Sibelius 2 solo phrase full, or as written?

[Todd S. Malicoate]

Composers were people, too. Everyone makes mistakes. In our attempts to correct things, maybe we make our own mistakes, but they're ours to make.

We're more than instrumentalists. We've all (presumably) been trained to some degree in composition and orchestration and when something is obviously wrong - like a wrong pitch in a part or an obvious missing note - then it's our responsibility to fix it. If we don't, who will?

So are you saying that the Sibelius example indicates that he made a mistake in not including the two notes in the tuba part? You presented an idea (completely valid, in my opinion) earlier that none of us really know what Sibelius wrote (due to the inevitable interference of editors, publishers, and copyists) so shouldn't one necessarily default to the score as presented? What makes the "mistake" of the omission of these two notes "obvious"?

Anybody can make generalizations and sound correct - what do you think about this particular case? What is it in your musical opinion that justifies adding the extra notes to the tuba part? How does that relate to other specific cases where the tuba part drops certain notes, and does your reasoning hold true in those cases as well?

Todd, enjoying the discussion

[Alex C]

If this hatred was so severe, why did he write that huge "the-too-buh...Play-the-too-buh...I-play-the-too-buh..." solo, then? He could have easily given that to the celli, bassoons, etc...and quite a few composers before, during, and after his tenure avoided the use of tubas completely in tens of thousands of orchestral works.

The tuba (at the time of Sibelius...along with tuba playing technique) was developed to about the equivalent of the level of electronic synthesizer instrument development and playing technique had developed by the mid-1970's. His tubas parts would naturally reflect those limitations.

When I execute things that are not written in orchestral works, I do so extremely sparingly. My experience, though, is when I'm playing a newly-composed orchestral work and introduce composers to issues that occur in their tuba parts, 99% of the time they are more than motivated to change the parts to address sonic or technical issues...and I'm not just referring to "student" composers...I'm mostly thinking back to premieres of works of high-profile composers.

I'm not a robot, but I'm also not a composer...and I'm a performer, but not (at least on stage) a jack-***. If extremely minor edits (omissions, mis-placed or mis-timed loudness markings/pitches omitted due to some composer assumptions of breathing requirements or range limitations/etc.) subtly improve performances while completely avoiding any "WHAT'S GOING ON BACK THERE ?!?!" issues, I'm for them. Music Directors do this with NEVER EVERY performance in which I'm involved. Have any of us NEVER been involved in a rehearsal where a music director has said, "Rather than fortissimo, please play that passage piano", or even, "Please circle that passage and don't play there...", not to mention, "I need the [articulation] in the strings changed from what is written to [articulation]"? One (high-profile) music in particular with whom I work seems more annoyed that complimented when I've (on rare occasion) consulted him about extremely minor "re-interpretations" within tuba parts...ie: "Just play, and I'll say something if I don't like it." He (properly so, imo) seems to view the tuba in the orchestra as nearly parenthetical...except when it is not.

I did not imply that Sibelius had a severe hatred of the tuba, you intentionally mis-represented my post to further your argument.

Additionally, I do not write posts on Tubenet as if they are research papers, I wite in a conversational style, as you do, which often uses hyperbole. It is true that I did not take into account those who do not understand hyperbole. For those people, I could have stated more declaritively that "Sibelius did not like to use tuba." He had less than than complimentary comments about tuba on more than one occassion (he was apparently a very conservative individual).

I did clearly state, without hyperbole, that his later symphonies do not use tuba and believe this supports my general argument. This should help you understand the context of my statement. (I didn't check this, someone may be able find a tuba part in the symphony 4,5,6, or 7 and prove something I said was wrong -- get looking.)

In reference to this particular excerpt, you know that the excerpt in question is not a "huge "the-too-buh...Play-the-too-buh...I-play-the-too-buh..." solo." I don't have the score but, as I remember, this particular melodic line is doubled in basses and celli; the bassoons may also be involved but it's been a while since I played it. It is not a solo and there are probably few professional tubist who would play it as if it were a solo. The tuba line is part of the orchestration fabric.

I am sorry that you take my remarks personally, they weren't directed at you and I had no clue that you were reading this thread or cared so deeply about Sibelius Second Symphony. I certainly support your goal of playing whatever you want to play and however you want to play. I'm certain the people you perform with also support that. However I think Sibelius' comment (which I posted earlier) does not support the tuba player adding notes in Sibelius' works.

---

I'm surprised at the rancor of those who want to play something other than the written part on the Sibelius Second Symphony... and the lack of reasoned justification. It's mostly just been "I want to do it so I'm gonna do it until somebody stops me." Very dissappointing from a musical standpoint.

[Todd S. Malicoate]

Here is a free look at the score in question (WARNING - large .pdf file). The passage in the tuba (at F in the second movement) is doubled by bassoons, violas, celli, and double basses.

Please notice in the score a few pages down the Poco largamente after H (same movement)...the tuba doubles the bassoon/double bass line, but Sibelius leaves out the two sixteenth notes before the D half note in the second bar. Is it "ok" to add those in as well, or is that "mistake" less "obvious" than the first? And darned if it doesn't happen again, two bars later, up a step!

Todd, hoping the slippery slope is being revealed

[Wyvern]

Searching the old TubeNet, I have just located interesting post on this subject;

I'm a Finnish tuba player (BTW I played the Sibelius' 2nd symphony 3 weeks ago with the Oulu symphony orchestra).
The reason why Sibelius stopped using the tuba in his symphoies that I heard is that the tuba player always was so drunk so he couldn't play the music.
That, I think, also is the reason for why for an example in the 2nd sympony, 2nd movement where the tuba has solo with the low strings the first eight in every phrase is missing in the tuba part. it's written e# a# but it should be f# e# a#. Today all tuba players (at least in Finland) play these phrases the same way as the strings. There are also more places where the tuba is not playing some notes that it should play in unison with the bassoon (also 2nd symphony, 2nd movement).

http://www.chisham.com/tips/bbs/aug2000 ... 31113.html

Now that is from just ONE Finnish tuba player, so is not corroborated. However according to Wikipedia, Sibelius did conduct the Oulu symphony orchestra, so that practice may have just been passed down through the years?

However, I think it is probably not a good idea to play other than what's printed without the conductor's prior agreement. I will see if I can grab a quick chat with him at the afternoon rehearsal.

PS Thanks Todd for posting link to the score. That will be useful!

[Alex C]

Yes, yes, this is what I meant, of course. Ignore all that is written and play as one feels.

Your use of hyperbole is misguided at best, and childishly ignorant at worst. Certainly no one would completely disregard the written music, nor should one be tied to the ink to such a point that would render our own knowledge and expertise meaningless.

Composers were people, too. Everyone makes mistakes. In our attempts to correct things, maybe we make our own mistakes, but they're ours to make.

We're more than instrumentalists. We've all (presumably) been trained to some degree in composition and orchestration and when something is obviously wrong - like a wrong pitch in a part or an obvious missing note - then it's our responsibility to fix it. If we don't, who will?

Then again, if you wish to be just a tuba monkey, that's up to you. (There, I can do hyperbole, too.)

Personal insults on Tubenet are low class. Citing hyperbole as childish is incorrect. Humor, irony, hyperbole and similar efforts require insight and intelligence. I do not lay claim to a high degree of either but certainly enough to know that your assertions are only meant to justify a position you take which has no intellectual validity which you cite.

I have stated opinions referenced to the score and an historical account. Those who disagree offer insults.

Really, "childish," "monkey," without cause is not worthy of anyone with the intelligence to learn to play tuba.

[Alex C]

x

[Biggs]

Yes, yes, this is what I meant, of course. Ignore all that is written and play as one feels.

Your use of hyperbole is misguided at best, and childishly ignorant at worst. Certainly no one would completely disregard the written music, nor should one be tied to the ink to such a point that would render our own knowledge and expertise meaningless.

Composers were people, too. Everyone makes mistakes. In our attempts to correct things, maybe we make our own mistakes, but they're ours to make.

We're more than instrumentalists. We've all (presumably) been trained to some degree in composition and orchestration and when something is obviously wrong - like a wrong pitch in a part or an obvious missing note - then it's our responsibility to fix it. If we don't, who will?

Then again, if you wish to be just a tuba monkey, that's up to you. (There, I can do hyperbole, too.)

Personal insults on Tubenet are low class. Citing hyperbole as childish is incorrect. Humor, irony, hyperbole and similar efforts require insight and intelligence. I do not lay claim to a high degree of either but certainly enough to know that your assertions are only meant to justify a position you take which has no intellectual validity which you cite.

I have stated opinions referenced to the score and an historical account. Those who disagree offer insults.

Really, "childish," "monkey," without cause is not worthy of anyone with the intelligence to learn to play tuba.

The wonderful thing about tubas is that that tubas are wonderful things.

[Alex C]

"Hats off gentlemen...."* Obviously.
.
.
.
.*Robert Schumann

[Todd S. Malicoate]

One of the things I like best about this place is that we are able to have such discussions without resorting to "flame fests" that are so prevalent elsewhere on the internet.

Sure, we often have brief exchanges of less-than-complimentary posts, but I attribute that passion in the dialogue to the passion most of us here have for music in general and the tuba (or euphonium/baritone...don't want to leave you guys out!) specifically.

I know that my position on this specific issue isn't any more "correct" than anyone else's, and everyone has done a nice job of backing up their opinion with substantial musical reasons. At the very least, this discussion has given everyone who viewed it something to think about...and that's always a good thing.

Todd, respectfully

[Wyvern]

Here is a free look at the score in question (WARNING - large .pdf file). The passage in the tuba (at F in the second movement) is doubled by bassoons, violas, celli, and double basses.

I have not been able to download that score. Apparently some technical problem with that link from the UK.

GOT IT NOW - THANKS TO THOSE THAT HELPED!

[Alex C]

One of the things I like best about this place is that we are able to have such discussions without resorting to "flame fests" that are so prevalent elsewhere on the internet.
...
Todd, respectfully

Todd,

It is responses like this that keep me on Tubenet. Reasoned and well worded, even if I consider it too ameliorating for this particular thread. Still, blessed are the peacemankers...

[ZNC Dandy]

I do believe Sibelius wrote for the tuba after his 2nd symphony. Just not any parts in the symphonies. Pohjola's Daughter has a tuba part, and a pretty nice one. It was written in 1906. Three years after his Symphony No.2

[Wyvern]

I think it makes an interesting myth about the drunken tuba player. However most composers (probably including Sibelius) write down what music they hear in their head. My theory is that Sibelius simply stopped including tuba because it was not part of the sound world he was trying to create in his later symphonies where he was trying move away from the musical influence of Tchaikovsky.

A late work that does include tuba is The Tempest Op.109 composed in 1925-26.

[J Stowe]

I think it makes an interesting myth about the drunken tuba player. However most composers (probably including Sibelius) write down what music they hear in their head. My theory is that Sibelius simply stopped including tuba because it was not part of the sound world he was trying to create in his later symphonies where he was trying move away from the musical influence of Tchaikovsky.

A late work that does include tuba is The Tempest Op.109 composed in 1925-26.

I like this idea, but I wouldn't rule out his personal vendetta. Everyone is a product of their environment, no matter how ingenious and creative he or she is. If I wrote music for a particular instrument, and no one possessed the skills to perform it well, then I think I would be encouraged to look to another instrument that could handle what I was looking for technically and musically. We idolize composers for their intelligence and wonderful contributions to art, but we can't expect them to be impervious to the temptations and frustrations of life.

[Wyvern]

Well, I played Sibelius 2 this evening including the extra notes. I managed to ask the conductor earlier before rehearsal who said "sure". What a great piece it is and super tuba part - I can see why this was the late John Jenkins' (Philharmonia) favorite symphony!

The orchestra seemed happy - booked me to play Finlandia later in the year.

As I was packing up after the concert an elderly gentleman came up to me saying he used to play BBb bass in a brass band while he still had the breath and how he had enjoyed the sound of my tuba, particularly in the finale (I was of course playing the Neptune). Nice when someone takes the trouble to express their personal appreciation like that

[eupher61]

agreed that this is an amazing piece of music. I've played it 3 or 4 times, once in college and the rest with community groups. The conductors all say the same thing "LOTS of open strings, good for groups like this". Even a bad orchestra can't ruin this.

In fact, one of the community orch performances was with a guest conductor, who specifically said "ANY time I do a guest shot, I do this piece just in case."

And, every one of them told me to beef up the dynamic in IV. They wanted it LOUD. No argument from me..

dang, doesn't work on emoticons...