TubeNet

Hello everyone! This is a bit of a ramble, but bear with me. I was talking to my flute-tooting girlfriend the other day about hard cases and how most cases only fit certain makes/models of tubas. This is because tubas vary so much in shape and size, even when only looking at one particular key. Looking at instruments which were developed earlier (violins, flutes, clarinets, bassoons), most of them seem to be a one-size-fits-all scenario as far as cases go.

What I'm wondering is if you think tubas will become more uniform over the years in terms of shape and size. Will tubas from different manufacturers gradually start to look more similar as better designs are used? To sum it up, do you all think the tuba community will eventually refine the design through a natural selection of sorts?

Before anyone says this, I know there will always be custom horns and fads amongst every instrument, but I'm wondering about the majority of horns.

I don't think the question really comes down to the amount of time an instrument has existed, but rather how it is shaped...

How many variations can really be made to a flute? That instrument only has so much length to it and it has so many keys that have to be present and reachable. Same with a clarinet and other woodwinds. Trumpets all look very similar for the same reasons. You can see a little more variation in trombones with triggers as they will have different wraps for these slides. French horns will also have some variances in how they are wrapped, but it still fits a certain ergonomic shape to be easy for a player to pick up and use.

I don't feel that tubas have that great of a variance in their overall shape and these design differences are so obvious because of the size of the instruments. And, there are great variances in the type of horn. So, I would argue that there is a general shape that most, if not all, rotary F tubas have very similar designs, as do rotary C and Bb tubas. I see very similar constructions for the other styles of tubas, as well.

So, in short, I don't see any reason to consider the variances in tuba silhouettes to be any more than that of other instruments, given their size.

German F tubas used to be pretty uniform, but then they were made from parts provided from a pretty narrow geographical area, were bell makers, bow makers, and pipe makers needed to make compatible products. Same has to some degree been in the US.

Tuba design is about making what is wanted from what is available.

Klaus

tylerferris1213 wrote:Looking at instruments which were developed earlier (violins, flutes, clarinets, bassoons), most of them seem to be a one-size-fits-all scenario as far as cases go.

Partly because they're little. If you were to take string bass as an example, instead of violin - they're somewhat standardized in size, 3/4 basses are sort of in the same ballpark, but little differences can be big enough to make a difference when the case isn't the right size. Baritone saxophone bells differ enough in size that a standard case may not fit, aside from the Bb/A variants. One bass trombone won't necessarily fit in another's case.

But aside from the size variations ... I guess it would be interesting to speculate on whether the English are ever going to give up on their top valve designs, for example. Or if the rotary valve enthusiasts will ever give up.

Cornets seem to have far more meaningful variations in shape than trumpets. Not that it really matters in a tuba forum . . .

tylerferris1213 wrote: To sum it up, do you all think the tuba community will eventually refine the design through a natural selection of sorts?

Well if this is ever going to happen we're headed in the wrong direction at the moment. There are at this time far more choices in tubas than there have ever been, with a new models appearing all the time. People love choice.

Donn wrote: Or if the rotary valve enthusiasts will ever give up.

When Hell freezes over... I'll still be playing with rotary valves

Donn wrote:

tylerferris1213 wrote:I guess it would be interesting to speculate on whether the English are ever going to give up on their top valve designs...

...and stop dipping them in silver.

String instruments have strings strung from one end to the other, very simple in design. Any woodwind instrument is essentially a tube with holes and keys, very space efficient. A tuba is the longest of brass instruments consisting of at a minimum 4 pneumatic circuits of tubing separated by valves. Brass instruments are the least space efficient and there are literally an infinite number of ways to wrap all those pneumatic circuits of tubing together. And tubas being the longest will be the most varied.

Tubas are like, in the old country of Bohemia, your mother's Kolace, which you would defend until the death as the absolute best. It doesn't matter if your neighbor Bohuslav 's mother actually makes them better. You would rather eat dirt that betray your matriarch.

Being that the tuba is the late comer to the orchestral table, I think that the answer lies partly in the demands placed upon the tuba player by composers; between being responsible for covering serpent/ophicleide/cimbasso parts (if one does not happen to own these instruments), dealing with big orchestrations (Tchaikovsky/Strauss/Mahler), light orchestrations (the other Strauss/some French repertoire/brass quintet/Dixieland), it's hard to imagine a one-size-fits-all (literally!) instrument.

All the brasses have gotten BIGGER over the years, but the basic role of the other brass instruments have not changed all that much since the invention of the valve.

It's interesting that you mention the major works that require a tubist to play something other than tuba. The past few years have seen something of a revival of the serpent, cimbasso, and ophicleide. Yes, there are tubas that can be built to mimic these instruments, but I am talking about tubas that are built to be tubas.

To everyone else, I overlooked how the variance in instruments becomes more noticeable as the instrument itself becomes larger. Even with that taken into account, the Brits have already adopted a very standard Eb and Bb tuba. How long will it be before before the world naturally selects the "best" tuba in every key?

Several years ago, when I changed over from the trumpet world to the tuba world, I was introduced to sea of alternate fingerings, 4th 5th and 6th valves, and endless conversations about the intonation weaknesses of this or that model of tuba.

Any competent trumpet or tuba player will say the same thing: "All trumpets [or all tubas] are out of tune." But they don't mean the same thing when they say it. Tubas are WAY out of tune in comparison to trumpets.

I find it somewhat humorous when a tuba player tells me "this tuba has excellent intonation;" I know he's not lying . . . it's just tuba parlance for "it could be worse."

The first time I heard the expression "this tuba has a bad scale," or has a "good scale" was in reference to tubas. I didn't even know what that meant. I have since translated it to "at least it can play a Bb scale . . . on accidentals you are on your own."

I believe that the wide variety of tuba designs is a search for, in part (yes there are other reasons) a tuba that plays truly well in tune.

I think designers figured this out for trumpets sometime in the early 20th century. Trumpets haven't changed much since then, and I don't think they will get much better. Tubas are not there yet.

Hup