Here’s my suggestion to end all this silliness. Let’s classify tuba sizes the same way Champagne bottles are sized. The tuba is, after all, the champagne of musical instruments. We would then have, from small to large:
Chopine
Clavelin
Fifth
Magnum
Jeroboam
Methuselah
Nebuchadnezzar
I know there are a few more intermediate sizes like Rehoboam, Salmanazar, and Balthazar, but these should be enough. I would much rather argue about whether my Alex 163 is a Fifth or a Magnum than whether it’s a 4/4 or 5/4. If we wear this one out, and surely we will, we can then move to olive sizes and debate whether a Holton 345 is a Super Colossal or a Mammoth.
MikeS wrote:If we wear this one out, and surely we will, we can then move to olive sizes and debate whether a Holton 345 is a Super Colossal or a Mammoth.
In any taxonomy, you have to reserve the largest designator for the Rudi Meinl 6/4. The Holton looks almost normal compared to it.
Greg wrote:You know I'm really thankful for all of the valuable things I learn of tubenet. With that piece of information, I have deduced that my tuba would be classified as a Colt 45 forty ounce. I have noticed that every time I take the besson to a gig, it works well.
Besson 983+Colt45MaltLiquor=Works every time!
Yeah, but are you as baaaaaaad as Billy Dee Wiliams?
The Jackson wrote:What if there is a 3/4 horn made of lead and a 7/4 horn made of tin?
This brings up a great new thread.
Dont the Perantucci tubas supposendly weigh more than a miraphone or MW of a similar size. I once started a topic asking why dont they make sizes of Contrabass tubas based on a 10 scale, 1 being the smallest 3/4 and 10 being the largest BAT......
You know as well as I that I meant "British." Now, be careful or Wade will be getting mean again (still?)
That said, at least it was a double reed - although I prefer "cor anglais" - my son plays contra-bassoon and never lets me forget that he has a lower range than I do.
All I ask is the chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Spike Milligan
