zbd1960

The weekend started with a chamber orchestra rehearsal on Friday where I play cello. This group meets alternate weeks. We're doing a suite by Delibes "Le roi s'amuse" and the movements are based around renaissance dance forms. One movement has a 4/2 time signature, which is pretty common with renaissance music (four minims to a bar). It's a quickish piece so the conductor decided she'd beat it in two, which in effect makes the time signature 2/1 - two semi-breves to a bar... the crotchets are quite short...  

Dowland's "Frog Galliard" played on a lute. Teh rolling score is in staff and English/French lute tablature (the letter indicates which fret - 'a' is open, b is first fret etc.). Note the use of flags to indicate rhythm. Tuning of a standard 6 course renaissance lute is the same as a tenor viol: GCFADG - two octaves from the G on the bottom line of bass clef. 

Today was the regular monthly sax ensemble meeting. We're widely scattered: Shropshire, North Wales, Liverpool, Lancashire... so we meet in a village hall near Manchester airport as it's just about equally inconvenient for all of us. We should be an octet of two each on soprano, alto, tenor, and baritone saxes.

Somehow I end up running the group and leading it. Partly it's because I have the most experience of performing in groups plus I've had some training in conducting. We were down to five today so instead of me bringing baritone I had to bring alto and tenor, but as it turned out I just played tenor today.

Whilst we would like to play the odd gig, we know that it's difficult with only meeting once a month. We play an eclectic mix and I throw in some renaissance music, which is good for sight-reading practice. Why do I use renaissance music? Being polyphony, no one line dominates on the tune - each line is independent. This also means you don't have the 'vertical' harmony that people are used to with 'tune and accompaniment'. It means you have to count and be brave and play your part.

The renaissance piece we did today was a pavan (a slowish dance) by the English composer Holborne which he published in 1599.  

A galliard is a much faster dance, which includes leaps/jumps. Might be a while before we do the Fairie Round (in thei video they've simplified the time sig to 6/8 it should be 6/4).

6 hours ago, Nicko said:

Surely this patently false statement is the whole basis of snobbery.  It's possible to compare instruments in terms of quality of components. quality of design, quality of construction but ultimately a good instrument is one that the player feels comfortable playing and that produces the sound they want. 

 

The sales price of an instrument is largely driven by the cost of labour in the country of manufacture and the perceived desirability of the product. 

 

I write this as someone who recently disposed of a US P as I always end up using my Chinese Squier P. I have a Mexican Fender branded Tele (the snobs would actually have to look at the serial number to tell), a Patrick Eggle and an Epiphone 339. 

 

These all do exactly what I want and I choose to spend the savings on expensive jeans which fit me better than the brand leader.

 

 

err... whilst you don't always get what you pay for (seems to be an issue with guitars where fashion seems to be an element) my main experience is with orchestral instruments and as a general rule more money = better made

I assume you're aware of the tyred wheel that has a spike to go into the the spike button on a bass? A couple of pro bass players I know that are London based use them. 

I realised a long time ago that what really matters is the player. I don't judge people on what kit they're using.

Whilst I have more of an orchestral than band background, instruments etc. are expensive and people will buy and play what they can afford. Some people are happy with less expensive kit. In the world of basses and guitars, entry level instruments are eminently playable without issues (perhaps some tweaking from a tech). This is in part due to them being made in relatively large numbers so production costs are lower meaning you can get more bang for your buck. This is less true with orchestral instruments, partly due to the numbers being made being much smaller and many of them are largely hand made. Some instruments, even entry level ones are £££ - talk to anyone who wants to play bassoon, where 'entry level' is over £3k, 'reasonable' is £7k+, and 'good' is £15k+. The 'good' category is what a professional orchestral player would have. 

As a cellist I wouldn't have anything other than a hard case, and my basses all have them. Two of my basses have Hiscox cases, as does my cello. I don't know about the bass cases, but the cello case is rated to 500kg - not that I intend to test it out... My two viols have cases which are similar to these new cases: zipped with shaped foam interior. Yes, they're lighter than a solid case would be, but they're bulky and the zips are prone to failing. I'd get hard cases for them, but they have to be made-to-measure, which last time I enquired was over £500 each (Kingham). You can get carbon fibre cases for cellos, which are much lighter, but they're stupid money - decent one is around £2k.  

1 minute ago, LukeFRC said:

Wow 😯 

I mean that must get more scientific as metal alloys can be more consistent than wood? Or actually I don’t want to know do I?! 

Nope! tbh the jury is mostly out on this one. There is perhaps some difference in the way that different metals respond to sound... but, like tone woods etc., it seems hard to actually measure and prove...

The part of the sax that is serious voodoo is mouthpieces and reeds....

1 hour ago, LukeFRC said:

Do sax forums argue about “tone metal”?

Yes.... 'vintage brass is better than...', 'solid silver bell/neck...', 'gold plated....', 'unlacquered...' (aka 'raw')....

Generally with musical instruments, you get what you pay for. The snobbery issue applies in other fields. I do a lot of photography adn there's little to choose other than personal preference and ergonomics between the major DSLR brands (Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji). Then you get the Leica owners... Nice kit, but stupidly priced.

Saxes have some similar issues. People go nuts and pay stupid money for 40 or 50 year old Selmer Mk.VI Yes, some of them have 'distinctive' sounds, but an awful lot of them are ergonomically poor and not special. The ergonomics and consistency of modern horns are much better than that of 'vintage' instruments, but people go nuts for the 'vintage' vibe.

I've tried some vintage horns like Conns, King Zephyrs etc (the ones I tried were from 1940s to 1960s). The ergonomics on all but one sucked. One stood out as good, the others I wouldn't touch.

Modern horns (Yamaha, Yanagisawa, Keilworth etc) are consistent, well made, and have much better ergonomics and are generally just much easier to play.      

Some years ago, for my job I had to analyse corporate banking data based on turnover. The results distribution was quite shocking.  As you'd expect, there was a big spike in the number of small businesses with turnovers measured in up to a few £million. There was another spike at 'big' corporates with turnovers in excess of  tens of £millions. There was almost nothing in between... You've got small local businesses, or big corps. What that tells you is the big corps buy out anyone that starts growing and has potential to bite into their market. The most obvious example, and one that is a cause of a lot of issues, is house builders. The big builders buy out all the medium sized companies and remove them from the market place. There are only a handful of companies building the vast majority of housing. You have some small local companies who build bespoke or very small developments. Legislation in this space is poor since what this is in reality is what is known as a 'complex monopoly' where a small number of companies control a section of the market.

So companies that care tend to stay small, because if they grow beyond a certain size, the risk of failure increases dramatically as does the risk of big corp buying them out. 

I use Allianz for all of mine. There are others. If you're a member of MU then you can get cover through them I believe. 

40 minutes ago, Johncee said:

A lot of people think that their old violins/violas/cellos look how they do because of natural wear and tear, when they were actually antiqued in the first place. It's not a recent trend - it goes back to the 19th century. Not saying this applies to yours, just making a general point. 

My cello is a German workshop one - it's just had a hard life. It's had a new neck at some point. The back is quite nice, but at some point some sort of solvent splattered the front and made a mess of the finish. I had a luthier give it s decent clean and polish, so it's better than it was.

You're right that in the C19th they started trying to make violins look like they were from the C17th and C18th....  this is when people realised that Strads etc were worth a lot of money

2 hours ago, Mykesbass said:

But what made them special for you?

The RVW was the biggest concert I've sung in - it was a full house at the Royal Albert Hall. It was the whole experience of the planning, rehearsing, travelling, the day itself. The Sea Symphony is also a great piece to perform and most amateurs don't get a chance to do it because it requires enormous orchestral forces and a big venue.

I saw that ad yesterday for the guitar and I just thought 'yuk'. I'll be honest, I don't see the point in 'relicing' - you get it with string instruments like violins as well, where it is described as 'antiqued'. I don't like 'antiquing' either. Natural wear and tear? Fine - my cello has had a hard life but it's about 120 years old. 

I've performed in many concerts. One of the best was Vaughan Williams Sea Symphony with the RLPO as the orchestra... Of the concerts for which I was the organiser, perhaps a full period instrument performance of the Monteverdi Vespers

You can read some serious physics on this... just vaguely digging A level physics form the 1970s out.... the wavelength that you want to produce (B) is affected by amongst other things the mass of the string and its length are the key ones with roles for stiffness, gauge, and tension... Whatever combination you settle on will be a compromise in some way or another. Unless assaulted by an attack of insanity, don't even think about gut strings... when it comes to tuning stability they belong in their own circle of hell    

13 hours ago, BassTractor said:

Aye, and in any style IMHO including jazz, even though I love jazz.
I suspect this is a popular opinion and thus off-topic, but I hear way too many standard licks and runs that have very little to do with the essence of the composition, runs that could be used (and sadly are used) in just about any piece. Slight exaggeration, but still.

My jazz teachers stressed the necessity to build up a wide range of standard runs in every key, as a library of sorts.
Er ... no.
No effin' way. 
 

One of the things that irritates me about certain types of jazz gig is where in every piece everyone has to take their turn doing the solo... which involves seeing how many notes can be squeezed into a given time interval... it's just boring.

In my world of choral singing, I've sung in many languages other than English including: Latin, Italian, French, German, Russian, Hebrew, Spanish, Swahili, Gaelic, Welsh... and some I've probably forgotten about

Indeed.... horses for courses.... Probably because at age of 12 school unexpectedly decided I should start to learn cello... it triggered a tendency in me to pick out and listen to the bass line. Later, when I started to sing bass in choirs, the same thing - I got used to listening for the bass line. Doing that helps a lot with understanding the harmonic structure of a piece. It also reveals how unutterably boring some people are with the bass doing little more than tonic/dominant oompah-ing...    

There are different examining boards with differing syllabuses. There are separate music theory and practical grades. The one most people known about is ABRSM, which offers the classical based syllabus and a jazz one. The main boards offer grades 1 - 8 plus 3 levels of diploma.. There are some other options around as well. There are syllabuses for other genres including music theatre. Rock School has a syllabus that is aimed at pop/rock. https://www.rslawards.com/rockschool/ 

I'm working on G6 for sax and I'm about G7 on cello (ABRSM). I have G6 theory. My bass tutor thinks I'm around Rock School G3 on bass. On sax I'm following the path but not currently sitting the exams.

The process has the advantage of providing a planned graded route adding technique and complexity as you go in a structured manner. There is a risk with some people that they get to grade 8 having only ever played 24 pieces...   

42 minutes ago, bass_dinger said:

That's helpful to know.  

 

I play in a church band, and previously, a ukulele band, both on bass.   Certainly, playing with others helps improve one's ear, timing and sensitivity to the playing of bandmates.

 

However, a lot of the music is improvised, with nothing written down, apart from chord charts.  It seems to me that I need to develop my ability to read music.   

 

Do you have any advice, or hints?

      

This comes up in the sax world as well where players are also split between readers and ears...

You have to be patient and accept that it's like learning to read - you start off with 'Janet and John', not Shakespeare. A useful technique is to download the score from a site such as IMSLP for an orchestral work, play a recording and follow a line in the score (bass/cello in this case). Acquire the ability to follow the line and listening for it as well. That will get you used to reading and following. 

My singing teacher would just put stuff in front of me and say 'sing that'. If you want to get better at reading, you just have to get on and do it. Find some easy stuff, and take it slowly until you can get it right, then speed it up, until eventually playing it at the correct tempo. 

27 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

 

Unpopular indeed; I'll take Schubert's symphonies every time over his leider. 

I've played 1,2,3,4,6 and 8 but only performed 3 and 8 in concerts. I think we're looking at 5 next week in my Monday orchestra. I' never sung any Schubert lieder - have sung some Brahms.

26 minutes ago, bass_dinger said:

This is the musicianship that I aspire to - reading the dots, and understanding timing too.

 

I probably started too late, and did not have lessons.  

 

However, I do enjoy sight-reading music on YouTube videos.

It's never too late. Something I picked up from when I started singing is the importance of playing/performing with others. My singing teacher had me singing in a choir in a few months. When I got my cello and sax back in 2011, I joined a community orchestra straightaway. Community orchestras are almost always short of bass players. If you want to get to grips with reading and playing from staff notation, then playing the bass part in an orchestra is a way forward (and yes the community group I was in had both an electric bass and a DB on that part). Such groups tend to play a lot of film music.      

21 minutes ago, Barking Spiders said:

Musical instruments that should be taken to the local recycling yard and chucked into skips are Hammond organs, flutes, tenor saxophones, harpsichords as well as previously mentioned accordians.

I've heard no music where the flute hasn't sounded sh**e, especially if it's played by hippies standing on one leg

Tenor saxes sound like elephants f@rt1ng in a train tunnel

Harpsichords only belong in the 18th century and should only be played by chaste young women in Jane Austen stories

Hammond organs have no place in a just world. Any song featuring one automatically qualifies as one of the worst songs ever made

My avatar is me playing my tenor sax... which isn't purple, that's just some of my photo editing. I have a baritone sax... Harpsichords - depends on the instrument: the mid C20th created these cast iron framed monstrosities. Works as a continuo instrument, fair to say more challenging as a solo instrument (depending as I said on the instrument). I'd agree that I'm not a big fan of the Hammond sound. Flutes depend on who's playing them, but it's not my favourite instrument for sure. A nice baroque wooden flute is kinder to the ears