This dialog serves to remind me of an experience I had in my first
year of teaching ... ca. 1966. Our high school had a very fine
advanced band called a Wind Ensemble, which, in fact, had a minimum
number of players per part, in general. Then there was a less
advanced "Concert Band," with everyone else. In those days, the Wind
Ensemble concept was very popular and was synonymous with higher
quality wind performances. Well, our Wind Ensemble was picked to play
at the State MENC Conference that spring, so I wrote something for it
and went to listen, still thinking that Wind Ensembles were at the
top of the food chain. This perception remained in tact until I
walked into a rehearsal of Clarence Sawhill's (either USC or
UCLA ... someone correct me) Symphonic Band. It featured MANY
players per part, and I swear the clarinet section(s) sounded just
like the string section of a major symphony orchestra. It's a sound
which is still in my mind. We live and learn.
Dean
On Oct 7, 2006, at 4:28 PM, John Howell wrote:
Are we talking about bands or wind ensemble?
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought there was a difference.
In theory there is. Fennell's original conception of a wind
ensemble was one player per part, but I don't know whether even he
held to that for his clarinet section. (I suspect there is someone
here who can answer that.) And of course the T.O. for most
military bands (although not the ones in D.C.) has slots that are
basically for one on a part, so Fennell's concept was not exactly a
brand new one.
In practice (at the college level, at least), a wind ensemble is
the band with the best players in it, on the small side, but not
necessarily with only one on a part.
Dean M. Estabrook
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Have you ever heard of an eleven or thirteen step program?
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
