Regionals 2008: First Section Test Piece: James Cook – Circumnavigator

Discussion in 'The Adjudicators' Comments' started by Di, Sep 30, 2007.

  1. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    - re:sextuplets

    - I've been listening to my recordings of JCC, and the variation of these sextuplet groupings in euphs/baris is wide. Has any band who has contested with the piece previously been criticised for the way these sextuplets have be sub-grouped (into 2s or 3s)???
  2. Accidental

    Accidental Supporting Member

    Had a bit of a eureka moment with the 6s on Monday - I'd been doing pretty much everything in 3s, but we tried the beginning in 2s and it was soooo much easier! I have no idea why, but it made a massive difference :-?
    We're (euphs/baris) doing most of it in 2s now, except the 'seasick' bit under the main tune.
  3. Apart from 3 notes it looks like the same flugel part as the old one (as far as I could tell, before I passed the whole lot over to JR!). Anyway, we've sorted out what we're doing now which is a relief!
  4. zak

    zak Member

    Am I missing something here but why can't they be played in groups of 6???? :confused:

    I must confess to not having played the piece much but they are they not marked as groups of 6? I have not had a problem feeling the pulse of the music playing in groups of 6 and the bands I have listened to rehearsing the piece are playing in groups of 6.

    In my opinion it is quite obvious on the trained ear to notice a change in the groupings hence changing the pulse of the music.

    Surely altering it is over complicating things?????
  5. leisa

    leisa Active Member

    Does it not have the sextuplets then? we werent sure whether that was just on the score or actually meant to be in.
    Thanks Paul
  6. Will the Sec

    Will the Sec Active Member

    One Bander's solution is another's head shaker, Shaun.
  7. tpcornet12

    tpcornet12 Member

    On the 6s - if you were tongueing them as two 3s you would triple, as 6s you would double - hence three sets of 2. It doesn't have to change the pulse of the music but thinking that way can get you out of the temptation to triple them! - which would be very noticable.
  8. Accidental

    Accidental Supporting Member

    Shaun & tp, I was responding to several previous posts about the sextuplets - very few people can play a group of 6 completely even, they tend to 'think' of them as 2 3s or 3 2s. Its not about changing the tonguing or the pulse, its just that some people find changing the way you think about them can make them easier to play.
  9. Bryan_sop

    Bryan_sop Active Member


    Someone in our band (not me I hasten to add!!) has lost our copy of the errata. Is there any nice person out there that could possibly scan and send me it? Peter, our conductor wants it for the weekend and I've just cycled a 10 mile round trip to the bandroom to hunt for it!

    I would be most grateful if anyone could mail it to me at and if you're at Stevenage I'll get you a pint!
  10. Accidental

    Accidental Supporting Member

    tbh Bryan I wouldn't worry about it - we abandoned our errata because 90% of the it didn't apply to the parts anyway! Its mostly mistakes in the score which can be amended with reference to the new (virtually unreadable) one. :rolleyes:
    Last edited: Feb 29, 2008
  11. GJG

    GJG Well-Known Member

    ... which, in itself is an unreliable reference source, still containing as it does many of the original errors, and worse, having introduced new errors ...
  12. Bryan_sop

    Bryan_sop Active Member

    Got one sorted now! Panic over!
  13. Angoose

    Angoose Member

    I think there was only one error we had to correct, I think that was the flugel or rep part. But as recently mentioned the score seems to be the only one with more holes than a sieve.
  14. zak

    zak Member

    Why would you have to tongue a group of 6 in duplets?????

    Groups of 6 are marked as that for a purpose, not to triple or play 3 sets of 2. Play them evenly in 6's, simple as that. These notes in the piece as far as I can remember are all slurred unless I am mistaken which would be easier to play an even group of 6 anyway.

    I am somewhat bemused by the suggestion that a group of 6 notes cannot be played other than in triplets or duplets!! And yes it most certainly does change the pulse of the music I'm afraid in my opinion.

    Just my 2 penneth

  15. GJG

    GJG Well-Known Member

    I'm sorry, I think you're wrong. I'm well aware of the theoretical basis of your argument, but in practice it makes a difference as to the underlying pulse. If the sextuplets are written above a basic pulse that is predominantly [duplet] quaver movement in 4/4 time, then it is natural to 'think' the sixes in two groups of three. If, however the sextuplets are written above a basic pulse that is predominantly triplet quaver movement in 4/4 time, then that effectively makes the pulse more akin to 12/8 time, in which case the sixes must be necessity be 'felt' in three groups of two. The fact is that in significant portions of 'JC' the pulse is really 12/8, even though the written time signature is 4/4. Yes, the trombones have duplet quaver movement against it, but the overall feel is still 12/8. If the semiquaver movement in the euph's/bari's is to feel natural, then it must, by definition have a 12/8 feel to it, which effectively means that they are no longer actually sextuplets but are in fact ordinary semi's in 12/8 time, which would naturally be played with a "3 groups of 2" feel. Of course, there are other passages in JC where this does not apply, which is why the Euph./bari. parts in particular are quite challenging to play.

    [NB: Note to my euph./bari. section: no way am I accepting any of the above as any kind of excuse for your not playing in time ... ]
  16. zak

    zak Member

    Sorry but we will have to agree to disagree on this one. Nothing to do with theories or anything, if I play a group of 6 either fast or slow I do not think 2's or 3's just 6 even notes!!! And yes it will alter the pulse.

    Perhaps I have been playing wrong for the past 30 odd years??? :confused:



  17. GJG

    GJG Well-Known Member

    So, forgive me if I'm misunderstanding, but you're admitting that you play your part without listening to, or heeding what's going on around you ... ?
  18. helen_euph

    helen_euph Member

    Obviously!!! :rolleyes: He doesn't do too badly though for someone who doesn't listen! I think you know full well that thats not the case and are just being difficult. I think the suggestion to agree to disagree was a sensible one!

    Can't help myself saying though that i'm thinking 123456 123456 123456 etc as i'm playing the sextuplets. Maybe I'm right, maybe not!

    Anyway, back to JC....
  19. zak

    zak Member

    I won't lower myself to reply at your sarcastic level. Obviously I don't listen or heed parts around me, perhaps I must try better in future, then perhaps I might play at a higher level, thanks so much for your worldy/much experienced advice!!

    Not debating this point anymore with you at this childish level.


  20. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    I'll pinpoint the areas of concern. First place is the Molto sostenuto when the tempo drops to crotchet=70 after the introduction. Bars are in 4/4 and baris/euphs (playing sextuplets) support the melodic line (which is written in triplet notation). This can be played in straight sixes without problems. It's when the bassline playing sixes starting at bar 25 that the boat starts rocking. Traditionally the groups are subdivided and played in triplets although there is no indication that they should (as each group of 6 is clearly notated as such).

Share This Page