Salute to Youth. Parts nightmare

Discussion in 'The Rehearsal Room' started by Flicks and Elbows, Feb 16, 2009.

  1. I am not blaming anyone, I really am not. Music publishing is a business we all should be thankful for, cos handwritten manuscript parts on the whole (with notable exceptions) are a nightmare.
    I am also very grateful to whoever, wherever, went through the parts to the new edition of Salute to Youth to find the five pages of errata that have just arrived at bands doors (some not all had been spotted very quickly I am sure).
    There are however some that have not been spotted, certainly score crescendi and part crescendi do not match in places. They may be roughly in the same bar but some start on different notes and go on for longer etc. There are also 5 beat bars in the baritone part and I could go on.
    Surely though in 2009, there must be some sort of technology or checking system that avoids 5 sheets of errata that however you do it take an age to implement?
    For those who have checked each part meticulously you will find that there needs to be an errata sheet for the errata!
    I am pleased that a musical icon in Salute to Youth has been re-aired it is a truly fabulous piece, but just wish I could spend my time rehearsing the band on the music and not confusing them referring to bar numbers that are wrong or parts that dont exist, or trying to work out if the 3rd note of bar 641 in th 2nd Baritone really is a B flat.
    Sorry its Monday, but does anyone feel the same.
  2. Bar 641

    Before anyone says anything I know the 2nd baritone part does not have 641 bars.
  3. You need to speak up about the mistake

    Going back a few weeks ago I contacted Alan Hope who is on the music panel for the pieces for the areas regarding the errors in this piece and asked whether Studio Music would be issuing a list of errata for this music. I was told that they would look into this and was then informed that they were re-proofing the music.

    Since this the erratas have been issued and have today been told by Alan Hope that I am the only person who has raised any queries regarding this.

    If you have queries they should be raised with Alan Hope whose email address is because unless you speak up nothing will be done as I was told by Studio Music that this music was 40 years old and they had anyone questions any mistake in the piece at all.

    Christine Wilson
    Stannington Brass Band
  4. westburykid

    westburykid Member

    Our parts are the 2nd worst I have ever seen. Notes wrong, missing dynamics, bar numbers in the wrong place etc....

    Worst ever must be Ballet for the Perfect Fool some years back in the 1st section finals. Nightmare.
  5. Further ideas

    A better suggestion is - if you have any complaints regarding the mistakes in the music would be to contact your Regional Secretary to ask them to contact the music panel on your behalf regarding the problems.

    Christine Wilson
    Secretary - Stannington Brass Band
  6. scotchgirl

    scotchgirl Active Member

    The baritone parts are terrible...extra beats in some bars, missing beats in others, tempo markings completely wrong, tempo markings/missing/in the wrong bars, wrong notes all over the place....really bad.

    I went through my part highlighting all the queries and it looked like I'd rewritten it....ridiculous....considering how much this stuff costs to buy!
  7. old warrior

    old warrior New Member

    There isn't much point in speaking with Alan Hope because all he says is that he has a lot of sympathy with you and your band. He then goes on to say that it is not the responsibility of the music panel to either check the score or parts for any errors before selcting a test piece nor is it their responsibilty to check that the erratars are correct.

    He then says contact the publisher direct and sort it out yourself!
  8. WoodenFlugel

    WoodenFlugel Moderator Staff Member

    We get this every year - James Cook last year, Images of the Millennium a few years before, the list goes on and on.

    Trouble is that brass band music accounts for a small percentage of most publisher's sales, so they are not really going to volunteer their time and money cross checking the parts, and until someone either does it independently or the music panel take it upon themselves to ensure the parts are up to scratch we'll get this problem year after year.

    Incidentally after having to endure a few real dogs in terms of part quality over recent years, I have to say the parts for Pentacle are refreshingly well published.
  9. I appreciate that Brass band music is a minority sale. But when there are 100+ bands playing the piece and admittedly not all will invest in a set because a lot of the 'Big Boys' will have one there still must be 60 bands buying a set at £40 a 'pop'. This time I think it is different as the piece has been untouched but older pieces usually have new perc parts which means that even those that have a set have to make some investment. The publishers do have a monopoly and whilst this certainly is not a dig at Studio in any way shape or form, perhaps if it ever got to the stage where regional test pieces (as these have the largest amount of bands playing them, so may be the only ones that are economically viable) were all offered by two publishing houses then we may well see a rapid increase in the quality of what is on offer! Not only in terms of mistakes but in terms of readability of some pieces too. Perhaps the days of multi-parts all on one stave (where you need a degree in cartography) would go too!
  10. bigE

    bigE New Member

    Why is there so many mistakes in the piece. I have played Salute To Youth on quite a few occasions in the past 20+ years, the second movement being my all time favourite slow movement in banding, and i can never remember there being many, if any problems with the parts in the times I and other bands have used the piece.

    Could it be, once again that publishers either cannot be bothered to check things when doing prints, or is it that they copy the original parts onto a computer using a certain well known piece of music software which quite often makes mistakes by itself, and the publishers have neither the time or the ability to put them right before they print.

    I suspect that the term "an easy way to make money out of bands" won't be far wrong
  11. jockinafrock

    jockinafrock Active Member

    Tried telling my MD that the split notes were errata but he wouldn't wear it... :eek:
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2009
  12. KMJ Recordings

    KMJ Recordings Supporting Member

    I don't know the answer to this, but is it really a new edition or just a reprint?

    Indeed there is, as I'm sure you know. It just involves real amounts of time to do it, an appropriate computerised notation system and someone who can proof read properly. The last one is the crux of this - it's not an easy thing to do, but then if it's your job you should do it properly.

    This is a double edged sword.

    For older pieces that may even be photocopies in some cases of error riddled originals, it shouldn't be allowed.

    However, if you look at the amount of time it actually takes to publish something properly from taking the original manuscript, inputting into the appropriate system, printing it and then error checking it until you're sure that it's error free....oh, and remembering to take out the monies payable to the composer....oh, and the cost of goods.....take the remainder of the 'profit' and divide by the number of hours it takes....and you'll find it's not much and you'll probably be better stacking shelves or flipping burgers. Of course, as was said elsewhere, the area sales are (almost) guaranteed (unless the piece is too hard ;) ).....but then if the publishers put this amount of time and effort into a 3 minute march as well that only sells 4 copies then more of the potential 'profit' from the testpiece has to subsidise the march....and for me the cost is justified by the effort.

    It's an interesting circle.

    I've not visited the Pentacle thread recently wrt errata, but IMO the overwhelming success story (so far) of this Area contest is The Once and Future King (Baker / Jagrins). AFAIK there are no errors in the score....the only criticism from here is that it was ink jet printed and was potentially smudgeable. Let's think about that one as well - the implication is that each set is individually printed. That's advantageous in itself in several respects - the main one for me is that it means that if errors are detected they can be corrected for the next future sale (and not when you've sold the 150 you had to have from the printers or whatever). Obviously there are also lower upfront fees to be paid which could potentially result in lower prices as there are less overheads to cover.

    I think there's an excellent idea in there.

    The issue I'd have is with who they'd potentially choose.
  13. KMJ Recordings

    KMJ Recordings Supporting Member

    I should, of course, have qualified that as being appropriate to new compositions.
  14. towse1972

    towse1972 Active Member

    20 minutes wasted in rehearsal correcting this appauling print. Absolutely shocking quality. Not a hint of an apology from the publishers either.
  15. Anno Draconis

    Anno Draconis Well-Known Member

    Rhetorical question:

    If Studio did the following in response to the errata fuss:
    • Paid a professional editor with a solid background in banding and a more than passing familiarity with Vinter's music (and there aren't many of them),
    • Went back to GV's original manuscript and notes,
    • Re-typeset it all
    • Generated a new "modern" edition (as has been done with Bach, Handel etc in the last 30 years) and printed new sets
    • Scrapped/recycled all the old sets still with distributors
    and then gave bands the choice of

    a) buying a new set of score/parts or
    b) downloading an errata sheet for free;

    how many bands would choose (a) and thereby make it worth Studio's investment?

    Bearing in mind that STY is still in copyright, and that royalties are therefore presumably payable to Vinter's estate, Keith's point above applies - for the publisher, the juice ain't worth the squeeze from a business point of view, even taking potential loss of goodwill into account. Only if bands were obliged to buy a "new" set for the contest would it become economically viable to correct the score, and I can just imagine the fuss about "thieving publishers ripping off bands" if that happened ;)

    Don't get me wrong, I'm totally on board with the "error-free music" thing - and it's gratifying that the work Gareth and I did proofing "Once and Future King" seems to be paying off and proving that it's possible - but it's interesting to note that some of the first posts in the "Once and Future King" thread were complaining about the cost of the music and comparing it unfavourably with the cost of "The Talisman" which is cheaper but has more errors. :rolleyes:
  16. KMJ Recordings

    KMJ Recordings Supporting Member

    How about you counterbalance the sums this way........

    Invest in new set of error free parts £60 - £100.

    Not having to waste a full rehearsal correcting parts with conductor = £xyz???????
  17. jondaw

    jondaw New Member

    The onus must surely rest with the 'Music Panel' to ensure that the parts & score have been proof read before any piece is selected for the Areas & the Finals.

    (Edited as requested by poster)
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2009
  18. KMJ Recordings

    KMJ Recordings Supporting Member

    Not sure I agree with that.

    I'd much prefer the Music Panel to stick with picking the appropriate music. IMO it's the publisher's responsibility to get it right....or as near to right as it can be.

    I also think that repeat offenders (and there are a few) who keep issuing music that is error strewn (and in a lot of cases full of completely avoidable errors) shouldn't be used...maybe a two or three strikes and you're out system in order for them to get their act together.

    The issue with that could be if a composer is under contract with a particular publisher, although I'm not sure how common that is, which could take their music out of contention.....that said if I had a publisher who was cocking up my work I'd have my own issues with them ;)
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2009
  19. themusicalrentboy

    themusicalrentboy Active Member

    or dock the pay they get per error, something reasonable - say £1k per mistake. I'm sure there wouldn't be any if you said that ;)
  20. KMJ Recordings

    KMJ Recordings Supporting Member

    Flippant statements get you everywhere :rolleyes:

Share This Page