V79 N&U Aio* /6J|

TWO EUROPEAN TRADITIONS OF TUBA PLAYING AS EVIDENCED IN THE

SOLO TUBA COMPOSITIONS OF RALPH VAUGHAN WILLIAMS AND

PAUL HINDEMITH, A LECTURE RECITAL, TOGETHER WITH

THREE RECITALS OF SELECTED WORKS OF W. ROSS,

R. BEASLEY, A. RUSSELL, V. PERSICHETTI,

W.S. HARTLEY, N.K. BROWN,

J.S. BACH, AND OTHERS

DISSERTATION

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

North Texas State University in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS

By

Charles A. Schulz, B.M.E., M.M,

Denton, Texas

August, 1980

Schulz, Charles A. , Two European Traditions of Tuba

Playing as Evidenced in the Solo Tuba Compositions of Ralph

Vaughan Williams and Paul Hindemith, A Lecture Recital.

Together with Three Recitals of Selected Works of W _ Ross,

Beasley, A^ Russell, Persichetti, W.S. Hartley, N.K.

Brown, J.S. Bach, and Others. Doctor of Musical Arts (Tuba

Performance), August, 1980, 32 pp., 15 illustrations, bibli-

ography, 44 titles.

The lecture recital was given on June 16, 1980. The

Ralph Vaughan Williams Concerto for Bass Tuba and the Paul

Hindemith Sonate for Tuba and Piano were performed following

a lecture on the historical evolution of the tuba in Europe.

The lecture included a history of the predecessors of the

tuba and their influence on the development of tuba playing

traditions. Tuba performance practices in Europe developed

around two playing traditions, one in France and England,

and a second in Germany. The ophicleide enjoyed tremendous

popularity in France and England during the early nineteenth

century. Because this instrument was a major competitor of

the tuba in these countries, the tuba was viewed as an ophi-

cleide replacement. Tubists in Europe and England had to

develop facility and sound quality equivalent to that of the

older instrument. In Germany the tuba's main competitor was

the Russian bassoon, a form of upright serpent. At this

same time the serpent and its related forms were in decline.

This lack of popularity with the older instruments provided

an opportunity for the quick adoption of the tuba in Germany.

In addition to the lecture recital, three other recit-

als were performed incorporating solo and chamber works for

tuba. The first recital was on July 7, 1976, and included

works of Morton Gould, Walter S. Hartley, Ralph Vaughan

Williams, and Newel Kay Brown.

The second recital was on June 9, 1978, and included

works of Walter Ross, Vincent Persichetti, J.S. Bach, and

Halsey Stevens.

The third recital was on October 22, 1979, and

included works of Armand Russell, Roger Vogel, Walter Ross,

and Rule Beasley.

All four programs were recorded on magnetic tape and

are filed with the written version of the lecture material

as a part of the dissertation.

Tape recordings of all performances submitted as disserta-

tion requirements are on deposit in the North Texas State

University Library.

111

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RECITAL PROGRAMS Page

First Solo Recital v Second Solo Recital vi Third Solo Recital vii Lecture Recital viii

IX LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

INTRODUCTION 1

Chapter

I. ANCESTORS OF THE TUBA 3

The Serpent The Russian Bassoon and the Bass Horn

II. FRENCH AND ENGLISH TUBA TRENDS 13

The Ophicleide Saxhorns

Vaughan Williams' Choice of Instrument

III. GERMAN TUBA TRENDS 21

Early Tubas

Hindemith's Choice of Instrument

CONCLUSION 27

BIBLIOGRAPHY 29

IV

North Texas State University School of Music

Presents

Charles Schulz in a Graduate Tuba Recital

assisted by

Tata Emerson, Piano

July 7, 1976 6:30

Program

Concerto for Bass Tuba Allegro Moderato Romanza

Finale-Rondo alia Tedesca

...And Then There Were Six Vision Contemplation Joy Confrontat ion Reconciliation Resolution

Music Recital Hail

R. Vaughn Williams

Newel Kay Brown

Sonata Intermission

Andante-Allegro Agitato Allegretto Grazioso Adagio Sostenuto Allegro Moderato, con Anima

Walter S. Hartley

Morton Gould Tuba Suite Prelude Chorale Waltz Elegy Quickstep

Mr. Schulz assisted by Joel Lopez, Robert Ensey and Sue Norton

This recital presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Musical Arts

NORTH TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF MUSIC

Presents

Charles A. Schulz in a Graduate Tuba Rec i ta l

assisted by

Judith Bookman, Piano June 9, 1978 6:30 Music Recital Hall

PROGRAM

T uba Concerto

Overture

Berceuse

T occata

Walter Ross

Sonatina Moderate) con moto

Andante affettuoso

Allegro

Sonata No. 2 in E. f lat Allegro Moderato

Siciliano

AI legro

Serenade No. 12 Intrada

Arietta

Mascherata

Capriccio

Intermezzo

Marc i a

Fancy Dances Galop

Saraband

Sal tare I lo

Halsey Stevens

INTERMISSION

J. S. Bach trans. C. Schulz

Vincent Persichetti

Walter Ross

Mr. Schulz assisted by

Joseph Sellsmanberger and Brian Book

Thi-o recital presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree Doctor of Musical Arts

NORTH TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MUSIC

presents

OCTUBAFEST 79 • • •

October 22, 1979 8:15p.m. Concert Hall

GRADUATE TUBA RECITAL

Charles A. Schulz, Tuba

Assisted by Sharon Shaheen, Piano

•Concerto for Tuba (1968) Rule Beasley Allegro Moderato

% Adagio Allegro Vivace

•Rltdown Fragments (1975) Walter Ross

Intermission

•Temporal Landscape IV (1978) Roger Vogel

•Suite Concertante (1963) Armand Russell Capriccio Ballade Scherzo Burlesca

Assisted by Pam Youngblood Jesse Youngblood Amy Anderson Lee Seibert Sue Norton

This recital presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of of Musical Arts

• • •

V l l

NORTH TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY

School of Music

presents

Charles Schulz, Tuba

in a

GRADUATE LECTURE RECITAL

assisted by

SHARON SHAHEEN, Piano

June 16, 1980 4:00 P.M. Concert Hall

PROGRAM

The Evolution of the Tube end Tube Pleying in Two Europeen Traditions es Evidenced in the Solo Tuba Compositions

of Ralph Vaughan Williams and Paul Hindemith

INTERMISSION

Concerto for Bass Tuba Ralph Vaughan Williams Allegro Moderato Romanza Finale-Rondo alia Tedesca

S o n a t e Paul Hindemith Allegro pesante Allegro assai Variationen

This recital presented in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree Doctor of Musical Arts.

V l l l

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure

1.

2 .

3.

4.

5.

6a.

6b.

7a.

7b.

7c.

8a.

8b.

9a.

9b.

9c.

English serpent

Fingering chart for keyless serpent.

Russian bassoon

English bass horn

Ophicleide

Ophicleide part from the fifth movement of Symphonie fantastique by Berlioz .

Last seven measures of the ophicleide part from Symphonie fantastique by Berlioz

Cadenza from the Prelude of the Vaughan Williams Concerto

Opening theme from the Finale of the Vaughan Williams Concerto

Opening theme from the Romanza of the Vaughan Williams Concerto

Contrabass tuba part from Die Wulkilre .

Basstuba part from Parsifal

Opening theme from the first movement of the Hindemith Sonate

Fortissimo section from the second movement of the Hindemith Sonate .

Opening theme from the last movement of the Hindemith Sonate

Page

6

7

10

12

12

17

17

19

19

19

23

23

25

25

26

IX

INTRODUCTION

The name tuba does not in itself define the specific

size, shape, pitch, or tonal concept of an instrument. The

history of the tuba is shorter than that of the other stan-

dard brasses and, perhaps for this reason, there has not

been substantial time for the development of a uniform,

international definition of the term. John Fletcher, cur-

rently tubist with the London Symphony Orchestra, said that

this lack of uniformity has evolved because "different

countries have developed the tuba along their own individual

lines and have created their own playing traditions which

tend to go hand in glove with the instruments.""'" It seems

logical, therefore, that to properly perform a composition

for the tuba it is first necessary to understand the evol-

ution of the instrument and the performance practices of the

country in which the music was composed.

The tuba for which Paul Hindemith (1895-1963) wrote his

Sonate (1943), and the tuba for which Ralph Vaughan

Williams (1872-1958) wrote his Concerto (1954) were very

different instruments, not only in construction but also in

sound. The tuba evolved around two playing traditions, one

in France and the other in Germany. Most other countries

"*"John Fletcher, "Tuba Talk," Sounding Brass and The Conductor, II (Summer, 1973), p. 6l~!

are more or less associated with one of these two major

divisions. Great Britain, Belgium, and Italy tend to more

closely exemplify the French model, while most Eastern

European countries and, to a lesser extent, the Soviet Union

and the United States lean toward the German approach.

To understand this divergence of approach to the tuba,

it is first necessary to examine the ancestors of the

instrument to see how these traditions evolved.

CHAPTER I

ANCESTORS OF THE TUBA

The Serpent

The serpent was the bass member of the cornetto family

but it remained in use long after the smaller members of

this family of instruments had disappeared from the

musical scene. It used a cupped mouthpiece not unlike a

contemporary bass trombone mouthpiece. The conical bore of

this instrument widens at a steady rate from approximately

one-half inch to approximately four inches. The serpent

differed from the other members of the cornetto family in

that it had thinner walls and no thumb hole. It did have

the standard six finger holes and was shaped like an "S" to

bring the finger holes within comfortable reach, and also to

bring the instrument's approximately eight feet of tubing

into a reasonably confined area. Craftsmen constructed most

serpents from wood and covered them with leather to add

strength. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries

the serpent was used primarily to support the choirs in

French churches. The early music historian Charles Burney

(1726-1814) wrote an interesting account of the serpent's

use in France.

In the French churches, there is an instrument on each side [of] the choir, called the serpent, from its

shape, I suppose, for it undulates like one. This gives the tone in chanting, and plays the bass when they sing in parts. It is often ill-played, but if judiciously used would have a good effect. It is, how-ever in general overblown, and too powerful for the voices it accompanies; otherwise, it mixes with them better than the organ, as it can augment or diminish a sound with more delicacy, and is less likely to over-power or destroy by a bad temperament, that perfect one, of which the voice only is capable.... I have always found that but little use is made of the organ in France, even on those days when it is most employed. The serpent keeps the voices up to their pitch, and is a kind of crutch for them to lean on.l

"In spite of its appearance, which has been compared to

a drainpipe suffering from an intestinal disorder, it [ser-

pent] was a highly artistic instrument and was held in great

2

esteem throughout the 16th century." Toward the end of the

eighteenth century the serpent became a standard part of the

military bands in France, England, and the German speaking

countries. During this time there was some experimentation

on the holding position of the serpent and on ways to

strengthen its construction.

The earliest method of holding the serpent was in a

sitting or standing position with the instrument held ver-

tically. Abbe Lunel, serpentist at Notre-Dame de Paris in

the 1770's, devised a method of holding the serpent diag-

onally with the second fold lying over the forearm. It was

not long before the instrument was held almost horizontally.

"'"Charles Burney, Dr. Burney's Musical Tours in Europe, Vol. I (London, 1959), p. 6.

2 Willi Apel, "Cornet," Harvard Dictionary of Music

(Cambridge, 1969), p. 206.

This position was favored by bandsmen as it made marching

with the serpent much more practical. This change in

holding position and the inclusion of the serpent into the

military band necessitated the strengthening of the folds of

the instrument. English craftsmen made serpents with braces

between the folds and included a covering of canvas under

the leather (see figure 1).

Because of the rapid rate of bore expansion, the ser-

pent lacked a well-defined tonal center on certain notes.

This fact is documented in fingering charts which sometimes

offer the same fingering for two adjacent tones (see figure

2). To help correct the intonation problems that arose from

this dilemma, three or four keys were added to the instru-

ment. Music instrument historian R. Morley-Pegge suggested

that the addition of keys may have been responsible for the

deterioration in serpent playing quality.

Good serpent playing depended above all upon good musicianship and a very nice sense of pitch. It is indeed more than probable that the addition of keys in the 19th century led to a deterioration in the quality of the playing rather than to an improvement. Keys encouraged players in the entirely fallacious belief that they cured faulty intonation, whereas of course they had no effect at all on the inherent flexibility of the instrument.3

The quality of serpent playing apparently dropped very

rapidly during the early nineteenth century. In his Trea-

tise on Instrumentation, published in 1844, Hector Berlioz

3 R. Morley-Pegge, "Serpent," Grove's Dictionary of

Music and Musicians, 5th ed., p. 713.

i?

j

4->

Pt| ON

W ^

txQCrt

1

j1

RH <2 ' 3

LH

= = 1 ^ 5 * 5 = 6 5 6 = fop g>

• • • O *

• O O O • O O O O •

• •

• 0

• • 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 #

• o ® o o o o o o ® o o o o o o o o o #

I !>'• » oifo o^o O

Egz:

a o • LH < 2 o o *

V3 o o •

a • • • • o o • • • o # RH * 2 • • • o • o • • • o •

\3 • e 0 o o o • • • o •

tl». 0

Hi {• •

o o o

• o o

o o o

I

o o

o o o

-far

o

o o o

o o o

o o o

• • • • o #

• • • • • •

E L

• o • o o o

o o o o o o

3 #

" I

I

• • o • • • • • • • o •

o • o • o • • • o • • •

Figure 2--Fingering chart for keyless serpent (from R. Schultz, "The Serpent: Its Characteristics, Performance Problems, and Literature," unpublished doctoral disser-tation, School of Music, North Texas State University, Denton, Texas, 1978, p. 16).

8

(1803-1869) had this to say about the serpent:

The truly barbaric tone of this instrument would be much better suited for the bloody cult of the Druids than for that of the Catholic church, where it is still in use--as a monstrous symbol for the lack of under-standing and the coarseness of taste and feeling which have governed the application of music in our churches since times immemorial. Only one case is to be excepted: masses for the dead, where the serpent serves to double the dreadful choir of the Dies Irae. Here its cold and awful blaring is doubtless appropriate; it even seems to assume a character of mournful poetry when accompanying this text, imbued with all the hor-rors of death and the revenge of an irate God.

The serpent was included in some works outside the mil-

itary band and the French Catholic Church. Parts originally

written for serpent can be found in Handel's Music for the

Royal Fireworks (1749), Beethoven's Military March (1816),

Wagner's Rienzi (1842), and several other works up to

approximately the middle of the nineteenth century. One of

the final employments of the serpent is found in Klose's Das

Leben ein Traum (1899). It is very doubtful that there was

a serpentist available to play the part at this late date.

The Russian Bassoon and the Bass Horn

Experimentation with keys led to the development of the

Russian bassoon and the bass horn. Both of these variations

on the serpent were attempts to eliminate its cumbersome

shape. The earliest known attempt to design an upright ser-

pent was in France (ca. 1770) when Regibo, a serpentist

4 Hector Berlioz, Treatise on Instrumentation (New York,

1948), p. 348.

at the church of Saint Pierre in Lille, designed an

instrument in the shape of a bassoon.

The object of straightening and doubling the tube of the serpent was evidently in order to make the instrument more convenient to hold and play while marching, and also to make it generally stronger and more compact, for the curved serpent was neither com-fortable to handle, nor strong.

This new instrument, called the Russian bassoon for no

apparent reason, was usually crafted of wood and had either

three or four keys. Clifford Bevan, tubist and brass his-

torian, suggested that since the crook of the Russian bas-

soon was longer than that of the serpent, "it is possible

that a less abrupt expansion of the bore may have given

slightly more resonance."^ The bell of the Russian bassoon

was often fashioned in the shape of a dragon's head, some-

times with a red tongue that moved back and forth while on

the march. The serpent was replaced by the Russian bassoon

in French and Prussian military bands by the beginning of

the nineteenth century (see figure 3).

About 1790, L. Alexander Frichot, a refugee from France

living in London, developed the English bass horn. The dif-

ferences between this instrument and the Russian bassoon are

slight. The bass horn was often made of metal, although

examples that were constructed of wood are extant. The pri-

mary difference, however, is the way the wing and bell

^Adam Carse, Musical Wind Instruments (London, 1939), p. 277.

£

Clifford Bevan, The Tuba Family (London, 1978), p. 51.

10

w

W

Figure 3--Russian bassoon (from Curt Sachs, The History of Musical Instruments (New York, 1940), p. 423).

11

joints emerge from the butt joint. The two main body parts

of the Russian bassoon are parallel, while the body parts of

the bass horn form a narrow V (see figure 4).

The English bass horn became the standard military band

instrument in England shortly after the beginning of the

nineteenth century and served the same function as the Rus-

sian bassoon did on the continent. Hector Berlioz did not

comment on the bass horn, but made the following obser-

vations regarding the Russian bassoon.

This is a low instrument related to the serpent. Its timbre is not very characteristic, and it lacks steadiness and hence purity of intonation. In my opinion it might be dropped from the family of wind instruments without the least injury to art.... It is to be hoped that they will disappear forever as soon as the bass tuba becomes generally adopted.^

^Hector Berlioz, Treatise on Instrumentation (New York, 1948), p. 348.

12

>3

®

e

o

ftr

i % i (

1?'' "fns il!' ;ti

Figure 4--English bass horn (from Curt Sachs, Handbuch der Musikinstrumentenkunde (Leipzig, 1930), p. 265)~

Figure 5--Ophicleide (from Kathleen Scnlesinger, Instruments of the Modern Orchestra and Early Records of the Precursors of the Violin Family (London, 1969)^ o M )

CHAPTER II

FRENCH AND ENGLISH TUBA TRENDS

The Ophicleide

The most successful instrument to precede the tuba was

the ophicleide. This instrument can be viewed as a fully

keyed improvement of the bass horn. In fact, the name ophi-

cleide means keyed serpent. However, the bore taper makes

it a member of the keyed bugle family. In 1817 Jean-Hilare

Aste, better known as Halary, submitted a group of instru-

ments to the French Academie des Beaux-Arts. This group

consisted of two keyed bugles, one alto ophicleide, one bass

ophicleide, and one contrabass ophicleide. The alto ophi-

cleide disappeared from the musical scene almost immediately,

but the bass ophicleide was quickly adopted into the mili-

tary bands and some opera orchestras (see figure 5).

The bass ophicleide was far superior to the serpent or

its related forms. The ophicleide was equipped with as few

as nine keys and as many as twelve keys. Because the ophi-

cleide was fully keyed, the holes no longer had to be

placed where the fingers could reach them, but could be

placed in their proper acoustical positions. Also, the keys

could be made in the correct proportional size to the bore.

The bore taper of the ophicleide did not expand as rapidly

13

14

as that of the serpent, consequently, the ophicleide had a

superior pitch centering ability. Despite this advantage,

intonation problems still existed.

The ophicleide enjoyed great popularity in France and

England, while the German speaking countries seemed to

ignore it. The popularity of the ophicleide was signifi-

cant in the development of the characteristics of tuba

sound. "The ophicleide was strongly established in France,

more firmly even than in England, and it was many years

before it finally disappeared from the orchestra.... It

appears that the new instrument [tuba] was expected to act

as a substitute rather than a completely new voice in the

orchestral brass section.""'" In fact, the tuba was called

an ophicleide a piston in France. The popularity of the

ophicleide resulted from the fact that despite its inton-

ation problems, it was an acceptable instrument in terms of

technical facility and sound quality.

Because of the quality of the ophicleide, there were

few developmental improvements made to it, and the

improvements made were rather superficial. Keys were added

to improve the intonation of the weaker notes. Modifi-

cations were made near the mouthpiece for the addition of a

tuning slide, and key guards were added. The keys guards

"'"Clifford Bevan, The Tuba Family (London, 1939) , p. 153-154.

15

were necessary to make the instrument more durable in the

military bands.

The ophicleide, for all its robust sound, was by no means a physically strong instrument; the rather thin sheet brass is easily crushed, andothe projecting key-work almost seems to invite damage.

The sound quality of the ophicleide is very important

to an understanding of the development of the tuba. Since

the tuba was viewed as a replacement for the ophicleide, it

must have had a similar timbre.

The sound of the low tones is rough; but in cer-tain cases... [the ophicleide] works miracles. The highest tones are of a ferocious character, which has not yet been utilized appropriately. The medium range, especially if the player is not skilled, recalls too closely the tone of the serpent.^

The tone of the ophicleide, when properly played, is full, resonant, and not unlike that of the euphonium; the instrument is also capable of giving forth pleasant and gentle tones, and should not be supposed... a roaring barbarous monster as is sug-gested by many who have described it after the period of its decline.

The similarity in tone quality between the ophicleide

and the euphonium is further evidenced in Adkins' Treatise

on the Military Band. While discussing the history of the

2 Adam Carse, Musical Wind Instruments (London. 1939).

p. 291.

3 Hector Berlioz, Treatise on Instrumentation (New York.

1948), p. 337.

4 Adam Carse, Musical Wind Instruments (London. 1939).

p. 291.

16

euphonium he stated that "the euphonium superseded the ophi-

cleide in the military band.""*

The ophicleide has been rediscovered in recent years.

It has been used in some commercials and was included in the

score for a B.B.C. television serial (1975).^ Clifford

Bevan made this comment about the ophicleide after hearing a

contemporary performance:

It is not easy to be objective about timbre, but I should describe it as a baritone horn with a modicum of alto saxophone toyround off the edges and add to the fullness of tone.

Considering that the timbre of the ophicleide is simi-

lar to that of the euphonium, a baritone horn or euphonium

would be a well suited substitute for the ophicleide. In

fact, the standard French orchestral tuba until ten or fif-

teen years ago was a six valve instrument pitched in C, a

whole step above the band baritone horn or euphonium. Since

the ophicleide is no longer used and the tubist must

play the parts originally written for it, a euphonium or F

tuba would be an appropriate substitute.

The ophicleide was a technically facile instrument.

This fact is evidenced by the parts that were written for

it (see figures 6a and b). Early tuba players in France and

^H. E. Adkins, Treatise on the Military Band (London, 1945), p. 168.

6

Clifford Bevan, The Tuba Family (London, 1978), p. 71.

7Ibid. , p. 65.

17

Figure 6a--Ophicleide part from the fifth movement of Symphonie fantastique by Berlioz.

fl'T II' lrff n ff

Figure 6b--Last seven measures of the ophicleide part from Symphonie fantastique by Berlioz.

England had to develop considerable technique to perform

parts originally written for the ophicleide.

Saxhorns

In 1843 Adolphe Sax patented a complete family of brass

instruments called saxhorns. These included, in alternating

keys of B fl.at and E flat, instruments from the size of the

piccolo trumpet to the subcontrabass saxhorn pitched an

octave below the standard B flat tuba of the United States.

Many members of the saxhorn family became standard in brass

bands in France and England. From these instruments evolved

the present day baritone horn, euphonium, E flat tuba, and

B flat tuba. The standard orchestral tuba in England today

is the E flat or F tuba with a rather narrow bore similar to

the bore of the saxhorns. This type of tuba blends well

with the small bore French type bassoons, French horns and

18

trombones that are popular in English orchestras. Even

though the F tuba is larger than the tuba used by the French,

the tone quality remains similar to that of the euphonium.

There is some evidence that many orchestral tubists in Eng-

land were also euphoniumists. Clifford Bevan, while

writing about the use of the F tuba in England stated that:

There are two possible reasons for this type of instrument in addition to the criterion of suitability. One is that the ophicleide was well established in the British orchestra. In France, as we have seen, a small tuba thought of as a substitute ophicleide became standard. In England the part written for tuba was often in fact intended to be played on the euphonium.°

John Fletcher, tubist with the London Symphony Orches-

tra, felt there was another reason English players played

both the F tuba and the euphonium.

Any English textbook on orchestration will tell you that the orchestral tuba is pitched in F... and this was certainly the case when I joined the pro-fession in 1964.... A good portion of our finest F players were originally celebrated euphonium players who, when they 'graduated' to an orchestral job, moved to the tuba nearest in pitch to the euphonium. In doing so, they were able to carry their remarkable dexterity and beautiful sound with them.

It seems apparent that the concept of tuba sound in

France and England was and is very similar to what Americans

conceive of as the sound of the euphonium.

^Clifford Bevan, The Tuba Family (London, 1978), p. 166.

9 John Fletcher, "Tuba Talk," Sounding Brass and The

Conductor, II (Summer, 1973), p. 6T~!

19

Vaughan Williams' Choice of Instrument

The Vaughan Williams Concerto for Bass Tuba was written

in England in the English tuba tradition. This suggests that

there are technical and sound influences reminiscent of the

ophicleide and euphonium. The first and third movements of

the concerto contain a great deal of technical writing (see

figures 7a and b). The entire second movement is in a high

Figure 7a--Cadenza from the Prelude of the Vaughan Williams Concerto.

I B 1 7 * ' '

Figure 7b--Opening theme from the Finale of the Vaughan Williams Concerto.

lyric style similar to lyric writing characteristic of

euphonium compositions (see figure 7c).

Figure 7c--0pening theme from the Romanza of the Vaughan Williams Concerto.

20

There is considerable evidence that this work was

written for the F tuba. The term bass tuba in the title was

used to refer to the F or E flat tuba as opposed to the term

contrabass tuba, which "is reserved for tubas... in 16 feet

C or 18 feet B flat."1^ This terminology for specific tubas

was used in England and Germany. The concerto is pitched in

f minor, which makes the technical portions more easily

accessible on the F tuba.

There is some direct evidence as to Vaughan Williams'

choice of tuba for his concerto. Philip Catelinet, the

tubist for whom this concerto was written, worked with

Vaughan Williams while he was composing the work. Mr. Cate-

linet stated that "Ralph Vaughan Williams... always had the

' F1 in mind when writing his orchestral works. And, defi-

nitely the Tuba Concerto was written for that instrument."''"1

It is possible to play this concerto on a larger instrument,

but such a performance would certainly be less characteristic

of the English tradition.

^Adam Carse, Musical Wind Instruments (London, 1939). p. 302.

^Letter from Philip B. Catelinet, tubist for whom Vaughan Williams wrote his concerto, April 6, 1980.

CHAPTER III

GERMAN TUBA TRENDS

Early Tubas

The first modern instrument called a tuba was patented

in 1835 by Wilhelm Wieprecht and Johann Moritz, but this was

not the first valved instrument in the tuba register. In

1828 StOlzel had produced a chromatic bass horn and in 1832

Guichard made his ophicleide a piston. However, the

instrument patented by Wieprecht and Moritz was the proto-

type of the early Prussian band tubas. Wieprecht's

instrument was pitched in F, had five Berliner-pumpen valves

(an early type of piston valve), and was shaped somewhat

like a bassoon. Previous to this time the ophicleide was

the dominant bass register wind instrument in France and

England, while the Russian bassoon served the same function

in the German speaking countries.

Shortly after Wieprecht invented his tuba the rotary

valve was invented by Riedl, the famous Viennese instrument

maker. Within a few years of the invention of the tuba, the

German speaking countries were almost exclusively using

rotary valves while France and England used piston valves.

The delineation of valve types among the European countries

may have had considerable impact on the development of tuba

21

22

performance practices. Although the rotary valve had a

slightly shorter finger stroke, the piston valve was gener-

ally faster, easier to dismantle, and allowed for slightly

easier slurring.^" Within a very few years, the tuba had

completely displaced its predecessors in the German

speaking countries. This was verified by Berlioz while in

Berlin in 1842.

The bass tuba... has completely dislodged the ophicleide in Prussia, if indeed the latter was ever prevalent there, which I doubt. The bass tuba is^ large brass instrument derived from the bombardon and fitted with a mechanism of five rotary valves which gives it an enormous range in the lower register.

The lowest notes of all are a little blurred, it is true; but when doubled an octave higher by another bass tuba, they take on amazing richness and resonance; and in the middle and upper registers the tone is impressively noble, not at all flat like the ophi-cleide' s but full and vibrant and well matched with the timbre of trombones and trumpets, to which it3serves as a true bass, blending perfectly with them.

The tuba did not have to compete with the ophicleide in

the German countries. It was adopted as an independent

instrument, and not as an ophicleide substitute. The Ger-

mans began with tubas in F and E flat, but soon the very

large bore B flat tuba became the standard German band

instrument. This large bore tuba is often characterized by

a very dark and immense tone.

"Kj. Kent Mason, The Tuba Handbook (Toronto, 1977), p. 92.

o Probably an early type of tuba without Berliner-

pumpen valves.

3 Hector Berlioz, The Memoirs of Hector Berlioz, trans-

lated by David Cairns (New York, 19l)97"j p~! 335.

23

Richard Wagner (1813-1883) first introduced the contra-

bass tuba in C into the orchestration for Das Rheingold

(1857), the first opera of Per Ring des Nibelungen (first

performed in its entirety in 1876). In so doing he began

the practice of clearly distinguishing between parts for the

bass tuba in F or E flat, and those for the contrabass tuba

in B flat or C. The principle difference was tessitura (see

figures 8a and b). The parts for contrabass tuba would

ite - > *

Figure 8a--Contrabass tuba part from Die Walktlre (1857)

TP

Figure 8b--Basstuba part from Parsifal (1882)

encompass up to approximately c', while those for the bass

tuba went about a fifth higher. This practice of carefully

differentiating parts was carred out by German composers

until the twentieth century.

Hindemith's Choice of Instrument

The choice of a tuba to play Hindemith's Sonate is not

nearly as simple as in the case of the Vaughan Williams

Concerto. Hindemith did not write his work for a specific

24

person or for a specific occasion, but wrote it to complete

his series of sonatas for the standard orchestral brasses.

The score published by Schott is of no help in choosing the

proper tuba. In the first published edition (1957) the

title read Sonate for Bass Tuba and Piano. The use of bass

tuba in the title suggests that Hindemith had in mind either

the F tuba or the E flat tuba. However, the title on the

4

newest printing is Sonate for Tuba and Piano.

Hindemith's orchestral scores were published by the

same company and, like his sonata, show an inconsistency in

labeling of the tuba parts. About half of the parts are

listed as bass tuba and the other half as tuba. Regardless

of the labeling, the tessitura of all parts consistently

favors the comfortable low register of the contrabass

instrument. Consequently, it seems that Hindemith did not

use the old German tradition of specifying the type of tuba

to be used. Alban Berg (1885-1935) is representative of the

German composers who also abandoned this practice. In Ftlnf Orchesterlieder [1912] there is a part for

'Kontrabass tuba (auch Basstuba)1 to cover a compass of almost three octaves, the lower instrument being asked for in the range of E'-B, the other up to d' flat. But in Lulu [1928-1935] the tubist is expected to cover an extensive range on one instrument.

Another possibility is that Hindemith did not conceive

his sonata in the German tradition. In 1943, when he wrote

4 American Edition A. P. 299, sold through Belwin-Mills

Publishing Corporation.

^Clifford Bevan, The Tuba Family (London, 1978), p. 141.

25

his sonata, he had been living in the United States for

almost four years. The dominant tubas in the United States

used in professional orchestras and in bands were the

instruments pitched in B flat and C. The final decision as

to the correct instrument and sound must be found in the

tessitura of the music.

The range of the Hindemith sonata is definitely within

the compass of the larger contrabass tubas in C or B flat.

More importantly, the mass of sound suggested by the opening

theme of the first movement, the repeated fortissimo

sections of the second movement, and the long expansive

theme of the third movement give strong support to the use

of the large German contrabass tuba (see figures 9a, b, and

c).

Figure 9a--Opening theme from the first movement of the Hindemith Sonate.

Figure 9b--Fortissimo section from the second movement of the Hindemith Sonate.

26

Figure 9c--0pening theme from the last movement of the Hmdemith Sonate.

CONCLUSION

Tuba performance practices in Europe developed around

two playing traditions, one in France and England, and a

second in Germany. The ophicleide enjoyed tremendous popu-

larity in France and England during the early nineteenth

century. Because this instrument was a major competitor

of the tuba in these countries, the newer instrument was

viewed as an ophicleide replacement. Tubists in France

and England had to develop facility and sound quality equiv-

alent to that of the older instrument. In Germany the

tuba's main competitor was the Russian bassoon. At this

same time the serpent and its related forms were in decline,

This lack of popularity with the older instruments pro-

vided an opportunity for the adoption of the tuba in

Germany.

The French and English specialized in small bore, pis-

ton valve tubas that were capable of producing the smooth,

light, euphonium-like quality characteristic of the ophi-

cleide. The Germans used large bore, rotary valve

instruments that produced a massive, dark tone which

blended well with trumpets and trombones.

The differences in concept and construction had con-

siderable effect on how Vaughan Williams and Hindemith con-

ceived their works for tuba. The Vaughan Williams Concerto

27

28

shows influences of the tuba's historical background in

England. This composition presents extreme technical

demands similar to the facility expected on the ophicleide,

and also requires a smooth lyrical quality of sound charac-

teristic of the euphonium. The Hindemith Sonate does not

make extreme technical demands on the performer, but does

require the mass of sound capable on the large bore German

instruments.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Adkins, H. E., Treatise on the Military Band, London, Boosey and Co., 1931, rev. ed. 1945.

Baines, Anthony, editor, Musical Instruments Through the Ages, London, Faber and Faber^ 1966.

Berlioz, Hector, Treatise on Instrumentation, English trans-lation, Theodore Frost, New York, Kalmus, 1948.

Berlioz, Hector, Memoirs, Paris, 1879, ed. in English trans-lation, D. Cairns as The Memoirs of Hector Berlioz, New York, Norton, 1975.

Bevan, Clifford, The Tuba Family, London, Faber and Faber, 1978.

Burney, Charles, Dr. Burney's Musical Tours in Europe, Vol. 1, edited by Percy Scholes, London, Oxford Uni-versity Press, 1959.

Carse, Adam, The History of Orchestration, London, Kegan Paul Trench, Trubner, 1925.

Carse, Adam, Musical Wind Instruments, New York, Da Capo Press, 1965.

Day, James, Vaughan Williams, London, J. M. Dent and Sons. 1961.

Donington, Robert, The Instruments of Music, London,

Methuen and Co., 1949.

Forsyth, Cecil, Orchestration, New York, Macmillan, 1936.

Galpin, Francis, A Textbook of European Musical Instruments, ropt

London, Williams and Norgate, 1937.

Geiringer, Karl, Musical Instruments, Their History in Western Culture From the Stone Age to the Present, New York, Oxford University Press, T3"45.

Kemp, Ian, Hindemith, London, Oxford University Press, 1970.

29

30

Kennedy, Michael, The Works of Ralph Vaughan Williams, London, Oxford University Press, 19o4.

Marcuse, Sibyl, A Survey of Musical Instruments, New York, Harper and Row^ 1975.

Mason, J. Kent, The Tuba Handbook, Toronto, Sonante Publi-cations, 1977.

Mersenne, Marin, Harmonie Universelle, The Books on Instruments, translated by R. Chapman, The Hague, N^hoff, 1957.

Sachs, Curt, Handbuch der Musikinstrumentendunde, Leipzig, Breitkopf & HSrtel, 1930.

Sachs, Curt, The History of Musical Instruments, New York Norton, 1940.

Schlesinger, Kathleen, Instruments of the Modern Orchestra and Early Records o? the Precursors of the Violin Family, London, William Reeves, 1969.

Articles

Bobo, Roger, "Tuba: A Word of Many Meanings," Brass Anthology, Evanston, The Instrumentalist Co., 1976, m-293

Farrington, Frank, "Dissection of a Serpent," Galpin Society Journal, XXII (March, 1969), 81-96.

Fletcher, John, "Tuba Talk," Sounding Brass and The Conductor, II (Summer, 1973), 59-61.

, "More Tuba Talk," Sounding Brass and The Conductor, II (Autumn, 1973), 78-79.

'Even More Tuba Talk," Sounding Brass and The Conductor, II (Winter, 1973-74^ 110-1127

, "Yet Further Tuba Talk," Sounding Brass and The Conductor, III (Winter, 1974-75), 116-117

Morley-Pegge, R., "The Horn and the Later Brass," Musical Instruments through the Ages, edited by Anthony Baines, London, Faber and Faber, 1961.

Morris, R. Winston, "The Tuba Family," Brass Anthology, Evanston, The Instrumentalist Co., 1976, p. 638.

31

Tucci, Robert, "The Tuba in Europe," T.U.B.A. Newsletter, I (Fall, 1973), 1-2.

Encyclopedia Articles

Apel, Willi, "Cornet," Harvard Dictionary of Music, 2nd ed., Cambridge, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1969.

Baines, Anthony, "Tuba," Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 5th ed., London, Macmillan, 1954.

Morley-Pegge, R., "Bass Horn," Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 5th ed., London, Macmillan, 1955.

, "Ophicleide," Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 5th ed., London, Macmillan, 1955*7

, "Russian Bassoon," Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 5th ed., London, Macmillan, 195?.

, "Serpent," Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 5th ed., London, Macmillan, 1954.

Music

Berlioz, Hector, Symphonie fantastique, London, Ernst Eulenburg, Ltd.

Hindemith, Paul, Sonate for Tuba and Piano, Mainz, Schott, 1957.

Hindemith, Paul, Sonate fur Basstuba und Klavier, Edition Schott 4636, Mainz, Schott, 1957.

Vaughan Williams, Ralph, Concerto for Bass Tuba and Orches-tra, London, Oxford University Press, 1979.

Wagner, Richard, Parsifal, Mainz, B. Schott.

Wagner, Richard, Die Walkdre, Mainz, B. Schott.

Unpublished Materials

Catelinet, Philip B., Letter of April 6, 1980.

Schultz, Russ Allan, "The Serpent: Its Characteristics, Performance Problems, and Literature," unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Music, North Texas State University, Denton, Texas, 1978.

32