Subject: TROMBONE-L Digest - 2 Feb 2004 to 3 Feb 2004 (#2004-35) Date: Wednesday, February 4, 2004 12:00 AM From: Automatic digest processor Reply-To: "Trombones and related issues forum." To: Recipients of TROMBONE-L digests There are 41 messages totalling 1578 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. Big Bore Rant (22) 2. roughening the rim 3. Freelancing Dilemma (10) 4. Opps - Re: [TBN-L] Big Bore Rant 5. large bore players was RE: [TBN-L] Big Bore Rant 6. To F-attach or not to F-attach (4) 7. Wash.Symphonic Brass 8. to: Angie Brunk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 01:11:42 -0600 From: Fred Hudson Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant dj ////////// where art thou? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Albert" To: Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 11:45 PM Subject: Re: [TBN-L] Big Bore Rant > One almost never encounters a situation in the average big jazz band where a > B-flat trumpet is playing the lead part and three flugelhorns are playing > the remaining parts (except in a situation where the arranger is going for a > real color difference, often in ballads). In most writing situations, this > type of "trumpet section" would not work very well. > ============================================================= > > That's an interesting point, because trumpets vary in bore size as well. > I've seen bores listed from .445 to .470 for trumpets. That's about a 6% > difference. .500 to .547 is about a 9% difference. Do trumpet players have > these issues? Are there certain bore sizes that are preferable for certain > styles? The .470 that I saw is the Callet "Jazz" model. > > Hmmmmmmm... > > Jeff > > PS I want to say that I agree with the things Bill said in his last post. > I don't mean this to be an argument with him or anyone else, just to spur > some thought and conversation maybe. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 10:04:24 -0000 From: Adrian Drover Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant I read Bill's posts with interest and agree with most of what he says, tho' I don't really understand why he says big bore horns cannot be heard. In my experience, in jazz band instrumentation at least, big bore horns stick out like a sore thumb. This can be proved by having one of the lower trumpets play his soli part on flugel. The difference in tone is so great that the listener's attention would immediately be drawn to it, and it would sound awful. Same if one of the trombonists decided to play his harmony part on a euph. In each case the section blend is completely destroyed. Such instruments are built for colour rather than blend. Brass bands are fortunate in having intermediary Eb pitches between the Bb soprano, tenor and contrabass pitches. The big band and modern orchestra instead suffers with a gaping hole between the trumpets and trombones, requiring low trumpets to play on those awkward 1st and 3rd valve combinations, and high trombones to play notes that can't be found in the Arban book. You might say that the french horn bridges this gap, but it is a completely different kind of animal, certainly not built to blend with the heavy team. So what about the bass trombone? A four piece section voicing may be spread anywhere between a 5th and a 16th. A five piece section, anywhere between an 8th and a 20th. That poor guy at the bottom has to blend with his team mates, whatever the arranger throws at him. For this job, he uses a hybrid instrument. Altho' it is pitched in Bb like the other horns in the section, it is built with a bore more appropriate to F or Eb. As a bass 'bonist, I find that it helps when I think of myself as being a small bore operator when playing close to the lead in a Dorsey type soli, and as a big guy when covering the low Kentonite bass register. Tone and volume have to be adjusted accordingly. And what about the 3rd chair? In the genesis days of the big band, only small bore tenors were used by everyone in the section. The lowest note written for the 4th player was an F or E, with the very rare pedal Bb thrown in for effect. Then with Kenton and George Roberts, the bass 'bone became fashionable and useful for the 4th/5th man. This leaves a gap to be bridged between the small bores and the bass. As an arranger, I often find that the 3rd part is lying in that awkward area where the low C and B require long positions with quick shifts to Bb. It is undeniable that a medium bore Bb/F would be useful, tho' that leaves only two guys with horns suitable for playing the lead part. Wouldn't it be nice if instruments could morph in size and shape to suit whatever register you were playing in? A. Adrian Drover ADIOS, Scotland www.adios.co.uk Personal email: adrian@adios.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:07:26 +0100 From: Anders Carlsson Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant On large and small bore horns. (More rant). The function of the trombone section in a big band and a symphonic setting is what makes the biggest difference to me. In a more symphonic style the trombone section is often required to provide a chordal base structure where everybody is supposed to play equally loud and play the chords with the same "loudness" through the entire duration of the notes. The articulation needed in that kind of setting is also softer than what is required in a big band/rock horn section. This kind of symphonic style (if I may call it that) is not that beneficial in big band playing unless it's of the more modern style which is written in a symphonic style. But in a more traditional swinging style it doesn't make that much sense. Some bands go for that style of eveness in the section and symphonic players with not too much experience of big band playing does this as well and in my opinion the results are not that succesful. Lead playing should be a little bit louder than the others in the section and to know when to accent the start of a note and then back off. I'm really allergic to tenuto style playing in big band playing with the exceptions as above. Listen to late 50's recordings with Milt Bernhart on lead bone and you'll know what I mean. Swinging Kids with the Buddy Bregnan big band is a great example. I have only played with one third trombone player in a big band using a .547 horn who was able to produce the sound and articulation to make a good section sound for a more classic big band setting. It's really the same problem with most bass trombone players. If the bass trombone player can't articulate as well as the lead player does then the trombone section as a whole loses much of it's punch and clarity and the sound of the section goes even more to the wah-wah-wah playing-inside-a-bag sound. VERY few bass trombone players can do this. And don't get me started on bass trombone players doubling on tenor in a big band/rock horn section. I've only heard one guy been able to do that and that's Bill Reichenbach . /Anders Carlsson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 07:29:16 -0500 From: "David A. Schwartz" Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant At 07:26 PM 2/2/2004 -0600, Bill Dinwiddie wrote: >... the .547 bore horn will not be heard by the audience. It will also not >be heard by the lead trombone player ... My own experiences squares well with Bill Dinwiddie's observations. I've seen .547's but not heard them in many situations. .547's can get lost behind cellos, tenor saxes, euphoniums, amplified basses, and drums. Unfortunately, we .547 players so enjoy our instruments that we resist change and sonic improvement. Only when we've heard an outstanding section of pea-shooter trombones cut through a big ensemble -sometimes at low volume - only then is there motivation to try the small equipment. There are some half-way measures that help. We can switch to shallow mouthpieces or small bells, yellow rather than gold or red, or .525 bore. They are still mushy and still get lost at low volume. Nothing compares with the articulation, edge, and audibility of a section of .500 or .508 trombones with appropriately small mouthpieces. They sound good to hear and they feel good to play. David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 07:30:59 -0500 From: "David A. Schwartz" Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant At 07:26 PM 2/2/2004 -0600, Bill Dinwiddie wrote: ... the .547 bore horn will not be heard by the audience. It will also not be heard by the lead trombone player ... My own experiences squares well with Bill Dinwiddie's observations. I've seen .547's but not heard them in many situations. .547's can get lost behind cellos, tenor saxes, euphoniums, amplified basses, and drums. Unfortunately, we .547 players so enjoy our instruments that we resist change and sonic improvement. Only when we've heard an outstanding section of pea-shooter trombones cut through a big ensemble -sometimes at low volume - only then is there motivation to try the small equipment. There are some half-way measures that help. We can switch to shallow mouthpieces or small bells, yellow rather than gold or red, or .525 bore. They are still mushy and still get lost at low volume. Nothing compares with the articulation, edge, and audibility of a section of .500 or .508 trombones with appropriately small mouthpieces. They sound good to hear and they feel good to play. David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:12:39 EST From: BITEensemble@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant I must add in my 2 cents here... I think the size of your horn means little to nothing in this conversation. It is all about concept. If you hear a small sound, you will get a small sound - end of story. I can sound exactly the same on my big shires as I can on my .500 bore Shires or my 4H. Especially playing lead! Yup, it is a lot more work - I'll agree, but not impossible. There are many great jazz trombonist out there who play large trombones. BUT, they have the right concept in their ear. You can play just as fast/slow, bright/dull, tight/loose, etc. The players you are complaining about simply have not mastered there own minds (or they simply hear something different than you do). If you hear it and believe it - it will come out of the horn. It is that simple. The human mind is awesomely powerful. Think about this, you can "think" yourself sick or well. Now if your mind has healing powers like that, imagine how simple it is to make the right trombone sound ;-) -Wes ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 13:27:36 -0000 From: Adrian Drover Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant From: > The human mind is awesomely powerful. Think about this, you can "think" > yourself sick or well. I wholeheartedly agree. I've been trying to think myself rich, but the Inland Revenue have stronger hypnotic powers than mine. A. Adrian Drover ADIOS, Scotland www.adios.co.uk Personal email: adrian@adios.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:47:16 -0500 From: "David A. Schwartz" Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant At 08:12 AM 2/3/2004 -0500, BITEensemble@aol.com wrote: >Think about this, you can "think" yourself sick or well. Now if your mind >has healing powers like that, imagine how simple it is to make the right >trombone sound ;-) Now that you mention it, Wes, Harold Hill's band, in that movie, did sound pretty good using the think method. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 09:01:26 -0500 From: Randy Campora Subject: Re: roughening the rim I know one player who painted nail polish on the rim to achieve just what you describe. I assume it came off OK with remover. Randy Campora >Other than repeatedly dropping my new mouthpiece in the sidewalk, to roughen >it up and other than gold plating the mouthpiece, does anyone know of a >semi-permanent way to make a mouthpiece feel a bit rougher? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:33:20 -0700 From: Dennis Clason Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant That's an interesting point, because trumpets vary in bore size as well. I've seen bores listed from .445 to .470 for trumpets. That's about a 6% difference. .500 to .547 is about a 9% difference. Do trumpet players have these issues? Are there certain bore sizes that are preferable for certain styles? The .470 that I saw is the Callet "Jazz" model. Hmmmmmmm... Jeff PS I want to say that I agree with the things Bill said in his last post. I don't mean this to be an argument with him or anyone else, just to spur some thought and conversation maybe. ---------------------- At the risk of being kicked out the Slushpumper's Union (I picked up a mute for a trumpet player at my last gig, so I *know* I'm on probation...) Jazz trumpet players (lead players especially) tend to gravitate toward large bore (around .470) Bb instruments. The good ones I've talked to say the large bore instruments are more 'open' and easier to play up high. The other factor we're ignoring is the bell flare, which really has more influence on timbre than bore size. A flugelhorn or euphonium has a very slow bell flare, trumpets and trombones faster flares. Trombones have a traditional distinction in that large bore instruments have slower bell flares and small bore instruments have faster tapers, typically. There are exceptions: the Bach 16 and King 3B bell flares are fairly slow flares for medium-bore instruments. The King 4B bell is fairly fast for a large bore instrument. Trumpet builders don't seem to have made that distinction. I've noticed also, though, that lead trumpet players gravitate toward fairly fast flares (like the Bach 43??), which would tend to get that bright sound. Then, there's the matter of sound concept. After decades of listening to Bobby Shew, Maynard Ferguson, Glenn Stuart and other modern clarion masters, trumpet players have that high and bright sound in their heads. And that's at least as important as the axe. Dennis ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:05:35 -0800 From: Gabriel Langfur Subject: Freelancing Dilemma I love freelancing, but sometimes we're faced with tough choices. It would be easy to decide to always go where the money is, but I refuse to live my life that way. I'm scheduled to play the Haydn Creation with one of my contracted orchestras. I've been looking forward to it for a year. It's not only one of our most important auditions excerpts, it's one of my personal favorites, and one of the best bass trombone parts in the repertoire. Now I've been called to play John Adams' Nixon in China here in Boston, with rehearsals conflicting with the Haydn. It'll be more money, for a group with which I play once or twice a year and want to keep my place in the call list. Will I get to play Nixon in China again? Maybe. It's becoming standard opera repertoire. The opera scene here in Boston is pretty small though. Will I get to play The Creation again? Probably, but probably not in a situation where I've got nothing to lose, where I hold a long-term contract and can comfortably take some chances musically. Of course, I try to always play positively, striving to contribute musically to every situation, rather than play defensively, trying to avoid mistakes - generally, that's a recipe for stress for me. But there's nothing like having a contract and simply being able to play without worrying about what the conductor or the contractor or the people around me think. Not that I'm not aware of those things in my contract situations, just that they don't have much impact on my future employment. Those of you who have experience freelancing know what I mean. If anyone has any thoughts, I'd love to read them. I have to make a decision today, or early tomorrow at the very latest. ===== Gabe Langfur Boston, MA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:11:51 -0500 From: richard.bartkus@COX.NET Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant For many years the only horn that I played was an 88H and I was NEVER asked to play softer. In the TOP band that I played in whenever I got above high Bflat I could bury both the trumpets. With the 3B I could only take out the 2nd player , so wouldn't that mean the 547 was more efficient....... at annoying the trumpets ?? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:13:28 -0500 From: richard.bartkus@COX.NET Subject: Opps - Re: [TBN-L] Big Bore Rant I am embarrassed I meant Iwas never asked to play louder on yelled at to keep it down. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 10:46:36 -0600 From: Jeff Albert Subject: Re: Freelancing Dilemma Gabe, That's a tough one, especially since there is not an obvious musical choice. I would normally say "go with the good music", but they both seem to be good music. Next I would say "honor your commitments." I usually feel like the right thing to do is the thing that I am already committed to. The contract works both ways; you get security, they get to know that you will be there (at least most of the time). Sometimes subbing out can be the right thing to do, but only you know the dynamics of the situation. I have a commitment (not contractual) with a wedding band. We work about 80-90 dates a year, and that account alone pays me more than a starting full time hourly wage day job (minus the benefits and self-employment tax, but that is another issue). I usually only sub that gig out for events that I have to attend with my wife (about 3 times a year), or a few very specific other musical situations (another 3 or 4 times a year). I sub it out way more than anyone else in the band, and that is an issue at times. I got a call to play Das Rheingold with the New Orleans Opera next month, and I am subbing out two gigs with my regular band to do it. I will probably never get another chance to play with an all professional opera company...it was a fluke of scheduling that I got the call. That is an opportunity that I need to take, so I am taking it. I guess that is the opposite of the "honor your commitments" advice. My point is that you "know" what the right decision is...so do that. Jeff Albert www.jeffalbert.com -----Original Message----- From: Trombones and related issues forum. [mailto:TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU] On Behalf Of Gabriel Langfur Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 10:06 AM To: TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU Subject: [TBN-L] Freelancing Dilemma I love freelancing, but sometimes we're faced with tough choices. It would be easy to decide to always go where the money is, but I refuse to live my life that way. I'm scheduled to play the Haydn Creation with one of my contracted orchestras. I've been looking forward to it for a year. It's not only one of our most important auditions excerpts, it's one of my personal favorites, and one of the best bass trombone parts in the repertoire. Now I've been called to play John Adams' Nixon in China here in Boston, with rehearsals conflicting with the Haydn. It'll be more money, for a group with which I play once or twice a year and want to keep my place in the call list. Will I get to play Nixon in China again? Maybe. It's becoming standard opera repertoire. The opera scene here in Boston is pretty small though. Will I get to play The Creation again? Probably, but probably not in a situation where I've got nothing to lose, where I hold a long-term contract and can comfortably take some chances musically. Of course, I try to always play positively, striving to contribute musically to every situation, rather than play defensively, trying to avoid mistakes - generally, that's a recipe for stress for me. But there's nothing like having a contract and simply being able to play without worrying about what the conductor or the contractor or the people around me think. Not that I'm not aware of those things in my contract situations, just that they don't have much impact on my future employment. Those of you who have experience freelancing know what I mean. If anyone has any thoughts, I'd love to read them. I have to make a decision today, or early tomorrow at the very latest. ===== Gabe Langfur Boston, MA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:53:30 -0800 From: Chris Tune Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant We tend to think of a note as being of one, particular pitch. In fact, the note we play is composed of many different "overtones". The particular tonal quality that we hear as trombone, horn, euphonium, tuba, etc. (let's say they are all playing the same pitch) relates to the particular composition of overtones. This includes which overtones are audible, and their relative intensity. The trombone is also varying its overtone makeup in different ranges. The "Rhenish" high note is much less edgy and bright than a Pedal Bb. That being said, there is undoubtedly a difference between a King 2B and a Bach 42 in overtone makeup. If there were none, then really no one would have much reason to center on one particular model or another. Also, there would have been little reason to DESIGN different bore size horns. [we're not even talking yet about the tone of a "dual bore" vs. a single bore horn] Fact: Large bore horns can play louder than small bore horns [that's one reason you see them in large ensembles]. The larger volume of air in a large bore horns air column will induce a greater intensity of occillation of the air out in front of the horn. It will do this (my belief) with a relatively less bright sound at any given volume (they all get about equally bright at their top volumes). That is where perception sometimes causes us to believe that large bore horns are lost in the mix. So: If I play at 114db with my King 2B I have a certain amount of "edge" or brightness. If I pick up my old 8H with the 61/2AL and play 114db, the amount of edge at that volume will be less. Maybe the 2b tops out at 119db. Maybe the 8H kit tops out at 121db (that's actually quite a bit louder folks! Its a logarithmic scale). THESE are extemporaneous illustrative figures not based upon real observations, but based upon real acoustical principles. The key is the amount of edge or high overtones at a given volume of sound as measured in decibels. This last observation is why the 8H (I played one in Studio Jazz Band in college. . .I stopped) blends and sounds less distinct in a jazz band SECTION. As the only trombone in a four horn section it really doesn't matter at all. Also, groups with this composition usually are being mic'ed and that, too, produces radical filtering of the sound (just look at the response graph of a mic--none are perfectly flat--most are quite jagged in response pattern). Don't even start on the subject of very close mic'ing. This, too, produces very profound increases in lower frequencies. This is known as proximity effect and is used by Bill Watrous to produce a very dark sound (out of the PA) on a small bore horn. I don't know of that many great, great .547 bore jazz players. There surely are more but I've heard Raul DeSouza and Dan Weinstein. When I think of the enormous number of people playing great jazz I could probably list a dozen playing Jiggs Whigham .490 bore Kings. Kaplan, Isles, Jiggs, Martin, (that's four in a matter of seconds. . .). Others are playing Shires, Lawler, Rath, Williams, Getzen, Conn, Bach or similar smaller horns. Sure, concept has a lot to do with it, but also I am that poor guy struggling to lead the section through a bebop soli and wanting our section to be heard, to sound crisp and energetic and most of all for the sound to "make sense". True, it's not a catastrophe of "9-11" proportions if my 2nd and 3rd show with their 8H/88H gear, but why? What would the benefit be? I can see no real benefit, but I can see some real down side. The biggest is probably that they would need the endurance of a Triathelete to really pump out the shout chorus on that last tune of the night. That same band sporting three 2B's and a bass bone would be as "up" on that tune as possible, given the rigours of the gig. Chris Tune ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Albert" To: Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [TBN-L] Big Bore Rant > First let me say that I am not being argumentative just for sport, I am > however playing devil's advocate and pointing to holes in logic in an > attempt to make us all actually think about the dogma to which we subscribe. > > Secondly, I am playing a lot of improvised music and 4 horn rock section > stuff on a Conn 88H/5GS right now, BUT I do have a 6H/11C setup that I use > on the types of big band gigs that have been mentioned. > > Now to the discussion: > > It was stated: > To me, the whole argument about whether to play a large bore instrument in a > jazz band on the 1st, 2nd or 3rd parts, is this: the .547 bore horn will not > be heard by the audience. It will also not be heard by the lead trombone > player who would like to have some support while he is busting his butt up > there on the high Cs and Ds and even higher. > ====================================== > > Then why can the audience and section mates in a symphony hear those big > horns? I understand that amplified rhythm sections and ringing cymbals take > up some aural space, but so do 50 strings and tympani, and many people > complain that those large bore trombones can be heard TOO well. If you say > the sound is wrong that is a taste issue, but to say they can't be heard > doesn't seem to hold up to my experience or the laws of acoustics. > > > It was later stated: > When the tempo is fast and the voicings tighten up, the small bore horn is > really the only horn that will keep up with the drums and the trumpets both > tonally and rhythmically. I hate to say it, but most trombonists who play > large horns tend to drag. In fact, many small bore players tend to drag. It > is a problem with the trombone that everyone needs to fight on anything > above a medium tempo. > ================================================= > > So you are saying that the size of the horn is irrelevant to rhythmic > accuracy because you state that "In fact, many small bore players tend to > drag. It is a problem with the trombone that EVERYONE (my emphasis) needs to > fight on anything above a medium tempo." > > > > There are a couple of recent big band recordings that have entire sections > playing large bore horns. The new Dave Holland Big Band CD, and the Dizzy > Gillespie Alumni Band CD. I don't think these sections sound odd at all. I > do agree that in more repertory style bands that smaller gear usually sounds > more appropriate, but I think we are entering dangerous territory when we > start to dismiss gear choices out of hand with out considering the musical > situation. To say that playing third in a big band on a .547 is just wrong, > is like saying that you should never play a first trombone part in an > orchestra on a .500. While not the norm, both of those gear choices might > be the most musical in certain situations. We should remain open to those > possibilities. > > The funny thing is, the question that started all of this had nothing to do > with big band, and was about small group jazz playing... > > Jeff Albert > > www.jeffalbert.com > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:03:34 -0000 From: Edward Solomon Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant > Fact: > > Large bore horns can play louder than small bore horns > [that's one reason you see them in large ensembles]. Really? I'm afraid I disagree. So, too, does Michael Hext, principal trombone at the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden. I won't repeat verbatim what he says in his article, but would strongly recommend reading it for yourself: http://www.trombone-society.org.uk/smallbore.htm. He contends that the volume of both the narrow and wide bore trombones in terms of sheer decibels is identical. However, the narrow bore trombone will always be heard in situations where the wide bore won't, if playing at the same dynamic level, the reason being due to the fact that the tone quality differs and the narrow bore instrument will cut through the texture. I'll let Mike Hext speak for himself, though. He puts it very eloquently. __________________________________________ Edward Solomon British Trombone Society Webmaster mailto:webmaster@trombone-society.org.uk Visit "The Trombonist Online" - the online magazine of the British Trombone Society http://www.trombone-society.org.uk __________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:19:12 -0600 From: Jeff Albert Subject: large bore players was RE: [TBN-L] Big Bore Rant I don't know of that many great, great .547 bore jazz players. There surely are more but I've heard Raul DeSouza and Dan Weinstein. =========================================================== ...and Slide Hampton, Steve Davis, David Gibson, Robin Eubanks, Josh Roseman, Andre Heyward, Roswell Rudd (for a while might be on a Bach 36 now), which gets to a whole other bunch that play .525s, which would include Jimmy Knepper, Steve Turre, John Mosca (who plays lead in the Vanguard band on a 79H)... I won't belabor the other points because I think we have all said our piece. I just wanted to point out that a lot of good music that would be in the jazz bin at Tower gets made on large bore trombones. Jeff Albert www.jeffalbert.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:35:28 +0000 From: Daniel Pliskin Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant >By the way, I think the Conn 32H is a wonderful horn for 2nd or 3rd. I have >a lovely one and it produces a marvelous sound. I just wish it was made a >little bigger in the grip department. My hand really gets cramped when >holding that horn and my hands are not particularly large. Bill, Another thing that makes trombones hard to hold is that they are sometimes really poorly balanced. Yes, most straight trombones have an added counterbalance and the F-attachment section also helps balance a trombone. But those counterbalances may not be enough. I used to like adding weight to my trombone, so that it would balance perfectly, in first position, in the crotch of my left hand and left thumb. Now, adding weights also damps the tone and sometimes thatās a problem and sometimes itās not. How does one add more counterweight to a trombone? First off, you could dig out the old counterweight that came with your trombone and put it back on. Or maybe you could put on a counterweight, from another trombone. Some trombones balance quite well with two counterweights. Or you could get some large nuts (as in nuts and bolts) from the hardware store, wrap masking tape around the outer tube, of the tuning slide, at the gooseneck side, and thread those nuts onto the masking tape. But also, all of those cramped hands are temporary. The counterweights can slowly come off, as you get pumped up, from playing that particular trombone. I needed counterweights desperately, when I started playing trombone. Now theyāre all taken off. DanP _________________________________________________________________ Check out the new MSN 9 Dial-up ÷ fast & reliable Internet access with prime features! http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=dialup/home&ST=1 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:38:59 -0500 From: Erik Tkal Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant I have been playing my King 4B (.547 bore) w/ Schilke 51 mouthpiece in rehearsals for the Mozart Requiem (tenor part). However, with all of this discussion, next week I will take my Besson 940 .500 bore w/ Bach 5GB mouthpiece and see if the conductor (or anyone else) makes any comments... BTW, the arrangement we have omits the trombones for most of the Introitus (I think there are 4 notes in the Requiem movement and nothing in the Kyrie) as well as the Agnus Dei and Communio. But the CD I have, as well as the Barenrieter score, definitely have trombones playing almost throughout, and the sound is fantastic. So I found some MIDI files online, imported them into Encore and extracted the parts for us to use instead... :-) Plus this way I printed the tenor part in tenor clef, whereas the edition we were handed has it in bass clef. Erik Tkal ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:59:39 -0600 From: Mearl Danner Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant Interesting article. I'd be interested in his relative classification of trombone bore sizes. He classifies his 2B as a medium bore, whereas I would call it a small bore and put the 3B in the medium bore category. Is there a correlation of "small-bore" to an actual bore size or is it a subjective term? Mearl Danner Systems Programmer jmdanner@samford.edu Samford University http://www.samford.edu >>> Edward Solomon 2/3/2004 11:03:34 AM >>> > Fact: > > Large bore horns can play louder than small bore horns > [that's one reason you see them in large ensembles]. Really? I'm afraid I disagree. So, too, does Michael Hext, principal trombone at the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden. I won't repeat verbatim what he says in his article, but would strongly recommend reading it for yourself: http://www.trombone-society.org.uk/smallbore.htm. He contends that the volume of both the narrow and wide bore trombones in terms of sheer decibels is identical. However, the narrow bore trombone will always be heard in situations where the wide bore won't, if playing at the same dynamic level, the reason being due to the fact that the tone quality differs and the narrow bore instrument will cut through the texture. I'll let Mike Hext speak for himself, though. He puts it very eloquently. __________________________________________ Edward Solomon British Trombone Society Webmaster mailto:webmaster@trombone-society.org.uk Visit "The Trombonist Online" - the online magazine of the British Trombone Society http://www.trombone-society.org.uk __________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:11:09 EST From: MikeSuter@AOL.COM Subject: Re: To F-attach or not to F-attach Hi All, Dan P wrote << And as for practicing until you get the sound you want, there's GOT to be a magic pill that will make your sound however you want >> It's here. I take a mix of Neurontin, Norco, and Soma 3 times a day. On the days I can find my horn, I must surely sound great. Don't I? What? Never mind. MS ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:21:45 -0500 From: Erik Tkal Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant At 12:59 PM 2/3/2004 -0600, Mearl Danner wrote: >Interesting article. > >I'd be interested in his relative classification of trombone bore >sizes. He classifies his 2B as a medium bore, whereas I would call it a >small bore and put the 3B in the medium bore category. > >Is there a correlation of "small-bore" to an actual bore size or is it >a subjective term? Of course it's subjective. I also would classify the 2B as a small bore at .495", and the 3B .508" would go by the classification of small to me as well. I tend to consider medium bore to be around .525" a la Bach 36, and .547" to be a large bore tenor. Perhaps he is considering the .500" region to be medium because he's also taking alto horns into account? I have heard the Bach 39 alto at .468" to be considered a medium bore alto, but of course that's relative to that type of horn. I dunno. Erik Tkal ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:22:44 EST From: MikeSuter@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Freelancing Dilemma Hi Gabe & All, << If anyone has any thoughts, I'd love to read them. >> This is terribly old-fashioned in the modern world, but I ALWAYS go with the first hire. I may lose money - sometimes even opportunity - but I can always sleep at night. And you'd (the universal you) be surprised at how many times the contractor appreciates the candor, and calls again in the future. Mike Suter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 13:50:51 -0600 From: Bill Dinwiddie Subject: Re: Freelancing Dilemma Gabe,=20 I must say that I think the advice "Go with the first hire" is the best = policy. While I occasionally miss out on something that I would really = like to play on, or a chance to make a lot more bread, I feel that I = have built a pretty solid reputation for "not bailing", and that has = stood me in very good stead for many years. Contractors and leaders = really appreciate that sort of thing, and, having been a leader for a = few years, I can completely understand this attitude. Having to call a = bunch of people at the last minute is really the pits. Many leaders I = know have been through all the "geniuses" long ago, and are very happy = to have a competent player who they know will be there when they hire = him. In the end, it's worth a little disappointment.=20 Bill Dinwiddie billdin@comcast.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:58:52 -0700 From: Dennis Clason Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant Interesting article. I'd be interested in his relative classification of trombone bore sizes. He classifies his 2B as a medium bore, whereas I would call it a small bore and put the 3B in the medium bore category. Is there a correlation of "small-bore" to an actual bore size or is it a subjective term? --------------------- It's subjective, but I'll throw my classification out for scrutiny: Small bore is anything under .500 Medium bore is .500 to .520 or so Medium large bore is .520-.540 or so Large bore is .545 - .550 or so Extra large bore is anything over .560 This mostly corresponds to Bach's 1970s classification. The big exception is that Bach didn't have ML or XL categories. The model 36 was a large bore symphonic instrument to them. Incidentally, Conn's numbering system (3-4-5-6-7-8) corresponding to tubing bores. My forgettery isn't recalling right now what the conversion from bore number to bore diameter is. Dennis ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 15:24:07 -0500 From: "Dr. Carole Nowicke, Applied Health Science" Subject: Re: Freelancing Dilemma On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 MikeSuter@AOL.COM wrote: > This is terribly old-fashioned in the modern world, but I ALWAYS go with the > first hire. Not even in the 21st century. I mentioned some old recordings of various NY orchestras I'd purchased to the late Lew Waldeck. He said, "Oh, I'd be playing on x, y, and z album. It was actually so-and-so's job but he never played it because he usually had a better paying offer." I wondered how one could do repeatedly that and keep getting hired. What if the sub wasn't up to snuff? What if the sub was better? Carole Nowicke cnowicke@indiana.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 15:35:42 -0500 From: DSlide13@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant I think the most important thing that we've learned from this discussion is that there is only one correct bore size to play in a big band. As demonstrated by many on this list with several passionate arguments and anecdotes, I have seen the error of my previous ways. I'm convinced that small bores are the way to go. I cab thank one influential trombone accessory manufacturer for personally taking time with me to point out my flaws in concept and technique. I think the world is a much better place when we all subscribe to the same singular view and try to suppress differing voices. The silliest argument that I've heard is that it's a taste issue. Taste obviously has nothing to do with it. Isn't music about science? It's all about mathematics and physics. There's no room for taste. And this jibberish about the power of the mind...I mean really. Aren't we getting a little too cosmic here. That's not what music is about. So, I hope we've all learned our lesson. There is only one way to do anything, and that's with a small bore instrument....as long as you're playing 1st, 2nd, or 3rd part in a big jazz band. To the others who may disagree, I say start you're own list or pick a new instrument to play. You'll never be accepted here. Quiet your voices and step in line with the conventional way of thinking in the same way as Columbus and Magellan. So, I'm off to my weekly hate group meeting, but thanks to all for your words. Now I truly know that OUR way is the only way. DG ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 15:04:11 -0600 From: Jeff Albert Subject: Re: Freelancing Dilemma Contractors and leaders really appreciate that sort of thing, and, having been a leader for a few years, I can completely understand this attitude. Having to call a bunch of people at the last minute is really the pits. ================================================= I agree with the idea of doing the first call, but I have subbed the first taken gig out on occasion. The two conditions being that it is ok with leader/contractor #1, and that I find my own sub (of equal or better quality). I would never call a leader and say "dude, I can't do tomorrow, I just got a call from the Neville Brothers, sorry." But I might call a leader and say "I just got a call from the Nevilles for tomorrow. Jerry is available and can do your gig. Do you mind if he does your gig, so I can do the Neville thing." There are some leaders you can do that with and others that you can't, and it is important to know the difference. If I am not sure what type of leader he/she is, I just play the one already in the book. Jeff ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 13:37:53 -0800 From: Gabriel Langfur Subject: Re: Freelancing Dilemma I really appreciate all the solid advice I've gotten on this...it's a constant issue for freelancers, as we all struggle to build a satisfying career that allows us to do things like eat and sleep in a warm bed, at least occasionally. If anyone cares, I've opted for the in-town gig, the opera I was just called for. There were lots of reasons, but an important one was that my most frequent, first-call substitute for the orchestra was available. I certainly respect the position of always taking the first contracted gig, and it's what I do the vast majority of the time in freelancing situations - with the same kinds of caveats that Jeff described for himself: knowing whom you're dealing with and playing very straight with them as a rule. This was a little bit different, in that the work I'm getting out of is for a job I won by audition. I have long-term job security there, and one of the privileges that comes with that is the ability to sub out without fear of losing future work - as long as I adhere to the terms of the contract. It's similar to what Doug Yeo or Joe Alessi might do for a concerto appearance or some other unique musical opportunity that came up in conflict with their regular orchestras. To explore this issue a little further, we have an interesting situation here in Boston, in that we have the Boston Symphony and Pops. The Pops employs a lot of freelancers, and pays the same per-service scale as the Symphony, starting at an astronomical $398 per concert. By contrast, our Wage Scale 1 (concert), which is essentially the category the Pops would fall under if it was just the normal union agreement, is $137. The regional orchestras in the area pay less than that. This is all public record stuff, so I don't hesitate to write it here. That kind of pay difference changes things quite a bit, and a lot of bets that would be certain in some other cities are sort of off here. In a newspaper interview a few years ago, the conductor of the Ballet orchestra here referred to the Pops as "the gorilla down the street," in the sense that a lot of his regular players were unavailable for most of the holiday Nutcracker run (which runs to about 75 performances) because of all the Pops work they were also offered - where, even though the Ballet is also above scale, they make more than twice as much money. I happened to be sitting with one of the BSO personnel managers when he read that, and he wasn't amused, to say the least. Anyway, like I said, this can be a constant struggle. And don't get me wrong - I'm thrilled that this is the kind of problem I'm dealing with this week! ===== Gabe Langfur Boston, MA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 16:49:04 -0500 From: tom gibson Subject: Wash.Symphonic Brass --Apple-Mail-2-900980099 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed For those in the DC area, here's an event you won't want to miss: http://www.miltstevens.com/htmlpages/OperaPoster.htm Dr. Tom Gibson Brass Dept. Coordinator Georgia State University ph: 404-651-1740 tom@trombonelessons.com www.trombonelessons.com --Apple-Mail-2-900980099 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=US-ASCII For those in the DC area, here's an event you won't want to miss: http://www.miltstevens.com/htmlpages/OperaPoster.htm HelveticaDr. Tom Gibson Brass Dept. Coordinator Georgia State University ph: 404-651-1740 tom@trombonelessons.com www.trombonelessons.com --Apple-Mail-2-900980099-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:27:56 -0500 From: Raymond Horton Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant I'm not getting in on either side of this, but I have to take issue with an unequal comparison: Bill Dinwiddie said: >... >One almost never encounters a situation in the average big jazz band where a B-flat trumpet is playing the lead part and three >flugelhorns are playing the remaining parts (except in a situation where the arranger is going for a real color difference, often in >ballads). In most writing situations, this type of "trumpet section" would not work very well. Arrangers know this and tend to >avoid writing this way. I submit that a similar situation exists with trombones. Three small horns and a bass trombone works >in the standard jazz band musical situation. This is not a valid comparison. Small bore trombone = small bore trumpet x 2 Large bore trombone = large bore trumpet x 2 EUPHONIUM = Flugelhorn x 2 Ray Horton ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:56:47 -0500 From: Dale Cruse Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant Wes, if your statement below is true, then why bother owning three (or more) trombones? ---- Dale Cruse www.dalecruse.com Setting you up for success. On Feb 3, 2004, at 8:12 AM, BITEensemble@AOL.COM wrote: > I can sound exactly the same on my big shires as I can on my .500 bore > Shires or my 4H. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 23:36:40 -0000 From: Edward Solomon Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant > Interesting article. > > I'd be interested in his relative classification of trombone > bore sizes. He classifies his 2B as a medium bore, whereas I > would call it a small bore and put the 3B in the medium bore category. > > Is there a correlation of "small-bore" to an actual bore size > or is it a subjective term? Until the change to large bore instruments after World War II, the British used to refer to the old French peashooter trombones as "small bore". Instruments made by the likes of Courtois and Thibouville-Lamy were prevalent among orchestral players at the time, before American imports started to become more popular. When the whole system was revised, the British referred to the following: 0.483" = small bore 0.500" = medium bore 0.525" = medium-large bore 0.547" = large bore 0.562" is and was reserved for B flat bass trombones only. This would be the method that Michael Hext uses for his article when referring to different bore sizes. __________________________________________ Edward Solomon British Trombone Society Webmaster mailto:webmaster@trombone-society.org.uk Visit "The Trombonist Online" - the online magazine of the British Trombone Society http://www.trombone-society.org.uk __________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 15:51:58 -0800 From: emrose79 Subject: Re: To F-attach or not to F-attach Hmmm... how about... .500, .525, .547, .562 for the whole section??? (1st 2nd 3rd and 4th) Ed (another poke at the theory)..... don't forget the :) Jeff Albert wrote: >-----Original Message----- >From: Trombones and related issues forum. >[mailto:TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU] On Behalf Of Chris Tune >Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 3:34 PM >To: TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU >Subject: Re: [TBN-L] To F-attach or not to F-attach > > >---snip--- >There are reasons players choose large bore for symphony and small bore for >jazz band. The best is that there is a proper blend with the section mates. >---snip--- > >What if the whole section played .547s? Then they would blend with each >other. > >Jeff (not trying to start a war, just poking at the theory a little) Albert > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 16:10:28 -0800 From: emrose79 Subject: Re: Big Bore Rant well..since we're being subjective...... for me, anything less than .562 is small bore.... ok...another :) Ed > >It's subjective, but I'll throw my classification out for scrutiny: > >Small bore is anything under .500 >Medium bore is .500 to .520 or so >Medium large bore is .520-.540 or so >Large bore is .545 - .550 or so >Extra large bore is anything over .560 > >This mostly corresponds to Bach's 1970s classification. The big exception >is that Bach didn't have ML or XL categories. The model 36 was a large bore >symphonic instrument to them. Incidentally, Conn's numbering system >(3-4-5-6-7-8) corresponding to tubing bores. My forgettery isn't recalling >right now what the conversion from bore number to bore diameter is. > >Dennis > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 16:14:06 -0800 From: emrose79 Subject: to: Angie Brunk Angie, are you still on this list? CAn you please contact me off the list? I have a personal question for you.. Thanks Ed ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 19:22:19 -0500 From: Dale Cruse Subject: Re: To F-attach or not to F-attach So should we use a .578 for the bottom part in a five-trombone section? ---- Dale Cruse www.dalecruse.com Setting you up for success. On Feb 3, 2004, at 6:51 PM, emrose79 wrote: > Hmmm... how about... .500, .525, .547, .562 for the whole section??? > (1st 2nd 3rd and 4th) > Ed (another poke at the theory)..... don't forget the :) > Jeff Albert wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Trombones and related issues forum. >> [mailto:TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU] On Behalf Of Chris Tune >> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 3:34 PM >> To: TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU >> Subject: Re: [TBN-L] To F-attach or not to F-attach >> >> >> ---snip--- >> There are reasons players choose large bore for symphony and small >> bore for >> jazz band. The best is that there is a proper blend with the section >> mates. >> ---snip--- >> >> What if the whole section played .547s? Then they would blend with >> each >> other. >> >> Jeff (not trying to start a war, just poking at the theory a little) >> Albert ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 19:14:50 -0600 From: Eric & Candice Swanson Subject: Re: Freelancing Dilemma Gabriel Langfur wrote: >I'm scheduled to play the Haydn Creation ..... >Now I've been called to play John Adams' Nixon in China >here in Boston, with rehearsals conflicting with the Haydn. >It'll be more money............ > > Gabe, I'm primarily a freelancer too. I almost always honor my first commitment, the gig I took first. People appreciate the loyalty. The exception, would be when there is a big difference in money. Like one night versus a week of work. Most people understand when you back out of a night or two of work for a week or two doing something else. Always offer to do the work off finding another player when you call. Eric Swanson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:13:02 -0500 From: Peter Collins & Sara Wilbur Subject: Re: Freelancing Dilemma Hi Gabe and list, You have already made your decision, Gabe, so there is really nothing more to be said on that. However, I did want to add my two cents here regarding the freelancing thing and a couple of anecdotes. First off, I totally agree with the "take the first booking" concept. I had to put that to the test back in the fall when I was called to do a tour for the "Royal Christmas Show" or something to that effect. (I think I would have ended up in your neighborhood, Gabe!) It was a two week tour around southern Ontario and NE US that paid $1000 a week plus per diem. I already had some work during that time but this was the first time this particular contractor called me on a solid recommendation from the principal trombonist. I really wanted to do it as it would possibly open the door for more extended run work later. I already had some work during that time so I put him off for a day while I did some math to see what was going to be more worthwhile. As it turned out, staying home and doing the work was going to be more beneficial for more than just financial reasons. I told him no and went ahead with daily life. A month later, FIVE DAYS before the tour was to start (I wasn't on it, remember) the whole thing got canceled! I sit in a section with two of the other players that were booked and they were devastated to say the least. They were scrambling to try and get back the work that they had subbed out of but to no avail. As it turns out, one of the gigs that I kept was getting sweeter by the day. I got booked on an extra recording session for the gig. It was a CBC pick up for two broadcasts for some extra cash. And the rate that I had budgeted for on the recording sessions was way below the actual rate. In the end, I made as much on that one gig as I would have on the whole tour! There is a moral in there somewhere... The other thing that I wanted to add didn't have to do with subbing out or not but has to do with my little triangle of criteria for accepting a gig in the first place as a freelancer: Does it pay enough? Is it musically satisfying? Is it career furthering? These are all personal decisions that are entirely subjective. I may think that something is musically satisfying enough to take the gig but somebody next to me may think that it is complete drivel. Same for the other two point in the triangle. That is my theory, and it's mine. Enjoy the opera, Gabe. Peter Collins Bass Trombone Hamilton Philharmonic Orchestra ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:15:26 -0800 From: Price Taylor Subject: Re: To F-attach or not to F-attach Surely you watched the Super Bowl ads...we must all have droopy slides! Price -----Original Message----- From: Trombones and related issues forum. [mailto:TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU]On Behalf Of MikeSuter@AOL.COM Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 11:11 AM To: TROMBONE-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU Subject: Re: [TBN-L] To F-attach or not to F-attach Hi All, Dan P wrote << And as for practicing until you get the sound you want, there's GOT to be a magic pill that will make your sound however you want >> It's here. I take a mix of Neurontin, Norco, and Soma 3 times a day. On the days I can find my horn, I must surely sound great. Don't I? What? Never mind. MS ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 00:27:10 -0500 From: TRBNTERRY Subject: Re: Freelancing Dilemma Gabe, I freelance all the time here in southern Florida. Over many years, I found out the hard way that breaking a commitment has a way of coming back to haunt you. And so, for many years, I embraced a policy of complete committal. However, that can also backfire, especially when something much more lucrative comes along. My solution to this problem, especially when not a lot of money is being offered, is to tell the client up front that if anything comes along which pays double or more, I will have to back out. If I fail to tell that to the client, I then keep my commitment, no matter what is being offered. It's pretty hard to get yourself in deep doo-doo's with this policy. Sincerely, Mike Terry ------------------------------ End of TROMBONE-L Digest - 2 Feb 2004 to 3 Feb 2004 (#2004-35) **************************************************************