TromboneChat

I play in a "big" band which occasionally doesn't have a full section available (parts 1-4). I usually play 4th or 3rd, but when we only have two trombones available, and my colleague is on 1st, would it be better for me to play 2nd, or 3rd? Part 1 is obviously important, but what other part is usually "next" in priority? Is there a consensus?

Probably 2nd will fill in the harmonies best.

Most big band arrangements I have seen should be filled in the order 1-2-4-3 except when the 3rd part is bass trombone and 4th part is another tenor, in which case it is 1-2-3-4.

Orchestral music is a different thing entirely. Much German music of the Romantic period relies most heavily on the 3rd (Bass) trombone and often in a 1 man section, the part to be played is 3.

As a "default setting", I'd go with Gabe's suggestion of covering the second book so you get the tight harmonies between 1st and 2nd.

But...

It really depends on the chart. If your band has a fairly stable book, I would suggest making the determination on a case-by-case basis and noting the order of importance at the top of the 1st trombone part.

You should also be on the lookout for exposed licks in the 4th trombone part. Many of them will be doubled by the bari sax, but there might be some that are not. Pencil those licks into the other parts as cues. Hopefully someone will have a horn with an f-attachment and can cover them.

Yeah. I agree that sometimes the 4th part is equally important, but not always. Rarely is the 3rd part that important.

If you only have 2 bones, I think you need to be looking at a "little big band" setup (if the trumpets and/or saxes are a bit short also), or getting a longer sub list. 2 bones does not make a big band section.

I showed up for an MPTF Big Band concert and we had 3 trombones and 3 saxes (2 altos and 1 tenor). 3 saxes is a worse section than 2 trombones, so I covered the 4th sax line. Overall sound was much better. But I found the 4th sax part went REALLY high!