TubeNet

My pick is 2 trumpets, trombone/euph and tuba. It's a wide range from Trumpet down to Tuba, so you sound good. I've found it way easier to find trumpet players then horn, and I think the trumpets have a nice blend in their range. A good horn player would be great, and clearly in the quintet it's a must have. However, I still prefer the trumpets for quartet.

I hear of more string quartets than brass quintets...maybe because of the range that can be covered by these (string) instruments?

Joseph

We did this at MSM for a semester. Two trumpets, trombone, F tuba (same model as yours.) I suppose two trumpets, tenor trombone, and bass trombone could work also (although those long fast bass runs are never the same on a bass bone.) We were also trying to get a contract to record a 4 part hymnal for a small publishing company.
French horn has always seemed the odd instrument, timbre wise, in a brass quintet.

I have done quite a lot of arranging for brass quintets. The appropriate selection of instruments often just plain boils down to the piece that being arranged/played. Because of the chord density associated with much of the music people want to hear, it is hard sacrifice a trumpet or other high register voice. There is just too much going on generally. It is also very hard to sacrifice in the middle registers because in arrangements the horn and trombone often are worked into role-player parts that require a lot of flexibility. Can't get rid of the bass voice (tuba or bass trombone) period. Nuff said.

The popularity of the brass quintet form I think stems partly from the fact you can get more out of a piece and performance by having the flexibility to add and take away voices as you need to while leaving the identity of the piece intact. Having done a certain amount of quintet playing I also like to put strategic breaks into my arrangements for the players, especially for longer or technically challenging pieces.

So in a way, the quintet on any given piece consists of your starting players and your bench, everybody coming in and out of play as needed. It makes things VERY much easier when you have five options on an arrangement than four. The combinations of voices you can get go up by a factor of 5 (if my logic about factorials is still intact).

That being said...

Arranging for quartet can be quite challenging but certainly not impossible. I have had success with a couple of favorite combos:

2 Trumpets, Trombone, Tuba

and

Flugelhorn, French Horn, Euphonium, Tuba

A related observation. I absoultely hate it when arrangers take a SATB work and arrange it for brass quintet by writing the trombone and tuba in octaves. This completely negates the special sound the quintet gets over the quartet.

I would prefer 2 trumpets, a small bore trombone, and a bigger (.547 or possibly bass depending on the range) trombone. If done with 2trp/2trb, euphonium on the lowest part for quick runs, more of a tuba sound without being overbearing,... should be the most important double of the group. Tuba doesn't really belong in quartet (nor do I think it belongs in a lot of quintet music), especially with the tighter voicings I associate with brass quartets. I might go so far as to say that tuba really doesn't belong in -most- groups without a bass trombone (ok) or a euphonium (better) there as well.

Truth be told, I don't care for french horn much at all and when I last tried to put a quintet together had a saxophone (alto and tenor, to deal with the wide range of french horn parts) for the 3rd part. I also don't like euphonium on anything but the bottom part. I played bass trombone and then small bass tuba in a quintet with 2 trumpets who switched instruments constantly, a french horn, and a euphonium and I never thought it really worked. I do think euphonium is a great "random" horn for a tuba player- French stuff, Bydlo, some quintet, better fit on cimbasso stuff than a big contrabass,... I want one, but I can't find one I really like and I think I'd rather get a Bb cimbasso built up next.
Now that I've, once more, alienated myself from the vast majority of tuba players out there, euph/euph/bass or contra/contrabass is a lousy setup for tuba quartet. 2euph/2contra is ridiculous, and 2euph/bass/contra is still too far apart. 2bari/euph/bass might really rock! But now I'm rambling again...

This seems to be an issue only in the USA.There is a HUGE undercurrent in the British Brass Band field of the Brass Quartet consisting of a Bb Cornet, Flugelhorn, Eb Horn, and Euphonium. It is a marvelous sound. I bet that you could go through the tremendous amount of literature produced for that instrumentation and find at least 100 works that could be adapted for a quartet of a cornet, flugel horn, horn in f, and an f tuba. May take some work making the tuba work, but it probably would yield a great group with a large amount of rep.

Chuck"who has heard some wonderful recordings of the BBB quartet style, especially Beethoven(!!!) quartet transcriptions that are really nice"Jackson

We were fairly successful for almost 10 years with 2 cornets, trombone and euphonium. One perk was we could add a last minute church gig reading directly from thy hymnal. This helped "get us home" from touring after drinking away our earnings...

All kidding aside, the quartet worked for us. One less player personality to deal with, one less player schedule to work around, and more room in the van!

MOST mixed brass quartets are either 202 (2 trpts, 2 trombones) or 211 (2 trpts, hn, trb). Many have alternate parts for the 3rd part so as to be playable by either complement. There are SOME 1111, but not much and these KILL the trumpeter. If you go to our web site, you can see a ton of brass quartets:

http://www.humboldt.edu/brass/musiclibrary.html" target="_blank

NOTE: there are three diffrent libraries.

Bob Kolada wrote:2euph/2contra is ridiculous, and 2euph/bass/contra is still too far apart.

I beg to differ. Sotto Voce and the British Tuba quartet make wonderful lush music; Sotto Voce in particular has a rich thick blend. You are entitled to your view, but I wanted to stick up for tuba quartet.

the elephant wrote:Quartet is less expensive, and that goes a LONG way right now. There is one less person to deal with when stress is factored in. There is one less person to house and feed on trips. There is less crowding in the vehicle on tours.

It is just that no one had ever made brass quartet popular enough after the standardized brass quintet formula took off.

That was our thinking, exactly. We sold ourselves for less than quintets - which "everyone" knows and loves - yet provided the variety and the "schtick" that many of the big-boy quintets included in their shows. It worked well for us.

What didn't work for us, I guess, was our home base. We did as much work as we could, working around our other lives, balancing as best we could. We introduced the mixed brass quartet to as many as time allowed. From that we were able to establish a fairly successful publishing company due to the many requests to make our arrangements available. From the amount of sales over the past 15 years, there are plenty of mixed quartets working. I'm not saying they are out touring and recording as we did, but they are working.

Had we been based in a populated area I think we could have done much more to jump start something other than quintets. What we did, we were successful at.

There is no reason why four good players can't take what we did and flourish. It only takes a little creativity, ambition and time. Audiences like to be entertained - that really is the bottom line.

As for the question about "why there isn't a standard instrumentation for a quartet" - I'm not sure there has to be one. For the most part, alternate parts work real well for the inner voices. Flexibility is always a great option. Being able to play directly out of a hymnal is a plus for last minute gigs, or easy "fill" when time is needed. Any combination of instruments can tour/record/teach/etc if they have the desire and work hard enough. It takes more than just sitting down and playing a part.

Our group preferred cornets over trumpets - leaning more towards the mellow, rounded timbre. Using a trombone kept enough brightness in the overall sound to keep out the "mush" It all worked for us. We could have taken things much further if circumstances were different.

I'm babbling.

I may as well add a link that may show a little of the creativity I was speaking of: http://brassworks4.com/gallery.html" target="_blank" target="_blank

the elephant wrote:At the professional level the real issue is finding a pair of trumpeters who truly match each other and can pass lines off in a manner that is seamless, a la Canadian Brass. That is VERY difficult, and then you have to factor in personality. Horn is MUCH easier to find than trumpet 2, in my experience.

That is a really good point. Locally (non professional) I have found that sometimes* trumpets in different brass quintets get along well if neither are the official "first" trumpet. They just take turns with one on first for half and the other on first for the rest. From my point of view, it is also helpful because it sort of forces the group to listen more and be intentional about the blend. This leads to why I said it works only *sometimes, and kinda ties into what Elephant touched on about personality. I have encountered at least one trumpet player who doesn't know how to fill the role of second trumpet. This guy just always tries to lead, set phrasing, and play out when playing second, despite that the player covering first part does a very good job. But back to my point, some trumpet players are happy to share the spotlight as long as they get their fair share. I think that those types of players are the best guys to do chamber music with anyways.

You say that "the answer has been uniform", but (with all due respect), I'm not sure you heard the answer.

What *I* heard was: quintet offers 5 times as many options for instantaneous instrumentation choices. If you *want* a quartet, but have a quintet, you can have a quartet. In fact, you have your choice of several different quartets. The other direction doesn't work.

You want "one of each". That's reasonable. The price you pay is the "two soprano voices" that others seem to think is important. The question is: how can you arrange for that effect when the music requires it? Or, do you simply forgo it entirely?

It seems to me that the question "what quartet", was answered hundreds of years ago: SATB.

If you want to restrict it to brass, it seems to me the obvious choice is: trumpet, horn, trombone, tuba. This covers the voices, and provides enough variety so that everything doesn't sound like saxaphone choir. Each one of these instruments does SOMETHING that the others can't. If you can only afford four, that's your starting point.

All of these players (except the horn? - perhaps I'm showing my ignorance here), should have some flexibility to alter the mix from piece to piece. The trumpet player has at least 3 options; the trombone player has a couple of trombones plus a euph; the tuba player can go bass or contrabass, upright or wrap-around. That gives you approximately 15 (20?) different instruments on stage (if you want) - from which you get to choose 4 at a time.

But, you can't have two sopranos playing off each other.

I think that's the right tradeoff. If you insist on 2 trumpets, you have to give up *something* somewhere else. The standard quintet seems to be "just right" - taking anything away *must* detract slightly. On balance, I would lose the 2nd trumpet.

Unless, of course, you want to go for something "thematic". EETT is, of course, a classic quartet - but (pace, Sotto Voce) it has distinct limitations. 3 trombones and a tuba should be easy enough to find in your Orchestra, and I'd be happy to listen to that group for 1 set. I'm not sure I would stay for the second.

You need a melody - it's hard to argue for anything other than a trumpet. You need a bass line - it's hard to justify anything other than a tuba. The only question is: what do you put in the middle?

If you want uniformity - by all means add a 2nd trumpet and a euph. But...I would sorely miss the horn.

You *might* use 2 trumpets, horn, and tuba. But...I would sorely miss the trombone.

Which brings me back to vanilla SATB: trumpet, horn, trombone, tuba.

But, you know...I'd love to have a sub list at least 3 deep on each instrument - and I wouldn't be at all surprised to find myself calling for that 2nd trumpet to show up some of the time, so you can play some classic quintet literature... Maybe you need to be 3 deep at trumpet and 2 deep everywhere else?

For me the ideal would quartet Cornet, Trumpet, Euphonium and Tuba, I believe the tone of these instruments together sounds great!!

I think you can make about any combination of instruments work, if you have good arrangements. Here's a group that's normally a sextet, but they also play smaller combinations:
http://www.brassplanet.net/BPhome.html

That's right: four tenor trombones, tuba and percussion! And, none of those wimpy F attachments; those are straight trombones for maximum projection. Here's a YouTube clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2dOmvknxaE

It's all in the arrangements and the performing spirit.

Cheers,
Allen

Not addressing the OP questions directly:

Chuck Jackson wrote:This seems to be an issue only in the USA.There is a HUGE undercurrent in the British Brass Band field of the Brass Quartet consisting of a Bb Cornet, Flugelhorn, Eb Horn, and Euphonium. It is a marvelous sound. I bet that you could go through the tremendous amount of literature produced for that instrumentation and find at least 100 works that could be adapted for a quartet of a cornet, flugel horn, horn in f, and an f tuba. May take some work making the tuba work, but it probably would yield a great group with a large amount of rep.

Chuck"who has heard some wonderful recordings of the BBB quartet style, especially Beethoven(!!!) quartet transcriptions that are really nice"Jackson

There's a "Mr. Bean" Christmas episode with a UK Salvation Army quartet playing on the street -- iirc, Cornet, Alto, Baritone, Tuba -- amazingly warm, deep (as you would expect) sound.

I have a couple of the Brassoworks 4 CDs -- nice stuff.

I used to play in a quartet -- 2.0.1.1 instrumentation with Eb bass tuba for the bottom end. We played a few of the Brassworks 4 arrangements, which worked out well. With bass tuba, you can cover the 2nd 'bone part, adjusting the octave down when appropriate, but keeping the written octave when needed. This the adds a bit of weight to the overall sound.

So I vote for: Tpt, tpt, 'bone, bass tuba (to avoid too great a departure from the "typical" US expectations), or if I had my "ideal group", I'd probably vote for Cornet/Flugel, horn, euph, bass tuba.

Cheers,

Steve Inman
Kokomo, IN

Norlan Bewley had a very successful quartet for years called Top Brass. They started out at IU as a standard quintet IIRC. They moved to a trumpet, euph, trombone, and tuba setup. In fact they would generally score the euph higher than the trombone to fill the horn niche. Ben, back me up. Do you remember their setup when we were studying with them?

Because they focused on American music they settled very nicely in a niche that was trumpet, saxophone, trombone and tuba. Dave Coleman (an amazing trumpet player) had quite the array of trumpets. The sax player would double on flute as well as various members of the sax family, and Norlan would bounce back and forth from his euphonium to his YCB621. He is also an accomplished trombonist.

These guys brought more horns to a gig than any quintet I have ever seen and they could play them all spectacularly.

So to answer the question that has already been answered, no there is no formula for a brass quartet. And perhaps that is part of the attraction. I would enjoy the fact that there is no rigid expectation (apart from voicing as Sloan mentioned... SATB) and really surprise some people with sounds they may not have heard before.

I for one look forward to hearing what you come up with.

the elephant wrote: At the professional level the real issue is finding a pair of trumpeters who truly match each other and can pass lines off in a manner that is seamless, a la Canadian Brass. That is VERY difficult, and then you have to factor in personality. Horn is MUCH easier to find than trumpet 2, in my experience.

One of the things I like, is the way they pass off lines around the entire quintet. Perhaps this is one of the reasons Gene frequently used euphonium instead of trombone. Also, I think this is another reason why a smaller tuba is preferred in a quintet or quartet - the direct clear voice of a bass tuba or smaller contrabass allows the tuba to be a 5th solo voice that can trade lines much easier.

I play in a pretty serious brass quartet and believe me...there's a lot of good rep out there. Our instrumentation is 2 trumpets, trombone, and euphonium (with a decent low range). The Ramsoe Quartets are our Ewalds. Play them all and find as much new rep as you can. In my school library there's stacks of old brass quartet music from the Golden Age and some of it really works.

Believe it or not, the Canadian Brass started as a quartet! And the Nothing But Valves Quartet seemed to be pretty successful...so go for it!

I think, especially in a genre this young, that making a quintet the definitive form of brass chamber music is a foolish decision!!!

Soprano Trumpet
Trumpet
Flugelhorn
Bass trumpet

Soprano trombone
alto trb
tenor trb
Bass trb

S sax
A sax
T sax
B sax

Tenor tuba
Eb tuba
Bb tuba
Sub contra bass tuba



, but making a serious suggestion is difficult.
I think two trumpets, trombone, cimbasso would work out nicely: maybe one of those trumpets could be a flugel to get an alto-ier voice.