TubeNet

Hi , while looking at Tubas I ran across these prints from the 1800's of this instrument called the ophicleide...Now do to only playing in my room I have never heard of this instrument!! Was it before the Serpent?? how long were they popular and why aren't they still around today??Are they a BBb horn? are they even a horn?? The two pics I'm sending were interesting to me as a matter of fact there's a art show coming up and I think I'll use one to make a sculpture but with steel notes(bass cleff of course<s>)coming out of the top... any info or history would be greatly appreciated.....Thank You!.................bigbob

It might help to find stuff when it's spelled correctly (sorry to be the spelling nazi... ) but it's spelled ophicleide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophicleide

WOW!! busted for an E!!<s> I was hoping some of the people here knew more through there knowledge of the instrument... Thanks for correcting my spelling too bad theres not a spell checker here.. OH! There is<s>bigbob

tubaguy9 wrote:It might help to find stuff when it's spelled correctly (sorry to be the spelling nazi... ) but it's spelled ophicleide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophicleide

Very informative!! Thanks

They were in use in Brazil well in to the 20th Century, especially in Choro bands - they spell it "Oficleide" there. It was eventually replaced with the Saxophone. Irineu de Almeida was probably the most famous oficleide player in Brazil, she taught Pixinguinha the music.

Could need a spelling revision, but never mind. I just copied myself from old TubeNet:

Specific questions on this board are legitimate. That is what the board is about.

More general and very widescoped questions should be subdivided. Or even better should the persons putting such questions do some library work, search the net, or even follow a class or two at some relevant school.

Putting such general questions as yours tends to provoke at least one Pavlovian type answer: Wieprecht and Moritz will proudly be presented by their teacher from Königlich Hochpreussischer Hoch- und Unterschule für Applikierte Musichalische Ventilmontage back in Berlin anno 1830, Rick "the Doctor" Denney.

Others will place premade middle- and highschool papers here on the board. I did so earlier this month. Due to board technicalities that posting will not be available through the archive search until next month. So here it comes in a non.revised reprint:



Schoolteachers want papers being relevant,
no-nonsense-straight-to-the-point, and true to the level of understanding
they have achieved themselves. Which does not equal, that they want it to be
true by general standards.

I will provide a synopsis for such a paper:

Brasses in form of trumpets, horns, and trombones had been known for
centuries, when Mozart enriched the world by his musical creativity. Trumpets
were used for war and for royal courts. Horns were used for hunting and for
beauty of sound. Trombones were used for extended playing in the churches.
Hence they had an extendable tubings.

Haydn was less than content with the selection of available notes on the
then valveless trumpet. So when an inventuous trumpeter presented him to a
specimen of the not-yet-invented-soprano-sax-fitted-with-a-trumpet-mouthpiece,
he wrote a concert for that virtual instrument.

To transfer the achieved agility to the bass range someone put a trombone
mouthpiece on a bassoon and called it a Russian bassoon. The obvious reason
for that name was, that then, as now, nobody had a chance to verify, what really
happened in Russia.

However very few players had the 4 square inch finger tips needed to cover
these Russian-foxholes-cum-bassoon-tubing-vents. Hence the same mouthpiece
was put on the-not-yet-invented-bass-sax. The sound was obnoxious, a word
nobody could spell. So the resulting instrument was called an ophicleide.

Even if its holes-cum-vents could be shut up, it still was mostly of use in
the "There is a hole in my bucket"-type of tunes.

The Germans as well the French went on and soldered the keys to the tubing
(they could not make the keywork work anyway). Both nations then put valve
mechanisms on the tubing.

The Germans have these minds gyrating around themselves, so they of course
put rotary valves on their
non-invented-saxes-going-through-Russia-to-end-up-as-hole-deprived-ophicleides.

The French went mechanically down another road. As they were not totally
content with the resulting sounds, and as they still had not gotten their
spelling right, they called their valving mechanism pis-tons.

They were so ashamed of themselves, that they exiled a number of these
noise-tool-makers through the
not-yet-dug-out-but-already-planned-by-Napoleon-Chunnel to England. Names among
others were Bess-on and Disdain.

Hence there are basically two sorts of tubas: rotary-left-belled-Germanoids
and top-pistoned-Franglaises.

The Americans already 125 years ago had an urge to police the world into
their basically visionless mold. So they took the Fra-Brit top pistons and
placed them, where the Germs originally had put their gyrators. No
inventiveness at all. Just a lucky attempt by a skilled repairman in Nome to
make the best out of two wrecked tubas.

Your humble schoolteacher level tuba historian aka. Klaus

Klaus can come up with some great satire, can't he!

Seriously, the ophicliede was the predecessor to the tuba, and was the development of the even more antique instrument, the serpent. It was used in military bands as well as orchestras and other ensembles. Berlioz originally wrote for 2 ophicleides in "Symphonie Fantastique," but when he heard the tuba, re-wrote the parts for tuba.

I hate to quote Wiki, but it does have generally some relevant basic facts:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophicleide" target="_blank" target="_blank

Here is a better article:
http://www.contrabass.com/pages/ophicleide.html" target="_blank" target="_blank

And here is a video where you can hear Doug Yeo and others in an ophicleide ensemble that sounds better than a lot of tuba players:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUS-NJ8nSnI" target="_blank" target="_blank

Finally, since both hands are used on an ophicliede, this explains the original configuration of the original Wieprecht-Moritz tuba being very slender and having valves operated by both hands:

http://www.rugs-n-relics.com/Brass/t...tz-F-Tuba.html" target="_blank" target="_blank

The ophicleide followed the Serpent and was invented in France around 1815 and was produced until around 1900. They are in several keys but most commonly in Bb and C.
Berlioz often used one of each on the ophicleide part to cover the uneven tones.
I have an ophicleide in C from around 1840 myself and it is quite different to play than a tuba
The mouthpiece is the size of a trombone and the intonation is demanding

To read about (and hear) the instrument: ophicleide.com

Roger

My trombonist friend Bjarne Thanning photographed a Cuban street musician playing an ophicleide in Havana in 1992 or 1993.

Eppelsheim, who is one of the rare modern Ophicleide-makers, says that one reason for the bad intonation is, that two factors never were optimized like on the Saxophone, which basically is a reed-ophicleide.

The acoustically best placement of the keys was never researched by the original makers. Neither was the optimal bell profile.

There was a summit in Berlin a few years ago. The superior Australian virtuoso (Byrd?) was there as was Yeo from Boston. There is a youtube video with these players playing a trio with a younger German player, who plays a modern Eppelsheim, which has a wider flare with a more open throat than seen in the old designs.

Klaus

imagine a bari sax with a trombone mouthpeice and you can get the general idea of what the ophicleide is. They were made in different sizes and keys, so most were not as large as a bari sax. They used a key mechanism similar to the keyed bugle with "clapper" keys as opposed to the Boehm system like most woodwinds use today. Many orchestral pieces from the early to mid 19th century actually have parts for ophicleide not tuba. One example that I know of is the oratorio "Elijah" by Mendelssohn, which I played in college. And Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique?

There was also a similar brass instrument of that period which used a double reed like a bassoon called a sarrusophone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarrusophone" target="_blank) think metal bassoon.
The top picture you posted reminded me more of a sarrusophone rather than an ophicleide due to the player using what looks more like a reed rather than a mouthpiece.
k

If you're looking more on the opicleide I have been to tuba/euphonium camp where Roland Frocher a swiss euphonium player on NAXXOS was there and he also played this instrument its got a very unique sound if you want to check out some of his stuff his website is http://www.rolandfroescher.ch" target="_blank

imperialbari wrote: Brasses in form of trumpets, horns, and trombones had been known for
centuries, when Mozart enriched the world by his musical creativity. Trumpets
were used for war and for royal courts. Horns were used for hunting and for
beauty of sound. Trombones were used for extended playing in the churches.
Hence they had an extendable tubings.

Haydn was less than content with the selection of available notes on the
then valveless trumpet. So when an inventuous trumpeter presented him to a
specimen of the not-yet-invented-soprano-sax-fitted-with-a-trumpet-mouthpiece,
he wrote a concert for that virtual instrument.

To transfer the achieved agility to the bass range someone put a trombone
mouthpiece on a bassoon and called it a Russian bassoon. The obvious reason
for that name was, that then, as now, nobody had a chance to verify, what really
happened in Russia.

However very few players had the 4 square inch finger tips needed to cover
these Russian-foxholes-cum-bassoon-tubing-vents. Hence the same mouthpiece
was put on the-not-yet-invented-bass-sax. The sound was obnoxious, a word
nobody could spell. So the resulting instrument was called an ophicleide.

Even if its holes-cum-vents could be shut up, it still was mostly of use in
the "There is a hole in my bucket"-type of tunes.

The Germans as well the French went on and soldered the keys to the tubing
(they could not make the keywork work anyway). Both nations then put valve
mechanisms on the tubing.

The Germans have these minds gyrating around themselves, so they of course
put rotary valves on their
non-invented-saxes-going-through-Russia-to-end-up-as-hole-deprived-ophicleides.

The French went mechanically down another road. As they were not totally
content with the resulting sounds, and as they still had not gotten their
spelling right, they called their valving mechanism pis-tons.

They were so ashamed of themselves, that they exiled a number of these
noise-tool-makers through the
not-yet-dug-out-but-already-planned-by-Napoleon-Chunnel to England. Names among
others were Bess-on and Disdain.

Hence there are basically two sorts of tubas: rotary-left-belled-Germanoids
and top-pistoned-Franglaises.

The Americans already 125 years ago had an urge to police the world into
their basically visionless mold. So they took the Fra-Brit top pistons and
placed them, where the Germs originally had put their gyrators. No
inventiveness at all. Just a lucky attempt by a skilled repairman in Nome to
make the best out of two wrecked tubas.

Your humble schoolteacher level tuba historian aka. Klaus

Sheer Genius.
Perhaps the best thing I have ever read on TubeNet.

MartyNeilan wrote: Sheer Genius.
Perhaps the best thing I have ever read on TubeNet.

I agree - that should be taught in all Schools of Musicololololology!

Previously heard:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=24898&hilit=+ophicleide" target="_blank

Would the ensemble playing on the Berlin ophicleide summit be accepted had the player played euphoniums and a bass tuba? Not by professional standards I guess.

For me the superb player is Nick Byrne, whom I from bad memory named Byrd earlier in this thread. His page has some sound clips displaying excellent playing:

http://www.ophicleide.com/audio/Audio.htm

I am not entirely convinced that the ophicleide is worthwhile today. To me it in general sounds like a slim euphonium with a trombone colouring in the lower range and with a horn colouring in the top range. Euphoniums sounding like trombones are not so rare. The horn colouring is quite rare, but I have heard it in a quartet recording. The lead player was a female euph professor from Florida (name slips my memory). Wonderful playing.

Klaus

The ophicleide is what it is: a valuable instrument in the history of the development of the bass and contrabass brass voice. In that regard, it will always have a place in certain period literature, when used along other period brass.

I actually like the rather hybrid tonality of the beast as a change of pace from the too-large bore, too-dark-and-broad tone of a lot of contempory euph playing.

I also like the "American" baritone/euph tone of the instruments of the "classic" period of American concert bands from Sousa until recently, as made by Conn, King, Olds, Reynolds, Martin, etc., with the front bells. With the slightly smaller bore, but still more conical profile, they also have a hybrid "horn-y" tonality that actually fits better in the American concert band setting in its blend with both brass and woodwinds, and still bringing out countermelodies and such when required. It is a shame that these instruments were usually only produced in 3-valve versions, and their true potential unrealized by too many, to really knit the lower sections of an American concert band together.

As far as Klaus' rhetorical question? The horn has its limitations, yes, but these professionals play them as well as they can be played. Any limitations speak more about the inherent limitations of the instruments than the professionals playing them.

The one ophicleide I've heard in person was a nice sound, sort of a cross between a bassoon and a euphonium.

Just to hazard a guess at the real reason the ophicleide is gone: not loud enough. Same as gut strings, small bores, small bells, basset horns, etc. That's what mainly drives `progress' in musical instruments - survival of the loudest.

Donn, have you tried a bari/tuba mp in one of your low saxs?

Some good general information overall (Klaus, you're a riot! - I couldn't breathe!)

Couple things...

The Ophicleide isn't really a descendant of the Serpent, despite its name... it's a bass keyed bugle. It never really replaced the serpent in its original role as vocal bass in the churches. It did supplant (note the term) the serpent in military use due to its lighter weight, durability, cost and repairability.

The Ophicleide isn't really a predecessor to the tuba either. What it did do was establish a location within the orchestra where the tuba would eventually sit, as the bass of the brass and trombones. The serpent, when used orchestrally, was a more general low instrument used more often as a bass woodwind or a general low voice (you can think continuo voice and you'd be sort of in the neighborhood).

The instrument is in a class of its own (with the keyed bugle and the quinticlave, its alto cousin), and was pushed out of western art music by careful and deliberate marketing of valved instruments, which were far more profitable. Much like the saxophone compared to the oboe, the valved brass was easier to begin playing than the ophicleide, which helped sell them as "easier" and "better in tune" instruments. But any skilled ophicleidist or keyed bugler could keep up with the best of the valve players of the time.

In fact the first musician who was an international sensation from the US was a keyed bugler.

Nick Byrn is a master; you can click on some of his playing samples on ophicleide.com. Doug Yeo is much in demand, for good reason. I have a clip I'm relatively proud of on YouTube, but the sound quality of the recording is gawdawful (I have a better one to upload) but it gives an example of its range and "happy register" (note, it's not the tuba register).

I'm a huge proponent of the ophicleide. There were magnificent instruments with excellent "intonation" (it's still left much to the player to deal with as it's center is much more flexible). There are also many dogs. Few original instruments people get to try out are in excellent playing condition, and an out-of-adjustment instrument will get panned immediately, frustrate the player and listeners, and confirm every bad thing you've ever heard. I've played maybe 5 instruments which were properly adjusted. The others sounded like elephant borborygmous.

I learned on a crappy instrument, and now own a doll. Doug's instrument is wonderful - you can tell. Nick's Hallary is a very late instrument with very modern design and execution and it shows.

I love this instrument. It has a lovely voice and deserves great respect. No other instrument gained some much international success and widespread use as quickly as the ophicleide. Heck, not even the tuba, as it existed in over an octave of different tunings and keyes and widely different timbres for a century, but the ophicleide in just C or Bb was adopted with very little design variance in just a few years. For a very good reason – it worked! Composers wrote for them not because there was nothing else available… they would’ve skipped it if it sounded like $#!+. But they used it because it enhanced the music like nothing before.

J.c.S. (off his pro-‘cleid soapbox).

Bob Kolada wrote:Donn, have you tried a bari/tuba mp in one of your low saxs?

Sure. Works better than the other way around, but there isn't much resonance and the intonation is way off.

I think the last time we talked about this matter here, someone almost had me convinced that the acoustical principles were significantly different, but if I were going to give it a serious shot, I think I would try to fabricate a short leadpipe that extends the bore taper, like maybe eight inches. That would add the extra length that the saxophone mouthpiece chamber weirdly replaces, and it would bring the bore down to trombone mouthpiece dimensions. Or it might end up narrower than that, would have to see what works. Right off the top of my head I can't think of any way to actually make that leadpipe myself, so this will not happen real soon. And anyway my whole thing is finding ways to make the baritone saxophone even louder and more strident, so the interest in ophicleide noises is purely academic.