Compensating F & C

[Todd S. Malicoate]

Simple answer...it's easier and more economical to add a 5th (and 6th!) valve instead.

Besides, those compensating tubas that were manufactured are really heavy!

I think an equally compelling question would be...why aren't there more 5 or 6 valve euphoniums???

[The Jackson]

Other members can provide much more detail, but there were (are?) compensating systems made for F tubas.

I would think that the reason C tubas don't have compensating systems is because most of the intermediate-to-professional grade horns have 5th valves and some even have slide kickers. This can effectively achieve what a horn with a compensating system does.

[Wyvern]

The compensation system was designed by Blaikley in England and was essentially a British idea. In the UK, C tubas were not in general use until more recent years, so very few compensated C have ever been manufactured. However, compensated F were more common, being used in British orchestras right up until the 1980's. I recently owned a Boosey one - see picture below

[Wyvern]

I think an equally compelling question would be...why aren't there more 5 or 6 valve euphoniums???

I think there are plenty in Germany, but they call them Bariton

[Rick Denney]

Simple answer...it's easier and more economical to add a 5th (and 6th!) valve instead.

Besides, those compensating tubas that were manufactured are really heavy!

I think an equally compelling question would be...why aren't there more 5 or 6 valve euphoniums???

In another thread, I made the point that the tuba we know today is the result of a collaboration between musicians and instrument makers over the whole history of the instrument. The reason we think of the modern tuba sound as being characteristic is because that's the sound we have always associated with the tuba. This concept migrates, but slowly.

For this topic, the important element of this process is that it is regional. In this modern age when we can have world-wide discussions just by typing into a keyboard, we sometimes have to remind ourselves that when someone invented something in Germany in 1836, it might take months or years for someone in, say, England to be aware of it.

Even now we continue the regional trends that started a century ago. Occasionally, something happens that causes a fundamental shift.

There is no doubt in my mind that the British-style euphonium was a generally superior instrument to the American-style baritone. People will argue, but the British instrument has a bigger sound and presence in a band. That's why the introduction of the Boosey euphonium to the Marine Band in about 1950 revolutionized euphonium use in this country. (Was it Art Lehman who first brought the Boosey to the Marine Band? My memory fails me on that important detail. It was Glenn Call who first recounted the history, and now I can't remember all of the story as he told it.)

The Blaikley compensation system came along with those Boosey euphoniums. Boosey's premium models didn't have the option. So that's what everyone got used to in the premiere bands over the subsequent years. It has taken a very long time for that to filter its way down into schools, but I suspect the schools still using front-action, bell-front Conns are diminishing rapidly. Even at schools that use non-compensated euphoniums such as the Yamaha 321, the best players are dreaming of the instruments used by their heroes.

But the motivation for this was that one influential performer brought a new instrument technology to a region and that sparked a shift in tradition.

In England, the standard orchestral F tuba was an uncompensated Barlow F tuba. That instrument was quite small, but it did indeed have five valves. It was still configured like a saxhorn, with three top-action valves and two side valves similar to a modern French saxhorn basse. It wasn't compensated because it was developed before Blaikley's invention, or at least before it was popularized by Boosey. As Jonathon has pictured, some of the orchestral F's did eventually get built as compensating instruments. But since nobody in England at the time was playing a C tuba, there was no motivation for Boosey to construct one, beyond the occasional experiment.

The small British orchestral F tuba was unlikely to cross the pond, because over here, the very large C tuba already had its performers who were themselves world-class. In fact, their performance so defined the orchestral tuba sound that the tradition is working its way back into England.

But American instruments didn't have the Blaikley compensating system, and the reason they didn't is at least in part because Boosey owned the patents on it. So, orchestral contrabass tubas used additional valves as a means of managing intonation problems (primarily what Stauffer called the valve swindle), rather than an automatic compensation system.

Germans went their own way from the start, and never felt the need to adopt the instruments or practice of Britain or America. They, too, solved the valve swindle problem with additional valves. Even if they had embraced the Blaikley automatic compensation system, those patents would have prevented them from using it.

In the end, both methods work. Fine performers manage somehow to play all the required notes in tune, using whatever method that have grown accustomed to.

And, as the two approaches have developed, people have grown accustomed to the results and figure out how to make them work. Thus, British tuba players think their pinky finger is too weak to operate a valve, and American tubas players think compensated tubas are stuffy.

Rick "thinking neither solution comes without compromises" Denney

[Rick Denney]

I think an equally compelling question would be...why aren't there more 5 or 6 valve euphoniums???

I think there are plenty in Germany, but they call them Bariton

Euphonium players are victims of their own terminology, in my opinion.

In my general use of the term "tenor tuba", some instruments have rotary valves, some piston. Some use additional valves to compensate for the valve swindle, and some use automatic compensate as designed by Blaikley. Some have smaller bore, and some have larger bore. The differences between them are much smaller than the differences between, say, a Yamaha 621 F tuba and a B&S PT-15.

But low-brass players in general shun the "tenor tuba" term, thinking it only applies to the Alexander 151. Is that what Holst had in mind when he wrote "tenor tuba" in the part for The Planets? I don't think so--such an instrument wouldn't have been available in England at the time. He clearly had the saxhorn-style euphonium in mind. But he used the general term.

So, if you adopt the general term, then there are several 5-valve tenor tubas on the market. The Alexander is one such. The Courtois Saxhorn Basse in Bb is another. It uses three top-action valves and two on the side, just like the English Barlow F tuba of long tradition. The small French C tuba could be a six-valve version of the same instrument, and it probably sounds less like a modern orchestral tuba than does your average monster euphonium player on a Willson 2950.

But credit to Boosey: They made a superior instrument by the standards of the day, and it happened to come with compensating valves. That's what established the tradition.

Rick "realizing that an Alex 151 doesn't sound much like a Besson euph, but then neither does a Holton sound like a Miraphone" Denney

[sloan]

But credit to Boosey: They made a superior instrument by the standards of the day, and it happened to come with compensating valves. That's what established the tradition.

Note the careful wording! Association does not imply causality! If you have a superior (complicated) product, it's often difficult to figure out which of its features MAKE IT SUPERIOR and which ones simply don't drag it down towards mediocrity very much.

"Great X has Y" does NOT imply that "if it has Y, then it's a great X".

Although...it is the smart way to bet, until you learn differently.

"No one was ever fired for specifying IBM" - conventional wisdom in the business world, until about 1984 or so...

[Wyvern]

The Courtois Saxhorn Basse in Bb is another.

I don't think I have ever heard one. Anyone who has - does it sound more like a British euphonium, or German Bariton?

[Wyvern]

But low-brass players in general shun the "tenor tuba" term, thinking it only applies to the Alexander 151. Is that what Holst had in mind when he wrote "tenor tuba" in the part for The Planets? I don't think so--such an instrument wouldn't have been available in England at the time. He clearly had the saxhorn-style euphonium in mind. But he used the general term.

I think Holst probably had in mind international performances of his music. Most likely the term "euphonium" was ONLY used in Britain at that time. Tenor Tuba is more descriptive of the instrument he actually wanted used.

[Rick Denney]

Most likely the term "euphonium" was ONLY used in Britain at that time. Tenor Tuba is more descriptive of the instrument he actually wanted used.

The why did he write it in treble clef, ala British brass band tradition?

Rick "looking at the score" Denney

[Wyvern]

Most likely the term "euphonium" was ONLY used in Britain at that time. Tenor Tuba is more descriptive of the instrument he actually wanted used.

The why did he write it in treble clef, ala British brass band tradition?

Rick "looking at the score" Denney

I really don't know, but the 'tenor horn' part in Mahler 7 is similarly treble clef transposed. Actually in the UK at that time, they would more likely have got in a professional military band euphonium player for the part (as Bevan documents they did for the tuba in the early days), so there seems no logical reason why it is treble and not bass clef.

[Rick Denney]

I think that was acutally Harold Brasch who played the first Boosey in a major DC service band

Yes, that was it. Thanks for the reminder.

Rick "who misses MC's stories" Denney

[Rick Denney]

I really don't know, but the 'tenor horn' part in Mahler 7 is similarly treble clef transposed. Actually in the UK at that time, they would more likely have got in a professional military band euphonium player for the part (as Bevan documents they did for the tuba in the early days), so there seems no logical reason why it is treble and not bass clef.

Bevan's comment regarding how the part was transposed was, "It leaves little doubt as to the instrument Holst intended."

That being a plain euphonium, of course.

The more I think about the word "euphonium", the more it reminds me of terms adopted by manufacturers in the deep past for instruments they thought innovative enough to get their own name. Sorta like "EEb". Thus, it seems more like a model name than a brand name, if you get my drift. Conn's use of the term to refer to their high-end models, while they used "baritone" to refer to models of the same exact dimensions but one less valve, suggests to me that the same thing.

Of course, it's the instrument that defines the term and not vice versa. Our use of the terms puts composers in the position of having to provide a scale drawing.

Rick "doubting that a rotary tenor tuba existed in all of England when the Holst was composed and debuted" Denney

[Mikelynch]

And then, of course, there is this compensating F on the right, that will be readily recognizable to those who frequent this list, in view of the widespread adoption of this configuration . . .

Ftubas.jpg

Mike Lynch

[Wyvern]

The more I think about the word "euphonium", the more it reminds me of terms adopted by manufacturers in the deep past for instruments they thought innovative enough to get their own name.

I have been thinking exactly the same thing! Euphonium is a nice slick 19th century marketing name which has stuck

Rick "doubting that a rotary tenor tuba existed in all of England when the Holst was composed and debuted" Denney

Sorry Rick, but on that one you are definitely wrong
(Yes, I know they are Welsh, but did play gigs in England too)

The Cyfarthfa band was in existence at least until 1915. It instruments can today be seen in the Cyfarthfa castle museum

[Mikelynch]

Rick Denney--wrong ?!?!

Can't buy it . . . clearly the photo and instruments are an elaborate forgery to cover up the Empire's regretful and embarrassing lack of a rotary tenor tuba proximate the turn of the century . . .

Mike "if Rick is wrong, where does that leave the rest of us" Lynch

[imperialbari]

Weren’t the Cyfartha instruments German made? The Eb tuba looks like a converted F.

Klaus

[imperialbari]

And then, of course, there is this compensating F on the right, that will be readily recognizable to those who frequent this list, in view of the widespread adoption of this configuration . . .



Mike Lynch

Make, model, history of the compensating rotary F tuba?

The two first comp loops being almost of similar lengths puzzles me.

Klaus

[Wyvern]

Weren’t the Cyfartha instruments German made? The Eb tuba looks like a converted F.

If I remember correct from my visit to the museum, they were Austrian made dating from 1870's. One of the (two) Eb's looked in playable condition. I would loved to have given it a try!

[Rick Denney]

Rick Denney--wrong ?!?!

Actually, no (or at least, not yet).

Cyfarthfa Castle is in Wales, and I limited my statement to England.

Rick "wondering what other goodies are in Jonathan's picture file" Denney