TubeNet

When I played in the River City Band (I think 96-97) our principle tuba was the late Neal Tidwell, who also taught at Duquesne where I was at school. He played a CC Scherzer on the Eb parts. Holy hell he sounded amazing. I've never heard such a compelling tuba sound in my life. I heard he eventually moved to a more common model, maybe a MW of some sort, and that he sounded even better. People who've played that scherzer say its the most out of tune thing ever. But you wouldn't have known it when you heard Neal play it.

The River City band, from my recollection, uses french horns rather than alto horns and an Eb trumpet rather than Eb cornet. The Eb player just said the trumpet was much easier to play in tune. I never once thought it didn't blend with the cornets, but that might have been because of the player more than the horn. I wonder if the instruments have changed with James Gorley at the helm.

Still french horns and trumpet

Tubas are...from top of my head, Eb compensators (980/982 combo) and Fafners
A proper BBb tuba!!

I have heard brass bands with Cc and F tubas and frankly it is not the same as BBb/Eb, they just dont fit the overtones series of the band. Trust me it makes a difference and sounds rather thin. I like the analogy of taking a c trumpet into a big band......

As a Euphonium player (and not a Tuba player) I think it does make a difference - you are going for the right "style" and the right style calls for Eb and Bb compensating bass and contrabass saxhorns (which is why they are referred to as Basses and not Tubas)

That being said, play what you got and don't discriminate. Later on you can focus on getting the appropriate instruments if time and budget allow.

Hello
We have 3 Besson 993 BBb
1 Besson 981 EEb
and I play a Willson 3400 TA compensator from the 80s with a 15.5" Bell.

bloke wrote:I've always been on the perimeter of Eb tuba playing.

Only, in the last few years have I barely pierced the Eb tuba "mainstream" (as - at least - the one I'm using now is a widely-used/well-respected make).

Based on playing them at shows, playing customers' instruments, playing those which I bought for resale, and my limited experience, the compensating Eb tubas seem to offer (for now, and in general) the best intonation.

Of the non-comp's, the Willson (which supports Sir Isaac Newton's theory) is one of the better in-tune ones, though (to my tastes only) a bit bland. I find the FA-5 version to definitely be more lively (i.e. "not bland"), but also not quite as well in-tune. (Do others find this to be true?)

The brand of comp that I sell, JP, really impresses me...referring - in particular - to the upper-line 377 model, but this comment should be probably be viewed as (if not a blatant advertisement) biased.

The neo Eb and Bb are great horns and in my opinion having played them side by side with the JP much lighter and with an all around better response and playability. I see both every year at NABBA and the Neo line is the top shelf for compensated basses. The JP is heavy and lacks the nuances the Yamaha provides with color and timbre dimensions.

In the Lancaster British Brass Band we have two Ebs, my cohort plays a Besson 983. Last year I switched from my old Boosey Imperial with the 19 inch bell to a Miraphone Norwegian Star. I play the top part and I always felt my sound with the big 19" belled Imperial was too broad. I like the precision in the tone of the NS although there are a few funky notes. Also the ergonomics of the NS are much better on my neck and left arm, since I have some disc issues in my neck.

The BBb parts in our band are played by one guy on a CC either an Eastman, Czerveny Piggy, or Hirschbrunner, and one guy on BBb, a King 2341.

We are not a competing band, although we do use the traditional instrumentation with cornets, tenor horns, and baritones.

http://www.lancasterbbb.org/" target="_blank


ken k

Brass band has much bigger problems:
1. Finding competent percussionists. Usually they still need to be spoonfed every single thing. And even then, will routinely overplay and overpower the band, or set a high "noise floor" of unmuffled miscellaneous arrhythmic ringing that ruins all nuance.
2. Lameduck sound of tenor horn vs french horn, and to a lesser extent cornet vs trumpet.
3. monodynamics: in concert band, at least instruments come in and out and dynamics can be fairly automatic. But brass band is kitchen-sink most of the time. and the arrangements don't help, often saying "ff" forever...which might even be okay if the music had obvious peaks but it tends to be either stubbornly rigid or rambling in form, not flowing.
4. Goofy euro arrangements...better or worse, they just aren't in the language of American wind playing. weird foreign feel.
5. Composers...there's not really an answer to Reed, McBeth, Tichelli, Hazo ect.

TheGoyWonder wrote:Brass band has much bigger problems:
1. Finding competent percussionists. Usually they still need to be spoonfed every single thing. And even then, will routinely overplay and overpower the band, or set a high "noise floor" of unmuffled miscellaneous arrhythmic ringing that ruins all nuance.
2. Lameduck sound of tenor horn vs french horn, and to a lesser extent cornet vs trumpet.
3. monodynamics: in concert band, at least instruments come in and out and dynamics can be fairly automatic. But brass band is kitchen-sink most of the time. and the arrangements don't help, often saying "ff" forever...which might even be okay if the music had obvious peaks but it tends to be either stubbornly rigid or rambling in form, not flowing.
4. Goofy euro arrangements...better or worse, they just aren't in the language of American wind playing. weird foreign feel.
5. Composers...there's not really an answer to Reed, McBeth, Tichelli, Hazo ect.

Got it! Thanks for reminding us that you don't like British brass bands. Would you care to know which type of bands I don't like?

Hup

Scubatuba wrote:I have heard brass bands with Cc and F tubas and frankly it is not the same as BBb/Eb, they just dont fit the overtones series of the band. Trust me it makes a difference and sounds rather thin. I like the analogy of taking a c trumpet into a big band......

Obviously it does make a difference using say, rotary F's & C's in place of comp Eb&Bb's, but to say it "sounds rather thin" is a sweeping generalisation. I also don't buy into the overtones comment - assuming pieces modulate widely, the key of horn matters not.
Would a section of four of the finest orchestral tubist sound "thin" playing F & C? Of course they wouldn't.
So it's the players more than the gear...
MP

Peach wrote:

Scubatuba wrote:I have heard brass bands with Cc and F tubas and frankly it is not the same as BBb/Eb, they just dont fit the overtones series of the band. Trust me it makes a difference and sounds rather thin. I like the analogy of taking a c trumpet into a big band......

Obviously it does make a difference using say, rotary F's & C's in place of comp Eb&Bb's, but to say it "sounds rather thin" is a sweeping generalisation. I also don't buy into the overtones comment - assuming pieces modulate widely, the key of horn matters not.
Would a section of four of the finest orchestral tubist sound "thin" playing F & C? Of course they wouldn't.
So it's the players more than the gear...
MP

I never bought into the whole overtone thing either. A CC tuba with the first valve down is a BBb tuba. Either the note is in tune or it isn't. I really don't believe it matters what kind of horn is playing it. But then again, I just may not have a good enough ear to hear the difference. I am an old fart after all.

Crazy mix of horns in our band, but when we all play Bessons, the sound seems to resonate better. Bessons are my choice, especially on the Eb parts, but I also like the Yamaha Neos. I’ve heard sections sounds good on every type of combination, so I’d have to say the traditional 3+1 sections look good, but it really comes down to the players more than the equipment. I will say I like the bottom produced by larger bore Bbs than the little 4/4 horns. Just my 2 cents!

Just a quick derail: i’ve just been watching “Brassed Off” (great movie by the way) and the way the actors hold the tubas by the leadpipes while they carry them to rehearsals had me shouting at the screen.

Might it matter more that all the section's instruments are pointing the same direction?

This came to mind as I watched this year's AFTEE performance at the Army workshop. I'm guessing that the upper euph parts were towards my right (audience right, stage left, that is) which meant that they were pointing to the back of the stage. Their perceived dynamics, then, were half as loud as what was coming out of the euphs who were pointing towards the audience.

This might not apply to the back row of a brass band, though, since nobody is pointed towards the audience. Hmm.

TheGoyWonder wrote:Brass band has much bigger problems:
1. Finding competent percussionists. Usually they still need to be spoonfed every single thing. And even then, will routinely overplay and overpower the band, or set a high "noise floor" of unmuffled miscellaneous arrhythmic ringing that ruins all nuance.
2. Lameduck sound of tenor horn vs french horn, and to a lesser extent cornet vs trumpet.
3. monodynamics: in concert band, at least instruments come in and out and dynamics can be fairly automatic. But brass band is kitchen-sink most of the time. and the arrangements don't help, often saying "ff" forever...which might even be okay if the music had obvious peaks but it tends to be either stubbornly rigid or rambling in form, not flowing.
4. Goofy euro arrangements...better or worse, they just aren't in the language of American wind playing. weird foreign feel.
5. Composers...there's not really an answer to Reed, McBeth, Tichelli, Hazo ect.

I feel that your perspective on banding is with a single perspective or misguided. I could say the same for some of the community orchestras I have played in but just like orchestras, brass bands vary by level of musicality and the execution of playing by the players. There are great arrangements and composers in every genre. Great brass bands are on par with any professional music organization around the world. It sounds like your experience was not positive.

Leland wrote:Might it matter more that all the section's instruments are pointing the same direction?

This came to mind as I watched this year's AFTEE performance at the Army workshop. I'm guessing that the upper euph parts were towards my right (audience right, stage left, that is) which meant that they were pointing to the back of the stage. Their perceived dynamics, then, were half as loud as what was coming out of the euphs who were pointing towards the audience.

This might not apply to the back row of a brass band, though, since nobody is pointed towards the audience. Hmm.

I noticed the same thing.

Candidly,
I received quite a few p.m.'s (a couple of years ago) when there was a discussion of attempting to form a pro-level brass band vs. a pro-level brass choir, with (at least, in the USA) the "brass choir" choice being the overwhelming recommendation. Professional players (who carve out time to do the same thing for fun as they normally do for remuneration) really aren't "into" competing, and certainly not into hitting to road to do so.[/quote]

The Lancaster Brass Band is a unique group. WE do a series of 3 - 4 concerts in the spring and then another series in the late summer. WE have three or four rehearsals for each series. They pay us for travel but not really for playing.
The group is made up of mostly musicians with degrees, not all however; Many are school music teachers, college teachers or retired teachers. Membership is from about a 80-100 mile radius of Lancaster. So some people travel pretty far to play. I drive 45 miles. Some of us car pool. So the musicianship is pretty high. (I can honestly say it is one of the best groups I play in) But due to that type of schedule, we are not necessarily the most authentic when it comes to the traditional British Brass Band sound. But we do have alot of fun. Where else can you get to play with 27 other fine brass players.

bloke wrote:yep...
British brass bands should rethink seating (imo), and place the (again: 3+1 compensating BBb and Eb tubas) stage right rather than "along the back".

In the typical BBB seating, NO instrument points to the front except sometimes the Flugelhorn.

Honestly, I've long wondered what it would be like to put tenors/flugel, euph/bar, basses on stage right (3 rows) to let them point a bit toward the front, all cornets on stage left, trombones/percussion in the center (trombones facing the back wall optional).
Of course, left-pointing tubas would need to be on stage left behind the cornets . . .

ken k wrote:Candidly,
I received quite a few p.m.'s (a couple of years ago) when there was a discussion of attempting to form a pro-level brass band vs. a pro-level brass choir, with (at least, in the USA) the "brass choir" choice being the overwhelming recommendation. Professional players (who carve out time to do the same thing for fun as they normally do for remuneration) really aren't "into" competing, and certainly not into hitting to road to do so.

Although there is a tradition of competition among British brass bands, there is no reason that any brass band needs to compete. I play in two bands, neither of which competes, not do we have any desire (as far as I am aware) to do so in the future.

Hup

I know this just may be sacrilegious to many brass band folks, but my tuba section is:

BBb's: PT6, PT6P, Mirafone Bruckner
Eb's: Gronitz PF125, OLD Meinl Weston Model 32

Sounds pretty good to me!