TubeNet

Why won't anybody build me a contra-bass trombonium?
You know, just like a regular trombonium, with mostly cylindrical tubing (a la trombone), but in the tuba range (Bb probably, but no reason not to build F, Eb, CC).
Hell, in the soprano voice, there are the trumpet, the cornet, and the flugelhorn. In the tenor voice, there are the trombone, the baritone horn, and the euphonium. Each group, you see, progressing from mostly cylindrical tubing to mostly (or all) conical tubing. The resulting waveforms and sounds therefore progress from the edgy to the more mellow to the warm and fuzzy.
However, in the bass voice, there's ONLY the tuba, with all-conical tubing (forget the valve section). (Now don't start in on cimbassi, which are just glorified valved bass-trombones.)
What i want is a lip-vibrated aerophone in the bass range with cylindrical (or mostly cylindrical) tubing, such as with the trombonium, but an octave lower. I've been pestering tuba-manufacturers since the 1960s with this idea, and they all blow me off. The kindest (if most disingenuous) response has been, "Why change what sells?'
The sound from such a beast would (could) be more along the lines of the deepest string on the cello, or the rich velvet of a Russian bass singer (usually male). The horn would be lighter, since less metal would be used, thereby being easier to transport and hold by smaller people. The mouthpiece would take considerable experimentation, admittedly. Maybe the horn would be half cylindrical, maybe a third. Who knows? But just think of the glorious sound you could get out of it in a big band, somewhere between a bari sax and a bass trombone, but with a richer tone.
But -- bottom line -- why not?

TubaNero wrote:Why won't anybody build me a contra-bass trombonium?.... (Now don't start in on cimbassi, which are just glorified valved bass-trombones.)...

What you are describing IS a cimbasso. You can wrap it any way you want. What key do you want it in? ... what bore? ... how many pistons/rotors? ... what is your budget? ... when do you want it?

I think that he is describing an instrument 1 (one) octave lower than the cimbasso, if I read correctly.

tubasinfonian wrote:I think that he is describing an instrument 1 (one) octave lower than the cimbasso, if I read correctly.

Kalison's cimbasso is supposedly available in CC, cf. http://www.tubaexchange.com/oldsite/www ... mbasso.htm

That would be the requested octave, right? Much lower than this, and prospects of the following seem rather remote:

TubaNero wrote: glorious sound you could get out of it in a big band, somewhere between a bari sax and a bass trombone, but with a richer tone.

tubasinfonian wrote:I think that he is describing an instrument 1 (one) octave lower than the cimbasso, if I read correctly.

Cimbassi are built in about every key that a tuba is made in. An octave below that would not be very practical. I have a BBb cimbasso (about 18 feet of open bugle like a BBb tuba). A BBBb (subcontra trombonium??) would have about 36 feet of open bugle???


I guess you could use it to make fart noises.

Mike Johnson wrote:Try this!
http://www.orsi-wind-instruments.it/special.htm" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank
Mike

Orsi's "Verdi tuba" is the instrument I first thought of after reading the original post.

Kevin Hendrick wrote:

Mike Johnson wrote:Try this!
http://www.orsi-wind-instruments.it/special.htm" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank
Mike

Orsi's "Verdi tuba" is the instrument I first thought of after reading the original post.

AHA! Contra-bass trombonium = skinny tuba. Same pitch range and music application as a cimbasso.

Orsi has built some strange stuff over the years. Have a peek at this... the woodwind version of the instrument in discussion here:

If you have a little patience (I have a hell of a backlog) I'll build you anything you want. Have you looked at the other bell on this:

http://www.bassethoundmusic.com/hardware.htm" target="_blank" target="_blank

(srcroll down to the double bell "thing"). I've owned two tromboniums. I've also used the chasi of a reynolds one to build a tenor horn for someone - he adores it. Having played the larger ones like the Conn 90G (and the King 4B one like it), I can express some appeal for them. The originals sound like strangled ducks, but they're fun!

J.c.

P.S. You'll have to have a decent budget for this too...

TubaTinker wrote:
Orsi has built some strange stuff over the years. Have a peek at this... the woodwind version of the instrument in discussion here:

ew. Looks like about 1/2 of a contrabass clarinet. Maybe pitched like a bass clarinet, but with tone better suited to industrial alarm sounds?

Acutally, what came to mine for me was this: http://www.bassethoundmusic.com/fluba.html" target="_blank" target="_blank .

Donn wrote:

TubaTinker wrote:
Orsi has built some strange stuff over the years. Have a peek at this... the woodwind version of the instrument in discussion here:

ew. Looks like about 1/2 of a contrabass clarinet. Maybe pitched like a bass clarinet, but with tone better suited to industrial alarm sounds?

Nope. This horn is a lot larger than it appears in the photo. The mouthpiece is 6 1/2" long and 2 1/2" in diameter! It's twice the length of what we know of as a bass clarinet in Bb. Bb Trumpet length x 2 = Bb trombone/euphonium x 2 = BBb tuba. Bb Soprano clarinet x 2 = Bb bass clarinet x 2 = this thing!

TubaTinker wrote:The mouthpiece is 6 1/2" long and 2 1/2" in diameter!

TubaTinker wrote:

TubaNero wrote:Why won't anybody build me a contra-bass trombonium?.... (Now don't start in on cimbassi, which are just glorified valved bass-trombones.)...

What you are describing IS a cimbasso. You can wrap it any way you want. What key do you want it in? ... what bore? ... how many pistons/rotors? ... what is your budget? ... when do you want it?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, now that i've got everybody's attention. . . .
What i REALLY want is not a contrabass trombonium, or a cimbasso, but a tuba built along those lines. That is, i want a tuba that has cylindrical tubing for part of its length, giving the tone an edgier sound. But i don't know the proportions -- it might be 30% or it might be 50%, or anywhere in between. Experiment.
I also want it to have 4 piston-valves, and a bell-front bell detachable so an upright bell could be used, in the unlikely (to me) event i would not want the audience to hear me well. I always want my bell pointed toward the listeners, because i think the tuba sound is (or could be) marvelous. I haven't read any cogent analyses of perceptive knowledgeable audiences preferring any brass instrument's bell-upright sound to bell-front sound. What's the last time you preferred a trumpet, cornet, flugelhorn, trombone, baritone horn, or euphonium with its bell pointed toward (and lost in) the ceiling? I can't believe you would prefer Wild Bill Davison's deliciously raspy tone pointed toward the ceiling. The only possible reason for pointing the tuba's bell up is that you think the tone is ugly when it's pointed at you. Think differently? Gimme evidence.
Also, what is the supposed advantage of a bigger bore-size? Hmm? You can't overblow it as easily? C'mon. It takes more air the larger the bore is, and the advantage is . . . what? The instrument has more metal that vibrates because of the bigger bore-size, and so what? A bore-size like current 4/4 tubas have is fine.
What i want is a choice! I want a tuba not only like those available now (and i have 15 of 'em), but one structured like a baritone horn, and one like a trombonium. If a cimbasso can be re-wrapped to look like a trombonium/baritone horn, with 4 valves, detachable bell-front, that'll work.

You have plenty of choice...build one yourself, or commission someone to build your dream tuba for you.

I have neither the time nor inclination to debate you about the reasons for large-bore tubas or bell-upright tubas.

TubaNero wrote:(and i have 15 of 'em)

With a collection like that, I would think you would have noticed the differences for yourself.

Nethereuph wrote:........Shame on the scandelous instrument manufacturers for tricking kids and amateurs into buying upright bell instruments. All of the professionals I know or have seen prefer and exclusively use the bell-front model, and it's about time someone else noticed this! .....

I don't think the manufacturers are to blame as much as the directors. I've known at least three directors who told their tuba players to "just leave the bell-front horn at home... it's just too much in my face"!

TubaNero wrote: I want a tuba not only like those available now (and i have 15 of 'em)

You have 15 tubas, and no cimbasso?

I hope this doesn't mean bell-front horns in F are optimal; why not make bell-front clarinets while we're at it?
If changing the bell direction changes how I sound to the audience, someone build me a backwards-belled tuba with the bell coming from the bottom of the tuba and facing the same direction as my back so it sounds like I'm passing really loud gass.(but it won't sound like that to my audience ) I don't want my horrible tone in their faces.


This man must have sounded horrible, whoever he may be, because he didn't chose a foward-facing bell

If the concept is true, would prefer the trumpet with a bell facing up.
They're all you friggin hear in the brass voices.

i have trouble believing there ain't trolls abounding.

But, just in case, here's reality--the bell front tuba is a result of the recording industry. ONLY. Not until it was found that recordings couldn't adequately capture the full sound of a tuba --a bell UPWARDS instrument--did the manufacturers turn the bell forward. The contemporary sousaphone? A bastardization.

I have nothing against bell front horns, I agree that they work well in early jazz groups.

Nethereuph wrote:You're right! All successful tuba/euphonium players use bell-front instruments.

Bell front is very much an American idea. Apart from the use of recording bells to aid recording in the early part of the 20th century before good microphones, players in Europe use upward pointing bells. And there are a lot of successful tuba/euphonium players in Europe

Forward facing bells sound like a good idea for use out of doors to project, but they are hardly a necessity for being a successful player.

What about french horns? Their lovely tone is produced with backward facing bell. My understanding is that the bell direction becomes less important as pitch becomes lower.

Neptune wrote: What about french horns? Their lovely tone is produced with backward facing bell. My understanding is that the bell direction becomes less important as pitch becomes lower.

Looking at who's front and who's not, for general use including indoors, the forward facing bells belong to the trombone family including the trumpet (i.e., soprano valve trombone). (According to my theory, flugelhorn should point up, if it weren't a doubling instrument for trumpet players.) Maybe it's about tone, not pitch - backwards, upright and forward bells emphasize the distinct tonal qualities of their respective instrument families.