Ladies and Gentlemen - The Bessophone!
Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 11:35 pm
OK, first of all, I think for brass band and 99%+ of concert band usage, the original 3-valve compensating tuba, as perfected in the New Standard series with the 17-inch BBb bell, is the best tuba for tone, intonation and support of the ensemble.
The drawbacks: heavy as a tank, and nothing usable below F below open BBb. Modern tuba playing seems to be tolerant of the occasional intonation variance in return for lighter weight and near-pedal tone (Eb below open BBb down to at least CC, if not BB nat) range.
Next, the Miraphone 186. THE workhorse. There are those still who hold the opinion, and are justified, that if it can't be done on a 186, then it just can't be done. I understand that point of view.
The drawbacks: some folks, including me, don't like the "point-and-shoot" tone of the older 16 1/2 inch "stovepipe" bell, nor the "vanilla" tone of the newer 17 3/4 inch bell, nor the "bark" that can happen in the low range. That is all in addition to the elephant in the room: the "flat fifth partials." The postive in all this is that Miraphones are so consistent that we all know that, and if we have to play a gig with a tuba sight unseen, if it is a 186, we can all deal with it and adapt accordingly.
My 186 started life as a @1971 detachable recording bell variant, resurrected from a college write-off, retrofitted with a modified St Pete bell that served for upright, as well as keeping the stock recording bell.
Now, those who have read my previous posts have read how I really liked the St Pete bell, with its wide throat and small flare, as being really dark and leaning towards Alex in tone. The problem over the years is that the tenon and collar damped some of the tone and response, and 1st ledger line Eb 1st valve never centered properly. It was so noticable that I thought for awhile that I may have had a worn valve. No, it was the tenon. Moreover, I actually finally was able to hear that the inherent burble of this configuration actually dulled overall articulation, and I could not lock with the bass drum to keep the band in time as well as in tune.
Second, I really like a souzy for outdoors. As good as the recording bell is, I just never completely got to where I liked it. By definition, it made the tuba top-front heavy, and I could never find the magic balance point. Moreover, since this bell used the stock tuning slide instead of the extended tuning slide, the "flat fifth partials" were more evident with the recording bell, and I finally got to where I did not care to deal with that, either.
One last diversion: when I had my Besson, I had purchased a non-comp hulk so I could have "crash parts" in case something untowards happened. I never needed them, so the hulk resided peacefully in the morgue of my local tech, the bell waiting for its time.
When I traded for my Reynolds 'glass souzy, I decided it was time to do some custom tuba work. I missed the tone of my Besson bell. But I was not going to purchase a 4-valve 3+1. I am left handed playing a right handed tuba, and if I tried to play a 3+1, the left hand would want to take over. I didn't have the $$ for a 993, and I don't like the Besson 19 inch bell, anyway. So I had to think of another solution.
Because the St. Pete bell was effectively shorter than the recording bell, Dan Schultz had already made me an extended tuning slide to make up for it. Funny thing: the longer tuning slide, adding cylindrical tubing at a critical point, almost got rid of the flat fifth partials, while not affecting anything else. That's right: 2nd line B nat 1+2 is good; 2nd space C is right on; middle line Db is lippable, and middle line D can be played either open, lippable, or 1+2, depending on the key signature and which tempering of that note fits better.
Time to do the deed. I went to my tech. I explained what I wanted. We measured and figured. We pulled the old hulk out of the morgue. We measured and figured again. The bell would fit. I told him to go for it. He did. He smoothed out a couple of wrinkles on the flare, trimmed it to fit, and oh, did it fit. The length required for the bell to fit both in length for the existing tuning slide and in diameter to fit the bell stack ferrule on the bottom bow of the 186 was exactly right. We put it together. Wait for it....
TONE - INTONATION - PERFECTION
Well, as close to perfect as a player can have without the compensating valve block. The burble is gone. An extra pound of weight from the tenon was gone. Eb 1st valve centered. Response was immediate. Tone was broad and centered at the same time. Lock with the bass drum was complete. And I got a bonus - check this out: the throat of the Besson bell is a tad smaller than the Miraphone stack, so I got the advantage of having a suspended lead pipe. Burbles are gone. The same positive effect on the fifth partials is still there, if not even better. I can actually play middle line D as I desire without automatically resorting to 1+2. With the St Pete bell, the lowest register could be compressed and play sharp, requiring slide pulling to get the pitch down. No more. Pedal open BBBb is achievable. It is all there. And like bloke opined about the leadpipe on his R-M, I have a small bore, more conical profile lead pipe than a modern 186. It does the same for me as bloke's does for him: better air management, better dynamic control, better tone and intonation.
The only drawback: all my old mouthpieces are now on the shelf. I had to get new mouthpieces. For a smooth, slightly dark, legato tone, bloke's Imperial with a spacer (I was lucky to find a 2-piece model) is the choice. For solo and upper range, a Taku Lite has precise, even intonation. For the "cash register" of community band, I was lucky to find a Griego 325XD that sounds large and round, with even intonation.
EDIT - I have since come to prefer the smoother Imperial, as more "tuba" in tone that "bass bone" in tone. And I don't think I will play that much solo literature going forward. So the Griego and the Taku are out, in favor of the Imperial with the spacer, and a Kelly 18 for spare/backup/inclement weather.
I am very thankful that I have been able over the years to be able to discern what aspects of tubas fit my playing, both through the privilege of playing many instruments and mouthpeices, and a critical analysis of my strengths and weaknesses as a tuba player, in order to assemble what is essentially a custom tuba to fit my playing, the ensembles I support, the repertoire I play, and the tone and intonation characteristics I prefer.
The drawbacks: heavy as a tank, and nothing usable below F below open BBb. Modern tuba playing seems to be tolerant of the occasional intonation variance in return for lighter weight and near-pedal tone (Eb below open BBb down to at least CC, if not BB nat) range.
Next, the Miraphone 186. THE workhorse. There are those still who hold the opinion, and are justified, that if it can't be done on a 186, then it just can't be done. I understand that point of view.
The drawbacks: some folks, including me, don't like the "point-and-shoot" tone of the older 16 1/2 inch "stovepipe" bell, nor the "vanilla" tone of the newer 17 3/4 inch bell, nor the "bark" that can happen in the low range. That is all in addition to the elephant in the room: the "flat fifth partials." The postive in all this is that Miraphones are so consistent that we all know that, and if we have to play a gig with a tuba sight unseen, if it is a 186, we can all deal with it and adapt accordingly.
My 186 started life as a @1971 detachable recording bell variant, resurrected from a college write-off, retrofitted with a modified St Pete bell that served for upright, as well as keeping the stock recording bell.
Now, those who have read my previous posts have read how I really liked the St Pete bell, with its wide throat and small flare, as being really dark and leaning towards Alex in tone. The problem over the years is that the tenon and collar damped some of the tone and response, and 1st ledger line Eb 1st valve never centered properly. It was so noticable that I thought for awhile that I may have had a worn valve. No, it was the tenon. Moreover, I actually finally was able to hear that the inherent burble of this configuration actually dulled overall articulation, and I could not lock with the bass drum to keep the band in time as well as in tune.
Second, I really like a souzy for outdoors. As good as the recording bell is, I just never completely got to where I liked it. By definition, it made the tuba top-front heavy, and I could never find the magic balance point. Moreover, since this bell used the stock tuning slide instead of the extended tuning slide, the "flat fifth partials" were more evident with the recording bell, and I finally got to where I did not care to deal with that, either.
One last diversion: when I had my Besson, I had purchased a non-comp hulk so I could have "crash parts" in case something untowards happened. I never needed them, so the hulk resided peacefully in the morgue of my local tech, the bell waiting for its time.
When I traded for my Reynolds 'glass souzy, I decided it was time to do some custom tuba work. I missed the tone of my Besson bell. But I was not going to purchase a 4-valve 3+1. I am left handed playing a right handed tuba, and if I tried to play a 3+1, the left hand would want to take over. I didn't have the $$ for a 993, and I don't like the Besson 19 inch bell, anyway. So I had to think of another solution.
Because the St. Pete bell was effectively shorter than the recording bell, Dan Schultz had already made me an extended tuning slide to make up for it. Funny thing: the longer tuning slide, adding cylindrical tubing at a critical point, almost got rid of the flat fifth partials, while not affecting anything else. That's right: 2nd line B nat 1+2 is good; 2nd space C is right on; middle line Db is lippable, and middle line D can be played either open, lippable, or 1+2, depending on the key signature and which tempering of that note fits better.
Time to do the deed. I went to my tech. I explained what I wanted. We measured and figured. We pulled the old hulk out of the morgue. We measured and figured again. The bell would fit. I told him to go for it. He did. He smoothed out a couple of wrinkles on the flare, trimmed it to fit, and oh, did it fit. The length required for the bell to fit both in length for the existing tuning slide and in diameter to fit the bell stack ferrule on the bottom bow of the 186 was exactly right. We put it together. Wait for it....
TONE - INTONATION - PERFECTION
Well, as close to perfect as a player can have without the compensating valve block. The burble is gone. An extra pound of weight from the tenon was gone. Eb 1st valve centered. Response was immediate. Tone was broad and centered at the same time. Lock with the bass drum was complete. And I got a bonus - check this out: the throat of the Besson bell is a tad smaller than the Miraphone stack, so I got the advantage of having a suspended lead pipe. Burbles are gone. The same positive effect on the fifth partials is still there, if not even better. I can actually play middle line D as I desire without automatically resorting to 1+2. With the St Pete bell, the lowest register could be compressed and play sharp, requiring slide pulling to get the pitch down. No more. Pedal open BBBb is achievable. It is all there. And like bloke opined about the leadpipe on his R-M, I have a small bore, more conical profile lead pipe than a modern 186. It does the same for me as bloke's does for him: better air management, better dynamic control, better tone and intonation.
The only drawback: all my old mouthpieces are now on the shelf. I had to get new mouthpieces. For a smooth, slightly dark, legato tone, bloke's Imperial with a spacer (I was lucky to find a 2-piece model) is the choice. For solo and upper range, a Taku Lite has precise, even intonation. For the "cash register" of community band, I was lucky to find a Griego 325XD that sounds large and round, with even intonation.
EDIT - I have since come to prefer the smoother Imperial, as more "tuba" in tone that "bass bone" in tone. And I don't think I will play that much solo literature going forward. So the Griego and the Taku are out, in favor of the Imperial with the spacer, and a Kelly 18 for spare/backup/inclement weather.
I am very thankful that I have been able over the years to be able to discern what aspects of tubas fit my playing, both through the privilege of playing many instruments and mouthpeices, and a critical analysis of my strengths and weaknesses as a tuba player, in order to assemble what is essentially a custom tuba to fit my playing, the ensembles I support, the repertoire I play, and the tone and intonation characteristics I prefer.
