TubeNet

For those of you with experience on both: Is there much of a chance of getting a sound that is close to the quality of a brass instrument's sound, out of a fiberglass horn?

It is my experience that the sound from either horn is about the same. It will sound a little different to you as the player due to the 'after-ring' of the brass bell. But... the true test would be to record each from thirty or so feet away and then make your judgement based on what you hear on the recordings.

I play both kinds of Sousaphones on a regular basis - I do not think there is enough of a difference in sound quality to be noticed by the general audience. so I agree with Dan.

At this point in my career as a tuba operator I will use the lighter plastic horn for a long marching gig (or if I will be playing in harsh conditions) but I don't mind the extra weight of my all brass Sousaphone for some other gigs, because it has a 4th valve and I think it might sound a tiny bit better to my ear. For the kind of music(s) I am playing either horn works well - I probably wouldn't use either for a Symphonic Orchestra, but I am probably not going to be doing that anyway...

It depends on which instruments you're talking about.

We switched from regular fiberglass Conns and Kings made in the '60s to new Conn 20Ks while I was at NC State. There is a noticeable difference. We played the fiberglass horns side by side with the new 20Ks for the first year of the switch because the athletic department budget didn't have the $$ to upgrade the entire section at one time. The 20K has a broader tone and more projection on the marching field. Yes it also has that brass 'after-ring', but that's not as noticeable from a distance.

I've also played a regular brass sousaphone for 2 years in HS (I think it was a Jupiter) and there isn't much difference from that to the fiberglass Conn I played my Freshman/Sophomore years at NCSU. I played the same mouthpiece (Conn Helleberg) for all 8 years so I'd like to think this is a fair comparison.

I think most of the difference in sound has to do with the bell and the bore. The 20K is a beautiful, well designed instrument that compares to a 5/4 tuba. (And it looks good.) The others are all about equal to the Conn 12J tuba - a nice american style 4/4 with a standard bore, but nothing to write home about.

I played a brass sousaphone last week for a big show, and I'm positive that even if there were a significant tonal difference between brass & fiberglass sousaphones at 10 paces in your back yard, it wouldn't make a scrap of difference in the hall, with the kind of music where you'd bring a sousaphone! Holy mackerel, what a racket! I mean, if you're going to be playing brass quintet on sousaphone, then excuse me, but I doubt it.

The real reason for brass is looks. It's the classic look for brass instruments, and fiberglass (or whatever?) typically looks like trash. I know bloke has gone all out to bring a little more scenic beauty to the fiberglass tuba, it would be interesting to see how well those paint jobs have held up.

KiltieTuba wrote: Did you switch from a 22K to a 20K or from a 36K to a 20K?
I find that both the 22K and the 20K sound relatively the same, the only difference being the after-ring from the bell.

Though these were both very old sousaphones - pre-1980

I think I was playing a 36K. It has a noticeably smaller bore than the 20K.
If I remember correctly, the 1st valve slide from the fiberglass Conn could fit into the 1st slide of the 20K without touching (including the ferrule on the smaller tube).
I don't remember the model on the King fiberglass sousas, but we had about 7 of each type (Conn and King). They had similar bore size to the Conns.
Now that I think about it, there may also have been a few coats of paint and some fiberglass patching that affected the sound of those old souzys. They weren't in the best shape.
One thing I'm sure of - they were bought in the mid '60s after the old music building burned to the ground.

Edit - Just did a google search for Conn 22K. It has the short action valves. The 36K has regular valves - that's what we had. That was another thing I really liked about the change - moving to the short action valve.

I tried playing an old King fiberglass sousaphone, but it seems to me that it was a little dull sounding, compared tp the brass version. Does the sound get better on a fiberglass sousie, the more you play one?

Z-Tuba Dude wrote:I tried playing an old King fiberglass sousaphone, but it seems to me that it was a little dull sounding, compared tp the brass version. Does the sound get better on a fiberglass sousie, the more you play one?

First point - I think the King fiberglass sousa is a little dull sounding too, but they don't sound so bad out front. Have someone standing in front of you check the sound, or play close to a wall so you get a good sound reflection. The fiberglass bell with the funny bell lip makes it harder to hear what you're doing.

Second point - I've never had a horn that can improve with time. If it sounds genuinely bad, check to make sure the mechanical details are correct.

NCSUSousa wrote:Second point - I've never had a horn that can improve with time. If it sounds genuinely bad, check to make sure the mechanical details are correct.

Sorry, I should have been clearer with my question; I really meant: Does a fiberglass horn end up sounding better (more like a brass horn), the more you play it, and you adapt to it?

Z-Tuba Dude wrote:

NCSUSousa wrote:Second point - I've never had a horn that can improve with time. If it sounds genuinely bad, check to make sure the mechanical details are correct.

Sorry, I should have been clearer with my question; I really meant: Does a fiberglass horn end up sounding better (more like a brass horn), the more you play it, and you adapt to it?

Thanks for clarifying.

Here's my answer: It will never have all of the 'brightness' that a brass horn has because the fiberglass elements will deaden some of the high frequency overtones more than the brass version.
The same comparison can be made between silver and lacquer with a smaller difference of tone. Only a few people notice it. Mostly fellow musicians who've heard both the brass sousa and the fiberglass sousa in rehearsal or on the practice field.

Just remember, everything you do on a new instrument is colored by the sound concept you already have in your head from playing your existing horn. If you're playing a Conn 5J or King 2341, the fiberglass sousa (assuming it's an american design) should be a quick transition. If you're playing a Miraphone 186CC, it's going to be a totally different sound/feel just because of the physical differences.

imho, fiberglass has less highs than brass. If your function is to be the bass you probably won't have any problems musically. It might even be advantageous since it could separate your sound just a smidgen from the rest of the brass. If on the other hand you had to play a Bach fugue with a brass quintet (just sayin') you might find that getting that special brass blend will be more difficult.

I find in general that it's easier to find a place for the fiberglass sousaphone in music than a pBone. Similar idea, similar sound qualities, but the musical "function" is different. Trombones usually have to blend. The tuba/sousaphone (if playing the "bass) also has to blend, but in a different way. It's OK as a the bass player to have a sound thats not entirely homogenous with the rest of the brass.

My 2 cents
-Pat

i have played both (fiberglass king and metal dillion's sousaphone) and i have to say brass is worth every penny. fiberglass it just feels like a toy and the sound you get is not 1/2 as good as the sound you get out of the brass

goodgigs wrote:Well Vinny, did you watch those videos ?
A great player well sound good on almost any horn.
You sir, may or may not have bin given a true 'matched pair" to compare.
Were both lead pipes round ? Was there an equal amount of receiver gap ? Was the inevitable air leakage equal ?
My favorite blanket statement is that "Fiberglass sucks". Some of it certainly does.
Some models of fiberglass sousies weigh almost as much as brass. The Selmer Signet is about 1/2.
Is fiberglass inferior ? Yes. How inferior ? My opinion is that were talking about a very small margin.
Ultimately only Brass will sound exactly like brass, but what brass are we comparing ?
There's York brass, gold brass, rose brass, case brass, just to name a few.
Then there's all the platings and coatings. Silver, gold, nichol, chrome, epoxy lacquer, synthetic laquer, organic lacquer and so forth.
I liked Kiltytuba's coment on my brass vs plastic video.
(Somthing to the effect of) "It's different but I wouldn't call it worse".
I'd post that link, but for some reason I couldn't switch between BBb and CC that day, and it was done in one take.

well i was just saying from my point of view that is how i always say it because the fiberglass horns seemed (at least in my case)to have a lot more problems in the valve section and the fiberglass as well.
in no way shape or form am i trying to say i am right but its just my 2 cents

IMHO,
A lot of these comparisons of Fiberglass vs Brass seem to involve older Fiberglass horns vs new or newer Brass horns.
If one were to take an equally older brass sousaphone that has survived in a school environment with a new Fiberglass sousaphone, I wonder what the player might comment on.Listening from the bleachers, at a HS football game, the difference in the sound (with the crowd) is more on the player than the horn. (Isn't it always?).
That said, I own several models of both , and as David R. says, it depends on what I want to carry for a particular gig.
The difference in sound to me at this point in my "Sousaphone" playing is not the most important factor, my back is.
Dave Hayami

How about a fiberglass horn with a brass bell? Would it make a difference?

Dave Hayami wrote:IMHO,

The difference in sound to me at this point in my "Sousaphone" playing is not the most important factor, my back is.
Dave Hayami

Yeah you got that right. I've got a restored vintage '69 36K and the difference between that and a King 2350 I have access to on your body is no contest. And quite frankly nobody in the crowd can tell the difference in sound other than no after ring. The thing is so light you can wear it for hours. If only it didn't look like I made off with stolen porcelain plumbing...

I have played on two different borrowed King fiberglass sousaphones, and now own (through the generosity of Jim Newell) a 1962 brass King sousaphone. I am, at best, a mediocre tuba player. The fiberglass sousys are middle school horns, the brass has an unknown history.

I like the sound that I make with the brass sousy better than the sound I make with the fiberglass. At age 55, I would MUCH prefer marching with the fiberglass sousy, and am not willing (at least not yet) to make the swap back to a fiberglass horn.

I have asked the folks who sit in front of me if they notice a difference in the sound of my playing...they said no.

So, in the fiberglass vs. brass debate, you now have one woman's input. I'll bet there aren't very many 55 year old women in this particular gene pool.