TubeNet

If you play a rotary F tuba, which one do you play, and why? Thanks!

B&S 3100 Goldbrass six valves [pt9G new version of older symphonie, the 3099 (pt8) is the same with five valves], because has a good warm sound and sound like an F; don´t need too much air in the notes around "low C", good intonaition and it´s my end F tuba after a B&S 3100W (pt12) and my last YFB621S.
Carlos.

Gold brass B&S PT-15 5099 because with it large bell throat (as big as the PT-20 4/4 CC) it has an incredible full low register, while at the same time having the most wonderful singing F tuba tone in the middle/upper registers. Intonation seems excellent, and while the fabled low C feels a bit different, it sounds as good as any other note (listening to H2 recordings). Ergonomically it fits me perfect and seems a beautiful design.

I am a 100% happy with this F as my bass tuba, and like the Neptune is here (I am convinced) to keep having been through a number of different tubas previously!

Gold Brass Alex 155.

Why?

The sound is warm and colorful, the response (partly due to the thin, gold brass) is quick and the high range is easy.
The Bydlo notes are in tune and easier than any other instrument I've player.

Jon

Willson 3200RZ, hands down. I quietly searched for a replacement for my Meinl-Weston 45S for many years but never found anything that would make me want to part with it. After playing the MW for approximately 15 years I sold it to purchase this dream F tuba. The sound is amazing, low register effortless, point and click pitch and the fit and finish is second to none. To my knowledge there are a scant handful of folks in the US playing this instrument. This horn is the best rotary F I have experienced and I am continually baffled why it isn't more popular amongst rotary tuba lovers.

My 2 cents.

Andy Rummel

B&S 3099something-or-other--basically a slightly newer version of the old Symphonie, with the same bore profile as the Symphonie and six valves. I had a five-valved Symphonie that sounded gorgeous, but had playability issues. The six-valve instrument sounds 98% as good and does not have those playability issues because of the longer fifth valve branch and the extra valve. Projection with these is astounding without making the F-tuba sound woofy or contrabass-like. It really sings in the upper register and is really perfect for Berlioz. Intonation requires more steering input than does my Yamaha 621, though. My preferred mouthpiece for it is the Sellmansberger Solo, which does a lot to improve the low register without giving up the characteristic F-tuba sound. For upper-register prettiness, the Finn MF-4 is still my pick.

I'm using this for quintet and for the rare occasions when I get to play F in a large ensemble.

Rick "in the bold belief that my opinion would provide any useful input to Tony" Denney

@ Rick I just had Norm Pearson's 3099 something or other here. And while I really liked it, it didn't have the projection I was hoping for. Could be just this sample.

Tony "I look for input from everywhere" Clements

<thanks, rick>

tclements wrote:I just had Norm Pearson's 3099 something or other here. And while I really liked it, it didn't have the projection I was hoping for

I don't know about the 3099 (is that not the PT-9?) projection having never played one, but have no problem in that area with the PT-15. Earlier this year I recorded with large orchestra using my H2 positioned at the back of the hall and sent the recording to a tuba friend who commented;

I'm presently enjoying your playing in the Leigh. No problems with projection!! You sure the mike wasn't stuck right over your bell!!??

I must say when I listened I was taken aback by how the F projected through the orchestra, in fact even more so than the Neptune which I used in another work in that concert.

I think you can really only judge projection by playing in a large hall with either astute listener, or recording to give 'out-front' feedback.

tclements wrote:If you play a rotary F tuba, which one do you play, and why? Thanks!

Probably a dumb answer... but I play a Cerveny 653 because it was the F tuba I could afford. Lucky me, it turned out to be a great tuba.

If I had to very roughly describe it, I'd say it's like a rotary-valved Yamaha 621 in terms of size, playability, and output, but sounds more like an F tuba. (I don't have a *ton* of experience on the 621, but that's a rough description.)

My only complaint is that it is a small F tuba... but, that's what it is, and it does it well. So that's a stupid complaint.

I will probably sell/trade for a larger F tuba in the near future, but not because I don't like how this tuba plays/sounds!

PT15 in conjunction with a Laskey 28F.

This is a magical combo. *Extremely even* sound and response. Colorful robust characteristic sound from top to bottom. Ultra easy snappy quick response in all registers. Better or comparable intonation than most anything else on the market at the moment and very easy to manage if you use your ears.

I have a good amount of experience with the 3099(Pre-PT, PT9, Symphonie etc). I owned both a 15 and 3099 at the same time for over a year. The 3099 has a lighter sweeter sound which is much more euph like in it's voice. I never felt like it had near the power or projection but it is a distinctly beautiful sounding instrument. In comparison the PT15 is a larger heavier voice but interestingly.. it is also brighter and crisper/cleaner. I found the 3099 to be lighter and sweeter but also darker/more covered. Also, I found the high end response to not sing as effortlessly as it does on my PT15. Perhaps it's just the example that I owned. That said, in an ideal world I would love to own both. It was an exceptional instrument. The 3099 could quite possibly be on of the top 5 all time best quintet tubas. The 15 is just a far better fit for my physical approach to playing(I love my dreaded low C) and the sound that I prefer to produce.

Anyhow.. that's what I think.

joh_tuba wrote:...I found the 3099 to be lighter and sweeter but also darker/more covered.

Try a Sellmansberger Solo. That will open it up and provide more clarity at the same time.

The times I've tried a PT-15, I've found them to sound hollow in comparison to mine. Probably me.

And I agree with Mr. Hodgetts. The carrying power of the old Symphonie design has to be evaluated out front--these can really punch through an ensemble.

And the 3099-whatever (they use that model number for several different tubas and I can never keep it straight) is supposedly like a PT-9, but there are only empirical reports to go on. Mine is certainly not marked that way. But this design was never subject to Perantoni and Tucci modifications, so a PT designation seems inappropriate to me.

Playing loudly on these requires a different blowing technique than on a contrabass, just the same as a euphonium requires an even more different blowing technique. I can't play that loudly, but I can make the B&S sound ugly if I'm not careful. Again, it's about halfway between a contrabass and a tenor tuba in that respect. I'm quite sure that this problem, however, is nowhere in Tony's consideration space.

Rick "who wants an F tuba to sound like an F tuba" Denney

I have an older MW 46 F. I don't play F much so I don't need latest, greatest and I got it for $2000 on TubeNet about 7 years ago.

bort wrote:

tclements wrote:If you play a rotary F tuba, which one do you play, and why? Thanks!

Probably a dumb answer... but I play a Cerveny 653 because it was the F tuba I could afford. Lucky me, it turned out to be a great tuba.

If I had to very roughly describe it, I'd say it's like a rotary-valved Yamaha 621 in terms of size, playability, and output, but sounds more like an F tuba. (I don't have a *ton* of experience on the 621, but that's a rough description.)

My only complaint is that it is a small F tuba... but, that's what it is, and it does it well. So that's a stupid complaint.

I will probably sell/trade for a larger F tuba in the near future, but not because I don't like how this tuba plays/sounds!

I also have a Cerveny 653, for the price, it can't be touched. A really fantastic tuba. I also play a Willson 3200S, but that is a piston F. If I could afford another F, I have to agree with Andy Rummel. The rotary 3200 would be my choice.

This year i will begin the conservatory, and i'm sure that my teacher will recommend me the B&S PT-10 3099, if i can purchase a new condition F tuba, if not, any tuba that has 4 valves, or better, 5 valves, it's enough.

.

I bought a Yamaha YFB 621 F tuba about a year ago. It's got a lovely sound with a big, responsive low register. However, as with most piston instruments I've tried out these days, I'm finding it to be almost too responsive. I think I want a little more resistance. I have a feeling the problem is in the small end of the leadpipe and possibly having the 5th valve there, too.
But, being a new instrument, I'm leary of taking a torch to it.
I am considering the MW 2250.

Any thoughts?

Updated post: F Tuba Timeline

I have owned three Mirafone Model 180 F tubas.
#1 - five valve, thumb operated, made early 1980's
#2 - four valve, very early serial number
#3 - four valve, mid 1970's produced
It took me a few years to figure out how to play them. They are very small. Try to sound like Bobo! I found a use for them in serpent/ophicleide/bass trombone/cimbasso parts, plus 1st tuba in a tuba quartet.
Mouthpiece: Mirafone C4, worked great

Next came a Meinl-Weston six valve F, (4+2), Model 46S (the older model F).
This one was bigger than I wanted, but it was there. I used it for many years

Currently playing: Yamaha 621 F - fantastic player, and not too big.

My brother's tuition has put horn buying on hold for a while, but I still want to get a Cerveny 653. I'm one of those guys that will try just about any bass tuba any chance I get. When I go to conferences I'll spend hours on them, even going back and forth between booths to compare. The 653 is still one of the most even playing, satisfying rotary tubas I've ever played. That little MW 182 is also nice; I put it roughly tied with the Firebird for #2. Sure do wish I had grabbed that 182 that went for $2000 on here a few years back.

bloke wrote:I have an early 1980's GDR B&S "Symphonie" with 6 rotors that I bought new from Richard Nahatski, who brought it to me from Germany and left it for me at his parents' home - as he returned to Germany before I was able to get to Baltimore to pick it up (ie. I bought it "sight unseen"). I paid $2400 or so for the instrument, and I believe Richard used the "profit" (about $400) to pay for his r/t plane ticket to visit his parents in Baltimore. (I picked it up from his parents while visiting relatives in D.C. and attending the big T.U.B.A. thing that was hosted by the University of Maryland.)

Over the years, I would have been perfectly happy to have purchased "something better", have sought "something better" with reasonable diligence, but have never found it. Nothing (regardless of price level, and I would have been perfectly willing to pay) has equaled this particular instrument's low quantity of pitch anomalies (no slide pulling whatsoever, except triggering #5 for extremely special occasions) and beauty of sound. I have not found any newer-made similar instruments (nor "Classic" configurations, nor anything made by any other manufacturers) which equal it in any significant way. It was blind luck.

Richard, a great player and super nice guy, was in the catbird's seat for years, playing and living in Germany. He had direct access to the finest factories and manufacturers of the day. When he retired from playing, he brought his two remaining horns back to the states where they were sold. His Nirschl York Grand Master was purchased by a then student at UNT (I believe he also frequents this board...?), and his 6-valve gold brass Alex F was sold through Baltimore Brass (I think). Both of these horns were state-of-the-art: the finest examples of their kind, and the finest CC and F tubas I've ever played.

I should have bought them both, but $$ or more accurately, the absence of sufficient $$, prevented me.

As for me, I have a 5-valve Alex F that I really love. I bought it used nearly 30 years ago, and I've never had a good reason to sell. With an old PT-9 or a newer Laskey 28C, the horn sings in the upper register, has easily adjustable intonation, and sounds much better than it feels in the low registers

I think I've posted this before, but you can hear me and the Alex F here:

http://www.navyband.navy.mil/Sounds/Con ... ctotum.mp3" target="_blank" target="_blank

Karl "who is trying to get better at shameless self-promotion" H.

B&S-PT10 from the early '80s. It's raw brass and plays great. I've had it since 1990 and have never wanted to part with it. It's like an old, worn saddle. I played interesting ones at TUSABTEW like; the Firebird, JBL Classic, Kanstul 5/4, Petruska, the new 181 and the Gemeinhardt.

I used the B&S for over 20 years, as my quintet horn. It was the opportunity of working with some REALLY strong horn players that made me get a 188 (always wanted one, anyway). I felt keeping up was producing less-desirable results in intonation.

I've never been into the piston f tubas. Nothing wrong with them, just not my bag. The Gemeinhardt was interesting. I just couldn't get my head around the dependent 5th valve.