Playing in sharp keys

[Chuck(G)]

Stuffiness is a lack of resonance, not flow.

Uh, well, yeah. It's easy enough to test this out (I've done it) with a water manometer and a low-pressure air supply (a big tank compressor with the outlet regulator set down to a couple of PSI will do). Hook the output of the supply with a tee to the manometer to the leadpipe of whatever you're testing.

You won't see much of a variation in back pressure at all, even on those "stuffy" valve combinations. Curiously, some of the "stuffier" ones can exhibit less back pressure than the more open ones.

What I haven't done (and need to do one of these days when I'm occupied with nothing more than studying my navel) is to couple a sound source and transducer to measure SWR (standing wave ratio) when a horn is excited at various frequencies. I suspect that will tell the story behind "stuffiness". A high SWR should result in the least "stuffy" feeling.

In the electronics world, one generally strives for a low SWR (as close to 1:1 as possible), since higher reflected power results in transmission line inefficiencies. But in a brass instrument, being a good transmission line is what you don't need--you could hook your mouthpiece to a 6" diameter length of drainpipe and have a very low SWR indeed.

One of these days...

[Geotuba]

Well who would have thought that my original, mostly tongue in cheek, posting would have generated such an interesting set of sometimes pretty technical repsonses. Of course I figured it might go down the path about bends in tubes, which I had surmised was a significant factor in why the proposal hadn't been put into effect much. Mind you I suspect that as more research is done (if anyone has the time, and if there is any reason to do it in the first place other than academic curiosity) a workable design might actually be possible.

The comments about "just learn the sharp keys" and generally about familiarity are, of course, perfectly valid but it is still a fact that beginners at least (especially those who learn in bands - which is most kids who start learning at school) find it easier to play brass instruments in flat keys. Clearly they are taught them first which is why they have more familiarity with them. But why are they taught them first? As someone suggested, probably because most band music is written in flat keys. And why is that? Is it because of the transposing instruments, which are all (the most common ones anyway) in flat keys, thereby reducing the accidentals they have to deal with? But why did transposing instruments evolve to be in flat keys? Why not sharp keys? So where is the chicken and where is the egg in all this?

Oh - of course, in Mark's chicken and egg salad sandwich stuffed down Rick's Sousaphone with the rest of his lunch

But seriously though, thanks for turning my flippant posting into a pretty interesting thread

[windshieldbug]

The chicken is the B flat/A sharp, and the egg is C = 523/C = 466, etc.


Who knows. Why did we develop the 12 tone scale? Why not quarter-tone, as some cultures did? Why is there air?

[Rick Denney]

In the electronics world, one generally strives for a low SWR (as close to 1:1 as possible), since higher reflected power results in transmission line inefficiencies. But in a brass instrument, being a good transmission line is what you don't need--you could hook your mouthpiece to a 6" diameter length of drainpipe and have a very low SWR indeed.

Actually, the analogy holds fine. But the tuba isn't the transmission medium, it's the antenna. The reason we don't want reflected power on the transmission line is because we want all the power to be radiated by the antenna and not absorbed in transmission line inefficiency, and that requires resonance at the anetnna. It's an unresonant antenna that bounces power back down the transmission line.

The trick to resonance is for the reflected pulse to arrive in time to reinforce (and to be reinforced by) the next pulse coming from the buzz. That keeps that reflected pulse from pushing back on the player, which we feel as stuffiness.

A good tuba also has a low SWR, but then it also depends on what you are comparing it to. Lots of antennas radiate suberbly with high SWR. They are still resonant. In fact, they may be too resonant, and they don't reflect back enough power to give the transmitter something to lean against. (This one's just for Chuck and one or two others: Look up the impedance of a really optimized yagi antenna--it's about 17 ohms, which is a 3:1 SWR with typical unbalanced transmission line. You need an impedance matching system to use it effectively.) On a tuba, I suspect that's where resistance comes in. Some resistance is necessary for playability, it seems to me.

Rick "who thinks air moves fast in a tuba--back and forth" Denney

[Chuck(G)]

Who knows. Why did we develop the 12 tone scale? Why not quarter-tone, as some cultures did? Why is there air?

I vote for the 53EDO scale. Think of the valves, the valves, the valves!

[Tom Holtz]

I wish I could figure out what was being objected to.

(Tom, you don't have to read this if you don't want to.)

Oh, and props to the elephant. The Waffle House sig is a classic.

[eupher61]

where's Dr Fred when you need 'im???

[LoyalTubist]

How I learned sharp keys:

I had a teacher in college who had me play major scales using the circle of fifths (or circle of fourths, if I wanted to go backwards). I memorized these scales WITHOUT READING THEM. Then I wrote out the scales with sharp keys... I ended up learning sharp keys I would NEVER have to use. Consequently, I did the same thing with flat keys. E became Fb (with one double flat). The easiest one to learn was B--it became Cb. If you can work with flat enharmonics, learning sharps is easy. Work with this for a few months B is no longer Cb and you start wondering why everyone gets so hung up on sharp keys!

[Todd S. Malicoate]

regarding the comment about why put it in F# rather than Gb....well research strings and the use of quarter tones

More info on this, please...what do quarter tones have to do with enharmonic re-spellings?

A string player will actually change tuning when playing a Db and going directly into a C#

Not this bass player, unless the Db is the root of a chord followed by a C# which is the third of the next (or something similar like that). If it's just a enharmonic respelling (say a section ending in Db major about to modulate to F# major and respelling the V chord of the next key for a transition), my hand is staying in the exact same place for both notes. I'm interested to find out where you got this idea from, or if you have seen (heard) string players do this first-hand.

Strange, but they are 2 different notes on wind and string instruments

No, they're not...Db and C# represent the same "pitch," even on wind and string instruments. The ones in the middle of the bass clef staff are both fingered 1-2 on my tuba. The choice of which notation to use is only governed by ease of reading and theory protocols. The intonation of the note is governed by it's use in a chord or its relationship to other notes in a melodic line...not solely by the enharmonic spelling.

But if you insist...which one is higher in pitch...Db or C#???

[TubaRay]

How I learned sharp keys:

I had a teacher in college who had me play major scales using the circle of fifths (or circle of fourths, if I wanted to go backwards). I memorized these scales WITHOUT READING THEM. Then I wrote out the scales with sharp keys... I ended up learning sharp keys I would NEVER have to use. Consequently, I did the same thing with flat keys. E became Fb (with one double flat). The easiest one to learn was B--it became Cb. If you can work with flat enharmonics, learning sharps is easy. Work with this for a few months B is no longer Cb and you start wondering why everyone gets so hung up on sharp keys!

I took a similar approach. Learning all those keys one will never use was interesting, but wasn't so bad. Nowadays, I'm really glad I did. On this very day, I played music in the following major keys(not counting minors): E, A, D, G, C, F, Bb, Eb, and Ab. Believe it or not, this is not a problem. Admittedly, there are some keys I am more familiar with, but none of the above keys provides any particular added difficulty.

[Chuck(G)]

The only difference in how notes are tuned is each note's place in the chord. According to the chord tonic (and unless you have the melody), tune the M3 slightly flat, P5 a wee bit high, m7 quite flat, M2 a little high, M6 a little high, P4 a little low, M7 a wee bit high.

So, if the orchestra tunes to the oboe sounding an "A", and the first work is F major, do you sharpen the F or flat the A for a M3 in the tonic?

[Chuck(G)]

If we tune to an A and play in A the A should not be intentionally altered from the "tuning baseline" but in F the A would have to come down and in D it would have to sort of go up a tiny bit. Likewise, in the key of E an A in a B chord would be a dominant seventh and would have to be a little flat.

That's what's intrigued me about the A tuning. Suppose a work starts off on an Fmaj chord. Immediately, the instruments playing the M3 above F need to flatten almost 14 cents immediately. That's quite an adjustment!

That's why the pros get paid the big bucks, I guess.

[Chuck(G)]

Play one pitch against different drones and play different pitches against one drone. You get trained very quickly to remove the beats this way. The Tuning CD is an excellent method for this training.

Singing against a drone isn't a bad exercise either.

So this stuff about orchestras using "just" intonation is a bunch of malarky, right? It's sort of a compromise between equal and just temperaments.

A few (or maybe more than a few) years ago I posted that no orchestra, save perhaps some baroque and early music ensembles used just intonation because the sound of a perfect major third is a little odd sounding to modern ears.

A lot of folks disagreed and said that orchestras were indeed trained to use just intonation.

Coulda fooled me...

[windshieldbug]

Aren't you glad brass players don't have to do that? All we need to do is know very basic theory (at best), and just listen

Aren't you glad that singers don't have to play in tune with violins, oboes, bassoons, or worst yet (gasp!) violas!

That's why the notion of a tuba built "in-tune" is absurd. In-tune to what? The perfect tuba is one that is easy to adjust on ANY pitch.

[Chuck(G)]

Aren't you glad that singers don't have to play in tune with violins, oboes, bassoons, or worst yet (gasp!) violas!

...and all of this discussion about adjusting to the interval goes completely out the window when you toss a piano into the mix--unless the player's equipped with long arms and a tuning wrench.

[windshieldbug]

How many steps was that again?

1 less than that.

[LOTP]

When I have to play in sharp keys I cheat a little. I just put a capo on the leadpipe and play in Bb!

Paul

[windshieldbug]

When I have to play in sharp keys I cheat a little. I just put a capo on the leadpipe and play in Bb

That would be the "capo de tutti capo" then, wouldn't it?

[TubaRay]

When I have to play in sharp keys I cheat a little. I just put a capo on the leadpipe and play in Bb!
Paul

I believe you just qualified to become a guitar player.