Hindemith question

[eupher61]

That trill isn't impossible without a 5th valve. Ever heard of a lip trill, for one? Harvey's Conn (yes, the piece was written for Harvey Phillips, who probably played an F tuba 4 times in his life*!)
is a 4 valve.



(not a scientific statement)

[tubasound]

it's correct that there is a strong tradition in Austria and Germany concerning F and Bb Tubas. The F Tuba is normally quoted as Basstuba and the Bb as Kontrabasstuba. As I have studied in Vienna, 99 % of the solo pieces are played on the F, the Hindemith Sonata too.

Nowadays in big symphonies its almost common that the players change their tubas between movements or parts of movements.

I just played Mahlers 7th and I played the first and fifth movement on the Bb and the 2nd and 3rd on F. So its really depending on the individual player which instruments he uses for which part.

My Professor plays a Alexander F and C double tuba and has a really nice sound in the lower regions, therefore he only seldomly plays the big Bb whereas most of his students (me included) take the big one more often....

[jonesbrass]

I think after he was in america and such, that he had the contrabass tuba in mind for at least the first movement

German Rotary F- Pesante, FF, on a low Bb? I dont think yahamas were invented then to get rid of that stuffy low range

The german tuba players have been doing it for years on those "stuffy" low-range instruments. Perhaps the biggest problem is with the player?

[Todd S. Malicoate]

Also, the piece was written in 1943, though first published in 1955.

Incorrect. The piece was completed in January of 1955, and first published in 1957.

The best concrete is made by mixing 1 part cement, 2 parts dry sand, 3 parts dry stone, and 1/2 part water (by weight, not volume!). Some people like to put branches or twigs in it, but this lowers the strength of the final product.

[SplatterTone]

Some people like to put branches or twigs in it

Some people like to put people in it.

[eupher61]

no, the 1943 date has been proven erroneous. I don't have that information at hand, but the later date is correct.

[Todd S. Malicoate]

If you say so. But it was written in 1943. Thanks anyway!

I can give you at least 5 sources showing the 1955 date, one specifically stating the piece was completed in January of that year.

Selected Letters of Paul Hindemith, ed. Skelton (Yale Univ. Press, 1995)
The Music of Paul Hindemith, David Neumeyer (Yale Univ. Press, 1986)
Paul Hindemith: The Man Behind the Music, Geoffrey Skelton (Crescendo, 1975)
Paul Hindemith in the United States, Luther Noss (Univ. of Illinois Press, 1989)
Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians

Also, as tuben pointed out, there is a great deal of information on Hindemith at www.hindemith.org - be sure to click the "English" link on the homepage unless you speak fluent German!

What source do you have that shows the sonata was written in 1943? Many of the sources I used point out that the tuba sonata was the last of the sonatas composed for the orchestral instruments and piano...much later than the trumpet and trombone sonatas (1939 and 1941).

[tubasound]

I happened to play an opera where a trautoniom takes part

Paul Dessau "Die Verurteilung des Lukullus", an, as it still was present, east-german composer.

The trautonium itself is something like an early form of the synthesizer invented by someone called Trautwein....

[Todd S. Malicoate]

I already did say "If you say so", so please don't get on my back if you think I am wrong. It is possible that you are wrong also. My score and part say 1943 on them and I have been told by many sources including all of my teachers and my composition instructer that it was composed in 1943.

Surely you must understand that it is possible for all of your books to have the same sources. If something is printed enough, then of course it will be assumed to be correct even if it is sometimes not.

It is completely okay for you to believe something different, though. I am not trying to start an argurment, just saying that we have different information, that's all.

Agreed, and no ill will was ever intended. Please do not read emotion into my post where it does not exist. I will do the same in the future, as I will admit your response of "If you say so" was interpreted by me as condescending. Even so, I did not "get on your back," I presented my sources and asked for yours in the hopes we all might learn something about an important piece of the tuba literature.

I did some very extensive research on the piece in graduate school, and simply wanted to know if there was a stone I left unturned. The Skelton biography is the best resource on Hindemith facts, and if there is an error in the date of this composition, it should be corrected. The folks who maintain the hindemith.org site would be interested in the correct date as well, I presume.

Of course I wasn't there when Hindemith wrote the tuba sonata, so I have no direct knowledge of the date of completion. But, academic pursuits sometimes require the acceptance of documented facts, not hearsay from professors or one's "belief."

I also have the original Schott edition of the piece...it does say 1943 in both spots, as you say. It also says copyright by B. Schott's Sohne 1957 on the bottom of the first page of the tuba part. In light of the overwhelming majority of sources that say 1955 as the composition date, and the difficulty of reconciling the piece sitting unpublished for 14 years (none of Hindemith's other compositions were unpublished for so long), I can only conclude that the 1943 date on the Schott edition is a misprint.

[eupher61]

in the TUBA Journal (pre-ITEA) there was an article about this very subject. It was definitively stated that the 1943 date was errant. I don't have that issue, but surely someone, or some library, does.

[Haugan]

When I was attending the Institute for Advanced Musical Studies (a short-lived conservatory that gathered teachers from many different countries in Montreaux, Switzerland) I was in contact with one of the faculty members that had been a collegue of Hindemith's while he was in the process of composing his "Sonata fuer Basstuba und Klavier".

This faculty member told the story of listening to Hindemith work out the particulars of the sonata on a small (similar to a Mirafone 184) BBb tuba that had been a Swiss military instrument. He was quite certain it was a BBb instrument, although Hindemith was allegedly preparing the Sonata for BASStuba. Anyone who has performed the Sonata on a BBb tuba can attest to how well it "lies" on the BBb instrument - there is really no doubt as to it being composed by someone with a BBb in hand.

Hindemith was well known for being proficient on a great number of instruments, most notably viola and (F) horn, which he allegedly played with professional level expertise. It is not a stretch to imagine him working out the difficulties on ALL the instrumental sonatas by experiencing them himself. As to what instrument the Sonata was written for, there is really little doubt that he intended it to be played on the F Basstuba, though in the tradition of Hindemith himself (a serious proponant of Gebrauchsmusik - or music for simple day-to-day use) I'm sure he would be "open" to to the use of ANY of the tubas (F,Eb,CC,BBb) and would express interest in the different nuances achieved by one doing so.

At the time in Germany (as well as in the early 1970's when I was a member of the Nuremberg Philharmonic) the F Basstuba was used almost exclusively - CC tubas could only be found in some limited quantities in Czech folk music and in some of their orchestras, BBb tubas could only be found in militairy bands, and used on the rare occasion where "Kontrabasstuba" is the heading on the music such as in Mahler's 5, Der Ring der Niebelungen, Bruckner's 7th(two movements) and the like. As far as I know, this tradition still exists, although a number of the younger players seem to be embracing the larger instruments more readily these days.....

An interesting sidenote - The use of the CC tuba in America can be attributed to August Helleberg, the great turn of the (20th) century tubaist, who played in Sousa's Band, The Metropolitan Opera, and the Chicago Symphony to name but the most recognizable organizations of many in which he played. Helleberg had a loyal following, and his use of the BBb tuba in Sousa's band and alternate use of CC tubas in orchestras was largely due to the practice of dropping orchestral transcriptions a whole step to modify them for band use. Helleberg was said to have made the switch to CC tuba to facilitate playing the same piece in different keys!

Those aspiring to play in Symphony Orchestras adopted the practice of playing CC tubas, under the mistaken notion that it was somehow necessary.

Helleberg's influence on American tuba playing exists to this day. The Conn-Helleberg is the SINGLE remaining example of a long line of Conn "signature" mouthpieces produced during the first third of the 20th century. The two models that exist (S & 7B) reflect mouthpieces Helleberg himself crafted for his Sousa Band BBb and for his small CC tuba formerly owned by Reynold Schilke and last in the possession of Bob Tucci (I believe I recall this tuba being the victim of airline baggage or some other similar fate)

American tubaists still seem to be trying to "knock themselves out" with 5 & 6/4 CC tubas in an attempt to duplicate a BBb Kontrabasstuba sound. I've been playing BBb tubas (alongside F tubas) professionally for 32 years, and I have yet to hear anyone play anything on CC tuba that can't be done equally well (or better(!)) on a BBb in the hands of a skilled player.

Flame Away CC tuba players. Your choice of instruments is due to a misinterpretation of historical events a century prior and the influence of one remarkable bandsman.

Isn't history strange? Sort of like taking a time machine back and accidentally killing a butterfly.............. . .

[Haugan]

Dale, Dale, Dale. Challenge me? I thought we settled that all years ago.......

[jonesbrass]

"I'm sure he would be "open" to to the use of ANY of the tubas (F,Eb,CC,BBb) and would express interest in the different nuances achieved by one doing so."
It was hard to pick this nugget out of all that typing. And I think its lost in the not-so-veiled troll statements your post is peppered with. Since this is an open forum, I want to challenge you, Mr. Haugan, to consider that kind of open-ness yourself. It doesn't come across in your writing. Oh, please don't send me any more of your foul-language private messages, I'll just forward them along to the tubenet police

Now then is this thread fully-done ?

I didn't see anything "troll"-like in this post, either. Actually, the nugget about the adoption of the CC tuba (albeit unverifiable) is interesting. I've often wondered why we in the states have adopted such a CC-specific preference, especially since most of the early orchestral tubaists here in the states were from Germany, where F and BBb were the key instruments.
We should all do well to remember that the music you produce is far more indicative of your skill and artistry than is the choice of tuba it is made on.

[Haugan]

Amen, Jonesbrass

[Wyvern]

An interesting sidenote - The use of the CC tuba in America can be attributed to August Helleberg, the great turn of the (20th) century tubaist, who played in Sousa's Band, The Metropolitan Opera, and the Chicago Symphony to name but the most recognizable organizations of many in which he played. Helleberg had a loyal following, and his use of the BBb tuba in Sousa's band and alternate use of CC tubas in orchestras was largely due to the practice of dropping orchestral transcriptions a whole step to modify them for band use. Helleberg was said to have made the switch to CC tuba to facilitate playing the same piece in different keys!

That is a very interesting anecdote, although I would question if the tuba in band and orchestra would actually be playing the same musical line anyway (often not the case in my experience)? Also would not a player of Helleberg's standard not be able to make the transposition with ease?

So that would make me wonder if this reason is in fact an urban myth? (I am sure recalled by Haugan in good faith)

I've been playing BBb tubas (alongside F tubas) professionally for 32 years, and I have yet to hear anyone play anything on CC tuba that can't be done equally well (or better(!)) on a BBb in the hands of a skilled player.

That does sound a bit of a mischievous statement!

It can be debated that the slightly higher register of the CC tuba does provide greater security in the range required by the orchestral repertoire. That could well be the reason for its popularity?

No doubt great results can be achieved using either with a skilled played.

[tubasound]

heavily off-topic, but I'm very interested in the background of USA and Germany/Austria etc concerning CC or Bb and F tubas. As mentioned before, there is a big tradition in Austria and Germany for playing both the F and the Bb. In the 50s, 60s and so on the CC Tuba came across the pond I would say with great names like Bob Tucci, Tom Walsh, Ron Pisarkievicz (don't know the correct spelling of his last name), Mark Evans etc. Nowadays they play their CC-Tubas as well but I think they had to go with the tradition, too. I recently performed the "Alpine Symphony" with Mark Evans on the second tuba and he played a Bb Tuba and from the principal trombone player of the "Deutsche Oper Berlin", Marks working place, I got the info that he is testing an F Tuba by B&S because his is already a wreck after 30 something years of playing. You see, the Americans in Europe adapted to the BB and F Tuba tradition as well.

[Rick Denney]

An interesting sidenote - The use of the CC tuba in America can be attributed to August Helleberg, the great turn of the (20th) century tubaist, who played in Sousa's Band, The Metropolitan Opera, and the Chicago Symphony to name but the most recognizable organizations of many in which he played. Helleberg had a loyal following, and his use of the BBb tuba in Sousa's band and alternate use of CC tubas in orchestras was largely due to the practice of dropping orchestral transcriptions a whole step to modify them for band use. Helleberg was said to have made the switch to CC tuba to facilitate playing the same piece in different keys!

Boy, if that isn't true, it ought to be. It completely fits with one trait common to professionals of my acquaintance: They use instruments that make it easiest to achieve the effect they desire. It makes much more sense than any of the other explanations I've seen, most of which try to apply modern thinking to a decision that was made in a completely different performing environment.

C tubas have existed since at least the 1850's. Helleberg could easily have chosen the C for orchestra for the reason stated above without having to spend real money.

I think the flat-whole-step fifth valve can be explained with similar reasoning. It provided a means of converting the C tuba back to Bb as needed.

And on the question of whether transcriptions are similar to their orchestral arrangements, I can speak as one who plays mostly transcriptions. In my experience, the old transcriptions write music for tubas in two voices: string bass and orchestral tuba. If there is a tuba line in the orchestral version that is characteristic, it is usually present in the transcription without modification, except for key. Often, it's jammed in the middle of long stretches of string-bass music, which doesn't make it any easier. The excerpts that Helleberg might have memorized for the late Romantic stuff that was the staple of tuba music in his day (and ours) would have been similar to the transcriptions he played in band, except for the change in key. Playing a C in orchestra would have simplified going back and forth.

In later days, the transcriptions are often in the orchestral key. The transcriptions of Hindsley come to mind as examples. But those weren't written for professional bands (which outside the military no longer existed). They were written for college bands, and college kids by that time were playing orchestral tubas recommended to them by their teachers. That has no more historical documentation than Paul's story, but it sure makes sense to me.

Rick "liking down-to-earth history, but still wanting sources" Denney