[Trombone-l] Cimbasso or tuba?

[Raymond Horton]

Well, I will take issue with two of your assumptions.  Symphony players 
in a position like mine aren't afraid of not being hired again - we have 
a contract. 


And we _are_ more than willing to try different sounds, to be 
adventurous, when appropriate.  On various orchestra gigs I have played 
bass trombone, tenor trombone, euphonium, bass trumpet, tuba, digeridoo, 
etc....  Add small group ed gigs and I can add alto horn, trumpet, 
garden hose and PVC pipe to the list.  My section plays alto, medium 
bore tenor when appropriate, etc.... 


_I_ don't play small bore horns because _I_ sound like crap on them, 
after all the years of playing bass and euphonium nearly exclusively.   
I don't sound that great on tenor, either, but I can get by.  I guess 
the Conn euphonium/8H hybrid agreed with me so well because, for me, it 
was a natural match.


I just don't think I would want to hear a Verdi or Puccini opera played 
on three small-bore three-valve valve trombones.  The intonation and 
sound of the three intruments would be too bizarre for a modern 
orchestra and modern audiences, (especially if I.were playing one of them!).


RBH



thetubameister at adelphia.net wrote:

>I disagree.  You can mix an match bore sizes, strings, clarinets, whatever.  I wish our community was more flexible to try different sounds.  Not a common attitude amongst classical musicians.  I single no one out.  And I wouldn't dare come in with an ophicleide without checking with our conductor. 
>
>The truth is, we all second guess ourselves, our comrads, our personnel managers and our conductors to make sure we get hired again.  Even with a conductor, we think in the box to avoid making waves or getting fired, get tenure, whatever.  Rarely - if ever - do you find a large ensemble with a collective, adventurous spirit.  Keeps us from breaking the mold and doing new things - the sourse of great art.
>
>J.c.S.
>
>
>---- Raymond Horton <rayhorton at insightbb.com> wrote: 
>  
>
>>Trombonium was the name.  Really - that was a euph valve section?  
>>hmm..  Only played one for a minute.  It was brand new, at dealer, in 
>>1971.  .Shoulda bought it, but I was a college freshman totally in debt. 
>>
>>
>>Of course, small bore valve trombones are closer to the instruments 
>>Verdi and Puccini would have heard, but unless the rest of the orchestra 
>>is also using original instruments and techniques, etc. etc.
>>
>>
>>I am looking for a modern instrument compromise. 
>>
>>
>>RBH
>>
>>
>>thetubameister at adelphia.net wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Conn made the 90G, which was an 88H bell attached to a .562 euph valve section with guts to tie them together.  The one I tried worked quite well, as did the King 5B/.562 valve second version of the trombonium, which was it's competitor.  Olds also made one based on the Opera.
>>>
>>>However, while I know some would feel uncomfortable on small bore instruments, I think the small bore of the valve trombones would be 70% of the point.  Small bores have their place, and their sound, and it just might be a better idea for Italian Opera.  Tough to find out, though.
>>>
>>>J.c.S.
>>>
>>>
>>>---- Raymond Horton <rayhorton at insightbb.com> wrote: 
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Thanks for posting that, Walter.  That paper looks like an excellent 
>>>>contribution to the discussion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On the other, related subject of instruments for the Italian opera:  
>>>>When the subject of valve trombones has come up, we immediately come 
>>>>back to bore size.  Symphony players often do not feel comfortable 
>>>>playing the valve trombones that are currently available because of the 
>>>>small bore. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I once tried a (no-longer-available) Conn valve instrument that had the 
>>>>8H bell soldered on it (looked like an alto horn - I forget - is that a 
>>>>flugabone?).  That seemed like it would be an excellent choice for a 
>>>>symphonic valve trombone, if it were available. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Another possibility might be a marching euphonium or marching baritone.  
>>>>The former, which I have tried, may be too broad sounding, but I haven't 
>>>>tried the latter. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Back in 1977 Per Brevig, then co-principal with the Met, told me that 
>>>>when Met conductors requested valve trombones the section played BASS 
>>>>TRUMPETS!  That is hard to imagine. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Anyone had experience with valve trombones or other beasts in opera?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Raymond Horton
>>>>Louisville Orchestra
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Walter Barrett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>On Sep 11, 2006, at 5:36 PM, d. sleeman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Listmates,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I have been asked to play the tuba part in Verdi's opera I Lombardi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Shouldn't that be a (contra)bass trombone or a cimbasso instead?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Dick Sleeman, Lelystad, Holland. <d.sleeman at hccnet.nl>
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>According to James Gourlay's excellent paper on the use of Cimbasso  
>>>>>in Verdi, the instrument most likely used in 1843 in La Scala would  
>>>>>have been ophicleide, so whatever gets you closest to that. Small F  
>>>>>tuba, cimbasso, even a euphonium can work.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Walter Barrett
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>