TubeNet

Is it me, or is the recording that they are using for the medal ceremony in Athens one of the wimpiest, sorriest recordings of the SSB ever made?

Debra Silver asked on the TubaEuph and Trombone Lists, "Who the heck picked a version of the Star Spangled Banner played by an orchestra, rather than a band?!"

so can we finally get "America the Beautiful" (Ray Charles version) as our national anthem.

Well, I have to disagree.

I was quite impressed by the fact that someone managed to make an orchestration of the SSB that sounded very lyrical. I also enjoyed the fact that there is contrast with the transparency of the strings and the depth of the texture. The SSB is just not that great, but I feel that the recording is very presentable without sounding like what is really is, a bar song for drunks.

I agree with Matthew Gilchrest. I think the recording used at the olympics is one of the most lyrical, flowing recordings of the National Anthem I have ever heard, and shows how beautiful that song can really be. The forceful, march-like band arrangements just don't do it for me. The olympic version does.

I vote for the Hendrix version

TMurphy wrote:...The forceful, march-like band arrangements just don't do it for me. The olympic version does.

While the SSB would be a bitch to march to, personally I sort of like it in a march and militaristic style. At the very least it should be played with a lot of brass (read this a more TUBA).

Doc wrote:

tubajoe wrote:I vote for the Hendrix version

Very sweet. Better than the crap that was played in Greece.

The National Anthem is supposed to stir feelings of pride, honor, patriotism, and joy, not put you to sleep.

Doc

The Hendrix version fills me with something, but it ain't pride, honor, patriotism, or joy.

Anybody hear the Newsong rendition at one of the Nascar races this summer? I wish I could give a more exact date, because it's what I'd prefer to hear more often.

I see we have a bit of a disagreement about the Star Spangled Banner arrangement being used at the olympics. Where I can understand most of the comments being made, I like the arrangement, myself. I believe it is quite musical and enjoyable. I like a variety of arrangements I have heard. I like the olympic version far better than I do some of the presentation where singers embellish the heck out of it. To me, when it is kept simple, it is most effective. This arrangement, though not at all boisterous, does NOT put me to sleep. I enjoy what they have done harmonically, also.

That's just my opinion.

There's a particular band arrangement I'm very fond of. I don't remember the arranger, but it's "based on the harmonization by John Philip Sousa" whatever that means.

I should be able to get more info this weekend. AND if I can find out what race that was, and get a recording, I'll post the Newsong version.

This may be slightly off topic, but here is a link to several historic versions of the SSB.

http://www.1stbrigadeband.org/SSB.html

The most recent arrangement is from 1864. All arrangements are for military or brass bands.

TubaRay wrote:I enjoy what they have done harmonically, also.

With minor keys? And such a slow tempo? I'll ask the same question I asked on Tubaeuph: Is it supposed to be a sad song? I personally found it too sentimental.

Rick "who is right while Ray is wrong" Denney

Rick Denney wrote:

TubaRay wrote:I enjoy what they have done harmonically, also.

With minor keys? And such a slow tempo? I'll ask the same question I asked on Tubaeuph: Is it supposed to be a sad song? I personally found it too sentimental.

Rick "who is right while Ray is wrong" Denney

I absolutely agree. The National Athem is being played to celebrate a victory and should be celebratory. This version just isn't. It doesn't matter how nice the harmonics are if it doesn't cause one to stand up and be proud to be an American.

Lew wrote:
I absolutely agree. The National Athem is being played to celebrate a victory and should be celebratory. This version just isn't. It doesn't matter how nice the harmonics are if it doesn't cause one to stand up and be proud to be an American.

At the risk of moving this to the politics board, I'd suggest that was the point.

cktuba wrote:

TubaRay wrote: I like the olympic version far better than I do some of the presentation where singers embellish the heck out of it. To me, when it is kept simple, it is most effective.

Amen to that. I absolutely despise singers who get up in front of a crowd and "embellish" the "Star Spangled Banner", it's our national anthem for crying out loud not the finals for a bad scat singing competition.

AMEN and AMEN. I like the Olympics arrangement of the Star Spangled Banner. It's easy to listen to.... NOT severely stylized like some of the crap I've heard.... AND it's obvious, after listening to the national anthems of several different countries, that the same arranger probably did all of them. It is yet another great attempt to 'level the field' for the olympics in the tradition of equality and good fellowship. I thank the olympic committee for treating all of the national anthems with dignity.

I have to agree with Dan.

This ceremony is supposed to be a bit subdued and reverent, not a car-flipping riot like many of our sports have devolved to. All of the anthems have received the same treatment and come across wuite well. Had each country submitted their own, only God knows what political nonsense would go on then.

The SSB is not a march and from all of our BAND training, we have become comfortable with the semi-quick tempo most bands play it in. A little slower won't hurt anyone as it gives our atheletes a bit more time on the podium.

Hey, who can recite the other three strains from memory?

Who knew three other strains existed?

Who knows what an anthem is?

Rick, I have official statistics here. It shows that you are correct 99.99785% of the time. It further shows that I am correct < 99.99785% of the time. I'm afraid my record is clearly inferior to yours. Sorry!

TubaRay wrote:Rick, I have official statistics here. It shows that you are correct 99.99785% of the time. It further shows that I am correct < 99.99785% of the time. I'm afraid my record is clearly inferior to yours. Sorry!

Foolishness aside: For those who don't know, Ray and I are old friends. He has wisdom I can only hope to earn someday, even if in this case he is completely wrong.

Rick "wondering if that percentage of being correct is an accurate or merely precise value" Denney[/i]

After reading this thread, I had a listen last night. Gets off to a good start, but that minor bit in the middle just kills it for me, and the end seemed weak. Still, I've heard lots worse. I think the best I've heard was the rendition the British band played in the square in front of Buckingham Palace after 9/11. Of course, emotions were pretty close to the surface, so maybe that affected my judgement.

wnazzaro wrote:I like the middle section, even though the mood doesn't fit the words, musically it is appealing.

Tubatoad wrote:Gets off to a good start, but that minor bit in the middle just kills it for me, and the end seemed weak.

We'll never get this resolved! Heh...

Personally, I'm starting to think that recordings used at the Olympics should have been performed by an ensemble native to that medalist's country. Whenever I've played another country's national anthem, no matter how well we do it, there's that nagging feeling in the back of my mind that somehow we won't be doing it quite "right" by their ears.

Which performance/arrangement/ensemble would I prefer for the USA? Well, if it were a singer, there's the singer's celebrity status that would taint the nationalistic sense of the Olympics and take away from the principle of the Team Effort that Americans like to portray so much. That would leave bands, orchestras, or a chorus, and of those three, nothing to me quite says "Yankee" (Suth'nuhs included) like a military band.

Which one? I'd say the band down the hall from me (even though they're moving down the street), but I'm just a tad bit biased...