Posted by Kenneth Sloan on May 04, 2001 at 23:17:59:
In Reply to: Re: Contra-Octave in band playing posted by Dave Zerkel on May 04, 2001 at 07:19:06:
"If the composer wanted it down an octave, he would have written it that way."
I agree - ALMOST all the time. But, it seems to me that once in a great while you run across a passage which has clearly had the low end transposed UP an octave (or, I suppose, the high end transposed DOWN) in the interests of fitting the part to the (assumed) capabilities of the player. In those cases (and *only* those cases) it seems reasonable to play the passage without an "unnecessary" octave jump in the middle.
Although, one wonders why hot-shot high school players consider ONLY the possibility of transposing the high parts DOWN instead of moving the low parts UP...
The other exception is a long chord, where a large section gives the opportunity for a divisi that hardly seemed worth notating. This is the situation we see being reported where GOOD tuba sections *augment* their part by adding a lower note, but only AFTER they have covered the written part.
In my case, I can think of only ONE piece in recent memory where it made sense to take
anything down an octave. It falls into the first catagory, above: a few measures which are clearly better an octave down, but which were written to fall squarely in the amateur range. We tried it in rehearsal, and the conductor smiled indulgently - I think he felt it was harmless and let us have our little fun.
If you are doing it every day (not as an exercise) then either you are playing in the wrong ensemble, or you're a jackass.