TubeNet

.

For me - the sound is very dark and rich! The 3/4 CCs are very consistent from horn to horn with the same minor pitch quirks (top space G sharp, middle line D flat), but all have a slightly different character.

I love my Rudys!

5/4 CC; 5/4 F and two 3/4 CCs.

I've only ever played one bad 3/4 CC out of about 25. It had been taken apart and messed with. There have been various levels of wear and tear, but the way they've played is very consistent.

Just wish there was a reasonably priced piston version, that isn't the Conn copy from a number of years ago.

Everything is a matter of personal preference.

My 2 cents.

Mike Milnarik

Very few smaller CCs are worth a squat in my opinion. Most are oinky, out of tune, and one dimensional.

All the R&D goes into building better big tubas. The lone exception is the MW2000. It would be interesting to spend some time comparing these two horns. I suspect I would find the Rudy to suit my tastes better but maybe not. It has been a few years since I've tooted a 2000.

The Rudy 3/4 CC isn't just above average, it is excellent. It is an ultimate do everything tuba.

The horn is extremely resonant in the hand and produces a very rich characteristic sound with lots of core, projection, clarity, density, etc. Unlike many small tubas it will get progressively bigger without breaking up. It could easily hold down most any large orchestra and sound huge; the next day do a solid impersonation of an F tuba on a solo recital. It's a heavier sound with a stronger core than you will get from a typical F tuba but few would know to complain unless they heard them back to back.

The response is even from top to bottom, effortless response even in the extreme lows and highs. There are no bad notes or registers. The low end can really crank and everything above the staff slots readily and securely.

Intonation is some of the best from any tuba ever made. Only a couple notes require attention and those are easy to manage. I personally lack the mental power to think hard about intonation and make music at the same time. Excellent intonation is required for me to keep a tuba. Most small CCs have unbearably sharp 3rd and 6th partials. This tuba requires surprisingly little effort to play in tune.

In summary: the 3/4 Rudy CC fills the role that many use a large EEb all purpose tuba for but with better intonation, more interesting sound and more versatility. I like other tubas better for specific jobs but if I can only bring one tuba to cover a variety of material or I'm showing up blind to a gig the Rudy will be on my back. After a performance, the Rudy is always the horn most likely to receive unsolicited compliments from the audience.

FWIW, a year ago I asked Lee Stofer his best guess on the replacement value of my horn for insurance purposes. He quoted me a number just under $17,000. I'm sure the price and rarity of these horns has added to the mystique but they are excellent horns on their own merits.

.

@TheHat: Rudys run large. The 3/4 would be a 4/4 for almost anyone else. The 4/4 and 5/4 horns are a size larger than most companies', and the 6/4 BBb is probably the biggest standard key horn currently made. You might check out the company's web site and look at the pictures of different horns in comparison to the sizes of the players.

In order of size: PT6, PT605, PT15, and 3/4 Rudy

It's a silly thing to argue about but this is tubenet so I'll do it anyhow.

The bell diameter of the Rudy is 16 3/4"(a 186 measures 17 3/4"). The bell rim diameter of the PT15 is 16 1/2" BUT I checked at several random locations along the length of the Rudy and PT15 bell and the Rudy consistently measured 1/2" smaller in circumference. The Rudy has the same bore through all five valves and it's a pretty small bore diameter. I don't have a micrometer close or I would measure it. The 2nd valve slide fits sloppily inside the 2nd valve slide of the PT15. The final nail in the coffin is that the LARGE side of the Rudy main slide is the same diameter as the SMALL side of the PT15 main slide.

Moral of the story, it might produce a big sound and play like a big horn but physically it's just not that big.

joh_tuba wrote:In summary: the 3/4 Rudy CC fills the role that many use a large EEb all purpose tuba for but with better intonation, more interesting sound and more versatility.

Aw snap! Better watch out dude- Oystein's going to parachute from the sky and simultaneously make you laugh with a funny accented joke and cry from Nordic roadhouse-style kicks.

Bob Kolada wrote:

joh_tuba wrote:In summary: the 3/4 Rudy CC fills the role that many use a large EEb all purpose tuba for but with better intonation, more interesting sound and more versatility.

Aw snap! Better watch out dude- Oystein's going to parachute from the sky and simultaneously make you laugh with a funny accented joke and cry from Nordic roadhouse-style kicks.

I'm sure Oystein can do anything on any tuba. The Norwegian Star(the big one) is an excellent horn capable of covering a lot of sonic ground with a gorgeous sound but I view it filling the same role most of us use our large F tubas for. Great for solo and chamber work but not the right tool for large ensemble work.

I was actually thinking of the Besson 981 or MW2041 and the English tradition of using that style of horn in an orchestra.

I probably just stepped on even more toes and am not totally convinced of my own certitude. Fletcher can kick my butt too.

I believe the Rudolf Meinl 3/4 CC has a .750" bore, a bell diameter very similar to the old Mirafone 186, and is just slightly smaller overall than a Mirafone 186. As far as gig bag fitting, it will fit in the same bag as one for an older Mirafone 186, just perfectly.

Rudolf Meinl tubas are made differently from anything else, and so have a unique sound. I owned a Rudolf Meinl tuba/tubas throughout most of my career, and I have won more auditions on a 3/4 Rudi CC than any other instrument. In my first lesson with Mr. Pokorny, one of his final comments was, "If you ever sell that instrument, don't forget the sound you got with it."

My first encounter with one of these instruments was at the 1978 Midwest Show in Chicago. My, what an exciting day that was for a farm kid who had never before been to Chicago! That day, I met Arnold Jacobs (who owned a 3/4 Rudi CC), Dan Perantoni (who was working for Custom Music, owned a Rudi 3/4 CC, and was selling them), and several other prominent players. After play-testing for three hours, I narrowed my search to a Hirsbrunner HB-2 rotary (they were all rotary then) and the Rudi 3/4 CC. The Rudi was more agile, I like the tone color better, and in short could not find a reason at the end of the day to pay more for an instrument I liked less. The Rudi cost me and my parents $3,500.00 in December 1978 (a ton of money then), and the Hirsbrunner had a street price of nearly $5,000.00. My roomate had a Cerveny Piggy CC that cost him about $1,800.00, and I could have bought a Mirafone 186-5U CC from Wichita Band Instrument Co. for about $2,100.00 + shipping, but I never regretted that decision. Really good horns have always been expensive, like really good anything else.

I love this idea of a "not huge" rotary CC tuba being in-style, accepted, and appreciated.

TheHatTuba wrote:What is it about these horns that a lot of people seem to like?

I dunno, I've never been tempted to buy a Rudy.
But I guess a lot of ppl like the fact that they are more "handmade" than other tubas and they do offer a different character of sound. Rudys kinda have a 'medium' tone color to my ears --- not very round, imo, but vibrant and colorful in the hands while playing it.

Different strokes for different folks.

I had one for many years. I bought it as a 4-banger, and Minick put the 5th valve on, as well as a main slide tuning jigger. Because of the small bore, it played a lot like the old Mirafone 185's. Great response, good low register, excellent pitch, EASY high notes. But since after the tuning slide it got bigger, faster, it sounded a lot like a 186. It was kind of the best of both worlds. I used it for smaller orchestral works, brass quintet, solo playing (Gregson, Ross and Broughton Concerti) and I used it in the 49er band. I played in on "Barnum" as well (they had a mike clipped to my bell). By today's standard, I would think it would be too small for most larger ensemble playing.

sorry, double post!

I had one for about 15 years, never never should have traded it for a wonky out of tune Hirsbrunner F. Anyway, those Rudy's sound great, I had an extension on the 3rd valve slide for pulling, and I did use it for Eb's and Ab's out for the Eb and in for the Ab. There was also quite a bit of pulling for 1st valve slide as well. Overall though it was not that difficult to get in tune

The one I had did have a drawback, the clunky early 80's ball and socket linkage, grrrrr!

I'll just add one more comment to answer Mike Milnarik's comment.

Although Rudi has not made a true 3/4 piston-valve CC tuba, he has made a truly fine mid-sized piston CC, called the model 4345 piston CC tuba. Herr Meinl & son seemed dissatisfied with the Perantucci model piston CC tuba they had been commissioned to make in the latter 1980's, a copy of an old Conn CC. It was a very true copy of the old Conn, but not exactly what modern players were looking for. Rudi has now for about 20 years made the 4345 piston CC, a .750" bore valveset 4/4 instrument with an 18" bell diameter. He has also made a very few model 4345 rotor CC models, which I may like even better than the piston version. Rudi considers a .750" bore to be his 3/4 instrument valveset, so the 4345 rotor instrument has the same valveset as the 3/4 rotor CC on something close to a 5/4 York-sized body. So, this opens up the instrument even more in the volume department, particularly in the low range, without sacrificing anything in the high range. So, if you can imagine playing a York 5/4 CC with a 5-rotor valveset and 2nd slide trigger, this is it. And, they are readily available for less than $20,000.00.

My teacher said he has one of the first three of these 3/4 CC tubas Rudi Meinl shipped to America. I got to play it throughout my high school career and I loved it. If i can get the money I would buy his since he wants to sell it.

Lee Stofer wrote:I'll just add one more comment to answer Mike Milnarik's comment.

Although Rudi has not made a true 3/4 piston-valve CC tuba, he has made a truly fine mid-sized piston CC, called the model 4345 piston CC tuba. Herr Meinl & son seemed dissatisfied with the Perantucci model piston CC tuba they had been commissioned to make in the latter 1980's, a copy of an old Conn CC. It was a very true copy of the old Conn, but not exactly what modern players were looking for. Rudi has now for about 20 years made the 4345 piston CC, a .750" bore valveset 4/4 instrument with an 18" bell diameter. He has also made a very few model 4345 rotor CC models, which I may like even better than the piston version. Rudi considers a .750" bore to be his 3/4 instrument valveset, so the 4345 rotor instrument has the same valveset as the 3/4 rotor CC on something close to a 5/4 York-sized body. So, this opens up the instrument even more in the volume department, particularly in the low range, without sacrificing anything in the high range. So, if you can imagine playing a York 5/4 CC with a 5-rotor valveset and 2nd slide trigger, this is it. And, they are readily available for less than $20,000.00.

The bore size of each Rudolf Meinl 4345 piston tuba I've had the pleasure to play (3 or 4 including the one I currently own) has been .709" (18mm). I have measured.

Every 3/4 Rudolf Meinl CC tuba that I've seen had a bore size around .728" (18.5 mm).