Posted by Klaus on March 09, 2003 at 22:35:19:
In Reply to: Re: Different Question About CC vs. BBb posted by Rick Denney on March 09, 2003 at 19:15:54:
"The staff C will probably be flat on the BBb version, and you'd probably have to push in the first-valve slide to make it center the needle on the tuner, but if you did, you'd probably be sharper than your section mates. The CC player playing his C open may have to pull it to match the flatness of his band mates."
Rick, I have to admire you, when you find yourself able post the most distilled and pure nonsense! That at least provides a handle to oppose you, which is not always the case in your avalanche of postings.
Should players able to play their scales in tune adapt to players not having that ability? Never!
The true goal for good section work is not to be commonly out of tune. It is that all players are in tune on all notes!
Anyone telling the opposite is pursuing social goals, not musical such ones.
The player to be followed intonationwise, is the one playing in tune. Be he/she seated on the first or the 4th chair. And in a pitchwise mixed section, the truth might wander from chair to chair depending on the notes written in the common part.
The alleged intonation discrepancy between CC and BBb tubas in non-pro level bands is a fake one. All players in all situations should strive to be in tune with the desired true pitch. If they are so, there are no intrasectional intonation problems.
We have a board owner, who auditioned on CC and F tubas to achieve a prestigious job, where he mostly plays a 3 valve BBb instrument provided by his employer. This 3 valve BBb instrument not even is the optimal choice of today, which choice would have carried the model designation of 20K.
Is our board owner allowed to play as wildly out of tune, as one might expect from his equipment? No way, if he wants to keep his job.
There might be very good reasons to select soundwise matching instruments for a section. There also might be valid reasons to do the opposite. One source told me that some old Italian maker of string instruments built violas in pairs. One huge one to fill the hall and a smaller one to define the musical lines. Old Swedish military bands used huge Czech BBb helicons to fill and smaller F tubas to define.
But no matter what sound function one should fulfil, one should play in tune.
I once was "hired" to sub on bassbone on a band tour through Eastern Europe. During the pre-rehearsals, I went rotten about having to adapt my low Gb/F# to the 2+3 combination on the 3 valve BBb tuba, which had pulled his 3rd valve way out to attempt to be in tune on 1+3 and 1+2+3 fingerings. My solution was to dig up a source for a better instrument to be taken on the tour.
In euph parts it frequently happens, that a middle C concert has to be played in unisono with the 2nd or 3rd cornets. A euph not very well trained will tend flat on that note, whereas less well trained cornets will tend sharp on that note. What is the solution? The euphs should go home and fix their embouchures, and the cornets should train trigger application.
Euph parts also often happen to play in octaves with a solo cornet. If the euph player happens to play his middle C in perfect tune, but the solo cornet is playing his equivalent written D less than a full octave higher, should the euph then adapt? Never!
Because that will reinforce the solo cornet in his bad intonation.
In some local level bands, there is an unfortunate attitude among even accomplished amateur players. I know of at least three players, which are very strong readers. All playing 4 valve instruments. All doing so with terrible intonation. They consequently use 1+3 instead instead of 4. They consequently play their 5th partials way flat and their 6th partials way sharp. If one dares to approach the topic with them, their sadly unisono replies go something like this: I was trained on a 3 valve instrument, and I never was taught to mingle with whatever intonation the instrument might give. If my intonation is faulty on the instrument, which the band has provided me, then the band should give me a better instrument. (All three players are even older than I am).
From a talk with Steven Mead a few years back I must deduce, that this attitude was not entirely unknown even within fairly high grade brass bands.
One reason behind these problems listed here is, that many band players allow themselves to be inspired by band recordings of bad music, that never would have made it beyond social vehicles like community bands. Those players, who really want to have their own playing to take off into a higher level paradigm, should foremostly listen to pro players of instruments, where the performance level, and none the least the available music, is of a much higher level, than it is within even widely recognised brass and community band levels.
Klaus