TromboneChat

I'm finding it difficult to maintain a traditional quintet in my area. We've been at it for a year and part of the struggle isn't getting any easier. The problem is that there's one part that we just can't cover with a decent player who is also available.

How do y'all feel about quintet vs quartet or even trios? I've spent a year developing the 90-100 tunes in our book, and we'd need to start again. Which is most effective / in demand / accessible by your average modern brass music listener?



If we cut back to quartet, it would be tpt, f horn, tbn, tuba. I know there's a bit of repertoire available for that instrumentation, but is it enough? Much of the newer style tunes we have are from Musescore. I suppose it would be just as easy to get quartet stuff as quintet.

Most of the quartet music I have seen (and I have created a book for one) is trumpet/trumpet/trombone or horn/trombone or tuba. Most of the gigs I played with a quartet were Church services (particularly Catholic).

Trios are either trumpet/horn/trombone (think Poulenc) or the low brass trio horn/trombone/tuba, which is a rework of the trombone trio. If you are going to go trio, which of these are you planning?

Quintet has, by far, the most repertoire and the most varied repertoire. Most of the quartet rep. that I've played had either 2 trumpets & 2 trombones, or 2 trumpets, horn and trombone (sometimes w/substitiute parts on the 3rd part for either of those combinations). There are some pieces with the combination you suggested (again, sometimes with substitute parts that allow for slightly different combinations). Trios are usually trumpet, horn, trombone (again with some exceptions, and some flexible arrangements).

Generally, the less players involved, the more tiring the arrangements are - no opportunity for rests. Also, sustaining notes becomes more important, and the ability for one player to grab a breath while others are sustaining the musical line becomes more difficult.

There's a reason that Brass Quintets are the most standard brass chamber music group - there is a wealth of original music and high quality arrangements, at many different levels of difficulty. Trumpet players are also usually the ones that feel the added endurance strain with smaller groups the most. Having 2 trumpets allows for spelling each other off by splitting the 1st trumpet duties.

Jim Scott

I prefer quartets with two trumpets and either two trombones for trombone plus tuba. Not much rep though. I was in a quartet that most stuff was arranged by the guy running it. Had a ton of tunes though.

I find it’s easier to find trumpet players than horn players and tubulars can rad a bass trombone part with no special transposition so it makes it a lot easier to find subs. If you do have everything in musescore it would be easy to either make the book a trombone or trumpet alternate part but you’d either have to make all of them interchangeable or keep track of which charts go which way

Few years ago we did a low brass only quartet; tuba, 2 euphs, and a French horn. Really worked nice. After nephew graduated from high school and lost euph access, he used my euph and I went to trombone. Changed the sound some, but still worked really nice. We’ve done quintets with 2 trumpets, trombone, French horn and tuba, but since I’m low brass by birth and trumpet by necessity I prefer the sound of the low brass only. But that said, some songs do benefit from a trumpet or two. Nephew moved on, but still have grandson for trumpet or euph, daughter on French horn, and myself and a local band director for whatever else is needed.

As a listener, if it's brass with absolutely nothing else, I prefer quintets, unless of course the musicians are absolutely spectacular, in which case it doesn't really matter. But quintets just offer a lot more orchestrational flexibility than the smaller ensembles.

As a trombonist, I also prefer quintets, for endurance and breathing.

When I was in the Navy, we played 2 trumpets 2 trombones and had repertoire enough for concerts. The current situation is tpt, horn, tbn, tuba. If we had to cut to trio it would be the tuba that gets cut.

We've just got a member who is the weak link musically, reliability wise and socially. And can't find a replacement who can commit the time. We tried to play without that part, and everything that had been going wrong magically fell into place. The answer, or part of it anyway, became obvious.

Ideally, i agree with you all, i want a quintet, but from a practical point of view, I think we have a quartet.

A lot of quintet music splits the load between the two trumpets. But when one of them isn't holding up their end, that makes it tough for everyone else. Splitting the load with a competent horn and bone might allow us to play better music, plus as a bone player, getting the lead more often is not a bad thing.

I started a quartet a couple years ago (2 trumpets, trombone & bass trombone).

I do agree that there is additional strain put on the players in comparison to a quintet. There's no getting around that it's significantly more difficult to pull off a performance with one less person. More than I thought it would be to be honest. I don't regret it though. I have been going after jobs where things are a little less formal than a recital/concert scenario with a captive audience where taking a little extra time between tunes isn't an issue. It's working for us so far.

There is also not the amount of repertoire available for 4 vs 5, but it's definitely out there. I've built my book up to about 175 arrangements so far. They're harder to find than they should be. Since there is such a disparity in the counts of quintet vs quartet arrangements, most sites where you can search through a catalog of offerings for quartet arrangements will take it upon itself to fill in your search results with quintet arrangements which you then have no choice to manually sift through to find the quartet arrangements you're looking for. It's F***ING INFURIATING.

What is the vision for the group? You can do whatever you want with any combination of instruments, including solo instrument.

My advice is to brainstorm what you want your group to play, and then tailor your book to that vision. Sure, a big band might need a book with 100+ charts that the leader can call out. But what's nice is that big band music pretty much is one genre these days. As long as it's a big band playing big band charts, it doesn't matter if it's bop or swing, or whatever. People don't know.

If you want to do church gigs, there is such a plethora of SATB charts that it shouldn't be difficult to put books together. Throw in some Bach, Praetorius, etc to round it out. You can get by with the big format hymnal and maybe 20 charts that you arrange or find.

If you want to do pop music, you will have to arrange yourself. I would keep the book size small, and stick to one genre or one decade. Musescore won't be your best bet because your group has unusual instrumentation. Look at what that string quartet was doing, covering metal music -- they absolutely made the music their own and weren't necessarily trying to sound "metal". This is probably the most difficult situation to make a group that "works". The instruments are "wrong", you need a drummer, anything that has a guitar solo will immediately sound like a letdown, and people will be listening for the strong vocal (play the melody like Sting sings).

If you want to do feature classical recitals for the group, you need to arrange for your group. Otherwise it will be unbalanced and probably won't play to your group's strengths.

Serious suggestion:
Replace one trumpet with a good clarinet player, or soprano sax.

That’sa really good idea. Actually, one reed player would add a lot from an orchestration standpoint if they enter decent at any doubles too. Sax player who was good enough on two saxes, or sax and flute or sax and clarinet would give you tons of options

Something that just occurred to me that there’s a lot of saxophone quartet music out there. You might be able to lift some of that and put other brass instruments around that to.

hyperbolica wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 6:23 pm We've just got a member who is the weak link musically, reliability wise and socially. And can't find a replacement who can commit the time. We tried to play without that part, and everything that had been going wrong magically fell into place. The answer, or part of it anyway, became obvious.

Some really good musical solutions being offered, but socially/politically is it necessary that you "become a quartet", at least initially, as opposed to immediately finding a replacement? Depends how social this was to begin with... in which case Matt's suggestion of borrowing from the much larger sax 4tet rep is great. Sop/tpt has no issues, bari/tuba is easy enough at sight... but you may want to transpose things to better fitting keys for all concerned, in which case you're making new parts anyway.

Doug Elliott wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2023 8:29 am Serious suggestion:
Replace one trumpet with a good clarinet player, or soprano sax.

Clarinet > soprano sax (IMHO) but only because of the occasional low trumpet part that the soprano would have to octave-transpose that the clarinet could just read. But I agree, great idea.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2023 7:51 am What is the vision for the group? You can do whatever you want with any combination of instruments, including solo instrument.

The vision is to play some music, have some fun, prove to ourselves that we still can, and maybe make enough money to pay for gas and charts.

My goal is not to become an arranger, but we've been doing jazz, marches, assorted classical, quintet classics, some 50s/60s rock/pop classics, feel-good music and some well-arranged recognizable hymns. My preferred genre would probably be 70s rock converted into recognizable but also more serious charts.

My advice is to brainstorm what you want your group to play, and then tailor your book to that vision. Sure, a big band might need a book with 100+ charts that the leader can call out. But what's nice is that big band music pretty much is one genre these days. As long as it's a big band playing big band charts, it doesn't matter if it's bop or swing, or whatever. People don't know.

If you want to do church gigs, there is such a plethora of SATB charts that it shouldn't be difficult to put books together. Throw in some Bach, Praetorius, etc to round it out. You can get by with the big format hymnal and maybe 20 charts that you arrange or find.

If you want to do pop music, you will have to arrange yourself. I would keep the book size small, and stick to one genre or one decade. Musescore won't be your best bet because your group has unusual instrumentation. Look at what that string quartet was doing, covering metal music -- they absolutely made the music their own and weren't necessarily trying to sound "metal". This is probably the most difficult situation to make a group that "works". The instruments are "wrong", you need a drummer, anything that has a guitar solo will immediately sound like a letdown, and people will be listening for the strong vocal (play the melody like Sting sings).

If you want to do feature classical recitals for the group, you need to arrange for your group. Otherwise it will be unbalanced and probably won't play to your group's strengths.
[/quote]

Doug Elliott wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2023 8:29 am Serious suggestion:
Replace one trumpet with a good clarinet player, or soprano sax.

Yeah, I like that. I know a couple great clarinet/sax players. I hadn't considered an option like this. I've been transcribing/rearranging sax quartet and even string quartet tunes, which has had various levels of success.

Sax quartet of SATB might work well for your quartet instrumentation. Trumpet reads soprano part directly, horn reads alto sax part as Horn in Eb, trombone reads tenor sax part as tenor clef, and tuba reads bari sax part as bass clef.

BGuttman wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2023 3:05 pm Sax quartet of SATB might work well for your quartet instrumentation. Trumpet reads soprano part directly, horn reads alto sax part as Horn in Eb, trombone reads tenor sax part as tenor clef, and tuba reads bari sax part as bass clef.

I was going to suggest something similar. The only transposition in a sax quartet that’s weird is the alto part imo and if you have a sax or horn player then… it’s actually a common transposition. But for a group of that caliber it still might be tricky but at least it’s a reasonably easy transposition for everyone (or standard in the case of trumpet).

I had a very successful brass quintet in SC for years - gigged every weekend. Moved to North Alabama and tried to build a new group, but couldn't find a horn player. Trumpets and trombones galore, some tubists, but not a single "hand shover" in my area.

The situation may resolve itself. Our problem child is bowing out, and at least temporarily we've found a good trumpeter. His wife's about to have a baby, so his time with us may be short lived.

Our regular trumpet player wasn't too big on the quartet idea, so we're kind of at the mercy of the universe's supply of 2nd trumpets.

Not all trumpet players are built for quintet. You need time, tone, intonation, control, repeatability, ability to follow, etc. We've been through several mediocre community band trumpets, with predictable results. It's not that we don't have any trumpet players here, we are just having trouble matching up with one who fits the situation 60% or better.

I appreciate all the suggestions. I'd have been happy to go with some combination of traditional brass quartet transcriptions and re-orchestrations along with sax quartet stuff, but the way its working out will probably be better.

Like others have said, quintets get the lion’s share of original pieces and arrangements for chamber brass groups. There are some historical reasons, but it’s the de facto small chamber brass group. Quartet is next, then trio.

There is a relatively small amount of literature for tpt, horn, tbn and tuba (111.01, in Robert King nomenclature). There’s a bunch more for 202.00 and 211.00, which are more “standard” instrumentations. You can always arrange things, of course. As you might guess (or already know), a lot of it is Renaissance and Baroque transcriptions which, if done well, can be very pleasing for the audience and the players. Like it was mentioned above, there’s more face time, though, and fewer rests.

I like Doug’s thinking-outside-the-box idea of clarinet or sax. Volume with either instrument could be tricky: can the clarinet play loudly enough for a good balance of voices, or can a saxophone be played softly enough?

Depends on the player. Clarinet low range typically doesn't project well but mid and high range can definitely project. In my 5 horn band I've written clarinet on lead trumpet parts and it's very effective. Can't always depend on having a trumpet player with enough chops to get through a lot of hard charts.

Doug Elliott wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2023 11:43 pm Depends on the player. Clarinet low range typically doesn't project well but mid and high range can definitely project. In my 5 horn band I've written clarinet on lead trumpet parts and it's very effective. Can't always depend on having a trumpet player with enough chops to get through a lot of hard charts.

Yes, the player is the key. I was thinking of the lower register. Clarinets in Dixie/traditional certainly project well enough—sometimes too well!

We play brass gigs with all of these combinations. It really depends on the gig, the budget, etc. Brass Quintet is the usual, brass quartet for church services. We have two versions of a brass trio, Trp-Horn-Bone, all classical book for weddings and church services. We also have a brass trio with Trp-Bone-Tuba that our tuba player wanted to do. The tuba player did 90% of the arrangements, and the book has ~180 songs in it now. Classical, novelty, bleacher tunes, thematic programs, etc. We add a drummer and play in the schools, sometimes 6 shows a day. Corporate parties, wedding receptions, etc. The tuba player did some arrangements for the brass trio and string quartet for weddings. Worked well!

We have trouble sometimes with the horn chair in the quintet. Great horn players are hard to find. I started out reading horn parts as soprano clef, changing the key signiture of course. That is tough. I have transposed a number of our horn parts in the quintet, and many times we are 202.01 instrumentation wise. (I have a couple of brass quartet books I always take with me on brass quintet gigs in case someone fails to show. Only had that happen once in decades.)

Keep thinking about how you can achieve what you are looking to do. A working brass group is hard to keep going. Good luck!

Doug

Isn't it mezzo-soprano clef to read horn in F? One line up from alto clef.

Jim Scott

Make that one line down - the middle C is on the second line of the clef. Soprano has the C on the bottom line.

JS

dougm wrote: ↑Tue Aug 08, 2023 6:25 am ...
Keep thinking about how you can achieve what you are looking to do. A working brass group is hard to keep going. Good luck!

Doug

Wow, that sounds seriously impressive. My biggest problem here is that it's not NY or LA. Of course that's also the biggest benefit. We just don't have the opportunity or resources that a big metro center has. If it doesn't have a banjo or a GEEtar, people don't know what to make of it.

CalgaryTbone wrote: ↑Tue Aug 08, 2023 10:12 am Make that one line down - the middle C is on the second line of the clef. Soprano has the C on the bottom line.

JS

Yes - sorry. One line down from alto clef. Messes with your head if you play alto and tenor in the same week.

Doug