It's an old 1915 Conn Eb in all rose brass (everything but the joints/valve tubing). The story with this horn is that he bought it from Del Negro of the Chicago Opera who had it made for him by Conn. For some size comparisons I also pictured it with my other two tubas. If the pictures didn't come out good (my monitor SUCKS and everything looks really dark) than tell me and I will try to fix them.
Bob1062 wrote:
I've always wondered, what's up with the screen name?
When I was a freshman in High School I had a friend set-up my first email account for me. What I wanted was Bubbabassboner (I was a freshman and I played bass bone ) but he was a little... not himself that day and wrote bububassboner. I didn't want/know how to change it so I just stuck with it.
A lot better than I would have thought for a horn from 1915. The bore is .620 so the horn is a little stuffy (doesn't help that the felts for the valves have not been replaced since 1979) but I have played worse when it comes to stuffiness. Intonation on this horn is really good even to todays standards. With my playing to a tuner there is NOT A SHARP NOTE on the horn. However the 3rd partial Bb and the 6th partial Bb are a bit flat. What makes this horn hard to play is the receiver. The receiver is somewhere between the old small shank (bass bone shank) and an American shank. So a small shank mouthpiece is too small yet an American shank is too big. I have been switching between a Roger Bobo TT mouthpiece with some tape on the shank and a 62 made to look like a conn 2. With the Bobo the Bbs come up to pitch (making this horn play VERY well in tune) yet the low range loses focus. Yet with the 62 the horn seems to play a lot better but the Bbs go flat. But other than that it plays really well. I feel if it was updated with a new valve section and new receiver/leadpipe it could be a great horn.
Old doesn’t necessarily imply bad when it comes to playing properties. My 1870 Besson has a slightly larger bore than “your” Conn. The sound is different from modern fat tubas, but not bad.
Aligning the valves would be the first step in the process towards improvement. I don’t remember, whether the old Conn’s have marks on the stems to indicate the alignment. Else you have to go the mirror route or loan an endoscope.
The flat Bb’s easily could be caused by the 62 (is that Schilke?) sitting too far out in the receiver. The Bobo TT was made for a very different purpose. Its backbore and its throat both are likely to be too small for an Eb tuba. The cup would be too shallow also.
Not even the original mouthpiece might be sensed as being good for modern playing, as the cup diameter is likely to be too small compared to, what most players use today.
There is a current thread on shaving a mouthpiece. That is the way to go. But don’t shave a mouthpiece that you like for playing other tubas with more standard receivers. Aren’t there companies making fairly cheap copies of the Bach 24A just to mention one model with proportions likely to fit this tuba? You may also be able to find something relevant for a shaving project in the hellbox of a school/college/university band programme. As for the shaving itself, bloke probably gave the best answer in the thread mentioned.
With the provenience of this instrument a little effort to optimise its playing may very well be worthwhile.
My suggestion about fitting a mouthpiece for this instrument does not give you the guarantee of a perfectly in tune tuba. You may very well end up with a set-up having reasonable Eb’s and Bb’s, but having a flat 5th partial (a very common intonation pattern, which also is the one of my 1870 Besson). But as “your” instrument has 4 valves, you should be able to find work-around’s.
) but he was a little... not himself that day and wrote bububassboner. I didn't want/know how to change it so I just stuck with it.
