Does anyone know the differences between these PT F tubas?

[pattonsj]

Bloke the B&S F that I think that you are talking about is the Mel Culbertson Apollo model. It was gold brass, .748-.827 bore, and had a big 19" bell. Sound right?

[Tubadork]

The PT-10 has the same profile as the original "Symphonie" (Communist era) F, except the instrument gets larger sooner. (After the 3rd valve, they are believed to be identical in profile.) I believe the early versions offered two interchangeable mouthpipes (two tapers, both of them necessarily ending up - due, by definition - to the 5th valve bore - larger than a "Symphonie" mouthpipe, but one more resembling a "Symphonie" mouthpipe taper).

The PT-15, I believe, is fatter than a PT-10 (at least the bell...??), and the PT-16 is (I think) a 6-valve version of the 15. I have played recently-made B&S F tubas (and other recently-made B&S versions of old models of BBb tubas as well). The new editions of old models seem to play "dead" to me, in much the same way that modern versions of traditional models of Miraphone instruments seem to compare to their old 1960's/1970's counterparts. Somehow, I believe they suffer from hydraulically-formed (rather than hand-bent/hand-hammered) bows.

In the past (or it is still offered?) there was yet another B&S F tuba that was even fatter, I believe. It had some sort of "deep sea" name (much like the "Neptune" CC instrument). As I recall, it was also billed as the "Somebody's Name" F tuba. I played one once that was briefly on display in my own store, and recall that the scale (tuning) was (at least to me) unusable. However, there are F tubas marketed today that offer similar (if not worse) tuning as compared to that (name forgotten) B&S made very large F tuba of the past.

Apollo F tuba?
it is pretty big,

Bill

[THE TUBA]

There is also, although I have never heard anything about it other than a passing mention, a B&S Culbertson piston F: The Vulcano. It looks like a modified PT-10 to me.


...just throwing it out there.

[Rick Denney]

The new editions of old models seem to play "dead" to me, in much the same way that modern versions of traditional models of Miraphone instruments seem to compare to their old 1960's/1970's counterparts. Somehow, I believe they suffer from hydraulically-formed (rather than hand-bent/hand-hammered) bows.

I bet not. I bet the taper is subtly different.

I have a B&S 3100, which is supposedly identical to the Symphonie, one of which I used to own (except that my old one had five valves and the 3100 version I have has six). There were differences in the measurements--the bell ferrule was a little different, for example, and the leadpipe is different--but the instruments are so much more alike than either of them are like the typical modern PT-10/11 or PT-15/16 that I put it down to sample variation as much as anything.

The main difference between the Symphonie and the PT10 is the bore of the 5th, and 6th valves. On the Symphonie and the 3100, they are 17mm, and the bores for valves 1-4 are 18, 19, 20, and 21mm, respectively. On the PT-10/(which is the 3099/1/W), valves 1, 2, 5, and 6 are 19mm, and the 3rd and 4th 20 and 21mm, respectively. The PT-15/16 are the 5099 models. The Culbertson Apollo is the 4100, and the JBL is the 3100/W.

I'm nearly certain that my 3100 (which may have been called a PT-9 at some point) has a hand-hammered bottom bow. Mine was probably made before unification by a hair, so they were still committed to the old Communist ways, comrade.

Rick "agreeing that the PT-10's and 15's have a hollow sound compared to the narrower-bored models" Denney

[joh_tuba]

The PT10 was an attempt to improve upon the original B&S Symphonie model F tuba. As has been stated already the *only* design difference was a change in the initial bore size of the valve set and a resultant change in the taper of the leadpipe so that it matches up to that larger initial bore size. The result is a horn that does indeed make more noise while giving up some of the sweetness of the original. I would agree that the intonation did suffer as a result and the low C response became a bit unstable. I'm not so eager to claim that they ruined an otherwise great design but they certainly didn't make a better horn. For my tastes, intonation trumps other concerns.

Later the PT15 and 16 were released. The 16 is just a six valve version. It is an attempt to improve upon the PT10 and has the exact same specs in terms of bell diameter and bore size through the valve section as the 10. According to the marketing materials of the time the leadpipe was redesigned and the bottom bow and bell made larger and from thicker brass. Supposedly the redesign was done by computer. If you set a 15 next to a 10 they look identical. That said, there is a difference. The 15 might have moved a smidge more into the big tuba with less sweetness sound arena but it's SUCH a slight difference that I doubt a typical audience member would know the difference. I believe the intonation of a good 15 to be comparable to the original Symphony model. The response is probably best characterized as remaining like that of the PT10.

The modern version of the Symphonie is the PT9. As stated above they aren't necessarily exactly the same as the original design. I have it on reasonably good authority(I hope this isn't rumor) that the original mandrel for the Symphonie leadpipe no longer exists. That said the PT9 is more similar than different.

Please keep in mind that there is significant sample variation between same model horns. I've played multiple B&S horns over the years and observed HUGE differences in intonation and response in particular. You really need to take the time to play the specific horn you intend to buy. I also once played a PT6 that seemed just 'ok' that was then chem cleaned and had the rotors properly aligned. It then became one of the best PT6s I've ever played. Maintenance matters.

These are just my opinions and completely subject to change. It is worth noting that despite the Tubenet freak jury concensus that the Symphonie is the superior instrument and my own intimations above, for many years Custom Music sold both the PT10 and 15 side by side but did not carry the PT9. They now carry all three variations. Custom Music is very much so a business and wouldn't bother carrying a horn that doesn't get sold. Perhaps there is something about the 10 that I've just not taken the time to appreciate.

In interest of full disclosure I currently own both a B&S Symphonie AND a PT15. Both are excellent instruments. I might ultimately be forced to sell one but that would be a gut wrenching decision.
Intonation:
They both have kick @$$ intonation.
Sound:
The Symphonie plays significantly smaller, lighter and sweeter. I think of it as my solo F. That said, in the right hands it can make a TON of noise as demonstrated by Tim Buzbee here: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=34675&p=305301#p305301 The 15 in contrast, has the sweet core but a lot more body around it. It really depends on the application which is most desirable but I suspect that it's also true that your typical audience member wouldn't be aware of the difference even if it were pointed out to them. Either horn could cover all the bases without showing any sign of weakness.
Reponse:
The 15 blows like all the other PT instruments which is really nice if you already have a comfort level on a PT6, for example. The 15 response is very predictable stable and right where I expect it to be. I think the Symphonie is more forgiving of being lazy about moving air. Technical passages tend to just pop out without much thought. I find it very plug and play. That said, it is also more responsive to subtle changes in what you are feeding into it. This is nice when you are playing a beautiful lyrical line and want to be expressive but can also feel a bit like walking a tight rope if you are trying to produce a perfectly even synthesizeresque sound from note to note for the purpose of winning an audition.

I tend to resist the desire to post here but this topic is something I feel competent to comment on. My opinions are routinely not reflected by tubenet concensus and I'm ok with that. However, as an owner of an excellent 15 and a Symphonie I would like to suggest that they are better described as different flavors of the same basic concept. The similarities far outweigh the differences and the differences aren't earth shatteringly huge in the grand scheme of things.

All that to say, go play a bunch and pick what you like!

[Wyvern]

How would you all compair them to the MW 45's (45s, slp, & slz)?

A 45s I played had a much dark sound than the PT-15. In fact its tone was darker than my MW 2040/5 Eb

[Rick Denney]

The modern version of the Symphonie is the PT9.

Yes, and though there are differences, they are very similar. When I got my 3100 (which I think predates unification and which I don't think was a PT-9), I had to compare it long and hard to my 5-valve Symphonie to decide which I would keep. The decision was not at all easy, but then when it's that hard to choose it almost no longer matters--pick the one that is easier to play. I picked the one with six valves and with a fifth-valve branch long enough to do some good.

I agree with your other assessments, too, though I still find the 15 to sound hollow compared to the Symphonie. But maybe I fall into your lazy category, heh, heh.

I suspect Custom didn't sell the Symphonie because it wasn't Parantucci-ized, and they do seem to have a business model of only selling brands and models that they can sell exclusively in the U.S. The PT model numbers gave them that exclusivity, even for instruments otherwise identical to non-PT instruments sold elsewhere. Making the Symphonie a PT-9 solved that problem.

Rick "agreeing that the leadpipe is a bit different" Denney

[Wyvern]

though I still find the 15 to sound hollow

But have you tried a gold brass one? They play noticeably better than the standard model (at least the one I tried) and are the preference of German professionals.

I suspect the improved playing is as much by gold brass being hand hammered, as the difference in metal.

[Norwintuba12]

I just made a trip to custom music two weeks ago, and I found that in comparison to the meinl horns the B&S horns are much smaller and alot harder to play in the middle range. Although, the JBL Classic was a great horn, I really didn't care for any of the other B&S tubas of any key.

[THE TUBA]

Sounds like no one really likes the newer models of this brand. Sounds similar to what people say about the old Alexanders. Popular in their prime, but not so much anymore.

I wouldn't go that far. In fact, I would say the opposite is true. Sure, many people find the older Symphonie models preferable to the newer PTs, but the "new" models are still perfectly fine horns.

In a survey by Dr. William Mitchell in the Spring 09 ITEA Journal,* the PT-10 was the second most commonly utilized bass tuba among survey respondents (college professors), the most common bass tuba among students of the respondents, the most frequently recommended bass tuba for purchase by the respondents' colleges/universities, and it was also tied for the second most common bass tuba owned by these same colleges/universities.

*You'll have to sign in to view the article.

[Mr.T439]

Is the "New" PT-10 recommended the most because of its sound or overall consistency?

[Wyvern]

Everyone has their own preferences according to their personal sound concept, mouthpiece choice and playing style. I have never played an old Symphonie model, but can say I loved the special lyrical sound of my PT-15 enough to switch over from an absolutely superb Eb - not a minor decision!

And the frequent complements I am receiving on its sound, makes me not regret that decision

Jonathan "who enjoys playing his PT-15 and Neptune equally"

[Bob Kolada]

I really haven't like ANY PT tuba I've ever heard or played (nor most VMI tubas either*). The ones I've played have seemed oddly disappointing for what they cost, and the F tubas especially seem to have like 3 or 4 sounds from register to register- none of them very appealing to me. Oh well, at least the horns I like cost a lot less (or, a lot lot less!).



*I like the way the 2103 plays, but every other one (PT6, 606, Neptune, 3301,....) has been kinda "bleh."

[Rick Denney]

No one tuba strikes everyone's fancy, or there wouldn't be so much diversity in the market. That's a good thing.

And I'm one of those who thinks that the original Symphonie models captured the best balance of a range of competing requirements, including intonation, tone, response, playability of the low range, and projection. My Yamaha 621's intonation is just as good (and easier to control), the response is just as good, and the low range playability is better, but the projection and tone don't match the B&S in many situations. I've played old Alexanders, and they made a great sound, but I struggled with all the other categories during my trials.

The newer B&S's that I've tried had intonation problems (possibly just sample variation), the sound doesn't have the same lively color, the low range is a little more work to manage, but they do project a bigger sound.

I had a short trial with a Miraphone Petrouschka, and that one could offer a really good complete package. I would need to spend more time with it to know--I couldn't hear it well in the room where I tried it.

Given that all tubas are a compromise of strengths and weaknesses, the ability of great players to make great music on any given tuba suggests particular strengths in overcoming a given instrument's particular weaknesses. That doesn't mean those weaknesses aren't there.

With all that said, the new B&S F tubas are still the standard by which F tubas are measured. It has taken a very long time for other F tubas to rise to that standard over the years. There might now be good competition from instruments that provided a more advantageous mix of strengths and weakness for any given player, but I think it's safe to say that if a tuba player can't make wonderful music on a modern B&S F tuba, the answer will lie within not without. The difference now is the number of other instruments on the market for which that is just as true.

Rick "remembering when the Symphonie and the Alex were really the only games in town" Denney

[joh_tuba]

Not the answer you are hoping for :/

I spoke with Neal Campbell a couple weeks ago about the current state of Hirsbrunner. Easy to get ahold of if you call the number on the Custom Music website. He's certain to give you the right answer and probably lots of extra info that you didn't even know you needed about the differences over the years. He's always been extremely kind and helpful and visibly cares about the PT tubas.

[joh_tuba]

A phone call to the sole distributor(when that was a thing) will get you the answer lickety split.

[besson900]

I Read this topic and in 2nd answer sombody wrote about bigger brother of PT-16. It was B&S 4100 Neptune, I had a chance to play on one and it was the worst B&S I ever played

48cm bell it is to big for F tuba I think, i t was more like 7/4(^^) F tuba

[tmmcas1]

My understanding was that the PT11 was the 6 valve version of the PT10. 5 and 6 on the left hand. When the big merger happened I think they went away from all the PT classifications. Maybe that’s incorrect. I only know this because I had to do a little digging to figure out what they call a PT9 now (it’s a 3100) when I wanted to try one. I was told the PT8 and PT11 were rare. Maybe a Buffet person or Mr. Tucci will chime in. It’s confusing.

Tom

[tmmcas1]

Clearly I know nothing...except that a PT9 is now a 3100.