TubeNet

Not exactly unusual - for example, the Gil Evans/Miles Davis big band had several different tuba players in that role (although I don't know if it was a 4th Bone replacement/double or an additional "5th" part.) I have several other big band/"stage band" recordings with tuba as part of the brass section (not in the rhythm section) but they are packed away for a move so I cannot reference them.

Stan Kenton also had tuba in the bone section, but he was not quite satisfied with the sound - http://www.bassbone.com/resources/articles.php" target="_blank" target="_blank (written with a bass bone player's bias

You are not making any sort of radical development here - from my experience the tuba voice in large band jazz is quite acceptable - go for it!

You cannot replace the Bassbone (4th part) with the tuba - the section would mostly not sound right.
But you can write material just for 3 bones and tuba and use the tuba in a proper way.
I`ve played some of Gil Evans material (Sketches of Spain, Porgy & Bess) where the tuba has a life of is own - It`s beautiful material, even though it`s difficult to hear in the old recordings with Miles Davies.
I`ve also played a lot of new material written for a section with tuba - works fantastic

Roger

It is not uncommon. i have played various parts in big band on tuba (bass trombone, tuba, bass, bari sax). It will add another sound to the mix. Have fun!

...

I bring my Miraphone 184 to big band rehearsals often. I do pick and choose carefully which tunes the tuba works on, mostly ballads. There are tunes that you just need to have the edgier sound of the bass bone. Tuba also doesn't usually work well on bone section soli's with divided parts.
If I pick a tune with a good fit for tuba, I usually get immediate feedback from the other bones and and rest of the band at how good it sounds. If you go through the 4th bone books in our band you will find many charts where I have penciled at the top "no tuba". These are charts that look like they could be a good fit for tuba but after trying it really weren't.

My high school did not have a bass bone, and none of the players had one. So one of the tuba players playing one of the school's souzys always sat 5th bone. It did alright so long as the player played lightly so as to blend with the rest of the bones and not get in my way playing electric bass.

Baritone Sax + Large Trombone + Bass Guitar = plenty of low end.

Notice how many bands have 2 bass guitars, or 2 baritone saxes, etc.

Unless the part says TUBA on it, learn bass trombone. Your wallet will thank you years later.

MartyNeilan wrote:Unless the part says TUBA on it, learn bass trombone. Your wallet will thank you years later.

I would agree with this. There's the occasional tuba part in big band stuff (example, Mingus) that will ask for tuba, but DON'T DO IT IF IT DOESN'T ASK FOR IT!!! Taking up bass bone is fun. It's something different. If I was forced to play something besides tuba, I would choose bass bone. The grit, IMO, sounds great in a big band setting.

I have played a Besson 983 in a reading jazz band, mostly to challenge myself, but I am interested in "pushing the envelope", musically.

You should not try to replace the bass trombone completely. That would be ignoring the demands of the music.

I find that the ballads seem to be the easiest fit, but I do not accept that as an absolute limitation.

I think WE need to expand the use of the tuba, and show what can be done.

bloke wrote:

iiipopes wrote:My high school did not have a bass bone, and none of the players had one. So one of the tuba players playing one of the school's souzys always sat 5th bone. It did alright so long as the player played lightly so as to blend with the rest of the bones and not get in my way playing electric bass.

"Making do" is a different situation all together.

Indeed. I'm just glad it was a King fiberglass souzy with the .687 bore, so it had some tonal, er, "characteristics" that made it work, especially with something like a small King 25 mouthpiece.