Re: Bydlo: Musicianship vs. Masculinity ?


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

Posted by Tracy on May 15, 2001 at 02:15:08:

In Reply to: Bydlo: Musicianship vs. Masculinity ? posted by Matt G on May 14, 2001 at 20:13:49:

I agree whole-heartedly. Most tubists don't understand that Bydlo was not written for a big tuba. Ravel wrote it for a single French C tuba, which is essentially a tenor tuba. I can play the solo on the big CC tuba, too , but for me to insist in doing so would be egotistical and foolish. Unfortunately, the word TUBA printed on top of our orchestral parts, doesn't always point to what kind of tuba to use. I know that sounds strange, but composers in the romantic and early 20th century era, had alot of bass brass choices to choose from. There were a whole family of saxhorns, and and all the many forms of the early bass and contrabass tubas in their various keys. And lets not forget the ophieclide, the cimbasso and the french tuba. All these instruments that composers wrote parts for would eventually find its way into our hands with the word tuba printed on it. What a mess! But, we have to deal with it. Arnold Jacobs himself would occasionally put down his York in favor of an F tuba or euphonium. The point is to get the best musical result. Gene Pokorny talks about Bydlo on his orchestral excerpt CD on summit records. I believe HE played on a euphonium. He said that we should get past our egos and decide who could make more music out it. You, or one of your trombone playing pals, who are tacet. I believe he knows what he's talking about. What it all comes down to, is what the conductor wants. If he's worth his salt, he'll know about Bydlo and the challenges it presents. But sometimes, we get an uneducated conductor, who will be unreasonable about it. What can you do, except to be prepared to play it on whatevers handy. We can do this, because we're tubas, and we are strong! Anyone agree?


Follow Ups: