TubeNet

What I wanna know, is, what can be done about the blatty, burpy lowest notes on an Eb tuba, and are there Eeefers that have a bigger bore or more intestines to deliver beefier low notes with more power? It seems like there are several more notes below where it falls apart. And, the low notes are kinda weak. I am new to tubing, and am learning on a 1942 King Eb 4 valve sousa body with Helicon bell. It's a wonderful thing, except when you go down into the basement, below C 2 lines below the clef, it goes all weak... Would a Monster with larger bore deliver stronger tones down to, at least, A below the staff? Are there Eb's with more valves that deliver the goods down there? Or, should I go off and sell the kids for medical research and buy a BBb?
Thanking you for all your wisdom, and forgiving my ignorance, Walter of Nevada City, CA

I don't find my Besson 983 to be blatty and am very happy with it's low range. The 983 is a 4 valve compensating system and to me works wonderfully. According to a lot of folks the compensating system causes it to be stuffy in the low range, but I don't find this to be the case.

On the flip side, my Conn 28K 4 valved sousa is a little stuffy in the low range. I have a hard time making the low Bb speak and when I can it is sometimes a little blatty (I think). I do like playing this horn for pep/marching band stuff and it is fun and gives me a great sound, again, in my opinion.

I'm not the smartest or most educated guy out there so not sure if this helps or not but I love my 983 and 28K and will never give up my Eb horns. I may supplement with a BBb at some point but not to replace my Eb's.

I switched to my MW2141 precisely because it had a beefier bottom range. Very good response down to G below the staff, and ok even below that. I have heard other Eb horns with good "basements" but won't comment on them since I haven't played them myself.

I find the old American Eb tubas with the compact fat bodies (Holton, York, King, Conn, etc.) to have the sweetest, roundest sound of all Eb tubas. But there are differences among them. My antique Holton 5-valve Eb tuba has a more open sound and response than my antique King 4-valve Eb raincatcher. Both horns have many similarities (both are old American-made silver-plated piston Eb "tubas"). But the Holton has a more open and even response and scale than the King and therefore is easier to play cleanly. But both horns are very well built with a sweet "heirloom" sound. I do have to work more to get the low notes to speak well on the old King, while they more or less pop out of the old Holton. The low register sounds great on both horns; it just takes some practice.
I guess you could say that my old Holton Eb is in a way like a mini CSO York-style tuba.

Of the newer Eb tubas, I like the MW 2141 Eb. Great horn with a great sound and very even response and scale. I am sure the "Fletch" and "Sheridan" model Besson Eb tubas are good too as well as the Willson Eb. I don't think I have played them......or if I have played them it has been many years. I have for sure played the MW 2141 Eb and have heard the other new Eb's played though.

But none of those newer horns will have the open sweet sound of an old Holton or York or Conn Eb.

Walter Webb wrote:What I wanna know, is, what can be done about the blatty, burpy lowest notes on an Eb tuba

Play better.

Rick "who doesn't hear blatty, blurpy notes on recordings of Fletcher playing an Eb tuba (or Sheridan, or Gourlay, or...)" Denney

my Courtois EEb has never sounded "blatty or burpy", in fact it never sounds of anything until you put a player on the end of it. I think you might be describing the attributes of a player rather than the instrument. 2 issues arise, (1) explosive (over) production, especially in the low range will produce the "blatty" note,(2) overblowing will make it sound horrible.

Get an experienced tuba player to try the instrument to see how it plays. That will determine if it is the tuba, or a playing problem.

An Eb should not have "blatty, burpy lowest notes" more than any other pitch of tuba

I own a Willson 3400s Eb tuba. 5 valves, 5th tuned to "2-3." It will play low register notes as openly and fully as any contrabass tuba I have ever played (includes a Hirsbrunner HB-19). It has a "HUGE" bore for an Eb (.803) but I don't think that is the reason it speaks so well in its low register. I have said this before but it bears repeating:

The Best Horn for playing in the low register is the one on which I have spent the most time playing the Grigoriev Études.

I have also played a Yamaha YEB321, Besson 983 and 984 and I have a 3 valve Conn Jumbo Eb from 1912. The biggest constraint is the lack of a 4th valve on the Conn. But its low BBb and A are quite good, too.

Practice man! Practice!

I JUST played one of the new Kanstul E-flats. Simply stated, it is one of the BEST tubas I have ever played. If it pointes the other direction (it has top valves) I'd scoop one up in a minute.

They make a front-valve 5-valve version. It's the on their web site.

http://kanstul.com/detail.php?pass_sear ... nd%20Brass

Regarding the blatty low register bit: a lot of older Eb's have low register problems. My Civil War horn is awful about it, and some of the turn-of-the century Eb's have serious thinness issues below low Eb.

My previous raw brass Conn monster Eb was difficult on low Bb and A until Lee Stofer took a big dent out of the bottom bow, which totally cured it. My current Stofer-refurb Eb (my avatar) plays very well but still has a little issue with Bb and A down low (lower pedal and 4th-valve combination notes are fine). It's a matter of getting used to the horn and learning how to center the notes properly. Trying to force the trouble notes doesn't work; try a open, slow-air approach. You might also try a wider, shallower mouthpiece; that works for some people.

More modern horns rarely have low-register issues. They usually have excellent lows, comparable to a good BBb or CC.

I played the valves front version, while it was a WONDERFUL tuba, I way preferred the top valves version.

Sorry, Tony, I misread what you meant. I'd love to have either. Or both.

http://kanstul.com/detail.php?pass_sear ... nd%20Brass

GC wrote: My previous raw brass Conn monster Eb was difficult on low Bb and A until Lee Stofer took a big dent out of the bottom bow, which totally cured it

Hm, interesting! Mine is bad, much worse than my little Italian Eb, and has largish dents down there.

I thank everyone who responded to my questions. Clearly, I am a beginner whose chops are just developing, and would, no doubt, have a different perspective in a year or two. My teacher has played my horn and has no trouble with the instrument. In fact, players report that this horn is remarkably easy blowing and responsive from about A below the staff, up to a high Bb. There are differences in range between an Eb and BBb, and excellent players are able to extend in both directions. My understanding is that the controlled looseness and soft, fat air flow necessary for a clean sound in the low register kicks in earlier on the Eb as it reaches the end of it's range, and it's volume decreases. I am wondering what effect a larger bore (Monster) would have, and what effect more tubing (5th valve) would have, on the power of low notes.
Thanks again, Walter

Walter Webb wrote:I am wondering what effect a larger bore (Monster) would have, and what effect more tubing (5th valve) would have, on the power of low notes.

I can't help with the acoustical prognostications, but on the semantics - for example, a 1932 King Monster Eb Bass is .687 in. at the valves (http://www.hnwhite.com/Low%20Brass.htm.) "Monster" doesn't really say much about bore. Same with my Pan American Eb "Giant" Bass - bore at valves is not that big, though overall it's a big tuba (and has terrible low Bb.)

(I envy your helicon, by the way!)

tclements wrote:I JUST played one of the new Kanstul E-flats. Simply stated, it is one of the BEST tubas I have ever played. If it pointes the other direction (it has top valves) I'd scoop one up in a minute.

I kicked myself for forgetting to mention the new Kanstul Eb tuba. Checked out their website and vids online a while back and the tuba sounds and looks really good. They are supposed to be "updated" copies of the old York tubas. Actually if I were looking into a new Eb, the Kanstul would be at the top of the list. I'd like to try one.
http://www.kanstul.net/category.php?ca ... et="_blank

Looking at the King HN White legacy website, it seems that most tubas are either .687 or .750 bore as measured at the valves. Other variables are introduced outside the small intestines (the rest of the the increasing taper, and bell size). http://www.hnwhite.com/Low%20Brass.htm" target="_blank The grand orchestrals and Giants go for .750 bore. So, the term MONSTER does not mean much, when it's a .687, or does it? Somebody knows the full explanation of all this, but they are probably out in their garage right now grafting a 5th valve from junkyard parts onto some peck horn sonically tuned for calling rodents to their doom.
Walter

Walter Webb wrote:So, the term MONSTER does not mean much, when it's a .687, or does it?

On the contrary, it's .687 that doesn't mean much, where `Monster' does have a clear meaning. Tuba is a conical brass - the bore increases throughout most of the length, not just at the end. The diameter at the valve section gives you some clue about the tuba, but it isn't a definitive gauge of its size by any means.

On the other hand, you could say that an Eb `Monster' or `Giant' bass has more or less similar proportions to a standard size contrabass tuba, and the intention is of course to give it some of the sound of a contrabass. That works fairly well down to maybe C below the staff, but below that is not such a sure thing. Why? Well, it shouldn't be a big suprise - of course the analogous notes on a contrabass (e.g., low F on a BBb tuba) can be difficult too. The extra fat size of these tubas may work against them here, for all I know - if you think about that supposedly conical bore profile, a low Bb adds a lot of straight tubing, something like 7 feet of it? off the top of my head, and the "more conical" the tuba (i.e., fatter), maybe the more acute the problem there. I'm only guessing. I would be surprised if even the designers of these tubas really understood exactly why some of them manage that range better than others. It probably isn't as simple as `larger bore' (and I assume those .750 Kings are contrabasses, not Eb.)

It seems to me that "monster" has little if anything to do with valve bore. It has to do with the size of the outer bows, bell stack, and bell diameter. My Conn monster Eb's are both as large as a 4/4 BBb or CC tuba in those regards, but simply have fewer loops in the inner tubing and shorter valve tubes. They have 19-20" bells also.

ED.: Sorry, Donn, didn't read yours before I posted.

Walter,
SWEET horn! Thanks for the horn dorn, it's a beauty!
(and, now that I really read your comments, I'm changing my response a little bit).

Regarding your blatty, spread, whatever sound. You actually said "at the bottom of the 88", implying the pedal Bb etc, way down there. If you're a beginner, and you're playing in that range (6 leger lines below the staff, or an octave below Bb below the bass clef staff), 1) you're doing pretty dadgum well and 2) your tone is likely to be blatty no matter what.

If it's actually the first Bb below the staff, air could be one solution. Lack of focus of the air is hard to describe when not in person, but if your cheeks are puffy, your lips are really, really really loose, and you can't find the pitch, it could come down to air.

Or, it could be the horn. Or, the mouthpiece. A 4 valve souzie should be ok in that range. I wonder about the bell change, though. If the bell was grafted on without consideration of overall length, there could be serious problems. I'm not saying that's the case, since I don't know anything about the specific instrument aside from the picture. If it was done by an experienced Frankentuba maker, it'll be fine.

A 5th valve won't add extra tubing to any note, it will just change the resistance and fingering. By having different bends in the airstream, the response could be changed for better or worse.

But, which range is it, really? The extreme, totally at the bottom of the piano keyboard, or an octave up. Remember that the lowest "normal" pitch of a 3 valve Eb tuba is A, 3 legers below the staff. That will help anyone with any virtual suggestions.

steve