Section playing thoughts

[Burgerbob]

Wanted to put some words together from thoughts I've had about trombone sounds recently:

I spent a few days up close and personal with a top orchestra section a short time ago. One thing that I noticed that I hadn't really noticed before was something subtle, something present in some (but not all) very good players. I also noticed it when listening to the Utah Symphony section at ITF, at the time I couldn't put a finger on why they sounded SO different than the college players or professors I had been hearing. It was especially obvious in the bass trombone.

In those top tier sections, every player (the principal, a bit less so) is making their sound transparent. I think William Lang has alluded to this time to time when he talks about the orchestral high register to have less tension, and commercial high register to have more lip tension- this could be some of the mechanic behind it. Basically, every player is making a lot of sound, lots of overtones, etc. but is not ever making their sound so present that it becomes THE thing to hear. The exception is obviously the principal trombone, but even those players are making room in their sound for the rest of the orchestra.

What made this clear to me was a specific moment, where the trombones were playing a sustained chord. I could tell it was balanced, in tune, and everyone had a good sound... but it took ALL my effort to pick out the specific note the 2nd trombonist was playing. This is not something that is usually difficult for me.

In most of my regular playing in sections, this is not necessarily the case. And this isn't necessarily wrong, either- if you have a section (in any context) that all plays with a full, present sound, you end up with a great section combination. The difference is sometimes that sound can be too "hot" in the mix and not leave room for other parts of the ensemble, whether that's saxophones or strings, etc.

I have been experimenting with this in my own section playing- when I can tell the people around me are trending towards that more "transparent" sound, then I will try to match in a way that I used to not be able to hear.

I think this is an element of playing with others that is not discussed much... and maybe I'm making it all up!

[VJOFan]

I don't think you're making this up at all. But I think it may be something that just begins to happen to players who get to play in large rooms in an orchestral setting for an extended period of time.

In my undergrad I had a stark look at this. One of my older peers got a gig in an out of country orchestra. He came back to town after a year of this and I didn't recognize his sound. There was a warmth and richness that had never been there before. There were just so many more harmonics (or something) alive when he played. There was more presence and carrying power, but no push or edge to the sound. He was also so much easier to play with.

When I was lucky enough to get an orchestral gig (and then took a few more lessons with a much better player in a much better orchestra 8 hours down the highway) in a group with a very nice hall my own sound blossomed and became a more glowing, warming flow of liquid. A flow that could be heard everywhere if I wanted or that could disappear when necessary. It was the hall, lessons on opening up and not pushing plus , and I think this is important, having to match the quality of an orchestral string section, orchestral clarinets players and oboists and the the other older brass players.

I believe orchestral players do sound different from a lot of other players, and I think it is the orchestral playing that does it, not so much that they have that sound before they do a lot of orchestral playing. When the playing takes on the dimensions of a beautiful hall, it becomes far more "blendy".

Practice in larger resonant spaces a lot.

[harrisonreed]

And then when you hear some of these same orchestral people step up to play a solo or recital, they are equally transparent, in the same "where is it, I know it's there but I can't see it" sense of that word, and not the "wow, nothing is hidden in their sound" sense of it.

I saw a very famous principal player perform a concerto some years ago, but I literally could not hear them. It wasn't great.

That's why Joe blows me away with his sound every time I get to hear him live, such a great sound in the section, and such a different, but awesome, sound as a soloist.

[2bobone]

Raphael Fruhbeck de Burgos was conducting our orchestra as a guest conductor. The orchestra's resident music director was a Russian whose favorite word was "CRESCENDO" ! As the rehearsal progressed, Fruhbeck addressed the brass section. He simply said, "Not so HARD"! The entire brass section knew exactly what he meant and in seconds we were playing with a full, rich sound even at top dynamic levels --- and --- with half the effort! When the brass played without the "Free For All" attitude encouraged by the principal conductor, intonation improved 100% because the inner partials weren't blown out of shape to satisfy the resident conductor's demands. Those unrealistic demands were not only detrimental to the music but to the physical wellbeing of the brass players themselves. The improvement was so striking that I've never forgotten it. Obviously !

[Burgerbob]

That's why Joe blows me away with his sound every time I get to hear him live, such a great sound in the section, and such a different, but awesome, sound as a soloist.

Joe is someone that I think plays extremely present at all times. Like... perhaps too much of the time. You can hear him clearly playing 6th trombone in some STS choir recordings. This is not a concept he subscribes to himself, I think.

[baileyman]

There are similar issues in big bands.

[Burgerbob]

There are similar issues in big bands.

Yes, and I think that's a situation where either way can work- it just depends on the style and the rest of the band.

[Digidog]

I think it's a trait that comes from the acoustic conditions the players find themselves in. How much the different, over all existing frequencies are occupied, with what quality of waveforms they are occupied, and how loud those sounds occupying the frequency span are.

In jazz, I find this difference in quality of tone very much with vocalists that mostly sing with an acoustic bass setting of their bands, versus those whom mostly have an electric bass accompanying them. I find this in instrumentalists too, but not as prominent or as regular as with vocalists. To me the trait is about projection and how the player centers and sustains the tone; what muscles they put to work when shaping the tone. F.ex. the proportions in the combination of relying on strength or technique. How they base their airflow, also seems to be an important factor in this equation.

To me, it's not surprising that players in a symphonic orchestra have a different shaping and maintaining of their airflow and tone, since that form of playing is entirely acoustic and depending on a balance of frequencies, honed for centuries, in order to be percieved and heard by the listeners. In bands with other means of producing sounds, the players automatically adjust to those conditions, and adjust the tone shaping techniques, and thus sound different. The differences between pop and opera vocalists, or between western folk and Indian raga singers, are two, to me, obvious examples.

This is why I most often prefer to play with as many acoustic instruments as possible, but also why I find it so fun to use a rhythm section with an electric bass and a solidbody electric guitar in a Big Band. The differences are stimulating and creative to work with.

[dbwhitaker]

This reminds me of something Doug Yeo wrote:

Back in my college days (early 70's), I went to hear the Chicago Symphony every week. After one particularly inspiring concert, I went backstage to offer my congratulations to Mr. Kleinhammer. I said something like, "Wow, you sounded incredible!" His response?

"If you heard me, then I was a failure. You should have heard an orchestra, not a trombone player."

https://www.yeodoug.com/articles/text/teamplayer.html

[tbdana]

I'm not sure if this is what you're talking about or not, but good sections know how to blend. It doesn't mean their tones disappear or all become the same, it's just that they recognize that they're part of a greater whole and their own sound isn't important. I think of it as learning to come from within the music rather than imposing yourself on top of the music, if that makes any sense. Most musicians, even most pros, impose themselves on top of the music they hear around them. The best surrender their ego and their identity to the music and come from within it.

I'm probably not saying it well. LOL!

[Burgerbob]

I'm not sure if this is what you're talking about or not, but good sections know how to blend. It doesn't mean their tones disappear or all become the same, it's just that they recognize that they're part of a greater whole and their own sound isn't important. I think of it as learning to come from within the music rather than imposing yourself on top of the music, if that makes any sense. Most musicians, even most pros, impose themselves on top of the music they hear around them. The best surrender their ego and their identity to the music and come from within it.

I'm probably not saying it well. LOL!

It's a related topic, for sure- I think good sections can play in a spectrum though, one where all the voices can disappear into each other, and one where all the voices are equally present in what the listener hears.

The second category can definitely be a section deciding they are more important than the music, and play together very well but not with the rest of the ensemble.