Historical Instrument Stuff

[tobysima`]

Just a couple questions regarding historical instruments that the internet seems to not have an answer for:
1) Are the Russian Bassoon and the Cimbasso (Not the movie soundtrack one) the same thing?
2) Are they tonally similar enough to a serpent to make it obsolete/unneeded?
3) Do the Russian Bassoon and the Serpent use the same mouthpiece?

Thanks in advance!

[bloke]

' pretty close, but sort-of a blend of serpent and ophicleide characteristics.

Compared to any modern/substitute instrument, sonically they are more similar to each other than to any tuba/euphonium.

[bisontuba]

Just a couple questions regarding historical instruments that the internet seems to not have an answer for:
1) Are the Russian Bassoon and the Cimbasso (Not the movie soundtrack one) the same thing?
2) Are they tonally similar enough to a serpent to make it obsolete/unneeded?
3) Do the Russian Bassoon and the Serpent use the same mouthpiece?

Thanks in advance!

https://www.berliozhistoricalbrass.org/instruments.htm

[DonO.]

Before the development of what we think of as the modern cimbasso, the term was used in orchestral scores to designate a bass horn. The term is probably a contraction of the Italian term “corno in basso” (bass horn). The actual choice of instrument was left to the player, as there were several variations floating around. The serpent was pretty much obsolete by the beginning of the 1800’s, although they were still played. The so called “Russian bassoon” (which was neither Russian nor a bassoon) was actually a variation on the serpent, being made of wood and having finger holes. It was made into a different bassoon-like shape, had a brass or bronze bell added (often in the shape of a dragon’s head or similar), but otherwise much like a serpent. The ophicleide was considered a big improvement later in the century, being made of all metal and having keys rather than finger holes. Composers of the time, apparently still confused by the rapid development of bass instruments, still hung on to the use of “cimbasso” in their scores, while others specified “ophicleide”. The cimbasso we think of today did not come into being until much later in the century, in the 1880’s-1890’s. So before then the term “cimbasso” was more of a generic term for a family of instruments. Hope this helps.

[DonO.]

Great resource bisontuba! Thank you for that link!

[tobysima`]

Before the development of what we think of as the modern cimbasso, the term was used in orchestral scores to designate a bass horn. The term is probably a contraction of the Italian term “corno in basso” (bass horn). The actual choice of instrument was left to the player, as there were several variations floating around. The serpent was pretty much obsolete by the beginning of the 1800’s, although they were still played. The so called “Russian bassoon” (which was neither Russian nor a bassoon) was actually a variation on the serpent, being made of wood and having finger holes. It was made into a different bassoon-like shape, had a brass or bronze bell added (often in the shape of a dragon’s head or similar), but otherwise much like a serpent. The ophicleide was considered a big improvement later in the century, being made of all metal and having keys rather than finger holes. Composers of the time, apparently still confused by the rapid development of bass instruments, still hung on to the use of “cimbasso” in their scores, while others specified “ophicleide”. The cimbasso we think of today did not come into being until much later in the century, in the 1880’s-1890’s. So before then the term “cimbasso” was more of a generic term for a family of instruments. Hope this helps.

Thank you for clarifying! Verdi was one of the composers who helped make the valved cimbasso relevant?

[tobysima`]

Just a couple questions regarding historical instruments that the internet seems to not have an answer for:
1) Are the Russian Bassoon and the Cimbasso (Not the movie soundtrack one) the same thing?
2) Are they tonally similar enough to a serpent to make it obsolete/unneeded?
3) Do the Russian Bassoon and the Serpent use the same mouthpiece?

Thanks in advance!

https://www.berliozhistoricalbrass.org/instruments.htm

Thank you very much. Seems to me that the Serpent is unique enough to keep around, but there seem to be better instruments that are similar enough in existence. I guess an example would be the cimbasso Roland Szentpali uses.

[tobysima`]

My apologies. YouTube seems to want to fight me today.

[bloke]

[Three Valves]

Needs a spit valve!!

[royjohn]

tobysima wrote:

Verdi was one of the composers who helped make the valved cimbasso relevant?

I guess there is some truth to this, but you would have to know what everyone else was doing at the time to say so...there is a thesis or dissertation on Verdi and the cimbasso somewhere and I think it has been referenced in some threads on that other forum in the past. Best I remember, addressing questions of what instrument to use in Verdi, it opts for a serpent or ophicleide in early Verdi and the cimbasso in late Verdi...I'll have to look and see if I can find the citation. I think nowadays you often find people using the tuba in Verdi...Chris Hall used a big tuba in the Met's Verdi Requiem this past year. Maybe for such a big work and big auditorium this makes sense as opposed to a cimbasso. But in Verdi's day most of the Italian opera houses were smaller than ours today, and the orchestra was probably smaller, tuned lower, etc., so a cimbasso would have been more in scale I suppose.
-royjohn

[royjohn]

It was easier to find than I thought. It was a 2010 dissertation at the University of North Texas,
by Alexander Costantino:
The Cimbasso and Tuba in the Operatic Works of Giuseppe Verdi: A Pedagogical and Aesthetic Comparison

You can pull this up on line and even download and read the pdf. I read it before, but I'm going to read it again.
If you read it, too, Toby, that will make two of us. I mean besides his committee...LOL...
-royjohn

[bloke]

As this is the best set of remarks (and - mostly likely - closest to actual truth - I've ever seen (and so very concise, as well) - regarding this, I'm enlarging and re-posting it.

Before the development of what we think of as the modern cimbasso, the term was used in orchestral scores to designate a bass horn. The term is probably a contraction of the Italian term “corno in basso” (bass horn). The actual choice of instrument was left to the player, as there were several variations floating around. The serpent was pretty much obsolete by the beginning of the 1800’s, although they were still played. The so called “Russian bassoon” (which was neither Russian nor a bassoon) was actually a variation on the serpent, being made of wood and having finger holes. It was made into a different bassoon-like shape, had a brass or bronze bell added (often in the shape of a dragon’s head or similar), but otherwise much like a serpent. The ophicleide was considered a big improvement later in the century, being made of all metal and having keys rather than finger holes. Composers of the time, apparently still confused by the rapid development of bass instruments, still hung on to the use of “cimbasso” in their scores, while others specified “ophicleide”. The cimbasso we think of today did not come into being until much later in the century, in the 1880’s-1890’s. So before then the term “cimbasso” was more of a generic term for a family of instruments. Hope this helps.