TubeNet

I don't have a scanner, but I could snail-mail a copy.
(Played it on tour with Keith Brion's New Sousa Band.)
I'm sure someone on this forum will be able to email one.

I sent over a .pdf.

Never played through it, so it might have the odd error or two. . .

pm sent.

I am in the same boat as Schlep...the band I'm in thinks it would be "funny" to have the tuba and piccolo play the same part. I was promised the part to transcribe over the winter, and it has not arrived, and I am fundamentally lazy, anyway. So if someone could help a bear out....

Ally"who thinks they don't really understand what funny will be"House

No self-respecting Cal alum (go Bears) could resist a request from a self-labeled bear, even if not a Cal Golden Bear. However, can you tell me how to attach a .pdf file to a PM? That, or an email address, and I'd be glad to pass along what I've got.

bearphonium wrote:I am in the same boat as Schlep...the band I'm in thinks it would be "funny" to have the tuba and piccolo play the same part. I was promised the part to transcribe over the winter, and it has not arrived, and I am fundamentally lazy, anyway. So if someone could help a bear out....

Ally"who thinks they don't really understand what funny will be"House

It was on the old Bass Clef Brass site.

There is a pdf copy of a transcribed arrangement for solo tuba with Chuck Guzis' name in the pdf files's metadata.

If anyone knows how to contact Mr. Guzis, maybe he would sell or give permission to share the transcription.

Dean E wrote:There is a pdf copy of a transcribed arrangement for solo tuba with Chuck Guzis' name in the pdf files's metadata.

If anyone knows how to contact Mr. Guzis, maybe he would sell or give permission to share the transcription.

How does Mr. Guzis own the rights to something he copied from Sousa? How could he possibly legally sell such a transcription? That's like paying the smart kid in class $20 to do your homework for you.

Is the music at http://gramann.net/images/stars2.gif illegal? It's terrible, anyway...trills notated as sixteenth notes, no ornaments (the best part!), wrong notes...you can have it.

Besides, schlep said he already has the thing...

I agree with JPNirschl...borrow a piccolo part and write the thing out if you need to...better yet, learn it from the treble clef part...good practice. If you are advanced enough to be able to play this part, you surely are advanced enough to dictate a 32-bar section from a piccolo part in bass clef and the proper octave...sheesh

S&S is in public domain. Chuck Guzis, or anyone, can sell an arrangement if they want, as long as that arrangement is based on a PD edition.

But, I know for a fact Chuck doesn't charge for that.

So, let me see if I have this right...

The original composition is in the public domain, so its use is unimpeded.

Someone has done a transcription of the famous 32-bar piccolo solo and notated it in the correct octave for tuba.

We therefore need to contact that transcriber for their permission to use it or buy it from them.

Makes no sense to me at all, but I don't generally find legal issues terribly logical, anyhow. I would think any indisputably derived work which is taken from a work which is public domain should automatically be public domain as well, but I am obviously mistaken. I wonder if I should start copying all the public domain marches I can get my hands on into Finale and start selling them to band directors for 20% less than the major publishing houses do.

DP wrote:

Todd S. Malicoate wrote:So, let me see if I have this right...

The original composition is in the public domain, so its use is unimpeded.
Someone has done a transcription of the famous 32-bar piccolo solo and notated it in the correct octave for tuba.
We therefore need to contact that transcriber for their permission to use it or buy it from them.
Makes no sense to me at all, but I don't generally find legal issues terribly logical, anyhow. I would think any indisputably derived work which is taken from a work which is public domain should automatically be public domain as well, but I am obviously mistaken. I wonder if I should start copying all the public domain marches I can get my hands on into Finale and start selling them to band directors for 20% less than the major publishing houses do.

Good grief, Todd, I wonder if you need to either chill out or just plain S.T.F.U. ! Chuck's name was derived from a pdf "Metafile" (file properties) there were no claims by him to anything related to that stars and stripes "fake sheet" that you so vociferously slammed. give it a rest why don'tcha?

I don't believe Todd is referring to this excerpt transcription specifically, he is referring to how a band director who wishes to play Stars and Stripes with his band must purchase the music, and thereby the rights to perform it, even though it's public domain. That right Todd, or am I not making any sense?

WakinAZ wrote:

I second that motion.

Todd,
haven't you seen/played the arrangements of classic (read: Public Domain) marches, eg Sousa, Fillmore, which are edited by Revelli or Fennell?

They're copyrighted. You have to pay to purchase the edited versions. Most of the arranging consists of added dynamics and putting the copy onto full size paper, instead of march size.

IF Chuck Guzis wanted to charge for his transposed part to S&S, that would be perfectly within his rights, IF he went about doing the version in the proper way. But, then, YOU could do your own piccolo to tuba version in the proper way and copyright IT and charge for it.

It's all perfectly legal. Is it worth it? is the question.

And believe me, Chuck doesn't charge for his version. If you know where to look for it, it's right there.

How about go borrow a C piccolo part from somebody in the flute section, sit down and read it off.....

you guys do read treble cleff, don't you??

Just think what would happen if you guys got that worked up and spent all that time and energy practicing real tuba parts.

Todd S. Malicoate wrote:I would think any indisputably derived work which is taken from a work which is public domain should automatically be public domain as well, but I am obviously mistaken.

You're are indeed mistaken. If I write my own arrangement of S & S, it can become copywrited material. For me to simply recopy the piccolo part would not qualify as a derived work, however. there needs to be some substantive change which would cause it to be a derived work. That's my understanding of the subject.

The trills written out raise a question for me. When I am playing this on BBb, I trill to "D" but when playing it on Eb, I trill to "Eb." I think the Eb is musically correct but I have never met a BBb player who did it. When playing with a BBb player (George Black and I used to stand at either side of the band and do it together) I had to do the difficult Db to D trill on an Eb. How do you usually do it?

TubaRay wrote:If I write my own arrangement of S & S, it can become copywrited material. For me to simply recopy the piccolo part would not qualify as a derived work, however. there needs to be some substantive change which would cause it to be a derived work. That's my understanding of the subject.

That's my understanding, as well, and you hit the nail on the head with "there needs to be some substantive change which would cause it to be a derived work."

Re-copying the piccolo solo into the bass clef and down a few octaves doesn't entitle someone to a copyright license - that's the point I was trying to make when someone suggested we would need to contact Mr. Guzis to obtain his permission to use the transcription. You are all correct, though, in asserting that he is certainly within his rights to sell it. I find the concept of doing so intellectually lazy, but it would not be illegal per se.

As for the rest of the reaction to my post - some of you continue to read emotion into words on a message board. I was not "worked up" when I posted, nor do I feel the need to STFU. Re-read the post again without all your presumed emotional undertones and decide for yourself if I was "vociferously slamming" anything. If we can't have a resonable discussion about issues relating to tuba-playing here, I don't understand the reason for the site.

Of course I have played the Revelli and Fennell editions of PD marches (and other editors' works as well). But eupher61 made the point I was trying to make - dynamics, phrase markings, incorrect/illegible note corrections, and modern percussion parts are just part of what is "edited." I was saying it would be wrong (legal, but still wrong) for me to simply copy note-for-note the original marches, not changing anything from the originals, and "undercut" the publishing houses who sell these editions. I should have used a better term than "indiputably derived" when I meant to say "copied note-for-note."

My apologies for the disruption....but gee, it's only a discussion of ideas... it isn't life or death, folks.

If you put the original march into a larger font, on larger paper, that's a substantial change. (Bob Reynolds did this, I think. I could be mistaken.) If you rewrite a part down 3 octaves, that's a substantial change.