TubeNet

I know, Why?, right? Why play low notes on a euphonium when a tuba does it so much better? Let's just assume for the time being that there is a satisfactory answer for that, and I'm doing it anyway.

I got a Wessex Festivo primarily because of the ergonomics (4 front valves keep my shoulders low), and sometimes think that it could sit in for a bass trombone. It really can't, at least not with me playing it. I have variable results in the "compensating" or trigger ranges (F under the staff to B under the staff). It gets stuffy. I guess that's what compensating euphs are best known for. Low E 123 is way better than low E 14. Sometimes I can get the other notes to speak, and sometimes not. It's kind of funny that I can get an octave down (Pedal E, Eb, D) and they don't feel stuffy.

The low notes on the Festivo improve with the size of the mouthpiece, but I've been told by a real euphonium player that "the euphonium is a lyrical instrument, and shouldn't play with such a big mouthpiece" (~Bach 1 1/4G). Another real euphonium player suggested that I just get used to it. Which I guess is the only real option, but it requires practice, and I'm just a part time valve pusher at best.

Anyway, I've been curious about how the Festivo compares to a King 1280, which while not compensating, can be tuned to get the entire chromatic range in tune. And because it's not compensating, I'm guessing that its trigger range maybe sounds/feels better than a comper's stuffy trigger range.

I was reading Tubenet today and noticed member @nworbekim has both the Festivo and the 1280 in his stable. Maybe there's a way to convince him to compare the two in the 4th valve range. And please comment on what mouthpiece gives the best low note results.

tia

I don't know about the festival, but the older Wessex dolce has a nice low range. Very fine until Eb and D, 1+2 and 1+3, then it gets more stuffy. As usual, the more valves, the worse it goes. The solution is not to use very large mouthpieces, as the tend to wrap the alignment of partials badly, but to use the size which still keeps partials well aligned. Then you get a better response down there. On my dolce a schilke symphonic D 5.2 works fine, and a Yamaha 58 small bass trombone mouthpiece ( smaller as Bach 1.5) is on the edge to getting too large. Make sure you tune your valves to avoid too much tone bending, that helps too. And s lot of relaxing practice down there ..

Mark Finley wrote: by the way, low E is 2-4, not 1-4. That might have been a typo

Yeah, busted. I know that E is 24, I just wrote 14.

I also know the King is a 2280, but I keep calling it a 1280.

So the Festivo is a low range dog? Due to a pinched nerve in my shoulder, I have a better time keeping my arms low. Playing the Festivo is like cradling a baby. Playing a typical 3+1 or 4 on top is more like someone standing on my back and wrenching both arms into an unnatural position.

The Festivo is just a pinch off of the low notes. Sometimes I get them to work nearly acceptably, and sometimes I can't. Mine isn't an early Festivo. I got it about a year ago, I guess.

macromme wrote:The solution is not to use very large mouthpieces, as the tend to wrap the alignment of partials badly, but to use the size which still keeps partials well aligned. Then you get a better response down there. On my dolce a schilke symphonic D 5.2 works fine, and a Yamaha 58 small bass trombone mouthpiece ( smaller as Bach 1.5) is on the edge to getting too large. Make sure you tune your valves to avoid too much tone bending, that helps too. And s lot of relaxing practice down there ..

I'll try something smaller. I've been using a Ferguson V, which is about 1.5ish and a Bach 1.25. The big mouthpieces don't seem to effect the high range like they do on trombone. Interesting.

Thanks for the answer.

nworbekim wrote:my silver festivo is 2 years old and i'm using a 5G mouthpiece. the bottom register is amazing... when i'm "practiced up" the 2nd Bb below bass clef is easy and i can actually go lower but it's just a fart sound by then.

i have a 2280 that i really like, but it doesn't have the low range... however, how many times do i play those notes?

Maybe that's it, I need to have mine silver plated.

Hmmm. It comes with a mouthpiece about 5g size.

What about the range from F under the staff down to B? All those 4th valve notes? Pedal Bb down is great, I agree, but the compensated notes are tough to make sound good (for me on my setup).

I am not an experienced euphonium player but manage somehow to sound pretty good when a rare gig comes along. I have owned an old Conn and a nice Cerveny C/Bb. Low range perked up very nicely when I used either a Bach 3G or a Schilke 57. Unexpectedly, these m/p's worked OK in the mid and high range as well.

Ace

When I was in the Navy, I was issued a Willson. Of course I was too young and stupid to have any idea what it was. I wish I could happen across a find like that, but I'm just a casual valve player, so I probably won't.

We were talking about smaller mouthpieces and Doug Elliott. I tried my large bore bone mouthpiece (DE 104G8) and it played better than the bigger ones. It's a far cry from a contrabass bone mouthpiece

In the course of playing tonight, the low notes worked great at the top of practice time, and not very well at the end. That says the problem is me, not the horn or the mouthpiece.

Thanks all for your help.

Does an Eb tuba work better in that range than a euph? Just wondering. I don't actually own one, but it is on the list of horns I would like to get one of these days.

mikebmiller wrote:Does an Eb tuba work better in that range than a euph? Just wondering. I don't actually own one, but it is on the list of horns I would like to get one of these days.

Yeah, I'm sure it does. But it doesn't have fingerings that I can just pick up and play. And I don't have one. Part of my issue here is weight and ergonomics. I have to play bass bone parts, but even the lightest bass bone I can find really hurts my pinched nerve. I'm just trying options.

bone-a-phone wrote:I have to play bass bone parts, but even the lightest bass bone I can find really hurts my pinched nerve.

Out of curiosity, does that include single valve instruments? I know even those can be pretty heavy if the weight runs into some physical issue like this, but the double valved basses probably ought to be in jail for the physical damage they do. Even otherwise nice ones like your Kanstul 1662.

My old Reynolds weighs 4 1/2 lbs, and has an E stop for the slide, which is where I leave it. That would take some getting used to for a real trombone player, and the B is still kind of dangling on the stockings, but they're good instruments.

For even less weight, if you might have $7K to blow on it, Dillons' may have a 2V Butler carbon fiber bass you could try out.

Donn wrote: Out of curiosity, does that include single valve instruments? I know even those can be pretty heavy if the weight runs into some physical issue like this, but the double valved basses probably ought to be in jail for the physical damage they do. Even otherwise nice ones like your Kanstul 1662. My old Reynolds weighs 4 1/2 lbs, and has an E stop for the slide, which is where I leave it. That would take some getting used to for a real trombone player, and the B is still kind of dangling on the stockings, but they're good instruments. For even less weight, if you might have $7K to blow on it, Dillons' may have a 2V Butler carbon fiber bass you could try out.

Well, my 1662 is fairly light, but I still use an ergobone with it, and I only play it when I have to . Now that all ensembles are pretty much dead for a while, I don't have to play it. Interestingly, I improve on bass when I don't play it. In quarantine I've just been playing a straight 525 bore.

I do have a single valve bass, but if I need a bass, I only pull out the double. (if you want a decent 72h, I know where you can get one...) To be honest, even a straight tenor causes my arm to give out in about the length of a Rochut etude.

Yes, I did have a slobber over that Butler double. I figure I can get used to whatever odd feedback there is for a 4 pound double bass. Still saving up the $7k, though...

When I was in the army, some people tried to explain the army's fraternization policy as follows: you can date two ranks up or one rank down. Okay, thinking about that for more than a fraction of a second should reveal the lack of logic in that statement.

So, with that as a preface, the general tuba consensus is that the range of a contrabass and a bass are essentially the same, yes? Even though their fundamentals are a 4th or 5th apart. Okay, so the euphonium is a 5th above the Eb tuba, and a 4th above the F tuba. Same interval range as the bass and contrabass, right? So does it not follow that the euphonium "should have" the same range as the bass? Or does the bass still have the same range as the contrabass?

I love playing my euphonium in its lowest range. I consider myself a tuba player who happens to use a 1/4 tuba. Does it sound like a 6/4? Of course not; it doesn't even sound like a 3/4. But does it sound good in its own right? I think so.

If the physics of the horn allows us to play well below the bass staff, I feel it's worth developing. If it is stuffy or if there are intonation problems, we work on those things, right?

acemorgan wrote:the general tuba consensus is that the range of a contrabass and a bass are essentially the same, yes?

No.

Does it sound like a 6/4? Of course not

Does it sound like a BBb, is the question. If it doesn't (and it doesn't), then the ranges are not essentially the same. The essential range of a brass instrument isn't reducible to a two note, high / low bracket. If you move from a contrabass to a bass tuba and can't tell you're playing a higher instrument, something's wrong.

I've seen someone play bass on a euphonium, and he was getting away with it, and that's what counts, so I think we end up in the same place, my objection is only with the route you were trying to take to get there.

Donn wrote:

bone-a-phone wrote:I have to play bass bone parts, but even the lightest bass bone I can find really hurts my pinched nerve.

Out of curiosity, does that include single valve instruments? I know even those can be pretty heavy if the weight runs into some physical issue like this, but the double valved basses probably ought to be in jail for the physical damage they do. Even otherwise nice ones like your Kanstul 1662.

My old Reynolds weighs 4 1/2 lbs, and has an E stop for the slide, which is where I leave it. That would take some getting used to for a real trombone player, and the B is still kind of dangling on the stockings, but they're good instruments.

For even less weight, if you might have $7K to blow on it, Dillons' may have a 2V Butler carbon fiber bass you could try out.

Trombones have been an ergonomical nightmare for the last 500 years. The lighter ones are manageable with some training, and some models are less uncomfortable than others. I play my Courtois 151R (small bore tenor with F valve from 1983) with an Neotech grip when playing longer. For bass bone I would recommend a look on http://www.ergobrass.com" target="_blank" target="_blank
I use their system for the french C tuba and the bass saxhorn and I like it very much!

Snake Charmer wrote: Trombones have been an ergonomical nightmare for the last 500 years. The lighter ones are manageable with some training, and some models are less uncomfortable than others. I play my Courtois 151R (small bore tenor with F valve from 1983) with an Neotech grip when playing longer. For bass bone I would recommend a look on http://www.ergobrass.com" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank
I use their system for the french C tuba and the bass saxhorn and I like it very much!

I have the ergobone chest harness, seat post, and floor post. I also have the get-a-grip, and the neotech grip.

The ergobone is not bad, but I've custom designed and 3d printed some different mounting hardware for it. The floor post is what I use most of the time. And I use it in conjunction with the get-a-grip, which required some adjustment, but works well.

I think the key to bass trombone comfort is more balance that weight. I had a Getzen 1052 that was extremely well balanced and easy to play for long periods. And I once had a Yamaha that I could barely hold for 15 minutes, even though it wasn't that much heavier than the Getzen.

bloke wrote: The LOW range is PARTICULARLY strong, and I use this instrument to cover bass trombone parts (which also might soar up to a G, A, or even a B-flat) - mostly at church gigs. I use an Elliott contrabass trombone mouthpiece with it - when covering bass trombone parts. The Elliott does NOTHING to screw up the intonation, tilts the timbre much more towards "tuba" (ie. BASS), and jacks up the already-great low range to the "bionic" level...yes, even "low C".

It turned out that I have a Denis Wick 4 sitting around the house, small shank tuba/large shank trombone. Fits the Festivo perfectly. Probably in the size range of your DE CB tbone piece. Just like you said, it changes the timber to a more tubby tuba sound, and the stuffiness in the trigger range goes away. I can get the Bb above middle C and the pedal C an octave and a half below the staff. That more than covers the written bass trombone range in the stuff I encounter. Our quartet has some Elkjer stuff with a lot of pedal F and Eb (octave below the staff).

I'll have to go through the combination with a tuner, but the initial octaves and scales sound no worse than with a normal mouthpiece. Thanks for the idea of using a small tuba mouthpiece. That might work out.

Honestly, my euphonium low range might be better than my Bass Trombone. Even with a Hammond 11ML or Wick 4AL I have no problem getting down to pedal F with no shifting. Maybe it's the extra resistance?

tbonesullivan wrote:Honestly, my euphonium low range might be better than my Bass Trombone. Even with a Hammond 11ML or Wick 4AL I have no problem getting down to pedal F with no shifting. Maybe it's the extra resistance?

Yeah, my euph low range is definitely better than my bass bone low range. I can barely get a pedal F on bone, but I can get to a pedal D on euph. I found that playing the low range on my euph helps me play lower on bass bone. Well, any bone, really. My range is the same on whatever bone I play. Some instruments sound better in different ranges though.

Mark Finley wrote:Even with a 51d sized mouthpiece, my low range on Euphonium is only limited by the Tubing. B0 is easy, but maybe that's because my main instrument is tuba? I thought it was like that for everyone

I used to play semi pro, and I had a great range. I took 10 years off and when I came back, a lot of stuff didn't survive the vacation. Low range is one of them. I'm really a tenor player, and a high tenor player at that. I'm kind of forced into the bass parts by circumstances. I don't put as much practice time into the low notes as I do to maintaining the high notes. It's an odd situation, but I'm trying to get as much back for free as I can. With a day job that is unaffected by the quarantine, I don't have a bunch of extra practice time.

acemorgan wrote:So, with that as a preface, the general tuba consensus is that the range of a contrabass and a bass are essentially the same, yes? Even though their fundamentals are a 4th or 5th apart. Okay, so the euphonium is a 5th above the Eb tuba, and a 4th above the F tuba. Same interval range as the bass and contrabass, right? So does it not follow that the euphonium "should have" the same range as the bass? Or does the bass still have the same range as the contrabass?

I love playing my euphonium in its lowest range. I consider myself a tuba player who happens to use a 1/4 tuba. Does it sound like a 6/4? Of course not; it doesn't even sound like a 3/4. But does it sound good in its own right? I think so.

If the physics of the horn allows us to play well below the bass staff, I feel it's worth developing. If it is stuffy or if there are intonation problems, we work on those things, right?

My preferred F tuba mouthpieces are far more similar to my Bb tuba mouthpieces than they are different. But both are far different from euphonium mouthpieces.

My Yamaha 621 F tuba sits between a 4/4 contrabass and a euphonium, but my B&S is much closer in volume to a small contrabass than to a big euphonium. Yet both the Yamaha and the B&S sound like tubas, not euphoniums, until a try to push the volume (the B&S goes tuba-like, and the Yamaha goes euphonium-like when really pushed).

I heard a professional euphonium player warming up in the low register, and before I walked through the door and saw that it was a euphonium, I thought it was a tuba. And then I recalled a comment by William Revelli, or Philip Farkas (who were giving a joint presentation at a TMEA conference back in the deeps of time), which was listing to a trombone player and then rounding the corner and discovering it was a French horn player. Yes, it was loud, or low, or whatever, but the player had lost the characteristic sound of the instrument. A euphonium should sound like a euphonium even when played low, and a tuba should sound like a tuba even when played high.

For me, that distinction seems to follow the mouthpiece. I own a trombone mouthpiece with a tuba shank, and it makes a tuba sound like a bad baritone horn. And I own a Wick 1 with a bass trombone shank (old Besson shank) and it sounds like a tuba when put into a euphonium that can take the shank. There are those who can get a characteristic euphonium sound from a mouthpiece with a tuba-sized cup, but I'm not one of them.

So, even though I might be able to play as high on a Bb tuba as on an F tuba, it loses the F-tuba singing quality in the upper register. And even though I might be able to play an F tuba as high as a euphonium, it's really difficult to maintain the purity of tone one gets with the euph-sized mouthpiece.

All that said, I can think of one case where being able to play strongly in the lower register is more than just a parlor trick: Bydlo. Sure, sensible tuba players will want to give this to a trombone player for playing on a euphonium. And tuba players don't want to use a euphonium because of the part of that movement that isn't melody, which sounds much stronger on a tuba. But if it was on my stand without the option, I'd rather optimize for the melody and compromise the low stuff, than compromise the melody using an F tuba. (I've heard enough top pros struggle with those high G-sharps, especially the piano entrance near the end, to suggest that an F tuba is harder than it seems on that note.)

Rick "who hasn't had his euphonium out of the case in a long time--maybe soon" Denney