[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 2000 Test Pieces & Errata

To: brass-band@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: 2000 Test Pieces & Errata
From: "Mac" <mac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 01:48:58 +0100
Priority: low
Reply-to: brass-band@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> Simon Davies wrote:
> 
>> The first section area test piece for 2000 is Music for the Common Man by
>> Kenneth Downie. 40 for the score and parts, and then a free extra .
>> Yes you guessed it a page or erratum!
>> Watchdog might say "it's not fit for the purpose intended".

The errata sheet for Purcell Variations two years ago listed only a few of
the 30 or so printing errors we found in the score and parts.  Some of these
errors were critical (eg the missing top B second-to-last note of the
second-to-last movement on the solo cornet part), leading to noticeable
differences in performances between bands.  Do adjudicators receive the
errata sheets, and if so, do they penalise bands who play without their
benefit?

>From: John Todd <john.todd@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I've heard a lot of people say that - not about the parts but about the piece.
> What sort of test is that for the first section. It's one of the poorest
choices
> for years. Compare it to Spectrum or Ballet For Band. It's going to be a
> struggle to motivate any band to play it, and as for the audience, having to
> listen to performance after performance of rubbish like that ......

We all have different tastes in test pieces though, and I have to say that I
like 'Common Man' a lot, as I do Purcell Variations.  I'd love to hear
opinions of 'Narnia Suite' for the Third Section, which is IMHO the most
criminal choice of a test piece in years - I can't find anything in it at
all to justify its selection, other than the composer being a nice
high-profile mainstream name.  There's no substance to the piece at all - it
makes no memorable thematic statement and doesn't develop or progress
anywhere, it's incredibly badly scored and most of the band might as well
not bother turning up because there's nothing at all to test or interest
them.  Not a single member of the band had ANY positive comment to make
about the piece after we played it through last week, and I thought the
basses and troms were going to quit!

It's not even worth a concert performance because it's just not interesting
enough (it was written as background music for a TV show).  I never would
have thought I'd wish Warwick were back in the fourth section - but at least
Haslemere Suite is has some teeth to it (cheesey as it may be!) - what's
more, it's representative of what 4th section bands play in concerts.

I'm just sick to death of having to motivate the band to play these
pointless pieces of  the NCC keep selecting (this is the third
'original' suite in two years for us - at an average of 45 quid a time - not
one will EVER darken our stands again).  There are plenty of good test
pieces, both old and new, which offer more for bands and audiences alike.

And yes, I know the option is there to withdraw from the areas - but who
really benefits from that? To be honest, if it weren't for the lure of the
RAH we wouldn't bother - we have better ways of spending our limited time
together.

Apologies if I've offended anyone, but this selection is offensive to me as
a conductor and a musician (the two being mutually exclusive) and I reckon
I'm simply returning the gesture...

Cheers,
Mac

--
Colin McDonald
Director, Warwick University Brass Band, http://www.warwickbrass.co.uk

--

Prev by Date: Re: Coloured shirts and uniforms at contests
Next by Date: David James / Brass Workshop
Previous by thread: There but for the sake of God
Next by thread: David James / Brass Workshop
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread