TubeNet

I've been out of the loop for a few years now, but I've been mulling over an idea, and I thought I would throw it out there in case anyone wants to take it up. Maybe it's already been done, but just in case, here goes:

We spend a lot of time asking what horns win auditions, what did so-and-so play, and universally, the response is, “He would have won that on any horn,” etc…And then there is the more recent discussion regarding CC vs. the new BBb’s and the recent shift to using more BBb tubas in the U.S. And I think that equipment, while not the end all and be all, is important. We get different horns for a reason. If it was 100% the player, no one would pioneer new horns, and no one would ever buy a new horn.

So, this got me thinking about a rather complicated, but I think fun, experiment. It might not be feasible, but if anyone can pull it off, I’d love to see the results.

The short of it is: Responses of members of every section of an orchestra to a screened “audition” in which the same person plays the standard first round excerpts on different horn setups.

The long of it is: Someone whose chops are in really good shape and has a good handle on Ride, Mahler 1, Prok 5, Meistersinger, etc… somehow arranges to have a York copy tuba, a 5/4 CC (PT6ish), a 4/4 CC, a 3/4 CC, a big BBb, a big F and a smaller F. The person then arranges (again, I don’t know how; maybe the person has really good connections and is great at begging) to have a bunch of people present in a performance hall – woodwind, string, and brass players and a number of tuba players. The person also puts a screen on the stage, like an audition, so the committee can’t see who is coming/going.
The audition panel/committee is told that they will be ranking a mock audition. They’re not told it’s the same person using different horns. They keep notes, just like real audition committees.
Then, the same person goes out and auditions as a bunch of different people:
1. York copy and small F
2. Big BBb and smaller F
3. 4/4 CC only
4. Big F only
5. 3/4 CC only
6. 5/4 CC and smaller F
7. 5/4 CC only
Or whatever combination the person wants or can arrange. The comments and rankings from the listers is then collected and compiled to see who liked what, and what aspects of each setups different people like and didn't like.

I think we could see a few different interesting results here. First, is a 4/4 CC or 3/4 CC better in the first round than a 6/4? Since you’re not playing with anyone else, size of sound may not be as big a factor as clarity, and maybe the 4/4 would get you to the later rounds, at which you could bring out the big horn to keep up with the trombones. To that end, would a 6/4 F provide the same benefit? Would the panel hear a difference between a big BBb and a big CC, and would they have a preference? Do tuba players have different preferences in sound and performance than other brass players or other sections (do we become an echo chamber)?

I realize the inherent issues here – Mouthpiece selection will affect it, and we can’t control for or really test that without making this inordinately complicated. Player fatigue will be an issue. Going from one horn to another quickly will be tough. It would also be a long-term project, because the player would want to get pretty familiar with each of the horns to get the best performance out of each.

That’s why I was thinking a person at a large university doing a grad program would be a good candidate for this. Access to a lot of other musicians. Access to a lot of other tubas. Chops are in good shape, and most likely polished on the standard audition rep. Time to practice and work it all up.

So, feel free to critique the idea. I know there are a lot of details that aren’t worked out and bugs in the system, and the logistics would be a bear, but I would be really interested in the results if someone did this sort of an experiment.

And I'm not willingly refusing to do it myself. I work in another field, only have about 45 minutes per day to practice, and I live in Juneau, Alaska, so access to the number of horns that this would take is impossible absent more means than I currently possess. I would love to be able to do this, but since it's not going to happen absent me winning the lottery, I thought that if I threw it out there, someone else could take it up.

I really like your idea, timayer. Don't let jerks like these discourage you from continuing on your pursuits. Some of them are just geezers who can't get with the times.

We geezers need nursing!!

timayer wrote: Do tuba players have different preferences in sound and performance than other brass players or other sections (do we become an echo chamber?

In my opinion, yes. The best thing you can do is play MUSICLY.
That alone will put you through the first rounds.

lost wrote:not sure the orchestral part is necessary unless the orchestra players are the basis of reference for what is acceptable.

My thought was that people would be looking for something different in an "orchestral" tuba than "tuba" in general. Possibly that hypothetical difference in preference could be the subject of chapter 2 of the dissertation?

Hey!!! let's not mock 'geezers' We're just 'geeks' who have matured. Back to the idea...

Whether we're 'old f-rts' who some may think have way to much time on our hands or young 'pups' aspiring to get the 'answers, 'magic bullets,' 'keys to heaven,' (or at least the copy machine) the chance to witness first hand what some of the differences are between various designs of instruments is something I would love to experiment with. I do have a small cache of my own horns from F, BBb & CC. Right now I am in my 6/4 period of life. Maybe I should be downsizing to that 3/4 "Mirafone 184" that I lust after. But I keep thinking how luxurious the 6/4 sound is, and in good hands, how seductive it is to listener, or so I believe. Maybe I'm nuts.

I do 'know' from experience that different equipment makes a difference when used appropriately. I am fortunate and have been around quite sometime, but I think of those who have not be privy to being around so many great players. There are others who are way beyond my humble background. I'm not planning on a major audition any time in the rest of my life, but 'hell' the opportunity may arise and "what would I have to lose".

But I think the issues here center around younger players just trying to get some answers. Maybe not "THE" answer, but at least some place to start. I think most of us were there once in our lives. I recall going to clinic after clinic and trying to absorb all I could from as many of the 'greats' as were around.

I still look for a better mousetrap every time I go to Ace Hardware, and 'ya know ... they are makin' 'em.) For me, life is a 'hoot' when I can still learn something. And the more I learn, well, the more I want to learn. An old age obsession I guess.

Mock auditions are out there.

I have done a similar thing for a horn player friend where we set up on the platform at a wonderful concert venue and I listened with a critical ear. That day, we learned to modify things such as articulations, weight of tonguing and dynamic contrast to adapt to a certain acoustic and a large stage. Having that under her belt she went out and 'won' that major orchestra audition. It's funny that sometimes what we think of instinctively as being the perfect delivery of an excerpt is often not perceived that way out in the hall. And as she said during the session, "I'm really not comfortable playing the Strauss that way, but if you say it sounds better, well maybe I need to adjust." Sometimes we tend to be a little too self indulgent in our playing and need to find ways to learn what we really sound like and also what we need to sound like. There is no "one way" to do something.

Okay, this is "all on a good day in a perfect world." We know there are very few 'good days' and certainly no 'perfect world.' But we keep trying. Best wishes on the idea, and if you are in the Upper Midwest (greater Minneapolis) and want to try this, count me in.

Paul (the maturing - though not necessarily mature - 'geek' who is an aspiring 'geezer') Maybery

PaulMaybery wrote:But I think the issues here center around younger players just trying to get some answers. Maybe not "THE" answer, but at least some place to start.

Unfortuantely, I'm not even that interesting. I took my last audition 8 years ago and got out of the game directly afterwards. Don't plan on taking one ever again. I enjoy playing a lot more doing it for fun than a living. This is just pure, idle curiosity. It's something I have thought of recently that I would like to do myself, but I'd rather see it get done than wait for myself to be in a position to do it. I figured posting it here would be the best way of sparking someone to do something like it.

The reason I suggested set it up the way I did was to take out as many non-factors as possible - biases against specific horns on sight (maybe a clarinet player sees a big horn and goes all negative), and technical and stylistic differences between multiple players. Now, on the other hand, if 2 or 3 guys wanted to each do a full cycle of the instruments in front of the same committee, that would allow us to see if there are consistent preferences in horns.

And, in general, I've just never thought that it was at all controversial to try to increase the amount of practical knowledge in a field. Not everyone may think it has value or want it, but it's not hurting anyone by being there. I'm not saying this would be the be all and end all of winning an audition. Just interesting.

For the sake of conversation… I think you'd actually want to have multiple (maybe many) players play the array of horns. You can't get to a truly double blind test, but you'd want to minimize the influence of the human variable as much as possible.

Wouldn't it also be interesting to set up the "committee" in such a way that different regions are represented? As in, would a group from the US have different preferences than one from the UK, or Germany, or where ever?

I'd be interested in this experiment, but of course at the end of the day, you'd just have an answer for this point in time. 10 years from now, tastes and preferences may have changed enough to give different results.

I think it is important to set some parameters and remember what you are trying to learn out of this. (A gathering of information) IMHO I really do not believe it a good thing to just spread some horns around and randomly have players blow them down. It has taken me a year or so just to find the sweet spots on my own equipment, (tubas and mouthpieces combinations) and I am still working on it.
I think I can play a pretty decent "Ride" on the BAT, and a Mahler 1 on the F. Meistersinger could go F or CC. To throw a 'strange-to-me' horn into the mix for instance, would not necessarily get results that would be anywhere at all conclusive or persuasive.
Then, who is the panel and where is the hall?

What is the best horn to win an audition? One that you play your best on.!? One of the greats out there, once said he believed many auditions were one on the ol' 186. Then when they got a signed contract, then they got out the 'beasts.' I though that great advice.

I think on a regional and less formal level, quite a bit can be learned.

Maybe this would be a good session for an Itec (sometime, somehow, somewhere)

Every time someone like this gentleman asks a legitimate question, some people here always feel the need to make fun of the person and mock them. Such attitudes discourage young enthusiasts from asking questions if they know someone will ridicule them with statements like "too much coffee," or "let's do an experiment with white and black people instead." Seems to me like some people can't accept that newer generations like to think outside the box. Their thirst for knowledge should be applauded instead of sneered at. I apologize for making a pejorative statement of "geezers." It only applies to the ones opposed to new ideas and self-growth.

I've been following this topic (that has actually had a little intermittent serious discussion) and "someone plugging away on a bunch of different tubas with which they have absolutely no experience playing" has absolutely no relation to the original post or the intent of it.

Also, a double-blind test is neither necessary nor possible for such an experiment. But the audition committee can't know what's up, and I see that as a big problem and a reason why doing it at an ITEA wouldn't be productive. There's no way you could keep that secret.

In my defense:

timayer wrote: Going from one horn to another quickly will be tough. It would also be a long-term project, because the player would want to get pretty familiar with each of the horns to get the best performance out of each.

And thank you to everyone who has responded so far with constructive suggestions/critiques. I realize this is a pipe dream, but it's nice to dream sometimes.

And for everyone who hasn't responded with constructive suggestions/critiques, please consider changing your tone. It's just not necessary to be nasty. I litigate for a living. In my experience litigating (i.e., professionally arguing), ad hominem arguments, straw men, and the like never win anyone over. They just leave people unable to talk to each other afterwards.

I meant to suggest a fun little test based on 20 years of playing and 15 years of following auditions and the related discussions. Please take it in that spirit.

If this could ever actually happen, I would suggest instead of 7 different combinations, you double it to 14, alternating between two players to give each one a few minutes to recover and get in the mindset of the next instruments.

And of course they would each use their own familiar instruments, of the same size and key categories even if they're not identical.

As long as you're getting a committee together that would give you even better information about preferences of the varied listeners.

DP wrote:And you really thought (on behalf of the original poster) that "too much coffee, dude" was ridiculing them?

I'm sorry for calling you a "geezer." It was in the heat of the moment. If you didn't mean to ridicule the OP, then how else did you mean it? It was fairly obvious that you were mocking his largely thought out idea with a simple dismissal. You could have said "I think you're over thinking the concept of auditions and tubas" instead of "lay off the coffee dude." That's really offensive and a slap in the face for his efforts.

When I switch horns nobody cares but me. Mr. Torchinsky told me, "that thing won't play itself you know, and if it ever does, you better get out because the joint is haunted".

Leto Cruise wrote:

DP wrote:And you really thought (on behalf of the original poster) that "too much coffee, dude" was ridiculing them?

I'm sorry for calling you a "geezer." It was in the heat of the moment. If you didn't mean to ridicule the OP, then how else did you mean it? It was fairly obvious that you were mocking his largely thought out idea with a simple dismissal. You could have said "I think you're over thinking the concept of auditions and tubas" instead of "lay off the coffee dude." That's really offensive and a slap in the face for his efforts.

Consider the source.

bloke wrote:Once the perfect combination of instruments to "win" a job has been determined, [will] more people be able to "win" each job?

Then it may come down to mouthpiece combinations, too.
If you don't use the right mouthpiece with the right horn you'll never have a shot...

I think think a lot of tubists are interested in things like this. The problem with the proposed experiment is that there are tons of variables for it to be scientifically reliable.

What difference does the instrument actually make sonically? How is articulation different from one horn to another? Differences in resonance? Tone? Projection? Overtones? Sound direction? Valve differences manifesting in sound? Does finish make a difference?

What difference does the instrument make to the performer? Is there a scientific way to measure what the performer feels while playing? Resistance/backpressure? Can we measure how hard the performer needs to "work" to make the same result on different instruments? Do some instruments "play themselves" more than others? Is there a scientific way to measure "bad notes" on each horn? How do ergonomics affect performance?

What difference does the audience make? Does seeing the instrument impact how we hear it? Do tuba players hear the instrument differently than other musicians? Does what instrument you play affect how listeners perceive tuba performance? Does musical culture or tradition affect perception of tuba performance? How much do acoustics affect perception of tuba performance? How does proximity to performer affect perception of tuba performance and does this change with different equipment? Can the audience tell the difference between different equipment used by the same performer?

What difference does the performer make? What variables in performance are up to the performer? When two performers play the same excerpt with the same equipment, what changes? Do different performers perceive equipment differently? Can listeners discern differences between different performers with the same equipment? Are findings about audience perception consistent through different performers? How do differences in technique affect performance? Do physical differences in the performer (height, weight, shape of chops) affect performance?

When we get to comparing different musical selections, we open up another big bag of worms.

I'm curious to see if there have been other studies into instrumental construction. I know that research has been done on Stradivarius instruments in hopes of discovering what makes those instruments "those instruments." Perhaps an ambitious tubist (possibly one trying to obtain a fancy degree) could replicate an effective study from another instrument with tubas and tubists.