TubeNet

For those of you out there in Tubenet who have played Wilson's 3050 CC tuba what has been your thoughts? I have thought about trying some of these but i thought I would get your advice first. Thank you.

tubadaddy92 wrote:For those of you out there in Tubenet who have played Wilson's 3050 CC tuba what has been your thoughts? I have thought about trying some of these but i thought I would get your advice first. Thank you.

If there's been one universally consistent reaction to picking up my horn and playing it, it's been... unnnhh *grunt*! Yes, Willsons are heavy! I think my all-rotary horn is a tad heavier than the piston variant. I couldn't manage this thing without my BBC tuba stand.

The horn doesn't necessarily provide a lot of ground zero feedback, and in that sense might feel a tad "dead" in your lap. The sound out front is anything but dead, though. The horn has an enormous presence, but with a great sense of core to the sound. A lot of BATs I've played and heard produce a big, broad bark, but not much bite. In the context of a large ensemble, they maybe start to become sort of an amorphous low sound to my ears. For some, this may be desireable. For me, not so much... but that's just my own personal taste.

I haven't spent a holotta time on other Willsons, but I've had mine for around two years. Intonation is very solid, and response is quite even from top to bottom. Construction and craftsmanship is better than any horn I've ever had in my lap. Personally, I find that big rotary horns on average tend to be zippier on the low end than their piston counterparts, and the rotary 3050 is certainly no exception. One thing I like about the horn is that it retains a nice sense of clarity at softer dynamic levels, and doesn't fog out. On the other end of the dynamic spectrum, there's not much it can't cut through, or even overwhelm.

At the million dollar horn showdown we recently staged, the 3050 was described as having "a little less breadth than a Yamayork, but more clarity and point in the sound". I wouldn't disagree with this assessment. I wish we'd had a piston version there for comparison.

As a tool, the 3050 is like any other horn - it's only as good as what you put into it. Like a lot of big rotary axes, my horn can be somewhat revealing when I don't practice it. The sound it's capable of producing, however, is well worth the effort.

As always, just my $.02, your mileage may vary...

...Dave

tubadaddy92 wrote:For those of you out there in Tubenet who have played Wilson's 3050 CC tuba what has been your thoughts? I have thought about trying some of these but i thought I would get your advice first. Thank you.

The Willson 3050 RZ I have had for about 18 months is my first CC, and I really love how it sounds with a chamber orchestra, community band, or other large ensemble. Below the staff is marvelous, and it's great to rattle the walls with penetrating low Gs in Gershwin, or lay down pianissimo Gs in Irish folk songs, for example.

There are some notes in the staff that do not play themselves, requiring me to consciously buzz the correct frequency.

The horn weighs about 26 pounds, which could be a potential liability as far as getting dropped accidentally.

thanks for the bump greg. does anyone know any stores that have the rotary in stock?

My Willson CC is owned by the US Navy Band and I am sad to say it will stay there when I leave shortly.

Having played it for nearly 14 years in all sorts of groups I can say that IMO they are very good horns.

Mine is one of the first 6 made, we had them shipped to us and I chose the one I wanted.

Pitch is very good overall. There are some notes that have to be altered by pulling the first slide, but much less work than on my Hirs. or Nirsh.

Sound is as full and large as a larger horn without being woofy and it offers some very nice clarity.

It is very big to play in a chamber group so I use my EEb Willson (that is now for sale, see my post). The CC is too big.

I find top to bottom it is very consistant in feel and blow. I work much harder on my other horns to achieve the same sound top to bottom.

I do find that others (bone players) in orchestra love the sound, but when I bring in my Hirsbruner they like that sound OVER the Willson. I think it is because the sound takes a while to develop on the Willson - meaning it sounds much better at 30 feet away than at 3 feet away as the same people at 30 feet will pick the Willson over the Hirsbruner as it sounds fuller at that distance.

The bell sits way away from you on the Willson, on the Hirsbruner it is on top of your head giving you the feeling that the Hirsbruner responds quicker IMO.

As a player, I think the Willson's are hard to beat. It is a very large bore, takes a different kind of blow, and is not as easy to play as a smaller horn. It is very consistant once you figure it out.

I am very sorry to lose this horn as well as to sell my EEb. I just purchased a Hirsbruner a few months ago as I think in my post Navy Band life it will be more versitle for what I will need. I'm just not going to need multiple horns sitting around not being played.

JKD