Errata Sheet for Vizcaya

[BRIAN KEECH]

Does anyone know if an Errate sheet has been issued for "Vizcaya".
There are many differences between band parts and score. Listening to Regionals CD some they play per band part some per score!

Brian Keech

 

[Dave Payn]

I don't know if one has been issued but as there appears to be quite a number of discrepancies, I'm going to go with the score, even with the inconsistencies with itself, seeing as that's what the adjudicators will have in front of them.

Regards

 

[Naomi McFadyen]

here we go again!

 

[Roger Thorne]

here we go again!

That's exactly what I thought!
Missing bars and beats, added trills (flugel) staccato marks instead of tenuto etc. etc. :evil:

I agree with Dave though - Go with the Score

:wink:

 

[Big Gav]

It would appear that there are problems with parts/scores at every contest these days.COME ON PUBLISHERS,SORT IT OUT!
Another major problem is that several errata sheets will appear from various sources.In the two weeks before the 2003 British Open we at YBS received several different errata sheet from publisher,arranger,and other sources.This just adds to the confusion.
The problem with late changes is that it's difficult for some players to adjust once they've got used to their parts.This is very true in lower sections where there are a lot of youngsters.I will be working on Vizcaya with the Menai Bridge Band,and I don't want to have to tell my 12 year olds on the back row to change their parts a few days before the contest.Especially when they will have been playing the parts they've got for the previous 8 weeks!

Big Gav

 

[tewkeshorn]

Another problem we've found is that half the parts have differences from the score (which may explain why it's different on the CD), on some theres bars (of rest) and beats missing, accents, dynamics etc arent all there in some parts.

I don't know how this can happen though, as surely the band parts should be copied from the score?? :?

 

[Naomi McFadyen]

I don't know how this can happen though, as surely the band parts should be copied from the score?? :?

Yea, that's how it's done... it's called transcription... and whoever's been doing them recently hasn't been doing a very good job so it seems :x So frustrating!
You get paid a lot for transcribing music, surely that would have been an insentive to do it proply...

I'll offer do it next time I think :roll:

 

[Roger Thorne]

I don't know how this can happen though, as surely the band parts should be copied from the score?? :?

You must remember that this piece was published in 1967! So the modern technology that exists today didn't exist 37 years ago.
Unfortunately in the Brass Band Publishing Industry the 'Proof Reader' always seems to be the least important person in the company!


:wink:

 

[Naomi McFadyen]

Bet bands didn't get errata sheets in 1967 though!

;-)

 

[Dave Euph]

Damn, and I was practising that and I'll probably find that everything I've learnt is just wrong ...

 

[drummerboy]

You must remember that this piece was published in 1967! So the modern technology that exists today didn't exist 37 years ago.

True, though I've never encountered errors in Salvationist music, and I played a fair bit when I was in the SA. SP&S (and it's various divisions now) publish an awful lot of music, and always have done, so if they can publish error free music, why can't other publishers?
In my opinion, especially in this technologically aided era we live in, there is no excuse for errors in pieces.

 

[ploughboy]

Practicing Dave!! Bravo, I feel much better now!! thank, hope you had a good christmas!!!

Some of the errors are some elementary, like not putting numbers above the rest bars! how simple is that!!!!!!

Oh well, It seems a little sad that this isn't a suprise to anyone these days!!

 

[Dave Euph]

Practicing Dave!! Bravo, I feel much better now!! thank, hope you had a good christmas!!!

Some of the errors are some elementary, like not putting numbers above the rest bars! how simple is that!!!!!!

Oh well, It seems a little sad that this isn't a suprise to anyone these days!!

Admittedly not as much practise as I could do ... but practise all the same. It's not that hard, just the odd bit here and there that could catch me out come March.

See ya 12th Jan

 

[Lauradoll]

Damn, and I was practising that and I'll probably find that everything I've learnt is just wrong ...

Fool!!!!! :wink: :wink: :wink:

 

[Dave Euph]

Damn, and I was practising that and I'll probably find that everything I've learnt is just wrong ...

Fool!!!!! :wink: :wink: :wink:

If you say so ...

 

[PeterBale]

I don't know how this can happen though, as surely the band parts should be copied from the score?? :?

You must remember that this piece was published in 1967! So the modern technology that exists today didn't exist 37 years ago.

It was published in 1967, but it was also used for the Finals in 1995, so surely the errors were sorted out then :shock: :?: :!:

 

[Railybobs]

I seem to remember a set of music that were published where one or two parts only had four stave lines. open to Correction, but I'm sure it was the Barrtione parts.

Proof reading doesn't always eliminate all mistakes.

I'm sure that when Tyldesley did Resurgam not too long ago there was one or two mistakes that had to be corrected.

 

[Roger Thorne]

I'm sure that when Tyldesley did Resurgam not too long ago there was one or two mistakes that had to be corrected.

I think that any piece of music that you play which is considerably 'old' or typeset before the advances of todays modern technology will be prone to some error's. In those days the score and the parts were typeset seperately, and I think it would be fair to say that we all accept one or two errors to a degree.
What annoys me nowadays with the modern notation systems available is that a part can be produced from the score with the touch of a button. If your score has been proof read correctly there shouldn't be any note errors within the extracted parts. You might get the odd dynamic or cresendo in the wrong position but again this can be corrected when the parts are checked.

In my opinion, especially in this technologically aided era we live in, there is no excuse for errors in pieces.

There is an excuse, and that is COST. Although no-one will admit to it, the errors in todays music in my opinion come down to one thing - Money!
Just think about the costs involved with the use of Vizcaya for the Regionals (back on topic too!).
Let's say that there are 120 bands (approx.) taking part.
(I know a lot of bands would already have this in their library, but lets presume that its a new piece)
Each band pays £40.00 for the score and parts.
Total £4,800.
If a big publishing house was producing Vizcaya from scratch, and considering the huge overheads these bigger companies sustain, £4,800 would be nowhere near enough to produce a top quality, error free product, so you would probably end up with a more inferior product than the original!
If the Brass Band world wants quality, then unfortunately it will have to pay for it - but that's another argument!
In the meantime, just think about the quality of music we are talking here (Gilbert Vinter) the era it was produced (before the days of modern technology) and the cost to your band (£40)
All in all we have a pretty good value for money piece here. Just thank your lucky stars it wasn't a new commission, then perhaps we would have had something to moan about!

:wink:

 

[Jo Elson]

That's exactly what I thought!
Missing bars and beats, added trills (flugel) staccato marks instead of tenuto etc. etc. :evil:

I agree with Dave though - Go with the Score

:wink:

That sounds good, gets me out of doing the trills anyway. But saying that in the flugel solo, both the Scottish co op and Faireys band play the last trill, and not the one before that which is also marked on the individual part.

 

[Roger Thorne]

That sounds good, gets me out of doing the trills anyway. But saying that in the flugel solo, both the Scottish co op and Faireys band play the last trill, and not the one before that which is also marked on the individual part.

Correct Jo! Its the 5th bar of N which doesn't have the trill on it.

:wink: