Page 1 of 3
F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:44 am
by tubashaman2
.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:03 am
by Wyvern
If you liked the sound of a PT-16, but not the 4+2 valve set up, then try the 5 valve PT-15. You may also find it not so stuffy in the low register.
I am pretty new to F tubas, but still have little problem with the low register on my PT-15. And
http://www.oberloh.com" target="_blank have a good used one for sale by the look of it.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:22 am
by skeath
I once bought an F based more on sound than low range/high range, and was sorry for years. I have played about 6 different Fs over the years, and the Yamaha 822 is by far the best I've ever played (full disclosure: I have not played the Firebird or the 621). The 822 is a big horn, but intonation is good, high range is very free-blowing, and response is consistent through all registers. It projects like a C tuba, and can be overpowering if you want. It also responds well to different mouthpieces, so a shallower cup brightens the sound considerably.
The downside: they are not cheap, and seldom show up in the used market. People who play them just don't sell them.
Sandy Keathley
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:05 am
by bort
You might also want to check out an MW-45 or MW-45S. These are pretty cool F tubas, with a not perfect, but learnable/workable register around the low C (but you already know what that's all about). Above and below that, the ones I've tried play and sound great. You can probably find one for less than $4000.
Or, what about a Miraphone 181?
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:52 am
by tubashaman2
.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 12:01 pm
by cjk
tubashaman2 wrote:Remember I am keeping my 180, ....
Why on earth would you want to do that?
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 12:15 pm
by bort
For me, the 822 would be too close to the 1291 in size. I'd want a little more contrast between my contrabass and bass tubas.
I don't know, those rotary MW F tubas are just fun for me. I probably wouldn't want to play "stars and stripes forever" all day long with them, but the "C range" isn't something to scare me away. The pedal range rocks and the mid/high range is sweet.
Also, if you want to stick with a smaller F, the Cerveny F tubas are gaining a lot of fans these days...
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:50 pm
by Rick Denney
Look into a PT-9 (B&S 3100). It has the same bell as a 10/12, but it has the smaller bore on 1, 5, and 6. That does not limit its power in any way, but it does restore the accessibility of the low register. It feels a little less open, but it does not sound a little less open. With that instrument, you might decide you don't need the 180, and I think you'll find the sound the very epitome of a German rotary F tuba, as you seem to prefer. These are harder to find in the U.S., but I think worth the search. They have the same dimensions as the old Symphonie, but that doesn't mean they are the same in every way. If you could find a 6-valve Symphonie, that would be worth looking into, but they are not common.
The Petrouschka is also the real deal. I sat and played one at the Army Conference and could have easily gone home with one were I prepared to spend that kind of scratch. My wife was appropriately instructed as to what to do should lottery winnings ever come our way.
And I will agree with Joe concerning the Willson 3200R. I've played one on several occasions, and thought it had much more of the German tone than the piston 3200, but still the plays-like-a-CC low range.
Rick "who has no use for an F tuba with an unplayable low register" Denney
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:10 pm
by tubashaman2
.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:13 pm
by tubashaman2
.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:46 pm
by Kory101
I'd sell your 180 and get an 822. It can cut through an orchestra just as well, if not better than an 180.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:40 pm
by JB
bloke wrote:I hear (not directly, admittedly) that Gene Pokorny has been playing a Firebird lately.
Confirmed...; "directly."
bloke wrote:In the past (after outings with new F tubas) he's always gone back to his love-to-hate/hate-to-love early vintage Perantucci B&S F tuba.
Somehow, because of sound, I expect the same.
(My first B&S Perantucci F tuba was one that he had for a spell, and used for some solo recording, as I recall...)
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:56 pm
by tubashaman2
.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:27 pm
by pierso20
the elephant wrote:I dislike both the PT-10 (+ various offshoots) and the Willson piston F. The other two I have not played on.
Agreed...at least the ones I played.
I do like the MW 2182 though. Very easy playing horn.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:40 pm
by bububassboner
bloke wrote:tubashaman2 wrote:Bloke,
how do you say the tone is not right
That model kind-of brings to my mind an image of a very fine F tuba...
...encased in concrete.
bloke "who has gotten in trouble here more than once when speaking my mind"
I got this feeling as well when I played a Yellow brass Firebird. Yet the Gold brass Firebird is SO much better. I have always thought that Yellow Brass Miraphones had something missing in the sound. Yet every Gold Brass Miraphone i have played has been great.
Bubu"Who thinks Miraphone should make the Gold Brass option the standard" bassboner
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:59 pm
by Allen
Kory101 wrote:I'd sell your 180 and get an 822. It can cut through an orchestra just as well, if not better than an 180.
I'll second that. I use two different mouthpieces. One (Roger Bobo solo) gives a more focused tone -- it will be heard. The other (Roger Bobo symphonic) gives a less focused tone that blends more, and has a huge low range -- for those times when you want to sound like a modest size CC tuba.
The 822 F tubas have been evolving. The earlier ones had poor pitch, making a main tuning slide trigger a practical necessity. The later ones have much better pitch. [Mine is two years old. I just do a little first valve slide tweaking.] If I were to look for a used one, I would only look at recent vintage ones.
Cheers,
Allen
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:47 pm
by tubashaman2
.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:33 am
by tubashaman2
.
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:02 am
by Rick Denney
tubashaman2 wrote:If I could find a GOOD Older B&S F, with approval from a future teacher I will consider, also still considering Firebird, petruscka , YFB621, and MW 2182....though i think the yamaha might be too small for orchestral playing and overall use????
I found that the 621 sound had a limit beyond which it will not go. And that limit falls short of being enough for a large ensemble. Someone reported second-hand that Daellenbach claimed his 621 C was good for ensembles up to about 12 people, but I think even that is stretching it. When you try to play the 621 louder than it wants to play, it will back up on you. The only option at that point is to use a really shallow mouthpiece and go trombone-like.
But you already have a small F tuba. What's the strategery in getting another one? A PT-9/Symphonie/Willson 3200R would be an orchestral F. The notion that even the old Symphonie is a small F tuba is just nutty to me. Mine absolutely dwarfs my 621.
Rick "who uses a gig bag made for a Miraphone 186 to carry, with not that much room to spare, his B&S F" Denney
Re: F tuba--which one might be right
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:21 am
by tubashaman2
.