Why not brass quartet?

[stevel]

I know WW 5tets and Brass 5tets are pretty common, and I would go so far as to say they're the analog of the String 4tet, but why?

Why does it take 5 instruments to equal the strings' 4? !

I haven't encountered many WW 4tets, but I know of Eliot Carter's piece for that ensemble.

What about Brass Quartet? Any brass players out there can give me their experiences with this?

Any insight as to why 5 instead of 4 (or 3 or 6 for that matter) became the established norm for these groups (WW too if you can add)?

I've written for String Orchestra as a 4tet - but not Vn I, Vn II, Va, and Vc and DB doubled, but as Vn, Va, Vc, and DB. So i like to try to mix up ensembles a bit from "standard", and have thought about WW and Brass 4tets instead of 5tets (though I've heard of more trios of both).

Any reason why the 5tet has become favored?

Best,
Steve

[reith]

Interesting - I wrote a Woodwind Quartet for people available to me except it was too difficult (from the endurance angle besides being rhythmically complex). For Flute, Cor Ang, Clarinet and Bassoon.

I've been trying to simplify it and make a mock-up using samples so that if I can get the bunch together again, it would help with the rhythmic stuff at least.

So I suppose it's tradition - string quartet, brass- wind- quintet, and since there's an established repertoire they tend to hunt as a groups. No reason to stick to that, though.

Reith

[Boneman]

Surprisingly enough there are loads of Brass Quartets, one just has to know where to look for them. I think that with them it is more of a case of balance between instruments. (A quartet with 2 trumpets and two tubas!) Also to acheive the register that one gets with a sting quartet with a brass quartet will always need the five instruments to be successful.

[Thorolf]

I think it has a lot to do with backgrounds: The original strings orchestra is essentially much like a vocal choir, and the string quartet is basically a scaled-down version of this. Then comes natural development by adding double bass to double the cello part, and eventually this became independent due to bigger and more modern ideas, and development of the double bass itself, with added agility.

As with the choir, the traditional ideal is maximum sonical egality and blend. This comes naturally with the string quartet (2-1-1-0), but needs some extra attention in the (1-1-1-1) setting. Also, practicalities play an important part: Violin players outnumber viola players by many orders of magnitude, and the same with cellists versus double bass players.

Enter the brass quintet: The brass quintet (1-2-1-1 horn first) is essentially a transformation of the developed string choir idea, hence its five parts. But if you try to meddle with it, the troubles immediately emerge: Omitting the Tuba leaves the trombone with a bass role that seldom sounds right: Not round enough, and dry in the setting. This can be alleviated by reintroducing an ephonium (essentially a tenor tuba) in the place of the trombone, but then you get a non-standard instrument from the symphony orchestra point of view. Taking away a trumpet on the other hand extracts too much power from the top, and the setting gets bottom heavy. And taking away horn or trombone makes the tuba blend much less. A quartet with two trumpets, and two horns is sonically satisfying, but craves a lot of the 2. horn player, and will generally lack some power. Two trumpets and two trombones makes the trumpets sound too thin. So, building a quartet from the symphony orchestra brass instruments, will always be deficient in some way.

If you, on the other hand, enter the world of brass band instruments, you will find a lot of obvious contenders to the string quartet, an obvious one being two cornets, alto horn and euphonium. Other possibilities include trumpet, horn, trombone and euphonium, etc. etc.

So you’ll just have to choose: Who do you write for? And do you need the sonic ideals of a string quartet transferred to the brass quartet?



Regards

[stevel]

Originally Posted by Boneman

Surprisingly enough there are loads of Brass Quartets, one just has to know where to look for them. I think that with them it is more of a case of balance between instruments. (A quartet with 2 trumpets and two tubas!) Also to acheive the register that one gets with a sting quartet with a brass quartet will always need the five instruments to be successful.

I was hoping you'd pipe in on this one!

What do you think about the following cobinations Boneman - problems, concerns, practicality, etc.:

2 Tr, 2 Hn
2 Hn, 2 bone
2 Hn, 2 Tuba
1 Tr, 1, Hn, 1 Bone, 1 Tuba

2 Tr, 1 bone, 1 Tuba
2 tr 1 Horn, 1 Tuba

Any other combinations you can think of,? Better combos than I've listed. Seems to me, registrally speaking, one would need the trumpet, and then either bone or tuba could make a solid bottom - but what about the middle?

I see your point about matching the register that string 4tet gets - but what if you don't want to match that - is there a registral space that 4 instruments might be able to cover effectively?

I know there are certainly Tuba choirs, and I'm sure there are plenty of arrangements for things like 4 trumpets, 4 horns, 4 bones, etc. I'm looking for mixtures though.

Thanks,
Steve

[stevel]

Originally Posted by Thorolf

I think it has a lot to do with backgrounds: The original strings orchestra is essentially much like a vocal choir, and the string quartet is basically a scaled-down version of this. Then comes natural development by adding double bass to double the cello part, and eventually this became independent due to bigger and more modern ideas, and development of the double bass itself, with added agility.

As with the choir, the traditional ideal is maximum sonical egality and blend. This comes naturally with the string quartet (2-1-1-0), but needs some extra attention in the (1-1-1-1) setting. Also, practicalities play an important part: Violin players outnumber viola players by many orders of magnitude, and the same with cellists versus double bass players.

Enter the brass quintet: The brass quintet (1-2-1-1 horn first) is essentially a transformation of the developed string choir idea, hence its five parts. But if you try to meddle with it, the troubles immediately emerge: Omitting the Tuba leaves the trombone with a bass role that seldom sounds right: Not round enough, and dry in the setting. This can be alleviated by reintroducing an ephonium (essentially a tenor tuba) in the place of the trombone, but then you get a non-standard instrument from the symphony orchestra point of view. Taking away a trumpet on the other hand extracts too much power from the top, and the setting gets bottom heavy. And taking away horn or trombone makes the tuba blend much less. A quartet with two trumpets, and two horns is sonically satisfying, but craves a lot of the 2. horn player, and will generally lack some power. Two trumpets and two trombones makes the trumpets sound too thin. So, building a quartet from the symphony orchestra brass instruments, will always be deficient in some way.

If you, on the other hand, enter the world of brass band instruments, you will find a lot of obvious contenders to the string quartet, an obvious one being two cornets, alto horn and euphonium. Other possibilities include trumpet, horn, trombone and euphonium, etc. etc.

So you’ll just have to choose: Who do you write for? And do you need the sonic ideals of a string quartet transferred to the brass quartet?



Regards

Thanks for the good info Thorolf - I left it all above for other readers. I see your point about the "missing" parts of balance. Yes, I don't want to build one from orchestral instruments - I forgot to mention Baritone and Euphonium etc. I think your point about the Wind/Band ensemble is a better one for a non-traditional Brass Quintet.

Boneman, if you're reading this, please include the potentials of Euphonium etc. in the combinations I mentioned.

And no, I don't want the sonic ideals of a String 4tet transferred to brass - I'd be more concerned about balance, and practicality.

Ok, another post...

[stevel]

Ok, let's approach this from this angle:

Given four brass instruments, what would be practical mixed combinations (1+3, 2+2, 4 different types) and their registral (low range, meium range, limited range, full range, etc.) and sonic qualities (dark, bright, intense, etc.)

Thanks,
Steve

[Thorolf]

Some ideas for balanced quartets:

2 Tp, 1 Hn, 1 Euph
2 Cn, 1 Ah, 1 Euph
1 Tp, 1 Hn, 1 Bone, 1 Euph
1 Tp, 2 Hn, 1 Bone (hey that’s Symph Orch compatible!)
2 Hn, 2 Bone (this one too!)
2 Hn, 1 Bone, 1 Euph
2 Euph, 2 Tuba

Try to envisage the “two depths”, one register-wize, and one for sonical depth:

Tp, Bone: Foreground instruments, may be thin/dry
Cornet/Euphonium/Tuba: Full instruments, with sonical depth, but sometimes vanishing behind foreground instruments.
Horn: Background instrument, always full, but with little edge by itself. Needs space and/or upper register to come through in its own soloistic right.

The ingedients are all there: Cook away!



Regards

[Gryvix]

You are forgetting the Flügelhorn, it is like the glue between cornet and Tenorhorn. As the bariton is the glue between tenorhorn and euphonium.
Oh cornet and Fr. Horn mingle quite well also, after all they are close related.
I think the smoothest, most intimate you should try cnt, Flh, TH and Bar.
If you want range, you might want Sop Cnt., Cnt Tenorhorn and Bb Bass/Euph.
String quartets don't have the contrabass usually, so literally translate it it would be Cnt I Cnt II TH and Euph.

[Thorolf]

Good points, Gryvix! I admit flatly that the Fh was out of my head when I made my list! But the different bores of the Horn/Tuba thingy in Bb, (Tenor Horn, Baritone Horn, Euphonium) was not… I just know that the local differences in availability and emphasis, and even terminology!, are very different across the globe, and that I have yet to see a symphonic band score who differentiates between these varieties… even if the same scores have separate parts for 3 trumpets/cornets and 3 bugle/flügelhorns! So this is a hard core brass band topic, and not always given emphasis even there!

This is why I hinted that what I was talking about was the wide bore variety (“essentially a Tenor Tuba”), as the differences between this one and the trombone is both recognized, robust, and pronounced, whereas the sonic differences between the Tenor Horn in Bb and the Tenor Trombone in Bb are on the specialist, subtle side.

Regards