Boanerges wrote:After reading Mr. Denney's magisterial missive I wonder if my 6/4 Rudy BBb is really a *KaiserBAT* ?
Hmmm...
I have seen and played a Rudy 6/4 Bb, and there's no way it can be considered in the field of merely huge tubas. It is gigantic. No, that's not good enough. It is morbidly obese. No, that isn't it, either. It's not fat in the morbidly obese way, but more like BIG in the Refrigerator Perry sense. Just mammoth, and in all dimensions. You expect it to be about right for someone 8'-6" tall.
For so big an instrument, it is remarkable easy to play. But a big, deep mouthpiece in the Rudy is likely only to do structural damage. Felt but not heard, indeed.
quinterbourne wrote:monster horns DO NOT work well in brass quintet, tuba quartet, solos and most wind band, brass band & orchestral literature.
That's quite a revelation!
Don't tell John Philip Sousa......I've seen pictures of his band with 4-6 jumbo sousaphones at the height of it's popularity.
Ha Ha Ha! I thought the same thing when I read Quinter's post. 6/4 horns CAN play softly, and sound really full and rich at this dynamic. Remember, the Kitchener Waterloo Symphony Orchestra that Jane plays in is not a "brassy" orchestra by any means. She has to play to the ensemble. I thought her 4/4 was more than enough for that orchestra years ago.
Good ol' Jonathan summed it up very well:
Jonathantuba wrote:It is funny that for years I thought why do I need a big tuba? My Besson EEb does everything and I have received no complaints.
However now I have got a BAT in the form of my Neptune CC, I find that in every group I use it, I am getting complements about the sound, and specific requests to bring along "Big Bertha" (as one band affectionately calls my Neptune) to the gig.
A lot of tubists seem to have my previous view that a medium size tuba is sufficient for all. Yes, it will do the job very satisfactorily, but my experience is that in far more cases than I anticipated, a big tuba is noticeably better and provides something really special with its solid foundation to the band, or orchestra.
Last edited by Mark Preece on Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mark Preece
Principal Tuba, Regina Symphony Orchestra
Performing Artist, Besson Instruments (Buffet Crampon)
Performing Artist, LefreQue Sound Bridges
Instructor, University of Regina
Yes, I concure. I have seen this horn at the Grand Gakki store in Kobe, Japan.
Mark Preece
Principal Tuba, Regina Symphony Orchestra
Performing Artist, Besson Instruments (Buffet Crampon)
Performing Artist, LefreQue Sound Bridges
Instructor, University of Regina
I recognize that a BAT isn't a bad thing. The problem I see is that I see people who want to have a BAT as their only instrument when they enter college/university.
In college and university, a lot of what you play will be solos. I definitely think the larger the instrument, the less flexible it is. It is just more difficult to play solos on such a large instrument.
The other stuff you will play in includes brass quintet. Although a few people have managed to play a BAT soft enough as not to overpower the other instruments, it is extremely difficult to do so.
If you play in a school orchestra... well, most college/university orchestras aren't really all that super great. Many schools have smaller string sections and the rest of the woodwinds/brass don't really product a whole lot of sound. A lot of the music you play will be by Tchaikovsky, Verdi, etc. I still do not think it is necessary to play this kind of music on a very large instrument.
From my experience, non-tuba players want to hear the tuba produce a nice, clean, articulate tone with a lot of musicality. Conductors (who are usually string players, or worse) don't want to necessarily see a big monster tuba that will cover up the precious string players (the ones who actually have the melody).
It is easier to learn the fundamentals on a medium sized instrument, instead of on a huge one that really "gets in the way." I still think it's best to get a medium sized, learn the basics, then add a BAT when you think you are ready.
I think the problem is that a lot of people see many of their idols playing on these large instruments. I am almost certain that most of the tuba idols, who are currently playing in a major symphony orchestra on a BAT, did not start playing on BATS when they entered college/university.
Go ahead and buy that BAT, but prepared to work really hard to get the thing to play soft enough for quintet. Work extra hard to work your way around the Vaughn Williams. Prepare to get lots of "the hand" from the orchestra conductor. I'm not saying that it can't be done, but it is really difficult to do so.
I yesterday played my Neptune in quintet for the first time. I was delighted how well it worked. No trouble with balance at all and the other members of the group loved its sound - will have to consider if to use regularly in quintet (instead of F as I have previously).
People that do not regularly play a top-quality BAT tend to think them loud and difficult to control, but what I find with my (goldbrass) Neptune is that I can play easier softly than on a much smaller tuba with a rich wrap around sound, while its high register is even more secure than on my 4/4 CC.
I love the F sound of my PT-15, but reckon I would have no trouble using my Neptune as all around tuba (except for marching!). I certainly would rather do so than always play on smaller tuba missing that BAT foundation tone which in most situations a tuba is all about
bloke wrote:Slightly changing the subject...After quite a few years, I am (once again) a B.A.T. owner.
Are you referring to a horn other than your Thor? If so, what are you playing?
bloke wrote:Pushing all of that air past my embouchure required considerably more work with a B.A.T., and I definitely felt it.
The only BAT's I've owned over the years have been 2165's (2 of them). So my frame of reference may be limited. With my first 2165, I had to teach myself that I can, under NO circumstances, play the horn the same way as I would my Yamaha 822 F. If I played the BAT with that type of (for lack of a better description) aggressive approach, I would sound bright, crappy and sloppy. I learned that I had to let the large size of the BAT do the heavy lifting. With my current 2165, the same thing is true. If I let the horn's natural resonance do the majority of the work, then I am pleased with the results.
In short, can you elaborate on what the difference is for you? I am curious.
bloke wrote:I played in a large hall last night, and competed with an electric bass.
Ahhh...say no more.
bloke wrote:This is an extremely good 2165 (playing characteristics similar to yours) with a near-new appearance. I'm spending a few hundred bucks to make it more like a 6450, resistance wise, but I'm not changing out the bell, as I prefer the 2165 bell's sound to the sound of the Fafner bell. Even though I'm going to buy the 6450 "choked" main slide crook and "choked" post-tuning slide dogleg, I'm keeping the 5th valve where it is...I've ordered a (kinda wild) "tuning" valve from Meinlschmidt (to put where the 6450's 5th valve is. It will be there to address the three 1-2 sharp pitches, the two sharp 6th partial pitches, and the two sharp 5th partial pitches...It will be the equivalent of an instantaneous 2" pull when activated. I'll probably also use that valve to pull one or two of the very low 2nd partial pitches in line as well. Most of these pitches can be easily fixed by pulling the #1 slide, but I prefer (assuming it works out) flicking a finger to activate a valve, rather than yanking and jamming a slide all night long.
Before and after tweak picks would be cool. Congrats on the new ax!
But seriously, its not how big it is, its what you do with it.
A good player can play soft or loud, fast or slow on (almost?) any tuba. A great tuba plays great, whether it's monster huge or teeny tiny.
It's all about sound concept. When my colleagues and I are happy with my tuba (3/4, 6/4, whatever) then I have the world at my feet. If it's not working then I have to figure out what's best; practice harder, more rehearsals, different approach, different mpc, different horn, horn modification, quite the group, etc.
6/4 horns are a lot of fun because the good ones play real easy. You supply the air, tubby does the rest. Personally I find them easier to play than smaller horns (less resistance?), but thats just me I guess. Still, I've been in plenty of situations where everyone agrees that the BATS a great sound but the other tuba rhymed better with the needs of the group.
"Right tool for the right job"
We tubists have a much larger selection in instrument types than many other musicians. GENERALLY speaking, the modern tubist has four different tunings to choose from (BBb, CC, Eb, F), two different valve types, I believe three different mpc receiver sizes, two different lead-pipe styles (long German, short American/British), short bells, tall bells, recoding bells short flares, wide flares.
Shall we add sousaphones and helicons into the mix?
Being conical doubles the trouble; that long journey from the lead-pipe to the bell. When should it start expanding? How far should it go? Should it expand just a little bit in the beginning and flair out radically at the end or should expand more evenly? Or something in between? And of coarse we have the different makers, years, material, etc, etc, etc.
Its this huge variety in tuba choices that makes it difficult to choose the right tuba. They're all so different, REALLY different. And a lot of fun to play on.
