TubeNet

I was told a story of a German brass quintet playing a piece that had some descending figures in the tuba part. The tubist was playing them on his F tuba, (which he used for most of the concert). Toward the end of the piece, during a ONE measure rest, he switched to his big contrabass tuba, and continued the descending line. The stronger bass sound was just right at that time.

Allen Walker

I've taken more than one horn out on many occasions, including Pictures (for obvious reasons, and yes, I needed to play Bydlo on an F just to prove to myself I could do it). Mahler 1 (because the canon just lies so well for an F), and lots of others, where a solo horn comes in very handy while you need a BAT to support the sound later.

The one thing that is difficult is that even if you are using the same mouthpiece you don't have any warm-up time to get used to the new key/bore/rsistance. Usually you need to come in spot-on in a loud passage when you switch/switch back. I would buzz silently and blow air through the horn in unison with the orchestra playing to get used to the new overtones even though I had practiced the switch as part of my prep. You also need to solfeggio what the first new note will be from the orchestra playing before so that you have it fixed firmly in your mind (and it's amazing how little prep you get on the pieces multiple horns make sense). You're not allowed any mistakes with paying customers...

Faced with this situation, I always ask myself "If I were a composer, would I want a suddenly completely different timbre in a work, even though I hadn't called for it specifically?" That's what you do when you swap instruments. As a result, barring extreme tessitura, I use one instrument per composition.

As a composer and tubist, I would want the very best sound possible from each specific player in each situation. This is pretty much the responsibility of the conductor. I say a tubist should play any horn they want, remembering that there is a risk of a conductor not digging it. Whatever is going to sound best in the mix should be up on stage.

I once played Pictures using three horns. A tenor tuba, an F, and a CC. It may have been over done, with the F tuba being questionable, but I thought it blended better in one particular spot, which I can't think of right now.

The audience and orchestra members love to see more instruments on stage. If it sounds good, it's a win/win situation.

A player just needs to sit down and have a conversation with their lower back and knees, and from there decide how many horns to haul.

MellowSmokeMan wrote: The audience and orchestra members love to see more instruments on stage.

Far from being a primary consideration, but colleagues may conclude you used the other horns because you had to; a hardware solution to a software problem.

UncleBeer wrote:Faced with this situation, I always ask myself "If I were a composer, would I want a suddenly completely different timbre in a work, even though I hadn't called for it specifically?" That's what you do when you swap instruments. As a result, barring extreme tessitura, I use one instrument per composition.

Normally, when faced with this situaton, I would use horns that at least sounded similar (a big F, say), and the same mouthpiece, if I could. And at the bottom end, I've never spoken to a composer who didn't absolutely want the BIGGEST sound possible, regardless of whatever else you might need. When I talked with John Adams about this, he just said "Oh! Well that's what I heard there!"

Several occasions in my career, I've found myself in the unfortunate circumstance of playing programs such as Mahler 7, or Alpinesymphony, where the first trumpet didn't feel confident playing the most difficult parts on C trumpet, so resorted to piccolo trumpet. Do you think his colleagues / conductor / audience didn't notice?

bloke wrote:I don't believe any of us who play instruments need to "prove" anything.

Not what I was speaking to. More to those who said that a) timbre difference wouldn't be noticed, or b) with the right concept, an F would sound sufficiently like a CC as not to be noticed when abruptly swapped, or c) it's our business, and not the composer's.

UncleBeer wrote:Not what I was speaking to. More to those who said that a) timbre difference wouldn't be noticed, or b) with the right concept, an F would sound sufficiently like a CC as not to be noticed when abruptly swapped, or c) it's our business, and not the composer's.

I never worked for a conductor that was the least bit shy of asking for another horn if they noticed it. Now I suppose my colleagues may have thought less of me as a tuba player (not that I'd care), but pro trombones and pro french horns (even if they're Schmidt wrap, which minimizes the timbre difference) already have the option of double or triple horns.

UncleBeer wrote:the first trumpet didn't feel confident playing the most difficult parts on C trumpet, so resorted to piccolo trumpet. Do you think his colleagues / conductor / audience didn't notice?

I sure as heck think they'd ALL notice if the first trumpet choked...

Some of this "two horns" issue comes from the tuba not really being standardized. Can you imagine clarinetists talking about 6/4 size instruments versus 4/4 and 3/4? Further, although many of the woodwinds and trumpets come in several keys, the music generally designates which instrument (and transposition!) is intended.

Using bass and contrabass tubas is like an oboist switching between oboe (in C) and english horn (in F). there is a pitch difference, and a timbre difference. Further, composers are aware of the differences, and will call for one or the other, and write accordingly.

Regarding timbre differences among different tubas, even one tuba (like most other instruments) changes timbre from low to high.

I think the lack of standarization and the lack of specific direction from composers is a great opportunity for tubists to do some musical interpretation, and not be bound by mere slavish playing of the page.

Allen Walker

Switching from C trumpet to "pic" is akin to switching from CC tuba to euph. Sure, this will be noticed, and seems rather inappropriate. But this isn't a good analogy, since we're not talking about switching from tuba to euph. If this musician had switched to D or Eb, for example, then that would not have been as obvious. But depending on the key of the piece, the fingerings may have been awkward -- in which case some more practice may have been the "correct" solution.

The timbre change from CC to some bass tubas (Willson Eb or F, for example) is not always very obvious. I bet it is very difficult to hear the difference between a Conn 52J and the Willson Eb -- same bell size (about) and same bore. I know what the difference is between a Conn 56J and the Willson, and it is surprisingly (or not) small.

Now if you're switching between a 2165 and a Miraphone 281, THAT will probably be noticed. And if you switch at the wrong time so that the effect is that the tubist took a 5 minute break (i.e. can't be heard), then THAT will probably be noticed. But if one movement is in the pedal range and the next one is above the staff, a change may be ideal.

I wouldn't change during a one-measure rest to continue a descending run on a contrabass, however. THAT seems excessive....

Are we resisting the concept due to the status quo for tubists?

UncleBeer wrote:Several occasions in my career, I've found myself in the unfortunate circumstance of playing programs such as Mahler 7, or Alpinesymphony, where the first trumpet didn't feel confident playing the most difficult parts on C trumpet, so resorted to piccolo trumpet. Do you think his colleagues / conductor / audience didn't notice?

Does it matter? Is the audience there to listen to the music or watch the players? If it's the latter, I humbly suggest that funny hats, big shoes and bright wigs would improve the entertainment factor enormously.

Sheesh. Just look at the spectacle involved in getting a mute in and out of a tuba.

Chuck(G) wrote:If it's the latter, I humbly suggest that funny hats, big shoes and bright wigs would improve the entertainment factor enormously.

Hey Chuck, lets leave drum corps out of this!

Aw, cut it out, you Bozos!

Chuck(G) wrote:Aw, cut it out, you Bozos!

Why, I'm lovin' it!

MartyNeilan wrote:

(just looks like some of the "famous" conductors I've had to work with... )

windshieldbug wrote:

MartyNeilan wrote:

(just looks like some of the "famous" conductors I've had to work with... )

Yup. If conductors look like that, tubists probably look like...