What would you do?

bububassboner · Post by **bububassboner** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:07 pm

So last week I bought a York CC tuba from my teacher(Dr. John Richards). This horn was converted from Eb to CC by Dr. John and I love this horn to death. However, it's only a four valved horn. The false tones are good but hard to belt out(play loud). So my question is if this were your horn would you leave it or add a fifth valve. What would you do? Thanks in advanced.

Steve Inman · Post by **Steve Inman** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 9:03 pm

Can you get the low register okay with some slide pulling and alternate fingerings? I used to play a 4V CC (186) and it worked okay, so I didn't bother adding the 5th valve. The only thing that was a little annoying was having to use 2,4 instead of 2,3,5.

Personally, I wouldn't add a 5th valve to an already modified horn, especially an Eb modified to CC (more significant key change). It might work out fine, and maybe there isn't any added liability regarding the likelihood of a good result, but it's a good chance that this same model of Eb-modified-to-CC has never had a 5th valve added to it -- so nobody knows how pleasing the result will be (mostly concerned about the impact on the response when the 5th valve is not being used).

If the notes below low G can be played with alternate fingerings / slide pulls, I would instead use it as is and save my money for a 5V CC that was designed to be this way from the start -- and that could be play-tested before buying. I've read posts on more than one tuba that played better after a 5th valve was REmoved.

That's what ** I ** would do, fwiw.

Cheers,

bububassboner · Post by **bububassboner** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 10:19 pm

I ask this because this is BY FAR the best tuba I have ever played. The only thing I don't like is the lack of the fifth valve. This horn is a TOP action horn so the first slide is a pain for me to use(intonation on this horn is great so I wasn't worried about this). The fourth slide is easy to move but the slides are about an inch and a half long. Some of the added loops to bring this horn to CC are removable so I was thinking about adding a fifth valve there. Once I borrow a camera I'll take pictures to show everyone what I mean. Again any thoughts on this would be great. Thanks

iiipopes · Post by **iiipopes** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 10:37 pm

The problem with adding a 5th valve to a horn not meant for it, frankly, like the Conn 5XJ, which being derived from a King BBb, well, I'm not going there now, is you never know if you're going to hit a critical node and completely foul up the intonation and response. Let's just say I've heard a 56J with its 5th valve removed, both before and after, and it was at least half again a better tuba for overall tone, range, consistency and intonation.

Art Hovey · Post by **Art Hovey** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:01 pm

If the bore of the 4th valve tubing is reasonably big I would suggest putting a 5th rotor in the 4th valve tubing, making it a "dependent" valve. You might be able to arrange it to replace a tuning slide in the 4th valve tubing, so you could remove it and replace it with a regular slide when you don't really need it. You can get a full chromatic scale down to pedal C with either a long whole-step 5th valve or a 2-step (major 3rd) 5th valve. Making it a dependent valve cuts down on the number of alternate fingerings possible, but it also leaves you with a freer-blowing tuba and you still get all the notes.

bububassboner · Post by **bububassboner** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:15 pm

Just to give an idea of what this horn looks like here some pics of a little bit older one(still as Eb).
http://cgi.ebay.com/YORK-4-Valve-Eb-Mon ... dZViewItem

Mine is about 10 years younger than this one. The little loop by the tuning slide is where the extra tubing was added to mine. Plus all the slides got lengthened to bring them down in pitch(but the pull on the slides stayed the same). From these pics do you see a good place to put another valve? Thanks

bububassboner · Post by **bububassboner** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:18 pm

oh the one BIG difference is the fourth valve tubing goes OVER the valves and not UNDER. But the tuning slide is still in the same place.

Shockwave · Post by **Shockwave** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:34 pm

If you want to add a 5th valve, put the horn back into Eb first. I'm assuming the conversion to CC was done by adding cylindrical tubing. The less the better!

-Eric

bububassboner · Post by **bububassboner** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:41 pm

Its not all straight tubing. Though the extra tubing has "tuning slides" in it so most of it is removable. My teachers plan was to make a second set of slides so the horn could be played as an Eb or a CC by switching the slides. But he never got around to making new slides. A project for me. I hope that makes sense.

windshieldbug · Post by **windshieldbug** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:42 pm

What about the possibility of putting a fifth valve as a PART of the 4th valve extension? Then you won't be changing an original part of the horn, anyway.

A dependant 5th valve sounds like the way to go.

Tubainsauga · Post by **Tubainsauga** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:47 pm

Perhaps you could have someone build a dependent 5th valve? Gives you the low range, though less options, but you don't risk the horn.

Edit: Beat me to it apparently.

markaustinhowle · Post by **markaustinhowle** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:16 am

It sounds like, from your description, that you have a very good CC tuba. How it became a really good CC is not important, (IMO) when considering whether or not to add a 5th valve. I think one way Iâ€™ll look at the 5th valve question in the future isâ€“ â€œis it worth the $1,500 it costs to have a 5th valve addedâ€

Rick Denney · Post by **Rick Denney** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:35 pm

Many storied pros, not just the several biggies that Mr. England mentioned, got through life just fine with four-valve Alexanders. Considering the intonation challenges of those instruments, you'd think they would need more, rather than fewer valves. But they managed just fine, even if it was a bit more work. Fletcher reportedly removed the fifth valve on his Holton, claiming that the instrument was better without it. Even for a C, it would appear that the fifth valve is a convenience rather than a necessity.

A dependent valve is relatively easy on a top-action tuba, where the fourth valve usually has a wide tuning slide on the back side of the instrument. Several commercial instruments have used that approach. And at least one of the big 6/4 Yorks that Rusk converted for Baltimore Brass had a dependent fifth valve, because that instrument afforded no practical place to install a fifth valve in the main bugle.

Rick "who thinks 4-valve C's are great deals because of the myth that the 5th valve is essential" Denney

tubeast · Post by **tubeast** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 5:32 pm

The necessity of a 5th valve depends greatly on the kind of literature youÂ´ll be playing. When you find yourself somewhere near the first partial CC most of the time IÂ´m convinced youÂ´d WANT a fifth valve badly enough to get one.
If it takes 1000â‚¬ , so be it. This is the monetary value you add to your horn, and the musical value will be measurable in the delight you receive from it.

When youÂ´re constantly above 2nd partial C you shouldnÂ´t bother parting with your horn for the time it takes to have it converted.

Steve Inman · Post by **Steve Inman** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 7:23 pm

Bob1062 wrote:
Rick Denney wrote:
Rick "who thinks 4-valve C's are great deals because of the myth that the 5th valve is essential" Denney

What would some of those be?

I had a nice, older 186-4U CC (16.5" bell).

From multiple sources, I've heard the legend of the 4V Conn 56J ... and I wonder what I'm missing!

Cheers,

iiipopes · Post by **iiipopes** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:10 pm

Steve Inman wrote: From multiple sources, I've heard the legend of the 4V Conn 56J ... and I wonder what I'm missing!

From sitting next to one in concert section, and listening out in the audience, I can tell you overall, the 56J is a fine instrument. Not spectacular, but nice. The big whoop-la was at the beginning when they only cost about half as much new as current list price, and was such a value for money. Now, at their current new price, they are not the deal they were, so they have retreated back to the rest of the pack. And since they came out, other companies have brought out some better horns for the money. And finally, as time wears on, the current consensus is that the 5th valve is rather too small and misplaced, and has a couple of bends that are too tight, destroying the advantages of Matt Walter's prototype.

markaustinhowle · Post by **markaustinhowle** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:59 pm

I canâ€™t wait until I get my York 4/4 CC (with 5th rotor added) back to try out. I had posted some pictures I was proud of while it was tacked together with the valve section still in BBb. I wonâ€™t know for sure if any of the notes are stuffy until the valve section is cut to CC. But all of the open partials have great response and they are in tune with each other exceptionally well.

I am excited to have figured out (pure luck) what valve section from what tuba to use, and where to make the cuts etc, in order to make the conversion from a York Eb to a great CC that is like the 56J, (with the great York sound).

I think I would go for it and put the 5th valve on if I were you, especially since it is a York CC.

MartyNeilan · Post by **MartyNeilan** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:57 pm

tubeast wrote:When you find yourself somewhere near the first partial CC most of the time IÂ´m convinced youÂ´d WANT a fifth valve badly enough to get one.

No offense, but is there really much literature that hovers around pedal C (aka first partial C)?
Notes below 5 ledger D seem rather few and far between and mostly for effect, thereby giving enough time to pull a slide or setup for a false tone (aka our good friend Bob).

tubamuphone · Post by **tubamuphone** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 9:46 am

I've been playing on a 4 valve Alex CC for about 8 years now. When I bought it, I had thoughts of a fifth valve but was talked out of it. It's an awesome tuba, so why risk destroying all it's good qualities? Are you willing to spend $1000+ for two notes that you really never play? I did the right thing. I practice my false tones and they sound fine in a big hall.

I also have an Alex F. When I bought it, there were only 4 valves. It's a little different story though, the intonation was bad and you really need five valves when playing below the staff on F tuba. It cost me a little more than $1000 to get the valve and then get it installed (which means cutting the leadpipe). It's okay, but it's not a holy grail.

Your York has already been mutilated enough, if it sounds good, leave it alone. It's not going to kill you to be a monster at false tones. Although it may hurt your ego if you show up to an audition with only 4 valves.

Just my thoughts after playing on a 4 valve Alexander for a while.

JB

Rick Denney · Post by **Rick Denney** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 10:44 am

Bob1062 wrote:
Rick Denney wrote:
Rick "who thinks 4-valve C's are great deals because of the myth that the 5th valve is essential" Denney

What would some of those be?

TubaRay just acquired a very nice 4-valve Rudolf Meinl 5/4 for FAR less than the usual price for a large C. He made it sound great when he was auditioning it, and he got an instrument that can hold its own in ANY orchestra or large wind band situation. The price he paid was not far from high-end used Bb tubas.

And we've all seen deals come and go for four-valve tubas that were solid players in the several thousands instead of many thousands. Examples include the old Cerveny Piggies and 601's. They aren't in the class of that Rudi, but they do the job and provide a huge payback.

In general, it appears to me that four-valve C's are priced similarly to four-valve Bb's of the same mode, brand, and condition. Five-valved C's are much more expensive.

Rick "thinking it would be hard to find a new C tuba with four valves" Denney