On Jan 22, 2009, at 1:46 AM, Ray Horton wrote:
The Eb down to C in question can be played in 4th through 7th
position. On modern instruments, played by players who do not
cultivate this series of notes, there is a noticeable timbre
difference, but on smaller bore instruments, the sound can be
cultivated to match well. [...] Often when a player gives up an
F-attachment for the cleaner-blowing tenor without a valve, they will
work on this "falset" range to cover occasional low notes.
I just *knew* when I wrote that someone was bound to bring up the
subject of privileged frequencies (which is what you and others mean
when you speak of "falsett" tones). and I wondered whether I should
bring them up myself. "Naah," I decided. "Too pedantic."
And here I am, after all, discussing them.
When it comes right down to it, any brass instrument can play any note
from about F# below the piano up to g''' or higher. I had been very
reluctant to believe such a thing until Don Harry of the Buffalo
Philharmonic demonstrated it to me by playing the 2nd Brandenburg
trumpet part (in the correct key and octave) on his contrabass tuba. He
affirmed to me very strongly that the same unlimited range was
available on the trumpet as well--and in my presence got a trumpeter to
agree, after some hemming and hawing, that this was true.
But of course this is not a *practical* range on any instrument--but it
means that the "real" top and bottom limits are fuzzy and somewhat
arbitrary. So yes, the appearance of one or two unusually high or low
notes in a given brass part do not necessarily imply the existence of
an instrument designed and built to play these notes in an everyday
context.
Privileged frequencies are unstable, difficult to hit, and cannot be
reasonably expected to be produced at high volume. They lie by
definition outside the normal range of the instrument, so that if one
is used, it will normally be very clear that the composer has chosen to
descend below the instrument's usual range.
A very high level of expertise is being thrown around in this thread,
both by trombonists and musicologists, so I am going to retreat here
into the music of a composer on whose music ( I am surprised to find) I
am now considered the leading authority: Anthony Philip Heinrich
(1781- 1861)--an American contemporary of Weber.
Heinrich's 40 or so orchestral works are all preserved in single MS
copies--no multiple MSS, no publications, only 2 or 3 sets of parts.
About half the MSS are autograph, and the rest in the hand of (usually)
named copyists. The composer's orchestration is famously flamboyant and
adventurous (ranking with Berlioz in that regard), but his writing for
individual instruments is very conservative. His range for the flute is
*always* d' to a'''. He *never* writes the low B-natural for bassoon.
For timpani he *always* writes for just 2 drums, tuned a fourth or
fifth apart.
So what about his trombone writing? He *always* writes for three
trombones, on a single staff, in whatever clef is convenient. The staff
is *always* named " 3 Tomboni (alto, tenore, e basso)". The section is
led from the bottom--that is, if only one trb. plays, it is the bass;
if two play, they are bass and tenor. I observe this same practice in
Beethoven--at least, throughout Fidelio.
Heinrich *always* takes the btrb. down to low C at least once in *every
single piece* that I have examined. He *never* writes lower, and he
*never* takes the tenor below E. Since, in addition, he does not
hesitate to call for the lowest btrb. notes as loud as ff and even fff,
there cannot be, it seems to me, the slightest doubt that he considered
these notes to be a standard part of the instrument's range.
Remember now that this must be read as a *conservative* arrangement,
since H. writes conservatively for all the other instruments. He
writes, in fact, for the models of instruments that were available in
Europe before he left for the States in 1816. He didn't write for any
actual orchestra (American orchestras of the day simply could not
master his scores), but for an ideal one. But that does not mean that
he wrote for non-existent instruments, or that he misunderstood the
range of the bass trombone. Given his extraordinarily idiomatic and
practical writing for *every other instrument* in *every* score, I
regard it as unlikely in the extreme
that for the bass trombone, and *only* for the bass trombone, did he
consistently misunderstand the range throughout an orchestral composing
career spanning more than 30 years.
[...]there are some low notes in the classics, but not as many as you
might think, when you start looking at them. You say 'Beethoven
routinely wrote down to C.' But I know of no Beethoven bass trombone
part that extends below F, including passages in _Fidelio_ and the
Ninth which studiously avoid obvious places for lower notes [...]
As far as Mozart - I believe there are a few low notes in _Don
Giovanni_ (I don't have that part here) but there is only one quarter
note low D in _The Magic Flute_. The choral pieces do not go any
lower than the bass voice.
My bad, I'm afraid. I made the mistake of relying on a secondary
source, albeit a highly regarded one: Forsythe's 1914 _Orchestration_.
Now, Forsythe is far from perfect, but nonetheless he is usually very
reliable about the instruments of his own day and the way they were
used.
Of the trombones he says (among much else) that the alto trombone is
"practically obsolete" (note the *practically*); "on the continent the
Bass Trombone has always been built in F"; and "it has always been the
practice from Mozart and Beethoven's time to the present day to write
down to the low C1". He cites a low D in the _Freischütz_ Overture. In
discussing the pros and cons of valves on trombones, he cites as one of
their advantages the ability to fill the gap between the tenor
trombone's low E and the Bb pedal below. Make of all this what you
will.
Andrew Stiller
Kallisti Music Press
http://www.kallistimusic.com/
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
