TubeNet

Since it seems German orchestras require Bb tuba with rotors why do American schools/orchestras lean toward C tubas? Also, who cares if one plays pistons versus rotors?

Maybe Schleppie can make a 'stickie' out of this topic!

Resonance and response. Similar to C vs. Bb trumpets...

Even worse... Lacquer vs. silver plate?

Some ideas I've heard from American players include CC tubas are more responsive, the sound isn't as "fuzzy," orchestral keys are easier, etc.

I'm not a physicist, but it does make some surface-level sense that since a CC tuba has a shorter bugle than BBb, identical notes will occur lower in that instrument's overtone series. Ie. There's less tube to go through on a CC tuba. Might that be why response tends to be quicker on CC?

The better answer to your question: cultural preference.

BBb OR CC?!?

Both.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_nffM4ulPDA

windshieldbug wrote:Resonance and response. Similar to C vs. Bb trumpets...

Good. Now.... define 'resonance'.

NO! NOT AGAINNNNNNNNNN....

TubaTinker wrote: Good. Now.... define 'resonance'.

Pleasing overtone decay.

windshieldbug wrote:

TubaTinker wrote: Good. Now.... define 'resonance'.

Pleasing overtone decay.

That's the best explanation I've ever heard.

I like CC tuba because the open scale is based on having no sharps and no flats. Playing BBb tuba is like counting starting at -1, instead of counting starting at 0.

It really doesn't matter very much, but my brain works better with CC.

bloke wrote:C tubas are much more expensive, and if someone can spend a lot of money on just one tuba, that unburdens that person from having to figure out how to spend the otherwise leftover money.

I see.

So you get several feet less tuba, only for more money.

Like a Porsche!!

So now I'm thinking that prices for tubas (other things being equal) should be inversely proportional to their length. That seems to work for (at least a lot of) CC tubas and F tubas, but not for EEb tubas. Also, I'd then be inclined to think that euphoniums (tenor tubas?) should be a lot more expensive than they are. More research is clearly necessary.

ghmerrill wrote:So now I'm thinking that prices for tubas (other things being equal) should be inversely proportional to their length. That seems to work for (at least a lot of) CC tubas and F tubas, but not for EEb tubas. Also, I'd then be inclined to think that euphoniums (tenor tubas?) should be a lot more expensive than they are. More research is clearly necessary.

The fundamental warning about empirical data: Correlation does not prove causation.

(Yes, I know you were joking.)

For the credulous who don't see the joke, the price difference is caused by: C tubas are more popular with pros in the U.S., and are thus willing to spend more than most high-school kids, schools, and community-band amateurs who play Bb tubas. Thus, in the U.S., C tubas cost more than Bb tubas.

But in the parts of Europe where the tradition means that "Kontrabasstuba" = "Bb Kaiser rotary tuba", the Bb instruments that those orchestra pros use are generally as expensive as their C counterparts, all else equal. A Rudolf Meinl, Alexander, or Hirsbrunner Bb tuba intended for the German pro market is much more expensive than what Bb tubas will fetch in the U.S., with few exceptions.

Of course, in those parts of Europe, the default instrument is an F tuba, which is even more responsive and nimble than a C tuba. So, one might as well ask, "Why F over C for European orchestral tuba players?" And the answer is: tradition.

Rick "the best Bb tubas usually don't come to the U.S. because the usual Bb buyer won't spend what they cost" Denney

Rick Denney wrote:And the answer is: tradition.

I agree, and would only add that in many cases this translates to politics. We know of players whose positions allow them to own and use in their jobs tubas that lesser players deride as beneath them. But many college students and per-service orchestra players do not that have that freedom. So they play what they are expected to play, because the incentives they depend on are tethered to those expectations.

It's fine to treat those expectations as oppressive or whatever if you don't have to meet them. But before anyone says "who cares" it would be well either to become financially free from having to compromise, or to develop a taste for locusts and wild honey.

Which also makes the whole notion of a rotary CC tuba sort of a hybrid concept -- German style, American key. You sure don't see them much in Germany (nor do you see piston BBb's, even.)

Cc tubas do speak quicker and play a little 'cleaner' than most BBb tubas (for a lack of a better word, such as 'clarity'). They are a bit better for playing in sharp keys, IMHO. However, it's also easier to pick up a CC tuba that's more challenging, in terms of tuning, than most BBb tubas. Be prepared to pull slides around and experiment getting the right mouthpiece. A lot of it depends on what kind of playing you want to do, I think.

For community bands, there are plenty of good BBb tubas that'll do the job just fine. I came close to buying a King 2341 myself. The Miraphone 191 is also a very good BBb tuba (and I like it better than its "Bruckner" CC counterpart). But if you want to play in bands, orchestras AND brass quintets, then you may want to consider a good 4/4 CC tuba - 5/4 at the largest. That's just my zwei groschen.

Rick Denney wrote:And the answer is: tradition.

From the perspective of today the answer is "tradition." But, given the preponderance of BBb in the non-orchestral world, why did CC take root in orchestral circles in the first place? The answer to that question is: orchestral tubaist wannabes = sheeple.

pgym wrote:

Rick Denney wrote:And the answer is: tradition.

From the perspective of today the answer is "tradition." But, given the preponderance of BBb in the non-orchestral world, why did CC take root in orchestral circles in the first place? The answer to that question is: orchestral tubaist wannabes = sheeple.

Could be, but that's hard to prove. August Helleberg played a rotary C tuba (and is perhaps the first known example) and he my be the vector for that trend in the U.S. Orchestra pros were playing C tubas at least by the 20's, so that when Donatelli ordered his famous York he specific that it be pitched in C. The Conn that he played before and after the York was pitched in C. Bell played a C tuba in orchestra. C euphoniums (aka, small French Tuba in C) were the standard in French orchestras by that time and for many subsequent years.

So, why did these early performers use C tubas? Maybe they were better in sharp keys, or just easier to manage. Maybe they were a bit more versatile in an era when tuba players didn't usually have a fleet of specialized instruments. While the latter may still be true, the former is not really.

As to sound from the audience's perspective, I do not hear the difference between Bb and C tubas the way I hear the difference between Bb and C trumpets. That doesn't mean it doesn't feel different to the player.

Rick "not really sure about the history of this" Denney

Rick Denney wrote:

pgym wrote:

Rick Denney wrote:And the answer is: tradition.

From the perspective of today the answer is "tradition." But, given the preponderance of BBb in the non-orchestral world, why did CC take root in orchestral circles in the first place? The answer to that question is: orchestral tubaist wannabes = sheeple.

Could be, but that's hard to prove. August Helleberg played a rotary C tuba (and is perhaps the first known example) and he my be the vector for that trend in the U.S. Orchestra pros were playing C tubas at least by the 20's, so that when Donatelli ordered his famous York he specific that it be pitched in C. The Conn that he played before and after the York was pitched in C. Bell played a C tuba in orchestra. C euphoniums (aka, small French Tuba in C) were the standard in French orchestras by that time and for many subsequent years.

So, why did these early performers use C tubas? Maybe they were better in sharp keys, or just easier to manage. Maybe they were a bit more versatile in an era when tuba players didn't usually have a fleet of specialized instruments. While the latter may still be true, the former is not really.

As to sound from the audience's perspective, I do not hear the difference between Bb and C tubas the way I hear the difference between Bb and C trumpets. That doesn't mean it doesn't feel different to the player.

Rick "not really sure about the history of this" Denney

You're definitely on to something Rick. I'd take it one more step and say that the next owner of Donatelli's tuba had so much influence on American tuba players that he is one of the main reason most of the "sheeple" play on CC tubas.

How many of the most popular piston CC's also have "York model" attached as a descriptor, or show some physical resemblance to Donatelli/Jacobs' York tuba? Arnold Jacobs, and people who wanted to sound like Arnold Jacobs, are a big reason for CC tubas being considered the "pro" horn in America.