TubeNet

When I played a 1291(piston) and a PT6(rotor) back to back a few years ago, I thought:



The 1291 sounded darker, required less air, played a bit smaller, had a much easier low end and was 'kind of' in tune.

The PT6 sounded very 'broad' across it's range, playing in and above the staff took surprisingly little effort, was pretty well in tune, and took more air than the 1291.




Overall, the 1291 would be a better choice if ease of play was the most important, and you wanted a horn that was quite forgiving.

However, the PT6 took more effort but played more consistently and better throughout.

I have indeed experienced and lived with a stuffy low register on a PT6 for many years. There *is* a solution. There is nothing intrinsic to that bugle that prevents the low register from being far more resonant and free.

My first suggestion would be to take the horn to a detail oriented repairman and have the horn properly chem cleaned and valves aligned perfectly. That alone will DRAMATICALLY open up most any PT6 out there.

Step two is to spend a TON of time in the low register and learn a truly focused clear direct approach to your sound production in that register. Simply 'going loose as a goose' is never acceptable on any horn. Even horns that do tolerate a sloppy approach respond very positively to improved efficiencies. Remember, a super resonant focused sound is FAR larger and carries in the hall way better than an over round, unfocused nebulous sound.

I also believe there is some variation in the leadpipe design of these horns and quite possibly a simple fix that if implemented could significantly improve the low end response without negative affect on any other register. I believe that the stock pipe on the 6 is just a smidge too small with no real benefit in playability. That said, I have no concrete evidence that this is true. My horn is an older horn with a smaller receiver than the current production horns. My horn is amazing now after many years of mediocrity. I am pleased as punch but would be extremely hesitant to perform the same operation on another person's horn without their complete understanding of the potential risks.


Sidenote:
If they could learn to build the PT6 while instilling the response curve of the PT3 direct from the factory these horns would no longer be debated as the ultimate orchestral tuba. Conversely, if someone far smarter than me could figure out how to instill a PT3 with the intonation of the PT6 the debate regarding ultimate chamber music tuba would quickly come to an end.

joh_tuba wrote:If they could learn to build the PT6 while instilling the response curve of the PT3 direct from the factory these horns would no longer be debated as the ultimate orchestral tuba.

But it would still sound like a PT6! To me, their sound has always been the big turnoff.

pauvog1 wrote:Has anyone else has an issue with their pt6 being stuffy in the lower register? If so was there an easy fix to correct this? I read an old post about changing the gap on the lead pipe, but it wasn't specific. Just curious as I haven't played this one and probably will not have the ability to go out and try out a bunch of horns in the near future (also not in the market)...just curious.

Thanks

Hi
I have had the receiver gap on my PT6 shortened and it has made the world of difference. My initial post was probably a fraction unclear but if you contact Alan Baer he will know the exact problem and how to fix it. He said to me that it was hard to explain and gave me the exact measurements and I sent my tuba and mouthpiece to the shop and had the work done. It has opened up the lower register and made the horn more responsive.

Cheers
Bjorn