Bubbie one step further

[bloke]

but...but...You don't like my toy !!!

[J.c. Sherman]

It’s hard to jibe pejoratives such as “awfulcleide,” “toy,” and “blah, blah, blah” with “no interest”. I never said “fear”, but trepidation of being supplanted in a gig by another musician or having to deny a request to perform on the instrument could be a threatening position to be in. I was speculating, as I can’t understand the drive to malign.

But, since sincere efforts at persuasion are resulting in very obviously closed ears, I’ll simply continue to use it when hired to do so, and we’ll see where the art takes us.

By the way, bloke – cool photoshop – may I borrow it? That’s one of the few contrabass ophicleides, perhaps put to good use!

[J.c. Sherman]

I'd be much more interested in a modern take on the serpent: brass, better intonation than the old models, maybe sax-type keys . . . . sweet.

You just described an ophicleide Like a bassoon, if you make it a rational system, it stops sounding like itself and becomes something new.

[Lingon]

A small clip for for those that feel the ophicleide as a threat in everyday life and thinks that it is impossible to play in a useful way etc etc...

[MartyNeilan]

A small clip for for those that feel the ophicleide as a threat in everyday life and thinks that it is impossible to play in a useful way etc etc...

While what he did was nothing short of amazing on that instrument, I don't necessarily think it would satisfy on an undergrad bass trombone jury. Ignore the gymnastics (and the piano) and listen to the sound itself, particularly in the low register.
Yes, they are an interesting novelty. No, they honestly do not sound that good.
Sorry!

[imperialbari]

OK, but not nearly as musical and as even a sound as in the takes that Nick Byrne made available on his site some years ago (they weren’t there last I looked).

In one take Nick Byrne played duet with a euphonium. The blend was excellent and revealed that the ophicleide basically sounds like a lean euphonium.

Klaus

[PMeuph]

While what he did was nothing short of amazing on that instrument, I don't necessarily think it would satisfy on an undergrad bass trombone jury. Ignore the gymnastics (and the piano) and listen to the sound itself, particularly in the low register.
Yes, they are an interesting novelty. No, they honestly do not sound that good.
Sorry!

The player is a French Horn and Trumpet player and has played both within the Orchestra Nationale de France.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Guerrier

I truly wonder how much time he has spent on the ophicleide and on his low range.

(If that is not the most unlikely brass triple ever (Horn, Trumpet Ophicleide)) I don't know what is!)

[bloke]

a bunch of random thoughts on this all jammed into one unorganized paragraph:

I see the reason that composers/orchestrators stopped writing for this (the "monumental development of machine manufacturing - and thus 'the brass instrument valve' " aside) is the same reason that tenor tubas/euphoniums/baritone horns (pick your favorite name) aren't often used in symphony orchestras: They sound too much like French horns, yet lack the potential intensity that the French horn can offer. Recorders ("blockflutes") sound too much like flutes and offer an extremely limited range of volume and sonority. Recorders are not used in modern orchestras. As to modern-day inclusion of throwback instruments in new works, there are probably currently less than fifty (more...?? fewer...??) people in the world that can really play these bass keyed bugles with true artistic competency. Moreover, the acquisition of these by universities (rather than paving roads, repairing bridges, and paying state troopers) is a great way to burn state sales and property tax revenues and (as they are toyed with by musicologists) sustains their undeserved reputation as wretched instruments. "Money", though (in the case of privately-funded professional symphony orchestras), has always affected orchestration. Composers might (??) love to be able to (as did Mahler on some monumental works) include everything-and-the-kitchen-sink, but extra folks back there (who, in this particular case, mostly would contribute a mezzo blendy sound) cost dough.

[J.c. Sherman]

Cogent argument, Bloke. And that is true - they do rather disappear. Some liked that. Most, especially now, prefer the tuba's unique and separate voice. No disagreement there. I like tuba too.

Training to play one, well, that onus would be ill justified by tax dollars; also true. I paid the prices to learn, and it took a damn long time for the earnings to outweigh the direct expenses... but the rewards were every bit as grand as golf is to some


J.c.S.

[PMeuph]

a bunch of random thoughts on this all jammed into one unorganized paragraph:

I see the reason that composers/orchestrators stopped writing for this (the "monumental development of machine manufacturing - and thus 'the brass instrument valve' " aside) is the same reason that tenor tubas/euphoniums/baritone horns (pick your favorite name) aren't often used in symphony orchestras: They sound too much like French horns, yet lack the potential intensity that the French horn can offer. Recorders ("blockflutes") sound too much like flutes and offer an extremely limited range of volume and sonority. Recorders are not used in modern orchestras. As to modern-day inclusion of throwback instruments in new works, there are probably currently less than fifty (more...?? fewer...??) people in the world that can really play these bass keyed bugles with true artistic competency. Moreover, the acquisition of these by universities (rather than paving roads, repairing bridges, and paying state troopers) is a great way to burn state sales and property tax revenues and (as they are toyed with by musicologists) sustains their undeserved reputation as wretched instruments. "Money", though (in the case of privately-funded professional symphony orchestras), has always affected orchestration. Composers might (??) love to be able to (as did Mahler on some monumental works) include everything-and-the-kitchen-sink, but extra folks back there (who, in this particular case, mostly would contribute a mezzo blendy sound) cost dough.

For those same reasons of money, wouldn't it make sense then, that Jinbao makes ophicleides that could be sold for individuals so they can muck around and do whatever they want using their own money (given the low cost) rather than buy a Robb Stewart replica for 25k using your money? That amount of money is too much money for an individual and the only other institutions that could fund it are museums and universities.

I would debate as too why the euphonium is not used in orchestras but I'll spare that rant for another day. I'm in partial agreement with you on that....

[bloke]

With bated breath I await this future Jinbao offering.

[J.c. Sherman]

With bated breath I await this future Jinbao offering.

You know you want one... even if for a lamp or theatrical prop

J.c.S.