ilikethetrumpet

(The previous post is brought to you by Itunes' shuffle feature!)

dambly

It's interesting to see how this discussion has evolved from Ed's call for diversity in orchestral/solo trumpet sound to the discussion of new repertoire, and from his original scope of the "classical" genre to jazz and other genres.

If by diversity you mean the coexistence of different sounds, styles, and interpretations in or among orchestras, that's more of an institutional value, and less of an individual one. It would be up to the management to create an environment that fosters individuality, but that seems unlikely. (While audition committees might not be looking for Phil Smith clones, I doubt they're looking for mavericks either.) Is the orchestra really a place for innovation? And does new repertoire necessarily foster new and diverse sounds for the instrument, or just use the same sounds in a different context?

The homogeneity of orchestral sound and style has been blamed on increased intercontinental travel of music directors, the proliferation of recordings, the cookie-cutter methods of the conservatories, the severity of the audition process, and the lack of imagination on the part of the performers -- all of these are probably contributing factors. But I think the main reason is that it's simply the nature of the orchestra business today.

Orchestral music -- the master works (available in many versions), and the very sound of an orchestra (available in numerous sample libraries), is definitely a commodity in the 21st Century: interchangeable, transferable, portable. How many composers write music with a particular orchestra's sound in mind? (It's interesting to note that Salonen's "Wing On Wing," though written for and premiered by the LA Philharmonic for the opening of Disney Hall, was recorded for commercial release by the Finnish Radio Symphony Orchestra.)

The other side of the diversity coin might be versatility, which is an individual value -- the performer can learn to create different sounds, to play a wider repertoire, and to work in several genres -- but I'd argue that a much wider net needs to be cast: as Ed has pointed out, a trumpet teacher who can also accompany students on piano is much more employable. By the same token, a trumpet player who can improvise backup parts in the studio, organize a music festival or write a film score adds more musical value to the equation.

So I'd argue, even if the possibilities seem limited in the world of orchestral music, the range of musical possibilities available to a performer today is greater than ever: now you don't have to choose between pre-composed music vs. real-time composed music, or between composer-based music vs. performer-based music, or between acoustic music vs. electronic music. All of these modalities are available simultaneously.

Enjoy them!

rowuk

Excellent post Mr. Dambly!
I think the call for "perfection" by the recording industry does in fact promote the "universal" sound and style as well as "portability" of such.

Even in the baroque scene we have had many mavericks that dared to take on the great conductors of the late 50s and 60s. In fact, the natural trumpet was brought back to life and the first feeble attempts (captured by Leonhardt and Harnoncourt for instance) to play that beast got the ball rolling. Many serious positions in Europe now demand a greater variety of instruments and playing styles. The Radio symphony in Frankfurt used natural trumpets and horns on the most recent Beethoven recordings.

I think the players have the power to stretch the envelope IF they want to. If Mozart, Beethoven or whatever comes up and the trumpet section OFFERS a different color and style, most conductors would not complain. A section that thrives on security will stick with a smaller selection of instruments and appropriate playing style..............

Khora

Excellent post, Tom. SO well said. Thank you - for so many things, of course - but especially for this at this particular time!

Back to the grant application for my concert series!

mahaberio

Very well said, Tom. Nice to hear from you again. You too Sandy!

dambly

Robin,

Thanks for your response. I like the idea that it was the players' initiative, years ago, that led to more sonic options in the orchestra today. (Your phrase "dared to take on the great conductors" is revealing -- in today's climate, I would imagine a player would have to achieve tenure before being so brave!)

Your point is a good one -- if a section can offer a variety of styles (and use different instruments, such as piston, rotary or natural trumpets to facilitate those styles), that can only be an advantage. Perhaps that range of options is now becoming the norm, so that players will need to be versatile enough to play in those styles (and use the instruments that facilitate them) just to hold down an orchestra job.

So, to return to Ed's points, could this expanded palette help distinguish one orchestra from another? Could it open the door to greater individual expression on the part of the individual orchestral player? I'd have to agree with Vulgano -- I'm not sure that the orchestra (or even the brass quintet or the classical solo recital circuit) is the place for sonic innovation.

Regarding the expectation of "perfection," and its role in the homogenization of sound: given today's oversupply of talent and extremely competitive landscape, it's hard to see how it could be otherwise.

Here's an interesting article on conservatory culture that addresses, among other things, the cult of "perfection":

Do As I Say: Music Conservatory Culture and its Contribution to Discontentment
Among Professional Orchestral Musicians

Sandy and Matthew,

Thanks for the kind words! I hope your '07-'08 season goes well!

rowuk

It already has! Christoper Hogwood and the Academy of Ancient music, or Marriner/Brown with The Academy of St. Martin in the Fields have been offering the whole gamut of instruments depending on the piece. The Vienna Phil. uses Wiener Horns and the Vienna style rotary trumpets. The Bayreuth Festival offers Wagner every year on suitable instruments.

Disappointing is the increased use of a pic instead of a D trumpet for things like Strawinsky or Ravel (or Bernstein for that matter).

I would dare to disagree. If the orchestras were interested in a particular sound (Remember Ormandy and the Philadelphia sound? - it was more than a marketing scam - such lush strings and elegant brass playing!). I am sure that many of the players getting jobs would be willing to play other horns(and styles) if that was part of the deal. I think that many players are all too willing to accept that Bud Herseth is the greatest that ever was and will even state that if it was good enough for him........................ Why can't we turn that around to: Bud Herseth opened the door and there is a very big world on the other side!

Yes, Sonic Innovation can be very present in the orchestra or brass quintet. You just have to want to innovate.
Check out any Stockholm Chamber Brass Quintet CD (the one with Jan Bach's Laudes comes immediately to mind). There is a very personal sonic stamp in that ensemble.
The next time any of you play Mussorgsky/Ravel Pictures, imagine the opening theme not being a 300 pound lumberjack marching through the museum, rather the typical museum visitor with his wife quietly, respectfully approaching the first picture! A real challenge for players posessed with the desire for the biggest, darkest, fattest sound on the planet!
What about a Christmas Oratorio that doesn't sound like a concerto for 3 trumpets with orchestra and choir accompaniment (VERY hard to accomplish with piccolo trumpets).
The innovation can be the message - not a call to wimp out, but to perform alternate functions in the big picture!

dambly

Hi Robin,

Good points, and interesting examples -- thanks. I had no idea that ASMF was using different instruments while the late Iona Brown was leading them; would that have included natural trumpets? (I had the pleasure of seeing them perform Baroque music a few times in the '80s -- on modern instruments -- and just assumed that they stayed modern.)

I think your example of Philadelphia in the Ormandy era (not to mention Chicago in the Herseth era) is exactly what Ed is talking about when he waxes nostalgic "...for the days when orchestras and solo performers sounded not so bloody much alike."

I like your optimistic view and your ideas about Pictures and the Weinachtsoratorium -- of course, similar ideas could apply to other repertoire. Perhaps in their quest to stay relevant, more orchestras and ensembles will encourage versatility on the part of their performers. Would that help lead us back to the diversity of sound that Ed laments?

Regarding the "cult of perfection" and how that might impact sonic innovation -- that topic might be big enough to warrant its own thread...

wiseone2

When I was growing up in Philadelphia there was only one orchestra, the Philadelphia. Kincaid and Schoenbach had a show on the radio. The Philadelphia sports teams were bombing. The Orchestra was our pride and joy.
Chicago who?
Wilmer- The Philly Phanitic

rowuk

Dambly,
they often used "period instruments". Michael Laird was very active! If the baroque or classical nat was called for, they did it, I am not sure if they ever used F trumpets.
I think the point is WE need to get the ball rolling, not wait for the conductor to dictate. Many times a conductor will say that the trumpets are too loud. What they many times mean is that the sound of the modern trumpet is so dense, that it covers many other things up. Using a lighter "period" instrument lets us play at a proper dynamic level without as much criticism. That leads to comments directed towards the other players.