TubeNet

Just happened to check the Canadian Brass Web site, for the first time in years and years. Looks like their current roster is Chuck, and 4 really young guys? I always figured the last few long-timers would be gone soon, but I was kind of shocked to only recognize 1 face and see a bunch of other people my age or younger.

I'm sure they are all wonderfully talented. But this isn't really the Canadian Brass anymore. Time to hang it up? Rebrand?

This has gone on for decades with high profile quartets and quintets: One founding member holds the group together as others come and go. Eventually that person retires, but usually the name stays. The Canadian Brass is a strong brand from a highly successful quintet that I imagine any quintet player would love to be associated with regardless of having any link to original members.

Same story with Emprie Brass...only founding member still in the ensemble is Rolf Smedvig.

Take the Budapest (String) Quartet for example. There was a period in their history where they weren't even based in Budapest! The group is somewhere around 100 years old, I beleive. Obviously they've endured beyond the founding members.

Is ensemble xyz still ensemble xyz? Yes and no. It depends on how you look at it.

Edit:

You know, Canadian Brass hasn't actually consisted of all of the founding members since 1971 when a young Stuart Laughton left the group to go back to school before being appointed Principal Trumpet at La Scala while still in his 20's.

Yep, I totally understand that, and it makes sense. Just seems like even the new people has been a rotating door for some time now.

I'm sure I would enjoy the music no less than before, nor would the current roster feel any less honored to play there.

Kind of like playing on a fabled baseball team like the Yankees. Always an impressive accomplishment and lots of name recognition from the team...but I'd think a player would rather be known for being on the 1998 team (114-48, world series champs) than the 1990 team (67-95, October vacation). I swear, I'm not a Yankees fan, not even close. I just know lots of "stuff".

bort wrote:Yep, I totally understand that, and it makes sense. Just seems like even the new people has been a rotating door for some time now.

I agree. It seems that ensembles loose a little bit of their history and tradition when this happens, but I don't think there is much stopping it.

bort wrote: I'm sure I would enjoy the music no less than before, nor would the current roster feel any less honored to play there.

I agree.

bort wrote: Kind of like playing on a fabled baseball team like the Yankees. Always an impressive accomplishment and lots of name recognition from the team...but I'd think a player would rather be known for being on the 1998 team (114-48, world series champs) than the 1990 team (67-95, October vacation). I swear, I'm not a Yankees fan, not even close. I just know lots of "stuff".

Good comparison. Yes, much like sports teams, be it the Yankees, Chicago Bulls, etc.

As long as the web shop supports somebody’s retirement the brand will live on.

Klaus

I agree with everyone here. It just seems like this version of the quintet should be called "Chuck and His Grandsons". No offense to Chuck at all. I met all those guys (Fred, Ron, Graeme, Chuck and Gene) back in the early 80's when they were "THE Canadian Brass". Lots of changes since then of course, but unlike the Yankees or similar comparisons, they will never be the same. And I don't think this is an apples to apples comparison. The new CB are constantly reinventing themselves - playing new rep and new entertainment shtik. The Yankees - whether it's Babe Ruth or Derek Jeter - are just trying to win ballgames.

In short, I'm for a name change when Chuck leaves. But of course that won't happen because the legacy = money. And why shouldn't it? They certainly earned it with all those innovations and years on the road.

This is an ancient philosophy conundrum. When you have something (anything) made up of
separate parts, and replace 1 part - is it the "same"?

For a solo act, this isn't too hard a question.

For a duet - can you replace ONE of the Smothers Brothers? Probably not. Although Fred Astaire managed to change partners often enough.

How about a trio - now it's starting to get interesting...

...

CB is a quintet - if you swap out ONE performer, it kinda feels like it's still the same quintet. But, if all 5 were to retire en masse and 5 other performers took the stage, in what sense would it be the "same" quintet? The book? The style? The website? How many versions of "Blood, Sweat, and Tears" were there? Could the Mamas bring in a replacement Papa? Would it have been "The Beatles" with the original drummer? Was it really "The Beach Boys" onstage when Brian Wilson stayed home?

If you swap one performer (out of 5) every 5 years - that doesn't seem like much, until you look back 25 years and see that none of the original performers remain. Now the question is WHEN did this group cease to be the group that was formed 25 years ago? With the 1st change? the 3rd? the 10th?

How about "The Navy Band"? How many performers can you replace before it ceases to be "The Navy Band". All of them? Half? 1/10th? none? How many changes were there last year? Did anyone notice?

What matters? The parts or the whole? Is the whole more, or less, than the sum of the parts?

Somehow, I don't think the Canadian Brass will come up with the definitive answers to these questions...

Anybody seen the Preservation Hall Band lately?
Great show, all new faces, all new sound.
Still selling tickets.
Here they are last summer with my youth band:


http://greatctjazz.org/Sugarfoot/

Art, your youth band has some pretty obvious qualities not found in bands needing preservation.

Klaus

Art Hovey wrote:Anybody seen the Preservation Hall Band lately?

The last time I saw them in person, Kid Thomas was on trumpet and he was about 1000 years old even then.

For me, it depends on how the group identifies themselves. You can't replace one of the Smothers Brothers because they are the Smothers Brothers. But if they were the New Comedy Duo, perhaps you could. You can't replace Paul Stukey in Peter, Paul and Mary because they identify themselves as names and personalities more than as a trio.

The Navy Band has no connection to any individual, and if they showed up on stage next year with all new musicians, they would still be the Navy Band. They are that because they are the premiere band representing the Navy, not because they include any particular individual. I would be likely to go hear the Guarneri String Quartet and not know any of its members by name, or care that one of them is new.

I suspect the Canadian Brass is more the latter than the former. It should always be possible for Canada to be represented by an eponymous brass quintet. We have come to identify ourselves with the individuals in the group because they were a constant for a long, long time (except in the horn position), but if that roster had changed frequently we would not think of them the way we do. I don't know the roster, for example, of the American Brass Quintet, and I think of them only as the American Brass Quintet. But I know the members of the Canadian Brass, so they rise above "Canadian Brass" to become Chuck, Ronnie, Fred, David (as in O'Hanian--hornist when I saw them in person and met them in clinics), and Gene. Folks who knew them earlier might have a different roster of first names in mind, and younger folks might not remember David O'Hanian or Fred Mills (RIP) at all. But I suspect those who identify with the individuals on a personal level are a small fraction of their audience.

But there is one requirement: They must still produce the product that made them famous. Otherwise, they don't live up to their own name. That includes a mix of old stuff delivered credibly, and new stuff that is a reasonable advance in the direction they have established. When the Doobie Brothers lost Tommy Johnston and Michael McDonald became the lead singer, the fundamental sound and approach of the group changed. McDonald had his fans but to me they just weren't the Doobie Brothers any longer, and weren't until Johnston came back. His voice was a key ingredient. Does a brass quintet have that sort of key ingredient? In the case of the CB, is was their blend of music, stage presence, and humor that made them famous and allowed them to break out of the usual chamber music mold. Daellenbach is perhaps the key ingredient there--he was always the main delivery vehicle of the humor. Will someone else be able to deliver that humor when he leaves? Maybe not. The CB will then have to change its identity, and that will annoy older fans, but if they survive that and still present the quality product, the newer fans will identify with the new group. To do that, they will have to update their schtick to resonate with their new roster.

Rick "who went to a Marshall Tucker Band concert and discovered that 1.) they had nothing new and 2.) they were no better than a tribute band to themselves" Denney

CB was Fred and Ronnie on the trumpets, with Chuck and Gene and the revolving door french horn. Anything else just isn't the same (although Ryan Anthony is a heck of a trumpet player and sounded great when he was with them.)

I think it would be great if Ronn and Stuart L. (unfortunately Fred passed away) on trumpets, David Ohanion on horn, Gene on trombone and Chuck on tuba did one more year together as a sort of farewell tour playing all the quintet pieces they made famous. After that they can decide if they want to keep the group of new guys but I think they would rake in a lot of revenue if they did a nation-wide farewell tour and maybe one more CD with the "real canadian brass" since they won't be around forever. Even at their advanced age, I bet they would still sound great. There are some recent videos on youtube of Ronnie Romm and he still has it. Sell a DVD of the final concert too.

doublebuzzing wrote:I think it would be great if Ronn and Stuart L. (unfortunately Fred passed away) on trumpets, David Ohanion on horn, Gene on trombone and Chuck on tuba did one more year together as a sort of farewell tour playing all the quintet pieces they made famous. After that they can decide if they want to keep the group of new guys but I think they would rake in a lot of revenue if they did a nation-wide farewell tour and maybe one more CD with the "real canadian brass" since they won't be around forever. Even at their advanced age, I bet they would still sound great. There are some recent videos on youtube of Ronnie Romm and he still has it. Sell a DVD of the final concert too.

I don't think you could call it a "real" Canadian Brass farewell tour without Fred. Kind of like trying to do a Beatles reunion without Lennon.

An entertainment ensemble (sports, music, etc.) can choose to either be a phenomenon (Beatles, Rolling Stones, Queen) or a franchise (most sports teams, Sousa Band)

Its apparent the Canadian Brass has chosen to become a franchise. I'm sure it will continue to be profitable and successful, for at least a while longer.