TubeNet

Our quintet has been meeting the past three weeks (with distancing) thankfully due to a pastor member with a large open space to play in. Our last number of an excellent 2 hour session yesterday was Paul Chauvin's arrangement of "This Could Be The Start of Something Big". Great tuba part, especially up to speed. We ran it once with me on the Wisemann 900 (PT6P Clone which I pretty much always use) and once on my unsightly Conn 2J (first time in this group and IMO a great player). Same mouthpiece. I could tell a major difference, punchier sound, a bit clearer articulation from the 2J with perhaps less gravitas and presence. Both were a good fit in different ways, each with adequate volume and clarity. Members commented that "both sounded great" and did not notice or care about the difference. Someone with a trained ear should notice these differences out front, but seems I overestimated the effect different equipment would have. The 2J is a major fun horn to play and I'd like to take her along more often as she's been feeling left out. The question is, do others even care or is it all in our minds if the parts are well played and the horns well driven?

You're going to get several answers on this because there is no "correct" answer. It all comes down to preference, some like the tuba to support the whole group like a blanket (similar to what a large contrabass is seen to do) others like the sound of a smaller contrabass or bass tuba as a distinct 5th voice.

In my experience, after using a 4/4 CC, a 6/4 CC (I brought it along with th F to try some some pieces where the "blanket of sound" approach was more appropriate), A 4/4 F, a 3/4 F, and a 5/4 Eb, I found I enjoyed and the group liked the bass tubas it provided a clearer 5th voice. I now use my large Eb for any chamber music, and actually all playing I do now. (It was the best compromise between the bass and contrabass to do what I need currently.

If you're still unsure of which horn to use, record the group as you play with each horn, see which you and the group prefer.

Aren't there quintets where the bass part is played on a bass trombone?

A 2J would be a great quintet horn, imo. If I were playing a lot of quintet and small ensemble work, I’d likely own one. I still think this is a great little horn that not a lot of people are into nowadays.

Similarly, a 184/185 or any other 3/4 contrabass work well. When you go 4/4 and larger, you’re making the trumpet players work harder even when the tuba is backpedaling, I’ve found.

This also depends on a lot of the arrangements you’ll be using. So much of the easier to find rep is Canadian Brass and that’s got a bit of tilt toward CC.

On some of the older transcriptions of Renaissance and Baroque period works, the YFB-621 was a nice light sound with a good pop on the low end.

Donn wrote:Aren't there quintets where the bass part is played on a bass trombone?

Yes, indeed. The American Brass Quintet is set up like this and John Rojak is fantastic at his duties as the bass voice. Any arrangements or compositions done for them will be voiced accordingly.

ETA video link:

https://youtu.be/ZqR-eqtfECA" target="_blank

If the other players can't tell a difference, use both.
Whatever you feel most comfortable with.
It's nice that they don't care.
You are the expert in the bass range, and if they have no preference use what you think best.
Can you imagine telling the horn player to use a different horn?

Got it! All points well received and with the last 2 posts, Case Closed

I think it's greatly a question of agility and balance. If I play my 6/4 "Neptune" with a small-ish Helleberg, there isn't a problem unless a piece is peppered with tons of high stuff. If I use a large m.p., it cuts down on agility and overpowers a small group. Keep in mind that I'm compensating a bit, because I greatly prefer the bigger pipe on the Neptune.

Barry Guerrero

cktuba wrote:

windshieldbug wrote:Can you imagine telling the horn player to use a different horn?

OMG! That's our horn player. Wow. She gets around.

Ace

As a trombone player, I have two horns I specifically use for small ensembles. A Bach 42 can blow away a quintet, while a smaller medium large bore horn like a Bach 36 works just fine. Also take less air to get that nice edge.

Thinking about this a bit more, the pieces being played and the venue matter some as well.

If you’re in a room with “muddy” acoustics (lots of modern churches), smaller is probably better. If you’re in a really dry space, a larger horn might lend some additional heft to the sound. Outdoors (like wedding stuff) is a toss up but smaller would probably be better there for more “punch”.

Similar to the horn, as mentioned above, we are stuck with room feedback as part of the sonic component the audience hears. Those factors count.

Probably most important is that the tuba be nice and pretty. Silver with lots of engraving.

One thing I have noticed is that about 95% of the recording engineers prefer the tuba that plays the cleanest. 95% of the time that's an F. This doesn't mean I always grab my F for my quintet but 95% of the time it's my default quintet tuba.

The members of my quintet talk about equipment frequently, but still leave the choices to the players. We all try things from time to time just to see how it works. My default instrument (and what I bring if I bring only one) is my "large rotary F tuba" (to quote Bloke--and my F tuba is nearly identical to his). But some stuff needs a deeper, more soulful sound, and for those works I'm enjoying my new Eastman Kingclone. I had previously used my Hirsbrunner, but it's too big and too "straight", and I always had to hold back. The Eastman makes a big, broad sound for its size, but it's easier to blend in a smaller ensemble. The Eastman, except for its very wide bell flare, is probably 2Jish (or 5Jish) close enough.

But we've had some personnel changes, bringing us a powerful lead trumpet and the return to a big-sound trombone player instead of the euphonium player who had been filling that role. I would never have brought the Hirsbrunner without those guys providing a big sound to fit into. With out old lineup, I usually brought the F tuba only, though there were some works that just wanted the warmth of a bigger (wider) contrabass.

A main feature of an F tuba is that it fills a bass trombone wall far more easily than a contrabass. My Yamaha 621 F tuba was particularly good in that role.

Rick "tuba has lots of possible roles in a quintet" Denney

I use two different horns for quintet. Both are almost the same size, even though one is F.

I prefer CC in Quintet as I am oldschool. I use a MW 3450. The other is my Yamaha 821F. Side by side they are hard to tell apart.

Donn wrote:Aren't there quintets where the bass part is played on a bass trombone?

The American brass quintet used a bass trombone. I haven't listened to them in a long time. Not sure if they are still together. I enjoyed it, enjoyed the sound but will say I prefer a tuba on the bottom.

Davidus1 wrote:

Donn wrote:Aren't there quintets where the bass part is played on a bass trombone?

The American brass quintet used a bass trombone. I haven't listened to them in a long time. Not sure if they are still together. I enjoyed it, enjoyed the sound but will say I prefer a tuba on the bottom.

For me it depends on the music. The Renaissance stuff seems to work well with a bass trombone on the bottom, but the swingy/jazzy stuff really wants a tuba/bass sound. My quintet seems to do both. The F tuba can provide or at least approach the narrow, edgy sound needed, when needed. The serious original quintet literature (what little of it that my quintet is willing to take on--Ewald, Cheetham, etc.) is designed around color, it seems to me, and benefits from the added color of a tuba rather than a bass trombone. Otherwise, the horn is too singular a voice in the ensemble. Then, I can let the F be a tuba, or if the work is jazzy with a real bass line, I can use my Bb.

But if I ever showed up with a bass trombone, the other members of my quintet would do the right thing (for the good of mankind) and wrap the slide--tightly--around my neck. So, a slight compromise of sound using an F tuba is vastly preferable to an intolerable compromise of intonation, technique, articulation, and (yes) sound if I was playing a bass trombone.

Rick "the amateur musician's Hippocratic Oath: Do No Harm" Denney

bloke wrote: Probably, most of us are not familiar with the specific piece about which you're excited.

Great Quintet arrangers are something to get excited about. There's a bunch of crap out there.

From Tubenet 2016

Paul Chauvin passes away
Postby BVD Press » Sat Nov 12, 2016 6:57 am

Dear All,

Every now and then the name of arranger Paul Chauvin pops up here. I learned about 2 weeks ago from an Orange County DA that Paul passed away in his home on September 28, 2016.

Paul was probably most well known for his Brass Quintet arrangements of which many can be heard here:

https://www.amazon.com/Wacky-Winsome-Wo ... B000003J4K" target="_blank" target="_blank

About 2 years ago, Paul contacted me and was wondering about publishing some of his works. As a HUGE Chauvin fan, I was both stunned and flattered. First because I think he is a great arranger and secondly because many of us had been looking for Paul for years and have had no luck finding him or his arrangements. He simply disappeared at some point. When I say disappeared, I mean no one has been able to find him in years and according to the DA he is completely stumped on finding any relatives/heirs or much information on Paul at all. I kind of think Paul wanted it that way and simply wanted to write more music.

I (Cimarron Music Press) agreed to publish anything Paul wanted to send. How could I not publish it? And WOW did he start sending. All in manuscript as Paul did not use a computer. For those 2 years, I would get 3-5 packages of music a month from Paul. Some older pieces going back to 1971, but also many arranged between 2014 until his death.




To get things published, this is how the process worked with Paul:

He would send, I would engrave, I would send the new version back and then we would talk (hours many times simply talking about arranging) and edit on the phone. Basically he would tell me where I messed up! During those editing conversations, I once asked if he had any Tuba Quartet music. He said a few pieces and would send them eventually. First came a set of duets:

http://www.cimarronmusic.com/dizzy-duets" target="_blank" target="_blank

I think they are neat, fun and challenging.

Then came a package of tuba quartets. Not a couple, but 25 in one package! Then another package, another package and another package and...you get the picture. In 2016, Paul arranged and sent me 115 Tuba Quartet arrangements! The few Christmas Quartets can be found here:

http://www.cimarronmusic.com/chauvinchristmas" target="_blank" target="_blank

I am working on the rest slowly...

Paul also continued to send Brass Quintets, more duets, Double Brass Quintets, Trios, etc. I have about 6 feet of manuscript Paul sent along.

The latest piece is a Low Brass Trio:

http://www.cimarronmusic.com/travelinmedley" target="_blank" target="_blank

Special $5.00 price this weekend, but enough of that

--

There was no obituary for Paul as there are no relatives to be found, but I am hoping to collect stories, if anyone has any, about Paul or just his music and write an article at some point.

If you have anything, please email me here: bvdpress@gmail.com" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank

--

For now, I will continue to plug away to Paul's music. If only I had more hours in each day. More of his charts can be found here:

http://www.cimarronmusic.com/catalogsea ... &q=chauvin" target="_blank" target="_blank

Or just his Brass Quintets:

http://www.cimarronmusic.com/catalogsea ... &q=chauvin" target="_blank" target="_blank

Thanks for listening,

Bryan
Bryan Doughty
http://www.cimarronmusic.com/" target="_blank" target="_blank
User avatar
BVD Press
TubeNet Sponsor
TubeNet Sponsor

Posts: 1587
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 3:11 pm
Location: CT

Thanks for the lesson on Chauvin, this maybe deserves its own thread? Lots of great info here.

I’m not sure a recording will help all that much.

When I was in college, our quintet played a recital at the nearby Catholic Church, mainly because the acoustics there were better than the school’s auditorium.

The Parish Priest recorded the recital on the overhead microphones meant to pick up the spoken word near the altar.

I played two different tubas on that recital, a 188 and a YFB-621. Both sounded like overkill because (for a change) my bell was the only one pointed at the microphones. When we later did a forum in the rehearsal hall (that had ok acoustics) and was recorded by a professional sound engineer* (the staff member at school had been the recording engineer for the local philharmonic), the balance was as expected.

Different rooms, different microphone placement, different microphone quality, etc. yielded a completely different sound.

*We also convinced this generous sound engineer to give a class on recording techniques. My roommates and I rounded up enough interest to satisfy the enrollment requirements. Probably one of the most insightful classes I’ve ever taken across three disparate degrees. The main takeaway here: audio recordings aren’t as insightful as we hope they are.