TubeNet

[quote="Jonathantuba"] The final tests were extremely satisfying and Øystein Baadsvik congratulated Miraphone´s development manager Christian Niedermaier on the – so the artist´s words – “the best Eb-tuba in the worldâ€

The one in the picture with him standing, the Eb looks a little smaller than expected... I heard that there were two sizes being made; the larger coming to stores first, then the smaller quite later... Could someone elaborate on this?

I want one.
I drive only junk.

Oystein posted on this a while back and I spoke with him in October. There are 2 models: a larger symphonic model (SY) which he toured the US with about a year ago, and the solo version (SO) he is holding in the picture and he toured with this past fall.

Here's the URL: viewtopic.php?t=10017&highlight=norwegian+star

As I lifetime Besson Eb player I too, have to have one...

charlieJ wrote:Oystein posted on this a while back and I spoke with him in October. There are 2 models: a larger symphonic model (SY) which he toured the US with about a year ago, and the solo version (SO) he is holding in the picture and he toured with this past fall.

Here's the URL: viewtopic.php?t=10017&highlight=norwegian+star

As I lifetime Besson Eb player I too, have to have one...

Is there any idea as to what these two models will be actually sold for?

Speculation is nice, but the real thing is better.

I'd like a piston-valve Eb player to give one a try and come back with reactions. I'm wondering if this Eb will play like a lot of rotary F's--that 4th valve low Bb is an "aim for it" note, rather than just "popping" out.

Not a bad thing if you get used to it, but I'd rather not bother.

if the answer is not "because i like the sound of rotary f's",then you really have wasted a lot of years...

With a height of 920mm and a 400mm bell this looks a little like an Eb "Firebird"...

Bell throat and bows sure appear similar.

Not saying an Eb Firebird is a bad thing - quite the opposite. Played a Firebird and absolutely loved it.

Talking about it as a replacement for C tuba seems kinda odd (to me) though.

In Oystein's post linked earlier he talks about the SO Model fitting in a regular F case and the SY being an altogether bigger horn.
As I understand it though the horn pictured by Johnathantuba is the (bigger) SY model? The dimensions given make it a touch smaller than say a PT-whatever-F...
The SO Model must be very small.
Again, not saying this is a bad thing, just things seem to have moved a little from the earlier direction.

Chuck(G) wrote:Speculation is nice, but the real thing is better.

I'd like a piston-valve Eb player to give one a try and come back with reactions. I'm wondering if this Eb will play like a lot of rotary F's--that 4th valve low Bb is an "aim for it" note, rather than just "popping" out.

Not a bad thing if you get used to it, but I'd rather not bother.

I've got an old, beat-up, bell-front 183 and don't find any probs with the low Bb or Ab. Likewise the MW Rotary Eb's I've played spoke just fine around there.
I was brought up on Besson Eb's.

Most of the rotary F's I've played had horrible C's & Bb's.
My experience suggests for some reason it's just an F-specific problem.

Interested to hear what others think...

Peach wrote:I've got an old, beat-up, bell-front 183 and don't find any probs with the low Bb or Ab. Likewise the MW Rotary Eb's I've played spoke just fine around there.
I was brought up on Besson Eb's.

Most of the rotary F's I've played had horrible C's & Bb's.
My experience suggests for some reason it's just an F-specific problem.

Interested to hear what others think...

Not too long ago, I sold a not-very beat-up 183 (photo below). I found that it played just like a rotary F;l if anything, it was a little less open on the low Bb in an A-B comparison with the low C on a Rudi F. I could easily blow a C on that 183 with the 4th valve if I wasn't thinking about it.



My personal opinion is that the 4th valve on the typical rotary F or Eb is strange because of the relatively late placement of the valve in the bugle compared with, say, a rotary CC, which doesn't seem to have the same characteristic.

Chuck(G) wrote:My personal opinion is that the 4th valve on the typical rotary F or Eb is strange because of the relatively late placement of the valve in the bugle compared with, say, a rotary CC, which doesn't seem to have the same characteristic.

Oh - so this is really about the 4th valve and may not apply to 1st & 3rd combination? (I'm actually a little surprised that people use 4 to play Bb - I tune it low for combinations like --34 G, and never use it alone.)

Wonder what acoustical principles might be at work here. For some combination of valves and leadpipe length, it's possible for notes in the 2nd partial to be larger than the clear bugle length, which can't be good. I think the leadpipe would have to be 5 feet long for this to happen with Bb, though, but then we're looking for something more complicated here anyway if we need to explain why 4 isn't the same as 1-3.

Donn wrote:Oh - so this is really about the 4th valve and may not apply to 1st & 3rd combination? (I'm actually a little surprised that people use 4 to play Bb - I tune it low for combinations like --34 G, and never use it alone.)

No, just that most folks tend to use 4 for the low C on an F or the low Bb on an Eb. I can remember trying this with 13 and there really wasn't much difference from 4.

On a 4-valve compensating Eb like a Besson 981 or 983, 4 pretty much has to be tuned to Bb to make things line up.

234 G on the Willson is pretty much bang on, but if I use the 5th valve slide extension for a 5=23 setup, 45 feels a bit more open than 234.