Posted by Klaus on May 23, 2002 at 17:59:13:
In Reply to: Basses and Contra B. posted by WHY on May 23, 2002 at 15:16:13:
Three remarks first:
It is so much more inspiring to exchange thoughts with a person, that puts hers/his name on his/hers posting.
Hank is right in emphasising the sound being a factor in choosing equipment.
Your thinking of bass and contrabass functions in conical brasses is very relevant. At least I would say so, as I have done a lot of thinking on that subject myself.
If you take a conical brass quartet comprising flugelhorn in Bb, alto horn in Eb, (British style) baritone in Bb, and euphonium in Bb, then you have an ensemble that can play most church style choral music. The sound might be less familiar to US ears, but it will represent the spirit in Moravian and German traditions quite well. The Brits would use a cornet in place of teh flugel.
This tells us, that the euphonium is a well functioning caretaker of the bass line in a range comparable to the human bass voice. If there are intonation aids like a 4th valve, a compensating system, and/or a trigger, I am leaning towards saying, that the euphonium is the most beautifully sounding brass bass. Albeit with strong competition from the bass trombone and the French horn (when played by musicians taking a pride in blowing in the low range). The bass tuba often is too heavy if playing the bass function.
The contrabass function by definition is an octave lower than the bass, making contrabass tubas in CC and BBb ideal for that function. (When playing transcriptions, it also is helpful, that their ranges are very similar to that of string double-basses).
Why then at all bother with bass tubas in F and Eb?
Because the first tubas available were in F (Germany) and Eb (France). The latter actually called the Saxhorn contrebasse en Mi bemol by its inventor just to confuse matters.
The German romantic repertoire is intended for tuba in F, with few digressions down to the BBb contrabass. Whereas the German military was heavily relying on a BBb contrabass foundation with the octave represented by F tubas.
In France the orchestral tuba was a 5 or 6 valved instrument in C, actually pitched a whole step above the present day euphonium. That this instrument was used in tenor range solos is small surprise. But at least one of the pieces representing a peak in the art of instrumentation applies the C tuba as well in the tenor solo function as in some really low ensemble stuff. To understand that, one must remember the light sound of the older French orchestral tradition.
In the early days of the British brass band the instrumentation was just about the same as today. Only the Bb bass staff was placed above that of the Eb bass. Indicating that this part was played by a euphonium(-sized instrument).
Our revered fellow boarder Chuck Guzis, of Eugene-Oregon, a year or more ago pointed towards the score of a circa 1875 piece, found in the Library of Congress, called The Helicon Schottische. The composer is J. H. Woods.
It is a solo/soli for Eb bass(-es). There is an accompanying part for "B BASSO" (verbatim quote from the part). This part is clearly intended for a euph or something very similar. The range does not descend below Ab in the staff (bass clef concert).
My experiences with Eb parts in brass bands, are that they are unsatisfying in transcriptions, because there are so many not very musical jumps between the bass and the contrabass lines. Try to compare the Eb and BBb parts in the transcription of Hungarian March by Berlioz. The BBb part is much more musically rewarding to play.
However, if the composer knows his/hers brass band and writes directly for it, then the Eb parts can be very interesting. I guess because the musical inventiveness has been steered directly towards the Eb tuba and not just towards any low honker.
I have written things like the above lines before, and i could go on with more aspects of this topic. But not right now.
Klaus