Antique question, High and low pitch tubas.

[TheBerlinerTuba]

Hallo All,

I want to ask those of you who might have information on this subject or know of (a) resource(s) with this information.
I am curious as to the phenomena of high and low pitch brass instruments from the late 19th to early 20th century.
What were the dates for these instruments?
What was the reasoning for their usage?
Were the instruments themselves designed for low pitch and then cut or the other way (longer slides added)?
What was the actual range of pitch variation?
Any other information is greatly appreciated as are pictures!

Thanks!

2165

[Rick Denney]

I want to ask those of you who might have information on this subject or know of (a) resource(s) with this information.
I am curious as to the phenomena of high and low pitch brass instruments from the late 19th to early 20th century.
What were the dates for these instruments?
What was the reasoning for their usage?
Were the instruments themselves designed for low pitch and then cut or the other way (longer slides added)?
What was the actual range of pitch variation?
Any other information is greatly appreciated as are pictures!

The Wikipedia article is quite informative and fits with my memory from when I researched this once before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitch_(music)

That answers most of your questions.

In the tuba world, there were two standard pitch systems, low pitch and high pitch. Low pitch conformed to the International Pitch before Concert Pitch (A-440) was standardized in 1939. That was about A-435. High pitch is about A-455, as I recall (dimly). Those who bought instruments who needed to accommodate both systems bought high-pitch instruments with a low-pitch conversion slide. That slide either had a loop in it, or was made in a W-shape to increase its length.

Some of the really old low-pitch instruments need to be cut down a bit to work in modern ensembles. Even the Chicago York was famously trimmed (by Renold Schilke, using a hacksaw in the locker room, so to speak, of the CSO) to bring it up to modern Concert Pitch.

In England, high-pitch instruments persisted for use by brass bands well into the 80's or 90's. Elsewhere, though, high-pitch instruments were not much made after the adoption of the Concert Pitch standard in 1939. A tuba made before that date might have been offered both ways, and that does requires some care when buying old stuff.

Example: The York Bb Bass, Model 700, was offered in their 1920's catalog as follows: "Supplied in Low Pitch Unless Special High and Low Pitch is Ordered." The High and Low Pitch model included a conversion slide, but was also made differently in the first place. That instrument is listed as being 37-1/2 inches tall in low pitch, and 32-3/4" tall in the high and low pitch model. The wording suggests that low pitch had become a de facto standard by that time, but that York still needed to accommodate a portion of the market still using high pitch.

My 1935 Conn catalog copy makes no mention of the pitch standard, suggesting to me that by that time, bands and orchestras in the U.S. had already standardized on low pitch. It seems as though orchestras had standardized on low pitch, for the most part, some decades earlier.

Sad to say, pitch inflation is occurring again, with some orchestras attempting to drive pitch standards up in order to sound a bit brighter than their competition. Tubas are already made differently for the German and American markets because of this. Nothing good can come from pitch inflation, it seems to me.

Rick "Death to A-444!" Denney

[windshieldbug]

In the early part of the 19th century, the general pitch standard was as low as A=420 (modern Ab is 415). The standard rose quite dramatically throughout the course of the century so that
by the end of the century in some venues, pitch was as high as A=457 (modern Bb is A=466), this despite the fact a standard of A=435 was established by a French Commission in 1859, and in 1887 this was formally adopted by the Vienna Congress, an international conference on musical pitch. Many American band instrument makers in the later 19th century followed the general trend of building instruments at a higher standard.

By the end of he century, however, the influence of the trend toward low pitch was also evident, perhaps owing to the 1887 resolution by the Vienna Congress. As a result, by the beginning of the 20th century until about 1920, American instrument manufacturers were faced with the dilemma of having to accommodate at least two different pitch standards, which were termed "high pitch" (around A=452) and "low pitch" (around A=440). While the practice of manufacturing instruments which could play at two standards was abandoned about 1920, some manufacturers continued to produce some high-pitch instruments for a few years.

In 1917,the American Federation of Musicians pressed for a standard pitch at A=440. The Annual Piano Technicians Conferences attempted the same from  1916 through 1919. There was a considerable effort by many musicians to establish 440 standard during this period, but no standard occurred. In 1939, Germany attempted to set 440 as standard pitch, but was unsuccessful.  A second congress was held in London in 1953, to again attempt to impose 440 internationally.  As recently as 1971, the European Community passed a recommendation calling for the still non-existent international pitch standard. It was reported that that A=440 is still not an international standard.  Lower tuning was common in Moscow (A=435).  British church organs were still tuned to A=425, and the  Vienna Philharmonic played at A=450.

[TheBerlinerTuba]

Thanks for the information everyone!

So it seems that most of the dates can be inferred from sale lit from the time. Any idea as to when the first high and low instruments were built? Also, what exactly were the high pitch tubas used for, wind band, etc?
Thanks again!
2165

[Wyvern]

In England, high-pitch instruments persisted for use by brass bands well into the 80's or 90's.

Actually I understand the change to low pitch occurred in the 1960's soon after B&H stopped making high pitched instruments. I believe all bands were low pitch by the 1970's.

[windshieldbug]

Thanks for the information everyone!

So it seems that most of the dates can be inferred from sale lit from the time. Any idea as to when the first high and low instruments were built? Also, what exactly were the high pitch tubas used for, wind band, etc?

Pitch has varied widely according to locations for centuries. It it not simply wind instruments, but organs, bands, and orchestras.

High pitch instruments are mostly associated with military bands, but orchestral pitch has crept up, too at a slower rate. The issue there is that string players notice that their instruments are more resonant and project better the more tightly that they are strung.

The short answer is that there have been multiple pitches as long as there have been instruments. Over last century in the US the pitch has been relatively stable, with the emphasis on relatively.

Another thing to remember is that equal temperament is a keyboard solution that just makes everything equally out-of-tune. Then one starts "stretch tuning" the keyboard... Tuning is not as simple at the higher levels than just a number on a tuner.

[humBell]

Sounds just like my Pan American Eb Giant Bass (a.k.a. Conn.) My guess would be that mine was built flat, like A=435 (I'm making up that number, but have the impression that while "low pitch" is often taken to mean modern standard A=440 "not high pitch", some say there was a lower pitch standard too.) Bb and A are no fun at all.

Neither of these issues responded much to mouthpiece that I could tell, but for what it's worth the 7B was my favorite with it. I also have a couple older Conn mouthpieces that are more in the bass tuba size (but with large throats), and they don't sound bad but sure don't do anything for the low end.

From Re: 1919 Conn Professional Eb Bass - worth messing with?

I've been meaning to posit something similar (that there is a lower pitch standard than low pitch) though i've seen no mention of it in my (admittedly small) wanderings about the internet on the subject up until now. Perhaps in a particular location or circumstances that were still worth making instruments for?

My experience has been two old cerveny tubas that seem to originally have been pitched lower than modern pitch. One had tuning slide extensions removed to bring it up to Eb, and the other had the original tuning slide replaced with a shorter one to bring it to BBb. (I've no pitch measurements, just going by ear somewhat and believing what i've been told...) The BBb valve tuning slides seem consistent with BBb tuning at glance, while the Eb 2nd valve might be long, but others seem fine. Haven't played with them enough to say i've done all i can to resolve the kinks (and i feel stupid every time i forget that collected water in the pipes can affect the sound)

The recent Caveat emptor might also be an example, interesting either due to 1950s being much more recent than the other examples (or that tuba is older than they think? which might help explain the excessive wear?) and looking further back, if i read it right Re: Holton Del Negro tuba which says BBb = 440 (which is A, these days, isn't it?) This, and Donn's Pan Am Eb would also indicate it isn't unique to European tubas?

Not that i have anything to add yet. I've just been sitting on this question for a while.
Oh, and i had some smug self-satisfaction in the joke in my version of the subject, for all that's worth.

[Dan Schultz]

Although A=440 is the accepted 'standard' pitch.... I believe Yamaha is setting their percussion equipment (chimes, bells, xylophones, etc.) to A=442.

[Donn]

The recent Caveat emptor might also be an example, interesting either due to 1950s being much more recent than the other examples (or that tuba is older than they think? which might help explain the excessive wear?) and looking further back, if i read it right Re: Holton Del Negro tuba which says BBb = 440 (which is A, these days, isn't it?) This, and Donn's Pan Am Eb would also indicate it isn't unique to European tubas?

I don't think it's unique to European tubas, but I don't think those two examples offer any support for any theories. More likely they're messed up and not playing like they're supposed to. The Holton served well enough for 1st tuba in a symphony performance in 1964, which I think tells us it wasn't Bb=440 at that time.

[CA Transplant]

I used to have a Czech-made euphonium that dated back to the 1920s. It played flat. I could force it to A=440, but its natural pitch was A=435 or maybe a bit lower. I had to get rid of it, because it was really incompatible with modern ensembles. What I learned from that is that if you're interested in an older instrument, take a tuner with you when you try it out. If it's consistently flat, it may well have been built that way. While that could be corrected by cutting, that's not really worthwhile for most vintage instruments, I think. I believe that if I were designing brass instruments today, I'd make them to play at about A=445, to allow for slide pulling to match the pitch of the ensemble.

Trying to play sharp interferes with the sound quality, for sure. A flat horn is a useless horn, in my opinion.

[iiipopes]

I just purchased an old Couesnon flugelhorn that had the wrong leadpipe installed: the shorter "318" Eb soprano flugel leadpipe instead of the standard Bb leadpipe. Judging from the condition of the solder joint on the bracket attaching the leadpipe to the back of the bell, it may be stock, or it may be an old repair or replacement with whatever happened to be at hand at the time. So I'm in good shape for either high- or low-pitch brass bands, if the opportunity ever arises, even though I purchased it for community jazz band. Yes, when I asked the seller to describe all markings, he told me up front, so I knew what I was getting. I surmised, and it turned out to be, that it has the effect of helping the upper range center a little better, especially with its original mouthpiece, which is not quite as deep as is now becoming the fashion, than its reputation would otherwise indicate, but not interfering with that delicious, smoky, piquant, inimitable tone that is the standard by which all other flugelhorns are measured and merely copied.

Hey - with its wide conical profile - the flugelhorn is considered a member of the tuba family!

[toobagrowl]

Although A=440 is the accepted 'standard' pitch.... I believe Yamaha is setting their percussion equipment (chimes, bells, xylophones, etc.) to A=442.

I am convinced that is also true for the Yamaha 411 sousas. I've played 4 different YSH-411 sousas, and I have to pull the main tuning slide out quite a bit to get to A=440. Even more if only using one bit; usually at least 2 inches. They all play & tune exactly the same. I think they are factory-tuned to A=442

[Donn]

I think they are factory-tuned to A=442

It's also worth noting that the international pitch standard of A-440 is at 68 degrees Fahrenheit. Pitch changes 2 cents plus or minus for every degree of temperature change.

So plug your numbers into the handy calculator at http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-pitchchange.htm. The way I read it, if you're at A=442 at 20°C (68°F), then you'll be at A=440 around 17°C (63°F.) This isn't particularly relevant per se - what really matters is how it compares to what's happening to the other instruments - but your pitch isn't fixed anyway, the important thing is to have enough adjustment. If sousaphones in the wild are playing in polar temperatures, then I would guess they have adapted by leaving a lot of slide room to tune up.

[ghmerrill]

... what really matters is how it compares to what's happening to the other instruments - but your pitch isn't fixed anyway, the important thing is to have enough adjustment. If sousaphones in the wild are playing in polar temperatures, then I would guess they have adapted by leaving a lot of slide room to tune up.

Yeah, exactly. I don't understand why manufacturers in general don't make their instruments so that they can be tuned easily to pitches sharper than 440 (as they can be tuned to pitches flatter than 440). It doesn't even require playing in polar temperatures for this to be a clear advantage.

[Donn]

Is that really how it is, tubas are commonly designed to play to A=440 with the main tuning slide all the way in? That seems crazy.

[pjv]

I live in a cold country and even though during the winter I turn the heat up in my studio space it's not a "modern office building" warm but more of a "old work space" warm. I notice on my tuba (and on my tuning slides!) the difference between practicing in the summer and practicing in the winter.

I've often wondered how (if at all) the local temperature affects the tuning of a tuba during the testing of a new instrument.

Is Kanstul's shop (SoCal) outside temperature or massively airco'ed during the warmer months? And the winter?
What about Miraphone? Or are they always play testing their horns at a constant temperature? Would a tuba built in a warmer climate play less awesome in tune in a cold climate, or visa versa?

[Wyvern]

Yeah, exactly. I don't understand why manufacturers in general don't make their instruments so that they can be tuned easily to pitches sharper than 440 (as they can be tuned to pitches flatter than 440). It doesn't even require playing in polar temperatures for this to be a clear advantage.

I aim to have Wessex with slides to tune up to 443, but it is not always possible to have one slide covering that and 440 if tuba has short tuning slide. In that case two alternative tuning slides may be required to cover alternative pitches and temperature variations.

Also remember that some people have a tendency to play flatter, or sharper, and mouthpieces choice has an effect too, so there are quite a few variables.

[pjv]

For a couple of years played an Eb helicon as if it was in D. It was low pitched and I was using my mpc instead of a smaller one that probably would've suited the horn better.

Actually worked out rather well.