Extant Altos

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

Photograph

_____

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

Photograph

_____

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

Photograph

_____

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

Photograph

_____

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

Photograph

_____

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

Photograph

_____

Year: 1771

Maker: Johann Christoph Fiebig

Location: Berngrund

Key: E-flat

Holder: National Music Museum, Vermillion, SD

Photograph

_____

Year: 1779

Maker: Johann Joseph Schmied

Location: Pfaffendorf

Key: E

Holder: Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg

Photograph

_____

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

Photograph

_____

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

Photograph

_____

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