Philharmonic Demise - Sad) On Tue, 2002-10-22 at 20:33, Craig Parmerlee wrote: > A big part of our dilemma is that so much of the 20th century music was > really crappy, it isn't worth performing. What MBAs did for Enron, the > music college industry did for symphonic music. one of the most interesting concerts i have ever been to included a performance of friedrich gulda's cello concerto. the first movement of the concerto has a driving rock-style rhythym on a full drum kit. it was very interesting to watch the reactions of the audience who didn't know the piece at all -- they were all expecting an old style cello concerto, and were very surprised by the sight of the drum kit on the stage before anything even started. there were some weird looks when the piece started, but most of the audience got into the swing fairly quickly. it was followed by one of mozart's overtures and the second half was schuberts unfinished. all in all a very good concert, if provocating. but most of the audience enjoyed it. greetings, simon. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 14:14:04 -0500 From: Craig Parmerlee Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos At 03:09 PM 10/23/2002 +0000, J.c. Sherman wrote: >I’m sure that in the past this subject has been thoroughly exhausted in the >past, but since I’m sort of new here, I want to raise this question anew >to see >what “peers and ears” think. WARNING ­ THIS IS LONG… but I would really like >some feedback. -- snip -- I think most of the discussion (historically and presently) about the role of "bass", "real bass" and "contrabass" gets sidetracked because it concerns itself too much with the length of the instrument and not enough with the sound and playing characteristics. The length isn't terribly apropos to anything except "fingering". There is nobody on this planet who can discern the timbrel difference between two tubas that are of the same design and materials, differing only in length (BBb or CC). The only reasons for choosing one over the other are weight and fingering. When we talk about the "true bass" being a G instrument, I would argue that the G business is completely irrelevant except for its implications on "fingering". What *IS* relevant is the timbre, and most of those G instruments had a rather small bore by today's standards. If that is the sound that the music needs, then we need to use instruments that follow similar proportions. Likewise, range is not much of an issue, as skilled Bb bass trombonists are quite effective down to pedal F or Eb these days, and the contra parts rarely venture below that level. I believe the crux of the issue, as suggested by Ben van Dijk, is brilliance and total sound volume. Brilliance of the cylindrical trombone/trumpet family versus a big rounded sound typical of the tuba/flugelhorn family. The instrument is important, but the mouthpiece is far more instrumental (bad pun, I know). For example, I have a Meinl cimbasso. It arrived from the factory with a huge hulking tuba mouthpiece, which makes it sound like an anemic tuba. I have not completely settled on my perfect mouthpiece, but a big bass trombone mouthpiece brings the timbre right into line (brilliance-wise) with the rest of the trombone section. Same thing applies to bass trombones. Throw a Schilke 60 on any bass trombone and it is not going to be very brilliant unless you have a player who can generate enormous velocity through that piece, which is not the typical approach to playing in the bass register. So where does this all lead? You can play just about any of the required notes on Bb bass trombone. But a carefully proportioned contrabass trombone or cimbasso and well chosen mouthpiece can truly give you a special combination of brilliance and volume that aren't easily achieved in the very low register with a Bb bass trombone. That's how I see it anyway. Craig P.S. It is vary hard to be succinct when talking about the contra instruments. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 14:33:01 -0500 From: Craig Parmerlee Subject: Re: Repertoire At 11:32 AM 10/23/2002 -0400, Chuck De Paolo wrote: > > Frankly I see no purpose -- no value in human jukeboxes, no matter whether > > they are play today's top-40 cover tunes or the top 40 from the > > 1800s. Guitar picks or bows -- it doesn't make any difference. If you >are > > just regurgitating the old hits, you are a jukebox. > >I think this is a little over the top. Regurgitating? Come on. What about >Picasso? Michaelangelo? Shakespeare? Shall we scrape up this "puke" into a >plastic bag and toss it into the dumpster behind the art museum/library >because it too is old? Following your logic, you would have us perform a >piece for a few months and then burn the scores and erase the tapes since >it's no longer "new." No that wasn't my point. I didn't mean to imply the music isn't worthwhile. What I meant to say and didn't express clearly enough is that I see no compelling service to society in the ongoing performance of the "top 40 of the past 200 years". If people want to hear that, the consumers of that should fund 100% of the costs, just as Brittney Spears' fans do today. I don't think a penny of public money should go to companies that spend the majority of their time playing the old chestnuts and celebrating the occasions with wine and cheese in the lobby. I do believe there is a strong public purpose in promoting the enjoyment of a broader range of symphonic music and other intellectually inspired music as well and I wholeheartedly support public investment in this case. I'm not sure you'll like my clarified answer any better than the original, but I hope it isn't as ambiguous as my earlier message anyway. :) Cheers, CP ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 20:25:45 +0000 From: "J.c. Sherman" Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos Craig, I would agree with your statement on mouthpieces. I'm still trying to find a mouthpiece I like in my Cimbasso! However, while I know there is subtle difference between CC and BBb equivalent tubas, I'm more concerned with the difference in BBb versus F or Eb, both with my Tubas and with the issue of Contras. A "G" bass does sound very different from an identical Bb tenor (we've checked - much different) and an F Bass will sound different than a Bb (I made one of those as well, which I dismantled since F positions are too long without a throw rod, and a throw rod is too dangerous without a full length slide). I pick my tubas not on fingerings at all, but on sound. I could care less if the instrument (tuba or trombone) was in E natural as long as the sound was right. But I must disagree with you, and argue that two different length instruments will sound different. Otherwise we'd all play Eb altos with two triggers to cover that same range you mentioned. After all, who needs more, right? I probably sound sarcastic. Sorry. You do mention the need for a "well proportioned" Contra or cimbasso. The question is - what defines those proportions? Theins have (I think) a smaller slide than my bass (.547/.562). Edwards experimented with a rather gigantic bell section for an F Bass. Cimbassos come in every key with every bore size immaginable. But what's right, and what MAKE'S it right? What makes a Meinl Weston F a cimbasso and a Cerveny F a bass valve-trombone? The angle? There's the bulk of my confusion. A triggered "Tyack" double-slide Eb has everything going in simplicity - one valve, familiar positions with and without the valve, and a relatively small bell. But can I justify playing parts written for Tosca and Rheingold with this? I guess the answer I'm getting is "sure"? Get the right size parts, good mouthpiece, and play whatever. Is it that simple? I wouldn't be surprised if (as usual in my life) I've made this issue far too complex for myself. Thanks for responding, and thanks for understanding the length of my originating message (and this one, hopefully). J.c. Sherman > At 03:09 PM 10/23/2002 +0000, J.c. Sherman wrote: > >I’m sure that in the past this subject has been thoroughly exhausted in the > >past, but since I’m sort of new here, I want to raise this question anew > >to see > >what “peers and ears” think. WARNING ­ THIS IS LONG… but I would really like > >some feedback. > > -- snip -- > > I think most of the discussion (historically and presently) about the role > of "bass", "real bass" and "contrabass" gets sidetracked because it > concerns itself too much with the length of the instrument and not enough > with the sound and playing characteristics. The length isn't terribly > apropos to anything except "fingering". There is nobody on this planet who > can discern the timbrel difference between two tubas that are of the same > design and materials, differing only in length (BBb or CC). The only > reasons for choosing one over the other are weight and fingering. > > When we talk about the "true bass" being a G instrument, I would argue that > the G business is completely irrelevant except for its implications on > "fingering". What *IS* relevant is the timbre, and most of those G > instruments had a rather small bore by today's standards. If that is the > sound that the music needs, then we need to use instruments that follow > similar proportions. > > Likewise, range is not much of an issue, as skilled Bb bass trombonists are > quite effective down to pedal F or Eb these days, and the contra parts > rarely venture below that level. > > I believe the crux of the issue, as suggested by Ben van Dijk, is > brilliance and total sound volume. Brilliance of the cylindrical > trombone/trumpet family versus a big rounded sound typical of the > tuba/flugelhorn family. The instrument is important, but the mouthpiece is > far more instrumental (bad pun, I know). For example, I have a Meinl > cimbasso. It arrived from the factory with a huge hulking tuba mouthpiece, > which makes it sound like an anemic tuba. I have not completely settled on > my perfect mouthpiece, but a big bass trombone mouthpiece brings the timbre > right into line (brilliance-wise) with the rest of the trombone section. > > Same thing applies to bass trombones. Throw a Schilke 60 on any bass > trombone and it is not going to be very brilliant unless you have a player > who can generate enormous velocity through that piece, which is not the > typical approach to playing in the bass register. > > So where does this all lead? You can play just about any of the required > notes on Bb bass trombone. But a carefully proportioned contrabass > trombone or cimbasso and well chosen mouthpiece can truly give you a > special combination of brilliance and volume that aren't easily achieved in > the very low register with a Bb bass trombone. > > That's how I see it anyway. > Craig > > P.S. It is vary hard to be succinct when talking about the contra instruments. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 16:41:17 -0400 From: Roger Hecht Subject: Re: MARKETING (was calgary symphony) Mike Switzer wrote: >if the symphonic world wants a new or growing audience, then yeah, maybe >they should knock on my door, >or advertise on buffy, or something... There is a point being made here. Few have deplored the state of classical music vis a vis attracting audiences more than I have. And it's true that many things worth knowing about are not going to be fed to us intravenously by the national media. But as I said, Mike has a point here. When Verdi died, there was national mourning in Italy. Few composers achieved that level of veneration among the "masses" of yore, but many certainly were well known and respected and their works looked forward to. I doubt people had to go on a "seek" mission to learn Verdi had commposed another opera. Operas were the movies of that time. Puccini achieved much of this fame, as well. Elgar was quite the figure in England. So was Shakespeare. Dickens was a best selling novelist who made his fame writing for in magazines--as did many great writers of the 19th century. Many novels that we deem classics today were popular with their contemporary masses. Some were extremely important. Utpon Sinclair's "The Jungle" changed the future of the meat industry. Nevil Shute's "On the Beach" affected the way we think of nuclear war. And so it goes. Times were different, then. People had time, for one thing. Great books take time. The magnificent Les Miserables takes much longer to read than to experience in the theater. A great symphony takes much longer than a popular song. Unfortunately, we don't have time the way people used to, and much of the time we do have is compressed, compartmentalized. Great art takes time and we don't have that much time. It may also require hardship. Life was harder then than it is now, but there's probably more to it than that. For one thing, we live in an age of propaganda and advertising. Corporations need to sell things and to do that they have to advertise. Naturally, they want their advertising to be quickly effective. And so they've glommed onto popular music, TV, the movies, sports and promoted the daylights out of all of those things. Why not? It's the way to the quickest return. In that sense the corporations have taken over our popular culture and directed it to their own ends. Yes, they could do this with a symphony, but that takes too much time, and speaks too deeply. In a way it may even resist the ads associated with it. One writer noted that academia took over music. This is true and I agree with the opinion that much of the music it produced was dry and dull. Perhaps we should ask why academia picked up on classical music. At least a partial answer is that it was allowed to. Or put another way, classical music was abandonded to it. My bottom line is that if classical music, writing, art, etc. were promoted with the same zeal popular music, TV and sports are pushed, people would be humming arias not only from La Traviata but also from operas that were never written. It's true, you find classical music and new works culture where you look for it and them. But you have to look a lot harder than you used to. All idealism aside, that does not bode well for the arts. Roger Hecht ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:45:20 -0700 From: Gabriel Langfur Subject: Re: MARKETING (was calgary symphony) --- Steve Gamble wrote: > Mike, > > A person spewing such caustic blather should at least be > well informed. Whoa... > It doesn't bolster your case to admit that you don't > follow the > orchestra world AT ALL. I do follow the orchestra world, and frankly I think the Adams commission could have gotten more press in the mainstream media. Did you expect the NYPhil to > come knocking at > your door? Maybe not that far, but when someone decides to make a real PR splash and put real money behind it, they can do HUGE things. I think Mike has a point...when the Boston Symphony replaced John Williams with Keith Lockhart as Boston Pops Music Director they took a relative unknown and created a celebrity out of him. Press conferences, newspaper articles, local TV news coverage, billboards, sides of buses even! And then they backed it up with an extensive series of recordings with Keith's face all over them. I had only ever heard his name because other musicians who had played for him in other places mentioned him to me. Likewise with Seiji Ozawa retiring and being replaced with James Levine. These things get press coverage because people in the BSO management know what they are doing and have the budgets to do them, not necessarily because of wide public interest. I think that the logical conclusion of Mike's point might very well be that large orchestras with secure budgets can CREATE more public interest in new art if they dedicate resources to doing so. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't...I actually don't think the overall picture is as bleak as many others on the list do. Gabe __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:58:52 -0700 From: David Guion Subject: Re: modern classics (was Re: [TBN-L] Calgary Philharmonic Demise -Sad) Does anyone know the recent history of the symphony by John Corigliano, which was commissioned by the Chicago Symphony Orchestra? Its premiere was pretty heavily hyped. I haven't heard who else has played it since then. It has long been my opinion that when an orchestra commissions a new work, it should play that work for several seasons, not just on one series of concerts. How else are we supposed to know if anything new is any good unless we have a chance to hear it more than once? Plus, if the orchestra for whatever reason does not play it effectively the first time, the work deserves another chance. If it's no good, people might legitimately wonder if it's the piece or the performance. Multiple performances by the same orchestra would settle the question relatively quickly. But of course, none of the major orchestras have ever shown the slightest interest in my opinions :-( The fact that new music is under copyright and therefore incurs fees for performance rights may legitimately keep municipal and community orchestras from trying it out. That shouldn't stop the groups that have the money to commission new music in the first place. They should play each other's commissions. I hope the answer to my question is that, after all the hype, the Corigliano symphony has had a respectable number of performances by several orchestras world-wide. But I use that piece as only one example in wondering what happens to important commissions. -- *^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^* David Guion Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? david@trombone.org *^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^* -- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 17:12:41 -0400 From: retiredprof55 Subject: Henry Cabot I am hoping someone can tell me how to get in touch with Henty Cabot. I was returning a call to him on the phone number he left on my answering machine and all I get is the sound of a FAX Machine. Thanks Sy Brandon ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 17:36:19 -0400 From: Roger Hecht Subject: Re: modern classics (was Re: [TBN-L] Calgary Philharmonic Demise -Sad) At 01:58 PM 10/23/2002 -0700, David Guion wrote: >Does anyone know the recent history of the symphony by John Corigliano, >which was commissioned by the Chicago Symphony Orchestra? Its premiere was >pretty heavily hyped. I haven't heard who else has played it since then. The St. Louis Symphony or maybe it was the National Symphony under Leonard Slatkin played it in Boston. I think that's where I heard it. It has been recorded twice to my knowledge. By Slatkin/National and Chicago/Barenboim. I was not that impressed with it and I may have heard it twice, once live, once on records. I guess all this vagueness means it didn't make much of an impression, though it is obviously a heartfelt serious work. That's the extent of my knowledge about it. Roger Hecht ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 23:15:10 +0100 From: Edward Solomon Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos Here's something I posted on the OTJ Forum earlier this year (slightly edited), which might help to clarify the issue of the contrabass in F versus BBb: It is easy to see why professionals use an instrument pitched in F when most of the repertoire never descends below GGb, which is the lowest playable natural note (i.e. second partial) on the F contrabass, without resorting to pedal notes from FF downwards. Remember that one is never supposed to employ pedal notes on the contrabass trombone. In fact Richard Strauss went to great lengths when orchestrating to specify when low trombone parts are supposed to involve pedal notes (2nd or 3rd trombone) versus low natural notes (4th, or contrabass, trombone). The obvious advantageof the F contrabass trombone, as with the Bb/F bass trombone when compared with the G, F or Eb bass trombones, is that one only has to set and maintain in motion an air column that is minimum 12 feet in length, as opposed to at least 18 feet in the BBb contrabass, though there is obviously some trade-off in tone quality due to the difference in pitch. Given the relative scarcity of parts for the contrabass trombone, it is hardly surprising that there has been reluctance to further develop its role in the orchestra. There is, as Robin Gregory pointed out in his book The Trombone some thirty years ago, a vicious circle, in that there are few good performers on the contrabass trombone, hence composers/arrangers do not score for it often. It is, sadly, a self-perpetuating circumstance, not least due to the very high prices charged for contrabass trombones, which is a factor in its own right, there not being that many trombonists who can afford to dip into their pockets to the tune of several thousand pounds/dollars/euros in order to purchase an instrument that is not called for very often. The truth is that whoever has put up the funds to buy one is very likely to play it well to get their money's worth out of an already very expensive instrument. But name one composer or arranger that actually knows that! Then, too, there are the general misconceptions about the trombone, often due to outdated texts about instrumentation and orchestration. There are examples of these around that still mention the "obsolete" alto trombone and the bass trombone in G, which (although neither is totally obsolete, nor ever has been) does not lend itself well to educating future generations of writers and orchestrators. The contrabass trombone, unsurprisingly, suffers the most at the hands of these writers, because the claims made about the difficulties in execution are wildly inaccurate, certainly with respect to today's modern contrabass trombone, which, moreover, has been in existence since 1921, when it was first designed in Berlin, and used ever since in preference to the older BBb instrument. A recent (1997) book I picked up (Instrumentation and Orchestration by Alfred Blatter), at least does the contrabass trombone some justice by stating: "However, as a cylindrical brass, it is a unique bass sound, not replaceable by the tuba. Scored with care and an understanding of the performance problems, it is an effective and majestic voice not easily forgotten but not often available." Robin Gregory, however, sums it up: "One cannot help feeling that not enough use is made by composers of this magnificent instrument, with its dark colour and massive tone. Some of the reasons for its neglect have already been mentioned - exaggerated accounts in many of the standard works on orchestration of the demands it makes of the player, which are certainly not true of the modern instrument; incomplete comprehension, perhaps, of its potentialities; unwillingness to write for an instrument which is unlikely to be available, and knowledge of the fact that even when a part is provided more often than not it will be played by a tuba, or, transposed an octave up, where necessary, by a tenor-bass trombone. Like the soprano trombone, but perhaps for less sufficient reason, the contrabass has never managed to gain a firm foothold in the orchestra; it is to be hoped that the development of the newer instruments described above may eventually enable it to do so." The bottom line is that the contrabass trombone, whether in BBb or F, is sadly neglected and the differences between instruments are really neither here nor there when you look at the bigger picture, for it is such a rarity that to see a contrabass trombone being used at all is a marvel for most people, regardless of which key the instrument is in! __________________________________________ Edward Solomon British Trombone Society Webmaster mailto:webmaster@trombone-society.org.uk Visit "The Trombonist Online" - the online magazine of the British Trombone Society http://www.trombone-society.org.uk __________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 15:51:07 -0700 From: emrose79@PACBELL.NET Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos Actually, you can play just about all of the notes on a tenor (with or without an F attachment..as I've heard someone do! I guess you can do it on just about any instrument, for that matter)..I agree...it all comes down to the sound.... Ed Craig Parmerlee wrote: > > > You can play just about any of the required > notes on Bb bass trombone. But a carefully proportioned contrabass > trombone or cimbasso and well chosen mouthpiece can truly give you a > special combination of brilliance and volume that aren't easily achieved in > the very low register with a Bb bass trombone. > > That's how I see it anyway. > Craig > > P.S. It is vary hard to be succinct when talking about the contra instruments. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 15:49:13 -0700 From: Gordon Cherry Subject: CONTRAPUNCTUS #1 by Bach/Wean for sale Dear brass colleagues: CONTRAPUNCTUS #1 by J.S. Bach, transcribed by Ellis Wean for Brass Quintet. A fantastic new transcription of J.S. BACH'S immortal CONTRAPUNCTUS #1, transcribed by Vancouver Symphony tubist, Ellis Wean is now for sale by the Cherry Classics. This work of about 5 minutes in length can be performed with a standard brass quintet of advanced players. Mr. Wean has transcribed this work in a very unique way, giving the piece a very "Symphonic" sound by blending together numerous combinations of voices from the quintet. The effect is very powerful, especially at the conclusion, with a thundering climax of sound. You are bidding on brand new printed parts. All parts and score (unbound) are printed on 24 lb. brilliant white paper, however if you wish I can upload the arrangement to you via pdf file format using Adobe's free software, Acrobat Reader. If you don't have it already you can download load it free on Adobe's web site. Printing out this way saves you costs on shipping and valuable time. You can have it immediately!! This work will be sold through eBay or privately on my web site (it's not posted there yet, so you can send me an email at this address above or gcherry@Cherry-Classics.com Cost for parts and score is $15.00 US. We accept personal checks, money orders, PayPal and eBay Online Payments as a payment method for this item. Please check out my feedback ratings and take a look at my other auctions. Ask for a free complete list of my published works for brass. You won't be disappointed. Satisfaction is guaranteed!! Shipping cost by Canada Post is $2.00 air mail to North America, $3.00 internationally. Best wishes, Gordon Cherry ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 15:53:42 -0700 From: emrose79@PACBELL.NET Subject: Re: Repertoire and on this point...my peeve has always been that they will only play the "top 40" (of what ever music genre)..but I've always wanted to hear maybe the bottom 40..or something in between! Ed Craig Parmerlee wrote: > > "top 40 of the past 200 years". ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 19:31:52 -0400 From: Randy Campora Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos Howard and everybody: What can you tell us about Wagner's version of the contrabass trombone? Would he have envisioned a slide instrument or a valved instrument? I suppose I always envisioned the Wagner version as being a slide instrument, and the cimbasso "Verdi" style as being a valved instrument. Also, keep in mind one other factor in how a contrabass sounds: who is playing it, a tuba player or a bass trombone player. One will be playing a larger mouthpiece than his normal setup and the other will be playing the same mouthpiece or a smaller mouthpiece on the cimbasso/contra. They will be coming at the instrument from different sound patterns in their heads. The reason I say this is: Hans Stroecker, bass trombonist of the Vienna Philharmonic, told me about 12 years ago that in Vienna the tradition has always been that the contra part in the Wagner and other opera repertoire is played by one of the tuba players. The VPO was going to do a Ring cycle with Dohnanyi and Hans asked the conductor months ahead of time if he would allow him to break tradition and play the contra part (I think Hans wanted to actually play the contra part on his regular Edwards bass or whatever he was playing at the time, ala Steve Norrell at the MET--but I am not certain of that point). Dohnanyi said no, we will do it like always, tuba player plays the contra. Also, he said in Vienna that the contra they use is the valved version, more like the Verdi cimbasso described by Howard. So you can see how the Solti recording of the Ring in the 60's has a particularly mean and present sounding contra part, it is being played by a tuba player on a cimbasso type instrument. I saw Vienna do Strauss's Elektra in Carnegie Hall in the early 90s and Hans played the 3rd bass trombone part and the 2nd tuba player played the contra part on a valved cimbasso. However, in Berlin, I understand that the contra part is played by the bass trombone player, though I don't know if traditionally they use a slide instrument or a valved instrument. I guess I have assumed it was a slide instrument, though I don't know what is normally done in Bayreuth each summer. The ads in Das Orchester for bass usually specify that contra will be asked as well. There is an audition coming in FEB for the bass trombone position in the Chicago Lyric and I doubt any of the folks will be showing up with contras even though there is a lot of contra stuff on the audition. For what it's worth, we just did a 50 minute Ring Without Words type concert, and I played the contra part on my Bach 50 with Thayers and a Bach dual bore slide with a Schilke 60-D mouthpiece: large American equipment and I think it worked pretty well. There were a couple of times when I would have liked a more contra like snarl, but on the whole I think it worked well. But remember, the horn I just described is much bigger in its bowels that any German bass trombone, past or present. The bell diameter maybe the same, but the guts of the horn and mouthpiece are much bigger so it is not far from an old style contra as it is in terms of the mouthpiece and bore size. Yes, there is much more to be opined on this topic, but for now... Randy Campora Baltimore Symphony Orchestra ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 21:35:34 EDT From: David Carter Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos Very Intresting post Randy, although the Solit recording of the Ring Cycle in the 60's used two players on the 4th trombone part-one of the tuba players played a 6 valved trombone in F, and Terry Cravens used a Holton TR-185 single trigger bass with a Bach 1 1/2G mouthpiece. Mr. Cravens once told me that the tuba player didn't have much projection up high with the valved contra bone, but that he could really belt out the lows and that between the two of them they put out a lot of sound. Few orchestras in this part of the world would use two players to play a 4th trombone part. Also Mr. Cravens played an alphorn part for this recording. He told me that he used his Bach 1 1/2G mouthpiece on the alphorn as well! DC ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 20:48:22 -0500 From: Tom Izzo Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos Randy, Howard & all, Howard and everybody: What can you tell us about Wagner's version of the contrabass trombone? Would he have envisioned a slide instrument or a valved instrument? I suppose I always envisioned the Wagner version as being a slide instrument, and the cimbasso "Verdi" style as being a valved instrument. _______________________ In my opinion... I think Wagner used the slide model. Although probably a straight BBb, or CC, (no valve). _______________________ Also, keep in mind one other factor in how a contrabass sounds: who is playing it, a tuba player or a bass trombone player. One will be playing a larger mouthpiece than his normal setup and the other will be playing the same mouthpiece or a smaller mouthpiece on the cimbasso/contra. They will be coming at the instrument from different sound patterns in their heads. _______________________ Well, a lot of us are coming from "both" sides. I mean, I consdider myself primarily a Bass Trombonist, but my first double (for 30+ years) has been the Tuba. Up until the last 5 years, I've doubled Tuba more than my Tenor Trb, Euphonium, Bass Trumpet, Alto Trb, even Electric Bass & Percussion work combined. So for me (and several other players I know), Bass Trombone & Tuba doubling--it seems "natural" to be playing a Contra. On Contra I use something akin to a CB mp--a very small Tuba mp, but I use that same piece on Tuba as well. Tom ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 21:06:08 -0700 From: "Joe L. Norcross" Subject: Re: Contrabass trombones and Cimbassos I have a Holton Bass an Alex F with rotors to C, D and together BBb, also a Boosey G. All have there voice. I use the same mp on the Holton and Alex a Doug Elliott and a small shank Shilke 59 on the G. Since the G is a small bore around 500 (no attachments either it has a very nice sound. I wish we still heard it in Brass Bands. The Alex can hit all the low notes and I have used it to add punch to doubling tuba. The Holton is still a fine bass, I have not found a horn yet I would replace it with. Joe L. Norcross Tuba: Visalia CA Sequoia Winds Bass Trombone: Clovis CA Community Band Tuba and Announcer: Kingsburg CA City Band joetuba@lightspeed.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 00:37:12 -0400 From: "Paul D. Kemp, Jr." Subject: Gordon Cherry Complete Low Brass Excerpts Dear List, Gordon Cherry has done a wonderful service for us in making this collection of orchestral parts available. With the Keith Brown Excerpts Books being out of print, for the price that Gordon is asking, this is a bargain. Teachers: If you want to have something that will really challenge your students, get this collection. I have already purchased the Bruckner, Mahler, Strauss, Tchaikovsky, and Wagner, and if you have students that interested in orchestral playing, there's nothing like having the real parts there. It beats the excerpts books all to pieces for this reason. The excerpts books basically just gave you what were considered to be the most important part of each work. However, if all you've done is studied the excerpt books, your knowledge of these pieces is extremely limited. There are too many examples of this fact--for instance, the Mozart Requiem--Barenreiter Edition. How many of you are aware that the 1st trombone part (alto trombone) is infinitely more difficult than the Tuba Mirum solo? The Tuba Mirum solo is literally a piece of cake compared to the alto trombone part. However, you don't know this until you've actually had the opportunity to perform the work, and how many of you are going to get the parts ahead of time? For less than $100 you can have the complete collection on a CD that you can print out and in a few minutes have a study part at your disposal. If you bought the parts separately, you'd pay literally hundreds of dollars. Gordon has done a great job on the composers that I have purchased from him thus far, and I suspect that the rest of the collection will also be first rate. For the past several weeks I have printed out a different work and taken it with me when I go to the school that I teach privately. I have a very good bass trombone student and a tenor student who is coming along, and I play the first part, my tenor student plays the second part, and we have a great time. It is a fantastic learning experience for them, and me too, since I normally play 2nd in the orchestra. Now that the Classical composers are done, I'll have a good opportunity to use my alto trombone. If you're serious about being an orchestra trombonist, then you must have this collection. Warm Regards, Paul Kemp Chattanooga Symphony www.trbnplyr.com ------------------------------ End of TROMBONE-L Digest - 22 Oct 2002 to 23 Oct 2002 (#2002-102) *****************************************************************