Change Receiver, 1915 Imperial?

[royjohn]

Hi Tuba Experts,
I decided I just had to have a 1915 Boosey 3+1 Eb Imperial tuba to go with my 1970 3+1 BBb tuba and my 1975 3+1 euph. If I keep acquiring tubas, I may be forced to play in public at some point. The Eb is pretty dingy, but the price is right.

Photos show what looks like a replaced lead pipe, but the receiver is still European. What mpc would you recommend using for the horn, as is --- a Wicks 1 or 3 or what? and what would be your take on converting the receiver to a large shank?

I had some dire predictions of what would happen if we converted the BBb, but the repairman had a really good tuba grad student try out the conversion before finalizing it and it does seem to have been successful.

Whatcha think?

[iiipopes]

Wick 3 is the "standard" small shank mouthpiece for the Eb comp. If the horn is in good shape otherwise, please consider leaving the small shank alone. Mine does very well indeed.

[Søren]

Is this in "normal" 440 pitch?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Tuba_W0QQitemZ250 ... dZViewItem

[iiipopes]

I absolutely agree with billako. And this applies to everything, not just tubas or even just musical instruments, but in the greater context of just about everything out there as well.

I used to have a Silverfaced Fender Vibrolux guitar amplifier which my folks bought for me new when I was in high school in the late 1970's. Great little amp, good clean tone that would get crunchy when you wanted it to. I used it for everything from garage bands to jazz bands and everything in between and on either side. Like, I suppose, everyone does at one point or another, I wanted "more" out of it. Then a replacement plug in solid state rectifier that could pass more current than the stock 5U4 rectifier tube, and a device that daisy-chained the two channels together by plugging into the 1st two pre-amp tube sockets to give an overdrive became available, more or less simultaneously. I bought both and modded my amp. Yes, the amp was marginally louder, and I got my on-demand overdrive, but the tone was harsher and grittier as well, which may have suited a couple of the harder songs my band played, but not in general. I also ended up blowing the reverb transformer and had to change tubes more often. So I ended up pulling the mods and going back to "original" specs, and got all the tone and tube life back.

The point being is the mouthpiece/horn combination as a whole is important, and you won't be able to change the characteristics of the horn but only marginally with a different mouthpiece that wasn't really designed for it, and even then, the results will usually be detrimental to the horn overall, although a single characteristic may be enhanced.

With that in mind, don't get me started on automobile engine mods....

[Wyvern]

Is this in "normal" 440 pitch?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Tuba_W0QQitemZ250 ... dZViewItem

With 19" bell, I think I am right in saying it must be 1970's, early 80's vintage, so should be "normal" pitch

[windshieldbug]

Any Boosey & Hawkes horn must be, by definition, a post 1934 horn, so I would think it would be A=440.

[Wyvern]

Any Boosey & Hawkes horn must be, by definition, a post 1934 horn, so I would think it would be A=440.

But they were made in high pitched for brass bands up to the 1960's. However, 19" bells were only introduced in the 1970's, so it must be A=440

[windshieldbug]

Sorry, just another Yank here...

[Geotuba]

You could use a Wick 3 or 2 without the L on the existing receiver

I have used a Wick 2 on my 1930s era B&H Imperial EEb since 1973. However, it was necessary to turn down the shank to make it fit the receiver.

Have you seen this page by Matt Walters of Dillon Music?

[windshieldbug]

I'd put the change in the ashtray, but I can't seem to find one in this Imperial...