TubeNet

It is now become common to read on TN that if you can't play in the high range on a contrabass tuba, getting a bass tuba won't help, and specifically that using an F tuba is all about tone and timbre, not range.

For some reason, I can play a lot higher on my F tubas than on the CC or BBb, and a lot lower on the contrabasses than on the basses. Is this just a placebo effect?

talleyrand wrote:Is this just a placebo effect?

No.

You also should be able to play higher on a trumpet than you can on a tuba.

Sure, the pitch you buzz on a mouthpiece is the pitch you play. And you should be able to buzz the same pitches into any instrument, blah, blah, blah.

I think your observation is the practical reality, though. It is sure consistent with my own personal experience.

I use same mouthpiece for both F and BBb tuba (if it works fine, why spend money?) and my lower range is bigger on BBb tuba, while upper register is almost the same (I can play higher on BBb, but its easier to find the correct tone on F).

I use a different mouthpiece contra and bass (and surprisingly euph, trombone and basstrumpet )

I don't really have that enormous difference in range. I probably have wider range on my basstuba than my BBb,
but anything below staff just sounds so much better on my BBb, and upper staff and above just walks so
much easier on my bass.

Right tool for the right job

I can't see this as a mouthpiece issue, at least for me. I use a Blokepiece Solo in the Fs, and a Stofer Geib in the big tubas. But I can switch them, and it does change the sound, but not the available range.

Uncle Buck wrote: You also should be able to play higher on a trumpet than you can on a tuba.

I should be able to play higher on a French horn in F than a tuba in F.

I think there is a synergy between the response of the tuba and the effort required to center any given pitch. Yes, it takes the same embouchure to play the same pitch, irrespective of what pitch the tuba is. But there are more factors about the response of the horn that may make any given effort at pitch more or less efficient on some tubas than on others, regardless of pitch. For example, on my old Besson BBb 3-valve comp I used to own, and on a 38K souzy I used to play, high register was easy. I'd use a Wick 1 on the Besson (yes, a deep funnel Wick 1, and I could surf the upper bass clef all day), a PT-82 on the souzy, and could soar all day if need be. Something like, "The Thunderer" was as secure and tight as you could ever imagine, and concert band repertoire that ventured up to the stratosphere, relatively speaking, was a breeze. On the other hand, my 186, even with something like a Bach 18 or a PT-34 (the tuba analog to a trumpet player's Schilke 14A4a), and a lot of air, does not have the same secure centering above 4th line f, and I have to really focus about twice to three times as hard to make sure I am secure in intonation when playing in the upper register.

It seems to me that much of the discussion as to the ranges of bass tubas, as compared to contrabass tubas, is misdirected. I assume it is true that the buzz for any given pitch is the same, regardless of the type of tuba. Furthermore, the timbre will be different between the two. The significant difference(at least as I see it) is in the distance separating the partials. Obviously, the partials get closer together as we go higher, but the bass tuba is not as high in its range, at any given point, as the same note is in the contrabass tuba's range. This allows for a little more forgiving environment when our buzz is not 100% dead center perfect.

Therefore, while a bass tuba doesn't increase our total range, it may allow us to play more consistently accurate in the upper register. Of course, it also provides a different tone/timbre.

An interesting and lucid article on brass acoustics is here:

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/brassacoustics.html" target="_blank

Well worth a look. The science points, not surprisingly, to a combination of the mouthpiece, the horn, and the player. The earlier posts allude to all of these to greater or lesser degrees. The information behind the link makes clear many of the influences associated with (at least) the horn.

Can't be just the mouthpiece because the partials change with horn size while the radiation from the horn and frequency response also will vary by horn (flare shape and rate, bell size, etc.). Can't be just horn length, because the mouthpiece plays a role (as players understand empirically but physicists haven't fully sorted out).

First order effects for the higher partials are related to horn shape and bell flare. My 3/4 size starter tuba, with the same player and mouthpiece, makes a sound quite different from my Miraphone 187. Better players make different sounds on both horns.

To toss in an effect not posited as important in earlier posts, the loudness of the note will influence how it sounds as the frequency characteristics of the note change with volume. Horn players all understand this empirically as well. Tongue location is another variable discussed in the article (and sporadically on Tubenet!).

I'd encourage anyone interested in an intro to the science behind the horn acoustics to take a look behind the link. If the math leaves your eyes glazed, at least give a listen to the sound files.

When I read this forum, the bass-contrabass thing is in constant discussion. When I visit the large retailers websites, they consistently call them all TUBAS.
Hornguys, Tuba Exchange, Dillon's, Baltimore Brass, Custom Music, and WWBW all do this. So do the manufacturer's websites, at least the ones I have seen. What do they know? Probably plenty, and enough.

swillafew wrote:When I read this forum, the bass-contrabass thing is in constant discussion. When I visit the large retailers websites, they consistently call them all TUBAS.
Hornguys, Tuba Exchange, Dillon's, Baltimore Brass, Custom Music, and WWBW all do this. So do the manufacturer's websites, at least the ones I have seen. What do they know? Probably plenty, and enough.

Yeah, bass tubas and contrabass tubas. There are bass clarinets and contrabass clarinets. It is specifying the range in which they are designed to play.

http://www.contrabass.com/pages/orch-tuba.html" target="_blank

HTH

well, it's also the designation use by composers such as Wagner.
Anyone who teaches that F Tuba helps increase high range should be flogged. IMO and experience, F helps more with LOW range and big horns help with high range, in terms of extension of range and stability. Working high on a big horn will make it a breeze on F, likewise the inversion.
Funny that Eb is never mentioned in this context.

eupher61 wrote: Anyone who teaches that F Tuba helps increase high range should be flogged.

See, to me it's not about increasing anything. It's just what is workable on that length of tubing. For me, it's like this:

Buzz a high note on a contrabass tuba ----> sound like a dying rat.

Buzz the same note on a bass tuba -----> sound like music.

Also, I would just like to record that there is nothing I love better than the big tubas (well, in the musical world anyway.) I'm playing the small ones in order to learn, and I am indeed learning. But I will shake the foundations on a big BBb any day.

LJV wrote:

eupher61 wrote:Funny that Eb is never mentioned in this context.

Eb tuba attracts pretty girls, makes you "strong like bull," freshens your breath, puts and leaves more money in the bank, and improves both high and low register.

Voila! Now it has. And with such a positive spin.