[78-L] question for dance band experts

[Tim Huskisson]

Although it is true that the Tuba and Banjo both recorded better than String
Bass and Guitar, I think live performance instrumentation was pretty much
the same as that used in studios, though sometimes bands were augmented with
extra musicians for recording (eg. strings). There are plenty of photos of
Dance bands in their resident surroundings (Hotels, etc). 

What is interesting however is the possibility that the use of
Tuba/Sousaphone may have become widely used in live performance AS A RESULT
OF THE POPULARITY OF THE SOUND heard on records. i.e. If the phonograph
hadn't been invented, perhaps arrangers would have preferred to write for
String Bass. Electric recording seems to have begun the gradual
transformation from Brass bass back to String bass. 

It's also interesting to note that in many small groups - notably the
Original Dixieland Jass Band - No Bass instrument was considered necessary -
either in live performance or on record. The Piano did all the work!

Tim Huskisson

-----Original Message-----
From: 78-l-bounces at klickitat.78online.com
[mailto:78-l-bounces at klickitat.78online.com] On Behalf Of
neechevoneeznayou at gmail.com
Sent: 24 October 2012 14:00
To: 78-l
Subject: [78-L] question for dance band experts

I'm thinking about acoustic dance bands. When they performed live in the
day, did they use the same instrumentation as they used for recordings, such
as tubas for the low end, or did they have other instruments, such as string
bass?

I am thinking that they used more conventional instrumentation for live
performances, whatever that would be. Same as classical performances. 
Would appreciate a confirmation or correction.
--
Joe Salerno
_______________________________________________
78-L mailing list
78-L at klickitat.78online.com
http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2741 / Virus Database: 2616/5850 - Release Date: 10/23/12