TubeNet

I will soon begin the process of reworking the large old tuba known as BART. I will be setting it up with a 4+1 valve design. I was originally torn between a flat wholestep or a minor third 5th valve, but looking at the tubing and wrap I realized that I could just as easily make it a tritone valve. There are a few F tubas out there with this configuration, and it seems to be well received. Has anyone ever done this on a CC? Pros and Cons?

DON'T do a tritone valve! There will be no good fingering for low F. & There aren't really any players that are used to the configuration, so it'd be a total re-learn for everyone. If you were feeling benevolent, you could include extra pipes that would allow that tuning, but don't make it the only option. Better off going with the 2 standards: long whole tone, or short major 3rd.

tclements wrote:DON'T do a tritone valve! There will be no good fingering for low F.

124 push or 14 pull?

tclements wrote:& There aren't really any players that are used to the configuration, so it'd be a total re-learn for everyone. If you were feeling benevolent, you could include extra pipes that would allow that tuning, but don't make it the only option. Better off going with the 2 standards: long whole tone, or short major 3rd

That is a good point.
Was thinking it might be nice to have one valve to replace the 2-4 pull for C# and F#.

Low F: 124 push is always flat, 14 pull is really sharp unless you pull out ALOT!! Why not just have a 5th valve that does all that pushing and pulling FOR you? I'd LOVE to have one valve for those two notes, but the benefit you gain with the F# & C#, you lose with other problems created.

Anything short of 6 valves will require slide pulling, so why not go with a 3 piston valve block and a flat tuned 4th as a rotary on the thumb (treated as an octave key of sorts)? Fewer valves, less tubing and braces to deaden the horn, less junk to buy ,... Play it as a 3 valver til the low range, play it as a 4 valver and ride 4, play it as a 3+flat valve and ride 3,... How often do you have to play right above the open pedal for prolonged lengths of time anyways?

I THINK Bob is kidding....

@Bloke: with a 23 valve 5th, 235 F will be sharp and, will require a 5th slide pull of about 2-3 inches.

tclements wrote:DON'T do a tritone valve! There will be no good fingering for low F.

Maybe stretch the horn to BBb and play low F with valve 4 alone ...

Wim (if it's good enough for Walter Hilgers, it's good enough for me)

@oedipoes, then you have the same problems, only a whole step lower.

F# and C# aside, it kind of makes my head hurt to think about what a tritone 5th valve would be like chromatically from F down to pedal C. Not that this is a range of spectacular agility to begin with, still...

@Bort - that's what I meant when I said & There aren't really any players that are used to the configuration, so it'd be a total re-learn

Nope, I understood. Just wasn't able to wrap.my head around the fingering patterns, and im not convinced they would be very accessible regardless of relearning them.

If you go onto the Gronitz web site, he has an F tuba fingering chart with a tritone 5th tuning. It's too weird, even for me!

tclements wrote:If you go onto the Gronitz web site, he has an F tuba fingering chart with a tritone 5th tuning. It's too weird, even for me!

http://www.gronitztuba.de/assets/files/ ... CHNUNG.pdf
Interestingly enough, they must have the tritone slide tuned a little low, since they are still using the 2-4 combination.

Ya know, I HAD one of those tritone valves on my PF125 and the 2+5 low B-flat really doesn't work....

Alright, Tony, you talked me out of it

@Marty - if you make the 5th valve a long whole tone, you can always offer pipes to extend the slide to whatever the end user wants...

Marty-

You doing this yourself? Lemme know if you need a extra pair of hands/ears/chops.

Ike

My 1932 King BBb 1241 has a tri-tone 4th valve.
It makes the lowest register play very well in tune.
Only means an alternate fingering for low E (4) Eb (2 + 4) and D (1 + 4)

tclements wrote:I THINK Bob is kidding....

Only a little bit.

The point of playing contrabass tubas, at least A point, is to have an easier time playing in what other instruments consider the low register. Why have 5 valves when we play 3 valve music most of the time? 3 "day to day" valves and 1 long one for the low register will do the job fine*. Less tubing and bracing on the horn=more resonant, simpler more intuitive fingerings (imo), the ability to have the long valve of a different bore and have more places to put it without being to tied to the other 3,...

I'm, kinda , putting my money where my mouth is on this. I'm getting an Eb built up (admittedly NOT a tuba but a valved bass trombone/cimbasso thing) with 3 valves. As it is it's meant to take the place of a bass trombone with the least amount of valves and least amount of tubing (3 valve F would mean no low Bb, 3 valve contra Bb is too big for what I want). If I really sync with the horn, in the not-so-long term I will have a larger 4th valve added as a rotary; most likely as a 2.5 step valve with a very long pull. Default tuning will probably be somewhere around a tritone, as possible on the 2J, 2280,...
The horn will actually be a bit bigger than my old F contratrumpet, so I know the initial concept will work.

*I can see a desire for something a bit more hardcore for those crazy brass band arrangements; I think I'd want a 4+2 Bb there.

Bob, I couldn't IMAGINE playing a tuba with less than 5 valves. There's almost NO way one can play in tune with less than that, without either a LOT of slide pulling, or lipping the pitch SO out of shape that the tone color suffers. We'll just have to agree to disagree....