sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bore (wind instruments), Cornet, Trumpet

Cornet vs. Dr. Richard Strange, Arizona State University

Is there a valid distinction in today’s bands?

Most experienced band directors versus a large- trumpet with characteristics 2 and 3 in have opinions on this subject that a 1 1/2 . If the two the chart].) are set in concrete; therefore, the instruments were played from Joseph Wagner, composer and title above may not thrill “old- behind a screen by the same fine author of a well-known book on timers” who have heard many player, chances are that most band scoring practices, had this times before much of what follows. musicians would be unable to to say back in 1960, “Actually, May I hasten to add, “So have I.” identify either instrument correctly these two instruments [ However, my opinion, which has in a series of trials (this experiment and trumpet] are more alike now been formed over a period of has been conducted many times than at any previous time in their time after careful study of the with the same “predictable” results). development. There is a mid- “problem” with an eye to its Twentieth Century trend historical antecedents, may Cornet: toward replacing be of some value to younger 1. Mellow “lyrical” tone (conical bore) with in American members of our profession. 2. Less blowing resistance bands.”1 The original Most directors like the tone of 3. “Larger” slot pronounced difference both the cornet and the trumpet, 4. Total dynamic range softer than trumpet between the two instruments but would be hard pressed to Trumpet: almost has been erased in the say why both are included in the 1. Bright “piercing” tone (cylindrical bore) last few years, mainly due to “normal” band instrumentation. 2. More blowing resistance the expansion of the trumpet They also would be hard pressed 3.”Smaller” overtone slot bore and mouthpiece size to to justify (on the basis of tone 4. Total dynamic range louder than cornet “darken” the tone (and keep quality alone) the selection by the tone dark at today’s high most arrangers/composers of It should be obvious, then, orchestral volume levels). either of the two instruments for that when we speak of the tone The cornet and trumpet any one specific part. If these of each instrument, we really are sounded markedly different from two statements are even partially speaking of our idealization of the each other in the 19th Century. The true, why has there been so much tone quality that we believe should natural (valveless) trumpet had a dissension through the years about emanate from the instrument. Let’s proud and ancient heritage, while the topic? face the “fact” (born out by past the cornet was the “new kid on the First let us draw up a list objective testing) that there is no block.” In order to understand the of “historically agreed-upon readily identifiable difference in the differing acoustical properties of characteristics” unique to each tone of the two instruments when the two instruments in a historical instrument in order to facilitate played by most performers. (Please sense, it is necessary to remember discussion. (See the chart.) understand that this statement that the cornet came into being Are the above characteristics is made only from the listener’s as we know it in the early 19th really true under all circumstances? point of view. The player can Century. Forsyth tells us that, Let us examine number one tell a difference in the “blowing” “This instrument is really a military objectively. Hypothesize a small- characteristics of the cornet as development of the Post- bore cornet with a 12C mouthpiece compared to the trumpet [see [family, without valves].

25 Bandmasters Review • December 2004 Texas Bandmasters Association Cornet vs. Trumpet

Its short tube is partly cylindrical and part conical. more technical facility (needed for the string parts) The bore is larger than that of the Trumpet, and a than many of the woodwinds, which one would cup-shaped mouthpiece is used.”2 Circa 1824, valves normally expect to play the technical string lines. were added to give the instrument true chromatic Besides, the outdoor venue of the band organizations capability, and this innovation was adopted readily of that day dictated that more volume was needed on by cornetists of that time. the melodic parts than could be supplied by only a It is interesting to note that many trumpet players few (probably) out-of-tune woodwinds (if Berlioz is resisted valves, and continued to perform on natural to be believed). trumpets (no valves) until the middle of the century. So, we see a historical reason, having to The rivalry between performers on the cornet and do with tone quality, for three cornet parts and two trumpet became so pronounced that at one time the trumpet parts, a reason that no longer seems valid to Paris Conservatoire de Musique had most of today’s composers. They just different studios for each instrument, The cornet and don’t see the necessity of writing for five Arban being the cornet teacher. trumpet sounded separate parts, and have started writing The valve-cornet seemed particularly markedly different for only one of the two instruments suited to solo performance because of from each other in (interchangeably, it seems). Some write its ability to play melodies in the vocal the 19th Century. The for three (or four) cornets, some for register (the valveless trumpet could natural (valveless) three (or four) trumpets, and at least one only play melodies at the top of its trumpet had a proud well-known contemporary composer tessitura), and because its conical bore and ancient heritage, utilizes three trumpet and two cornet made it a more flexible instrument from while the cornet parts. (Alfred , at least, has “method a technical standpoint. But, in spite of in his madness.” He believes in scoring was the “new kid these advantages, it was never adopted the cylindrical together [trumpets on the block.” as a necessary instrument by with ], and conical brass composers (with a few exceptions). together [cornets with French horns The truth is that the 19th Century orchestra and ]. This makes some sense, although probably did not need another melodic voice, since conical many times are scored as the bass line the strings and woodwinds served that function so of both different instrument combinations. Also, since well. This orchestral “cold shoulder,” however, gave most bands no longer use cornets, trumpets usually the cornet an opportunity to assume the role of the play all parts in spite of the instrument named on the in concert bands (that had to rely on orchestral page of .) transcriptions because there was almost no original This brings us to the practicality of modern repertoire). (wind ) instrumentation. Yes, Historically, this led to the inclusion of a cornet cornets and trumpets do have different characteristics section (usually three parts) playing the role of strings, (especially to the player), but, does it matter in light of while trumpets (two parts) played the trumpet parts the “fact” that most performers today play the trumpet found in the original orchestra score, much of the as their instrument of choice. When I was the band time in a different key from the original. In these director at Carnegie-Mellon University in Pittsburgh, mid-19th Century bands, doubtless the cornet had Pennsylvania, many years ago, I was the proud

26 Bandmasters Review • December 2004 Texas Bandmasters Association Cornet vs. Trumpet

possessor of nine (count ‘em, nine) Bach Stradivarius composers separate out their parts according to medium-large bore cornets. They were beautiful, the criteria listed above. expensive instruments, and my excellent students What then are the criteria that they use? I must “hated” them. They played them only during band confess, most of the time I don’t know. I believe many period, and never practiced their band music on the composers just put down the name cornet or trumpet cornets they were assigned to play. by habit (or the dictates of the publisher), and not by They practiced the music all right, but on their conscious choice based on the subjective musical feel- own trumpets. This meant that they never sounded ing of the part. If there is a good possibility that this is as secure on the cornets in band as they sounded on so, why should directors worry about tonal differences their trumpet in recital, or in the practice room. Not of the two instruments when these seemingly make no only that, since they only practiced (and cared about) real difference to the composer, and cannot be heard by the trumpet, they made their cornets sound just most of the audience. To contend that one or the other like the trumpet. Why shouldn’t they? That was the instrument truly will enhance the realization of the tonal concept they had in their heads. I finally gave composer’s musical intentions must be mostly illusory. up after several years of fighting the “cornet battle,” What then is the “bottom line” in this discussion? and decided to let them play their own instruments. I believe the cornet/trumpet war has been won Immediately, the section sounded more secure, and decisively by the trumpet (this may or may not better in tune. be “good,” it simply is a fact). The trumpet is the Another reason I have never gone back to using instrument of choice of most all young students cornets is because I cannot look at (and sing) most who aspire to be professional players and teachers. cornet/trumpet parts and make a judgment, based on To buck this historical trend is to waste time and the character of the music, as to which instrument energy on an issue that already has been settled in should be used. Should cornets only play florid the “marketplace.” Slowly, but surely, composers and melodies, with trumpets intoning only brilliant arrangers are writing band music in such a fashion as and march-like themes? If this is so, why is to phase out the cornet entirely. It has been relegated so much music seemingly scored just the opposite to its rightful position in brass bands as both a section for the two instruments (or, at best, with a mixture of and solo instrument. This probably is all to the good, these styles)? I just don’t think most contemporary and simplifies the scoring task of today’s composers and arrangers. Let’s leave well enough alone.

Dr. Richard Strange, Professor of Music and Director of Bands, Emeritus at Arizona State University. He was director of bands at Carnegie-Mellon University, where his bands gave six annual concerts in New York’s Carnegie Hall. While in Pittsburgh, he played with the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra. He has served as guest conductor with the US Marine Band, the US Air Force Band, the US Army Band (Pershing’s Own), the US Army Field Band, the US Coast Guard Band, Armed Forces Bicentennial Band, Dallas Wind Symphony, the Texas Wind Symphony the Fresno Wind Symphony and L’Orchestre d’Harmonie de la Ville du Havre at “Coups de Vents” (1991 and 1994) in Le Havre, France. Dr. Strange is listed in the International Who’s Who in Music and Musicians Directory. Dr. Strange was president and currently is Executive Director of the American Bandmasters Association. In the past few years he has conducted, judged or given clinics in Austria, Belgium, Canada, England, France, Germany, Guam, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Switzerland, and the United States. At present, Dr. Strange is Music Director and Conductor of the 90-member Tempe (Arizona) Symphony Orchestra. Reprinted by permission of Bandworld Magazine, 407 Terrace St, Ashland, OR 97520 Volume 8, #5 p.8 (May-Jul 1993) 1 Wagner, Joseph, Band Scoring, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1960), 126-136 2 Forsyth, Cecil, , (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1949), 103.

27 Bandmasters Review • December 2004 Texas Bandmasters Association