TubeNet

Hi-
Looking at the most popular new orchestral brass instruments and their families....Bb, C, Eb, F/G Trumpets, Double/Triple French Horns, Slide Bb Tenor and Eb Alto Trombones, and CC and F ContraBass & Bass Tubas....is the tuba family the only one that has their 'higher' orchestral voice-F vrs. CC -with for the most part a larger bore size? I see new 4/4, 5/4, & 'even' 6/4 piston & rotor F tubas coming out with bores 'starting' in the .770s, .780's and keep getting larger....some may say that tuba players use an F for brass quintet and need it for low range (low C) playing, but shouldn't our 'higher, lighter' Bass Tubas be smaller bore and make playing very high easier....and sound like a Bass Tuba and not a ContraBass tuba? Are manufacturers of tubas saying that the only way to have a low range is to have these big large bore F tubas--piston OR rotor? Doesn't the small Yamaha F tuba have a great low range and easy high range & have a bore size like .687/.689 bore? The sound everyone loves is the Alex F sound...but that is only a .728 bore & the low range is not like a Yamaha small F. Can't manufacturers make a well built F tuba in a 4/4 or 5/4 size with great low range --with a great low C, easy high range, a beautiful warm sound 'AND' superb intonation without having these bigger than CC bore sizes? Is this impossible to do, or just not a need a need/want for this today?
Just a question........
Mark

I think in part, Mark, it has to do with tooling.

Consider, for a moment if you will, B&S and Meinl Weston. A large majority of their piston tubas use the same .748-.787 bore valve cluster. If I recall correctly, this includes the MW Baer, new Ursus, 3450, 5450, 2250, 45SLP, Fafner 195P, 2182, PT20P, PT6P, PT606P, PT10P etc. Perhaps they have found through their research and development that that particular bore size is universal enough to use in so many different configurations, it didn't make financial sense to have all the tooling to make another set of piston valves with a .687 or .720 bore.

Also, when considering the other manufacturers, they may be looking at what competing firms are doing or through the various trials and retrials of consulting professionals have found that the smaller bore is not in demand. Miraphone still produces (according to their website) their 180 F tubas with their .709 bore. However, you don't see anyone making demands for that one vs. a Belcanto or the new Elektra.

As for why the big/bland F tuba being the trend, my theory is that it has something to do with the relative dearth of quality 3/4 CC tubas. Few players have both a small CC and an F tuba, so they choose a large F tuba to cover the bases of having an F tuba but can also have a big enough sound to provide enough bottom to a group, and to do so with minimal effort in the low range. That comes at a cost of having a true bass tuba sound.

So I'm suggesting that great F tubas already exist, but are commonly perceived as "too small" to get the job done. What we need is more good 3/4 CC tubas, and players who discern when to use a small CC vs. an F tuba. However, no one except for tuba players will care about this, and even then, it's only a percentage of tuba players who will really notice. Besides, most of the R&D is on the big tubas right now, anyway.

(I also realize that the Eb people will speak up now and say "told you so!" about the superiority of Eb's over F's. )

I think the "big valve" set is an economy of scale -- they only have to make one thing, and since they are only making that one thing, they can do so more efficiently and with higher precision and accuracy. Sounds like a very German approach to me.

Is it the best? Probably not. I'm sure it's probably the best for whichever Warren Deck or Alan Baer horn it was originally designed for, and it's probably very good for most everything else. There was one model though (I forget... PT-15P or PT-10P?) that was remarked as being a disaster of a horn -- slapping that same piston block on that horn just didn't work well at all.

Two words: herd mentality.

Sam Gnagey wrote:Two words: herd mentality.

As for owning great 3/4 CCs and and F, I have had both for a while - My 621 Yammy was accompanied by a Miraphone 184, and now a BMB 3/4. Each has it's place.

Economy, terrific marketing, and habituation (I think) have made both musicians and makers familiar with the large bore instruments in both CC and F. However, some have made a clear counterpoit that smaller (.689/.656) bore sizes can be efficacious and well suited to professional performance (Gnagey, Kanstul, et al.). While I own and play a "Big Valve" instrument, it certainly cannot be recommended for ergonomy... which is weird, as my large bore Kalison was MUCH easier to play from a valve stoke and ergonomic view.

Rotors have a clear advantage here... enter the Tuono, 4450, etc. But they're answering the ergonomy, rather than taking an original approach to the smaller bore ideally suited to the smaller instruments (would you play a .787 euphonium?). Until a maker looks more closely at the Alex F and adjusts things around the low C response (mirroring the Miraphone 180, etc.), we're stuck with carpel tunnel.

J.c.S.

What is the 4050?

bort wrote:What is the 4050?

Oops... I meant MW 4450

J.c.S.