Most recent ITEC Journal

[GC]

Can't find it, though I wonder who some of the folks in the background of the Meinl full-page ad are.

[bisontuba]

Hi-
Didn't see anything like that- the issue just bored me to be 100% honest.....
Mark

[dwaskew]

Pop quiz: Where is the photobomb in this issue?

page 10 where Bill is peering over behind the winners?

[dwaskew]

Can't find it, though I wonder who some of the folks in the background of the Meinl full-page ad are.

you referring to the kids in the workshop?

[GC]

That's a photobomb? He didn't even drop his pants or anything.

[pgym]

That's a photobomb? He didn't even drop his pants or anything.

Photobomb - An otherwise normal photo that has been ruined or spoiled by someone (something) who (that) was not supposed to be in the photograph.

[BAtlas]

Yeah, normally I'll at least find 1 or 2 things that interest me in the journal. This one was disappointing. I don't need to read reviews of every new piece that has been written and every college tuba ensemble that has played (not to mention, I feel like the reviews are sometimes non-descript political fluff).
(edited for exaggeration)

[GC]

GC wrote:That's a photobomb? He didn't even drop his pants or anything.

Photobomb - An otherwise normal photo that has been ruined or spoiled by someone (something) who (that) was not supposed to be in the photograph.

Ruined? Spoiled? By having Bill in the corner? Naah. It could only be improved by his presence.

[Michael Bush]

Not enough pictures of girls, beer, and food in this issue. This is a "tuba" journal, isn't it? What are they thinking...?

However... “College Bound for Music” by Matt Tropman was well written and should be read by anyone entering music school.

Side note: I've given up asking questions and making suggestions for the improvement of the ITEA, their "conferences," and their (very much non-scholarly) "journal." They seem to fall on disinterested ears.* It is set up for and by the college crowd. So be it. I'll get what I can from the journal. ITEA will be what it is... until it isn't any more, which, unfortunately, is a distinct possibility.

*This year when contacting a "professorly" type regarding their upcoming conference, I received a very unprofessional and snarky response to questions on payment and fees regarding a group of 18 students and family members I was bringing to their conference. That was the last nail in the coffin for me. Some of those students were considering this professor's school for music ed degrees next year, but I think that has changed, too. They are a fine example of the fact that it is possible to "butter your own bread" a little too much... Those parents were p!ssed and rightfully so.

I'm a beginner with ITEA, having been a member for about a year and a very part time staff member just a few days. But I feel pretty secure saying the board is working on serving the whole membership in a helpful way. The recent expansion of the board to include a broader spectrum of members is one sign of that. During the short time I've been working on it, I haven't been shy about advocating for this as well, and no one has told me to take a flying leap so far. Hopefully you'll notice a positive difference in the near future.

[Tubadork]

GC wrote:That's a photobomb? He didn't even drop his pants or anything.

Photobomb - An otherwise normal photo that has been ruined or spoiled by someone (something) who (that) was not supposed to be in the photograph.

Ruined? Spoiled? By having Bill in the corner? Naah. It could only be improved by his presence.

awwwww, thanks,

and speaking of presence, Robert (Tuben) Coulter, Thomas Peacock, Jerry McEver and I played some really loud notes that night with the Georgia Brass Band and it was literally TONS of fun. AND, Kenyon put on a really great conference there. THANKS KENYON!!!!!

Bill

[MikeMason]

Tubenet is far more useful than itea.I voted w my feet and money and haven't renewed.

[BAtlas]

IMHO, the reviews and announcements show that the world of tuba is still alive and well in an era that, quite frankly, isn't too friendly toward this particular genre.

Not to say I don't read that section, or not read the reviews. I'm a regular conference attender/member etc. Fluff may have been strong of me to say (I'm pretty sure I may have made a generalization also). Having performed in college groups and having been reviewed in the journal, I can say that I appreciate that aspect of it. However, I don't think the reviews are as relevant to as wide an audience, and sometimes can't accurately depict the topic matter (thinking more in the new materials section). (I especially appreciate reviews of masterclasses on pedagogical topics). I'd like to see more things like the El Tubador article, or the interviews with John Trustcott and Nick Etheridge.

[king2ba]

We've gone off topic on this thread, but what else is new, right?

I let my membership laps after college. For whatever reason I re-joined about 2 years ago. So far, I've thrown all the journals away...most without reading a single article since NOTHING stood out to interest me. Every journal is the same...first we talk about all the great people that have done great things....interestingly enough, these are all college profs.....or students of college profs....the SAME people over and over.

Next, we read about a conference....one that was run spectacularly well by.....a college professor.

We'll usually get an article about one of the greats in the field....written by a professor or soon to be professor.

Then, we get the reviews....oh...the reviews. Now, here, we don't hear from the college crowd as much....now we get the DMA candidates....these are the guys that hope to soon be college professors. The reviews are terrible. I appreciate knowing the range and sometimes the style and length of the piece, but really every description sounds the same!!!! (Lyrical this...technical challenge that....blah, blah, blah.) We don't even know how the reviewer came to their conclusions....did they play the piece at all, just sight read through it, perform it? If it's such a great work, lets hear some of it....turn on the Edirol or Zoom and post a few clips to the net. Let's see the first page....SOMETHING....ANYTHING has to be better than the crap that is in every journal.

Toward the back we'll get a decent article that people that are in college or don't plan to go back might have some use for, then we get pages of recital programs. Great! I love to know how many times the Vaughan Williams has been played in the past three months!!!!

The journal has really become a joke. It's only use is for someone that needs tenure to have a place to see themselves published. What's so interesting to me is that ITEA has completely moved away from one of Jake's biggest lessons.....this should be about being a musician, not about being a tuba player! If an article couldn't be used in any other journal that deals with education or musicality, then it doesn't belong in print. End of story.

I am so thankful that my subscription is about to run out...it's done at the end of this month, and so am I.

[trop2000]

Howdy tubenet,
As I know there are lots of ITEA members I thought I’d step up with my two cents. Advance warning, yes this *is* a “can’t we all get along” post!! And it’s long!!

I’ve been an ITEA member for a long time, and have heard a lot of views expressed which echo some of the posts here. Having just started a term as ITEA’s Executive Director, I have a bit of a different perspective on things.

I do think it’s true that there has always been a very close tie between ITEA and college teaching. Shouldn’t there be? A huge amount of the overall energy put forth by the tubaeuph world is put forth by college teachers. To me, this certainly does not mean that the only interest of ITEA as an organization is to promote college teachers. That is a leap that I personally cannot make. It’s not as if college teachers are “bad” and non-college teachers are “good”, right? And don’t all the top-flight professionals have college gigs too? The vast majority I know certainly do. Being published certainly helps college teachers in their professions, but that’s true whether we’re talking tuba euph or biology. A Journal like this is supposed to publish updates, programs, event summaries, and so forth. But I don’t think it’s pure self-congratulatory tenure-seeking either. If that’s what I thought I wouldn’t be involved. And in the interest of full disclosure, I also have a college gig. It’s quite part time and shows no signs of being anything else, so it’s not as if I took the XD gig so I could leverage my school or fatten my tenure file. Over the years I’ve come to really respect and admire a LOT of folks involved. Just think of some of the ITEA Board folks currently serving; Deanna just started as President, Dave Zerkel is Past President and Ben Pierce just started out as Editor of the Journal. I hope these folks don’t mind me mentioning their names, and these are only a few examples of some of the incredible virtuosi who are now devoting substantial energies to ITEA. Anyone who thinks folks like that are just out to fatten their resumes by somehow “using” ITEA as a personal platform … just listen to their recordings !

As to what contributions ITEA has made to the tuba-euph community at large, I think there are many. I’ll probably write more about this soon. One especially (I think) overlooked area is how much good music has come out of the ITEA press. Over the years the press was perhaps generous to a fault in publishing nearly anything submitted, but to encourage compositions for the tuba/euphonium at all 30 years ago wasn’t easy. I really feel that the existence of the press has overall improved the repertoire available to our instruments, not just directly but indirectly, helping to motivate by example other composers and publishers to take our instruments more seriously. It wasn’t as if there was NO tuba/euph repertoire prior to the press, but I do think the press created a real boost.

As to our conferences, I think the overall quality has been very high, both organizationally and artistically. So what if they’re held at colleges? The Holodome isn’t going to really work for a conference anyway. These conferences allow us exchange within our community, but they also expose our instruments to a wider (non tubaeuph) audience. I think conferences do a lot for our instruments and those who play them. As to specific instances of problematic issues mentioned in this thread, I can only say I’m sorry your experience wasn’t what it could have been.

On the usefulness of ITEA versus tubenet, I realize others differ but I just don’t think that they can be compared head-to-head. They aren’t up to the same thing. I find both useful, and I do find at times both have room for improvement. Even though I find tubenet useful, I’ve had some pretty negative experiences with it as well, but I’m glad I keep coming back because I DO get some useful information here.

I think it’s pretty easy to carp about ITEA, but to my based on my personal first hand experiences the organization is making a valuable contribution to all things tuba/euphonium. Of course I’m biased in our favor, but I don’t think tubenet readers are going to have any difficulty in forming their own opinions. What frustrates me is that while some complaints have been legitimate over the years, a lot of things really *have* changed and evolved in a positive direction, and I think sometimes it’s too easy to beat the same old drum of ITEA complaints. Of course ITEA isn’t perfect, far from it. BUT there are a whole bunch of top-flight people who are involved and, from my perspective, pretty passionately trying really hard to make ITEA as good as it can be. In our meetings the most important overall theme than I can pick out so far is a constant focus on serving our members and our instruments. I haven’t heard one single comment that could be even remotely interpreted as self-serving. The constant chorus of “ITEA is college teachers promoting themselves” is hard to hear because I know these folks personally, and I haven’t seen one single instance of the kind of blatant self-promotion that I sense some folks feel is afoot. Yes, tubaeuph folks NEED a place to call home, a place to publish our stuff and at least give the world a chance to know more about us. When I was working on my doctorate I spent a lot of time in the library, and often needed access to a wide variety of journals. That exercise gave me a pretty broad perspective on music (and many non-music) journals as well. The ITEA journal is just that, a journal. It isn’t a trade pub or a straight up magazine. In my survey I found that, to be fair, some journals were a bit more topical and engaging than ITEA. But not all, not by a longshot (again, obligatory comment about this just being my personal opinion).

Look, folks, you aren’t going to like everything in the journal and in ITEA. If you don’t like reading programs people submitted, don’t read them. I skip perhaps ¾ of the articles in Sports Illustrated but I’m not “mad” at the 75% that does not really interest me. I think a lot of ITEA detractors look at the Journal like fresh meat when it comes out with an attitude of “let me see what I don’t like”. If I open Sports Illustrated with the same mindset I also am not going to like Sports Illustrated.
So my naive hope: take a positive mindset towards ITEA because it’s absolutely the case that those involved are trying to make it as relevant and valuable as possible, and there are some serious badasses putting a heckuva lot of time and energy into making this thing work for its members. If you have suggestions, bring them forth (but perhaps an email would be easier than 50 more posts on this thread )

Something is telling me I should have a beer before I open up tubenet later tonight!

Thanks for reading,
Matt

[Biggs]

Howdy tubenet,
Ben Pierce just started out as Editor of the Journal.

Yes, tubaeuph folks NEED a place to call home, a place to publish our stuff and at least give the world a chance to know more about us. When I was working on my doctorate I spent a lot of time in the library, and often needed access to a wide variety of journals. That exercise gave me a pretty broad perspective on music (and many non-music) journals as well. The ITEA journal is just that, a journal. It isn’t a trade pub or a straight up magazine. In my survey I found that, to be fair, some journals were a bit more topical and engaging than ITEA. But not all, not by a longshot (again, obligatory comment about this just being my personal opinion).

Look, folks, you aren’t going to like everything in the journal and in ITEA. If you don’t like reading programs people submitted, don’t read them. I skip perhaps ¾ of the articles in Sports Illustrated but I’m not “mad” at the 75% that does not really interest me. I think a lot of ITEA detractors look at the Journal like fresh meat when it comes out with an attitude of “let me see what I don’t like”. If I open Sports Illustrated with the same mindset I also am not going to like Sports Illustrated.

With much respect for the musical talent of Prof. Pierce, it is my personal opinion as a former ITEA member and my professional opinion as a media professional that the editor of the ITEA Journal should have an impeccable command of writing and editing skills and, most importantly, publication design.

The ITEA is not a journal; at least not in the sense of scholarly journals that I believe you are comparing it to. It is THE professional publication for the tuba and euphonium world and, when compared to publications that fill the same role in other, similar communities, it is an embarrassment.

[bisontuba]

Hi-
As I mentioned to someone connected to ITEA, here are just 2 ways to change:
--compare the ITEA Journal to the trpet, French horn, and trombone Assoc. Journals--try to be more like them. Don't have reviews/ articles 9-12 months old also. The status quo for the ITEA Journal is just going to continue to kill off membership in it's current format, IMHO.
---exchange free ads with Tubenet and ITEA on each site/magazine--ITEA needs more members, needs add'l cash, and Tubenet is a great place to recruit. Tubenet and sponsors need fresh new faces--it's exactly where ITEA can recruit from- a win/win for each entity.

Just a couple of thoughts.
Mark

[opus37]

I am a member of ITEA and regularly read the Tubenet ( I sometimes even comment. Of the two I find the Tubenet more useful because it serves a broader audience. Journels in general go through the period of lost relevance. I agree that it is time for the editorial staff to rethink its direction and goals. There are a lot of tubist out there who play in community band or teach high school age kids that are not being served. I do enjoy the gem series, but I have yet to find something I could play. The reviews of new compositions don't help a lot either. I suggest you not only look at other instrument association journels but think out of the box. The American Association of Woodtuners Journal covers the same subjects (who is great, new tools, the conference, etc.) but it also has a how to section that covers all levels in almost every journel. No mater where you are in wooodtuning skill, there is something for you in most editions. It is time to get out of the ivory towers and try to relate to the rest of the world (of tuba).

[opus37]

My comments are not to pile on the ITEA, but to help strengthen it. I think it does have a place in the Tuba World. If they are looking for more ideas, just look at the subjects covered here on Tubenet. Things like, mouthpieces, instrument reviews, repair/restore, finding lost music, how to play a particular part, playing problems/help at all levels of skill, to name a few.

[Rick Denney]

I know some of the people who are and have been officers of ITEA. They are good people who really do want to do the right thing.

Part of the issue is that an organization can only go where the members are willing to take it. This becomes a chicken-and-egg conundrum, because the main reason ITEA is centered on academia is because academics are the ones who show up. So, should the Journal serve those who show up or serve those who ITEA would like to attract? The answer to that question is not obvious.

As one who does not show up, I feel reluctant to discuss inadequacies. I do have to say, though, that the descriptions of the current Journal issues seem to match the format of the TUBA Journal I read 25 years ago.

Most magazines are designed for turnover audiences and thus cater to beginners. Beginners are full of zeal and vacuum up every bit of information they can get their hands on. After a year, they've read all the beginner-oriented stuff and lose interest. But the publishers don't care--they have new beginners to attract.

Most scholarly journals seek to advance the state of the practice by presenting new research that advances the state of the art. For them, only two statistics matter much: Their citation rate and their peer-review standards. In the latter, they do sometimes succumb to long-term fads that become inbred as current reviewers become committee chairman and favor those who think like them to become new reviewers.

Most membership organization magazines and newsletters have a single goal: Demonstrating to the membership that their dues are being well-spent by their staff, and indeed should be increased so that the staff can be increased. When membership organizations are big enough to have a paid staff, the natural tendency is for the paid staff to see themselves as separate from the members and their officers as a way of protecting their gig. It is challenging for paid staff to maintain the perspective of a member rather than an employee, but I think it is essential. The staff should serve the membership but often it becomes the other way around. I have lots of experience seeing this happen, but with professional societies for the most part. I don't know if Matt is paid or what sort of paid staff ITEA hires, but this is the challenge for them.

So, what should a journal do to serve its members? First, it should spend some time documenting how members will use the journal:

1. Academics will publish scholarly articles that might not interest anyone but their tenure committee.
2. Students will be looking for information about potential gigs, the equipment that will make it easier to get those gigs, the people they need to know to position themselves to be favored for those gigs, the recital music they need to play to qualify for those gigs, and on and on. The important point here is that the gigs those students are pursuing are usually academic gigs.
3. Amateurs will be looking for reviews of equipment, and interesting (!) history about famous performers. For the reviews to be relevant to amateurs, they must be honest, and they must be written from an amateur's perspective.
4. Amateurs will also be interested in scholarly topics, but their interest is far different from that of a tenure committee. They won't care how many times the article is cited by other articles, for one thing. They will care that the writing be engaging rather than "scholarly". Many tuba amateurs are more technical than tuba academics, so they won't be afraid of math and science the way college music students might be.
5. Active organization "joiners" will want to see their activity represented so that they can start their clipping file. That includes pictures of the conferences and the active people doing the active things.

Each of these subscriber scenarios has to be served to retain those subscribers. Each of these scenarios leads to a series of requirements that each issue should fulfill. They can be segregated to preserve academic purity. For example, each issue can present one or two peer-reviewed scholarly articles in a section marked as such. Each issue can also have sections targeted at other scenarios. (Bigger organizations might segregate these into separate publications.) The point is to target parts of the format to different reader scenarios, rather than different reader constituencies. Often each section is pointed at the board members that represent that user constituency, instead of being evaluated by whether it fulfills the requirements that emerge from that scenario. Lots of pros play in community bands, and a few amateurs might have something scholarly to say.

For example, let's consider a review. If someone reviews the new RickBAT(tm), their review might talk about the history of its development, who was involved in that history, the commitment to a particular outcome as expressed by those people, and the commitment to realizing that vision on the part of the manufacturer. Maybe they'll throw in a few impressions from playing the instrument for a few minutes. That's the sort of review that makes people gag because it's just advertising fluff.

The sort of review that is relevant would have an outline like this: The background and history of the instrument's development is summarized briefly to identify the goals and target application. There is no discussion of commitment, except as it is reflected (or not) in the actual product being reviewed. The review would describe its applicability in various scenarios (not all of which are relevant in all cases, of course): How it performed in large ensemble, small ensemble, solo work. How easy is it to hold? How easy to carry? Does it come with a case? Is the case any good? How is the construction quality and maintainability? What mouthpieces seemed to work and why? How is the intonation? (And this has to be more careful than "good"--it requires some actual measurement, and an honest measurement approach.) How is the sound up close, from the player's perspective? How about out in the hall, with an expert, comparing it to the reviewer's primary instrument? Is it forgiving--good for a beginner? And so on. Above all, the review should provide information needed (objective and well-justified subjective) for a reader to decide whether that instrument is one they should consider, and every review should acknowledge that for some buyers, the answer to that will be no. Obviously, the reviewer had better not care about the Rick in RickBAT, so that if truth needs to be told, the reviewer won't care if Rick never speaks to him again. Usually, this can be prevented by noting the issues and working with the manufacturer to resolve them before publication.

The important point is that reviews like these are extraordinarily difficult in a small population, because we all want to remain friends. Writing strong reviews requires a committed editor and a board willing to back the reviewer up in the face of the inevitable complaints.

The same is true for reviews of music. The reviewer should be willing to say things like, "this would sound better on a bassoon--it just doesn't sound like it needs the power and purity of a brass instrument." When the composer is a buddy, will they be willing to say something like that? Or, "I played this for my wife and she's still laughing, which this reviewer assumes is not the intent, so performers may program this for an academic rather than general audience." That sort of thing is at least as useful as an analysis of the composer's historical references. But music reviews should also consider technical difficulty from the perspective of the reader scenarios. I can't tell you how many modern works have been described as not technically very challenging, but I still can't play them. I buy them and many sit in the file cabinet. They may not be challenging to the DMA performance major, or to a working pro, but they may be hopeless for a community-band hobbyist.

All journal issues should have something for amateurs who have experience, and something for newbies who don't. Often, the stuff I see in other journals that is targeted to non-professionals is really aimed at beginners rather than amateurs. I'm an amateur, but I've been playing tuba for 40 years. I may have wider stylistic and musical experience than some college-kid pro-wannabes, even though their playing fundamentals are better. Stuff that builds the community-band hobbyist might include material that is absent anywhere else, and of no real relevance (yet) to a beginner. I also suspect my underlying scientific understanding of tubas is on a part with most tuba professors. Fred Young was an amateur, but he had important enough scientific insights to get special mention by Arnold Jacobs. Is that sort of interaction between pros and amateurs reflected in the Journal?

And the journal should at least occasionally have stuff for working pros as distinct from academics, such as how to write a contract, standards of professionalism, and stuff like that. That will also appeal to amateurs who do pro gigs once in a while. Maybe that stuff is in there already.

I have not been a member of TUBA/ITEA for many years, mostly as a result of an administrative conflict I had with TUBA long before any of the current people arrived on the scene. And now it's just too dang difficult to keep up with memberships that renew yearly, and I have to be really motivated to join another organization. But I have wide experience with journals and organization magazines of all types, and have seen their many pitfalls. Maybe that will provide useful insight; maybe not.

Rick "who knows firsthand how challenging it is to edit and publish a membership organization journal" Denney

[Mark]

Part of the issue is that an organization can only go where the members are willing to take it. This becomes a chicken-and-egg conundrum, because the main reason ITEA is centered on academia is because academics are the ones who show up. So, should the Journal serve those who show up or serve those who ITEA would like to attract? The answer to that question is not obvious.

For those ofd us with long memories, we still have to wonder if the change from TUBA to ITEA was where the members wanted to take it.