Considered one of the first concerti for multipercussion, the “Concerto pour batterie et petit orchestre” op. 109, by Darius Milhaud, was written between 1929 and 1930. An important work in the percussion repertoire, it is played very often by both students and professionals.
The instrumentation prescribed by Milhaud is the following: triangle, suspended cymbal, cowbell (a small anvil according to an interview given by the composer to Michael Rossen in January, 1973), woodblock, two crashed cymbals, castanets, whip, ratchet, tambourine, snare drum, tenor drum, Provenzal drum, tam-tam, four timpani and pedal bass drum featuring a detachable cymbal.
Leaving aside the relative difficulty of getting a tenor drum and a Provenzal drum (I have already written about these two instruments, I own both and you can get in touch with me should you need them), this works asks for an instrument that, due to our lack of knowledge on Percussion History, leads the performers to make wrong decisions: the “grosse caisse à pédale avec cymbale décrochable”. It is about this instrument that I will be writing about.
Our "mistery drum" is, literally, a pedal bass drum featuring a detachable cymbal, as already stated in the second paragraph. Due to a contemporary conception of the instrumentation (thus an out of context one), performers use a hihat, a suspended cymbal... This makes very hard to find a correct interpretation of this concerto. None of the before mentioned alternative solutions is the one requested by Milhaud, and none of them gives the character and sound the composer was looking for (plus, they also also tend to complicate the interpretation).
The score is very clear regarding the instruments to be used. It also shows their disposition:
If we look carefully, we can see the following: the detachable cymbal is on the lower side of the bass drum head, parallel to it. There is a tray (a trap table) on the bass drum and, on it, we can find several instruments: suspended cymbal, castanets, triangle, whip, rachet, woodblock and cowbell.
This disposition is no coincidence. For a percussionist interested in the history of the drumset it is very clear that we are before a literal description of a trap set, the "primitive" drumset used by drummers when this concerto was written (“trap” comes from “contraptions”, the name given to all the instruments on the tray). The following photos show some trap sets:
As you can see, everything matches perfectly: the cymbal attached to the bass drum counterhoop, the accesory instruments (the contraptions, and exactly the same instruments Milhaud requested) on a tray above the bass drum... This concerto was written with a very specific instrument in mind. So specific that it is literally described and drawn in the score. So, should we want to be true to the score (and get the sound and character Milhaud was looking for and also facilitate the interpretation), we should use the device Milhaud knew: the clanger, omnipresent in trap sets of that period.
It is a metal striker that is attached to the bass drum beater...
… while another piece is attached to the bass drum counterhoop, to which a cymbal is fixed (what kind of cymbal, its diameter and thickness could be the matter of another article).
This device allows for the bass drum and the cymbal to be played together, something very common at that time if we take into account the military origin of the primal drum set.
Therefore, the hihat solution (although this device is historically correct, as it was patented in 1926 but was not featured in a recording until 1931) is wrong, as Milhaud´s description of the clanger is very precise. A suspended cymbal hit with a stick is also not valid, as it has nothing to do with the composer´s intentions.
Why does Milhaud ask for a detachable cymbal? Easy... As you know, there are certain passages in this concerto in which the bass drum has to be played whithout striking the cymbal. The player can use the rest bars to move the clanger backwards (a common practice at that time) so, when stepping on the pedal, the cymbal is not hit. There is also another solution which facilitates things even more: to use two pedals, one featuring a clanger, the other a regular one. Do you think a double pedal is a too modern solution? Well... Double pedals are as old as trap sets:
Some performers use an extra bass drum (a symphonic one played with conventional sticks) to play these passages, but I prefer to stay true to Milhaud´s intentions, so I use one bass drum and two pedals, one featuring a clanger, the other not. This facilitates the interpretation, the logistics... It also provides the character and sound the composer had in mind.
Clangers turn up on eBay from time to time at no specially expensive prices. I strongly recommend you to get one to play this work, as the part becomes easier to play, you will get the correct character and you will have to move less instruments. You can also use it to play New Orleans style! Mine is a Ludwig, a present from a good friend and colleague and I am glad I have it, as it is very practical for many situations.
If you do not own one, there is a very easy solution: attach a triangle beater to the bass drum pedal. You can do it using gaffer tape.
Use a boom cymbal stand to hold the cymbal and put it in a way that the latter can be hit with the triangle beater mentioned above.
A very easy solution should you cannot get a clanger.
Now we know why Milhaud wrote what he wrote, the device he had in mind, some history... Regarding this concerto we could still talk about the snare drum, tenor drum and Provenzal drum parts, as they can be quite confusing, but I think we better leave that for a future article.
What have you used to play this part? Now that you know the exact device Milhaud had in mind, would you use it next time you play this concerto?
