TubeNet

the elephant wrote:I like the BBb tuba version - almost always - a little better due to the seemingly greater depth (for lack of a better word) to the tone. But these BBb horns are generally "harder" to play versus the shorter, more quick responding CC versions. It is a trade-off.

I'd agree with that. My experience has also been that 3/4 horns the difference in response is narrower between BBb and CC versions then in 4/4 or 6/4 horns. It is still there - just not as much of a difference. For this reason I went with a BBb Lidl - which if you take one apart you will find an extremely well crafted instrument. Since they only make about 60 tubas a year I think they are pretty much hand made and yet sell for a reasonable price - even now. Great rotors, real depth to the tone and very agile. Rocking bottom and sings in the high register. Much nicer then a 184.

I have almost no experience with CC so I really don't know why I'm responding. However, I have played the Yamaha 621BB, the 184 BB and the O-99 a lot. The best one for my use is the O-99. I was marveling in rehearsal last night how easy it was to put the bottom on the group with velvety long tones or a moving bass line. I couldn't do that with the 621 or the 184. I almost replaced my Bielefelder with a Lidl. If I had the scratch I would have done it in a minute. What a nice rotary 3/4 BB. The only one I wonder about now is the HoJo FA. I might be persuaded to part with my O-99 if those are as good as I suspect they might be. So this is one guy's dissertation of smaller BB's and no mention of a CC comparison. Sorry Joe.

What's the difference between a Conn 4J and Olds 0-99?

So...what is the best 3/4 BB out there that would be the ideal proof for this hypothesis.

From playing several over the years, and sitting beside players of the same. I would tend to agree. I would also say that my experience of playing and listening to others play 3/4 BBb tubas, that they benefit from a deeper cup mouthpiece, usually the standard Conn 120S Helleberg or reasonable facsimile thereof is sufficient to help the body and "roundness" of tone.

I'd be curious to see the 2011RA next to a PT3. Same outer bows?

The PT3 only had a 16.5" bell which was *identical* to the bell on a PT15. MW website says the 2011 has a 17.3" bell.. but that could just be a little extra pancake?

I owned a PT3 for many years that I *loved* in every way save for a sharp 3rd and 6th partial.. otherwise... LOVED it and still tempted to own again.

BUT, if your hypothesis is correct, perhaps the 2011RA would offer the same sonic qualities, and amazing response in all registers with an improved scale? For me personally, that would make it a truly ideal small tuba.

Anyone in the KC region own one of these? Or a Lidle or O-99? PM me. I'll buy beer.

bloke wrote:The *copy* of the Mahillon sports an important difference: bore size

A genuine Mahillon BBb's bore size is only around 5/8" (around 16mm) whereas the original top-action German copy's bore size is larger (17mm).

And I think that's why I love the little Schuster "Army" - 33" LOA (~32" LOD) with a bore of 18.5mm. Plays like a much bigger horn.

Both the O-99 and the Conn's are good in my opinion, but I think that they can play really inconsistently from one horn to the next. I have played some that where easy to play and responded very well and I have played some that were absolute dogs.

If I had to pick one though I would probably go with the O-99.

Just my 2 cents...

bloke wrote:yeah...

I'm guessing that the powers that be decided to make the German copy more of a everyman's tuba, rather than a tuba that does what the original version particularly does so nicely.

A couple of questions:
Do you consider Hojo "a everyman" or were you referencing something other than the MW Hojo series?

Why did you post a video of Hojo playing an F tuba as an example of the perfect 3/4 BBb instrument? http://nicoviewer.net/sm10703015

Edit
The horn you had in mind?