TubeNet

The short version:
For people familiar with both the 3/4 and 4/4 Rudy Meinl CC, what are the specific differences between them? (bore sizes, playing characteristics, etc.)? Any thoughts or other comparisons?

The long version:
We all love "this vs. that" threads, I know. It's the middle of summer, so bear with me.

I own a Rudy Meinl 4/4 CC tuba, which sustained some damage during shipping. It is now with one of our favorite repairmen, awaiting restoration. While the tuba has been in my possession, it has always had bell damage, maybe an air leak, a few dents in inopportune places, and it needs a valve alignment. I have never played the undamaged version of it, but it still plays really well even though it needs work.

Thanks to a very generous friend, I am borrowing a Rudy Meinl 3/4 CC tuba for a little while. It is in great shape, and it is in great mechanical condition. My first impression -- my jaw dropped. I believe the hype, this tuba is the real deal! What a fantastic instrument!

Since I don't have both tubas with me, I can't do a side-by-side. But I'm curious if anyone HAS done that kind of comparison before (or, has owned both and can still make comparisons).

My first impression of the 3/4 is SO positive, that I'm wondering how a 4/4 in proper mechanical condition would compare. Do ALL RM's play this well and sound this great? The only comparisons I have in my head now are based on a tuba that is in great condition vs. a tuba that needs work and maintenance, and that's not a very good basis for comparison. Also, I used a different mouthpiece that I didn't have before my 4/4 went into the shop, although I doubt if a mouthpiece will make that significant of a difference.

Anyway, just trying to educate myself here. Think of it like a 186 vs. 188 question, but with Rudy's. I have clearly been taken in by Rudy Meinl tubas, and want to learn as much as I can. Thanks!

I had a 4/4 Rudy in C for a few weeks from Custom Music to try out in 1972 and played a concert in the West Point Band on it.Later owned a 5/4 Bb in New Orleans for a few years and had a 5/4 C shipped down from Dillon's in 2000. My friend here in town owns a 3/4 C which I've played on several occasions. The 4/4C was nice but to me nothing special although it very well made. The heavy tuba player in the West Point band had brought down two 4/4 Rudy C's and two "Sandner" Bb's which looked just like a Miraphone but with clockspring valves. The Bb's stayed and the Rudys went back to Custom. They were priced 25 bucks higher than the Bb "stencils". The 5/4 Bb Rudy sounded great and was easy to play. After playing an orchestra rehearsal on my King I decided to give them a treat and bring the Rudy. The conductor asked me to bring the other horn. It just didn't project well for me. The same with the 5/4 C Rudy. My friend's 3/4 C Rudy knocks my socks off every time I try it. Mabye that's why there are more of them around. The sound is clearer yet still deep and it really gets out.Just my take on them. I settled on Kings. An amusing side note. At the First International Tuba Symposium in 1973 Custom Music had Rudy's and the salesman was telling me that the big ones were just like Jake's York. He probably went on to sell used cars. But to summarize, they're all good horns, I just found the 3/4 to be the friendliest and nicest sounding.YMMV, Ed

Thanks guys! All of that is very interesting! Keep it coming!

Another question -- does anyone know what the bore sizes are on the 3/4 and 4/4? Is it like the 186/188 where the valve sections are the same, or does the 4/4 valve section have a larger bore than the 3/4?

Bort,

The 3/4 has a ~.728" bore and the 4/4 has a ~.768" bore. Additionally, RM makes another medium-ish CC called the 4345 in both piston and rotary...

A Rudy 4/4 was my primary instrument for 20 years. It is an amazing instrument. But, as Bloke said, they are not particularly easy to play. I'm extremely familiar with the 3/4 and 4/4 models, I've played a few 5/4 models but never been turned on enough by any of them to seek one. For me, the main difference between the 3/4 and 4/4 is volume of sound. Traditionally, you would expect a 3/4 versus a 4/4 to yield a pretty large difference (something like quintet horn versus orchestral horn) but the Rudy models don't follow that. Both the 3/4 and 4/4 are easily orchestral horns. In my opinion, neither works particularly well in a quintet unless that group plays pretty loud and likes lots of tuba sound in the blend. To my ear, the strength of the Rudy sound is projection. They project like mad! Honestly, I think they sound pretty harsh up close but stick them in a big ensemble and out in the hall they sound great.

I think there were fewer 4/4 models that reached the really high quality end but that could be because fewer of them were made. I'm only guessing, I don't know what the actual numbers are. I've seen far more 3/4 than 4/4 models around. I've played a lot of 3/4 and 4/4 Rudys and the 4/4 always just did it for me. I would expect once your 4/4 is fixed up, you could have some real fun with a fine tuba. It also depends on how old your model is. Back in the 80s, they tried to fix some of the intonation issues by slightly changing the wrap. To me, they ended up swapping some intonation issues for others and also taking a tiny bit of good out of the overall sound. The biggest marker to tell the difference that I know of is the top space G. If your top space G tends to be sharp, you probably have a newer one. If that note is well in tune, you may have an older one. Mine is older, from the 1960s. There is a quality to that sound that is very similar in distinctiveness to the Alexander sound.

I don't play my Rudy much anymore except when my Nirschl is in the shop, like it was the past 2 months. On a side note, Chris Bluemel at Instrument Doc is amazing at what he does. He did some work on my Nirschl and it plays and looks fabulous. I was surprised at how much better it plays after the tweaks Chris did. I encourage anyone curious to contact Chris directly and see what he can do for you if you need work done on a horn. His instincts and observation are pretty amazing. While my Nirschl was being worked on, it gave me the opportunity to enjoy my Rudy for a couple of months. Great horn but more work than I'm willing to put up with these days. For me, the Nirschl is such a "point and shoot" tuba that playing the Rudy reminds me why I switched. But there's something about that Rudy sound...

Thanks Jay. I think mine is about 25 years old? It says "made in Germany" and not "W. Germany", so it can't be much older. I think it has the sharp G.

One of my first teachers, Ivan Hammond, used to tell us - If you like the Rudy sound, get a 5/4 or 3/4. Not that the 4/4's were bad, but that the 3/4 and 5/4 were such awesome instruments. I played a 5/4 for a few years and regret selling it every day........

My association with Rudolf Meinl tubas goes back to 1977, when I played my University's 4/4 BBb. It was fairly beaten-up, but had a distinctive sound which was desirable-enough that when I bought my first horn, from Custom in Dec. 1978, I chose a 3/4 Rudi CC over all other horns at the Midwest Show in Chicago. They did not have a 4/4 CC at the show, and the one 5/4 CC they did have was a 4-valve instrument, and I really wanted 5 valves.

With that horn, I felt that was the point when my career took off. I would win more auditions with that instrument than any other to date. I later bought an outstanding 5/4 CC, and the characteristics were so similar on the two horns that I basically used the 3/4 as my quintet/solo/pit/small ensemble horn, and played the 5/4 for all large work. While stationed in Germany I got to know the Meinl family, had my horns serviced and customized there, and bought a new 3/4 at the factory, which was slightly better than the first.

Rudi, Jr. had told me that the 3/4 and 5/4 CC's were the favorites, and that the 4/4 models did not play as well in tune, so in the late 1980's when Rudolf Meinl had obtained CAD hardware and software, he first built a better 5/4 F-tuba, then set about re-designing the 4/4 CC, which had always lagged in popularity in comparison with the 3/4 and 5/4 models. The newer Rudolf Meinl 4/4 CC top branch looked a little more like a Hirsbrunner top branch, and the instrument did play more like it's big-, and little brothers, but I've remained a fan of the 3/4 and 5/4 CC, new or old.

In my experience, when I set the slides on any Rudolf Meinl CC to my liking, the E and Eb just below the staff are a little sharp, as the C# and F# beneath that will be, when played 2-4. With the 2nd valve slide trigger, all of these notes become a non-issue. As for the perception of a high G that is sharp, I'll relate the following; I was in a lesson with Dan Perantoni, with my 3/4 CC, and he told me, "Your G was sharp. That G is really not a high note. As you play it, think of descending to the note, not trying to get up to it". I never had trouble with that note again.

Can't comment on Rudys but +1 on Chris and the Instrument Docs

Bort:

By now you've gathered that it is not a comparison analogous to a 186 vs. 188. The Rudy 3/4 has a reputation for being every bit the equal (at least) of a 186 in size and output. I always preferred the somewhat richer, more "raw" sound of the Rudy. I have played, sold, and sat next to a lot of them, and was never disappointed.

As others have mentioned, the 4/4 was always a bugaboo for Rudy Meinl. For those that play them, though, they are terrific all-around instruments. It took me easily a year to play into mine, but it could pour out sound! Last I knew, despite owning other, more "elite" tubas, Fritz Kaenzig still had the Rudy 4/4 he bought for his undergrad work. The later, rewrapped versions in rotor or pistons never did much for me. The sound, to my ear, lacked color. Then again, the bell was closer, so maybe I was hearing things.

You will probably find that the 3/4 speaks very easily and plays well in tune with little manipulation. The 4/4 may require some favoring of the 3rd, 5th and 6th partials, but really puts a nice foundation under a larger group. They are both great multi-purpose tubas.

I miss my Rudy! Someday...

EdFirth wrote:At the First International Tuba Symposium in 1973 Custom Music had Rudy's and the salesman was telling me that the big ones were just like Jake's York. He probably went on to sell used cars.

Frank Tucci went on to sell tons of tubas, and he did it just like a used car salesman. RIP, Frank...

Lee and Greg,

Thank you both for all of the valuable information, this place can be such a great resource, especially when the questions are so extremely specific! That's all very interesting about the 4/4, and how it compares to the 3/4 and 5/4, in terms of reputation and design. Seems kind of like the "middle child" effect?

I will have to post my findings here when I get my 4/4 back from the shop, and I am able to give it a fair comparison to the 3/4. My initial reactions seem to support what was said here, but one of the biggest differences between the two seems to be the response and "feel" of the instruments compared to each other. The 3/4 was automatic, point and shoot, and easy to center every note. The 4/4 didn't quite feel the same way, it slightly less easy to play and center. I'm assuming that a fair amount of that is because it needs a valve alignment, dent removal from the leadpipe, and of course repairing the bell. Those things can make a huge difference.

In some rough recordings I've made of both instruments on the same excerpts, the 4/4 (naturally) sounds bigger than the 3/4, and both have the same characteristic (and exhilarating) sound, although maybe the 4/4 takes a little more air to get to that sound. The 3/4 maybe sounds a little sweeter and a bit zippier, but my 4/4 has a busted-up bell, there is no way for me to compare mine to that yet. Intonation seems a little better on the 3/4, but in all fairness, I haven't played either tuba enough to really learn its tendencies.

It's funny, when I got my 4/4, I thought "wow, this is awesome!" And then I tried the 3/4 and thought "whoa, this is really awesome!" I'm curious to try both back-to-back and see what I think. In the end, I would easily be happy with either the 3/4 or 4/4 tuba for a very long time to come, it's more of a matter of deciding which size/style is best suited for my needs. It's a win-win situation. The whole idea in this was to get something a little bigger (but not too much bigger) than my Miraphone 188, and either of these seem to be perfect for that.

And no, the owner of the 3/4 I'm borrowing does not need to worry about not getting it back. It's a stellar tuba, and he only recently got it himself -- I'm excited for him that he found such a great tuba.

I've owned my 4/4 Rudi for 11 years now and can say that, to me, it is the easiest, point and shoot tuba that I've ever played. I knew it was good from the first notes I played and it has done everything I needed it to do. I would like to have a 6/4 (or a 5/4 Rudi) but I have no need other than to have a bigger horn around. I don't play as much as I used to but my two Rudi horns give me lots of enjoyment when I do. Well, as soon as my CC comes back with its new leadpipe.

It should be noted that Fritz Kaenzig could play any tuba he likes but still owns a 4/4 Rudy. His opinion should count for something.

I've played a 4/4 and 5/4 Rudy(both) that I thought were excellent instruments. One of the most captivating sounds I've ever heard was produced by a particularly gifted student on a 4/4 Rudy.

Based on that experience and the mythical reputation, I purchased a 3/4 Rudy. It just never did it for me. Perhaps it was a dud?

Based on the one 3/4 Rudy I've owned, they strike me as a weird musical compromise:
1) I found the sound too dark and heavy(albeit sweet and lyrical) for brass quintet or chamber music in general. It's plenty pretty but I didn't find it well suited to matching the lightness and transparency of horn or trombone.
2) It's a 3/4 tuba. Sure, it has a big enough voice to balance an orchestra but it's not the best tool for that job either.
3) The logical extension is that it's a 'do everything' tuba. But, for me, it's the opposite.. It's a great tuba that is fun to play and listen to but not really quite 'appropriate' in most settings.
4) What it *really* is, is a wonderful solo contrabass tuba. If you want to play Kraft or Bordogni or English Folk Songs.. this is the perfect tuba.

3/4 Rudy in action by someone that clearly knows how to play it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDLscRvIdQA
His sound is more or less what I remember coming out of my horn.

This is what I think today.. could be wrong.

One of the best tuba sounds I've heard came from the "3/4" Rudi CC. There was a small chamber orchestra in my hometown during my high school years and the tuba player was playing a 3/4 Rudi CC. I eavesdropped on them during their last rehearsal and then attended their concert with my older brother. I still remember it to this day -- the tuba player was warming up and had this rich, vibrant sound that caught my ear. They played Brahms' Academic Festival Overture and the tuba player nailed his part, including the octave leaps at the end, with a great sound. I thought his sound on that tuba was perfect for a chamber orchestra.

I've also heard pros play the 4/4 and 5/4 Rudi's. I've played all Rudy CC models and they are great, but I still prefer other tubas.

Of the Rudi CC tubas, I agree that the 3/4 and 5/4 models catch your ear a bit more than the 4/4 model.

This is getting into Rudy Meinl 5/4 CC "only" territory, but since we've already headed down that road...

I had a 4 valve 5/4 Rudy Meinl CC for a while. I didn't realize what I had and how good it was at the time. I should have hung on to it (which means I probably wouldn't own an Alexander today).

Anyone that wants to know what a Rudy Meinl 5/4 CC can do should listen to Kansas City Dances by David Holsinger as played by Steven Seward of the Kansas City Symphony. http://www.encoremupub.com/products/Kan ... es-CD.html

Thanks everyone.

I'm excited to get my 4/4 back and weigh my own opinions!

bloke wrote:The best RM 4/4 I ever played was formerly in Cape Girardeau, Missouri. I believe it's owner sold it.

Yes he sold it. I almost bought it. Guess I would have saved myself a few years...

I currently have a friend's Rudy Meinl 3/4 and my own Rudy Meinl 4/4 here in my apartment, for a very brief time.

I've done some back-to-back playing this evening, and these are my observations based on having a few weeks with the 3/4, and a few hours with the 4/4 here in my apartment. I've never rehearsed or performed on either, so these are first impressions:

Rudy Meinl 3/4
Compact and focused sound, extremely responsive and articulate. Easiest playing tuba I've ever played, it just GOES (it's just stupid easy). Full-sized sound, and will take almost as much air as you can give it. Solid intonation, and best of all, an incredible tone quality. Fat, resonant, and "interesting" sound, it's just extremely pleasing. No, this tuba won't sound like a 6/4, but I doubt there's anything it can't do. I also found it uncomfortable to hold, it's an inch or two taller than the 4/4, and I could just never get comfortable with it. I'm sure a stand would have helped, but I don't have one anymore.

Rudy Meinl 4/4
Noticeably larger sound than the 3/4, much broader and bigger sound, but still a classic German rotary tuba sound. It's easy to play, just not as stupidly easy as the 3/4. I'm not sure I can overblow it, the sound just gets bigger and bigger. Takes a bit of air to make it "burn," but overall seems very efficient, especially the low register, which is massive and easy to play. The sound is big and resonant, and while it's still very "interesting," it's quite different from the 3/4. Very comfortable to hold, everything is in the right place.

Both are EXCELLENT tubas.

At the local regional university a few years ago, I got to community band practice early, and the instrument warehouse had not been completely shut down, as the marching band folks' rehearsal was running late. I got to go down the tuba aisle and try everything the school owned at the time, and compare them to my 186. There was the usual assortment of 186's, Yamahas, etc., and one Rudy BBb 3/4, which, yes, is as large as almost everyone else's 4/4. It had it all: clarity, foundation, intonation, easy to play. If it was available, I would have considered buying/trading, etc. Sad epilogue: a year later, I got to see it again, and it had been dropped, with a sizeable wrinkle in the bell. It did not play the same after that. So, here's hoping Bort's bell turns out great.