TubeNet

I just ran across this piece which expresses my sentiments exactly. Good for this syndicated columnist, Esther Cepeda.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html" target="_blank

Ace

I can only add my own recent observations. Two nights ago at a pro baseball game, the singer was a wanna be country "artist" who began with an out of tune scoop into the first note and scooped and yodled his way to the end. Before he finished, the crowd started whoo hooing and cheering like he had just hit it out of the ballpark (he actually struck out in my opinion). Last night while playing the National Anthem, I observed one gentleman in the audience who was swilling beer, eating chips and looking everywhere but respectfully at the flag. It's not my job to eject someone from the the concert, but if it had been, he would have been gone.

Unfortunatly, the people who need to be educated on such matters will never read an article like the one in the link.

Jackie Evancho just did a great job this evening at the Capitol Fourth celebration.

The performance of our national anthem is not an opportunity for the soloist to perform vocal excercises or try to put their immense skills on display. It should be played and performed straight, like Hail to the Chief , and any individual should feel honored to have been invited to present our anthem.
How about we just accept the notion that WhitneyHoustons Super Bowl performance of our anthem will never be out done and everybody just stop trying and play it as written -

I enjoy our National Anthem straight and if you sing it well that way, it is quite a good display of your vocal powers. An added high note or two is not out of place, but it ought to be recognizable. It is not easy to sing well, as we all know from having heard it murdered more often than not.

That said, I can tolerate and even appreciate some of the more modern renditions, but they have to be done well in their style and still not lose the grandeur of the original. Some people can do this and others---many---cannot. I think it's a real disrespect to our country to do it poorly. It isn't the performer's fault, really, it is the people who invite them and don't tell them "No" when they can't do it right.

I haven't ever heard it as a tuba (or even euph) solo, but I think that would be great. But not by a honking sousaphone, please.

royjohn wrote:I haven't ever heard it as a tuba (or even euph) solo, but I think that would be great. But not by a honking sousaphone, please.

Not exactly a solo -- a whole bunch of tubas & euphs, actually -- but we like it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86BzMGjD_3g

jamsav wrote:The performance of our national anthem is not an opportunity for the soloist to perform vocal excercises or try to put their immense skills on display. It should be played and performed straight, like Hail to the Chief , and any individual should feel honored to have been invited to present our anthem.
How about we just accept the notion that WhitneyHoustons Super Bowl performance of our anthem will never be out done and everybody just stop trying and play it as written -

So, you want people to play it as written but your favorite rendition of the piece is in 4. Surely you realize that the piece as written is in 3?

One of my least favorite forms of musical snobbery (remember, of course, that I routinely engage in many forms) is the sneering by critics at national anthem performances that do not align with their own arbitrary aesthetics for the piece. The USA is a place where artistic freedom, guided by the legal framing of the First Amendment, is the absolute rule. To expand, embellish, alter, and even parody the Star Spangled Banner is one of the most purely American activities.

Further, I ask these critics to consider the artistic choices that went into the performances that they so quickly deride as unworthy or even un-American. Consider the most popular 'alternative' rendition: Jimi Hendrix's 1969 anthem at Woodstock. Given that Hendrix was performing the anthem of a country that, some 100 years earlier, would have allowed him and his entire family to be enslaved and even still in 1969 continued to struggle with civil rights issues, is it any wonder he would have decided to reject the piece's historic performance traditions? Or consider my favorite rendition: Jose Feliciano's 1968 World Series anthem. Feliciano (an American citizen) performed the anthem in a manner that emphasized the stylistic traditions of his cultural background. If the American anthem, the national song of 'a nation of immigrants' and 'a melting pot' can't be synthesized with non-Anglo aesthetics, is it even any good? Finally, consider one of the most infamous alternative renditions: Roseanne Barr's 1990 anthem. Barr, a professional comedian and satirist of American life ("domestic goddess" anyone?) was parodying the very same thing that critics bemoan: supposedly tasteless anthem performances!

The critics of non-traditional performances are, of course, free to opine accordingly but also free (and welcome, as far I and all other music fans are concerned) to host their own concert, where they may perform the piece however they wish. The antidote to speech is always more speech!

But not by a honking sousaphone, please.[/quote]

Not exactly a solo -- a whole bunch of tubas & euphs, actually -- but we like it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86BzMGjD_3g

[/quote]

Good one Kevin. We play the Star Spangled Banner at every performance in the
50 piece band in Florida as Canadian Snowbirds. We end each gig with God Bless America.
I do the same with my little 8 piece Dixie band 'Gator Bait'

Kiltie Tuba: look at the flag so you wont see all those "Canadians" eating and drinking
during your National Anthem.

To expand, embellish, alter, and even parody the Star Spangled Banner is one of the most purely American activities.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ls1YVhcLD2c" target="_blank


Since Joe hasn't chimed in on this one yet...........

I figgered it was time for a "Bloke Video"

KiltieTuba wrote:He may have been Canadian...

The proper way to say it is, "He may have been Canadian, eh?"

And I've been at many hocky games where the Americans paid respect when "Oh Canada" was played, and then vice versa when "The National Anthem" was played. (of course, being a hockey game there were plenty of boors swilling beer and burping during both)

KiltieTuba wrote:

Ed Jones wrote:I can only add my own recent observations. Two nights ago at a pro baseball game, the singer was a wanna be country "artist" who began with an out of tune scoop into the first note and scooped and yodled his way to the end. Before he finished, the crowd started whoo hooing and cheering like he had just hit it out of the ballpark (he actually struck out in my opinion). Last night while playing the National Anthem, I observed one gentleman in the audience who was swilling beer, eating chips and looking everywhere but respectfully at the flag. It's not my job to eject someone from the the concert, but if it had been, he would have been gone.

Unfortunatly, the people who need to be educated on such matters will never read an article like the one in the link.

He may have been Canadian...

Hm...

Biggs wrote:

jamsav wrote:The performance of our national anthem is not an opportunity for the soloist to perform vocal excercises or try to put their immense skills on display. It should be played and performed straight, like Hail to the Chief , and any individual should feel honored to have been invited to present our anthem.
How about we just accept the notion that WhitneyHoustons Super Bowl performance of our anthem will never be out done and everybody just stop trying and play it as written -

So, you want people to play it as written but your favorite rendition of the piece is in 4. Surely you realize that the piece as written is in 3?

One of my least favorite forms of musical snobbery (remember, of course, that I routinely engage in many forms) is the sneering by critics at national anthem performances that do not align with their own arbitrary aesthetics for the piece. The USA is a place where artistic freedom, guided by the legal framing of the First Amendment, is the absolute rule. To expand, embellish, alter, and even parody the Star Spangled Banner is one of the most purely American activities.

Further, I ask these critics to consider the artistic choices that went into the performances that they so quickly deride as unworthy or even un-American. Consider the most popular 'alternative' rendition: Jimi Hendrix's 1969 anthem at Woodstock. Given that Hendrix was performing the anthem of a country that, some 100 years earlier, would have allowed him and his entire family to be enslaved and even still in 1969 continued to struggle with civil rights issues, is it any wonder he would have decided to reject the piece's historic performance traditions? Or consider my favorite rendition: Jose Feliciano's 1968 World Series anthem. Feliciano (an American citizen) performed the anthem in a manner that emphasized the stylistic traditions of his cultural background. If the American anthem, the national song of 'a nation of immigrants' and 'a melting pot' can't be synthesized with non-Anglo aesthetics, is it even any good? Finally, consider one of the most infamous alternative renditions: Roseanne Barr's 1990 anthem. Barr, a professional comedian and satirist of American life ("domestic goddess" anyone?) was parodying the very same thing that critics bemoan: supposedly tasteless anthem performances!

The critics of non-traditional performances are, of course, free to opine accordingly but also free (and welcome, as far I and all other music fans are concerned) to host their own concert, where they may perform the piece however they wish. The antidote to speech is always more speech![/quote

You and all other music fans ? Really ? So glad you are speaking for the masses- I am a music fan- do not put words in my mouth , or suggest otherwise.

I had always regarded Hendrix's rendition as a protest piece.
Roseanne Barr's attempt at humor disgraceful and insulting to those who are proud to be Americans and those who have fought and died to insure the very freedom that Ms Barr and others choose to use as a platform for all kinds of performance art.
I will continue to believe that some things remain sacrosanct .
You want to fly the banner of constitutional rights and artistic freedom ? Me too!, I am not the arbiter of good taste, nor are you, so to avoid the need for definitions of what is or isn't tasteful, leave the anthem alone

jamsav wrote:

Biggs wrote:

jamsav wrote:The performance of our national anthem is not an opportunity for the soloist to perform vocal excercises or try to put their immense skills on display. It should be played and performed straight, like Hail to the Chief , and any individual should feel honored to have been invited to present our anthem.
How about we just accept the notion that WhitneyHoustons Super Bowl performance of our anthem will never be out done and everybody just stop trying and play it as written -

So, you want people to play it as written but your favorite rendition of the piece is in 4. Surely you realize that the piece as written is in 3?

One of my least favorite forms of musical snobbery (remember, of course, that I routinely engage in many forms) is the sneering by critics at national anthem performances that do not align with their own arbitrary aesthetics for the piece. The USA is a place where artistic freedom, guided by the legal framing of the First Amendment, is the absolute rule. To expand, embellish, alter, and even parody the Star Spangled Banner is one of the most purely American activities.

Further, I ask these critics to consider the artistic choices that went into the performances that they so quickly deride as unworthy or even un-American. Consider the most popular 'alternative' rendition: Jimi Hendrix's 1969 anthem at Woodstock. Given that Hendrix was performing the anthem of a country that, some 100 years earlier, would have allowed him and his entire family to be enslaved and even still in 1969 continued to struggle with civil rights issues, is it any wonder he would have decided to reject the piece's historic performance traditions? Or consider my favorite rendition: Jose Feliciano's 1968 World Series anthem. Feliciano (an American citizen) performed the anthem in a manner that emphasized the stylistic traditions of his cultural background. If the American anthem, the national song of 'a nation of immigrants' and 'a melting pot' can't be synthesized with non-Anglo aesthetics, is it even any good? Finally, consider one of the most infamous alternative renditions: Roseanne Barr's 1990 anthem. Barr, a professional comedian and satirist of American life ("domestic goddess" anyone?) was parodying the very same thing that critics bemoan: supposedly tasteless anthem performances!

The critics of non-traditional performances are, of course, free to opine accordingly but also free (and welcome, as far I and all other music fans are concerned) to host their own concert, where they may perform the piece however they wish. The antidote to speech is always more speech!

You and all other music fans ? Really ? So glad you are speaking for the masses- I am a music fan- do not put words in my mouth , or suggest otherwise.

I had always regarded Hendrix's rendition as a protest piece.
Roseanne Barr's attempt at humor disgraceful and insulting to those who are proud to be Americans and those who have fought and died to insure the very freedom that Ms Barr and others choose to use as a platform for all kinds of performance art.
I will continue to believe that some things remain sacrosanct .
You want to fly the banner of constitutional rights and artistic freedom ? Me too!, I am not the arbiter of good taste, nor are you, so to avoid the need for definitions of what is or isn't tasteful, leave the anthem alone

Again: you insist that people leave the anthem alone and then gush with praise for a rendition (a beautiful rendition!) in a different time signature than the original melody.

Just for future reference, which changes are ok to make?

[curmudgeon mode on]The first twelve notes do not a rendition make. How many times have your heard Bagley's National Emblem as a substitute for The Star Spangled Banner? I love the march, but as an audience member I have never stood up in honor of its playing, so that makes zero times for me. There comes a point in a tune's arrangement that it becomes so dissimilar to the original that nobody but the 'in crowd' recognizes its origins. Besides, no one would mistake it for the original, which it is NOT a substitute for.[curmudgeon mode off]

Someone mentioned Roseann Barr's disastrous performance many years back. After the outcry by the fans, the very next night the team played a recording of the National Anthem performed by the United States Marine Band. this fact was reported on Entertainment Tonight.

When I was in college, I was asked to sing the National Anthem for a tournament basketball game over Christmas break, since I was in choir, and I was one of the few whose folks actually lived in the same city, so I was still in town and available. It was solo. Unaccompanied. I had my pitch pipe to make sure I had the right pitch, then the scorekeeper hit the horn. It was close, but not quite the same pitch. It rattled me and I had to take a couple of extra seconds to regain my composure before I sang. It was one of the most difficult songs to sing I have ever done solo.

Personalization? Extra notes? Holding out for effect at the end? Not on your life. I sang it as straight as I could and got through it, with only a slight tenuto on the high note to make sure I had good intonation, as is customary. I gave it my best shot, and fortunately, it was well received.

From then on, I decline to sing it except as part of a choir in parts or the crowd in unison. I am more than happy to just sit in the back and play the tuba part to the well-known Sousa arrangement. That, I do well, having played it since junior high band almost 40 years ago. I can play it from memory, and I don't even care if you use the Bb or Ab version. I'm not singing it on my own ever again.

The best version of it I have heard so far is that found in the "1853 Brass Band Journal".

A perfect, period, pretty waltz. Arranged when our country wasn't near as 'martial' as nowadays.

http://tapsbugler.com/store/#!/~/produc ... d=19534370" target="_blank

We have played it this way several times over the years to real accolades.

Dennis

My tuba quartet did Oh Canada for a St. John's IceCaps game during the lockout. (They're AHL). We would have done the American anthem too, except that the caps were playing another Canadian team that night. Forgive the rushing - I've played for huge audiences before but that was probably the most nervous I've been in my entire life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lQXx-xG ... ture=g-upl" target="_blank

How timely, Via my position as the ND Dept. Adjutant (State Executive Director) of the American Legion, I am in the process of introducing
a new "Certifcate" program to the Directors of the International Music Camp. The program is being designed to teach/train high school
students to sing the Nation Anthem and play Taps according to the Congressionally approved DoD version and the U.S. Army Field manual
for Taps. The students will receive a certificate and acknowledgement via a press release to their home county news media outlets.
The area American Legion Posts will receive the names of approved students for playing Taps for veteran funerals. We have extended an
invite to the Manitoba Provincial Legion to include the Canadian students to learn their respective anthem. Our goal is to implement this
program into the 2014 season.

jamsav wrote:

Biggs wrote:

jamsav wrote:The performance of our national anthem is not an opportunity for the soloist to perform vocal excercises or try to put their immense skills on display. It should be played and performed straight, like Hail to the Chief , and any individual should feel honored to have been invited to present our anthem.
How about we just accept the notion that WhitneyHoustons Super Bowl performance of our anthem will never be out done and everybody just stop trying and play it as written -

So, you want people to play it as written but your favorite rendition of the piece is in 4. Surely you realize that the piece as written is in 3?

One of my least favorite forms of musical snobbery (remember, of course, that I routinely engage in many forms) is the sneering by critics at national anthem performances that do not align with their own arbitrary aesthetics for the piece. The USA is a place where artistic freedom, guided by the legal framing of the First Amendment, is the absolute rule. To expand, embellish, alter, and even parody the Star Spangled Banner is one of the most purely American activities.

Further, I ask these critics to consider the artistic choices that went into the performances that they so quickly deride as unworthy or even un-American. Consider the most popular 'alternative' rendition: Jimi Hendrix's 1969 anthem at Woodstock. Given that Hendrix was performing the anthem of a country that, some 100 years earlier, would have allowed him and his entire family to be enslaved and even still in 1969 continued to struggle with civil rights issues, is it any wonder he would have decided to reject the piece's historic performance traditions? Or consider my favorite rendition: Jose Feliciano's 1968 World Series anthem. Feliciano (an American citizen) performed the anthem in a manner that emphasized the stylistic traditions of his cultural background. If the American anthem, the national song of 'a nation of immigrants' and 'a melting pot' can't be synthesized with non-Anglo aesthetics, is it even any good? Finally, consider one of the most infamous alternative renditions: Roseanne Barr's 1990 anthem. Barr, a professional comedian and satirist of American life ("domestic goddess" anyone?) was parodying the very same thing that critics bemoan: supposedly tasteless anthem performances!

The critics of non-traditional performances are, of course, free to opine accordingly but also free (and welcome, as far I and all other music fans are concerned) to host their own concert, where they may perform the piece however they wish. The antidote to speech is always more speech![/quote

You and all other music fans ? Really ? So glad you are speaking for the masses- I am a music fan- do not put words in my mouth , or suggest otherwise.

I had always regarded Hendrix's rendition as a protest piece.
Roseanne Barr's attempt at humor disgraceful and insulting to those who are proud to be Americans and those who have fought and died to insure the very freedom that Ms Barr and others choose to use as a platform for all kinds of performance art.
I will continue to believe that some things remain sacrosanct .
You want to fly the banner of constitutional rights and artistic freedom ? Me too!, I am not the arbiter of good taste, nor are you, so to avoid the need for definitions of what is or isn't tasteful, leave the anthem alone

Go, Jim, Go!!!

In elaboration on Jim's comments, before the Star Spangled Banner became the National Anthem, it was performed in a variety of circumstances and renditions. The tune started out as a drinking song, "Anacreon in Heaven," written for a British men's club. The top note provided for a break for a cadenza in the classical sense for many years, for many different arrangements and performance situations, before it was shortened to the tenuto and out.

As for me? Yes, as posted above, I will still play the Sousa arrangement as my favorite. But the older I get, the more I understand personal renditions. I do not like the current US Armed Forces arrangement. To me, the harmony is disjointed, lacking flow.