TubeNet

Why is it that most rotor F tubas come in 5 or 6 valve flavors, the 6 valve version often preferred; but the piston F tubas at most come in a 4+1 variant? Outside of a modified 45SLP I think I saw once, I have no other recollection of piston F tubas with 6 valves. How hard would it be to slap both a flat wholestep and a flat halfstep rotor either before or after the piston cluster? Or, would that defeat the supposed "openness" of the piston F tuba low range?

MartyNeilan wrote:Outside of a modified 45SLP I think I saw once, I have no other recollection of piston F tubas with 6 valves.

Are you referring to the MW Titan?
http://www.melton.de/index.php?id=117&n ... oducts_pi2" target="_blank[iid]=357&cHash=bc9161c74d

MartyNeilan wrote:... a modified 45SLP I think I saw once ...

That'd be a 46SLP "Titan":

http://www.melton.de/index.php?id=117&n ... bc9161c74d

That is the only current-production 4P2R F that I know of, though.

Slightly more interesting is this 2250 which I've never heard of before-

LJV wrote:2250 is supposed to be a larger F based on the 2141 Eb.

A larger F? As if that doesn't exist already.....

I think the 2250 was designed by Roland Szentpali...

B&S products a 6 piston valves F-tuba, too. It's the model 4100/II/P "Vulcano", designed in collaboration with Mel Culbertson (like the MW 'Titan').

I think the 6th rotor on the F tuba was to offer more fingering possibilities, due to the fact that any more than 20 years ago, most F tubas had serious response and intonation issues.

Piston F tubas are a fairly recent phenomenon, developed in an era when computer-aided design allows for tapers and bells to be sorted-out before an instrument is produced. Therefore, theoretically, the piston F tubas should have less need of a 6th valve than a rotary F of older design.

To this end, during the past 6 years, I have had Rudolf Meinl build several 5-valve F tubas, three 5-rotor tubas and one 4-piston/5th rotor instrument. Each of these used computer-designed bodies, all were 5-right-hand configuration, and I requested that each have his trademark 2nd valve slide trigger. I found that the instruments' slides could be easily-enough set to where any adjustments needed could be accomplished by the left-hand 2nd valve slide trigger, and that the instruments were lightweight and unususally responsive.

I wouldn't say that a 6th rotor is necessarily a bad thing, but I think I'd personally prefer an instrument where it wasn't necessary. I've owned a 6-valve F tuba, and as good as it was, it was just more work to play than a really fine 5-valve.

Rudolf Meinl made a piston F-tuba? That sounds very interesting. Was this just a one off? Or is it going to be produced in the future? How did it compare to other Piston F's?

I'm also intrigued by the 2250. Has anyone played this horn? Will it be available to the public anytime soon?

Frank Ortega

To reply to Frank's post, yes, Rudolf Meinl has built a piston F tuba.

They have had a body built for several years, but had been dissatisfied with the piston valvesets available out there. Although they are a small shop, they make their own high-end rotors, so that's why nearly all of their instruments have rotors.

I supplied Rudi with an obsolete Boehm & Meinl valveset, wonderful pistons from someone else's failed attempt at a 5-valve Eb, and he built them into their piston F body. The porting was a little unususal, as the leadpipe was longer than on most F's and had to curve around to come into 1st valve from the side away from the thumb ring, but I think that the long rose-brass leadpipe may have been the secret of this instrument. As I remember, the instrument has a .750" bore, 4th is .770" and the 5th rotor is .810". A student at Harvard owns this instrument, which is everything I could ever hope for in an F tuba.

Rudolf Meinl, Jr. told me that they could not make another one like that one, because valvesets like that are not available new. I have learned from a colleague in Germany that a piston F was made, using a typical modern Euro-valveset, but that it just didn't play like this one-of-a-kind. I'm seriously considering building a couple of one-off F tubas in 2010, and I'll guarantee that they will not have 6 valves - just 4 pistons and a rotor.

Lee Stofer wrote:I think the 6th rotor on the F tuba was to offer more fingering possibilities, due to the fact that any more than 20 years ago, most F tubas had serious response and intonation issues.

Piston F tubas are a fairly recent phenomenon, developed in an era when computer-aided design allows for tapers and bells to be sorted-out before an instrument is produced. Therefore, theoretically, the piston F tubas should have less need of a 6th valve than a rotary F of older design.
. . .
I wouldn't say that a 6th rotor is necessarily a bad thing, but I think I'd personally prefer an instrument where it wasn't necessary. I've owned a 6-valve F tuba, and as good as it was, it was just more work to play than a really fine 5-valve.

or

bloke wrote:...
I haven't played very many piston valve F tubas whereby a 6th valve would satisfactorily solve all of their remaining intonation problems.

Hmm . . .

LJV wrote:2250 is supposed to be a larger F based on the 2141 Eb.

Re: 2250

Roland Szentpaly has been playing one for a few weeks and from what I've heard he loves this tuba. Mine arrived on Monday, I'm using it on this weeks concerts. The tuba is very loosely based on the 2141 Eb, only the bottom bow and valve section are shared: the throat on the bell is tighter, the main branch, mouthpipe and tuning slide are all new. Response, evenness of sound and pitch are excellent. It's a fantastic F tuba!

Norm Pearson