Just exactly what is a concert Band??

[gander]

The following question is due to my obviously inadequate knowledge of classical musical groups.

As with most trumpet players, I came up through school (high school to be clear) playing in a “Concert Band.” By any one of several names, this basically was a musical construct comprised of wind and percussion instruments. We played everything from marches and melodies to more classical pieces. The string players made up the orchestra. And seldom did the two ever meet. (At least in my school career)

The predominant large-scale classical musical construct is obviously the Symphonic Orchestra. (or whatever the preferred name is) Now that I am on the comeback trail and playing in a community “Concert band” it got me thinking. Are there any truly professional classical “concert bands” or do the strings get front billing in all the classical arena?

I realize that there are small brass groups and such, I am mostly curious in larger groups.

Thanks

Gary

[trumpetchops]

I am in the musicians union and I play in a concert band with other union people. We practice about twice a month if that and we do about three concerts in the winter and about eight in the summer. We are also the duty band at some town ceremony functions.

The band is pretty good and we can get together at a concert and play well. I don't know what the union scale is for these jobs but I think after taxes I get about $50.00 each performance.

I also do concert band stuff with other local bands. I would call them pick up bands. It's never the same people. We would maybe rehearse once or not at all and than perform.

Same pay. Maybe four or five concerts in the summer

[David Oulton]

Bottom of the article in the link discusses the composition of various types of 'bands'...
http://www.simplyinstrumental.com/articles/friends_pk_differences.shtml

But are you asking if there:
a) are professional (i.e. members are paid) concert bands?
b) are concert bands that play mostly 'classical' repertoire?
c) are professional concert bands that play mostly 'classical' repertoire?
d) are pieces of classical music written specifically for 'concert band'?
e) all of the above

The post above answered point a), and we could probably include most military bands into the professional category (when they're sitting and not marching??)

... just curious (I play in a Concert Band with its traditional broad repertoire)

_________________
David
Wild Thing Bb, GR67LX
Kanstul CCT920, GR64P (soon)

[ This Message was edited by: David Oulton on 2004-01-22 18:19 ]

[gander]

In a general sense i'm curious about the entity that is the concert band, but on a more specific note: are any "Concert Bands" on par with the top Symphonies. (I suppose my question was not clear even to me)

Gary

[ This Message was edited by: gander on 2004-01-22 15:49 ]

[ZeroMan]

I'm unsure if there are any "concert bands" that are considered world-class ensembles. However, there are a few non-military bands that have a great reputation.

If we expand the designation to include military bands and "symphonic wind ensembles", then we could list a few ensembles that are truly world class. For example:

The President's Own Marine Band
Netherlands Wind Ensemble
Dallas Wind Symphony

Of course, there is also the Eastman Wind Ensemble. The EWE can't be considered to be professional since its membership is comprised of graduate students and the cream of the crop undergrads at Eastman. But some really good players have come up through that band, and they have recorded extensively under Frederick Fennell and Donald Hunsberger.

[trumpetmike]

Having heard the Dallas Wind Symphony last year (ITG) I will happily give them a great plug - superb group, ranks alongside many orchestras I have heard on the musicality front.

I think what changes is the name - all the top end bands tend to call themselves "Wind Orchestras" "Symphonic Wind Ensembles" and the like.
Somehow I don't think that Fennell conducts the "Eastman Concert Band" would get the same audience response, maybe we are just a little pretentious?

[_PhilPicc]

Whether there are world class concert bands now I don't really know. However in the past there was the Detroit Concert Band under the direction of Leonard B. Smith that was a world renowned organization.

There were also the Sousa and Goldman bands in the past.
_________________
Philip Satterthwaite

We cannot expect you to be with us all the time, but perhaps you could be good enough to keep in touch now and again."
- Sir Thomas Beecham to a musician during a rehearsal

[musicemt]

In a college setting, "concert band", "symphonic band", and other names like that that are used to denote groups of differant ability levels. Here at my school, the order goes like this:

Concert Band (non-majors, BAs, people who have pissed their teachers off ...)
Symphonic Band (undergrads of BME and BMP, really good non-majors)
Wind Ensemble (top-notch undergrads, grad students, etc...)

I've run into this situation at honor band concerts, too..."symphonic" seems to denote a higher level of ability and tougher music. I don't know where it originates, but that's the way it is here in KY....

Ben
_________________
"Imitation, assimilation, innovation"
-Clark Terry

Zeus Guarnerius
Bach C 239 w/ Blackburn pipe/slide
Weril Regium flugelhorn
Yamaha 14B4-GP
Yamaha Shew-lead

[Strawdoggy]

Interesting topic.

Like one poster mentioned, I think universities use the different names to denote the ability level of the ensemble.

I have always thought that a Concert Band was a bigger group with extended instrumentation.

I think the original concept of the "Wind Ensemble" was to take the winds out of an orchestra, add a small sax section and extend the bottom of the clarinets. A small ensemble with one to a part.

Now, many colleges seat a huge group on stage and call it a wind ensemble. ---?

[Nonsense Eliminator]

In a lot of educational situations, "Wind Ensemble" simply means the top band. However, that term is also very often used to denote a smaller wind band with fewer players per part -- sometimes only one.

[I see Strawdoggy has beaten me to the punch on this one, while I was composing. That's what I get for being so long-winded...]

I think it is fair to say that there are no wind bands that operate on the same level as the New York Philharmonic or the London Symphony Orchestra. There are a number of very good military bands in the US and elsewhere that attract players who might otherwise have decent careers in the orchestral field, and there are a handful of civilian organizations that are very good as well. Historically, wind bands have been more populist in nature than than orchestras. Their main uses were military and "light" music. In the first half of the 20th century, there were many professional bands that were quite well-known. Their repertoire primarily consisted of orchestral transcriptions and virtuoso solos. Consequently, it has only been in the last 50 years or so that there has been much serious original music for band, and even now the bulk of band music is the paint-by-numbers crap churned out for high schools.

There are a few original pieces for band that are good music by any standard, but not very many. Because the repertoire is highly inadequate compared to the orchestral repertoire -- or even the brass band repertoire -- wind bands are severely limited in the stature they can achieve. It is hard to attract listeners to come and hear a band play some mediocre original music and a few transcriptions when you can go down the street and hear an orchestra play Brahms or Beethoven. There are few great works for band, so there aren't many great bands (and most of the best ones tend to focus on lighter repertoire), so composers aren't inclined to write for band, and around and around it goes. Fundamentally, part of the problem may be that there is really very little a band can do that an orchestra can't, but having a string section opens up a lot of possibilities that are unique to the orchestra. Composers like having lots of colours to paint with, so working within the limitations of a band is not always an attractive prospect, especially combined with the rather lowbrow connotations of writing for wind band.

[ This Message was edited by: Nonsense Eliminator on 2004-01-23 13:27 ]

[pjtpt]

I agree with NE up to a point: the reason that bands are considered "lesser" is because they are a relatively late arrival--orchestras have a few hundred years head start. BUT, there has been a very large and sustained musical output for band that has outpaced new writing for full orchestra. Another organization that has, suprisingly, not been mentioned is the University of North Texas Wind Symphony (yet another classification) under the direction of Eugene Corporon. His organization of and leading of the Klavier Wind Project (which also includes recording from the Cincinnati Conservatory Wind Ensemble) has been a boon to wind music. I don't have the exact count but I think the Klavier project has put out around 20 CDs most of which are new music. There are many, I believe, definitive recordings of cornerstone band works: Holst, Grainger, Persichetti, Schwantner, etc., etc., etc. I would make a large wager that this new writing is performed more often than new writing for orchestra because of the existence of top-notch high school and university groups. Furthermore there are many more of these groups than professional orchestras. Am I saying that these bands are better than the professional orchestras? No. Am I saying that this music is better than the canon of orchestra literature? No(apples and oranges). Is there more innovation and creativity at the moment in band music than orchestra music? Almost certainly.

As for the aforementioned notion of "color" and that orchestras have a wider palate to choose from I challenge that assumption. Again, if you listen to some of these new works for Wind Symphony I think it would be impossible for an orchestra to duplicate. The use of the lower saxes, lower clarinets, Euphonium, and expansive (expensive?) percussion writing more than balances the scales. Some may say, "why would they want to?" They may not but again, in terms of creative, innovative writing in the latter 20th century up until now I would rather hear new "band" music than new orchestra music.

[musicemt]

Just a question, NE....where would you place the work of Percy Grainger in the wind ensemble literature? I'm not familiar with the background of it, and it seems so orchestral at times that I almost wonder if it's a transcription. Any thoughts?

Ben
_________________
"Imitation, assimilation, innovation"
-Clark Terry

Zeus Guarnerius
Bach C 239 w/ Blackburn pipe/slide
Weril Regium flugelhorn
Yamaha 14B4-GP
Yamaha Shew-lead

[pjtpt]

Grainger wrote for all types of ensembles but the Wind Ensemble folks claim him as their own. He would re-work ("dish-up") his works for many types of groups and even had "elastically scored" music for ensembles of varying instrumentation. He was one of the pioneers of wind band music in the early 20th century. He even played saxophone in one of the army (?) bands at one point. His Lincolnshire Posy was an original band work and completed in 1937. Shepherd's Hey was set for band in 1918 (band first?). Colonial Song was originally for 2 voices, harp and full orchestra (1912) and set for band in 1928. Irish Tune from County Derry was first a 5 part mixed chorus (1902) but saw many incarnations for band, orchestra, orchestra w/chorus. If you have the inclination listen to 2 versions of the Irish tune, the standard band version and then the highly chromatic version from 1923(?). The first is sad, the second is almost torturedly so. Some versions have this with full orchestra, chorus and organ--Goosebumps galore!

As for the question "who does Grainger belong to, band or orchestra"? The band people would say band and I don't think he's very prominant in the orchestra world to warrant claiming. The band world would be much poorer with out his music (original or not). I read a quote somewhere that Grainger thought of himself as being a choral writer first! His choral works are wonderful. He got his start of course as a concert pianist. I would just characterize him as a musician, iconoclast, and as most biographies say somewhere "a rugged individualist".

[Strawdoggy]

I know that we are now taking this thread around a bend in the road, but I want to ring in on this topic again.

What NE said comparing the repetoire of wind bands to orchestras is quite true. How many people you stop on the street could give you the name of a great composer of band music (other than Sousa) ? Hopefully, the citizen of average intelligence could come up with the names of at least a few composers of great orchestral works. It is also hard to argue with the opinion that orchestras have more flexibility with tone color (note that I do not use a "u" in that spelling) . The size (depth) of the woodwinds and brasswinds is the main difference. To add to what NE had to say - it is like having A LOT of red and blue paint on you pallet, but no yellow (strings). Some may disagree - feel free to do so.

That being said, I believe in the next few decades this will change as composers of wind band music augment the literature available to these groups. I can only hope.

I do have one preference of bands over orchestras..... Marches!!!! To me, an orchestra sounds good playing a march, but a good band sounds great! . It just sounds more "military" and authoritative coming from a band.

Now, NE, you have hurt my feelings with the comment about composers considering writing for band "low brow". I have just finished an arrangement for Concert band. Here's what's worse - it is a trumpet feature! Now I am going to cry. When I am finished sobbng, I will pull myself together and add a string bass part to double the tuba. Perhaps throw in some violas to double the alto saxes!

Steve

[ This Message was edited by: Strawdoggy on 2004-01-24 17:06 ]