TubeNet

For those of you who have played both the Mack Brass Thunderbird and Eastman 836, what are the differences between the two? I’m trying to decide if I would like to get one but have heard great things about both, but neither compared to each other directly. Also would a 6/4 be too big for college? I’ve seen people go through college with them and my college has a 4/4 CC I could use if I needed but I have to own my own horn after the first year no matter what.

pakins51 wrote:For those of you who have played both the Mack Brass Thunderbird and Eastman 836, what are the differences between the two? I’m trying to decide if I would like to get one but have heard great things about both, but neither compared to each other directly. Also would a 6/4 be too big for college? I’ve seen people go through college with them and my college has a 4/4 CC I could use if I needed but I have to own my own horn after the first year no matter what.

There is a lot of info on the 6/4 facebook page but here is a thread where I did do a side by side with the ZO and Eastman as I did own both at the same time.


https://m.facebook.com/groups/313866389 ... oser=false" target="_blank

Hope this helps as I think the Zo is the best on the market today, this is why we decided to carry them.

Good luck and hope this helps a little.

I know there were a lot of people at the DC conference that had a chance to play the new ZO and in person told me how amazing, not just the 6/4 was but how amazing they all were to include the new 5 and 6v symphony F tubas were.

An illusion, or is the ZO really about 10% bigger than the Eastman?

bort wrote:An illusion, or is the ZO really about 10% bigger than the Eastman?

It's a total illusion as both are almost the same exact size. The Zo I think is about a half inch taller but the only other difference is the bore size. The Eastman is a .750 for bttf he first 4 valves and if memory serves me correctly the 5th was a .827 or so whereas the Zo bore is a .757 for the first 3 valves and the 4th is a .797 with the 5th being a nice .867. The bore allows this horn to be very responsive feeling like a 4/4 allowing you to play just about anything you desire. Here are a few little things I posted on FB just a few days after getting this horn.

Snedecor Low Etude

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... oser=false" target="_blank


C. Kopprasch Etude

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... composer=0" target="_blank

Again, these were just after putting in a little time in on the horn and not being in any kind of good shape to really post quality recordings. So be kind with the criticisms. Lol

bort wrote:An illusion, or is the ZO really about 10% bigger than the Eastman?

From another recent thread about the Eastman....

"It fits fine in my Cronkhite pt6p bag but with about 3” of slack at bottom bow area of bag"

With this I'm confused. Although I realize these designations are somewhat arbitrary, if the PT6P is considered a 5/4, is it the bore or the bugle taper of the Eastman that makes it a 6/4?

bloke wrote:6/4 York-a-like C tubas are NOT tall tubas, just fwiw.

Definitely. My F is taller than my 6/4 CC by a few inches.

Height acknowledged, but the question remains. My W900 (PT6P size) fits extremely tightly width wise in my custom Cronkhite. I thus deduce the Eastman is not wider and as we know shorter. Then, what makes it a 6/4 as opposed to 5/4?

Size stuff all makes sense to me. Along the lines of the PT6 question, I once owned a PT7, which is basically the same as the 6 but with a wider bottom bow and bigger bell. That was a 6/4 tuba, but not a York style, so it was more like 39 or 40 inches tall. Like a bigger PT6.

Anyway, I was just curious if the Eastman and ZO were the same size or not, and that's been covered here. Shiny silver plating can make thing look different than reality sometimes!

pakins51 wrote:Also would a 6/4 be too big for college?

Back to the OPs question, I suppose the answer is no... as long as the player has (or can quickly develop) the skills to drive it. My take away from the above is that the bugle volume is a major component driving the designation, that again being somewhat arbitrary. Thanks for the clarifications

I am no expert, but having a 6/4 tuba in itself is not the goal, but being able to control air/buzz/sound and hear the pitch is what you will hopefully learn at college. A smaller tuba will be, generally speaking, easier to do those things on, so if you can master a 6/4 CC then your technique should be pretty good and perhaps better than what it would have been if you only learnt on a 4/4CC. The combination of an F tuba, to learn expression and musicality in addition to a 6/4 CC to learn control is the combination that should help you develop your skill and technique. I am no pro, but a couple that I do know learnt on 6/4 CC at college and have wonderful techniques, but are now choosing to use 4/4 CC for a lot of gigs as the 6/4CC is too big a sound. But I don't think they would be as good as they are without having pushed themselves to master a 6/4CC.

Patrase wrote:I am no expert, but having a 6/4 tuba in itself is not the goal, but being able to control air/buzz/sound and hear the pitch is what you will hopefully learn at college. A smaller tuba will be, generally speaking, easier to do those things on, so if you can master a 6/4 CC then your technique should be pretty good and perhaps better than what it would have been if you only learnt on a 4/4CC. The combination of an F tuba, to learn expression and musicality in addition to a 6/4 CC to learn control is the combination that should help you develop your skill and technique. I am no pro, but a couple that I do know learnt on 6/4 CC at college and have wonderful techniques, but are now choosing to use 4/4 CC for a lot of gigs as the 6/4CC is too big a sound. But I don't think they would be as good as they are without having pushed themselves to master a 6/4CC.

I am in agreement with this. For a long time I stayed away from the 6/4 tubasafter owning several over the years. The biggest challenge with them for me anyway, has been a consistent low register. Most over the years played fine and some were very nimble making. There was a time in my career where the only horn I owned was a 2165 and I had to use it for everything from large band and orchestral settings to quintet. As I was so used to playing it I found no issues or had any complaints about it from those around me. Today the 6/4 tubas like the ZO and the Nirschl, I am talking about the Nirschl 6/4 made after 2018 when they went with a larger valve section, respond better are more in tune and mostly have a much better low register than the 6/4 tubas of the past.

I still dont recommend them as a first tuba nor would I recommend them to a beginner but if you are an advanced player and have or have access to a 4/4 CC then I currently dont have a problem with recommending them out to the average player at all. There will be a skillset that you will develop.

Last week I had a chance to play mine with a large Pro orchestra for the first time and all I can say is holy cow as this was the easiest time I have had supporting the bottom of a large ensemble. The sound and response were like that of a much smaller tuba making the technical passages a breeze.

Choices of tubas we have today are vastly different than those we had even 10bor 15 years ago, certainly more than when I was a young college student 30 years ago. If I were in college today and the money was there for only 1 tuba to start with, yes, I would go for the 6/4, not just any as most dont meet my demands, but the right one would be a no brainer. As time goes on and progress and ability improve then get a F tuba. Both of these horns will cover pretty much all the bases of 99.9% of all tuba players.

The ZO Thunderbird is a little late in the 6/4 market but as time goes you will see more switching from what they used to consider "the best they ever played" to the ZO grouping of tubas we are now offering and what we have coming out.

I have told enough people about our new line of ZO tubas but the Piston F, if all goes as planned, will blow your mind. More on that later. But here is a teaser, a piston f that sounds like a German rotary F and has the low register of a Yamaha F and a unreal upper register.

Worth wrote:

pakins51 wrote:Also would a 6/4 be too big for college?

Back to the OPs question, I suppose the answer is no... as long as the player has (or can quickly develop) the skills to drive it. My take away from the above is that the bugle volume is a major component driving the designation, that again being somewhat arbitrary. Thanks for the clarifications

The OP has a 4/4 CC to use for the first year and then will have to get his own horn. Play it this year and see how it works. Borrow a 5/4 or 6/4 to play for a few hours and see how they feel different from the 4/4. A good playing 4/4 might be fine and a lot easier to haul around.