TubeNet

I prefer the CC and EEb only because of how I sound on those specific horns. On an EEb it is easier for me to get a dark orchestral sound than it is on the F. But thats just me.

Josh

Orchestral strings tend to favor the sharp keys. The use of BBb or
(even worse) Eb instruments would lead to more complicated fingerings and slower or less precise execution. Therefore I would prefer the CC or F tubas. Why do you think orchestral clarinettists carry around an extra instrument in A. C trumpets
(and even D for Baroque) are common in orchestras.

LOTP wrote:Orchestral strings tend to favor the sharp keys. The use of BBb or
(even worse) Eb instruments would lead to more complicated fingerings and slower or less precise execution.

Hmmm. I hope you are wrong, for the sakes of all those Germanic orchestral tuba players who play F and BBb instruments. Of for those British tuba players who play mostly Eb instruments.

Of for Jay Bertolet (who is well known on Tubenet for his use of Eb tubas as his bass instead of F).

Or for those well-known tuba players who still choose BBb instruments (Jame Jenkins being a current example; Herb Wekselblatt being a past example).

Or for me, who can play just as incompetently on a C as on a BBb (more incompetently, in fact, since I don't really know C fingerings well).

Seems to me that all but the last are able to get the job done, and have specific reasons for using the instruments they do.

How much orchestral music presents a fingering challenge? I played in an amateur orchestra for years and subbed in several others, and never saw anything that challenged my fingers then. I'm much better technically now, and still not on the same planet as your average college tuba major. I find the embouchure, air supply, and musical sensibility the weak links in my orchestra chain, not slow fingers.

I voted BBb and F, because that's what I have and know how to play. John Fletcher was once asked why he played an Eb instead of an F as had been the tradition in British orchestras before that time, and he allegedly responded, "Because I haven't bloody well got an F, have I."

Before I brought the F, though, I'd want to see something on the program that calls for an F.

Rick "wondering how many conductors can tell the difference between a C and a Bb tuba in any case, if the playing doesn't expose it" Denney

I can't make sense out of this question.

You should clearly take whatever is appropriate--which means that if you're playing Verdi and the conductor desires it, you should leave all your tubas at home and bring a cimbasso.

I dunno, maybe there's some contemporary stuff that might be best served by a GG contra bugle....

I voted CC and EEb because they are what I own and what I am used to. I would, however, play a BAT BBb because I like my sound on a huge BBb tuba.

Sousie

LOTP wrote:Orchestral strings tend to favor the sharp keys. The use of BBb or
(even worse) Eb instruments would lead to more complicated fingerings and slower or less precise execution.

There are no such things as hard fingerings, just fingerings we don't know as well.

[quote="dtemp"][quote="LOTP"]Orchestral strings tend to favor the sharp keys. The use of BBb or
(even worse) Eb instruments would lead to more complicated fingerings and slower or less precise execution.[/quote]

There are no such things as hard fingerings, just fingerings we don't know as well.[/quote]

Not "hard" fingerings but rather the cumulative error which occurs when multiple valves (of cylindrical tubing) are added thereby necessitating "slide pulling" and/or lipping.

I have used (and still use) CC in almost all of the professional work that I have done, including orchestras, pit orchestras, bands, etc... it worked and kept me working. I use E flat rarely. I bought my E flat in 1978 and see no reason to spend more money since it is a good tuba.

I really think that we spend the activity of too many neurons over this issue, especially when we could be exposing the neurons to tuba induced hypoxia or a good soaking in beer.

Mark

LOTP wrote:Not "hard" fingerings but rather the cumulative error which occurs when multiple valves (of cylindrical tubing) are added thereby necessitating "slide pulling" and/or lipping.

Some notes that are hard to play in tune on a BBb tuba include the low B, the C, Db and D on the staff (if the fifth partial is typically flat), and perhaps the low Eb (unless the instrument has good false tones or a fifth valve). A couple involve the fourth valve. The G on the staff might be difficult on some BBb's. F#'s, C#'s, and G#'s ought to be alright, except maybe the F# on the staff.

By contrast, the same relative notes on a CC would be the low C#, the D, Eb and E on the staff, and perhaps the A on the staff and the low F (though one would expect a fifth valve). I can't see that the notes that appear in sharp keys are in any better shape on a CC than on a BBb.

And I dispute the notion that BBb tubas use more valve tubing on the common notes in any key. I just jotted down a chromatic scale, starting at low F and going up three octaves to F above the staff. Using conventional fingerings, the CC tuba uses more valve tubing on the following notes (ascending through those three octaves):

Low Octave: F, F#/Gb, G, G#/Ab, A, Bb, C#/Db, D, Eb, E
Middle Octave: F, G#/Ab, A, Bb, C#/Db, D
High Octave: F, G#/Ab, A, Bb, C#/Db, D, and high F.

By contrast, the notes in those three octaves where the BBb tuba uses more valve tubing are:

Low Octave: B, C
Middle Octave: F#/Gb, G, B, C, Eb, E
High Octave: F#/Gb, G, B, C, Eb and high E.

And the high octave on both tubas can mostly be played on the first two valves, so they probably should not even be considered. In the bottom octave, however, the BBb tuba clearly uses less valve tubing much more often. Just how often does that low B really occur compared to the low C#/D?

Which multiple valve combinations in which keys were you talking about?

Here's my beef: Formulaic answers that assume universal truths that turn out to be drawn from myth and lore rather than fact.

Fact: In the U.S., most CC tuba players are better than most BBb tuba players, just because pros and trained pro-wannabes are in the former group and schoolkids and hobbyists are in the latter group.

Corollary Fact: Good players are more capable in sharp keys because they are asked to play in those keys, while not-so-good players are less capable in sharp keys because they are rarely asked to play in those keys and they don't practice in those keys. Don't blame the tubas for the inabilities of the players. When a good CC player has more trouble with intonation in a community band, it's not because of those BBb instruments, it's because of those community band hobbyists.

Myth: BBb tubas are more appropriate for flat keys and CC tubas are more appropriate for sharp keys. If you notice better sound from CC tubas, I would attribute it to CC tuba players.

Myth: Tubas sound better when fewer valve branches are used. Let's say I recruit a fine player, and ask him to play a low C on, say, a Miraphone 186 CC. Then, I ask him to play a low C on a Miraphone 186 BBb. Will he sound different? My contention is that you won't be able to tell the difference from behind a screen.

Rick "a BBb hobbyist" Denney

Mark E. Chachich wrote:I really think that we spend the activity of too many neurons over this issue, especially when we could be exposing the neurons to tuba induced hypoxia or a good soaking in beer.

I could not agree more, except that I can't play the tuba OR drink beer while at the office, but I can type messages on Tubenet, heh, heh.

Rick "craving a cold one as we speak" Denney

I decided to go with the biggest and smallest tubas possible. I don't play in orchestral situations anymore, as I have been so busy with recording and occational studio playing. I sold my 6 valve 4/4 Rudy F and my BBb York sousaphone in order to buy a Yamaha 621 F tuba, a Yamaha 622 bass trombone, and a Holton MF Superbone. It worked out to be a great trade-up for me.

Little F and BIG-BAT CC, those are the tubas for me...

My other two brassy friends...