Thor bell size

MikeMason · Post by **MikeMason** » Sun May 06, 2007 11:54 am

Seems like a rather small bell diameter for a 5/4.What's the thinking on this decision and what are(more importantly) the results?Scoob?Where aaarrrrre you?

Mike"a little intrigued" Mason....(don't let my wife see this thread

)

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Sun May 06, 2007 4:10 pm

I understand that the Thor has a smaller bell diameter to keep the sound focused.

I found it a tuba with a unique sound (neither 4/4, nor BAT) - which you either love, or don't

Jonathan "who found it was not the tuba for him"

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun May 06, 2007 4:48 pm

I thought that the specifics of the bell diameter and proportions had a major effect on the relative pitches of the lower partials.

If the lower partials are in tune, and the tuba has a good sound, MW did a good compromise.

Cheers,
Allen

UDELBR · Post by **UDELBR** » Sun May 06, 2007 5:00 pm

Greg wrote: I also was astonished by the specs when I saw the bell diameter. In fact, the MW C tubas in general seem to have a little smaller bell than other companies comperable tubas. I am surprised they don't get "splattery" at high volumes."

It's such a shame that the larger American-style flares just aren't available anymore. I think the radical flare near the bell adds an aura that's just indescribable. It'd be SO easy for a factory to simply plug this in as an affordable purchase option (plus swapable leadpipes, plus rotor or piston, etc).

Steve Inman · Post by **Steve Inman** » Sun May 06, 2007 5:02 pm

It's been a while since I tooted on one. It had a lot of "weight" or "power" to the sound -- especially in the low / mid registers. The one I tried produced a strong sound from pedal C upwards for two octaves, without a lot of effort or thought -- it responded very easily in this range. Approaching middle C it seemed to take a little more effort than the Miraphone 1292 I was also trying out -- not quite as much of a "point and shoot", or "easy to play without even thinking" response for me.

You really need to sample one. However, for overall ease of playing, the 1292 CC by Miraphone is what caught my attention the last time I visited a tuba shop. But the Thor really impressed me in the lower half of the "standard" tuba range.

Cheers,

Alex C · Post by **Alex C** » Sun May 06, 2007 5:54 pm

UncleBeer wrote:It's such a shame that the larger American-style flares just aren't available anymore. I think the radical flare near the bell adds an aura that's just indescribable. It'd be SO easy for a factory to simply plug this in as an affordable purchase option (plus swapable leadpipes, plus rotor or piston, etc).

I understood that the larger flare diffused the sound more, like comparing a trombone bell with a horn bell. 70 years ago, the bands were looking for a diffused tuba sound to emulate a string bass section. That sound is no longer in vogue.

The York/Holton copies do not have a particularly large flare. They do have a large throat which causes a 20" bell diameter. The Conn 2XJ, on the other hand, was designed 70 years ago and has that very large flare.

Which is all to say, maybe that's why the manufacturers no longer offer the radical bell flare.

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Sun May 06, 2007 8:02 pm

Alex C wrote:The York/Holton copies do not have a particularly large flare. They do have a large throat which causes a 20" bell diameter. The Conn 2XJ, on the other hand, was designed 70 years ago and has that very large flare.

Recall that the standard bell size for the York 6/4 BBb is 22.5" Bob Rusk routinely cut the bells down on the ones he modified.

But maybe the old time European makers were on to something...