Re: Shall tubas have their own scale systems


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Joe Baker on March 12, 2003 at 14:15:57:

In Reply to: Shall tubas have their own scale systems posted by Klaus on March 11, 2003 at 21:18:10:

One word: compromise. This is why I have to side with Rick instead of you, Klaus. I admire you for standing up for your convictions (though that admiration is sorely damaged by your insulting and condescending tone), but when it comes down to it any organization must compromise.

The key question is, how much do you compromise. Rick has implied small compromises (by amateur standards), maybe 8-10 cents, are sometimes necessary. Your response implies that Rick is so unconcerned about pitch that the whole section should deliver itself lock, stock and barrel to someone practically playing the wrong note! Your hyperbole does nothing to strengthen your argument.

With that said, I do understand your frustration with duffer bands. After a lengthy lay-off (about six months) I have had two or three false starts to practicing again recently. My main problem is that I don't WANT to be in another band where people don't show up to rehearsal, don't adequately prepare their parts in the woodshed, don't play on a regular enough basis to keep up their skills - I just get too frustrated. I believe I'll eventually get it back together, and then go looking for some kind of selective group to play in. But if I change my mind and join an all-comers band, I'll be prepared to make the best of whatever situation comes along. If the guy next to me is out of tune, I'll meet him halfway before I'll clash with him.

Joe Baker, who wouldn't join any band that would have him, just now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

p.s. Maybe the reason we disagree has to do with whom we hope to please. Is it ourselves, the sophisticates in the audience, the 'regular guys' in the audience, the director, the composer -- whose opinion matters most? I don't pretend to know an objective answer to the question to who SHOULD be most important, but I know who IS most important to me. My priority list is:

Regular guys (majority rules! That's the American way, Klaus!)
The director (the necessary component to bring about compromise and unity).
My section-mates
My band-mates
Myself
The sophisticates
The composer

I put the composer last, because he's probably not there (and, often, passed on!) I put the sophisticates next-to-last, because if they're that sophisticated they probably have other opportunities to listen to better groups, which they will enjoy more. I put the 'regular guys' first, because I want them to learn to love listening to music, and to reward them for taking time to come listen to our band.

The regular guys -- they are the ones who listen for simple joy, which is after all the best joy. I used to have the great privilege of playing an annual Christmas concert for recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. It was my favorite concert of the year, because they got the most joy out of our playing. Sophisticates would have heard some flurps and bad tuning; but whatever we played, these regular guys heard the same thing: "we care enough about you to come out at Christmas and play for you." And their hearing was spot on.





Follow Ups: