Re: "re-write the passage with 16th notes..."

I can`t tell here if you mean have the passage go half as fast or if you mean re-notate the entire score and all the parts replacing all 32nd`s with 16ths, all 16ths with 8ths, all 8ths with quarters, and so on.

Re: "...and have the bone hit the phrase and with the bone in half time compared to the rest of the horns it should sound alright."

I`ll withhold comment until I`ve tried this specifically (as a MIDI mock-up)--I`ll get back to you--, but you`ll note that I said above I`d tried various related ways to thin the trombone part .

"...i had this problem over the summer with a michael jackson tune, working day and night. if you ever listen to the song youll understand."

I`m not familiar with this tune, but it`s my impression that funk really never survived the onslaught of disco in the late seventies. There aren`t any Michael Jackson arrangements I know that I can fully endorse.

"...anyways it was a EXTREMELY hard line that was making me mad, so instead of playing all the notes, which were 16ths i just play the down beat and up beat. sounded cleaner and made the other horns a bit more honest because i was playing much more metrically solid.
on a somewhat unrelated note if you do ever listen to the song youll notice that the horns are trading 16th notesback and forth. bone bari are on down and up and the sax and trumpets are on the E and Uh of the beat. its pretty freaking awesome sounding."

Well, what`s the actual pitch and chordal content? My trombone is playing harmonically unstable, and thus, temperamental, pitches.

Of course, there are a few players that made their carreer around the valve trombone, in jazz, ska, mariachi, brass bands, and the like. There are also players that built their carreers around the Eb horn, the sousaphone, the serpent, and many other rarities of the brass world. That doesn`t mean they will work in any setting. It is still an instrument that physically cannot do what the slide trombone can do, simply because it does not have that slide.

"It`s my impression that in classical music, at least orchestral music, the potential of the trumpet is very rarely realized" Do you mean the valve trombone? If you want a valve trombone sound, use a euphonium. The instrument itself will sound MUCH better, and the player will be able to use the valves in the way you are thinking. Because the trumpet diffinately is utilized rather well in orchestral settings.

"The non-horn brass are used very sterotypically in a very limited manner." In older music, yes, but not in the last 100 years or so, and even less in the last 50.

Unless I totally missed your point, which, of course, would be nothing new for me....

Re: "re-write the passage with 16th notes..."

I believe he means leave everything the way it is, and remove every other note in the trombone part in that section, so while the other horns are playing straight 32nds, the trombone is playing 16ths, effectively "every other note".

Re:

"Re: I believe he means leave everything the way it is, and remove every other note in the trombone part in that section, so while the other horns are playing straight 32nds, the trombone is playing 16ths, effectively `every other note`."

I got that part, but I thought was proffering another suggestion as well in addition to that. Maybe not.

Me: "It`s my impression that in classical music, at least orchestral music, the potential of the trumpet is very rarely realized"

You (Eric): "Do you mean the valve trombone?"

No, I mean the trumpet. I`m not aware of any classical valve trombone music. Neither can I comment on the extent to which classical music realizes the potential of the slide trombone because I really don`t know what that potential is (which is rather why I`m here).

Re: "If you want a valve trombone sound, use a euphonium. The instrument itself will sound MUCH better, and the player will be able to use the valves in the way you are thinking."

I don`t particularly want a valve trombone "sound"--whatever that is--I want the passage to be playable. Otherwise, the idea is that a trombone (at least a slide trombone), in terms of balance and timbre is a lot like a trumpet pitched an octave lower. The old Rimsky-Korsakov dictum is two horns = one trumpet--and I recently noticed Bernstein following Rimsky-Korsakov`s advice in his overture to "Candide"--which theoretically should make the horn, for example, unsuitable in terms of balance--at least, to say nothing of the horn`s plushness (I used to play in a college jazz ensemble with a horn and write arrangements including it, and eventually I got, as the Band song puts it, "tired of everything being beautiful, beautiful and [I was] not coming back for more").
Another consideration is what I`m more likely to get. What do you think about the baritone? (Even though my very own brother played the baritone in high school, I`ve never actually heard it in isolation and don`t really know what it sounds like.)

Re: "Because the trumpet diffinately is utilized rather well in orchestral settings."

Well, "uitlized well" is different from potential realized isn`t it? I`ve looked at lots and lots of orchestral scores, and I just don`t see it (potential realized, that is).

Me: "The non-horn brass are used very sterotypically in a very limited manner."

You: "In older music, yes, but not in the last 100 years or so, and even less in the last 50."

It`s true that the vast majority of these orchestral scores I`ve looked at are pre-sixties, and I`m certainly not talking about avant-garde or "extended techniques" potential, but , on the other hand, I`m not talking about Haydn, etc., either--because that would be a very cheap shot. I am including Shostokovich and Bartok.

Re: "It [the valve trombone] is still an instrument that physically cannot do what the slide trombone can do, simply because it does not have that slide."

According to the Grove Dictionary of Jazz (which I DO NOT drag in as some sort of ex cathredra authority, by the bye), the valve trombone hit its stride in jazz with bebop because bebop made increased technical demands on players. Then, still according to Grove, various slide players, most notably J. J. Johnson, proved bebop could be played on slide. The thing that strikes me about this is that also with bebop (and NOT noted in the Grove article in question) jazz "effects", bending pitch, growling, wah-wah, extreme vibrato, pretty much went out the window. It is very interesting to me that late sixties rock brought all these (bending pitch, growling, wah-wah, and extreme vibrato) back, mistakenly supposing they were new. In any case, I saw Bill Watrous a couple of years ago, and it seemed to me his virtuosity largely consists of his ability to get around the obstacle of the slide without ever actually sliding, and I think there`s some irony here--which is not at all (I hope) to denigrate Bill Watrous, who is truly a great musician.

Mas:

Re:

Me: "I`m not familiar with this tune, but it`s my impression that funk really never survived the onslaught of disco in the late seventies. There aren`t any Michael Jackson arrangements I know that I can fully endorse."

On reflection, that comment seems fairly gratuitous and churlish now. Whether I can fully endorse a complete Michael Jackson arrangement is beside the point. Basically I was fearing circus music, so to speak. My owning thinning attempts were deliberately less obviously systematic so as not to seem plodding. I tried your idea, however, and now I`m thinking obviously systematic might be the way to go. I`m considering making this an ossia (following Erik`s suggestion, as I understood it).

Two sticky bits in particular, though: 1) Going from the F# (which I`d now be obliged to spell as Gb) to the Ab is crossing positions, going from fifth directly to third. It should certainly not be more difficult than stopping at G at twice the speed, but is it SIGNIFICANTLY easier? It needs to be SIGNIFICANTLY easier. 2) If I do make this an ossia, I should like to credit you ("as suggested by..."), and for that I`d need your actual name.

"the idea is that a trombone (at least a slide trombone), in terms of balance and timbre is a lot like a trumpet pitched an octave lower." Not quite. It is pitched an octave down, but that`s the extent of the similarities. The balance is slightly different (trombones are considered much louder), and the timbre is completely different. As for the horn, you are right, it is not a very loud instrument, but part of that is the playing technique. (hand in bell, bell facing down to the side) The horn deffinately can get up to those louder volumes, and there is nothing more that I like than watching something like Mahler 2 with 10 or them.

"What do you think about the baritone?" The Baritone and the Euphonium are almost the same instrument. Some people would argue that they are the same, but I do not. The difference, in my understanding, is the baritone has a cylindrical bell, while the euphonium has a conical bell. The effect of this is the euphonium has a deeper, richer, more mellow sound.

"I`ve looked at lots and lots of orchestral scores, and I just don`t see it (potential realized, that is)." What do you mean by potential realized, then? I`m a bit confused.

"The non-horn brass are used very sterotypically in a very limited manner." I see what you are saying, and yeah, sometimes they are. But, in an orchestra, we are just a color in a much larger pallet than a jazz band. However, there are several pieces where the potential of (in my case) trombone is diffinately more than realized. One example would be Ravel`s Bolero, with the range of the piece up near the top of the large bore tenor trombones usable range, which sets forth a very specific color, as well as the gliss`s, particularly at the end.

And you nailed it with the valve bone. People made the valve bone popular back in the day because they thought the slide bone couldn`t be played fast enough. J.J. proved them wrong. (For a while, the public was convinced J.J. was playing a valve bone, because no one can really play that fast) Now that we know the slide really does move just as fast as we need it to, there is no need to lower ourselves to an inferior sounding instrument. But then again.... The original subject was about rock/funk, so if it`s available, valve bone would of course work.

Re: Me: "the idea is that a trombone (at least a slide trombone), in terms of balance and timbre is a lot like a trumpet pitched an octave lower."

Erik: "Not quite. It is pitched an octave down, but that`s the extent of the similarities. The balance is slightly different (trombones are considered much louder), and the timbre is completely different."

I`m inclined to suppose the differences are magnified for the performer. Trumpets and trombones in equal numbers pitched approximately an octave apart will balance and blend--without creating a distinctly different timbre (the way that a cello and horn in unison create a distinctly different timbre--a different sort of blending effect). The question is whether or not a euphonium or a baritone will balance and blend equally well at the same interval.

Re: "As for the horn, you are right, it is not a very loud instrument, but part of that is the playing technique. (hand in bell, bell facing down to the side) The horn deffinately can get up to those louder volumes, and there is nothing more that I like than watching something like Mahler 2 with 10 or them."

You mean Rimsky-Korsakoff is right. I myself prefer not to mix horns with trumpets and trombones at all.

The Euphonium and baritone sound the same, especially to a non-trained ear. There are small differences, for example, the Euphonium has a slightly larger, richer, deeper, more mellow sound, due to the difference in the shape of the bell. The sound diference, however, is not as extreme as the difference between trumpet and trombone. Trumpet has a much more brilliant, bright, sound than the trombone, due simply to the size and shape of the instrument. (The tubing is much smaller, and is more tightly wraped, as opposed to the trombone, especially large bore trombone, being mostly straight tubing.) Clearly, the difference between cello and horn is much greater than between trombone and trumpet, but there is still a difference, noticable to not only the trained ear.

"You mean Rimsky-Korsakoff is right. I myself prefer not to mix horns with trumpets and trombones at all."
Yes. Mixing of all the brass does work, but for a specific sound. The are several cases where the horns and bones are playing a certain section, or trumpets and horns, or even all three, and it sounds awesome. After all, the "brass quintet" world has trombone, trumpet, tuba, and horn. And that sounds great.... But then again, the woodwind quintet also has french horn... And to this day I still have no idea why historically the horn has also been considered a woodwind instrument. (maybe the sound? I don`t have a clue)

Re: "The Euphonium and baritone sound the same, especially to a non-trained ear...."

Sorry, I meant the question is whether these two instruments will balance with the trumpet at approximately the interval of an octave as well as a trombone will, not whether the euphonium will balance as well as a baritone will. I`m pretty sure a horn, for example, replacing the trombone in the passage in question would get swallowed. The disparity in timbre (horn v. trumpet) may not matter so much here considering we`re fairly zooming, but it should matter elsewhere in the same song.

Re: "Clearly, the difference between cello and horn is much greater than between trombone and trumpet, but there is still a difference, noticable to not only the trained ear."

We can tell the instruments apart easily enough, but if you want an homogenous, or as I like to put it "congealed", sound you`re safe putting the trombone an octave below the trumpet. In the same way, I think of a bassoon as a bass oboe. Wind quintets sometimes have oboe and bassoon doubling at the fifteenth (the natural difference in range), and the problem with this is that there`s an octave missing (that`s okay on the piano, but in my opinion, not here). Brahms in...some symphony or other, escapes me now...puts the clarinet in its chalmeau range between the two, and that works very nicely (at the appropriate dynamic).

"Yes. Mixing of all the brass does work, but for a specific sound. The are several cases where the horns and bones are playing a certain section, or trumpets and horns, or even all three, and it sounds awesome."

It`s extremely common, but so far I`ve carefully avoided it. Not my cup of tea.

"After all, the "brass quintet" world has trombone, trumpet, tuba, and horn. And that sounds great...."

The thing I like about the sixties soul and rock "horn section" is that the saxophones take the edge off the brass, or, conversely, the brass gives the saxophones an edge. I`m not especially fond of the Blood, Sweat, and Tears section because two trumpets and a trombone against a single saxophone is two brassy for my taste. (It took some experimenting before I could get the alto saxophone to balance with the trumpet because the saxophone gets louder and brassier in its lower range, whereas as the trumpet gets louder and more incisive in its higher range. First I erred one way, then I overcompensated the other way.)

Re: "But then again, the woodwind quintet also has french horn... And to this day I still have no idea why historically the horn has also been considered a woodwind instrument. (maybe the sound? I don`t have a clue)"

And if you really want a mishmash there`s the wind quintet. I don`t know a single wind quintet (piece I mean, not ensemble) that successfully manages its disparate sounds. I came up with a tentative plan several years ago, but I never got around to implementing it.

yeah valve trombones (AKA bass trumpet), get over them.
theyre a stupid idea rather like a soprano trombone (aka slide trumpet)which really only work if you just want an iregularity. if you want that passage to sound good get your guys to slow it down to half or even a quarter of the speed and get it sounding great then move up the speed. F attachment trombones are great but wont help with this. just practice.

Re: "People made the valve bone popular back in the day because they thought the slide bone couldn`t be played fast enough. J.J. proved them wrong. (For a while, the public was convinced J.J. was playing a valve bone, because no one can really play that fast)"

One thing we`ve both overlooked here is that the most salient solution (to the greater technical demands of bop and post-bop) was simply to do away with the trombone altogether.

But that is clearly not needed, getting rid of it in bop in general, since the players evolved alone with the music, and can easily hold up to it now.

Alone = AlonG

Re: "But that is clearly not needed, getting rid of it in bop in general, since the players evolved alone with the music, and can easily hold up to it now."

It`s throwing out the baby with the bathwater and certainly lamentable. Nevertheless: I`ve been scouring the practice room for a second opinion (a non-cyberspace second opinion involving an actual demonstration, that is) and so far no trombones. Trumpets, horns, and tubas, but no trombones.

bottom line in my opinion in this case....


if you write it, someone will play it. whether it is as written... or an adaptation of it i.e. breaking the rhythym down.




We are only limited by our minds. IF you say it cannot be done, i know ill work my ass off to make it work and make it work better than you can imagine.