TromboneChat

...and of course I don't mean physical differences, like strings vs wind, appearance etc. But musically, what are the differences? They have a similar range, so naturally, I often look to cello literature to find pieces to play. Not least because imho music written for cello is so often much more enjoyable to listen to than music written for the trombone. But that's just my opinion, of course.

Anyway, if you're performing a cello piece on the trombone, what do you have to give extra attention to, to make it sound good? Obviously, one big difference is breathing, which can make some cello music almost impossible to play well on the trombone. But are there other aspects where the two instruments differ, in a musical sense?

It's really hard to play section lead on cello in a big band.



But seriously not playing both, it sounds like it must be a physical problem to play a rhythmic swinging line on cello. Trombone has a pretty emphatic accent available, but I do not hear cellists doing anything similar.

Trombone can easily do a continuous narrow dynamic style, subject to breath.

Cello can play insanely high forever at low effort, and sound high. Trombone can play high for a short while and never sound high.

I've been dabbling with cello for several years. It is more different than similar, I think.

The trombone is like a cello on which you can only play down-bows and only finger the strings with your thumb.

Cello is really hard to even do simple stuff on but, somehow, a very good cello player has more potential to be both lyrical and flexible than a very good trombone player. I think the fact that the physical movement you have to do to get from one note to the next is usually tiny on a cello has a lot to do with that.

A cello has a wider spectrum of tone color than a trombone. No cello notes sound like a fart.

And, of course, cellos have more composers writing their music. All the A-list composers wrote for the cello. And the B and C-listers.

Even their D-list stuff sounds cool...




Developing cello players have numerous examples of great players playing great music they can listen to and emulate. We don't really have that in trombone land.

For reasons i can't explain cellists can... must... use a wider vibrato than trombonists would ever be allowed (today). I've noticed that since I took up cello, my trombone vibrato has been getting wider and wider. I'm turning into a warbling church choir soprano.

Cellos get away with glissandos that would be preposterous on a trombone. Choosing where to do them is part of their art.

i don't think trying to be like a cello will work. I think you have to re-invent the interpretation for trombone.

The cello burns longer?

But slightly more seriously, just listen to a couple of Bach cello suites played on both... the other joke that one should practice the suites daily but never play them in public is a decent reminder. The trombone just doesn’t do that. String instruments do not take breaths. They just go. They do not roar. They can saw a bit, and the emotion is raw, but in a very different way. One interesting way to feel the difference is to listen to a transcription of orchestral works for different ensembles. For example, there are a lot of Shostakovich transcriptions for Brass Bands... they are interesting, but they miss the character of the orchestral or even full wind band versions where the different textures of instruments are played off each other.

Cheers,
Andy

Interestingly, trombone used to be interchangeable in some contexts with the cello's predecessors as the bass string instrument. A lot of 17th century chamber repertoire is scored for "trombone or viol". The earliest known solo piece for trombone is actually for "trombone ó violone". There was of course much less difference back then in how either instrument was approached musically.

I was going to say that unlike trombonists, cellists aren't afraid of vibrato. But I see Robert beat me to it.

timothy42b wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:06 am I was going to say that unlike trombonists, cellists aren't afraid of vibrato. But I see Robert beat me to it.

Not only that, but a lot of trombonists are hesitant to use a strong 'ping' at the front of a note, which on cello would be equivalent to a strong 'bite' of the bow into the string at the start of a note. In general, except for volume, trombonists (from what I've seen) are trained to tone down these elements instead of using them expressively.

In terms of written music, cello bowings vs. trombone slurs have to be treated differently.

Also: double-stops on cello have to be creatively interpreted on trombone.

Cellos cannot use mutes like a trombone can.

Trombones have a much wider dynamic range.

Cellos do not have the high range endurance issue that trombonists sometimes have to deal with.

AndrewMeronek wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:44 am

timothy42b wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:06 am I was going to say that unlike trombonists, cellists aren't afraid of vibrato. But I see Robert beat me to it.

Not only that, but a lot of trombonists are hesitant to use a strong 'ping' at the front of a note,

I was at a Michael Davis workshop, and he hammered (sorry!) on this point. Orchestral style trombonists can get away with a no tongue start to a note, but he wanted a really hard ping when the style demanded it.

I've worked on it and for me it isn't easy.

It's a little too hard to be heard on a cello and a little too easy to be heard on a trombone.

A trombone is considerably easier to take on a plane.

A trombone takes longer to burn........

Oh. Just thought of this.

I can't remember if a cello is the right size or not. Does anybody know? (that thing with body vs air resonances)

Ah, found it. Nope, the cello should be smaller or bigger.

https://nvfa.org/8tet.html

timothy42b wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:40 am I can't remember if a cello is the right size or not. Does anybody know?

Too big to play.

Too small to make the sound they want.

The big difference is the price!
Leif

I used to use cello msic and tutor books for practising on my 'bone with. It's interstingly different and gave me a new outlook on my playing

Main differences for me was the broadly speaking trombone music and excercises is often focused around arpeggios and transversing the harmonic series (I'd never noticed that "slant" before) whereas the cello stuff was much more to do with big octaves and runs.

So, it helped me think differently. Same sort of thing with bassoon music which is MUCH more run-based.

Oh, and trombone players drink more and therefore have a more interesting social life

The cello has better music, at least in the classical world, and far more people are able to play that music on cello than trombonists can play any of the pieces in our mediocre repertoire.

Then again, the trombone repertoire in jazz music is vast and you hardly hear any jazz cellists.

I think that the cello is FAR more expressive than any brass instrument. It is capable of far greater dynamic and tonal contrasts. Secretly, I think composers also know that it is even better than the violin -- probably because it is more similar to a human voice. There are more violin solo works, but the cello pieces are usually the best! It's probably second only to the piano as a solo instrument.

The trombone on the other hand needs all kinds of tricks to change it's tone. I don't think anyone tried harder than Christian to push it as a solo instrument, but he is from the 80s and 90s, and composers were not writing music like what the cello had any longer. So instead, we get about 100 pieces or so which heavily rely on mutes, multiphonics, and theatrics to fill out a piece with tonal and dynamic contrast as well as interest. The Berio and Xenakis concertos are difficult to to play, and just as difficult to listen to. Jan Sandstrom's concertos are fun to listen to, but to pull of the theatrics you are only going to be imitating Lindberg. He is too closely associated with those pieces.

The Grondahl and R. Korsakov are about all we have for romantic music, and the Albrechtsberger, Haydn, and Wagenseil for classical. The David is probably our most performed work, and the composer couldn't even be bothered to write new material for the third movement.

I listen to cello and many other instruments like the voice to get ideas, still I don't have a goal to sound exactly like them. We have a trombone and we can in fact find ways to sound expressive, nimble, delicate etc. And we also have options other instruments don't have. Just see George Roberts and how he found his way to change the bass trombone into a beautiful singing instrument. He changed the way both trombonists, composers and public/listeners looked at this instrument. He made his own way, and its quite an extraordinary historic event he made back then. Still, nobody can or will sound like him. Still we can learn by listening him.

One time long ago we had an arranger that write music for us. A small ensemble and I felt like an elephant in a glass house. I tried to make it sound like I thought what he wanted, like a singing string instrument. Then he told "don't do that, make it sound like a trombone, don't be afraid."

It was a learning lesson for me. But of course, the important thing is still to try understand the context we play in and at the same time put our own signature to it. Not easy but fun to try.

Leif

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:00 amI think that the cello is FAR more expressive than any brass instrument. It is capable of far greater dynamic and tonal contrasts.

I would take exception to the idea that a cello is capable of greater dynamic contrast...

The trombone is much louder, but I think, in general, the cello can play MUCH softer, and with far greater nuance and expression than the trombone in both extremes of dynamics.
It can also shift back and forth between extreme dynamics with far greater ease.

We as trombonists have issues with "breaking up" at extreme dynamics. As do all brasses.

Wrapping the bell throat with leather or duct tape was one way brass players have tried to combat it.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:26 pm the cello can play MUCH softer

Not willing to concede that point...

JohnL wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:39 pm

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:26 pm the cello can play MUCH softer

Not willing to concede that point...

One thing that strikes me in this latest pairing (thanks, PaKETaZ) is the trombone's need to figure out where to breathe.

I ran into the same problem when I had to cover cello parts for an amateur orchestra in a concert. The parts were not high, nor were they very "notey". Big problem was the part was relentless. There was nowhere to grab a good breath without breaking the line.

Guy needs to learn doodle tongue.

If you want a job go with the cello. If you want fun choose the trombone.

Leif

In its own genre, a trombone is better than a cello.
But in its own world, a cello is much better than a trombone.

That gentleman in the last video recorded the suites as a younger man as seen there, and recently as an older man. They are so different, but so excellent, young and old.

Cello has the dead guy on the outside....
Oh wait, that's a coffin joke....

NVM...

A Strad Cello costs several million bucks. A Strad trombone costs 3 grand.

If you're stranded on a desert island you can use a cello to make either a fire or a boat . Can't think of a use for a trombone in that situation, other than for frightening off the wildlife.

samopn wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:05 am If you're stranded on a desert island you can use a cello to make either a fire or a boat . Can't think of a use for a trombone in that situation, other than for frightening off the wildlife.

You could probably use some of the tubing to make a still.

JohnL wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:28 am You could probably use some of the tubing to make a still.

...spoken like a true trombonist

samopn wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:33 am...spoken like a true trombonist

Or anyone else who would rather not die of either dehydration or water-borne illness. Most desert islands are kinda short on fresh water, and what is there is likely full of unpleasant microbes.

With a trombone, you might be able to signal a passing ship.
Not so much with a cello.

... what would you play to signal the passing ships. The Acrobat? The Rimsky Korsakoff?

samopn wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:33 pm ... what would you play to signal the passing ships. The Acrobat? The Rimsky Korsakoff?

Barnacle Bill the Sailor on bass...

come on people!

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:38 pm

samopn wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:33 pm ... what would you play to signal the passing ships. The Acrobat? The Rimsky Korsakoff?

Barnacle Bill the Sailor on bass...

come on people!

Doesn't work that well without some accompaniment. Maybe we need the cello after all?

Barnacle bill, of course.... Qnd lots of time to practise it whilst waiting for the ship....

Could also glint the sunshine off the bell as a signal

samopn wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:33 pm ... what would you play to signal the passing ships. The Acrobat? The Rimsky Korsakoff?

I'd go with the Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald.

I'm just imagining how ridiculously funny it would be to hail a ship with the Rimsky Korsakov tbone concerto, especially Alessi's take on the opening motif (up an octave).

The clarinet triplets always sound comical to me. Good music to have as the sound track for a video of puppies racing down a hallway and falling over one another in slow motion

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:22 pm I'm just imagining how ridiculously funny it would be to hail a ship with the Rimsky Korsakov tbone concerto, especially Alessi's take on the opening motif (up an octave).

...

Actually, Davis Shuman did that some 20 years earlier. In many respects, it does improve the line and makes it more virtuosic. I suspect Rimsky's trombonist wasn't quite that much of a virtuoso.