TubeNet

While I admire the experiment...and I find it VERY interesting...

Noone likely noticed for a couple of reasons.

1) If you spend little time on the same instrument and set-up you have little time to develop or instill a sense of "normal" sound on the new pieces. So it may be difficult for people (especially those not paying attention) to notice, since they have no basis of comparison

2) Noone was paying attention

3) Many tuba's DO sound different, but it isn't necessarily the key of the instrument that does it. In our lessons studio, we took a day to listen to multiple recorded performances by profiled players soloing (one piece was the Hindemith Sonata). The key of the tuba's varied in the recordings. Some being on CC others F and Eb...and even one I heard on Bb. The F horn....VERY distinguishible. The Eb and CC were sometimes similar, but since we were paying VERY close attention we could identify which were wich.

BASICALLY, Different key'd horns still have a certain sound, and MOSTLY particular characteristic on certain notes. The fact that there was usually a larger horn playing (CC on #1 and Eb on #2) can also "mask" up the Eb sound.

Now, your director may not have "noticed" because the sound he was still hearing was Tuba. And it sounds as if notes wern't an issue and etc. Essentially, it is a tuba players goal to sound as much like a Tuba on ANY key'd instrument you can.

The fact also, is that you were playing in a Wind Band where Bb and even Eb are acceptable. And it also has to do with the literature you played. If you were both on Eb's for something that needed more *umph* and breadth, then the director may have noticed.

Your experiment shows a few interesting things, but maybe not what you are initially thinking or trying to get across.

It's still cool though

I definitely sound like me. The three I play may shade the tone a little bit, and the mouthpiece I use may shade the tone a little bit: my Besson is a little more forward, my Miraphone is a little broader, and my souzy is a little bigger, but at the end of the day I sound like me.

Granted, when I got my 186, it was in the middle of my Besson having some leaks, so it wasn't so much the tone that got noticed as the intonation.

Now that will get you noticed: changes of intonation. If it's not in tune and in time and in dynamic, you'll know it then!

ed wrote:
Not a single person noticed a difference in sound.

An important question: How did it sound to YOU guys? Did you hear big differences? Which set up sounded the best, to you?

I think that whether anyone else noticed, is not necessarily relevant; I am not certain that I would notice, unless warned ahead of time, if the trumpet section was changing instruments, or the bassoons, or whatever....especially when 166 hours passes by, before hearing the next instrument.

BTW - I think that it is much easier to detect a BAD sound, when you hear one, than different shades of good sounds!

It doesn't mean that we all should stop searching for what we think is the perfect sound, even if nobody else is listening.....

This reminds me of when my orchestra was reheasing Elgar 1 earlier this year. I couldn't decide which tuba to use, so tried each successive weeks. Not a single person commented, although I would have thought the difference between a 6/4 Neptune an Eb pretty noticable.

Yes most non-tubist seem not to notice, or care. However some do, such as the conductor who asked me to use my PT20 for Rach 2 instead of my Neptune.

A more likely explanation is this:

Respect goes in score order- Arnold Jacobs

A good tuba section is respected when it is gone, and not even then.

It's been my experience that the choice of tuba for a large ensemble is usually not noticed by anyone except other tuba players. As long as you're playing the right notes, right rhythms, balancing volume and good intonation, a conductor or colleague will never hear the difference in an ensemble. And this is not out of ignorance, but out of the fact that they are concentrating on their own responsibilities. Sure, they could hear it if there is nothing else going on in the band, but with everything else it's just not on their mind. The only people that really listen for it are other tuba players. And yes, some combinations sound better than others; it's up to us to make the right decision as to what sounds best (and maybe with the input of a respected colleague who was given a heads-up to listen for which horn sounds better).

I have said, and I'll say it again, for most audiences, if someone comes up to you after the concert who is not a low brass person and says you did a fine job, then you probably did something to stick out or not sit in the mix. But if the average person comes up to you and says the ensemble/concert/band/gig/etc sounded great, that they really enjoyed it, or something similar in general, then you did your job.

I play in a community band that welcomes all comers. We play good music, and try to get through it without any really serious mishaps, but we don't pretend that we really play well.

So, why do we show up? It's not for the audience. They are mostly friends and family and are there because of that connection. It's not for the conductor. It's not even for the other sections, though we do try to avoid embarassing ourselves as much as possible.

No, we show up because of what playing in the group does for us. Anyone who says playing in a band is not mostly a self-indulgence is kidding himself or you.

Thus, the selection of instruments for amateurs is important because of its role in our own enjoyment of participating. I like playing the Holton in a band, even if nobody can tell the difference between it and my other tubas. It gives me pleasure. It makes it easier to approach what I want to produce as a tuba player. For the same reason, I enjoy playing an F tuba in quintet.

The only time I've chosen an instrument based on conductor feedback is when he expressed concern that my Yamaha F tuba wasn't getting out. So, I added a larger F tuba to my collection. My other tuba purchases, however, have been to pursue my own interests, not those of others.

Our conductor definitely notices our instruments and comments on our choices. But then, he's a tuba player.

But in a professional setting, it matters. Mike Sanders tells the story that when he switched from an Alexander to a Yorkbrunner, several musicians in the orchestra literally put their instruments down and turned around to see what was different. Yes, he still sounded like Mike, but within that space the difference was noticeable.

Rick "an amateur" Denney

I can believe that as long as it's loud enough, the choice of tuba makes little difference in most concert band music. By and large, the tuba seems to be restricted to mid-staff D and down, with only occasional excursions to the top half of the staff.

Given that the ear is less sensitive to low frequencies than midrange and that the typical concert band is midrange-heavy, most subtle low-range distinctions would be overpowered by the sheer mass of sound of the other instruments.

If the principal trumpet in an orchestra played a C tpt. and the second played a Bb, would you notice (without looking)? If you weren't looking and weren't locked into listening to it, most people wouldn't notice the difference. That was the case, with the tpts. in the Sym. of LI (before it folded). The first guy mostly used C and the second a Bb. Sometimes, a sub came in for the principal, and I recall that he used an Eb on some blow your guts out romantic piece (I can't remember which one). I only noticed because he sounded so good and I just happened to look and see that he was playing an Eb tpt. Of course, a picc. might be the most noticeable, being an octave above the Bb. But, with the other tpts., as long as you play with good characteristic tone, and good rhythm and intonation, I don't think most poeple would care or notice. Just my observation! Damm! It's hot on LI today!

More importantly ....

15 !!!



Hey ... it's two more than 13 ....

Cheers,

ed wrote:

Doc wrote:Ed,

Peruse THIS.

Oh. I thought it was something worth knowing. That's what I get for asking. Won't make that mistake again.

Very valuable. I rather like #2 and #3 .....

Cheers,

But by the same token, (and be honest... ) don't most trumpets/cornets sound the same to us!?

The point is, no matter where in the sound strata you are, to MAKE the best sound one CAN.

Who cares WHO notices! (besides the conductor)

windshieldbug wrote:But by the same token, (and be honest... ) don't most trumpets/cornets sound the same to us!?

The point is, no matter where in the sound strata you are, to MAKE the best sound one CAN.

Who cares WHO notices! (besides the conductor)

Oooh, oooh! I can hear a flugel !! (I think ...)

I rather agree with Rick -- I want the sound **I** hear to be good. I play a somewhat expensive acoustic guitar (MSRP > $2K) and it sounds very good. But James Olson makes an amazingly awsome acoustic -- for > $10K. I played one once that absolutely knocked my socks off. But the odds that anyone in the audience would ever hear the difference is nil. (sigh) So, for an amateur (and I'm sure to the pros as well) self-satisfaction is one important factor. But there's a balance between what you want and what the audience wants (oh yeah -- and the conductor). And there are costs associated. Keep all that in mind, and buy what you want!

(note: because I want my sound to seem good from where **I** am sitting, I hesitate a little bit to ever consider a horn like the Thor, due to it's more edgy character. But a play-test with a microphone sitting out in the middle of the auditorium, OR with your buddy playing and YOU sitting in the room, would be helpful to convince you what the audience will experience. But I don't want to loathe the up-close sound, regardless.) (note #2 -- The Thor does NOT sound loathsome up close, fortunately!)

Random thoughts,

duckskiff wrote: If you replaced the expensive violins of the CSO, for example, with decent student quality fiddles, would anyone notice? I think not.

Duck "who tends to think that the largest part of the sound that an instrument produces is actually the musician, not the horn (or violin)" skiff

Have you ever played a student violin? The quality might not be as noticible to the uninitiated, but the *volume* would. A student fiddle has only about half the volume of a fine professional instrument. If I drag out my "bar fiddle" and my "classical violin" in my living room and have even a casual listener listen, they can tell a distinct difference.

MA

DP wrote:pfft
Sounds to me like you were f~cking around and no one "noticed"...so you talk such behavior up here?? Since when are rehearsals playtime? Sounds like you have the ensemble sense of a coupla grapes. Grow up.

You may be assuming the worst.

I think it is important to take into consideration, the intention of "the experiment". If they were searching for a combination of instruments to better serve the music, accidently discovering that nobody was aware of the switching instruments, I think that is very valid.

If the intention was simply to play different instruments until somebody noticed, that is something different.

My guess is the former.

Context matters, too. The OP said this was a community band rehearsal. Not the CSO.

In that context I would have been astounded to hear that anyone noticed any differences.

I don't intend that observation as an insult to community bands in general nor that one specifically. Just reality. What was the rehearsal space like? Could the people furthest away from the tuba even hear the tubas, let alone notice subtle differrences? Were the other musicians truly listening to anyone but themselves? If they could hear subtle differences in the tubas from across the band were they paying sufficient attention to what they, themselves, were doing?

When you are playing tuba yourself how much of your own attention is available to pick out tonal differences of other players? You may (and should) be trying to listen and fit into the overall ensemble well, but are you truly listening to individual instruments other than yourself while you are playing? I can't let my attention wander that much and play well myself.

I don't think anyone is going to detect much difference between tubas unless they are sitting in an audience. Even then, only of they are specifically concentrating and listening to the tuba to see if they can tell a difference. Other than a motivated tuba play who does that?

More important than the equipment is that people who matter to you know it's you playing, and well.
It surprises me to find that most people don't share my obsession with sound quality. Most folks find something they like in a performance and I like to surprise and please them.
Audience members frequently are inclined to have a word with the musicians. They mostly want to visit for a moment and speak pleasantly on any subject.
I get many comments on my 60's Gibson guitar but almost none about my horns. Fine, if they stick around it could be the music.
I've been asked who the kid blowing my tuba in the photo taped over the bad spot on my bell is.
I delighted in having a lady tell me, "Whatever that horn is, the sounds coming out of it make me smile."

tubashaman wrote:all woodwinds but sax sound the same to me, but ya, its the same concept

Bassoons, flutes, yeah, why bother having so many different types....

Once again, I am embarrassed to be a kollij student.

It surprises me to find that most people don't share my obsession with sound quality.

I was surprised to find out that out of me and my two roomates (one an architecture major, the other a computer science major), I was the LEAST concerned with quality of music.

The architect major has two sets of speakers of decently high quality, while the computer science major is a nut about the encoding quality and such. Meanwhile I'm listening to music on crappy old headphones enjoying the sound. Furthermore, I'll go to a concert and simply enjoy the music while my friends and colleagues will "critique" and their enjoyment of the concert will depend on that.

Maybe I'm just wierd