TubeNet

In general, do a contrabass trombone and cimbasso have basically the same timbre, assuming they are in the same or neighboring key?
To the uninitiated, they both appear to be largely cylindrical with similar bell flares, with the main difference of slide vs. valves.
(Obviously, I would expect something of a difference between a BBb and an F, but this is more for comparing F-F or Eb-F)

All of the slide contras I have owned (Kanstul, old single valve F bass) or played (custom F, Thein copy, Bb Miraphone) played darker than the one "production"cimbasso I've played (MW F). My valved bass thingy is different enough from what's popular to remove it from the comparison. THAT said, listening to others play them I find the slide horns to play brighter.

Your location also determines the sound! Here in America there hasn't been much of a contra tradition til the last few decades which is most evident in the bass trombone playing. Many European seem to have a lighter, more colorful bass trombone sound than the big, broad American style; I kinda consider the American style "pocket contra" versus the more tenor style. I find European contra playing not terribly different from American bass playing. I know owning an F contra made me question my style of bass trombone playing. I can ramble more on this if you like.

Fwiw, every F contra I've played plays noticeably better with a mouthpiece that is shallower than what appears to be the norm.

Similar. Any valve trombone gets a different timbre than a slide instrument of the same proportions. And then there's the fact that a cimbasso is intended for a tuba player and uses a tuba mouthpiece, where a contrabass trombone is designed for a trombone player and uses a slightly larger variation of a bass trombone mouthpiece.

They are the same comparison as a valve trombone and a slide trombone... because that's exactly what the are (or should be). There are some BAC (Big A$$ Cimbassi) out there marketed to tubists which will, by necessity of mouthpiece and giant bore, sound darker, since there's no slide instrument with those proportions, even the Miraphone BBb. That instrument, however, is intended for a Tuba-sized rim, and sounds pretty damn similar to a chimp.

The principle timbre coming out of the bell will be determined by the player.

J.c. Sherman wrote:The principle timbre coming out of the bell will be determined by the player.

Yep. And in my experience, toooba playahs tend to play "banana notes": tapered at both ends, which is decidedly not a trombonish way of playing. Cimbasso definitely takes a stylistic shift to carry off convincingly.

As people have mentioned above the biggest variable is the player. It would be interesting to hear a bass trombonist who is used to playing contrabass trombone also play a cimbasso in the same pitch.

I know the Haag cimbasso uses the same bell as the CBT, and I suspect the Thein does too (at least the one I saw a few years ago did - the player ordered it from them with both a valve section and an interchangeable double-slide.)

No doubt there is some difference between slide and valves, but that would be secondary IMHO

Cheers

Cam

UncleBeer wrote:

J.c. Sherman wrote:The principle timbre coming out of the bell will be determined by the player.

Yep. And in my experience, toooba playahs tend to play "banana notes": tapered at both ends, which is decidedly not a trombonish way of playing. Cimbasso definitely takes a stylistic shift to carry off convincingly.

Absolutely!

I'm a bass bone player playing a Haag cimbasso. With Franz's horns both the contra and the cimbasso are built pretty much to the same specs. My impression is that the trombone/valve trombone comparison is very apt in this case. The contra is more open to play and is a lot more like a bass trombone than the cimbasso, which is also the reason why I preferred to go with a cimbasso instead
In the context that I use it, it makes more sense to have a horn that differs more from my regular axe, the way I play it...


//Mattis

The trombone vs. valve-trombone difference that, for me, seems to explain why there are bass trombones and not so many bass valve-trombones, is that no matter what key the thing is in, you're inevitably going to end up trying live in the `valve range', where you need large combinations of valve tubing. In the trombone family, that's simple because you can use slide position to make everything add up. In the valve-trombone family, it's at least marginally more complicated.

My guess is that the stuffy small bore design of the normal valve trombone is a feature, having to do with responsiveness to breath pitch control, something a trombone doesn't need or want. The larger bore marching band designs didn't really increase its popularity, for anything but marching band anyway. If there's a moral to this for the cimbasso, it might be that the key to making the valve-trombone family pay off is to want a different timbre.

quesonegro wrote:...The contra is more open to play and is a lot more like a bass trombone than the cimbasso...

Mattis's description says it all. We happen to have both a cimbasso and a cb trbn by Lätzsch in our orchestra and those instruments works exactly that way. Then it might be possible to have them sound more or less different depending on how you approach them. So for those that want most sonic possibilities there is only one solution, use both cimbasso and cb trbn.