TubeNet

Just curious what other folks are doing about this:

There are small Eb tubas from the early 1900s that take euro-shank euphonium mouthpieces. In a historical context I assume that there was a a large sized euphonium mouthpiece packaged with the horn, but it has such a small receiver so that a town band's euphonium player could play tuba parts on his own mouthpiece if the need arose? In a larger band these could perhaps fill the gap between euphoniums and the larger basses?

In a modern setting these can be rigged with extender slides to put these in modern pitch as required, but what are current players doing about the mouthpiece? Do people just use a euphonium mouthpiece, or do they find a large tuba sized euphonium mouthpiece, or do they swap out the receiver for something more tuba sized? I've been using a standard size euphonium mouthpiece in mine, which makes...distinctly euphonium type sounds. I'm never expecting these to be killer low end tubas, but is there anything out there to make them sound more tubby? Regardless the upper range (rather predictably) sings quite well, allowing the sticklers that think "it says tuba on the page, so I must play a tuba for the part" to play songs that may sound a tad to strained on their larger size horns, while at the same time not disturbing their consciences.

Then all it needs is replated pistons, a fourth valve and a fifth rotor, and conversion to front action...etc

Um, I must disagree with one assumption in your post. These eefers had their own mouthpieces, and the smaller shank was the standard eefer shank & receiver of the day.

That said, B&H/Besson hung on to this particular receiver/shank size until the mid 70's for all of their tubas.

Denis Wick makes an entire line of the small shank (.490 shank tip diameter) mouthpieces. The largest is the 1 (no letter on the model designation means the smaller shank, as opposed to the "L" designation, for example, "1L" that is actually the "standard" "American" .520 shank) that I use on my BBb 3-valve comp, and the smallest is the 5. Most people use the mid-sized 3 on eefer, but it does have a really deep cup, and it can either be a great match improving overall tonality and intonation on the horn, or it can be a real dog. The 1, 2, and 3 have the same external dimensions, and the 4 and 5 have a size smaller external dimension. This means the rim is effectively wider on the 3 than on the 1 or the 2, as the cup is smaller, but with similar throats and backbores.

Any of the other mouthpiece makers, including PT, will make a small shank, but it has to be special ordered.

You can read all about them at deniswick.com (yes, Mr. Wick spells his first name with only one "n.")

There is another alternative available, if he still has any in stock: Mike Finn made a batch of his MF4 mouthpieces with the small shank a couple of years ago. Great mouthpiece, with very even tone and response. It has a thinner rounded rim that appeals to a lot of people. I tried one on an eefer I was experimenting with at the time. I did not keep the eefer, and so the mouthpiece found a new home as well. Great mouthpiece, however.

These small Eb's often did double duty as marching and concert instruments. Baritones and euphoniums used even smaller tenor trombone-sized mouthpieces. If there was a cross-over, it was from baritone/euphonium to trombone. Thus the proliferation of valve trombones in the last half of the 19th century.

The 20th century brass "arms race" gave everyone bigger bores. Small cornets gave way to trumpets. Bass trombones became tenor trombones, while the smaller tuba bore became the euphonium/bass trombone bore. In fact, what was called a "monster bore" Eb tuba would be on the small side today for a British Brass Band.

I don’t think the small tuba receivers were made for doubling euph players. US period euphs had receivers like small tenor trombones until very recent decades. British euphs had medium sized receivers (between tenor and bass trombones) until around 1973. British tubas weren’t equipped with large receivers until the first Sovereigns were introduced circa 1982.

I have a small 1870 Besson Eb, which arrived here some 5 years ago with a very corroded original mouthpiece a bit wider and shallower than the Yeo signature I use for my euph and bassbones. I have the Denis Wick ## 5, 4, and 1. The last was too large and caused overblowing. The 4 & 5 should have worked, but didn’t do the thing for me, as my embouchure felt restricted.

My current solution, which I expect to be long term, is an unlikely one: the Sellmansberger Solo aka. the blokepiece version #1. It is very wide with a shallow primary cup, a deep secondary cup, and a moderate flare to its backbore. The flip side is that the shank only enters very short into the receiver. The benefits are a robust sound, good control, and good intonation. This mouthpiece was bought for another tuba, but it also brings the potentials well out in this very small bore and heavy wall old Besson.

Fellow Danish TubeNetter Søren made that old Besson sound very convincingly playing through a Conn Helleberg with a turned down shank, but despite my liking of Helleberg type mouthpieces for larger tubas, the shallower cup of the blokepiece works better for me.

The pinch is, that we want a bigger sound out of these old tubas, than their designers supposed them to deliver, so each player will have search for his own solution.

Klaus