TubeNet

.

Its not hard, I used my CC.

One would have better results finding info online if one spells the composer's name "Arutunian."

I play this thing (on piano) for students at least a dozen times a year. The second movement (middle section) is exceptional, but the outer movements (which are 75% the same) just suck beans.

I have no idea what the tuba part might be like, as I've never even seen this performed with anything but piano. I pity you the chore.

.

.

In October, we did a tour with our Principal Trumpeter playing the Arutunian (w/band accomp). The part was not terribly demanding, but there was one stinkin' lick in 5/4 of 8th notes the sets up the melody that always increased my pucker factor. If I remember correctly, it was a fingering thing that was the challenge... a lot of Eb's below the staff to Db's or something that crossed fingers in a 23- 24 combination. and It's played with the trumpets, so pitch was always interesting!

Other than that, it's a pretty boring piece.


A side note.... We held a trumpet audition about 1 1/2 years ago, and only 2 of 16 people did not play the Arutunian. I have really come to dislike that tune! Can you guess which 2 advanced?

Hopefully your soloist will make it interesting, and the 2nd movement won't be painful.

.

I'm not talking about the notes commonly referred to as "pedals". Just Eb and Db one line below the bass clef staff.

Sorry to burst your bubble!

tubashaman2 wrote:Todd S Malicoate

Can you play the piano part to the Hindemith Tuba Sonata.

It's one of the very few pieces that I will not attempt to play. It's simply too demanding technically, and difficult to make "sound right" reducing to make it playable. As I'm sure you know, the big problem is the last two pages, but the rest is quite difficult as well. Interestingly, I have played the Hindemith trumpet and trombone sonatas several times each...but they are just not as technically demanding.

The most I ever charge a student is $100 a semester, and that's for a full recital (3 or 4 pieces) and a recital hearing. Folks that play a student recital hour and jury pay $50. That covers all the rehearsal time they or their professor want (within reason, of course) and the performances. I have a couple of studio "deals" with the trombone and trumpet studios at OSU, and they pay me quite well and include the additional duties of some recording sessions. Take a look at http://www.osutrombones.com/ for an outstanding studio in the middle of musical nowhere!

.

tubashaman2 wrote:All pianists will complain about the Hindemith....the Arutunian trumpet concerto is hard on piano but the Hindemith is in the impossible catergory

Actually, surprisingly when I performed this a week ago, it went quite well. My pianist actually didn't complain once about the piece! (And performed it quite well may I add)

I've seen three pianists who play the Hindemith without complaint, Steve Harlos, Sam Porter and Donald Munsell (a bassoonist by profession). If you are lucky enough to have any of them available as an accompanist, hit them up. It's your lucky day.

The Beaversdorf, on the other hand, is simply not worth the effort. It is an entry level solo for tuba and a Rachmaninoff concerto for piano.

Alex C wrote:The Beaversdorf, on the other hand, is simply not worth the effort. It is an entry level solo for tuba and a Rachmaninoff concerto for piano.

Sounds like the Lebedev...

.

.

.

tubashaman2 wrote:I love the lebedev, the piano part isnt that hard but it does sound Russian and Rachmaninov like

Hard? Not so much.

But I wasn't trying to say it's hard. I was trying to make an analogy to a previous poster who said another piece had an entry level solo for tuba and a Rachmaninoff concerto for piano. The tuba part on the Lebedev is certainly "entry-level" (that's probably why it's so popular among bass trombonists - not much technique in the solo part), and the piano accompaniment is full of big block chords (8-10 notes) and 32nd note arpeggios so common to the Russian piano concerto style.

As someone who has played many of the Hindemith sonatas, I agree with James that (in most of them) the soloist and pianist are on equal footing. In the tuba sonata, however, I would say it's more like a piano piece with tuba accompaniment. Scores of articles have been written about this piece (search old TUBA Journals) and most come from the same question..."Why did Hindemith think the tuba was so limited technically?"

.

Todd S. Malicoate wrote:"Why did Hindemith think the tuba was so limited technically?"

I remember reading that Hindemith wrote all of the concertos with the ability to play them himself. This might explain the juxtaposition of some relatively easy solos with tough piano parts.

Matthew Gilchrest wrote:I remember reading that Hindemith wrote all of the concertos with the ability to play them himself. This might explain the juxtaposition of some relatively easy solos with tough piano parts.

I've seen this postulated several times, but have never been able to find proof in any academic text or letter from Hindemith that supports this idea. It's well known that Hindemith was able to play each instrument at least passably (from the Skelton biography), but it's hard to conclude from that information that it was his intention to be able to perform the solo parts of each sonata. If he could play the "lick" at the end of the second movement with any dexterity, he would certainly have been among the best tuba players of the time. The clarinet and flute sonatas are quite difficult, as is the harp sonata.

Still, it's an interesting idea. But Hindemith himself rejected the term Gebrauchsmusik (literally, "utility music," or music to be played by amateurs) when it was applied to his music. It's unlikely he penned the sonatas to be played by musicians of modest abilities.