TubeNet

As an amateur musician if you could only play in a single ensemble due to non-music career, family etc. what type of ensemble would you choose and why? You can further assume that the ensembles are similar in: Quality, Level of Musicians, Level of Director and that the Tuba gets to play at least half of the pieces in the orchestra.

I way prefer concert band to orchestra--something about string players and orchestral music sits just off with me. I've never had the chance for a brass band, although I like the quintets I've played in.

I am brass to the core. I am so disappointed that to even just hear a brass band I have to travel at least three hours one way. My several trips to the UK spoiled me on brass banding, among lots of other things, especially real ale.

Quartet. Jazz or Classical.

This, as with your other options, would require both time and ability, neither of which I currently possess.

Wow -- a rough question, believe it or not...

I've always liked the sound of a brass band. I even prefer the British/European style with more vibrato, making the group sound larger than it really is (at least on recordings).

But, after a while, and primarily as a listener, I find that I start wanting to hear more colors and textures, and an all-brass ensemble just can't do the variety that you'd hear in a concert band.

Then there's orchestra, which has a greater variety of instruments than anything else. But, historically, there's not as much for the brass to playm -- sometimes nothing at all. And, you'd have to deal with string players.

I don't know. Each one can have things that either bug the bejeezus out of me or make me want to come back to every rehearsal.

Brass band. No question about it.

For a eupher, it just doesn't get any better than that. The music is inherently more difficult and challenging than in concert band literature (and I've done that for a serious chunk of my adult life); the euph voice is the premier tenor solo instrument. With only two euphs in a brass band, that means no hiding. Everybody pulls his weight.

If you want to do a good job in a brass band, you have to cut your part - period.

I play bass trombone in a community orchestra as well, and having a part to play in less than half of the pieces that are programmed is not easy to contend with.

I can't say I'm a big fan of the warbly vibrato characteristic of many Brit brass bands and it's great to hear that many Brit brass bands seem to be getting away from that practice.

I would much prefer a very small wind ensemble, 20-25 players.

I regularly play in all three types of ensemble and voted for Symphony Orchestra without hesitation.

Reason - the music is generally of a higher quality and in the orchestra the tuba is a solo instrument rather than the main bass. I like having my own part and adding a distinctive individual tone to the ensemble. Yes, you do not play so much, but I think less can be more as far as impact. In bands playing bass, the the tuba is so ever present that it just does not have the effect of in an orchestra coming in at specific moments.

Regarding bands, I prefer wind, to brass - firstly because I do not like contesting which is so important to most British brass bands and secondly because of the greater tonal variety. I remember an old euphonium player comparing the various ensembles as;

The brass band is like a black and white picture,
the concert band is like a coloured picture,
while the orchestra is like a three dimensional technicolor picture

Concerning the attitude of string players in orchestras. I have never found them any different from other musicians. They will treat you well if you act as a musician yourself and not as a brass playing bore. I frequently have string players coming up and complementing my tuba and of course a lot of string players are attractive young ladies!

Brass Bands for me. The standard over here is so much higher than any other amateur music making especially in my area of the UK, as well as having the most challenging, consistent playtime and rewarding parts.
As regards having to play in a section, I think this is a benefit not a hinderance.
I do plenty of Orchestral, Opera, Big Band and a little wind band playing, but I get easily bored compared to playing in a brass band or 10 piece.

It'd be great if everyone could experience a top standard brass band and play in a good tuba section, as I understand other peoples opinions and choices may be because they haven't done this!

Anyway, just my opinion.

PS if anyone's around the Northwest of the UK anytime, I can fix up a blow in a good band, or a visit to one of the best.

quinterbourne wrote:I would much prefer a very small wind ensemble, 20-25 players.

Ditto. Its the best of both worlds. Alone or a very small section of tubists, with more notes to play.

The world is a lot broader than just those 3 choices. Even for amateurs. So I say none of the above.

Jim "where're the beer and brats?" Wagner

Yes sir, I couldn't help but notice that boogie bands, banda etc... were not included but we who play steak houses and bars don't expect our minority? to be recognized due to the wide variation in quality of public performances. That's fine. Fame is localized and the pay is low.
I just wonder who really has the most fun performing. That's what I'm in it for (dangling participle).

Along with Doc, TubaTooter et al the poll is too limited. For those of us who have eye problems Traditional Jazz, Polka bands and other groups that play head charts are the most fun.

The freedom of laying down your own bass line or improvisation gives me the largest satisfaction, even more than the 25+ years I played in an excellent Brass Quintet (with the same musicians.)

Neptune wrote:Reason - the music is generally of a higher quality and in the orchestra the tuba is a solo instrument rather than the main bass.

Jonathon, you speak for me. The CD's in my machine are usually orchestral, because that's the music I love. The composers have been better for more years, providing a much richer repertoire. And the tuba gets to be the color instrument instead of the utility bass. I might not get to play as much, but the sounds are more satisfying.

Not that I have the opportunity to play in an orchestra. Few do. I have done so in the past and relish the experience of it.

A distant but still pleasing second is a concert band or wind ensemble that focuses on orchestra transcriptions. Transcriptions provide access to the rich repertoire of orchestras, but it is an imperfect access.

I do not make the judgment on the basis of how many notes I get to play. If I wanted to play more notes, I'd have taken up flute. I prefer quality of sound to quantity of notes. Give me a whole note that moves earth to technical wizardry any day, however much I may admire that wizardry in others.

I also do not care about competition. In fact, competitiveness annoys me. Music, for me, is not a sport. I do not wish to compete when playing music. I strive to match the sound in my head, perhaps, but that is not a competition but rather a drive to reach or exceed a personal standard. If the person next to me is better, I'll gladly lay out if that's the most musical decision for the sound of the ensemble. I greatly prefer playing in sections with better players than myself--I'd rather be a small part of a great band than a big part of a band no better than me. Both are vastly better than no involvement at all, of course.

And I didn't vote on the basis of specific groups, like, say, comparing my more favorable band experience with my least favorable orchestra experience. I've played in bands that drove me away in a month (usually because of schlocky musical programming and lazy performers--and those always seem to come together as a package), and others that are musically satisfying and challenging (whether or not they are really good). Ditto orchestras, though that database is much smaller.

Rick "a mediocre musician who nevertheless takes music seriously" Denney

tubatooter1940 wrote:Yes sir, I couldn't help but notice that boogie bands, banda etc... were not included but we who play steak houses and bars don't expect our minority? to be recognized due to the wide variation in quality of public performances. That's fine. Fame is localized and the pay is low.
I just wonder who really has the most fun performing. That's what I'm in it for (dangling participle).

(Preposition.) Is it about variation in quality? I've played in a few legit ensembles where you look out in the audience and wonder if there's anyone but friends and relatives of the band. I believe that's fairly common, among amateur legit ensembles. Fame and high pay are not something I associate with any kind of tuba playing, but if you take the average of tuba players in every legit ensemble in the US, I think you'd look like a rock star in comparison. And you get there by quality - you can't drag enough friends and relatives to those steak houses and bars to make it work. I'm not saying you're better than the local community college concert band that you couldn't pay people to listen to, I'm just saying that unlike them you're subject to an irreducible minimum standard of quality.

quinterbourne wrote:What single ensemble would you choose?
Symphony Orchestra
Concert Band
Brass Band

Yes.

Just as an aside, not all brass bands compete. In spite of playing in brass bands for years, I managed to either avoid the competitions altogether or moved out of the area before the competition, or played in a band that just didn't compete.

But after having done a couple of them now (NABBA, in 2005 and 2006), it is an interesting experience.

It is NOT like performing. And it ratchets up the excitement level considerably.

YMMV.

Donn wrote:
(Preposition.) Is it about variation in quality? I've played in a few legit ensembles where you look out in the audience and wonder if there's anyone but friends and relatives of the band. I believe that's fairly common, among amateur legit ensembles.

You've hit dead center on why I choose to play in an oom-pah band instead of a legit ensemble. The crowd feedback is just on an entirely different level. Much more interactive and enthusiastic. Not polite listening and golf claps from a captive audience. Much more improvisation allowed and encouraged. Something that's not really allowed in legit circles where it can be heresy to deviate from the score. I have played in brass quintets and community bands and enjoyed the experience, but there was never anything approaching the crowd feedback of what I do now.

For me, it's more about providing entertainment and less about technical pieces that only a musician can appreciate.

But, different strokes, and the question was what kind of group would we choose to play in. Whatever group one chooses I sincerely hope it's fun.

Good thread. I enjoy a couple of subsets of these choices, a tube-euph quartet and a traditional jazz group. One on a part, fast-growing repertoire in the former including transcriptions, good charts in the latter, some improvisation. And no one has told me to go get a smaller horn when I show up with the Holton!

windshieldbug wrote:

quinterbourne wrote:What single ensemble would you choose?
Symphony Orchestra
Concert Band
Brass Band

Yes.

Although I have no disagreement with your post, I must point out that I did not say what you quoted...