National Championships of Great Britain - Qualifying Bands - Championship Section [Archive]

18.03.2007, 12:17

National Brass Band Championships

Saturday, 20th October, 2007

The Royal Albert Hall

http://www.mjncolston.co.uk/projects/projimg/royalalbert1.jpg

http://www.themouthpiece.com/images/champsection.gif

Draw:

1. Hepworth (Cookson Homes)
2. EYMS
3. YBS
4. Desford
5. Aveley & Newham
6. Fodens Richardson
7. Reg Vardy
8. Kirkintilloch
9. Mount Charles
10. BTM
11. Cory
12. Polysteel
13. Black Dyke
14. Redbridge
15. Leyland
16. Staffordshire
17. Whitburn
18. Grimethorpe
19. Tredegar
20. Brighouse & Rastrick

jonesbp

19.03.2007, 14:15

Wow. Looks like a very different line up to last year.

Morghoven

19.03.2007, 15:35

It also looks like it could be a very close contest if everyone plays their best...

The inveitable question - Anyone have any ideas what the test piece is?!

jonesbp

19.03.2007, 15:38

I was on here looking for the exact same thing. It's normally out straight after the last area isn't it?

DaveR

19.03.2007, 15:44

I was on here looking for the exact same thing. It's normally out straight after the last area isn't it?

I thought it was normally released round about late April / May? :confused:

jonesbp

19.03.2007, 15:56

Ok. my mistake. Just done a search, Last year it was released end of May.

GingerMaestro

21.03.2007, 09:59

Forgive me if this is a silly question but:-

I can understand as current Champions why Grimethorpe pre qualify, but why YBS, Dyke and BAYV.

PeterBale

21.03.2007, 10:38

Forgive me if this is a silly question but:-

I can understand as current Champions why Grimethorpe pre qualify, but why YBS, Dyke and BAYV.

Currently it's the first four bands each year who receive guaranteed places for the next year's finals.

Deano

29.03.2007, 17:16

It also looks like it could be a very close contest if everyone plays their best...

The inveitable question - Anyone have any ideas what the test piece is?!

Heard a whisper at our area that it is a new piece from the pen of Mr Gregson, don't know how true that is though, maybe just beer talk.

Lauradoll

03.04.2007, 17:06

Yo ho ho and it's half term the week after as well. Personally hoping we'll be playing something without a baritone solo and with a lush tune.

Mrs Fruity

03.04.2007, 17:16

Or they could go for the Open stylee and have twenty seven tunes at the same time ;) and a second horn solo...:clap:

alangiff3

19.05.2007, 19:39

It also looks like it could be a very close contest if everyone plays their best...

The inveitable question - Anyone have any ideas what the test piece is?!

The test-pieces for the 2007 Finals (all sections) will be announced on http://www.kapitol.co.uk/ (Kapitol Promotions Website) at 9:00am on Friday June 1st 2007.

07.06.2007, 01:08

The line up of adjudicators for the National Finals has been announced :

David Read, Derek Broadbent & Prof David King

http://www.kapitol.co.uk/

stephenmrry

07.06.2007, 02:06

King in the box all i can say is omg! This is great to see and nearly made me fall out of bed reading this on my laptop! Its great to see him in the box and im seriously thinking of coming over to it. A Philip Sparke test piece a fantastic line up and king in the box as well it has certainly paved the way for a terrific day!!!!

BrassGroupie

13.10.2007, 13:05

I can understand as current Champions why Grimethorpe pre qualify, but why YBS, Dyke and BAYV.

I don't see why ANYONE should pre-qualify. I think they should have to get their on their own merit like all the other bands. But that's just my opinion. It really irks me this year that YBS have got through automatically when they only came 11th at regionals.

But BAYV actually won their regionals, so pre-qualification or not, at least they actually deserve to be there!! :D (IMO!)

matthetimp

14.10.2007, 20:13

I don't see why ANYONE should pre-qualify. I think they should have to get their on their own merit like all the other bands. But that's just my opinion. It really irks me this year that YBS have got through automatically when they only came 11th at regionals.

But BAYV actually won their regionals, so pre-qualification or not, at least they actually deserve to be there!! :D (IMO!)

So you don't think coming in the top 4 bands in the country last year is good enough to gain auto qualification? What have you been smoking?

dyl

14.10.2007, 21:38

What have you been smoking?
The same thing as someone who suggested The Essence of Time as a possible 2nd Section testpiece? :rolleyes:

BrassGroupie

15.10.2007, 09:57

So you don't think coming in the top 4 bands in the country last year is good enough to gain auto qualification? What have you been smoking?
Once again, please let me point out that this is simply my OPINION. But no. If the bands that came top in the country at last year's Nationals either:

1) Didn't deem it fit to try hard enough to come top at Regionals or
2) Were UNABLE to come top at Regionals

then no I don't see why they should automatically get straight through to London. I don't think it's fair on all the bands that try really hard to get to number 1 and 2 in their region, while the pre-qualified bands rest on their laurels, knowing that they're through anyway.

I'm not trying to stir up controversy, just stating my opinions. I simply don't think auto-qualification should exist at all.

Oh... and I haven't been smoking anything... :tongue:

Morghoven

15.10.2007, 11:37

I don't think it's fair on all the bands that try really hard to get to number 1 and 2 in their region, while the pre-qualified bands rest on their laurels, knowing that they're through anyway.

I'm not trying to stir up controversy, just stating my opinions. I simply don't think auto-qualification should exist at all.

How is it "not fair" on the bands that come 1st and 2nd if someone else lower down the field has also pre-qualified? The top four pre-qualifying isn't instead of one of the two from their area, it's in addition. In other words, if two bands from the same area are in the top four, that area sends four bands in total next year - two pre-qualified and two via the area.

Some people have argued that it weakens the contest by allowing pre-qualification. Firstly, how is a contest of any kind weakened by including the defending champion in the field? (Remember Liverpool FC and the Champions League a couple of years back?!) Secondly, how could a contest line-up including Black Dyke, Grimethorpe, B & R and YBS be considered weak? But they are all Yorkshire bands (and we haven't mentioned Hepworth or Sellers, Rothwell or Carlton Main...) so the only way they can all get to the Nationals is if two of them pre-qualify from the year before.

brassneck

15.10.2007, 11:47

then no I don't see why they should automatically get straight through to London. I don't think it's fair on all the bands that try really hard to get to number 1 and 2 in their region, while the pre-qualified bands rest on their laurels, knowing that they're through anyway.

- this doesn't add up as poor regional placings may have an impact overall for the band's Championship status regardless of pre-qualification.

brassintheed

15.10.2007, 13:14

Personally I think it actually makes things a little fairer this way. Especially in Yorkshire. If pre-qualification didn't exist, there would be some excellent bands (who would have a chance in most other areas) that don't really stand much hope each year when they're facing dyke, grimethorpe, brighouse etc.

So to me it's along the lines of "we know these bands are theoretically the best bands in the country, so lets stick them through anyway so the other bands can have a chance"

Let's face it, as good as it is competing against the best bands in the world at the area, it can be soul destroying if you have no hope of ever getting anywhere with it. (notable exceptions exist of course)

Anno Draconis

15.10.2007, 13:27

Two problems with pre-qualification:

1: A year is a long time in top section banding and a band that finished in the top 4 the previous October could be a significantly lesser outfit a year later; at least going to the area reduces the time lag between qualifying and competing.

2: It makes for less of a contest at the area - this was noticeable in Yorkshire.

What should happen is, like the Champions League that has already been mentioned, those regions that have a high success rate are rewarded with extra qualification places. So instead of "pre-qualifying" 2 bands from Yorkshire, simply allow Yorkshire to send 2 extra bands so that the best bands in Yorkshire in that particular year are at the final.

BrassGroupie

15.10.2007, 13:36

The top four pre-qualifying isn't instead of one of the two from their area, it's in addition. In other words, if two bands from the same area are in the top four, that area sends four bands in total next year - two pre-qualified and two via the area. Yes, I do know that it's in addition... (and what a surprise!! Yorkshire Region almost invariably gets 4 bands at London)

I have nothing whatsoever against Black Dyke, BAYV, Grimethorpe, YBS etc... but when, on that odd occasion, they actually DON’T get the results in regionals, should pre-qualification NOT exist, it’s nice to think that just maybe someone else might be in with a shot. Bands should have to come top at regionals, not just get a free pass because they did well before. You don’t see sportsmen getting straight through to later rounds of their tournaments just because they won it the previous year. They have to play the early rounds like everyone else.

Some people have argued that it weakens the contest by allowing pre-qualification. Firstly, how is a contest of any kind weakened by including the defending champion in the field? (Remember Liverpool FC and the Champions League a couple of years back?!) Secondly, how could a contest line-up including Black Dyke, Grimethorpe, B & R and YBS be considered weak? But they are all Yorkshire bands (and we haven't mentioned Hepworth or Sellers, Rothwell or CarltonMain...) so the only way they can all get to the Nationals is if two of them pre-qualify from the year before.
Well, I don't know who said it weakens it - I certainly can't say it's weakened with all those bands! If anything, I would say it makes it harder. But why should they ALL get to Nationals?? Why do we need so many Yorkshire bands there??

(And don't ask me to remember football!! :oops: )

- this doesn't add up as poor regional placings may have an impact overall for the band's Championship status regardless of pre-qualification. Not necessarily... I would only say that it is the case if number 2 in my earlier post is true. In most cases, I would say number 1 is true.

brassintheed

15.10.2007, 13:38

What should happen is, like the Champions League that has already been mentioned, those regions that have a high success rate are rewarded with extra qualification places. So instead of "pre-qualifying" 2 bands from Yorkshire, simply allow Yorkshire to send 2 extra bands so that the best bands in Yorkshire in that particular year are at the final.

I agree with the potential pitfalls of pre-qualification (ooh, unintentional illiteration there!). But your solution could also have its own problems. 1) reducing 2nd to 4th for qualification purposes could also reduce the quality of the contest. 2) The situation can change rapidly within areas. At least the nationals pre-qualification means that it takes some account of current standard of bands. A set increase in qualification places would be much slower to take account of changes, if at all.

Look at any top band and you will see that even they have dips in contest result. 9th at one competition in the middle of a string of wins. So coming first at the area isn't necessarily a better indication than coming 1st at the nationals a couple of months before.

I agree that there isn't a perfect answer, but I think the current process is at least close.

BrassGroupie

15.10.2007, 13:40

Good grief!! :eek: It took me so long to type that last reply, 2 more people had posted!!!
So to me it's along the lines of "we know these bands are theoretically the best bands in the country, so lets stick them through anyway so the other bands can have a chance"
I understand this reasoning completely. But this still doesn't solve the problem at the nationals though!

What should happen is, like the Champions League that has already been mentioned, those regions that have a high success rate are rewarded with extra qualification places. So instead of "pre-qualifying" 2 bands from Yorkshire, simply allow Yorkshire to send 2 extra bands so that the best bands in Yorkshire in that particular year are at the final.I think this is a good idea... there are a lot of bands in the Yorkshire region!

Anno Draconis

15.10.2007, 13:46

I agree with the potential pitfalls of pre-qualification (ooh, unintentional illiteration there!). But your solution could also have its own problems. 1) reducing 2nd to 4th for qualification purposes could also reduce the quality of the contest. 2) The situation can change rapidly within areas. At least the nationals pre-qualification means that it takes some account of current standard of bands. A set increase in qualification places would be much slower to take account of changes, if at all.

There are certainly problems either way, I just feel that allowing a band to pre-qualify without having to really put the effort in at their area contest (like Grimethorpe?) weakens the regional championships a bit.

But hey, I'm not on the board of Kapitol Promotions, so it's all a bit academic anyway! :rolleyes:

brassintheed

15.10.2007, 14:36

There are certainly problems either way, I just feel that allowing a band to pre-qualify without having to really put the effort in at their area contest (like Grimethorpe?) weakens the regional championships a bit.

But hey, I'm not on the board of Kapitol Promotions, so it's all a bit academic anyway! :rolleyes:

I agree that it can be frustrating sometimes when pre-qualified bands don't appear to have put as much effort in at the area. but I don't think a band like Grimethorpe would ever take a conscious decision to not bother trying just because they've pre-qualified. Pride and status of the band name is always still an issue at this level.

What could potentially happen is that the area takes less priority to important concerts around the same time for that particular year. And personally I could never argue with any band for putting their wider audiences first when possible.

matthetimp

15.10.2007, 15:34

The same thing as someone who suggested The Essence of Time as a possible 2nd Section testpiece? :rolleyes:

I was asked what test piece I would liked to have seen played and I gave my answer.:clap: Not that I am bothered anymore as I don't loiter on things like some peolpe do.

Morghoven

15.10.2007, 16:02

You don’t see sportsmen getting straight through to later rounds of their tournaments just because they won it the previous year.[/COLOR]

Errr...yes you do. That's why the top two divisions of football teams don't come into the FA cup until the third round, and the other league teams until the first round 'proper'. That's why some players have to play qualifying competitions for Wimbledon, but the best ones don't. Same for the snooker world championships. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples.

Pre-qualification for the finals is at least dependent on playing at the Areas, so it's not even a true bye.

Morghoven

15.10.2007, 16:07

Why do we need so many Yorkshire bands there??

Because more of the best bands in the country are in Yorkshire than anywhere else. (And that's not bias or wishful thinking, but simple geography.) We need more Yorkshire bands because then it's - as much as we can ever manage - the best in the country who are competing for the title of National Champion Band of Great Britain.

BrassGroupie

15.10.2007, 20:05

Hmmm.... maybe sports was a bad example!! I should have known!

I wasn't referring to the random pre-pre-pre Wimbledon matches that they have to play, or pre-pre-pre World Cup Qualifiers!!! I was comparing Regionals to the first and second rounds in tennis tournaments or Group Stages in football. I suppose I was a little out of my league there... or someone was being picky!! Hehe!

BBCBass

16.10.2007, 04:55

Wow...great thread, great discussion!!

Personally, I feel the opening to the thread was a personal attck on Grimethorpe, and in my experience they are a class act. I don't believe they "would not have tried" because of prequalification. I would think a Yorkshire title is right up there with the best wins possible.

I kind of like the Champions league analgoy...e.g. 5 spots for Yorkshire, 3 for Wales, 2 for the others, etc...

However, unlike footie (which is based on a 38 match performance) you are talking about deciding things on a "2 match" season.

Personally, I think I'd like to see 2 automatic births (for 1st & 2nd), for 3-6th, extra bids for that region (ala the Champions league analogy), and the 8 area winners for a total of 14 bands.

Super Ph

17.10.2007, 20:19

I don't see why ANYONE should pre-qualify. I think they should have to get their on their own merit like all the other bands.

Problem is that coming second at the areas is not necessarily any great shakes, coming top 6 at the nationals is a real achievement.

I would go for mostly pre-qualified, with maybe just areas winners in the weaker areas.

There are too many bands in the nationals.

BrassGroupie

17.10.2007, 22:44

And I would go the other way around. After much discussion, and reading of these threads - the previous year's champion - fair enough. But I don't see why the other 3 should get through.

And the other thing I was thinking... if (and I'm using North East as an example here because a) it's a smaller region and has less bands, b) no point using Yorkshire because this is what happens anyway mostly and c) I know you'll all laugh at me for it!) Ever Ready and EYMS came 1st and 2nd at Nationals in 2007, therefore pre-qualifying next year automatically, but they came 1st and 2nd at Regionals 2008 because they play well and score highest... the bands that place 3rd and 4th would also get through because of pre-qual - right?

Now, can I just ask how that is fair? Because of pre-qualification, it is sending 2 other bands who, under normal circumstances, would not have scored enough to get to London... it just does not make any sense to me!!!

(And that would sort out your "too many bands at Nationals" thing as well!! Which I also agree with!)

Just a thought...

brassintheed

17.10.2007, 23:20

Ever Ready and EYMS came 1st and 2nd at Nationals in 2007, therefore pre-qualifying next year automatically, but they came 1st and 2nd at Regionals 2008 because they play well and score highest... the bands that place 3rd and 4th would also get through because of pre-qual - right?

Now, can I just ask how that is fair? Because of pre-qualification, it is sending 2 other bands who, under normal circumstances, would not have scored enough to get to London... it just does not make any sense to me!!!

Just a thought...

The thing you've forgotten is that in this scenario, the bands coming 3rd and 4th would be coming just behind the two 'best bands in the country'. Whereas the band that comes 2nd in another area where the 1st placed band was actually placed 8th at the nationals is theoretically a much worse band.

SO.... all pre-qualify is a little unfair( and a little pointless). No pre-qualify is a little unfair (and can't take into account the area differentials).. Hold on.. a mix of both... is that possibly what we've got?...

BrassGroupie

18.10.2007, 00:07

The thing you've forgotten is that in this scenario, the bands coming 3rd and 4th would be coming just behind the two 'best bands in the country'. Whereas the band that comes 2nd in another area where the 1st placed band was actually placed 8th at the nationals is theoretically a much worse band.

But what I meant was, I think, that if, on the other side of my example, Ever Ready and EYMS hadn't come ANYWHERE in the Nationals but still came 1st and 2nd in Regionals, those 3rd and 4th bands wouldn't be going to London....

So... now I've confused myself!! LOL! I think we agree somewhere along the line!?

Anyway, going to bed now to rest so I can go to London for beer!!!! (And rugby in the evening!! Hee hee!)

18.10.2007, 08:40

.

And the other thing I was thinking... if [ Ever Ready and EYMS came 1st and 2nd at Nationals in 2007, therefore pre-qualifying next year automatically, ...

I used to conduct both bands and took EYMS at the finals in 1998 (on another Sparke piece) and would love this to happen!

However, I went to hear Dyke last night...

John R

BrassGroupie

18.10.2007, 09:36

However, I went to hear Dyke last night...:eek: :rolleyes:

Tee hee!!! I await their interpretation with anticipation then!! Although I'm sure everyone else's will be just as interesting :D

Lauradoll

18.10.2007, 13:53

I used to conduct both bands and took EYMS at the finals in 1998 (on another Sparke piece) and would love this to happen!

However, I went to hear Dyke last night...

John R

Ah but you didn't hear us then.....;-)

19.10.2007, 20:53

Wahay! Can't wait til tomorrow now. :)

When we were at Harrogate a few years ago, at the end, we were able to buy a CD of the bands performance. Does anyone know if that is the case at London please? :)

davidquinlan

20.10.2007, 00:53

Went to final rehearsal at Aveley tonight.
What an interesting piece.... would sure like to have been involved to work on it.. but anyhow.
Band sounded great, let's hope for a good show from them!

Best of luck to all tomorrow!

brassneck

20.10.2007, 10:04

Here's the draw for today's final ... 10 a.m. start!

1. Hepworth (Cookson Homes)
2. EYMS
3. YBS
4. Desford
5. Aveley & Newham
6. Fodens Richardson
7. Reg Vardy
8. Kirkintilloch
9. Mount Charles
10. BTM
11. Cory
12. Polysteel
13. Black Dyke
14. Redbridge
15. Leyland
16. Staffordshire
17. Whitburn
18. Grimethorpe
19. Tredegar
20. Brighouse & Rastrick

- live coverage on 4BR (http://www.4barsrest.com/live/2007_london/default.asp)

Forest Gump

20.10.2007, 10:20

Good luck to Polysteel, but you got a lot to do when you get drawn between the favorites.

Forest Gump

20.10.2007, 17:47

4br have predicted the top six and Dyke are not in it?http://www.4barsrest.com/live/2007_london/default.asp

Anno Draconis

20.10.2007, 18:17

4br have predicted the top six and Dyke are not in it?http://www.4barsrest.com/live/2007_london/default.asp

According to their live coverage (although sometimes a large pinch of salt is required!) there were a number of uncharacteristic errors, notably solo cornet in the first movement, hence their prediction.

Anyone online yet who actually heard it?

maestO_SO_musical

20.10.2007, 18:34

It also looks like it could be a very close contest if everyone plays their best...

The inveitable question - Anyone have any ideas what the test piece is?!

The championship section usually tends to be very close.

Sitting listening to a 3rd or 4th section bnd, I can make my own mind up, but at the top it's so close...

Not many mistakes, just different (slightly) styles. Very difficult.

brassneck

20.10.2007, 18:36

Results:

1. Grimethorpe Colliery, Allan Withington, 198
2. Fodens Richardson, Gary Cutt, 6, 196
3. Cory, Dr. Robert Childs, 11, 194
4. Black Dyke, Dr. Nicholas 13, 193
5. YBS Band, Richard Evans, 3, 192
6. Brighouse and Rastrick, Alan Morrison, 20, 191

Soloist: Euph, Michael Dodd, Grimethorpe

Hmmm! :rolleyes:

http://www.4barsrest.com/live/2007_london/placings.asp

Forest Gump

20.10.2007, 18:36

1 grimey
2 fodens
3 cory
4 dyke
5 ybs
6 brighouse

4br

brassneck

20.10.2007, 18:37

They have updated the results ... well done Grimey! (with 198 points)

postie

20.10.2007, 18:49

Full results from 4bars rest:

1. Grimethorpe Colliery, Allan Withington, 198
2. Fodens Richardson, Gary Cutt, 6, 196
3. Cory, Dr. Robert Childs, 11, 194
4. Black Dyke, Dr. Nicholas 13, 193
5. YBS Band, Richard Evans, 3, 192
6. Brighouse and Rastrick, Alan Morrison, 20, 191
7. BTM Band, Jason Katsikaris, 10, 190
8. Tredegar, Ian Porthouse, 19, 189
9. Whitburn, Steven Mead, 17, 188
10. Desford Colliery, Nigel Seaman, 4, 186
11. Polysteel Philip Harper,12, 185
12. East Yorkshire Motor Services Jim Davies,2,183
13. Leyland, Russell Gray,15,182
14. Aveley and Newham, Nigel Taken, 5, 181
15. Redbridge Brass, Melvin White, 14, 180
16. Hepworth (Cookson Homes), Mark Bentham, 1, 179
17. Kirkintilloch, Nigel Boddice, 8, 178
18. Staffordshire, Michael Fowles, 16, 177
19. Reg Vardy, Ray Farr, 7, 176
20. Mount Charles, Andrew Duncan, 9, 175

Soloist: Euph, Michael Dodd, Grimethorpe

Forest Gump

20.10.2007, 18:57

I see 4br predicted the top 3 correctly and was'nt much out on the rest, well done. Well done Grimey and the rest, good to see YBS getting back up there too.

Bobbi's girl

20.10.2007, 19:12

Well done Grimey! Attended their open rehearsal on Thursday and they sounded awsome! Well done too to the other Yorkshire bands - 4 bands in top 6 - not bad going!

Anno Draconis

20.10.2007, 19:17

Also a good result for Wales, all 3 bands in the top 8. :clap:

From what I've heard of the piece anyone who got to the end unscathed deserves a pat on the back!

Jan H

20.10.2007, 20:41

1 grimey
2 fodens
3 cory
4 dyke
5 ybs
6 brighouse

The top 6 bands are also the 6 highest ranked British bands in the 4BR ranking (Willebroek is ranked 6th, YBS 7th). So where are those arguments that these ranking don't make sense...? ;)
(all right, below position 50, some strange things happen every now and then...)

Super Ph

21.10.2007, 12:52

Caprice

21.10.2007, 16:19

I was at the Dyke rehearsal on Wed and also at London yesterday - I must say their full run thru for the audience on Wed was faultless - they must have had a bad day yesterday - I have never heard Richard Marshall lose it before and there was also a large bum note put in I think by flugal - their tuning was also suspicious in some places - really out of character for them I felt gutted after the performance they did at the rehearsal. Maybe it was because the cornets were all playing new 'York' instruments and weren't quite used to them enough to pull it off under pressure. For me, Grimethorpe were obvious winners but I didn't agree with Cory coming 3rd - they played a totally different style to all the others (obvious the 2 bros hadn't compared notes) and they were not as musical as some of the lower placed bands. I do think Polysteel deserved a higher position - their balance and overall 'ensemble' playing was beautiful esp in the 'elegy' - the soloists were sound and didn't stickout like a sore thumb - I was sure they would have come 7th being as they weren't in the top 6 - which I was sorry to see.

DaveR

21.10.2007, 16:34

There's a news article the contest on BBC News, believe it or not.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/7054206.stm

jim

21.10.2007, 16:42

I do think Polysteel deserved a higher position - their balance and overall 'ensemble' playing was beautiful esp in the 'elegy' - the soloists were sound and didn't stickout like a sore thumb - I was sure they would have come 7th being as they weren't in the top 6 - which I was sorry to see.

Many thanks Caprice I was personaly dissapointed with 11th although I knew we had been playing the peice far better than we had played on the day. Chris Howley on top man Andy Hicks Solo Euph and Spencer O'leary on soprano stuck out as playing exceptionally well.

It was a great buzz around the hall aspecially (from what I can remeber) it was almost full.

chris turner

21.10.2007, 17:47

Congrats to all at Grimey great performance. Also well done to Allan on his treble of double wins!!!!!!!!!
From all at Cory.

Ste69

21.10.2007, 19:30

Just got back from a great weekend. Heard about 8 other bands from the 2nd half and agree with the above comments, I thought Grimethorpe were a class apart.

As for ourselves, not a bad day at the office really. Surprised to see so many in the hall for us (especially as the RAH cafe was open for business)

BrassGroupie

21.10.2007, 19:42

Surprised to see so many in the hall for us (especially as the RAH cafe was open for business)People must have brought flasks for their cups of tea!! :biggrin:

I listened to 10 bands in all.... the atmosphere in the Hall always makes me sleepy so I had to get out in the middle for some fresh air!!) I was disappointed to be late back from lunch and miss Cory, because after hearing several Euph solos beforehand I wanted to hear David Childs play, but never mind... and apparently Fodens were pretty good too!! ;-)

I heard 1-4, 13-15 and 18-20. I thought Black Dyke were a bit all over the place, Grimethorpe were fantastic (hats off to Michael Dodd :)) In fact, their performance was SO good, it made me believe even more that they just sat back at Regionals because I can't believe a band that could play that well could only come 8th.

I thought Whitburn were very good too (what I heard through the curtains!) but I was very surprised by Leyland's result - I thought they deserved more after what I deemed a good performance. And well done to EYMS - top of the COT's (!) Hehe!!

I really enjoyed the piece, particularly the second movement which I think I could have listened to over and over and over.

(I'm just miffed that yet AGAIN the same people will be pre-qualified again next year.... but I'm not getting into all that again! Hehe!)

Overall a very enjoyable weekend :D

Pierre

21.10.2007, 21:17

:clap: Dear Mr Orange,
(Agent to your friends) I can only say that you were AWESOME!:clap: !!:clap: !!:clap: !! :clap: Those who missed the performance are the poorer for it but they will never know!

ps Just going to make a cuppa, one lump or two???

rosolino

21.10.2007, 22:05

[QUOTE=Pierre;558851]:clap: Dear Mr Orange,
(Agent to your friends) I can only say that you were AWESOME!:clap: !!:clap: !!:clap: !! :clap: Those who missed the performance are the poorer for it but they will never know!

Couldn't agree more. Only missed three bands - had to eat, drink and check out the trade stands. Personally I had EYMS placed higher - well played guys and gals.

Ros

Ste69

21.10.2007, 22:16

Couldn't agree more. Only missed three bands - had to eat, drink and check out the trade stands. Personally I had EYMS placed higher - well played guys and gals.

Ros

Many thanks for the kind words - we had a great time.

Thirteen Ball

21.10.2007, 23:13

I've got to put a thankyou on for the people from tredegar band who let us into the ticket queue in front of them, so we could try and get in and see our friends from hepworth play number 1.

We'd been held up on the tube and run halfway across knightsbridge to get there, and it was literally down to the wire whether we'd make it.

Well, we didn't make it - In fact, we reached the top of the stairs just in time to hear the cornet opening through a closed door, but it was very kind of you to let us in front of you, and we very much enjoyed Tredegar's performance! Good result, well done.

I'm slightly bemused as to how a very good, tidy and well put together YBS performance manged to finish below an error-strewn and frankly very dissapointing black dyke effort. More mistakes than I've ever come to expect from the scarlet and black, including unheard of tuning problems. Maybe their sound and tight ensemble carried them through, but for my money, they weren't top 6 material on the day.

Much as I didn't get chance to hear Leyland or Fodens, I did think Grimethorpe were good value for the win, thoguh Cory's were very close on their heels.

Liked the piece very much. Suited crisp cornet work, soulful euphonium playing and a big, bass led band sound - which Grimethorpe certainly posessed in quantity.

rosolino

21.10.2007, 23:40

Great advert for York cornets if Richard Marshall's valves did indeed stick. What's the story?

Ros

Big Bass Boy

21.10.2007, 23:57

I've just read some of the posts on here from Super Ph. I hope he enjoyed the finals, and from what I've read I expect he'll now be looking forward to Shrove Tuesday, as I suspect his expertise will come to the fore on that day.

BrassGroupie

22.10.2007, 07:36

I'm slightly bemused as to how a very good, tidy and well put together YBS performance manged to finish below an error-strewn and frankly very dissapointing black dyke effort. You're seriously bemused??? Hehe!! Maybe the adjudicators just know what Dyke are on and daren't NOT give them a top 4 spot!!! (just kidding everyone!!! or am I?! LOL!) That's the first time I've heard Black Dyke play in the RAH at Nationals and was amazed that I was actually able to raise my eyebrows occasionally at some rather obvious errors when, from what I always hear about them, I was expecting a truly supreme performance!

felt dyke were fortunate to get fourth place but great contestAgreed.

2nd trom virtuoso

22.10.2007, 09:38

The result just re-instates that Grimethorpe are the best toned band around at the moment and have the right mix to win contests and put on the best concerts, I am looking forward to the 4BR podcast and Radio 2 LTTB show in a week or so.

swisscornet

22.10.2007, 09:52

Hi Folks,

congratulations to Grimethorpe. The winning was well deserved.

I heard most of the performances. I totally agree with the top 3 placings. Black Dyke was very lucky to be 4th. YBS did also very well.

Does anybody know what happened to Richard Marshall? Was it a sticky valve?

Cheers

westburykid

22.10.2007, 10:07

We thought the Top three places was fair. Fodens were stunning, and we the first band who seemed to be in control of the music.

From where we were sitting (third row) the Grimethorpe performance seemed very edgy, but I assume it carried well to the box. The start of their third movement was the best we heard. Dynamics seemed a bit up on the whole piece though.

Leyland were unlucky for my money, they really tried to make the most of the dynamics.

The Black Dyke result was a bit of a surprise, with the few mistakes early doors, but once the band settled down into the second movement, they made a sound unlike any other band on the day. Would be very harsh to disregard a whole performance for a few missed notes in an incredably difficult cornet line.

Was surprised very few bands thought to sit the cornet and Euph together for the first unison bit.

Kerwintootle

22.10.2007, 10:52

I just want to give a public thanks to Kapitol Promotions who helped me out on Saturday. The fantastic stewards looked after my eight year old daughter whilst I was playing with YBS. Nothing was too much trouble for them and it really put my mind at rest. Thanks guys!!!:clap:

Many thanks for the kind messages about our performance on Saturday, another step in the right direction.

Bayerd

22.10.2007, 11:29

'Dyke' were dire actually, that 'airshot' was the sort of playing that gives the rest of us hope. However, the sort of support they get in the hall makes sure they are always in the prizes somewhere - the adjudicators aren't stupid!

Dire in relation to what? Their usual standard or the other nineteen bands?

Yes there were a few errors, but there was also some fantastic playing from them, particularly towards the end of the third movement. David Thornton was great in the middle movement too. I agreed with the result for the top three, then had YBS ahead of Dyke then Brighouse. It was obvious what Nick Childs thought of Dyke's performance, no standing up one by one, and he couldn't get off the stage quick enough. No, it wasn't a winner, but it was a performance that was still better than most there.

Applauding the 'big' bands on really gets on my nerves though, all bands deserve the same respect as they all earnt the right to be there. So for me it's either applaud all, or applaud none.

chiephonium

22.10.2007, 12:05

From where we were sitting (third row) the Grimethorpe performance seemed very edgy, but I assume it carried well to the box. The start of their third movement was the best we heard. Dynamics seemed a bit up on the whole piece though.

Disagree with you on that one... Their big dynamics were up, but more importantly the quieter dynamics were lower than anyones on the day....

I wasn't exactly keen on the pedalling in the basses at the start of the second movement.....?

Leyland were unlucky for my money,

Agreed, Leyland were solid... I thought they were top six material.

The Black Dyke result was a bit of a surprise, with the few mistakes early doors, but once the band settled down into the second movement, they made a sound unlike any other band on the day. Would be very harsh to disregard a whole performance for a few missed notes in an incredably difficult cornet line.

Can't agree with you on this one... the sound was nothing like Grimethorpe's

I think the result was fair... The judges seemed to do a great job...

Grimethorpe were very worthy winners... Mr Withington was on top form -- he makes it look so easy... Michael Dodd was a very deserving winner of the soloist prize... Clinching it from Glynn Williams right at the end....

Fodens were deserving of second place - thought they were slightly better than Cory. Although Richard seemed to have a nightmare with his valve Black Dyke played consistently and to a very high standard so nobody can say that they didn't deserve the last qualification spot... (Having said that i never heard YBS, but to be fair their draw won't have done them any favours...)

I very much enjoyed Alan Morrison's interpretation of the piece, it was different... Nigel Fielding played a stormer -- well done Nige!

This year was my debut at the finals and i absoutely loved it... Playing off number 2 we had a very good audience in the hall, I had a good look round before the judges green light came on and thought the view was fantastic... When Jim brought his arms up the steady murmor of noise died and it went silent the hairs on my neck stood on end - MAGIC...

Kerwintootle

22.10.2007, 16:32

Although Richard seemed to have a nightmare with his valve Black Dyke played consistently and to a very high standard so nobody can say that they didn't deserve the last qualification spot... (Having said that i never heard YBS, but to be fair their draw won't have done them any favours...)

Eh? I thought we did pretty fine off a number 3 draw. To be back in single figures result wise means that we are a very happy band right now.

Anglo Music Press

22.10.2007, 18:44

It seems the results have been well received - I certainly agree with the top 6.

Thoughts:-

1) Fodens were just beautiful and Grimethorpe more red-blooded. I really enjoyed YBS and Polysteel were innovative by playing the written tempos. ;)

2) I was really impressed by the ways cornets and euphoniums handled the 'cadenza' bit.

3) Too many bands ruined their own chances by playing too fast for the piece and the acoustic.

What is interesting is the closed/open adjudication bit here. I was looking forward to hearing Dyke and Cory (obviously) and expectant of something special when they both came on stage. I think they will both agree they were not 100% at their best, but, of course, they still played at a magnificent standard. The few rather major slips dented my expectations majorly, but, of course, the judges didn't have such expectations so were perhaps able to gauge the stature of the performances better than me. If any of the bands who came in the bottom 10 had come on stage and played as Dyke and Cory did, I would have been very impressed with them.

Interesting...........

BrassGroupie

22.10.2007, 18:53

Applauding the 'big' bands on really gets on my nerves though, all bands deserve the same respect as they all earnt the right to be there. So for me it's either applaud all, or applaud none.
Have to agree with you on that one. I assume you mean when bands are coming onto the stage? "Applaud none" would work for me. Alan Withington totally milked it coming on stage!!!!

I think what bugged me most was when whats-her-name woman read out the results for Black Dyke and Cory and the shocked gasp went up for both, but nobody clapped?!?

Okay, so they didn't get the results you wanted, but does that mean they still don't deserve applause??? Talk about...erm.. bad audience-man-ship(!)

Oh and that fanfare went on WAY too long.

Super Ph

22.10.2007, 21:47

chiephonium

22.10.2007, 22:13

Eh? I thought we did pretty fine off a number 3 draw. To be back in single figures result wise means that we are a very happy band right now.

Agreed... that is what i'm trying to say... (i.e. that if you got a better draw [something like 11-15 etc...] that you may have been placed higher).

I have absolutely no doubt that you played well...

And it seems that Mr Evans also beleives that the draw did you no favours...

http://www.4barsrest.com/news/detail.asp?world=uki&id=6577

(see paragraph entitled YBS)

BrassGroupie

22.10.2007, 22:27

This is too deep for me. Please explain!

One little thing - it's 'she' :biggrin: thanks. It's not really relevant if you're a 'she' ;) I wouldn't worry about it being explained...

Kerwintootle

23.10.2007, 11:11

Agreed... that is what i'm trying to say... (i.e. that if you got a better draw [something like 11-15 etc...] that you may have been placed higher).

I have absolutely no doubt that you played well...

And it seems that Mr Evans also beleives that the draw did you no favours...

http://www.4barsrest.com/news/detail.asp?world=uki&id=6577

(see paragraph entitled YBS)

Aye sorry. A weekend of banding befuddled my mind. Cheers and well played!

chiephonium

23.10.2007, 11:21

Thanks to Simon Kerwin who took our band for some "note-bashing" before the Nationals...

Say hi to Simon from me -- he will probs remember me... If not remind about the 100% blagged euph solo in one of his pieces... that should jog his memory.... Looking forward to the concert he his conducting us at soon....

Simon's tip for blagging was to try and use 1-2-3 rather than 3-2-1 ... It works a treat!!

beckyboop

23.10.2007, 12:14

What is interesting is the closed/open adjudication bit here. I was looking forward to hearing Dyke and Cory (obviously) and expectant of something special when they both came on stage. I think they will both agree they were not 100% at their best, but, of course, they still played at a magnificent standard. The few rather major slips dented my expectations majorly, but, of course, the judges didn't have such expectations so were perhaps able to gauge the stature of the performances better than me. If any of the bands who came in the bottom 10 had come on stage and played as Dyke and Cory did, I would have been very impressed with them.

I have to agree - when people listen to Cory and Black Dyke in contests they expect near perfection - occasionally this doesn't happen but that doesn't mean they played bad - I heard them and they were both excellent for most of the testpiece (good one to listen), but with a few errors. No band were error free (I heard 18!).

chiephonium

23.10.2007, 12:17

don't recall any in grimey's performance (obvious one's anyway)

Thirteen Ball

23.10.2007, 12:38

I wasn't exactly keen on the pedalling in the basses at the start of the second movement.....?

It'd be interesting to hear Mr Sparke's opinion on this.

I couldn't get hold of a study score, but as a bass player, one thing I usually listen for is unwritten pedalling. Unfortunately without a score it was tough to know if it was going on!

Generally, (and please correct me if I'm wrong) Phillip Sparke's pieces seem to be written where if he wants the octave dropped, it'll be written that way in front of you.

Also most of the time if you pedal where it isn't written in one of his pieces it rather spoils the effect.

Having read your comments on the bands on the day and whilst I realise it's something of a can of worms, Phillip - As a composer who really does exploit the low register of the bass section in your writing to good effect, I'd be very interested to know what your opinion was?

chiephonium

23.10.2007, 12:52

2nd trom virtuoso

23.10.2007, 13:59

I could be wrong about this but I'm sure deano or tiny were pedalling.... It sounded unlike anything i'd hard all day (which no doubt it wouold have anyway)... I'm convincedone of them was pedalling.

Sounded very good though, only thing is it wasn't on the score.

If it sounded great and won them the contest then there you go, maybe other's should have done it on the day! Nothing wrong with it if it makes a winning performance. I'm sure they didn't over do it

Anglo Music Press

23.10.2007, 14:40

It'd be interesting to hear Mr Sparke's opinion on this.

I couldn't get hold of a study score, but as a bass player, one thing I usually listen for is unwritten pedalling. Unfortunately without a score it was tough to know if it was going on!

Generally, (and please correct me if I'm wrong) Phillip Sparke's pieces seem to be written where if he wants the octave dropped, it'll be written that way in front of you.

Also most of the time if you pedal where it isn't written in one of his pieces it rather spoils the effect.

Having read your comments on the bands on the day and whilst I realise it's something of a can of worms, Phillip - As a composer who really does exploit the low register of the bass section in your writing to good effect, I'd be very interested to know what your opinion was?

This is a no-brainer. The idea of (classically-written, as opposed to improvised) music is that the composer writes the notes and the players play them. END OF !

If they want to start composing and asking me to play it, it would be a disaster all round. Let's stick to what we do best!

It was the pedalling at the end of the 2nd movement that stuck out the most. What an insult!!

chiephonium

23.10.2007, 15:03

Absolutely... agreed.

Les Wood

23.10.2007, 15:24

Must say that even though we had a (perhaps deserved) duff result, I thought the test-piece was an absolute cracker: very hard to play, but with such fantastic tunes and superb ideas. Some of the stuff in the last movement I thought was a bit of a departure from what Philip Sparke usually writes and, to me anyway, was packed full of interesting musical ideas. Couple that with the technical material in the first movement and the absolutely gorgeous music in the second and it was a great piece all round. Really enjoyed playing it!

Les Wood,
Kirkintilloch Band

PS don't think we pedalled anything!!

brasscrest

23.10.2007, 15:48

This is a no-brainer. The idea of (classically-written, as opposed to improvised) music is that the composer writes the notes and the players play them. END OF !

Well-said, Mr. Sparke.

cornetshell

23.10.2007, 16:17

If they want to start composing and asking me to play it, it would be a disaster all round. Let's stick to what we do best!

It was the pedalling at the end of the 2nd movement that stuck out the most. What an insult!!

this kind of stuff is being discussed in that "definition of a testpiece"....not to go off topic but if it is the composers intentions that they didnt want the notes dropped the 8ve(re-scoring/re-writting parts), should the adj. be made aware of the composers wishes also?

i wouldnt say it is totally the MD's who are being disrespectful [i think was what someone said] of the composers wishes, but adj. too?...If it is composers wishes- and it is in an "examination" enviornment, shouldnt everyone be enforcing this idea of play only whats on the page- as obvious as it may seem?

~if some bands continually "get away with it" surely all it does is encourage others to follow suit- as they've more chance of winning as band X,Y and Z did it before and did well....?

without going crazy with rules, surely there should be something in place to try and stop it, or else technically no one is doing anything wrong [other than upsetting someone's wishes-as blunt as that sounds]? (i dont know if anything is already in place!) A band wouldn't get away with playing too many instruments/players... i know an extreme example, but surley the same kind of idea...?

DannyCollin

23.10.2007, 16:24

This is a no-brainer. The idea of (classically-written, as opposed to improvised) music is that the composer writes the notes and the players play them. END OF !

If they want to start composing and asking me to play it, it would be a disaster all round. Let's stick to what we do best!

It was the pedalling at the end of the 2nd movement that stuck out the most. What an insult!!

Funny how you never hear Soprano players putting it UP an octave init.

Anglo Music Press

23.10.2007, 16:41

this kind of stuff is being discussed in that "definition of a testpiece"....not to go off topic but if it is the composers intentions that they didnt want the notes dropped the 8ve(re-scoring/re-writting parts), should the adj. be made aware of the composers wishes also?

But they have a copy of the score - that was my wishes. I didn't write 'please don't add any notes to this score' for the same reason I didn't write 'please don't play it backwards'. Just because a practice is endemic, doesn't make it the norm.

I can't imagine it had any effect on the result though. Just on my hackles!

Thirteen Ball

23.10.2007, 16:51

This is a no-brainer. The idea of (classically-written, as opposed to improvised) music is that the composer writes the notes and the players play them. END OF !

If they want to start composing and asking me to play it, it would be a disaster all round. Let's stick to what we do best!

It was the pedalling at the end of the 2nd movement that stuck out the most. What an insult!!

Well that's surely as definitive an answer as anyone requires.

Well said sir!

Ste69

23.10.2007, 17:55

Well that's surely as definitive an answer as anyone requires.

Well said sir!

Agreed - it was discussed but instantly dismissed at our band that we would play exactly what was on the part and no more. There are pedals in it and some lovely ones at that. If they're not written don't play them. I had to stop myself tutting outloud when I heard bands dropping things down when I knew full well they weren't written

maestO_SO_musical

23.10.2007, 18:04

Funny how you never hear Soprano players putting it UP an octave init.

Sitting in front of one, I swear they do it all the time!

salefc

23.10.2007, 18:56

without going crazy with rules, surely there should be something in place to try and stop it, or else technically no one is doing anything wrong [other than upsetting someone's wishes-as blunt as that sounds]? (i dont know if anything is already in place!) A band wouldn't get away with playing too many instruments/players... i know an extreme example, but surley the same kind of idea...?

Well, why not disqualify bands on playing wrong notes? They certainly aren't written. ;)

purplelove

23.10.2007, 19:40

I agree with salefc, it would be madness to suggest policing pedal notes. The situation has arisen because, until relatively recently, pedal notes never really featured in new set tests. As composers become aware of the amazing effect that pedals can achieve (when used sparingly) they have started to incorporate them in their writing.
You will never stop maverick bass players (and bass trombone players, for that matter) from being pedal happy on occasion; even after guidance from MDs, composers simply need to accept that fact.

Purplelove

brasscrest

23.10.2007, 19:45

New South Welshman

23.10.2007, 22:26

What about tempo markings on the score Mr Sparke?

Pythagoras

23.10.2007, 22:46

Bands that play wrong notes should be penalized by an effect on their score. An unwritten pedal is simply a wrong note that happens to be off by an octave - should be penalized the same as any other wrong note.

Totally agree. Sit next to a bass player who seems to think notes on the stave are wrong and pedals way too much. Drives me mad.

GJG

24.10.2007, 00:17

What about tempo markings on the score Mr Sparke?

Indeed. I would like to self-quote from a recent post on another thread, because it seems relevant here, since Mr. Sparke has already made reference to bands ignoring written "tempi" indications:

"... We had a[n] ... experience at Harrogate this year, when one of the adjudicators criticised us (or rather me) for opting for too-fast tempi in the outer movements. Fact was, we were playing almost exactly the written metronome marks, whereas it was noticeable that many higher-placed bands were playing at lower-than-marked tempi. Now, please don't misunderstand; this is not "sour grapes" of any kind - I have no problems with our placing, nor with the results in general. What I do have a problem with is being effectively told by the adjudicator that I should have ignored the instructions on the score. It is probably true that we may have been able to produce a slightly more controlled (although less exciting, in my view) performance if I had underplayed the indicated speeds. As it happened, in the final few rehearsals we had not experienced problems with the speed, and unfortunately on the day, for whatever reasons (nerves, unhelpful acoustic, inexperience, I don't know) we suffered some slight rhythmic (sp?) instability. Not bad, but not good enough at that level. Not playing safe with the tempi was my judgement call, and I have to take responsibility for it. But I do object to being told by the adjudicator that I was wrong to follow the score in that respect."

I would be interested also in Philip's take (as a composer) on adjudicators not penalising, or in our case actively encouraging non-adherence to the instructions on the score?

(I must reiterate here that I am not in any way complaining about results in Harrogate. Merely questioning an adjudicators position on following the score.)

Gareth

critic

24.10.2007, 07:03

Anglo Music Press

24.10.2007, 08:08

To answer a couple of the above points, I think pedalling should be discouraged, and a few negative remarks by adjudicators would soon stop the habit.

Tempo is a thornier issue; but I have said before that, in these days of composing on computer where I, for example, take great care to get the tempo markings 'right' (ie what I want them to be) a conductor needs a really good reason to diverge from them and that reason has to be justified musically. That's what the judges are there to judge.

Speed does not equal excitement (necessairly) and far too many bands at the RAH did themselves no favours at all by playing above the marked tempo in the faster sections.

I have also suffered at Harrogate, by the way. Our remarks said 'why so fast?' when we were in fact slower than the marked tempo. The judge was also the composer! I find that completely unacceptable bearing in mind how much thought and work goes into such contest perfomances. It's the same problem cricket has. It has to be umpired, but we deserve the best umpires. Just because someone has written the piece doesn't make him a suitable adjudicator; of course some composers, like me, make great judges!

:p

trumpetmike

24.10.2007, 09:53

As a start of a backlash, does anyone (*cough*Mr Sparke*cough) care to name & shame those bands that were adding in pedalling and taking the tempos above what were written?

New South Welshman

24.10.2007, 10:51

Polysteel were innovative by playing the written tempos . . . Too many bands ruined their own chances by playing too fast for the piece and the acoustic . . . Pedalling at the end of the 2nd movement stuck out the most. What an insult!!

I'm confused. Is it okay to change tempo to suit the acoustics but not pitch? Why hasn't anyone raised the concept of 'too slow'? Why isn't an unwritten tempo change an insult?

Thirteen Ball

24.10.2007, 12:24

WoodenFlugel

24.10.2007, 12:40

We should make this an annual event after the RAH. Get the composer of the piece to come on and give his/her opinion on the bands' interpretations.

It's made very interesting reading so far! :clap:

Might be a bit of a problem if an Eric Ball piece is picked next year though...;)

New South Welshman

24.10.2007, 14:54

mutedropper

24.10.2007, 15:08

Congratulations to Grimey on their 2nd win in a row, also well done to Tredegar and BTM, just missing out on placings.

brasscrest

24.10.2007, 15:17

I just figure that tuba pedals in brass bands playing is a style thing. In the same way that lead trumpet players in big bands might play their part an octave higher (at the appropriate moment), brass band tubists pedalling notes (at the appropriate moment) is about style. Sometimes a big band writer will write 'loco' to remind a lead player that they're not to do it at that point. Is that is what is required for brass band tubists? Some brass band composers request 'loco' in their preamble but I don't remember it in this score.

Having said that, I agree that the end of the second movement was probably not an appropriate moment.

There's a huge difference between big band writing, which has an improvisational tradition, and clasically written pieces like contest brass music. It's exactly the opposite in classic writing - it is assumed that the parts will be played as written, unless the composer gives an instruction (usually ad lib) that allows the player to vary. Pedal notes are not about style - changing the octave of a note within the chord structure can change the emphasis on overtones within the chord, and that can alter the sound. In a contest situation, adherance to the score should be (although, depending on the adjudicators, it sometimes seems like it isn't) a critical part of the performance.

Anglo Music Press

24.10.2007, 17:28

I'm confused. Is it okay to change tempo to suit the acoustics but not pitch? Why hasn't anyone raised the concept of 'too slow'? Why isn't an unwritten tempo change an insult?

I didn't mention it being 'OK to change the tempo but not the pitch', I was making the point that those who chose to play the piece faster than marked lost clarity, partly as a result of the acoustics and partly as a result of not being able to play it clearly at speed. Those who played at or near the tempo had clearer textures - that's why I chose those tempi! 'Too slow' is a different question. It is only too slow if the music loses flow; that's not a question of tempo but of performance ability.

But as you raise the topic, we are talking abut the basics of music here. Tempo is the choice of the performer (it has to be, for good or ill); the notes are the choice of the composer. Bleedin' obvious!

Anglo Music Press

24.10.2007, 17:29

Thinking further, if a performer is having trouble with a passage, they slow the tempo rather than rewrite the notes! Don't they????

brasscrest

24.10.2007, 17:45

Another point, Philip, is that the pedal notes that were added were not added because the player could not play, or thought that the passage was too difficult with, the written notes, but because someone (the player, MD, whoever) thought that it would sound "better" than what the composer wrote.

I've heard some people change notes to simplify passages - sometimes just rhythm, like playing quavers instead of semiquavers - sometimes modifying difficult passages to avoid awkward jumps or fingerings. Just as wrong as adding unwritten pedals, of course.

Anglo Music Press

24.10.2007, 17:55

Indeed.

I can't imagine why some brass bands think they exist outside the culmination of 1500 years of music convention. The notes are the notes. If I want it to be played ad lib. I will say so. I don't want to write 'the composer would be grateful if performers would play the written notes only, at approximately the given tempi, thank you very much' on every score!

I do, of course acknowledge and admire performers' input - notation can only hint at a performance style, and the bands are staggeringly good - but I would like the obvious line in the sand to be agreed.

Aidan

24.10.2007, 19:25

Well, why not disqualify bands on playing wrong notes? They certainly aren't written. ;)
Aren't they penalized enough by the fact that it sounds ****e? :p

New South Welshman

24.10.2007, 20:30

Thank you for all the answers. I really appreciate them. I find this sort of discussion very engaging, even if I get labelled a bit of a nerd. Mr Sparke, your presence adds a real touch of class to the thread, so thank you for joining in.

The other style thing I find interesting is that of vibrato (I can hear those who know me start snoring). There are almost never any indications of its use by composers (occassionally the odd 'no vib' indication), leaving performers to choose how they apply it.

I don't know any brass bands that play without vibrato. All bands used it in Battlecreek. Early brass ensembles choose to use astonishingly minimal vibrato so it's a choice for us in brass bands to use vibrato. I would suggest, again, that it's part of brass band style, which has been developed over 150 years of development.

John Brooks

24.10.2007, 21:09

I want to add my thanks to Philip for such an incredible piece of music and to the bands. I listened to 16 of the 20 performances and never got tired of the music. I was surprised at some things, particularly at this level of banding. For example, many of the bands and individual soloists simply could not play quietly and had to resort to tricks in an attempt to make it sound more quiet.

Overall though I had a most enjoyable day.

I also booked tickets on-line and included parking at Imperial College for the day for 7.50, a very good deal.

Super Ph

24.10.2007, 21:11

New South Welshman, you should listen to some southern (UK) bands for examples of brass playing with no vibrato.

I find the "pedal notes are wrong notes" argument ridiculous - if you admit that some bands "get away with it", that imples either that it is easier to add extra pedals than play the written notes (which doesn't fit with my understanding), or that it sounds better. Simple application of logic, innit.

brasscrest

24.10.2007, 21:27

Vibrato was much more prevalent in years past - it has been growing less and less over time. Listen to recordings from the 1960s or 1970s and you'll hear a lot more vibrato than you will on a recording of a good contemporary brass band.

New South Welshman

24.10.2007, 22:10

Hmm - not convinced that vibrato is absent in southern UK brass bands. It's still there. On the other hand, there was quite a well known Australian band that aimed for no vibrato at all. Had a very 'orchestral' sound approach and eschewed vibrato (and the 'british' sound - whatever that was/is). Vibrato changes the harmonics and upper partials of sound, therefore altering the resonance of any given chord in which it's used - just like a bass pedal does.

But getting a bit off topic here.

Great piece, great weekend, will be something (as an Australian) that I tell my grand children about. Thanks for the memories.

Bari2

24.10.2007, 22:58

Just because someone has written the piece doesn't make him a suitable adjudicator; of course some composers, like me, make great judges!

So should we give the composer a chance to be in the box with the other adjudicators. Philip - would you like to have been asked?

I seem to remember someone telling me a story about a contest where the test piece was by Eric Ball, who was also conducting one of the bands (Brighouse?) Commenting on the performance by the band Eric had conducted, one of the adjudicators said something to the effect that they didn't believe the piece was interpreted in a way the composer would have wanted!

dyl

24.10.2007, 23:01

I seem to remember someone telling me a story about a contest where the test piece was by Eric Ball, who was also conducting one of the bands (Brighouse?) Commenting on the performance by the band Eric had conducted, one of the adjudicators said something to the effect that they didn't believe the piece was interpreted in a way the composer would have wanted!

Now there's something I haven't heard before! ;)

Bari2

24.10.2007, 23:07

Sorry if I've mentioned something that's often quoted. I'm new to this contesting game (last 12 months only).

dyl

24.10.2007, 23:10

Sorry if I've mentioned something that's often quoted. I'm new to this contesting game (last 12 months only).
Hehe! No worries! It just seems that story crops up every time the subject of a 'composer's wishes' is discussed!

Anno Draconis

25.10.2007, 09:13

So should we give the composer a chance to be in the box with the other adjudicators. Philip - would you like to have been asked?

I seem to remember someone telling me a story about a contest where the test piece was by Eric Ball, who was also conducting one of the bands (Brighouse?) Commenting on the performance by the band Eric had conducted, one of the adjudicators said something to the effect that they didn't believe the piece was interpreted in a way the composer would have wanted!

1950 British Open, testpiece was Resurgam, Ball conducted CWS Manchester into 4th place, the contest was won by Harry Mortimer's Fairey Aviation Works Band whose performance apparently reduced EB to tears (not in a bad way :D ).

I find the "pedal notes are wrong notes" argument ridiculous - if you admit that some bands "get away with it", that imples either that it is easier to add extra pedals than play the written notes (which doesn't fit with my understanding), or that it sounds better.

Here, like many banders, you are confusing "better" with "technically impressive". Gratuitous pedalling is usually only done to show off the fact that the players in question can do it with ease. It doesn't usually sound "better" in any musical sense and Mr Sparke knows enough about brass band scoring, I think you'll find, to have written it if it was going to sound better.

Anglo Music Press

25.10.2007, 09:47

I've also never been quite sure why bands add pedals. Is it because they think they will make the band sound more impressive and therefore gain extra marks from the judges? If so, they are underestimating the skill of the judges - a common fault, I feel.

Whenever I have judged a major contest, the level of judging is way above that. We are looking for musical line and argument, not who can play lowest and not even - you may be shocked - who makes the best sound. Yes, it's essential to make a good sound but I can't remember an occasion when quality of sound was the deciding factor between two bands for their relative placings.

I certainly don't remember pedalling being a deciding factor! In fact it will only ever draw negative comments from the judges when we compare notes. It's musically and strategically naive.

brassneck

25.10.2007, 09:58

Maybe when brass band composers are confident of band tuba players playing in the pedal register will we find more being written? As far as I'm aware, any legal pedal notes are usually written for effect and/or enhancing chords (such as pedals used in organ works!).

Anglo Music Press

25.10.2007, 10:15

Maybe when brass band composers are confident of band tuba players playing in the pedal register will we find more being written?

Or maybe have the confidence but we don't actually like the effect as much as tuba players do????

brassneck

25.10.2007, 10:25

Or maybe have the confidence but we don't actually like the effect as much as tuba players do????

- and that as well! I always feel that some people forget that for earlier works, the use of pedals wasn't even a consideration as many bands did not possess 4-valve tubas. I don't think it was an oversight on these composers not to use them as orchestral composers do! (i.e., concert pitch for usually larger instruments than just Eb or F tubas). Some lower register (4th valve) use can enhance, but not always as the composer intended as they can dramatically change the sound with additional harmonics (as organs do!). Is that a fair comment?

Anglo Music Press

25.10.2007, 10:29

Some lower register (4th valve) use can enhance, but not always as the composer intended as they can dramatically change the sound with additional harmonics (as organs do!). Is that a fair comment?

Yes, of course.

My epitaph will be

JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DO IT, DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO

This, I find, applies to most spheres of life! Moderation in all things......

New South Welshman

25.10.2007, 10:37

Excellent perspective, one we don't often hear as performers. Another one UK brass band performers won't often hear about is the use of F and C tubas in the performance of brass band repertoire. For many reasons (which I won't go into here) Australian brass bands are filled with F and C tubas as well as E and B tubas.

Are brass band composer's wishes so specific with regard to instrumentation that they preclude F and C tubas, particularly in a contest setting? If a band's sound is not high on the adjudicator's priority, I'm guessing that there would be no problem with this circumstance.

Anglo Music Press

25.10.2007, 10:46

Are brass band composer's wishes so specific with regard to instrumentation that they preclude F and C tubas, particularly in a contest setting? If a band's sound is not high on the adjudicator's priority, I'm guessing that there would be no problem with this circumstance.

I actually don't think anything can replace the Bb Bass in terms of depth of sound. But which tubas are used makes little difference.

BTW I didn't mean to say that band sound is not high on the judge's priority, it just usually happens that the band's that play best usually have the better sound, so it's not usually a deciding factor.

brassneck

25.10.2007, 11:11

A question for you, Philip! Since the piece wasn't written with the Royal Albert Hall in consideration, how did the acoustics and resultant echoes affect the detail? Anything lost in the cavern?

Anglo Music Press

25.10.2007, 11:41

A question for you, Philip! Since the piece wasn't written with the Royal Albert Hall in consideration, how did the acoustics and resultant echoes affect the detail? Anything lost in the cavern?

I thought the hall was very well behaved. It was definitely possible to tell the difference between bands who played tightly and those who didn't. With all respect to the first two bands, YBS (no 3) sounded much clearer and more transparent. As I said above, bands who abused the tempo markings (even by a little) gained little.

Bari2

25.10.2007, 13:13

Philip

Do you have any thoughts on the use of mutes in the 2nd movement, in places they were not called for? I saw two bands do this - including the winners.

Thirteen Ball

25.10.2007, 13:37

I find the "pedal notes are wrong notes" argument ridiculous - if you admit that some bands "get away with it", that imples either that it is easier to add extra pedals than play the written notes (which doesn't fit with my understanding), or that it sounds better. Simple application of logic, innit.

Sorry mate, I think there's a flaw in your logic.

Often it IS easier, for tuning and ensemble reasons to add a pedal or 8vb, than to play what's written, since the two pairs of basses are in different Keys.

Any bass section will tell you that two Eb basses on a low C and two BBb basses on an F below the stave (1st and 4th) is dead easy to get into tune. Try getting all four to play the same note (ie - the BBb basses the octave higher) and you'll hit problems. That's not to say it can't be done, but it means you've got to think and play as a unit and listen very carefully.

And the same is true of Bnat+Enat, Dflat+Aflat, and any number of other notes. Dropping one pair of basses an octave is a quick fix.

Now obviously that's not the reason a band the calibre of grimethorpe did it! But it can be a contributing factor elsewhere.

It also halps to mask slightly ropey articulation from the lowest player in moving parts. (Though really bad articulation still comes through whatever tricks you use.)

Splitting the octave makes playing together and pitching easier. That's precisely why composers writing test pieces write unison bass passages - and why they expect them played that way!

Anglo Music Press

25.10.2007, 14:22

Splitting the octave makes playing together and pitching easier. That's precisely why composers writing test pieces write unison bass passages - and why they expect them played that way!

Thiough I agree with your argument, I don't quite agree with the reasons. Even though Music for Battle Creek was not written as a test piece, the following still applies: when scoring a piece of music, I try to make it as easy to play as possible. The music itself may be difficult, but I wouldn't write unison basses to test their tuning, but because I wanted unison basses. It's a question of getting the texture right.

There's no point making music more difficult than it should be.

Griffis

25.10.2007, 15:32

when scoring a piece of music, I try to make it as easy to play as possible.

The opening cornet/euph solo section was an exception i take it?? ;)

Cracking piece of music, a real test to all the bands, and a lot of sleepless nights for myself! :(

Ian McElligott

25.10.2007, 15:42

Yes, of course.

My epitaph will be

JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DO IT, DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO

This, I find, applies to most spheres of life! Moderation in all things......

......including moderation!!;)

Anglo Music Press

25.10.2007, 15:54

The opening cornet/euph solo section was an exception i take it?? ;)

OK! OK! :cool:

I didn't say I try not to write difficult music, but that I try to make whatever music I write as easy to play as poss. when scoring. I could have put some of that cad. in the sop. but that would have been different music (ie not a synergy of two players - which was the theory!)

New South Welshman

25.10.2007, 18:20

:confused:

You don't have to justify yourself to us!

Thirteen Ball

25.10.2007, 18:26

Thiough I agree with your argument, I don't quite agree with the reasons. Even though Music for Battle Creek was not written as a test piece, the following still applies: when scoring a piece of music, I try to make it as easy to play as possible. The music itself may be difficult, but I wouldn't write unison basses to test their tuning, but because I wanted unison basses. It's a question of getting the texture right.

There's no point making music more difficult than it should be.

Sorry Philip - I wasn;t very clear there. I wasn't necessarily saying that's what you had done. I couldn't get a study score so other than what I heard (and thoroughly enjoyed) I'm not really in a position to comment on the scoring of the piece!

I was just making the point that this kind of thing has previously been done (Not necessarily by yourself) specifically to test how well players can listen and overcome such tuning issues.

And I'm definitely in agreement that there's no point making music hard for the sake of it. But if it has to be hard to sound how the composer wants, then so be it!

Anglo Music Press

25.10.2007, 18:29

I was just making the point that this kind of thing has often been done specifically to test how well players can listen and overcome such tuning issues.

Are you sure about that? Most composers I know don't like the contesting part of contesting.

Thirteen Ball

25.10.2007, 18:54

Are you sure about that? Most composers I know don't like the contesting part of contesting.

I know composers of my level who've done it. That said, that's a long way from the highest level of composition! :oops:

It's just a general statement based on things I've run across in some bass parts I've played. Sometimes It makes me think so - albeit I may have just misinderstood the composer's intentions.

Though even if I could think of a specific example, without the compser's say-so it's impossible to attribute it to "Making things hard" rather than just being because that's how the composer wanted it to sound.

(Doffs imaginary cap... stops digging hole...)

Anglo Music Press

25.10.2007, 19:01

I know composers of my level who've done it. That said, that's a long way from the highest level of composition! :oops:

It's just a general statement based on things I've run across in some bass parts I've played. Sometimes It makes me think so - albeit I may have just misinderstood the composer's intentions.

Though even if I could think of a specific example, without the compser's say-so it's impossible to attribute it to "Making things hard" rather than just being because that's how the composer wanted it to sound.

(Doffs imaginary cap... stops digging hole...)

I feel players will generally always be dubious about composers' motivations....... 'specially if they can't play something!

Thirteen Ball

25.10.2007, 19:06

I feel players will generally always be dubious about composers' motivations....... 'specially if they can't play something!

Guilty, your honour.... :oops:

Super Ph

30.10.2007, 21:58

Will the Sec

30.10.2007, 22:54

:confused:

You don't have to justify yourself to us!

Ah, but there is the beauty of tMP. Mr Sparke can if he wants to.

brassintheed

31.10.2007, 00:20

I can't agree that playing in octaves is generally easier than playing in unison. Maybe for specific cases, but really not in general. Many of the hardest parts in banding are unison in octaves, and that duet mentioned above provides a good example.

I think that something written in octaves CAN be a very difficult part (usually because it's a duet which has been written in a test piece). But the basic concept of two instruments playing at their natural levels in octaves with each other is much less dangerous and much easier to play musically than two instruments playing in unison. This is down to intonation issues, tonality, harmonics etc. basically it's easier to keep in tune, and differing tones and styles can potentially work as an advantage musically. The advantage of unison to the players is that neither of them feels as exposed, but I would say this would only ever be an advantage if musicality is not among the players strong points!

Blagger

31.10.2007, 00:38

Philip -
Firstly apologies to mods as this may be a little off topic - but still relevant in regards to the "making the music hard for the sake of it" argument .
This is a question I have always wanted to ask you ( never had the nerve to at college :-) ) -

Harmony Music - what was your thinking/musical reason ( for want of a better term) behind the extreme register of the Euphonium solo ?
AND by writing that famous top "E" did you ever think how it would (in my opinion) open the the door for other composers to follow?
I'm open to stand corrected but it was the first instance of such an extreme register - and BTW my favourite 6 or so bars of Euph writing ever ......

Anglo Music Press

31.10.2007, 08:46

brassneck

31.10.2007, 10:38

So blame her!

- she wasn't a Scot by any chance? :rolleyes:

(... if it's who I think it was, her hubby was also Scottish and played 2nd euph at Hillingdon Band too!).

Anglo Music Press

31.10.2007, 10:46

Yes, 'twas Shirley!

brassneck

31.10.2007, 10:50

Yes, 'twas Shirley!

- and Campbell Wilson was her hubby. I (& three others) used to compete against her school quartet from Tayport years ago and Campbell was solo euph at Cowdenbeath during the '70s. Memories! (... and that's how I knew about you before I knew about your music! I stopped playing during the '80s!).

Blagger

31.10.2007, 17:27

Well, firstly, it was where I wanted the music to go, but I was unsure how wise it was. I took the cadenza down to my band and showed it to my euph player (who had just got her instrument out of the case) and she played it first time.

So I left it in - and it was about 10 years before it was successfully played again! So blame her!

Thanks - thats a great story :-)
That's why I love the Desford performance so much - hearing Steven Mead "struggle" to get up there ( and - according to the 2nd Euph who was a college mate of mine- the only time he did have to reach for it) just made it even more exciting. I have other recordings with Euph players who make it with ease - but they lack something of that Desford performance IMHO.