TubeNet

We all know that these parts sometimes show up in the book. "Calm Sea and Prosperous Voyage" and the "Reformation" Symphony are the most common. I just recieved the complete symphonies and overtures by Mendelssohn and must say that whoever was playing tuba in the London Symphony in November 1986 plays the stuffing out of the Calm Sea part. Nice, meaty, clear, resonant, and never overpowering. The Reformation is just as good and was recorded in February of 1984, so I assume it was Fletcher. The recording is DG471 467-2 and is with the LSO and Claudio Abbado. Some wonderful playing and it makes a believer out of me that they can be done on a bass tuba. This is a nice set. Mendelssohn sure had a way with a melody.

Chuck

I always thought they were OPHICLEIDE parts, not SERPENT parts.

At least that's what it says on my scores and the parts I bought from Edwin F. Kalmus.


SERPENT


OPHICLEIDE

I can understand how the cimbasso might get a more "authentic" feel to the piece, if you're wanting a tone more approaching the original ophicliede. But even Berlioz, upon hearing a tuba, even the small bore original military band F versions as invented by Wieprecht and Moritz, changed his scoring from oph to tuba. I prefer the modern renditions using bass tuba.

In the score of Calm Sea......the part is marked Serpent or Contrabassoon. One could make the assumption, quite correctly, that if we play it on a modern instrument you would read it down the octave to match the contra pitch. On the LSO recording, the tuba player reads it at written pitch which makes it quite rangy, but it is a really neat sound, one that doesn't sound wrong at all, especially in the quick slurred arpeggiated figure that goes up to a high e. The same with the Reformation. If you look at the 5th movement of the Brahms Requiem, he has the tuba working up to high F, an octave higher than the sounding bass parts. Very nice music on both accounts.

Chuck

Chuck Jackson wrote:In the score of Calm Sea......the part is marked Serpent or Contrabassoon.

Actually, the part is marked "Serpente e Contrafagotto", so BOTH instruments play the part. (happen to have the part before me, as I play it beginning of next season)

One well-know European conductor always does this with two contrabassoons, and no tuba / serpent / cimbasso / whatever.

When a composer specified serpent, the first question must be, "Is this a historic performance?". If the strings are playing on wire on long fingerboards, for one, then the answer must be "no, this performance will NOT be as the composer would have heard it."

Then the second question is, "Does this tambre serve any useful purpose?". In the case of Fantastique, I think a good case can be made for playing ophicleides with modern mouthpieces to evoke a witch's sabboth (plus the octave jumps are a one-key piece of cake). If, on the other hand, the composer might have relished the ability to have a decent resonant wind bass with intonation, I say, "Make it so, number one!"

bloke wrote:That's one reason I'm building a teenie-tiny top-action (bell facing the back of the shell) F tuba.

You must let us see that when it is completed.

Of commercially available model, wouldn't a small F, like the MW 182 work well for Mendelssohn?

I've got a little French-made Eb tuba with top-sprung valves and a 30"(!) leadpipe and crummy intonation (probably because of the HP-to-LP conversion in the leadpipe).

Sometime this summer, I'm going to whack the leadpipe down to size and see how the thing works as a little F (probably about a 0.640" bore). If the tuning lines up, it should be perfect.

I've been getting interested in some of the 19th century early chamber literature for brass and it's dawned on me that if the lead players are playing small-bore cornets and the trombonist is playing a peashooter, then having a blunderbuss for a tuba is probably not the right thing for a good blend.

Duh.