Untitled Document
     
Advertisement Click to advertise with us!
     

The Acoustic Equilibrium

tictactux

Distinguished Member
Distinguished Member
I recorded my Band's concert last Saturday and analyzed the result a bit. Brass and saxes are very present, small woodwinds sound as if seated 50 yards behind the stage. You can argue and reason any way you want, the result is always the same: not enough oomph, we simply are not loud enough.

Our band consists of 3 flutes, 6 clarinets, 7 saxes, 10 small brass, 7 medium/large brass and 2 percussion, basses in the back, on the right a block with small/medium brass and saxes, percussion in the middle, on the right the small woodwinds section. Doesn't really make it easier for us to play with the rest of the band when separated visually and acoustically by a "drum barrier".

The obvious answer would be to increase the size of our section, but as many of you know this is easier said than done. Another possibility would be to hold back the small brass a bit which mostly doesn't work, maybe in rehearsal but not under combat conditions.

Saxes are per se more capable delivering (and have no problem doing so), but flutes just can't blow harder, and we have our limits as well. We play f..fff during the whole show which doesn't work well with fast passages, not to mention tone and pitch.

How can we get more "presence" without sacrificing accuracy or tone? Mic-ing is out of the question as we can't (and don't want to) haul a PA everywhere, and it contradicts the paradigm of a "self powered" concert band.

Ideas from the field are welcome.

Side question to the acousticians: is the limited volume a property of cylindrical-bore woodwinds, or why is that?
 
Ben, the best bands out there limit their band and section sizes because of this. Yes, I know you said that isn't necessarily an option. So what is the size of a normal wind band you might ask? It's usually along the lines of:

6 flutes
9 clarinets
2 alto clarinets (if any)
2 bass clarinets
2 alto saxes
1 tenor sax
1 bari sax

Well, you get the idea. If you have too many alto saxes for example, then most of the time we are either sitting some players out or playing very softly, which doesn't usually help the tone and sound of that section.

If you reject my suggestion to size your sections accordingly then you can spend a lot of time teaching the large sections to listen for the smaller sections with statements like, "if you can't hear the flutes here, you are playing too loud." or "Listen to what you are missing here because you are playing too loud." or "Who can tell me which section had the melody the that last part we played?" or " Don't make me cut the section down because you are playing too loud." or "Do you really think your part should be the loudest in the band for this song?"

Really, sizing a band and it's sections correctly is the only fair solution. And for the WCB to get there, we instituted defined section size limits, auditions, and used attrition (vice asking people to leave) to accomplish our resizing. I'm subbing in another band that has problems; it really is no fun to have to play that softly and for some of the high French horn parts, it can be very hard to play as softly as is usually necessary.
 
...I should add that a) it is not "my" band (it's a community concert band) and b) I don't have a say in this regard anyway.

We try to motivate folks to double for certain occasions (eg two trumpets will play Eb horn in the winter season) in order to get a broader spectrum, but other (harder) measures are out of the question - no way we should want players to leave.

I really appreciate your thoughts, Jim, and it's an inconvenient truth you're describing here. We do sense that our director isn't really at ease with us, I sometimes think he'd prefer a more classical lineup with just brass and saxes.

But when entering a discussion or a brainstorming about these topics, I'd like to be a bit prepared.
 
If your group would be willing to use some unconventional set-up arrangements, you could do a lot to adjust the balance. Just a few ideas:

-Put the weakest woodwinds all in a straight line in the front of the band at the front of the stage.

-Seat the high brass whose sound is directional so they are blowing across the stage, not forward toward the audience.

-Place the low brass with upright bells near the center at the back.

-Seat the trombones if they are strong like the trumpets but blowing the opposite way on the opposite side of the stage.

-If the trombones are weak, put them at the back blowing forward with the baritones & tubas.

-Put the bass drum near the center alongside the tubas

-Put the rest of the percussion except the timpani well off to the side in the wing of the stage

-Put the timpani on the other side of the stage at the back near the tubas & bass drum.

-The alto voices - horns and alto sax work well in the center behind the woodwind line and in front of the low brass.

-If you want the horn sound to come out more seat them on the front left side of the stage facing in so the bells point out to the audience.

The trick is to be creative and think acoustically rather than "the way we've always done it". Look up some articles about how they used to make the earliest jazz vocal recordings using a single mike with no mixing and get a great balance by positioning the instruments in a large "V" with the vocalist in the front.

John
 
Every ensemble I've ever played in has always put the percussion as far away from everything else as physically possible. Realizing that they still can be too loud if you don't have that much real estate, clear plexiglass barriers around the various percussion have been a solution I've seen employed.

As far as volume is concerned, I can blow away a symphonic bass trombonist when I'm playing bari and using my hard rubber Berg Larsen 'piece :).

You have an extremely lopsided ensemble. You've got too many saxophones and brass in comparison to your high winds. At the very least, the high winds need to be in the front and the brasswinds that can play into the stand, should. Or buy/make some whisper mutes (they cost $2 to make, for a trumpet). Additionally, the flutes should be seated in such a way that the "business end" (i.e. low B/Bb) is facing out into the audience. Clarinets? Well, a posture change can also make a volume change. I think that the saxophones might be a bit of an issue. You might try taking away their metal mouthpieces. Either that or smack 'em upside the head when they get too loud :p.

I've gotta say, tho, that unless you're in a place with really good acoustics, it's going to be very hard with that small a proportion of high winds -- unless they're miked or everyone controls their volume.
 
If your group would be willing to use some unconventional set-up arrangements, you could do a lot to adjust the balance. Just a few ideas:

-Put the weakest woodwinds all in a straight line in the front of the band at the front of the stage.

-Seat the high brass whose sound is directional so they are blowing across the stage, not forward toward the audience.

-Place the low brass with upright bells near the center at the back.

-Seat the trombones if they are strong like the trumpets but blowing the opposite way on the opposite side of the stage.

-If the trombones are weak, put them at the back blowing forward with the baritones & tubas.

-Put the bass drum near the center alongside the tubas

-Put the rest of the percussion except the timpani well off to the side in the wing of the stage

-Put the timpani on the other side of the stage at the back near the tubas & bass drum.

-The alto voices - horns and alto sax work well in the center behind the woodwind line and in front of the low brass.

-If you want the horn sound to come out more seat them on the front left side of the stage facing in so the bells point out to the audience.

The trick is to be creative and think acoustically rather than "the way we've always done it". Look up some articles about how they used to make the earliest jazz vocal recordings using a single mike with no mixing and get a great balance by positioning the instruments in a large "V" with the vocalist in the front.

John
John, I have pointed this post out to a couple of my band directors. It is probably very obvious to great directors and it certainly makes a lot of sense. But I bet any director with some of the problems Ben describes should review this list.
 
And a response from one my fav directors:

I like JBT too, but I'm biased because he describes (almost) the exact setup I use with <local community band>. My exceptions:

  • I don't separate the percussion because we have so few players I want to keep the instruments close at hand for everyone.
  • We have too many clarinets for the front row.
  • I don't curve the back row much, because we don't have excess brass so pointing directly at the audience is OK. A slight curve is needed to push the brass sound across the group. But: the slight curve means that the trombone sound doesn't really reach the (conductor's) left side of the group, so I put the low woodwinds with the low brass to facilitate togetherness. The upright brass goes in the center so everyone gets to hear. There are tradeoffs, but I think it works best
As a note, I used to arrange parade bands in a similar way: flutes, then clarinets, saxes, trumpets, trombones, sousaphones and percussion. The argument being that the brass can't hear the woodwinds anyway, so don't pretend. On the other hand, if you put the brass in front the woodwinds can't hear as well (plus a tuning discrepancy when you stand behind directional brass). People thought it was weird, but it worked.

Just to toss another log on the "size of the band" discussion: there are actually two basic concert band approaches, the "wind ensemble" (WE) and the "concert (or symphonic) band" (CB).

Wind ensembles can be small: when I was teaching I would go as low as upper 20s, with one on most parts (like the 22 winds called for in the second movement of the Holst). Concert bands can go as large as 100 or more. River Winds is 2 horns away from textbook 'tweener instrumentation, almost identical to the Washington Wind Symphony (though arranged differently on stage). WCB, as best I recall, is a slightly different model though a little skewed in some sections, esp. saxes.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each. Wind ensemble is definitely harder and puts a lot more pressure on each player, not only technically but also dynamically: everyone has to have control of both highs (small band sounding loud) and softs (staying inside a very light texture when necessary). This is compounded by my love of soft dynamics, a source of pain and suffering for all concerned. Unfortunately, it takes college/professional players to really handle it expertly. Concert bands are loud by nature, softer dynamics may have to involve cutting down to 1-2 on a part. The sound is often "better" because individuals blend, mistakes are swallowed up and you get a "fatter" intonation that hides problems.
 
Back
Top Bottom