INTRODUCTION
From time to time there is an argument set forth that we really shouldn’t be using alto trombone so much—that the alto was historically quite rare or that the alto was really some other instrument outside the common D-E-flat-F pitch range. Seldom do these assertions take into account the actual physical evidence of existing instruments, a strong indicator that cannot objectively be ignored. More often than not, the assertions lean a little too heavily on the ultimately subjective “I just don’t like the sound of alto trombone.” See, for example, Howard Weiner’s “When is an Alto Trombone an Alto Trombone…,” in which Mr. Weiner argues from his own personal aesthetic opinion as a premise (Historic Brass Society Journal, 2005). The most comprehensive listing of extant trombones from before 1800 is found in Trevor Herbert’s book, The Trombone (Yale University Press, 2006). Here is what empirical evidence seems to suggest, based on Herbert’s list:
SALIENT POINTS
1) Of the 122 extant pre-19th century trombones with positively identified voice (alto, tenor, bass, etc.), Herbert lists the following:
64 tenors (53%)
30 altos (25%)
22 basses (18%)
4 sopranos (3%)
1 contrabass (less than 1%)
1 “quartbass” (less than 1%)
These are telling numbers. If alto trombones were historically relatively rare, why are there so many historical instruments still in existence? Why is the number of extant altos from pre-1800 second only to tenors? Why are there actually more extant altos (30) than basses (22)? (N.B. Personal email communication with Patryk Frankowski, senior assistant at Muzeum Instrumentów Muzycznych, Poznan, confirmed the existence of 2 more alto trombones not listed by Herbert, as well as casting doubt on one listed; see related blog entry. These instruments are listed below but not included in the tally).
2) Of the 30 extant alto trombones, Herbert records that 11 are of unspecified key, 13 are pitched in E-flat, 3 are in E, and 3 are in D. If, for historical reasons, we should really be playing some kind of alto outside of the D-E-flat-E orbit, where are these instruments? Why is the pitch of the numerous surviving instruments so overwhelmingly E-flat? While general pitch standards varied historically and some instruments were undoubtedly altered, it seems unlikely that all the instruments were simply altered or that pitch centers varied more than a few semitones. (For additional evidence of the alto trombone as an instrument primarily pitched in the E-flat orbit, see Alto in Treatises and Alto in 19th Century Trade Catalogs.)
3) Yes, but perhaps most of these altos were from regions other than the Austria-Germany-Bohemia region from which we draw the majority of our alto trombone literature (i.e., the instruments were primarily being used elsewhere). Again, it doesn’t appear so. Of the 30 extant alto trombones, 17 are from Nuremberg, Germany; 5 from Pfaffendorf, Germany; and one each from the following locations: Dresden, Germany; Vienna, Austria; Frankenberg, Germany; Prague, Czech Republic (Bohemia); Berngrund, Germany; Breslau, Poland (at times considered part of Austro-Bohemia); Markneukirchen, Germany; and Erfurt, Germany. In summary, every single one of the extant alto trombones originates from the Austria-Germany-Bohemia region from which we currently draw most of our alto literature. Although undoubtedly a number of these instruments were being exported to other areas, the modern museum holdings of alto trombones, which are again almost exclusively Austro-German-Bohemian, would seem to indicate that many of the altos were retained in the region (by contrast, compare this with tenor and bass trombone museum holdings, which show more geographic variety).
4) Well, then, perhaps these extant alto trombones are clustered chronologically, showing there was just one flash in the pan, followed by marked decline. Again, this is simply not the case. Remarkably, the largest gap in the manufacture dates of the 30 extant alto trombones in their 150-year existence before 1800 is 21 years (during which time there is a proportionate, though smaller, gap in tenor trombone manufacture dates). There are only 3 other gaps of 10 years or more (18, 14, and 12). The first alto trombone under consideration dates from 1649, the last from 1799, and those in between are spread remarkably evenly, especially given the overall decline in trombone activity of all types during the time span in question.
5) Well, then, alto trombones must have been amateur instruments. Probably not. That is to say, it is not likely that alto trombones were amateur instruments in any greater proportion than the other primary sizes of trombones were. Besides the fact that there is little empirical evidence offered by scholars for this claim in general, more specifically, there is scant empirical evidence to suggest that amateurs used the alto trombone in such disproportionate numbers relative to the other instruments of the trombone family. As Stewart Carter documents in “Trombone Ensembles of the Moravian Brethren in America” (in Brass Scholarship in Review, 1999), amateurs such as the Moravians usually acquired their trombones in sets of soprano, alto, tenor, and bass. Thus, a high number of alto trombone acquisitions would also likely mean a high number of acquisitions of the other members of the trombone family, leaving us with very close to the same basic overall proportions of instruments noted above (see Item 1, above). In other words, go ahead and subtract from the totals in Item 1 the number of alto trombones you think were used exclusively by amateurs. But then also subtract the number of tenors and basses used by amateurs. Because of what we know about amateurs (Moravians in particular) using sets of instruments, as well as the general popularity of the tenor trombone for both amateurs and professionals, you are very likely to end up with similar percentages for the various instruments.
CONCLUSIONS
While this body of evidence is only part of the puzzle, what the extant alto trombone holdings seem to suggest is that before 1800, 1) alto trombones were relatively common—more so, possibly, than even bass trombones, 2) the majority of alto trombones were pitched in the E-flat orbit, 3) alto trombones originated almost exclusively from the Austria-Germany-Bohemia region, 4) alto trombones were manufactured at remarkably consistent intervals from their inception up to 1800. Furthermore, it seems unlikely that alto trombones were amateur instruments to any greater degree than any of the other major members of the trombone family. All of this would appear to weigh in favor of the idea that modern performance practice is employing, broadly speaking (N.B. broadly speaking), the correct instrument and literature for the alto trombone. Again, the evidence is suggestive rather than conclusive, but one would hope it might become part of the conversation.
THE INSTRUMENTS
Source: Trevor Herbert, The Trombone (Yale University Press, 2006), Appendix 1
Year: 1649-1701
Maker: Wolff Birckholtz
Location: Nuremberg
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Marienkirche, Gdansk
_____
Year: 1652
Maker: Sebastian Hainlein II
Location: Nuremberg
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Marienkirche, Gdansk
_____
Year: 1656
Maker: Michael Nagel
Location: Nuremberg
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Bayerisches Nationalmuseum, Munich
_____
Year: 1670
Maker: Hieronimus Starck
Location: Nuremberg
Key: E-flat
Holder: Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg
_____
Year: c. 1675
Maker: Jacob Schmidt
Location: Nuremberg
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Sammlungen der Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, Vienna
_____
Year: 1684
Maker: Paul Hainlein
Location: Nuremberg
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Musikinstrumenten-Museum, Staatliches Institut für Musikforschung Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin
_____
Year: 1690
Maker: Hieronimus Starck
Location: Nuremberg
Key: E
Holder: Musikinstrumenten-Museum der Universität Leipzig
_____
Year: 1690-1724
Maker: Johann Leonhard Ehe II
Location: Nuremberg
Key: E-flat
Holder: Musikinstrumenten-Museum der Universität Leipzig
_____
Year: 1690-1724
Maker: Johann Leonhard Ehe II
Location: Nuremberg
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Gemeentemuseum, The Hague
_____
Year: 1692-1743
Maker: Friedrich Ehe
Location: Nuremberg
Key: D
Holder: Musikinstrumenten-Museum, Staatliches Institut für Musikforschung Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin
_____
Year: 1693-p.1740
Maker: George Friedrich Steinmetz
Location: Nuremberg
Key: E-flat
Holder: Musikinstrumenten-Museum, Staatliches Institut für Musikforschug Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin
_____
Year: 1695
Maker: Wolff Birckholtz
Location: Nuremberg
Key: E-flat
Holder: Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg
_____
Year: 1697
Maker: Georg Schmied
Location: Pfaffendorf
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Muzeum Instrumentów Muzycznych, Poznan
Note: Listed by Herbert as an alto trombone, this instrument is probably misclassified. According to Patryk Frankowski, senior assistant at the Muzeum Instrumentów Muzycznych, Poznan (where the instrument is held), the instrument came to the museum with an original tenor trombone bell, along with an alto trombone slide that had been added later (see blog entry).
_____
Year: 1698
Maker: Johann Carl Kodisch
Location: Nuremberg
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Städtisches Museum, Rosenheim
_____
Year: c. 1700
Maker: Johann Wilhelm Haas
Location: Nuremberg
Key: E-flat
Holder: Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg
_____
Year: 1702
Maker: Hanns Geyer
Location: Vienna
Key: E-flat
Holder: Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, Budapest (?)
_____
Year: 1714-94
Maker: Wolf Magnus
Location: Nuremberg
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Musée Instrumental du Conservatoire, Brussels
_____
Year: c. 1720
Maker: Friedrich Ehe
Location: Nuremberg
Key: E-flat
Holder: Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg
_____
Year: 1725
Maker: Johann Müller
Location: Dresden
Key: E
Holder: Bachhaus, Eisenach (on loan from Heimatmuseum, Sebnitz)
_____
Year: 1722-1771
Maker: Johann Leonhard Ehe III
Location: Nuremberg
Key: E-flat
Holder: Muzeum Instrumentów Muzycznych, Poznan (Museum of Musical Instruments/Department of National Museum, Poznan)
Note: This instrument is not included in Herbert’s listing. However, a personal email communication from Patryk Frankowski, senior assistant at Muzeum Instrumentów Muzycznych, Poznan, has confirmed the existence of and information about the instrument (see related blog entry). Subsequently, a personal email from Trevor Herbert verified that such omissions are not uncommon, as compilers often have to rely on communication from museum curators, etc.
_____
Year: 1743
Maker: Ferdinandus Weisser
Location: Frankenberg
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Unknown (former Breslau collection)
_____
Year: 1747
Maker: Johann Umlauff
Location: Prague
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Unknown (former Strahov collection)
_____
Year: 1768
Maker: Martin Friedrich Ehe
Location: Nuremberg
Key: E-flat
Holder: Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg
_____
Year: 1771
Maker: Johann Christoph Fiebig
Location: Berngrund
Key: E-flat
Holder: National Music Museum, Vermillion, SD
_____
Year: 1779
Maker: Johann Joseph Schmied
Location: Pfaffendorf
Key: E
Holder: Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg
_____
Year: 1783
Maker: Johann Joseph Schmied
Location: Pfaffendorf
Key: Unspecified
Holder: Musikhistorisk Museum, Copenhagen
_____
Year: 1785
Maker: Johann Joseph Schmied
Location: Pfaffendorf
Key: E-flat
Holder: Historisches Museum, Basel
_____
Year: 1789
Maker: Johann Simon Schmied (?)
Location: Pfaffendorf
Key: D
Holder: Musikinstrumenten-Museum der Universität Leipzig
_____
Year: 1793
Maker: Carl Benjamin Flemming
Location: Breslau
Key: E
Holder: Muzeum Instrumentów Muzycznych, Poznan (Museum of Musical Instruments/Department of National Museum, Poznan)
Note: This instrument is not included in Herbert’s listing. However, a personal email communication from Patryk Frankowski, senior assistant at Muzeum Instrumentów Muzycznych, Poznan, has confirmed the existence of and information about the instrument (see related blog entry). Subsequently, a personal email from Trevor Herbert verified that such omissions are not uncommon, as compilers often have to rely on communication from museum curators, etc.
_____
Year: 1795
Maker: August Friedrich Krause II
Location: Berlin
Key: E-flat
Holder: Historisches Museum, Basel
_____
Year: 1797
Maker: Carl Benjamin Flemming
Location: Breslau
Key: E-flat
Holder: Musikinstrumenten-Museum der Universität Leipzig
_____
Year: 1799
Maker: Christian Gottlob Eschenbach
Location: Markneukirchen
Key: E-flat (?)
Holder: Musikinstrumenten-Museum, Staatliches Institut für Musikforschung
Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin
_____
Year: Late 18th century
Maker: Carl Ziersfeld
Location: Erfurt
Key: D
Holder: Musikinstrumenten-Museum, Staatliches Institut für Musikforschung Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin