Helicon vs Sousaphone

The bulk of the musical talk
User avatar
bububassboner
pro musician
pro musician
Posts: 648
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:16 am
Location: Sembach, Germany

Re: Helicon vs Sousaphone

Post by bububassboner »

KiltieTuba wrote:
Since were talking about weight differences - if you consistently play with a heavier instrument, your body will, over time, become accustomed to the weight. Your whole point about the weigh being an issue, is mostly invalidated once you take into account the fact that you don't tend to notice the weight as much once you played with it for longer periods of time.
What? Yes just push through and you'll be fine forever. Tell that to all the retired Army tuba players with back problems or the Med Boarded Infantry guy who carried ruck packs everyday for 16 years that it'll be fine just do it more. Yes, as a young person in my 20s I can march around everyday and just deal with it. However, when I get to be in my 40s I don't want to be broken. I am someone that uses a sousaphone a lot, I like my job, and I want to be able to do what I do for many years to come. The "suck it up" method tends not to be so great down the road.
KiltieTuba wrote: 3. The somewhat standard size of the sousaphone has remained rather unchanged for the past 100+ years.
King and Conn have been making essentially the same body and bell since the introduction of the recording bell sousaphone. If there were so many problems with a large bell, as many people here claim there to be, one would think that one of these manufacturers would change their design to better fit the market. What's the saying? If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
Or...
As you said, there is no Professional market. Why would a company spend time and money improving a horn that is going to be used mostly for students with little experience playing tuba? How many high school and college bands ask for people to pick up sousaphone for marching band? I would say most of them. Other than Military bands and a few number of freelance players almost all sousaphone use is by students. With this in mind, it makes plenty of sense why companies don't work on improving the sousaphone.

Again, I don't think any company is ever going to try to improve the sousaphone. The best shot for a better sousaphone would be to custom order a bell and have some like Dan Oberloh flip the First valve tuning slide and make a better neck and bit system. I would love to do this myself but alas my E4 pay makes that kinda hard. Maybe down the road.
Big tubas
Little tubas
Army Strong
Go Ducks!
User avatar
bisontuba
6 valves
6 valves
Posts: 4320
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 8:55 am
Location: Bottom of Lake Erie

Re: Helicon vs Sousaphone

Post by bisontuba »

Hi-
Time for a helicon forum/website.......

mark
User avatar
Donn
6 valves
6 valves
Posts: 5977
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:58 pm
Location: Seattle, ☯

Re: Helicon vs Sousaphone

Post by Donn »

bububassboner wrote:Again, I don't think any company is ever going to try to improve the sousaphone. The best shot for a better sousaphone would be to custom order a bell and have some like Dan Oberloh flip the First valve tuning slide and make a better neck and bit system. I would love to do this myself but alas my E4 pay makes that kinda hard. Maybe down the road.
Some of this came up here not too long ago, and I thought the bell reduction surgery was deemed to be pretty simple, with a wire soldered on afterwards. `Proof of concept' would be even easier.

A good leadpipe could be a huge step up. Modern helicons made in Europe at least have one piece necks, instead of three piece.
toobagrowl
5 valves
5 valves
Posts: 1525
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 3:12 pm
Location: USA

Re: Helicon vs Sousaphone

Post by toobagrowl »

Lew wrote:
tooba wrote:The smaller bells on Helicons make them sound 'farty' outdoors, imo. Sousaphones sound better outdoors. imo.
This might be true if all helicons had smaller bells. I have a Distin helicon from about 1900 with a 30" bell, while my Conn 40K sousaphone only has a 24" bell. Even so, I find the sousaphone to be a better player, both because of the larger bore and smaller bell. In any case, the nice thing about a sousaphone is that, when assembled and used properly, the bell faces more to the front while that on a helicon will invariably face more to the side. I did like the raincatchers that I have owned and played, but if I were marching I would still go with the bell front sousaphone.
I guess we always have to be specific on this board. :lol: Anyway, I am talking about the eastern European & some old American helicons with 15"-18" bells. Those smaller bells - especially 'fixed' and pointed in your direction - give a dry, farty sound compared to 24"+ bell sousaphones outside.
bububassboner wrote: Bingo,
Sousaphones have an unneeded amount of bell flare. 24 inches is just too big. Standard sousaphones, like the Yamaha sousaphone, don't have 6/4 size branches yet have a bell which is 4 inches bigger than most 6/4 tubas. Could you imagine a Holton 345 with a 24 inch bell? Yuck, things need to be in proportion and sousaphones just aren't.
I think the big bell flares on sousaphones make them sound better outdoors since there are no acoustics outdoors. Tubas sound great indoors because they have the needed inherent clarity and resonance with the indoor acoustics giving more 'blossom' and richness to the sound. The hall/auditorium/room you play your tuba in *IS* a huge part of your sound. Sousaphones, with their typical 24"+ bells may sound a bit woofy/muddy indoors, but imo, sound better outdoors than most tubas & helicons because that bigger bell flare adds more richness/resonance and somewhat 'compensates' for the lack of acoustics outdoors.
User avatar
sloan
On Ice
On Ice
Posts: 1827
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 10:34 pm
Location: Nutley, NJ

Re: Helicon vs Sousaphone

Post by sloan »

bububassboner wrote: The "suck it up" method tends not to be so great down the road.
Quitcherbitchin'

Last Memorial Day, I marched a Sousaphone a couple of miles, including 2 flights up a spiral staircase and the last 1/4 mile UP a serious hill. I am, ahem, not in the best shape (unless your idea of "best shape" is "round"), even if you don't count my artificial heart valve. I managed to (just barely) keep up with the young whippersnappers who are attending college 40+ years after I did.

Properly worn, a Sousaphone balances nicely enough that you can walk short distances "no hands". According to my observations, most folk my age carry at least as much extra weight around the middle as a Sousaphone weighs.

I will grant you that it LOOKS big and awkward, and any problems you might have are realEasy to blame on carrying the horn - but I just don't believe it. Perhaps people with weirdly shaped shoulders (like Denney) have legitimate issues.

Suck it up - you get to complain when you have to ice skate and perform a counter-march (counter-skate?) while playing one. And even then, the bass drum player has a whole lot more to complain about.

And remember - Verdi *loved* the sound of the Sousaphone. Be glad you don't have to march a cimbasso, or a Glockenspiel.
Kenneth Sloan
User avatar
Donn
6 valves
6 valves
Posts: 5977
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:58 pm
Location: Seattle, ☯

Re: Helicon vs Sousaphone

Post by Donn »

I'm not so young myself and still hoist the 40K for a stroll from time to time, and I'd hate to foster a generation of weaklings, but ... he knows what he's talking about. If you could shave a few pounds off the sousaphone while making it sound better, by cutting off the extra flare, then that would be very good news for players.

But my guess is that tooba's right about what would happen to the sound. Maybe what the pro sousa player needs is a 24-26 inch fiberglass (or whatever) front bell for outdoors, and an 18 inch 45-degree brass bell for indoors. Or an 18 bell with a detachable fiberglass 6 inch flare, though I don't have a detailed idea how that would work.
Post Reply