TubeNet

Ideal tuba tone depends on the context of the music and ensemble. If I need to be soft or just simply provide a supporting, background voice, then I'll try to sound dark and smooth throughout the range to maintain blend (string bass like). If I have very loud accented parts that are unison with the trombones or brass ensemble, I'll blow with a little edge. If it's a solo in the middle-high range, I might brighten my tone a little to make it stand out from the ensemble. This is what I like about Gene Pokorny's playing. He can do all of it when he thinks it fits.

For me I usually want a DARK DARK sound. I have been leaning to a brighter tone with quintet and anytime I play jazz or dixie.

I prefer "big and dark". By "big" I don't necessarily mean loud. I mean full and rich, whatever the dynamic.

As an example, try this at 1:03. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHLW9FQbBzw" target="_blank

Ace

It may come down to what do YOU like. When I hear certain players I think mellow and smooth and blendy. Other have a dark and fat and edgy sound. There are different combinations. What do YOU like? These days it may come to more than a Bobo vs. Jacobs school of thought.

A few weeks ago, I was in a discussion about a particular player's strengths and weaknesses. The person I was talking to (someone eminently qualified to judge such matters) said that the highest praise he could offer was that the player involved was "a chameleon". His style and sound changed dramatically, depending on the music being played...and on what other instruments he was trying to blend with (or contrast with!) at the time.

Are there actually qualified players in this thread who think there is ONE "perfect" sound. Is this the sound I hear called "World Class" (usually in self-descriptions posted here)? Once one achieves this World Class Sound, should it be trotted out on every instrument, for every piece, in every ensemble? Or, should one then start the search for the perfect ensemble/instrument/piece in which to demonstrate this marvel? Perhaps it will be necessary to narrow things down to a single NOTE?

Enough navel contemplation - play the $%^&*( horn.

I prefer an overall somewhat brighter, livelier sound than most. Not sure where that sits on the scale.

I prefer to be darker rather than brassy, but always stylistically correct.

sloan wrote:A few weeks ago, I was in a discussion about a particular player's strengths and weaknesses. The person I was talking to (someone eminently qualified to judge such matters) said that the highest praise he could offer was that the player involved was "a chameleon". His style and sound changed dramatically, depending on the music being played...and on what other instruments he was trying to blend with (or contrast with!) at the time.

Are there actually qualified players in this thread who think there is ONE "perfect" sound. Is this the sound I hear called "World Class" (usually in self-descriptions posted here)? Once one achieves this World Class Sound, should it be trotted out on every instrument, for every piece, in every ensemble? Or, should one then start the search for the perfect ensemble/instrument/piece in which to demonstrate this marvel? Perhaps it will be necessary to narrow things down to a single NOTE?

Enough navel contemplation - play the $%^&*( horn.

+1
I would add that the venue matters as well. Different styles even within the same chart might at times be necessary in order to make faster passages speak clearly in a larger venue that just sucks up the sound while backing off the overtones on supporting longer notes in order to help provide a solid base.

I think terms are getting a bit mixed up for my taste. World class sound, to me, means the sound speaks with emotion. Oystein Baadsvik calls it musicality. I think this term sets with the player. The dark, big, brassy terms reside with equipment. I prefer the American organ like sound as apposed to the more brassy European sound. (I know, I just added a few more undefined terms). I play in comunity bands and quintets in church. I don't play jazz or polka. That organ sound fits my playing. I can make fine adjustments to the sound by changing the mouthpiece, but the coarse change is made by the horn itself. You can see by my signature what horns I think have the organ like sound.

Regarding overtones:

If you have an iPhone, you can get an app to see the overtones in any sound. The program I have is called FFT (fast fourier transform) and while simple, is very easy to read and has multiple formats for export. I have never used it serously, it was a curiosity at the time, I am curious about comparing a few of my colleagues sound profiles...

OK, now I gotta get some coffee and start this day off. I hope that was helpful

Not that I have any level of expertise...

As the only tuba in a New Horizons band (look NHB up; I call it my "over 40 middle school band") my first duty is to hold tempo; sometimes a bright tone is all that will cut through and other times a more rounded tone will work.

As 50% of the sousaphone section of a rag-tag marching band, I go for bright and brassy...UNLESS we're playing a piece that calls for a string bass like bass line.

As one of 4 or 5 low tubas in a 15 member ensemble I try to match tone and tempo; usually a darker tone.

As 50% of a non-auditioned concert band tuba section, my priority is intonation and tempo, and sometimes I have to sacrifice what my ears like for what the band needs.

I would love to produce a big, round, dark tone all the time (that is what my ears like to hear) but that is not always what my band (s) need.

I do not hear overtones (at least that I can identify; might have to get that app so I can see it)

I can't imagine one ideal tuba sound because I believe you should be flexible. I mean one of the things I notice in the old CSO low brass section recordings is the huge spectrum of sound that they got. I love it when the tubist succumbs to there inner bass trombonist on a big FFF section because it adds excitement, which I think many performances lack (also one of the reasons I don't care to hear *insert anything here* played the exact same way that I've heard ten other times). For example, when I play a slow song that tugs on your heart a little, I aim for Floyd Cooley's sound, but when I play a song depicting a huge invading alien armada, I go for that sound on Gene Pokorny's recording of Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet. I have that one sound that I go to when I am just playing an exercise, but I don't always use it, it's more of a starting point that I expand upon to fit the mood. Also, I feel that using the same sound on everything is almost like speaking in a monotone voice. So basically, if I was given the skills of Arnold Jacobs x 1000000, but limited to one tone color I would be very disappointed!

P.S. I was just spewing my thoughts as they came to mind so forgive me if it is a little bit jumbled!!

tuben wrote:Of the four colors listed in your subject, only two are mutually exclusive. One CAN be big, dark, and brassy.

Yep...

Big, dark, and 'brassy' = The late Tommy Johnson on his Miraphone 190 or Chester Schmitz on his Alex 163, or Walter Hilgers on his B&F. Oh yeaaaaah! My fav tuba sounds.

One of my favorite tuba sounds among the local crowd I play in, is a player with a really hefty core fundamental sound with also a lot of edge to it. Less favorite is a better player, really, whose sound is stronger in the mid range, or maybe it's just more evenly spread across the spectrum. On its own, that sound might be `darker' or not (not sure everyone really would call that the same way), but on a practical level, it tends to make the drums play louder, and the trombones, and eventually anyone else who wants to be heard over the din. The first guy is loud as all get out, when called for, but somehow, to my ear it's a much more distinct sound that lets the rest of the band play where they want.

I don't believe there's a spot on the dial between "bright" and "dark" where the ideal tuba sound resides. Specific partials as proposed above seems like it might have more promise.

Just guessing, but it looks like a pretty clear partial series for a note somewhere around 75-80 Hz, maybe Eb (or higher or lower, I'm not good at interpolating on a log scale.) Try playing louder? we're not picking up much above the 12th partial.

From at the leftmost peak around 75-80, you can jump one square to 2nd partial, another to 4th, 8th, etc. 3rd is of course next after 2nd, and jumping one square from 3rd gets you to 6th, 12th etc. Or I could be totally wrong.

big and brassy

bloke wrote:
Some really great players ("world class sound" - VERY old tubenet joke) play PT6-P tubas. I find the sound of those tubas to be about the most "teutonic"/"dark"/"bass-knob-turned-all-way-up-and-treble-knob-turned-way-down of all currently-made tubas (more so than most all of the piston "6/4" tubas).

Really? I think of the B&S PT6/6P tubas as medium-dark in tone. They sound great under the bell, but don't project very well out in the hall, imo. I have heard a couple players sound very dark on them and heard at least one player sound very bright on one. I like the 'real' B&S tubas better than most PT models. But some of those old PT-1 BBb's are pretty sweet tubas. I played one years ago that was an older model, lighter in weight, and it played very well with a sweet sound.
I think Meinl-Westons sound overall darker to my ears. Some of the MW's sound kinda 'grainy' up close and under the bell, but sound thick and dark (with center) out in the auditorium.