Alto in Brahms symphonies

[Bach5G]

Reviewing my calendar, I see that I have Brahms 1 coming up in Feb.

It would appear that an alto is appropriate as in a letter Brahms referred to a “true alto” and a “little” trombone.

Anyone?

[BGuttman]

The part doesn't require an alto. Quite playable on a tenor. That doesn't mean you can't try one, though.

[harrisonreed]

It's appropriate. Toby Oft uses alto on Brahms 1 and 2. He's not alone.

[Kbiggs]

Historically, using an alto is… up in the air? Howard Weiner or Maximillien Brisson would know about performance practice. Using an alto for Brahms is becoming more acceptable (standard?) for Romantic literature in modern orchestral practice, regardless of historical accuracy.

But more to the point: On what instrument are you most comfortable playing Brahms 2? Also, you might ask your section mates whether they are willing to scale down to accommodate the lighter, brighter sound.

[harrisonreed]

We already had this debate though, of what instruments were being played when the piece came out vs. what instruments we are comfortable on vs what fits with the entire modern orchestra vs. what the composer explicitly asks for.

OP, if the reasoning for using alto on the piece is because you think Brahms really meant "alto trombone" when he wrote posaune 1 (alt) on the part and really wrote in a letter that he wanted an alto trombone on the part, you're absolutely right. Here is a quote from Will Kimball's website:

[The letter] is of note because 1) there has been significant modern scholarly debate about performance practice and use of alto trombone in Brahms’s music; and 2) there has been some recent discussion about the use of alto trombone (or lack thereof) in the 19th century in general. Here is what Brahms says in the letter:

“On no account 3 tenor trombones! One genuine little alto trombone and, if possible, also a genuine bass trombone” (“Daß keine 3 Tenor Posaunen kommen! Eine ächte kleine Alt-Pos. u. wo möglich auch eine ächte Bass-Pos.”) (emphasis in original; Avins 127, 136).

(Avins and Eisinger point out, incidentally, that Brahms deliberately misspells the word echt as ächte in order to mimic the local dialect [Avins 128]).

It may be worth pointing out the similarity of Brahms’s request with that of another important composer of the era, Hector Berlioz. Less that 30 years earlier, Berlioz “demands” a “true alto trombone” for Symphony Fantastique (Trombone History Timeline–1830): “The alto trombone part must not be played on a big trombone, as is often done in France: I demand a true alto trombone.” The similarity of the adjectives is what I am drawing attention to here: “genuine” and “true” alto trombone.

The Brahms quotation would seem to suggest that Brahms may have had an affinity for the alto trombone and bass trombone. The Brahms and Berlioz quotations together would seem to indicate that the “true” or “genuine” alto trombone of that time was “little” (and not simply another tenor with a small mouthpiece; Berlioz describes it as an instrument pitched in E-flat in his orchestration treatise).

https://kimballtrombone.com/2009/08/07/ ... -trombone/

Like Brahms didn't know what he was talking about? It's also hilarious that he intentionally writes in the local accent to further drive his point home.

As for scaling down the second trombone and bass if alto is used, you don't need to, and it might be inappropriate to do so. Here is Jay Friedman and Ken Schifrin discussing this very issue:

K: I was just referring back to our discussion about the seemingly prevalent opinion that Brahms wanted a big, dark trombone sound (contrary to historical evidence). Speaking of using the alto, there seems to be a worrying trend to think that because the first player is using smaller equipment (i.e. the alto) then therefore the 2nd and 3rd should also use smaller horns. This masks the three distinct timbres that composers were looking for.

J: I agree with you about not playing a smaller tenor when alto is used. There is more color in trombones that are much different in size. I don’t like the tendency to play the biggest alto and mouthpiece for most alto parts. The alto trombone should not sound like a small tenor or the effect is lost. It should have a classic alto sound, warm but focused, which if need be blends with the alto voices.

https://www.jayfriedman.net/j-and-k-tal ... e-history/

[bcschipper]

Irrespective of what trombones have been mostly used in orchestras and chamber music of the 18th and 19th century, composers must have know alto trombones from trombone sections used in church music where sections from f-bass to alto and even soprano trombones were used depending on the region in Germany. So when they explicitly ask for alto, you can be sure they know what they talk about.

Today, the alto is used not so much for its range but rather because its more transparent sound. A punchy big sound would cover up the delicate texture of the music.

[harrisonreed]

There is less conviction to use alto in later Brahms symphonies -- by the fourth it seems he was hoping that trombonists would move to valve bones, and was reluctant to even write for trombone. The players apparently weren't up to snuff. Those websites I quoted are worth the read.

[HowardW]

There is less conviction to use alto in later Brahms symphonies -- by the fourth it seems he was hoping that trombonists would move to valve bones, and was reluctant to even write for trombone. The players apparently weren't up to snuff. Those websites I quoted are worth the read.

Yes, we've been through this before. Nevertheless, I just want to point out that the trombonists of the Vienna Court Opera (and thus the Vienna Philharmonic) played valve trombones from the mid-1830s to 1883. In early 1883 the music director decided he wanted slide trombones -- I have copies of some of the pertinent documents from the Court Opera archives -- so he fired two of the trombonists, made the remaining two promise to learn slide trombone within a resonable period of time, and hired three German slide trombonists. The three new trombonists assumed their positions by the end of the year, thus the premiere of Brahms's Third Symphony was given in December of that year most likely with a full section of slide trombones -- apparently one of the new trombonists was a specialist for the alto trombone, which however does not necessarily mean that he used it on this occasion. Anyhow, until 1883 Brahms's First and Second Symphonies were played in Vienna using valve trombones, possibly including a valve alto trombone in B-flat!

Howard

[harrisonreed]

The first symphony, at least, was not premiered in Vienna, and was written for and played on slide trombones.

[HowardW]

The first symphony, at least, was not premiered in Vienna, and was written for and played on slide trombones.

I didn't say it was (it was premiered in Karlsruhe). But it was undoubtedly played in Vienna after Brahms took up residence there, and thus he probably heard it there with valve trombones before 1883. He also had his Third Symphony premiered in Vienna, possibly without prior knowledge of the change of instrumentation in the trombone section -- and fully expecting valve trombones.

Howard

[harrisonreed]

I wonder if they were all tenor / Bb valve trombones in Vienna? Or were there distinct instruments for each part?

FWIW I'm not arguing that those symphonies weren't all played, especially later on, on valve bones. I'm sure they were.

For that first symphony though, I think he was pretty clear about what he wanted, at least when he wrote it.

If we go with historical practice, keeping in mind that the third and fourth symphonies might have been written with valve bones in mind, what did Vienna use after 1883? Alto , tenor, bass slide trombones?

[HowardW]

I wonder if they were all tenor / Bb valve trombones in Vienna? Or were there distinct instruments for each part?

A ca. 1850 price list from the Leopold Uhlmann "Metall-Blas-Instrumentfabrik" lists:

Tenor oder Alt Posaune in b (b-flat)
Terz oder Bassposuane in g
Quart oder Bass-Posaune in f
Quint oder Bass-Posaune in es (e-flat)

all "mit Garnierung und Maschin von Pakfong" (with embellishments and valve sets of nickel silver)

FWIW I'm not arguing that those symphonies weren't all played, especially later on, on valve bones. I'm sure they were.

It depends when and where. Valve trombones remained in use in Bohemia and Italy well into the 20th century. Apparently also in Viennese church music (Hofkapelle).

For that first symphony though, I think he was pretty clear about what he wanted, at least when he wrote it.

Yes

If we go with historical practice, keeping in mind that the third and fourth symphonies might have been written with valve bones in mind, what did Vienna use after 1883? Alto , tenor, bass slide trombones?

I doubt that the Third and the Fourth were written with valve trombones in mind. In 1883 the Court Opera bought a set of Penzel (Leipzig) slide trombones (they actually bought the new players' instruments from them and lent them back as service instruments), and three years later the Opera ordered a new set from Schlott (Gollis, Leipzig).
One of the new players was chosen specifically because he could play alto. I'm not sure about the bass trombone.

Howard

[LeTromboniste]

Pretty much everything was said here so I don't have much to add.

One thing is that I would caution against giving too much weight to the Brahms letter when discussing what instrument he "intended" in his symphonies. He was writing about a specific performance of a specific piece (and that piece is for chorus and wind band – not the same style of writing as his symphonies, at all). We can't necessarily extrapolate that as expressing a general preference applicable to his entire output. Generalising from a single data point is rarely a good idea. For sure it does indicate that he was familiar with the instruments and did write for them and like their combination, but that is not necessarily an indication that he always wrote for or expected them.

If I have to give a personal opinion, I would say to me it seems quite plausible that Brahms had an alto and a proper long bass in mind for the 1st symphony, based on the writing (whether he got that or not is if course an entirely different question). Especially the bass part had some pretty telling signs that it was written for an F bass, and you can compare it to the other symphonies and see some important differences. I also personally think with modern orchestras that piece sounds better with alto on the first part, historical "accuracy" notwithstanding.

[EdwardSolomon]

I've had the good fortune to perform the Brahms symphonies several times. I've done all of them (on bass trombone), the first trombone being either a tenor or an alto in different performances. I've done them on modern instruments and on German Romantic trombones (and tuba in Nº 2) and even used a section of alto/tenor/bass to perform Nº 3. It seems pretty clear that Nº 2 is not really long slide bass trombone territory, as the part lies significantly higher than the other symphonies, owing to the presence of a tuba. The alto works well in Brahms (also in the Begräbnisgesang and Ein deutsches Requiem) and according to Ken Shifrin's thesis, Symphony Nº 4 (1897) is quite possibly the last symphony to specify alto trombone, even though at the time it was largely obsolete.

[MrHCinDE]

I hadn’t thought about the points raised here about not downsizing 2nd/3rd when playing alto on the upper part. We fell into that accidentally when we played it with me on alto, a large tenor on 2nd and a big ‘ol Edwards on 3rd. The conductor initially assumed I’d play tenor but was persuaded during a sectional when we tried each combo and a clear preference emerged.

My advice is to try a couple of options in a sectional, invite the conductor to listen and decide what is most appropriate for your ensemble, regardless of what anyone else does.

[BrianJohnston]

Here is my take on Brahms:

1st - Alto
2nd - small tenor
3rd - large tenor
4th - large tenor

[Cmillar]

If I remember correctly, I think that Gordon Cherry (retired principal tbone of Vancouver Symphony) used a Conn 6H for Brahms.

[wnlqxod]

At least from what I know, the modern 2 tenors/1 bass setup really got its start with Wagner's Tannhäuser- and we know what that setup can do when playing a unison melody at fortissimo.

Furthermore, I notice that in rep played by 2 tenors/1 bass, when trombones are used as thickening agents, they are (often) used to augment orchestral shots at fortissimo (and boy does it slap your face with the intensity when the low brass is in the mix versus when it is not) rather than playing sustained, legato harmonies or chord progressions at moderate volume in the middle or background in tutti, a task better served by smaller horns especially when the string section in front of you is also thinner.

Furthermore, we have a case like Tchaikovsky where 2 tenors/1 bass is used to great effect, even if his score per se indicates "alto".

Thus, I think it really depends on the kind of writing that the composer does for that particular piece.

I think that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd symphonies are better served by a smaller section. Again, when not playing exposed chorales, trombones often play long notes that serve to progress the harmony... in tutti, with other instruments potentially playing rhythmically interesting figures.

The 4th may well sound convincing with a 2 tenor/1 bass section. Here, trombones are used for the purpose of, among others, playing important melodies and augmenting shots. Both of these tasks are arguably better suited for bigger instruments with some oomph behind them. Furthermore, we see more rhythmically homogeneous layers with members of the low brass doubled.. I mean amplified ( ) by various instruments, so we do not need to worry about covering up interesting middleground material as much as before. With that being said, there are still some spots where a more careful approach to tutti balance is needed though.

[LeTromboniste]

At least from what I know, the modern 2 tenors/1 bass setup really got its start with Wagner's Tannhäuser- and we know what that setup can do when playing a unison melody at fortissimo.

Furthermore, I notice that in rep played by 2 tenors/1 bass, when trombones are used as thickening agents, they are (often) used to augment orchestral shots at fortissimo (and boy does it slap your face with the intensity when the low brass is in the mix versus when it is not) rather than playing sustained, legato harmonies or chord progressions at moderate volume in the middle or background in tutti, a task better served by smaller horns especially when the string section in front of you is also thinner.

Furthermore, we have a case like Tchaikovsky where 2 tenors/1 bass is used to great effect, even if his score per se indicates "alto".

Thus, I think it really depends on the kind of writing that the composer does for that particular piece.

I think that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd symphonies are better served by a smaller section. Again, when not playing exposed chorales, trombones often play long notes that serve to progress the harmony... in tutti, with other instruments potentially playing rhythmically interesting figures.

The 4th may well sound convincing with a 2 tenor/1 bass section. Here, trombones are used for the purpose of, among others, playing important melodies and augmenting shots. Both of these tasks are arguably better suited for bigger instruments with some oomph behind them. Furthermore, we see more rhythmically homogeneous layers with members of the low brass doubled.. I mean amplified ( ) by various instruments, so we do not need to worry about covering up interesting middleground material as much as before. With that being said, there are still some spots where a more careful approach to tutti balance is needed though.

Having a tenor on top and as a bass were common way before Wagner.

When you say 2 tenors 1 bass, it doesn't mean much for that time period. They didn't have dual valves back then, and a section of only Bb instruments (as opposed to Eb alto and/or F or Eb bass) may or may not have had a somewhat larger instrument on "bass", or all roughly equal-bored instruments. Also with the widely varying designs, sometimes a smaller-bored instrument can sound more bassy than a larger-bored instrument. In a section of romantic German trombones, I've definitely played bass with an instrument that was technically "smaller" than what the principal was using (smaller bore, wider bell throat, same bell end diameter). Was I playing a "bass"? Or just a tenor that plays better as a bass? We're we both playing a "tenorbass"? Semantics. But it just goes to show we have to be careful with blanket statements.

Also, Tchaik wasn't writing for alto. The German prints of his symphonies might indicate "Alto" and "bass" (I can't remember if they do), but that was only an old edition convention, not an indication of what size instrument the parts are actually written for.

[BGuttman]

We can get into a problem of semantics here. Composers (and especially engravers) used the term "alto" to mean "high" rather than meaning a specific instrument. Also, as Maxiilien says, what constituted an alto trombone (instrument) varied from country to country. Just because the part says "Trombone Alt" doesn't necessarily mean they specifically wanted an instrument in Eb.

[HowardW]

Also, Tchaik wasn't writing for alto. The German prints of his symphonies might indicate "Alto" and "bass" (I can't remember if they do), but that was only an old edition convention, not an indication of what size instrument the parts are actually written for.

This was an editorial convention not just for Tchaikovsky's works, but for just about everything published before 1900 or so.

Howard

[wnlqxod]

Also, Tchaik wasn't writing for alto. The German prints of his symphonies might indicate "Alto" and "bass" (I can't remember if they do), but that was only an old edition convention, not an indication of what size instrument the parts are actually written for.

We can get into a problem of semantics here. Composers (and especially engravers) used the term "alto" to mean "high" rather than meaning a specific instrument. Also, as Maxiilien says, what constituted an alto trombone (instrument) varied from country to country. Just because the part says "Trombone Alt" doesn't necessarily mean they specifically wanted an instrument in Eb.

These would be what I have been trying to get at but failed to express with clarity: that "alto" should not be dogmatically taken to mean the Eb instrument, but rather we should use artistic discretion in deciding which equipment is appropriate. What is not to say that the same "alto" parts in different pieces by the same composer are actually best served by using different equipment, rather than getting stuck in a one-choice-fits-all mindset just because the works are by the same composer?

This was an editorial convention not just for Tchaikovsky's works, but for just about everything published before 1900 or so.

There we go.

[LeTromboniste]

Also, Tchaik wasn't writing for alto. The German prints of his symphonies might indicate "Alto" and "bass" (I can't remember if they do), but that was only an old edition convention, not an indication of what size instrument the parts are actually written for.

We can get into a problem of semantics here. Composers (and especially engravers) used the term "alto" to mean "high" rather than meaning a specific instrument. Also, as Maxiilien says, what constituted an alto trombone (instrument) varied from country to country. Just because the part says "Trombone Alt" doesn't necessarily mean they specifically wanted an instrument in Eb.

These would be what I have been trying to get at but failed to express with clarity: that "alto" should not be dogmatically taken to mean the Eb instrument, but rather we should use artistic discretion in deciding which equipment is appropriate. What is not to say that the same "alto" parts in different pieces by the same composer are actually best served by using different equipment, rather than getting stuck in a one-choice-fits-all mindset just because the works are by the same composer?

This was an editorial convention not just for Tchaikovsky's works, but for just about everything published before 1900 or so.

There we go.

Aah yes sorry, I misunderstood you. Exactly!

[wnlqxod]

Aah yes sorry, I misunderstood you. Exactly!

No worries! If anything, you brought up a poignant point that bore size alone does not completely determine the acoustic profile of the instrument- case in point: your bass with a smaller bore and wider throat.

Also, I will admit that the words "alto", "tenor" and "bass" immediately made me think in terms of modern North American instruments- still, there was a time when the 0.547" horn, coupled with a 6.5 AL-sized mouthpiece in modern terms, was a "bass".
Heck, I encountered another opinion stating that using the same modern 0.562" horn with a modern bass-sized mouthpiece, but just playing with more dynamic restraint, can work, too.

So, what is "alto", "tenor", and "bass"? In my opinion, they may indicate the commonly used range in the parts, or the "high-middle-low" ordering by range, and the only fixed rule on equipment selection and preparation would be whether we can get the appropriate sound, and many different configurations may help achieve the desired result.

[harrisonreed]

Well, don't stray too far from the topic here. In Brahms 1, alt posaune means alt posaune. Or, in Brahms' written style, "y'all play yer wicked tiny baby trambone now on first 'bone, doncha'know, mmkay? I'll be hella mad if you dudes all play tenor on this thing, yo."

The convention was not the same everywhere, all at once.

[PMPugs20]

FWIW - I went to see Brahms 2 at the CSO not long ago, and Jay used an alto for it and it sounded wonderful and fit really well. Isn't that one normally played on tenor? I sort of preferred the lighter sound for it.

[wnlqxod]

I've definitely played bass with an instrument that was technically "smaller" than what the principal was using (smaller bore, wider bell throat, same bell end diameter). Was I playing a "bass"? Or just a tenor that plays better as a bass?

Well, don't stray too far from the topic here. In Brahms 1, alt posaune means alt posaune. Or, in Brahms' written style, "y'all play yer wicked tiny baby trambone now on first 'bone, doncha'know, mmkay? I'll be hella mad if you dudes all play tenor on this thing, yo."

The convention was not the same everywhere, all at once.

At this point, what if a horn with 0.5" bore plays more "alto" than a 0.47" horn, for example? What if we had two horns of the same bore where due to whatever construction and mouthpiece choice, they sounded like they belong to two different categories? Sure, at least for the 1st, I think Brahms is demanding three distinct colours. Now, in terms of equipment choices to satisfy the artistic vision, we may well let go of hard-and-fast dogmas like "lower pitch always equals bigger bore."

[wnlqxod]

I think that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd symphonies are better served by a smaller (in hindsight, I should have probably written "lighter") section. Again, when not playing exposed chorales, trombones often play long notes that serve to progress the harmony... in tutti, with other instruments potentially playing rhythmically interesting figures.

FWIW - I went to see Brahms 2 at the CSO not long ago, and Jay used an alto for it and it sounded wonderful and fit really well. Isn't that one normally played on tenor? I sort of preferred the lighter sound for it.

And again, considering how the trombones are scored in the 2nd, I am not be surprised that the end result was spectacular.

[stewbones43]

Hi, I have just played Brahms 1 with my local amateur orchestra and was happy to play it on my alto; the section also had a large bore on tenor and a large bass on the bass part. This was because of the availability of players; we share out the parts between 4 of us. The other work which included trombones was Beethoven's "Fidelio" overture.

Our next concert has Mozart's "Magic Flute" overture as the only work requiring trombones and hopefully that section will be alto (36H), medium bore tenor (Rath?) and large bore Bb/F tenor (Yamaha YSL 682B). Then after that we have Beethoven's "Leonora" overture and Brahms 4. Again the line up will be alto (36H), MB tenor (Rath) and LB Bb/F
(88H). I might see how things go playing the 1st part on tenor, but I think I will prefer to do it on alto. (I am the only one of the 4 of us with an alto, so that restricts me to that chair).
The final concert of the season is next summer and the only work for trombones is Stamford's "Piano Concerto No. 2" and has a standard, 20th century line up of 88H, 88H and Reynolds "Stereophonic" bass (my turn to sit out).
Hopefully next season will be a bit more varied.

Cheers

Stewbones43

[Sjos1987]

From an artistic standpoint, go with something that blends well with the other trombones in the section. From a business standpoint, if you’re getting paid to double, maybe you play the alto. Compromise between those two things.

[Olofson]

From an artistic standpoint, go with something that blends well with the other trombones in the section. From a business standpoint, if you’re getting paid to double, maybe you play the alto. Compromise between those two things.

Word!

[LeTromboniste]

From an artistic standpoint, go with something that blends well with the other trombones in the section. From a business standpoint, if you’re getting paid to double, maybe you play the alto. Compromise between those two things.

I would say that from a business standpoint, it's usually a good rule of thumb to do best from the artistic standpoint. If your alto playing is good, then there's a decent chance that's what you'd choose artistically anyway, so enjoy the doubling fee. If it's not good enough, no one-off doubling fee is enough to counterbalance potential missed opportunities that can be caused by leaving a bad impression to your trombonist colleagues, other musicians in the orchestra, the conductor, and eventually people in the hall if just one of these people chooses not to hire you later on.

[sungfw]

From an artistic standpoint, go with something that blends well with the other trombones in the section. From a business standpoint, if you’re getting paid to double, maybe you play the alto. Compromise between those two things.

I would say that from a business standpoint, it's usually a good rule of thumb to do best from the artistic standpoint. If your alto playing is good, then there's a decent chance that's what you'd choose artistically anyway, so enjoy the doubling fee. If it's not good enough, no one-off doubling fee is enough to counterbalance potential missed opportunities that can be caused by leaving a bad impression to your trombonist colleagues, other musicians in the orchestra, the conductor, and eventually people in the hall if just one of these people chooses not to hire you later on.

Hear! Hear!