Category: Orchestral

Playing Requirement Differences Between Brass Instruments – Range and Endurance

~ wilktone ~ 6 Comments

I recently got an email from a trumpet player, Lee, who reminded me about a topic I’ve been meaning to blog about for a while. In his email about a different topic Lee mentioned that the range requirements for trumpet player are more demanding than that of trombone. While on the surface this could be correct, I’m not so certain that this is really true. There certainly is a lot more nuance that goes beyond how high each of those instruments are expected to play. There’s also the range where these instruments spend the most time playing as well as the length of time in a given performance. Of course that’s going to depend also on the style of the music and what the individual piece is. It’s really hard to quantify this and often it gets framed as which brass instrument is harder to play, which is not really a useful argument.

Regardless, as someone who has spent a lot of time studying scores of great composers and arrangers I’ve noticed that the playing demands placed on different brass instruments are not always comparable. A phrase played on a Bb trumpet in a particular range is going to have a completely different quality if played an octave lower on a trombone. A trombonist pasting out an F above high Bb can sound exciting, but it doesn’t have quite the same punch as the equivalent G above high C on trumpet. Then we also need to consider how much a particular brass part plays on a given piece of music. If I were asked to play a NOLA brass band style sousaphone part in the equivalent range on tenor trombone or euphonium I think I would be gassed by the end of one set, maybe sooner. Good arrangers come to an understanding of what good brass players are capable of and write parts accordingly.

Are there some ways to objectively look at the playing demands placed on different brass instruments? Maybe, but all the ways I can think of have their limitations. Still, I find this an interesting thought experiment and did some “back of the envelope” analysis to see if I could come up with anything that might tease out an understanding.

While I’m not really a brass doubler, I do find it useful to practice trumpet from time to time and while I was a student, particularly in high school, I played all the brass instruments in different ensembles. I also taught all the brass instruments for a while back when I was teaching at Adams State College and ended up working on my chops on all the brass to try to be able to keep up with my students. But honestly, I found it more effective to simply transpose and play along on trombone with my students on other brass instruments because it provided a better model. I’m providing this background simply to point out that I’m not completely inexperienced on every brass instrument, but also to acknowledge that I’m only expert on trombone (and some might argue not even on that). My background as a composer and arranger writing for brass might be more relevant, since I’ve had a chance to discover through trial and error what works well for different brass.

Suggested Ranges – Orchestral

The easiest way to look at the demands on brass range I could think of was to look at orchestration and arranging sources to see what is recommended by experts. Are trumpet players generally required to play a greater range than tubists? Which brass instrument seems to require the widest range or the highest range? For my purposes in this post I’m going to focus on trumpet and trombone in particular, but also discuss tuba and French horn when I have some info to share.

One of the first books I was assigned as an undergrad for scoring music was The Study of Orchestration, by Samuel Adler. I have the 2nd edition, so your copy might be different. If you’re not familiar with this text, it is largely concerned with orchestral arranging, so these ranges might seem a little smaller if you compare this to big band playing.

Bb Trumpet

This text suggests a range of 2 octaves and a minor 6th for trumpet. The highest recommended note is the 9th partial. The Adler text also helpfully describes the characteristics of the registers for each instruments. For trumpet it describes the lowest written F# to the B above as “rather dull,” the middle C to A above the staff as “clear bright and most articulate,” and B above the staff to the D above the staff as “brilliant but strident.”

French Horn

Horn is a different animal than the other brass instruments. The fundamental pitch of the instrument is actually lower than a trombone, but they tend to be scored on higher sounding pitches. The range demands on a horn are larger than on the other brass, Adler recommends a playable range of just under 4 octaves. We are cautioned, however, that the lower register are difficult and to be avoided in fast passages. Written C below middle C up to G below middle C is described as “dark and may be a bit unfocused.” Above that to written middle C is “deep and solid.” From there to G on top of the treble clef staff is “bright and heroic” and above that is “brilliant and loud.” The highest suggested note is way up in the partials and I’m too lazy to count and figure it out. If you’re a horn player help me out in the comments.

Tenor Trombone

The suggested range for a tenor trombone is 2 octaves and a diminished 5th, a whole step smaller than trumpet, but then Adler provides some additional upper register notes in the parenthesis. Adler writes, “Theoretically, the quarter notes . . . are possible, and many professional players can play them, but they are difficult and risky.” If we included the highest note in the above suggested range the tenor trombone has a range of 3 octaves and a minor 2nd. The lowest pitch up to the G on the bottom of the bass clef staff is described as “dark and rather nondescript.” From there to the F above the bass clef staff is labeled as “very strong.” G above the bass clef to the Bb whole note in the tenor clef above is “very intense.” The highest suggested whole note is the 8th partial.

Tuba

Adler’s suggested range for writing for tuba is 3 octaves and a major 2nd, but it is covered in the text that tubists will often play instruments pitched in different keys. The lowest suggested pitch above, F, to the Bb two ledger lines below the staff is described as sounding “deep and heavy.” From the C below the staff to E in the staff is indicated as sounding “very strong” and above that is “getting weaker but quite intense.” The highest recommended pitch for tuba is the 13th partial, I think.

“Winner of the Range Contest”

It’s not a contest, but the horn wins with almost 4 octaves. Tuba comes in second with 3 octaves and a major 2nd. Trumpet and trombone are about the same, roughly 2 and 1/2 octaves, depending on which pitch you go with for the highest recommended note on trombone.

Suggested Range – Big Band

For suggested ranges for big band writing I grabbed Nelson Riddle’s text, Arranged by Nelson Riddle. I’ve got several good books on arranging for big band, this just happened to be the first one that I grabbed off my shelf.

Trumpet

This suggested range is very close to Adler’s suggestions. For some reason the lowest note is a half step higher, so 2 octaves and a Perfect 4th. If you know Nelson Riddle’s arranging you know that he would often write his lead trumpet parts higher than suggested.

Trombone

Riddle describes the recommended range of the trombone differently from the trumpet, like Adler. The two notes at the beginning of the above example are almost the same as the equivalent trumpet range, 2 octaves and a diminished 5th. But Riddle also adds some pedal tones (personally, I wouldn’t recommend too many pedals on tenor trombone and the lowest I can think of in classical repertoire is the pedal G in the David Concertino for Trombone and Orchestra.) He clarifies his upper register suggestions as “The upper notes. . . are all practical and easily available to experienced professionals, but younger and weaker lips usually have ‘A’ or ‘Bb’ as a ceiling, and the high ‘D’ in particular seems to be the starting note of a kind of ‘stratosphere’ which is closed to all but the very finest players.”

French Horn

Riddles range suggestions for horn are difficult to follow. The above image is a recreation of what is in the book, but there’s not much description on what all that means. He covers the French horn in his chapter on woodwinds and then later in the chapter on brass. I may be missing a complete discussion on what ranges he recommends for horn, since I’m skimming.

Tuba

Riddle’s suggested range for tuba is a bit smaller than Adler’s, 3 octaves total.

“Winner of the Range Contest”

Again, not a contest, but at least according to Riddle the tuba “wins” at 3 octaves. I won’t attempt a guess as to what he feels is the playable range for the horn. The trombone might be considered to eke out the trumpet a hair. That said, I tend to think of the playable ranges of trumpet and trombone as being equivalent to each other (for professional players), but with some caveats that I mentioned earlier and that I’ll get into now.

Playing Demand Comparisons – Big Band Lead Trumpet and Lead Trombone

Something important for composers and arrangers to consider when writing for brass is how much time the players spend actually playing and how much rest they get in a given piece. Nelson Riddle notes, “The brass section should be used for punctuation and support, and should not be given the sustained passages you would assign to string players, who can saw away for hours without rippling a muscle or generating one drop of perspiration.”

Since most of my own writing and much of my playing is for big band, I’m most familiar with that repertoire. One thing I’ve noticed with most of the great arrangers is that the trumpets generally are used more sparingly than the trombone section. I think there are two main practical reasons why. First, the lead trumpet part in the upper register is often saved for the exciting shout chorus and it’s helpful to give the trumpet section a chance to rest a bit before they are required to play up there. Secondly, the range of the trombone section alone is a bit more rich and solid sounding than a the trumpet section up an octave by themselves. While there are certainly times when the trumpet section can carry a passage on their own, it’s more common for that section to be blended with the saxophone or trombone section. You don’t have to go very high before 4 trumpets alone start to sound “tinny” whereas the trombone section voiced an octave below is in a range that sounds rich and clear.

But I wanted to come up with a more objective way to measure my impressions here. I grabbed a chart out of my own library, A Little Minor Booze by Willie Maiden, written for the Stan Kenton Orchestra. I figured something out of the Kenton library might make for a representative sample of what is expected in modern big band playing. I looked at the lead trumpet and lead trombone parts and worked out a couple of different things that would give us a glimpse into the different playing demands. I worked out the required range for both parts, but also looked at what the average note and median note was for both parts. I also looked at how much of the chart each player would have the metal on the mouth. It’s not really an accurate comparison, a quarter note playing a 6th partial concert F isn’t as demanding as playing that same pitch for a whole note. Controlling for that sort of variable is too much work for a blog post (and just guess at how much effort it took to write this post already), but I think it could be done if someone was interested enough.

Here are the results using some charts to compare.

Following this chart takes some explaining. In order to easily calculate these numbers I assigned the number 1 to the concert E below the staff for both trumpet and trombone (the lowest recommended non-pedal tone note for both). The F above that was assigned the number 2 and so on, all the way up to the written “double C” on trumpet at number 43. Here’s another way to look at this data.

Lowest Pitch Played

Lead Trumpet (written)

Lead Trombone

The lead trombone part was required to play the equivalent of an octave lower than the lead trumpet part.

Highest Pitch Played

Lead Trumpet (written)

Lead Trombone

On the second to last measure the lead trumpet has to play a “double C.” This is a major 6th higher than the equivalent highest note on the lead trombone part. The lead trumpet part has an entire range of two octaves, the C in the middle of the staff to the C two octaves above. The lead trombone part has an entire range of 2 octaves plus a minor 3rd.

Average Pitch

Lead Trumpet (written)

Lead Trombone

The average pitch for the lead trumpet part came out to a diminished 5th higher than the lead trombone part.

Median Pitch

Lead Trumpet (written)

Lead Trombone

The median pitch, that is the middle between the highest and lowest notes played in both parts, has the lead trumpet part a major 3rd above the lead trombone part.

Mode Pitch

Lead Trumpet (written)

Lead Trombone

The mode pitch refers to the pitch that occurred most often in the part. The lead trumpet mode note was the equivalent of a Perfect 4th higher than the mode note in the lead trombone part.

Measures Spent with the Metal on the Mouth

Lead Trumpet

Lead Trombone

The entire chart of A Little Minor Booze is 108 measures long (not counting the quarter note pickup). The lead trumpet part has at least one note in 33 measures, compared to the lead trombone part having 53 measures with something to be played.

Summary Impressions

First of all, let me make it clear that all the above really doesn’t tell us which brass instrument is the most demanding to play, but it might give the composer/arranger some ideas on what brass are capable of and how to write more idiomatically for those instruments. For big band writing in general, my best guess is that the lead trumpet will typically be required to play higher, but the lead trombone part will be required to play a wider range in general. The trombone section will typically need to play for longer periods of time with less rest, whereas the trumpets, who probably need to play more in the upper side of their range, will get more rest. If you want your trombone parts to be higher than typical you might want to write them with more rests than normal. Likewise, if you want your trumpets to play more throughout your arrangement you should write their range lower than you might otherwise. If you want to look at which instrument is required to play the widest range in general, you can probably assume French horn can cover the most range, followed by tuba, trombone, then trumpet.

My general thoughts on range capabilities for similarly experienced brass musicians is to pretty much think of them as the same. Take the roughly 2 and 1/2 octaves for trumpet and transpose that down an octave for the range of trombone and euphonium. Drop that down an octave for tuba standard range. Those aren’t perfect, but they will give you a decent idea to work with so that instead of having to memorize ranges for 3 different brass instruments you memorize 1 range and transpose by octaves. French horn, of course, is different and you’ll need to learn their range if you’re going to write for that instrument effectively.

Guess the Embouchure Type – Christopher Martin

~ wilktone ~ 1 Comment

I’m going to play “guess the embouchure type” again, this time looking at a couple of videos of Christopher Martin’s trumpet playing. Martin is the principle trumpet with the New York Philharmonic and formerly played with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, so you know his playing is impeccable. Take a look at his chops in these two videos and see if you can guess his embouchure type. My guess after the break.

The best look at his embouchure is at the very beginning, when he plays the Pictures at an Exhibition excerpt. Since this trumpet solo involves a lot of large intervals you should be able to get a good enough look at his chops to tell, but here’s another video that has good shots of his embouchure for much longer.

Continue reading “Guess the Embouchure Type – Christopher Martin” →

Virtually Hang Out On Carnegie Hall Stage with Philadelphia Orchestra

~ wilktone ~ Leave a comment

This web site is pretty neat. The Google Cultural Institute set up a couple 360 degree cameras up on the stage of Carnegie Hall during a performance by the Philadelphia Orchestra. You can choose which camera you want to use and also drag around the angle to watch what you want to. Click here to visit.

I ‘ve watched this several times now. I tend to focus mostly on watching the conductor, Maestro Yannick Nézet-Séguin. I think that conducting is much like performing in that it’s necessary to watch and absorb how great conductors express themselves through their gestures and facial expressions. When you’re performing with an ensemble you have to watch the conductor closely, but my mind is always focused on performing rather than studying the conductor. With a video like this you can simply watch.

There are some other performances you can view too, including the Berlin Philharmonic in a rehearsal.

The Orchestral Dream (has been) Dead

~ wilktone ~ Leave a comment

The Phantom Brass blog recently posted an article by Matthew Waters where he declares, quite accurately, The Orchestral Dream Is Dead.

If we’re looking at the numbers alone, the odds of winning a position is astronomical. According to data collected by Datausa.io, 8,133 Music Performance Degrees were awarded in the United States in 2015. As of May of 2017, there are 8 members of the Regional Orchestra Players Association that pay over $25,000 base salary a year, with an additional 49 under other collective bargaining agreements with the AFM. That means there are 57 orchestras that one could theoretically find full-time employment with. Fifty-seven. That doesn’t mean there are 57 positions open a year. That means there are 57 full-time jobs in that industry, that have maybe a few vacancies total per year. Needless to say, the odds aren’t good with 8000+ bachelor’s degrees in music being awarded every year, and that number continuing to grow.

If I understand correctly, I think that Waters means there are 57 full-time orchestral “employers,” not jobs, since many musicians are employed by each of those 57 orchestras. His point, however, is quite valid. If you’re looking for a full-time orchestral job your chances of finding one are quite small. Waters also comments on how the music scene in southern California, where he is based, is difficult for even very fine musicians to earn a living.

This solution is simple, but certainly not easy. It requires the individual and institutional realization that there is a huge amount of space in the music industry for more than just tenured orchestra performers. We have the opportunity to be live-streaming artists and YouTube clinicians. Private instructors and ensemble founders. Arts administrators, music directors, arrangers, composers, and copyists. The problem in most of the training grounds today is that players are funneled into preparing for a job that they have little to no chance of winning, while totally neglecting all of the other possible jobs that are likely be a part of a successful music career. In performance degrees especially, we’re trained to do only that- perform.

Personally, I find it odd that music students in performance degrees are trained only to perform in orchestral styles, but that’s perhaps biased by my own education, teaching experience, and personal interests. I went to a liberal arts college for my undergraduate studies, majored in jazz studies for my masters, and my doctorate is in trombone performance, but I maintained my interests in a wide variety of different musical styles and topics and my degree track emphasized pedagogy. So when Waters comments, “If we’re not going to summer festivals, winning mock auditions, and outplaying everyone else in our studios, we feel like failures,” I find it an unfamiliar feeling.

But what is one to do if your dream is an orchestral job? Give up before you even try? Get a fall back degree? Go for it and risk failure?

I’ve never been particular interested in a full-time job in an orchestra, but I have been able to get paid to perform with regional orchestras regularly in the past (for disclosure, I don’t do a lot of orchestral playing these days, but that’s largely due to being busy doing other performing and not making an effort to do more than the occasional subbing). I don’t see orchestral playing as being any different than being a successful freelance musician in the first place. We all have our wheelhouse, and if yours is orchestral playing than you can focus on that side of your playing and make that your primary performing goals. Don’t neglect your skills in other types of playing too, however, and be ready to do a lot of different types of performing if your goal is to be a successful music professional.

And as Waters suggests, be ready to do some things that are peripherally related to your musical performing and get some background and education in those things. Teaching is the obvious one, but I generally don’t recommend you go into music education full-time unless that is your goal. Too many music students get a music education degree as a “fall back” and then end up miserable because they don’t enjoy it enough to justify all the non-musical stuff that goes along with it.

Keep in mind that overall, Americans change jobs between the ages of 18 and 48 an average of 11.7 times. That can be in the same career, but in non-musical fields people change careers all the time and still are happy and successful. The bottom line is that you, as an individual and as a musician, cannot be defined by your job, but by who you are and your attitude towards what you do.

This is the new reality for anyone pursuing a music career, and it’s time that we faced that. The skills that are needed to win an orchestra position are developed at the cost of excluding almost of all these other skills. It is a single-minded pursuit, and it is destructive for the vast majority of music students. We need to broaden our training and bring musical education into the 21st century.

Why You Shouldn’t Memorize Music (or at least revisit the score when you do)

~ wilktone ~ 2 Comments

For both jazz and classical soloists it’s extremely common to perform with your music memorized. There are usually a few reasons given for memorizing, including that it frees you up from the distraction of the page, it allows you to focus more completely on the sound, and it simply looks better without a music stand in front of you. Here’s an interesting take on memorization from a classical guitarist, called An Argument Against Memorization.

To watch a soloist, or an ensemble, perform without the score, without any physical partitions, and with a steadfast memory of the work, is incredibly compelling.

No doubt about it.

However, the goal of memorization is one that too many of us rush into without consideration of the harm it might be doing.

The author, Simon Powis, offers some good points on ways where memorization actually inhibits our ability to perform music. For one, he notes that what frequently happens is the musician is memorizing music through a kinesthetic process (“muscle memory”) and that it becomes difficult, if not impossible for the musician to pick up in places other than at the beginning of that phrase, or even the entire piece.

But worse than that, memorizing a piece of music leads to practicing that music only without sheet music, and this can be inhibiting.

If we have hammered in our kinesthetic memory via thousands of mechanical repetitions (which does work eventually) we are making it very, very, VERY, difficult to change and evolve over time.

So, no matter how far we evolve as a musician, our stubborn muscle memory will maintain a fingering, articulation, and execution that is inferior and less than our current capabilities.

What a shame, and what a loss!

Powis points out that this can cause the musician to resort to the easiest fingering, rather than exploring other options. Something that works for you now might not sound the best down the road. Certain instruments have different sounds with different fingers or positions and only playing a piece from memory might lock you into something that won’t sound as good.

Less of a concern to jazz musicians, where the music is improvisational and meant to be changed every time, is loosing focus on what the composer originally intended.

A score is incredibly complex. When a student comes to me and says “I have it memorized now” what does this actually mean?

Following this statement I will often ask what the harmonic progression is in the second phrase? Or, what the dynamic markings are in the coda? The answer is always a blank look.

This is because the score contains more information than just where to put the fingers. It is a veritable treasure trove of information that reveals itself over time.

You need time to explore the score, and if you respect the music you will give it that due time.

And the final point that Powis makes is that our memories are fallible, and we can memorize a piece wrong. Or it can drift away from what is correct over time.

Those of us who play jazz or other improvisational styles of music might be less concerned with Powis’s points than classical soloists, but I think there is some food for thought even for jazz musicians. While I usually feel freed up as an improviser once I’ve got a tune committed to memory, I do think there is some value to revisiting the sheet music and looking at the composition again visually. I have a tendency to look ahead when reading music, whereas when playing a tune by memory or by ear I am more in the moment. There’s something to be said for starting your improvised phrase already thinking about where you’re going.

I don’t think that Powis is really arguing to never memorize your music, but when doing so we should be thinking about the drawbacks. Being aware of the potential problems helps us avoid them, while still holding on to the benefits from playing without written music.

On Learning the “Classics”

~ wilktone ~ Leave a comment

I recently came across an interesting blog post Ronan on his Mostly Music blog. This post, entitled 21st Century Bebop, asks some good questions that jazz educators might want to consider.

In a musical world which has moved away from traditional jazz repertoire, at least as far as the vast majority of the general public is concerned, what is the relevance or otherwise of these skills – playing standards, playing changes, playing common repertoire, the swing idiom etc. etc. ? Why, the question is often asked, should we spend so much time teaching a type of music that hasn’t been popular for over 60 years? What is the relevance of standard repertoire in the 21st-century, and are we holding onto this type of teaching out of some misguided sense of loyalty to the past?

Years ago, when I was still teaching in academia, I was sitting in on a juried recital for a drummer jazz studies major. He was accompanied by a couple musicians that he played around town frequently with and they seemed to draw the music primarily from the tunes they play on their gigs. The performance was excellent, but I was concerned about the lack of variety I heard. Afterwards, I commented to the student’s studio instructor that I wanted to hear something in the swing style and was confused when he insisted that there was. It took me a moment to realize that while I was talking about a jazz style and repertoire from the 30s and 40s, his instructor was thinking of something that had swing 8th notes.

It still seems strange to me that an undergraduate student completing a bachelors degree in jazz studies would go through 4 years of higher education and not be required to demonstrate a familiarity with performing in jazz styles developed prior to the 1950s or 60s. Perhaps it’s my professional bias as a trombonist to find myself performing traditional jazz and swing styles more than a drummer might, but I see a familiarity with the history of the style to be more than simply being professionally ready to play a gig where you need to play in a non-contemporary jazz style. Ronan addresses this too.

So – technique, aural training, harmonic knowledge, rhythmic skills, reading skills, musical memory, deep listening, understanding of form and the ability to instantly create melodies over moving harmony. All of these are necessary in order to able to be able to play standard jazz material. This is a serious set of skills for any musician venturing into the professional music world, and some or all of them are transferable into any kind of musical situation you may be find yourself in.

I would take this a step further. I may be misremembering who exactly said this (and I may even be making this up entirely, but the point is still valid), but I think it was Wynton Marsalis who said it’s equally important for jazz students to get experience learning to play “classical” music as well. First, the pedagogy and practice on development of instrumental technique has been refined already with classical studies to a point that I still don’t see with jazz methods. The skill set you will learn from performing a classical recital or performing in an orchestra or concert band is going to benefit in a way that playing in a jazz combo just can’t provide. For example, if you’re performing a solo concerto you are going to have to have the chops to make it through all the movements and play what’s on the page, whereas when we improvise we unconsciously make choices that we already have the technique to play. Classical music challenges jazz musicians to improve their skills and become familiar with phrasing, articulations, and other nuances that you just won’t get playing contemporary jazz.

And, for that matter, I make the same argument for classical musicians learning to improvise and become familiar with jazz styles. I’ve listened to and played many pops concerts and noticed how uncomfortable the classical musicians sounded trying to phrase and articulate jazz and pop styles.

Of course we’re all going to have our personal preferences and strengths. There are some musical styles that I have little to no interest in learning to perform and others that I have made a conscious effort to become as good as I can playing. However, my experience has been that becoming a well rounded musician has been beneficial to performing in my preferred styles. Furthermore, my abilities as a “musical chameleon” have made it possible for me to work successfully as a professional musician and music educator in a wide variety of situations that many of my peers cannot.

Are Big Band Brass Players Losing the Concept of Being Team Players?

~ wilktone ~ Leave a comment
Playing trombone is NOT like punching people!

I remember reading this essay by Doug Yeo years ago, Me, Myself and I: Are Orchestral Brass Players Losing the Concept of Being Team Players?. Back in 1997 Yeo expressed his concerns that trends in orchestral brass playing had not necessarily been for the best.

Go into the parking lot of any brass conference, convention or workshop, and you’re bound to find more than a few cars with the bumper sticker that reads, “Question authority.” Some would argue that this mindset is the province of trumpet players alone but that surely is not the case. Over the past twenty years, American orchestral playing has been undergoing a significant change, as brass players have (with some notable exceptions) asserted themselves beyond their traditional role in the orchestra.

Most students go through their “loud” phase, of getting together with other players and just knocking the living daylights out of orchestral excerpts. This can be great fun to do, good for the face and boosting to the ego. But excerpt sessions don’t always relate to the real world, and as many brass players have developed a more “muscular” concept of playing, the American orchestra has, in my mind, begun to suffer.

Yeo’s essay is specific to orchestral brass playing, but much of it seems to relate to big band brass playing as well, at least among the big bands I get to hear and play in. The details are different, as are some of the influences, but a lot is similar.

The job of balancing an orchestra lies with the conductor alone. But there is no denying that a 15 member brass section can ruin any orchestral concert (despite what the conductor wants) very easily as the combined volume of the strings and winds can never compete with that of even a single trombonist. Arnold Jacobs once told me that in his view, the bass trombone was the instrument of the orchestra that had by far the greatest “high volume potential” owing in part to the fact that after the flute, the bass trombone utilized the highest flow rate of any wind instrument, including the tuba.

John Berry, in his excellent jazz pedagogy text The Jazz Ensemble Director’s Handbook, wrote about the “Monster Bass Trombonist.” He’s describing a common trend in student musicians, not professionals, but occasionally I run into this player in the professional world (not recently, and not anyone I work with regularly now!).

About once a decade the music world renders up a bona fide (pardon the pun) “Monster Bass Trombonist” – you know, the guy who can play louder than any human on earth…

…A good MBT (or even a bad one who thinks he’s good) can “cop an attitude.” He becomes a star. He basks in compliments. He becomes a junkie for oohs and ahas. He craves ever more. He plays LOOUUDD!!! . . . All the time!

Well, it’s not just bass trombonists. You find them in the whole brass section.

In his essay, Yeo brings up equipment trends in orchestral brass playing.

Part of the problem is simple ignorance; the idea that Bruckner symphonies are to be played at maximum volume would horrify Bruckner, the reserved, insecure, Catholic composer of music for and about the church and the inexpressible “beyond.” Let us not forget that his symphonies also require us to play as soft as possible. Unfortunately, many players look at passages marked fff and simply blow until the seams pop. Unsatisfied with the way their instruments respond to this treatment, they continually hunt for something that will allow them to play even louder with a reasonably good sound. Hence, we now have tenor players in many major orchestras using bass trombone slides and 3 or 4G mouthpieces, and bass trombonists without leadpipes, playing mouthpieces that resemble tuba mouthpieces, and gigantic dual bore slides. All of these changes do indeed allow players to play louder.

This mirrors equipment choices of big band brass players, although the influences are different. Many big bands pride themselves on the “faster, louder, higher” school. Certainly big bands like Stan Kenton and Maynard Ferguson have greatly influenced big band style and the demands of those styles strongly influence big band brass players to make certain equipment choices that favor louder and higher.

About 15 years ago I went to a clinic the great big band composer/arranger Bob Florence was giving. One thing that really stuck with me is that he said, if the details I remember are correct, that he never uses mp dynamics any longer because bands never play soft enough. If he wants mp, he writes p. For p he writes pp.

I’ve been playing and directing the Asheville Jazz Orchestra for a while now. We’ve played a lot of gigs together, but some of the ones that stand out in my mind as being particularly good were those times we played without a sound system. Everyone listened closely, especially during solos, and dynamics were played consistently correctly. Knowing that there wasn’t a sound technician “fixing the mix” for us forced everyone to become team players. It was just a mental switch, but it made a huge difference in the overall quality of our music.

What about your experience? Are the big bands you play with a “blast fest” all the time? What gigs have you played were the musical quality was excellent specifically because everyone was a great team player?

Weekend Picks

~ wilktone ~ Leave a comment

I just began working on a new project that is taking up much of my free time just now. It’s not ready for a public announcement, but it will be of particular interest to student jazz composers and involve the Asheville Jazz Orchestra. Details on the AJO web site and here when it’s ready to go live.

Speaking of the AJO, we played a private event for one of our trumpet players, Woody, and his wife, Becky. Their sons threw them a 40th anniversary party. Since it wasn’t a formal performance for us and there were a lot of musicians in the crowd to sit in, I got to go out front and listen for a change. I even moved around and took a bunch of photos. Too bad I didn’t think to bring a better camera.

At any rate, here are some music related links for you to surf this weekend. There’s a bit of a theme this weekend. Everything here is something I take with a grain of salt.

Well it’s about time. Science declares Universal Property of Music Discovered.

Researchers have discovered a universal property of scales. Until now it was assumed that the only thing scales throughout the world have in common is the octave. The many hundreds of scales, however, seem to possess a deeper commonality: if their tones are compared in a two- or three-dimensional way by means of a coordinate system, they form convex or star-convex structures. Convex structures are patterns without indentations or holes, such as a circle, square or oval.

Do you buy it? Assuming the math is sound, it’s probably just an interesting quirk. At least that’s my guess.

There’s definitely some good advice and food for thought, but the headline is just click bait, The End of the Symphony and How Today’s Music Students Should Adapt. I’ve been hearing about the end of symphony orchestras for decades and they’re still around.

Speaking of the end, here is Frank Zappa explaining the decline of the music business. An interesting perspective from someone who experienced a changing music industry, but the business has changed quite a bit more since Zappa recorded this.

And finally, here is “Hans Groiner” discussing the music of Thelonious Monk. The comments on YouTube are hilarious.

Upcoming Gigs and Weekend Picks

~ wilktone ~ Leave a comment

I’ve got a couple of upcoming public gigs coming up in the next three days. Tomorrow, (July 19, 2014) I’m playing traditional jazz with the Low-Down Sires at a lindy hop dance called The Process in Richmond, VA. I’m afraid I don’t know more of the details about the dance, but if you’re a swing dancer in the area or just a fan of trad jazz you can probably get in touch with someone through that Facebook link above. Next Monday, (July 21, 2014) I’ll be sitting in again with the Greenville Jazz Collective Big Band. We’re playing at Grille 33 in Greenville, SC. If you get to come out to either, please be sure to say hello to me.

If you’re too far away to come hear me play, here are some of my music related links for your weekend surfing.

Nikolaj Lund is a photographer who takes photos of classical musicians and puts them into a unique perspective. Take a look at some of them on his web site.

Hal Crook is a fantastic trombonist, composer, and the author of some of my favorite books on jazz improvisation. The Berkley College of Music, where Crook is on the faculty, has posted a downloadable library of play-a-long tracks Crook put together for improvisation practice.

An old manifesto from 1992, Dennis Báthory-Kitsz urges musical organizations that It’s Time to Bury the Dead. Here’s a quote to whet your appetite.

Is there anything new on the menu of the Vermont Mozart Festival or the Killington Music Festival? Does either the professional or amateur musical community of our state and beyond show any commitment at all to the music of their own age? Indeed, does the listening public have any clue what a wealth of music is consciously and maliciously being denied them? No, no, no and no. Of course not! Pleasant advisory committees, cheerful compromises, and polite accommodations are doomed because such efforts attempt to deal with a special, entrenched group of diseased minds called necrosones, those who make their living by exhuming, stuffing and mounting the music of dead composers –composers who demand neither royalties nor attention to the artistic thought behind what they once did. Necrosones will never change because they cannot, because they are not artists nor are they sympathetic to art. They are vampires.

To finish things off today, here’s Oleg Berg’s treatment of the classic Beatles recording Hey Jude, but tweaked to put it into a minor key. One of the things I love about great music is that it is often still strong when it gets twisted around like this.

Milt Steven’s Beefs and Pet Peeves for Trombonists

~ wilktone ~ 1 Comment

Milt Stevens (1942-2007) was the principle trombonist with the National Symphony Orchestra for 29 years before his death in 2007. He maintained a busy performing schedule and also taught at Catholic University. A while back I was poking around to learn a bit more about him and found some notes from one of his clinics called Beefs and Pet Peeves. A lot of these are my own personal pet peeves as well and some I think are a little particular to Stevens’s own situation. Here’s a few of them that I had some additional thoughts  or comments to make.

2. Not knowing tempos, styles, interpretations!
Listen!: Get lots of recordings.
Listen!: Keep radio tuned to classical stations.
Listen!: Attend live concerts.

I’ll add to this that I feel you should listen to all styles of music, not just classical (or jazz, if you perform jazz). Focus on what you want to perform most, but don’t neglect other styles. One of the reasons I feel successful as a musician is because I can step into many different musical situations and playing convincingly and stylistically. I perform with orchestras, big bands, traditional jazz combos, salsa bands, R&B bands, rock horn sections, brass chamber ensembles, solo recitals, and conduct a concert band and brass band. If all I listened to was jazz or classical music I’d not be as flexible, nor would I have been prepared to join these groups.

4. Pointing bell into the music stand!
Don’t wander with the bell as you play (unless you are David Taylor). Play off the left side of your stand, and when you read from the right hand page of music, don’t angle the bell into the stand.

I deal with this all the time with band students (and also frequently the adult players I conduct and sometimes even with professional brass players I perform with). The trouble is that when you play into the music stand you hear yourself quite clearly, but your sound isn’t projected forward to the audience and the rest of the group. Get used to directing your bell forward!

5. Pointing bell too low (toward the floor) or too high (at the head of the conductor)!
Ideally, the entire trombone section would agree on a mutually acceptable angle to hold the trombones. Use the “bells up” angle only for special effect.

On this one I’ll differ slightly with Stevens. Everyone has at least a slightly different horn angle and not every section will agree on a “mutually acceptable angle.”

I find it curious that Stevens would be such a stickler for this. One of my teachers, Doug Elliott, included Stevens in his film, The Brass Player’s Embouchure, and showed Stevens’s fairly low horn angle. If I recall correctly, Stevens had one of the most rare embouchure types. Doug’s teacher, Donald Reinhardt, called this embouchure type the Type III or “jellyroll” embouchure type because it is characterized by a rather pronounced lower lip roll and lowered horn angle. Even more unusual for Stevens’s embouchure, he used the reverse embouchure motion that most “jellyroll” embouchure players use, he pushed up to ascend and pulled down to descend. For a brief discussion of how Reinhardt’s embouchure types correlate to the embouchure classifications I prefer to use click here.

7. Allowing sound to puny, weak!
Get a weighty sound with resonance. Pretend that you can feel your resonant tone coming back into your body through your feet. Start with better quality inhales. Inhale thinking “OH”; exhale thinking “HO”.

Much like teaching articulations through using syllables, teaching breathing using these mouth shapes can be problematic if you’re not careful. Personally, I prefer to practice (and teach) keeping the lips just touching in the center (inside the mouthpiece) when breathing and breath through the mouth corners. When you open your mouth to inhale you end up having to hit a moving target when you make that initial attack right afterwards. Also, crashing the mouthpiece up against your lips every time after you breathe doesn’t seem to help your endurance in the long term.

10. Having tone production and embouchure problems due to using a dry lip embouchure!
Most brass players play with moisture on lips, even where the rim touches the lips. Mention survey of NSO brass.

I haven’t seen the NSO brass survey, but it doesn’t surprise me that most of the players played with a wet embouchure. There are some players who prefer a dry embouchure and just can’t fully adopt a wet embouchure, though. When I first made an embouchure change to the “low placement” embouchure type I was unable to keep my mouthpiece placement consistently on the same spot with a wet embouchure and I played dry. Gradually I switched to playing wet on the bottom lip and dry on the top lip to keep the rim from slipping off my top lip while playing. Eventually I was able to fully make the switch to a wet embouchure on both lips, which is my preferred way to play today. That said, every once in a while I’ll practice dry to work on some things.

In general, I’d recommend that any brass player who can play with a wet embouchure should try to adopt this. There are some advantages to this over dry for all around brass playing. Not everyone can play wet, however, and these players shouldn’t overly concern themselves about playing this way.

12. Trying to have a big sound by opening lips too far!
Your tone will be “woofy”, if your aperture is too wide for your air stream. Instead, open breathing apparatus, throat, and inside of mouth.

Players belonging to the “medium high placement” embouchure type are more prone to this problem than the other basic types, but all players should avoid this.

I also like this advice from Stevens because he discusses a good strategy for getting a focused and resonant tone – work on breathing and tongue position. Too often I come across advice from well-intentioned brass teachers who are all about breathing and keeping an open throat, etc., but when the encounter player with an unusual mouthpiece placement (e.g., the “low placement” type player) with a thin sound, they forget all about this important advice and immediately try to correct the mouthpiece placement first. Eliminate the other elements before you change embouchures.

14. Not letting lower jaw protrude enough to align lips!
When descending into lower register, allow a pivot. When ascending into extreme high register, try a reverse pivot!

Much like the horn angle above, this is personal to the player. Again, I’m surprised that Stevens would make this one of his personal beefs, because if I recall from Doug’s film, Stevens had a receded jaw position and lowered horn angle.

15. Having to shift mouthpiece up and down to change registers!
Learn to traverse registers without excessive shifting.

It’s best to keep your mouthpiece placement consistent, regardless of the register you’re playing. There will always be some pushing and pulling of the mouthpiece and lips together in an upward and downward direction, but keep it from being too excessive.

23. Having a non-existent or improper vibrato!
Discuss proper speed and amplitude. Discuss lip/jaw and slide vibrato. Mention diaphragm vibrato as not commonly done on brass instruments, except French horn.

I found Stevens’s comment of horn vibrato interesting. Most horn players I know don’t use vibrato, even for solo playing. John Ericson, from Horn Matters, has a nice article on horn vibrato here.

24. Not relying on basic tools to help you learn!
Metronome. 1/2-speed tape recorder. Mirror. Video camera. Tuner.

These days you don’t really need a 1/2 speed tape recorder, you can do the same thing with computer software. I remember lessons with Ed Kocher where we would record ourselves playing Rochut etudes phrase by phrase and then listen back to them at 1/2 speed. All the little cracked notes, out of tune pitches, and out of tempo rhythms were brought out even more by this. It was a real positive kick in the pants.

28. Exhibiting poor stage presence
Emptying water too obviously. Drinking water too obviously and too often. Not acknowledging audience/accompanists. Not bowing and taking curtain calls correctly.

This side of performing is something that is too often not taught, for some reason, yet it has a very important effect on the quality of the performance and how the audience perceives the sound. This topic deserves a post of it’s own at a later date.

29. Having no vocal training!
Sing in choruses and choirs. Be able to hear intervals before they happen. Have a singing quality to your sound.

One of the best things I’ve done for my trombone performing is to take a few vocal lessons and to perform regularly in choirs. Not to mention that it now allows me to sing backup in some of the groups I perform in once in a while as needed.

30. Not being a complete musician!
Listen to many and various recitals. Improvise. Be able to play by ear. Play in public often. Know how to effect a phrase and “turn a nuance”. Performing musically, with understanding, style, and emotion, is the primary goal of this art form.

See my comments on #2 above.

There’s plenty more beefs and pet peeves at Stevens’s web site. Go check it out here.

Got any of your own beefs or pet peeves you need to get off your chest? Leave your thoughts about them in the comments section here.