TubeNet

Certainly any device which would improve intonation is to our advantage. But is't a tuning lever on the main slide easer and more practical? (as apposed to a duo trigger which would improve the intonation of some low note but not all.)

One lever for all note that need tuning. Or are there disadvantages to this?

-Patrick

Careful there. I suggested a longer fourth valve (on a 4 banger) and I think someone called me crazy.

When you think about the system of valve tubing lengths which are the norm, it seems, to me, that we have settled for a less than ideal system with even 4 valves.

Why not have a 1/2 step, whole step, two step, and major third, and fourth in our four valve system? The current set up of having the third valve equal the 1 + 2 is a waste of the third valve. Make it equal to the current 2 + 3 combination and then make the first and fourth with easily accessible, free running, long travel slides and there would be no need for 5th valves. The old kings, with the extra loop removed from 3 pretty well have the length available in the 3rd valve circuit and with the first "flipped" offer good tuneability. A main tuning slide trigger could well be an option.

Going a bit further it would not be too hard to add a right thumb trigger to work one slide and another to work another slide with the left hand which could still be in a good position to "hold and balance the instrument" .

With a bit of precision manufacturing this could even be done with top action models in either 3+1 or straight 4 valve configurations.

where, oh where, is Dr Fred when we need him? [/sarcasm]

OK, I've seen this tuba before. What is it?

It looks (and some say, sounds) like the oil refinery in El Secundo.

bloke wrote:Quite a few may not realize this, but one reason the (3 valve) system is set up with those tubing lengths is because the finger patterns resemble (left hand) woodwind finger patterns.

I, for one didn't know that, but it does make sense. On Bb clarinet, from open G down to C#, it is exactly the same as the brass instrument 3 valve system currently in use.

On the use of a trigger to operate a combination of valve slides---

It sounds like it would be a definite improvement on the system of pulling each individual slide separately.

Why don't we all just connect a pull rod (or trigger) to our MAIN tuning slides and thereby have full control on every note on the tuba with the same controller? I've discussed this with my tuba-playin' sons and they say its because people are accustomed to pulling the valve slides in an upward motion to lower the pitch, and that the adjustment motion would be in the opposite direction when using a pull rod on the main slide. I can't convince myself it is a simple matter of what players are used to doing.

A normal 4v system plus a quint valve doesn't address the 2+4 problem. Might as well be one of those dumb dependent valves then.

Adding a flat half step to the arrangement above does and provides a scale as good as a normal 6v system with better low range options like the ability to play several valved notes below the fundamental.

Bloke, you've played at least one tuba like this.

What might be more interesting (at least to me) is a three valved compensating system plus a quint valve plus a flat half step (5 valves total).

However, if the bugle is not very in tune with itself, none of these fancy valve systems will help..

Well, I'm not up for straps to my elbows, knees, and toes. Why not a slide tuba with multi tubes on the main slide and 1, 2 or 3 key changing valves like a trombone?

Ken Herrick wrote: Why not have a 1/2 step, whole step, two step, and major third, and fourth in our four valve system?

Probably because you'd need five valves.

ginnboonmiller wrote:

Ken Herrick wrote: Why not have a 1/2 step, whole step, two step, and major third, and fourth in our four valve system?

Probably because you'd need five valves.

Eh, that's what happens early in the morning before the second cuppa coffee - things get said 2 ways: two step and major third being the same thing. Sooooo, only 4 valves with say a trigger on 2 and a good "pull" available on 1 will give a fully chromatic bottom end right down to the pedal range. 3 becomes equal to our current 2+3.

I'm not a brass tech, but I think a double slide trigger would be a heavier and slower construction than it need be. Both slides would have to be able to be triggered in a "closed" position.

Does a well vented valve (let alone two together) expend enough air during a "push-in" maneuver to meet the requirements we often need to quickly move from one note to another? My B&S F has a 5th valve trigger made by the late Larry Minnick and was also vented by him . As well made (and well kept) as that construction is, moving the slide in the "closed" position is still slower than I'd like it to be.

It's one of the reasons I suggested a main slide trigger as being a feasible alternative. But your a tech; build it and tell use what you think.

-Cheers,
Pat

Ken Herrick wrote:When you think about the system of valve tubing lengths which are the norm, it seems, to me, that we have settled for a less than ideal system with even 4 valves.
Why not have a 1/2 step, whole step, two step, and major third, and fourth in our four valve system? The current set up of having the third valve equal the 1 + 2 is a waste of the third valve. Make it equal to the current 2 + 3 combination and then make the first and fourth with easily accessible, free running, long travel slides and there would be no need for 5th valves. The old kings, with the extra loop removed from 3 pretty well have the length available in the 3rd valve circuit and with the first "flipped" offer good tuneability. A main tuning slide trigger could well be an option.

For your information, Meinl Westons tubas have the third slide long enough to make it 2+3. This fingering was quite common in certain countries in the past, like Belgium and Sweden.
Today I've never seen it on new instruments. Sometimes I use it to make lot of flats easier to handle.

Regards/Lars

bloke wrote:
If tubas (which would otherwise be marketed with five valves) are outfitted with only four valves - the fourth being a "quint" valve", what if there were a right thumb-activated trigger which (simultaneously) threw out BOTH the #1 slide and the #4 slide...

...ie. the #1 (standard whole step) and #4 (quint valve) slides would be lined up in close proximity - all four tubes lined up parallel to each other - and ONE thumb trigger moving BOTH slides in and out...

You are the repair tech, so this question should be easy for you:

If some manufacturers are making triggers that are already too strong, have poorly aligned slides and are ineffective, how many will be willing to spend the time to build a contraption that do what you say and not charge oodles of dollars for it?


Seriously, I like the idea of having a quint valve, it could make for a lighter, less expensive horn, but the trigger on 1 and 4 seems labour-intensive for companies. This seems like a nice project for a repair tech who has the parts and time....

I have to agree with PMeuph. If a manufacturer can't be bothered to properly align the slides at assembly time today, do you think they would really succeed in not only perfectly aligning one valve slide, but perfectly aligning two slides perfectly parallel to each other?

Better yet (on a contrabass anyway), 3 front piston valves and a threeish step rotor on the thumb. Long top slides on everything.

I enjoyed Dr. Young's tuba... it can be played conventionally, but after only a few minutes working with it, the other valves actually make seriously good sense. And his current model plays as well as any very good King.

I had the wonderful opportunity to try out Sam Green's old Sander tuba. That instrument had a major third ("2 & 3") 4th valve, and a perfect fourth fifth valve operated by the left hand. There were some great tuning options with that system! With the exception of the range issue if only equipped with those 4 valves, intonation was a breeze, with alternate fingerings for practically every note! Plus... DAMN nice instrument.

I played a Cerveny 6-valver with a quint valve and I'd slit a wrist for that horn - WONDERFUL F tuba!!! And the larger-bore quint valve opened the low range up a LOT!

Bloke, I've found, through Ron Bishop, that on a good instrument, it's an easy system on a four valver to have a flat 4th for an in-tune tritone with the 2nd, and a highly mobile 1st valve. With a highly mobile first valve, you've got everything. On my modified YBB-641, I've got a solid scale down to low C; and I had a great scale on my Alex 163, though the 1st valve pull to D was iffy. And there's no reason I couldn't put the first valve on a trigger on the 641, except that I like to physically touch that slide... Old Dog, New Trick, etc.

A quint valve, if my thinking isn't to clouded by the hour, would make some notes on the third (which I wish all manufacturers would allow a semitone pull on) require a hell of a throw to make the tritone work, IMHO. I get the idea... but the speed of execution with the best of triggers would concern me with two slides. It'd be worth a try on a King or MW 2X or something. You would have a saleable feature

J.c.S.

Any time I want to ponder alternative tuning systems I jump to this website first: http://galvanizedjazz.com/tuba.html

The provided spreadsheet should keep even the most ardent tuba nerd entertained for hours.

Alright, since the rest of you weren't nerdy enough in the last 24 hours to play with spreadsheets I've taken it upon myself to ponder the possibilities.

Assuming we are testing out this concept on a theoretically perfectly in tune(HAH!!!) BBb(I went with BBb because it is the most likely candidate for this system and also offers a worst case scenario for pulling slides) tuba:
2nd valve perfect half step
1st valve perfect whole step
3rd valve tuned to create a perfect double whole step(G-Flat) when used with 2nd valve
4th valve tuned to a perfect tritone

This is the chart:
Bb: Open and perfectly in tune
A: 2 -Perfectly in tune
Ab: 1 -Perfectly in tune
G: 1+2 -10 cents sharp requiring 0.7" slide pull
Gb: 2+3 -Perfectly in tune
F: 1+3 -15 cents sharp requiring 1.2" slide pull
E: 4 -Perfectly in tune
Eb: 2+4 -28 cents sharp requiring 2.5" slide pull
D: 1+2+4 -9 cents flat requiring 0.9" slide pushed in(potentially impossible with the proposed slide trigger... doubtful anyone would mind in this register)
Db: 2+3+4 -8 cents sharp requiring 0.8" slide pull
C: 1+2+3+4 -14 cents flat requiring 1.5" slide pushed in(again doubtful anyone would mind in this register)
OR 1+3+4 -42 cents sharp and requiring 4.5" of slide pull
B: 1+2+3+4 81 cents sharp and requiring 9.2" of slide pull(I wonder if that is a practical amount of slide to pull between the 1st and 4th valve if attached to the proposed thumb activated kicker)

Thoughts?

It seems more doable than I might have guessed.

Lars suggested exploring extending the tuning of the 3rd valve so that it is a full double whole step on its own:
2nd valve perfect half step
1st valve perfect whole step
3rd valve perfect double whole step
4th valve perfect tritone

The results:
Bb: Open perfectly in tune
A: 2 Perfectly in tune
Ab: 1 Perfectly in tune
G: 1+2 10 cents sharp requiring 0.7" slide pull
Gb: 3: Perfectly in tune
F: 2+3 19 cents sharp requiring 1.6" slide pull(this could prove problematic with the proposed 1+4 slide kicker unless we also could kick the 3rd slide simultaneously)
E: 4 Perfectly in tune
Eb: 2+4 28 cents sharp requiring 2.5" slide pull
D: 1+2+4 9 cents flat requiring 0.9" slide pushed in
Db: 3+4 8 cents sharp requiring 0.8" slide pull
C: 1+3+4 14 cents flat requiring slide pushed in 1.5"
OR 2+3+4 45 cents sharp requiring 4.9" slide pull
B: 1+2+3+4 28 cents sharp requiring 3.2" slide pull

Hopefully I got that all right.

Thoughts?