Compensating Valve Adjustment

[tuba.bobby]

Hi!

A strange topic, so mainly aimed at any repairmen out there or anyone who has an interesting answer!

I am looking to get my hands on an old compensating tuba, the question is Eb or Bb?

Im not interesting in using the instrument, i am interested in taking the valve block off including main tuning slide and valve slides and transplanting it onto another body that i have. The whole point being is that i am trying to build a compensating CC Tuba, for a bit of fun and if it turns out to be a good instrument then to keep and use!

Now i know this is probably a debatable topic which is why i am asking, but in my opinion compensating Bb's arent great instruments, or at least the age i would be looking to buy, whereas in my opinion i could do better with an Eb. Half my mind tells me to spend the extra money finding an Eb and extending the slides down to CC. The other half however says that it would be cheaper to cut the Bb than to add extra tubing.

What do people think, and just as importantly, what do you think about older compensating Bb's in comparison to their Eb counterparts? I want the CC to be as good as it can be in sound and possibly more on the Eb side in feel - i dont want it to do as much damage to my Eb sound as a Bb does, and i certainly want it to have the much better tone of an Eb, but as a contrabass not a bass Tuba.

I have also posted this on the mouthpiece, but common sense tells me that ill probably more (and if not better) feedback from tubenet!

Thoughts?

[Wyvern]

Are not most old compensated BBb with only 3-valve? 4-valve compensated BBb seem rare before the Sovereign.

What valve bore you are looking for is also important? What body are you planning on using?

An alternative other than cannibalising old instrument would be to get new valve assembly for a JinBao 700 EEb. My understanding is that Jinbao will supply and I could get for possibly cheaper than could buy old compensated tuba with decent valves? Also the 700 is larger bore than an Imperial EEb, so its valves might be better for use in CC? Just a thought! Happy to discuss more off-line.

[iiipopes]

Sorry about the accidental double post.

[iiipopes]

Besson Eb bore is @ .687-9, same for all practical purposes as a King/Reynolds/Olds tuba. So if you found one of those in an upright, it might be an interesting project.

Besson BBb bore is @ .730, which is similar to a Conn/Buescher/Yammy (which was copied from the Besson, etc.) and possibly others.

Here's the deal: the Besson valve blocks are usually valves up. Most folks want valves forward on a CC. Unless you're willing to take the entire valve block apart and rebuild it from knuckles down, it's apples/oranges.

Also, you really need a 4-valve comp block instead of a 3-valve comp block for CC so that you can get low G, F, E, etc., and even then, the lower you go, it can get really, really stuffy if you're not careful with your valve block placement and bracing to keep from interfering with antinodes.

I suggest you go play a traditional comp BBb so you get a feel for what it does before you go further.

This is what is most telling: Boosey/Besson/Music Group (the family lineage) have been making the Automatic Compensating system since 1874. They tried a couple of CC horns, but since the taper of the bugle and the proportion of cylindrical tubing to conical tubing, and the rate of expansion has to be different, it was never fully developed. And this is most telling: when Besson did finally release a general CC model, instead of it being compensating, it was a conventional 5-valve Nirschl design.

As far as what I think about a 3-valve comp block? Well, the Besson BBb I used to have (I gave it to a friend who needed, but did not have a tuba) had the best scale and intonation of any tuba or souzy I have ever played. The 5th partials were not flat. The 6th partials were not sharp. The 7th partials were actually lippable, so I could play top line Ab 1st and top space G 2nd. Low F 1+3 was more open than low C. If you could stand low C & B nat being slightly stuffy, and not having anything below low 1+2+3 E nat, it was a great tuba, especially with the Wick 1 that was designed for it. So why did I give it away? It was a tank of a tuba that weighed more than most BBb tubas, and I did not have a case for it. I needed to be able to transport properly for the various community band and other gigs I play in relative safety. I have outdoor gigs that need the recording bell, and I'm not up to carrying a souzy anymore. And I actually got some parts that had low Eb's in them and some others where on the cadential chords low Eb, D, etc., was actually desireable divisi in section. So I actually ended up needing a 4-valve BBb tuba, and I went with the workhorse I found and now own with both detachable bells.

[Dan Schultz]

Sounds like it might be a fun project. However... I'm wondering if the extra compensating loops might be too short to work as a CC and too long to work as a BBb. Altering those little 'buggers' might be big a chore.

[termite]

Hmmmm, hmmmmm, hmmmm.

I've spent a bit of time on older British three valve compensating BBb's and although they have a nice weight in the money range in a band situation they lack any sort of interesting colour for solo playing. I've found that apart from the contrabass "weight" in the sound you could say that the EEb sounds better. I currently have a Miraphone 1291 BBb and it gives NOTHING away to any EEb soundwise in any situation.
When I used my old three valve Imperial in a large concert band rehearsal recently while the 1291 was in hospital the director said he couldn't hear the bass. The difference wasn't as big under the bell but apparently it was huge out the front.

You will find compensating EEb's used by professional level players in a variety of situations. The only high level players using compensating BBbs are in the top level British brass bands. While I am in total awe of what these guys can do, they make a sound which only suits that situation. I've never heard one of these guys playing a solo on BBb although I would very much like to.

Compensating tubas come in two varieties - three and four valve. The compensating tubing and any associated stuffiness comes into play in the middle register more in the three valve version. In the four valve version it only cuts in on the notes just above the pedal register.

I think the only way to find out whether a BBb or EEb valve block would work best for a CC tuba is to build both. I can't imagine it sounding better than the higher quality BBb and CC tubas currently available but I guess that's not the point.

I'm sorry if I sound negative about compensating BBb tubas but they caused me extreme frustration throughout my youth and I never got anything remotely resembling the sound in my head out of any of them.

Regards

Gerard

[Wyvern]

I think 'termite' makes some good points which correspond with my experience. I played a BBb in brass band for quite a few years and when I decided to get into orchestral playing bought a 981 EEb. When I brought home and played for the first time the difference from the Besson BBb was like night and day - SO much better tone. Even my mother who was no musician could tell the difference from the other end of the house and said "why have you been playing that thing [pointing to the BBb] all these years?

What you want is a CC version of the EEb and not the BBb - definitely!!!

[tuba.bobby]

I was thinking more of the old Imperial four valve Bb's, they quite often crop up on ebay, either that or an equivalent (probably still B&H or Besson - I cant think of anything else that would possibly be old enough to be cheap?)

Jonathan - What bore are the Jinbao Ebs? How close are they to the Besson Bb's?

The body i have got is a Cerveny CC body (you probably saw it on ebay) that i have been eyeing up for quite a while now, and id been itching to grab it and do something with it even if it was just to add a rotary block and finish the job! But the idea that sealed the deal was when i went to get my own Tuba repaired, and me and Andy started talking for a while and id told him my idea and he was up for helping me build it so not quite a solo project but definitely hands on!

I probably shouldve mentioned I am looking to build a 3+1 rather than the four in a line like the 983 (typical Brit eh?!)

I have spoken to my teacher briefly about the idea, and he suggested that i steer clear from cutting down a BBb (the whole Besson/B&H) to a CC, saying that he spoke to someone from Edgeware about the idea, who didnt give much encouragement! He also said the bore size of the Eb would be way to small to consider using. But if the Jinbao Eb is similar to the BBb bore size id be willing to give it a go.

Or do Jinbao sell BBb blocks that i could cut down? What do people think of that idea instead of using an old Imperial or the like?

Thanks for everyones ideas and support! When i get to build it (hopefully later this summer) ill probably keep a diary

[Wyvern]

Jonathan - What bore are the Jinbao Ebs? How close are they to the Besson Bb's?

The JinBao EEb valve block is 17.5mm against 18.5mm for the Besson BBb.

There is a Chinese compensated BBb (which I have on order), but am not in direct contact with that factory. One I hope to visit on future trip to China.

Out of curiosity how are you going to do the expansion from the valves to the body you have?

[imperialbari]

The discussion yet has to be provided the possibly most important information: which kind of tuba body do you want to equip wit a compensating valve block?

A smallish body may best be served by a 0.689" block, a bigger body may best be served by a 0.732" block. Or even a 0.750" block, if you can get one from the Chinese BBb.

Don’t expect any good results from changing the length of the 2nd compensating loop. The 1st loop maybe can have its knuckles adjusted and the ferrules re-soldered. The 3rd loop with its slide is easier.

When I compare the blocks of my 1923 Boosey F comper and my 1999 Besson Eb comper, the 1st comp loop sits differently in the two, but the comping loops look like being equally long. The main loops on the front of course are shorter on the F, but to me it looks like the F has been given an Eb block and the adjustment has been limited to exactly the main loops. With only one whole step between the pitches I tend to believe the lack of difference is insignificant. Even if the significance of unaltered comp loops will only be marginally larger with a pitch difference of a minor third between the Eb block and the CC final result, the BBb block would be my first consideration for a project of this kind.

One may like British BBb basses or not, but ascribing their alleged limitations to their valve blocks alone would be a hard case to prove.

Klaus

[tuba.bobby]

Out of curiosity how are you going to do the expansion from the valves to the body you have?

Do you mean bore wise? My main body hasn't arrived yet so I'm not too sure, but the whole project will be a learning curve for me working with my repairman.

I think I am going to use a BBb block though, I was hoping to use from the leadpipe all the way to the main tuning slide, although in this case my body already has a main tuning slide so well just see how it goes. Maybe ill try just a straight cut before I try a transplant jobby, then maybe the transplant jobby could be made with an Eb valveset. Well see! I definately have a lot of ideas I wanna try, so if I don't get to use this body this time round then ill certainly use it in the future

[youngfj]

It would be best to cut off the compensating tubes and make them the full length required for a GGG tuba. Then you would not encounter the stuffiness caused by two trips throught the valve set. You would also need a special rotary valve to serve as the fourth and switch valve from CC to GGG. This would be equivalent to the enharmonic four valve tubas made by Boosey & Hawkes in the early 1900 and described in T.U.B.A a couple of years ago.