Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:41 pm
Just sold one like that:
1908 Holton, 22" bell, 0.750" bore.
1908 Holton, 22" bell, 0.750" bore.
Chuck,
Can you give some insight as to how it played in relation to pitch and response?
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:51 pm
Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:24 pm
I had only a couple of hours on it.
Note that it was a high-to-low-pitch conversion, so there are probably some issues associated with that.
On the whole, with the exception of a very flat third partial F and a remarkably flat open Bb on top of the staff dealing with the intonation wasn't a lot of work. Great low range, big cushiony sound wiith good false tones. I expect that the tone would improve with the right leadpipe some.
As much as it might offend the puriists, I was sore tempted to keep the horn and cut it to CC with a new valve cluster and leadpipe. But then, I already have its first cousin, so I couldn't see the sense in putting my back out manhandling another huge tuba. Leave that for the young people.
As I get older, I'm finding that I like to work on small tubas more and more.
If I read the new purchaser right, it'll stay a top-action BBb. He's a collector.
Note that it was a high-to-low-pitch conversion, so there are probably some issues associated with that.
On the whole, with the exception of a very flat third partial F and a remarkably flat open Bb on top of the staff dealing with the intonation wasn't a lot of work. Great low range, big cushiony sound wiith good false tones. I expect that the tone would improve with the right leadpipe some.
As much as it might offend the puriists, I was sore tempted to keep the horn and cut it to CC with a new valve cluster and leadpipe. But then, I already have its first cousin, so I couldn't see the sense in putting my back out manhandling another huge tuba. Leave that for the young people.
As I get older, I'm finding that I like to work on small tubas more and more.
If I read the new purchaser right, it'll stay a top-action BBb. He's a collector.
Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:06 am
I said as much in my 4 Sale posting. Here's the beast next to my Rusk-cut 1915 York CC. Same body.YORK-aholic wrote:Maybe I'm mistaken but with a 22" bell and a .750 bore, it sure sounds/looks like the York monster BBb. It seems we've talked a few times about Holton borrowing many of the large parts for the large tubas of that era from York...right down to that third valve wrap.
And my York is a good player.
Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:52 pm
Better than a lot of my other tubas. The only alternate fingerings that I use are 12 for top-of-the-staff G and 3 for mid-staff E. Nothing's really far out of tune.Bob1062 wrote:Awesome!!
What is the intonation like on your York Chuck?
Re: big tuba
Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:22 pm
The only difference I can see in general dimensions would be the bell diameter. The 345 has a 20" bell. But it's the same bell, just trimmed to the smaller diameter, like the CSO York. The smaller bell would likely tighten up the sound just a bit, especially in a live room.goodgigs wrote:So isn't this just about the same thing as the 345?
It seems HUGE in the picture because the guy is of unknown size.
Usualy, according to huge tuba guru Bob Rusk, if their much bigger then that (345 size) they don't play very well. I never asked him about the GIANT BBb Rudy!
Rguardless, it is MUCH PRETTYER then any rudy I've ever seen.
Thanks for the horn dorn post!
The 6/4 Rudy is not pretty. It's awesome. The word "pretty" would be disrespectful, and fear is a factor.
Rick "thinking the 345 was made using the same basic tooling as the pictured instrument, but not with anything approaching the same level of skill" Denney
Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:10 am
thats a cool horn. i like big horns. i have a conn 20k that i think is amazeing. Its alot different, but still huge. i love how you can vibrate walls with monster horns like these