The Wonderful Neptune

[oedipoes]

Jim, Neptune,

Can I conclude here that the Rudy 5/4 and the Cerveny 701 are more or less the same in the sound they produce? (apart from the fact that you can buy almost two cerveny's for the price of one Rudy...maybe it is time that someone explains to me why this is...) With the Neptune's sound having more core and project better in more technical passages?

Can you people extend this comparison with the Neptune to more brands of high-end tuba manufacturers?
I'd love to see detailed comparisons like the one Jim gave on Neptune vs. Rudy.
Neptune vs. Hirsbrunner (rotary and piston), Willson, Miraphone, ... maybe we can stay into the 5/4 sized instruments.
Oh, and I'm particularly interested in BB tubas, like them better.

This is very usefull information for me, it gets better every time I look at this forum!

(getting pretty depressed with the band's Yamaha YBB321, looking for better and 5/4 sized)

[Wyvern]

Can I conclude here that the Rudy 5/4 and the Cerveny 701 are more or less the same in the sound they produce? (apart from the fact that you can buy almost two cerveny's for the price of one Rudy...maybe it is time that someone explains to me why this is...) With the Neptune's sound having more core and project better in more technical passages?

I believe your conclusion is broadly correct. It is a while since I played the Rudy, so have never been able to directly compare with the Cerveny, but they both have similar sound characteristics. As did the Miraphone 190 5/4 BBb I have tried, although I felt that had less color to its sound. They all have the broad sound of a German Kaiser tuba, without the focus/core to the sound which I believe the Neptune shares with York-a-phone BATs. In my opinion the Neptune incorporates the easier playing characteristics of an American BAT with some of the tonal color of a German Kaiser which is why I have never played anything else I like as much.

[NDSPTuba]

I'm assuming that everyone who has commented on the playing characteristic's of the Neptune (great name by the way ) is referring to the Rotor version of the instrument. I seem to remember comments that the piston variety of the Neptune doesn't share the same love and high praise of the rotary version. I'm particularly interested in this, because of my recent reiteration of the fact that piston instruments slur much easier than rotary instruments. I have been practicing Holst's First Suite on my 11J and had the opening smooth and flowing and when I get to band rehearsal and pick up the 186 BBb, that first F to C slur is a bitch to get smooth. Requires a considerably greater effort to get smooth.

[Wyvern]

I'm assuming that everyone who has commented on the playing characteristic's of the Neptune (great name by the way ) is referring to the Rotor version of the instrument. I seem to remember comments that the piston variety of the Neptune doesn't share the same love and high praise of the rotary version.

I believe we are all talking about the rotary Neptune. My understanding is that the piston version is basically a PT-7 and a very different beast. Incidentally the latest B&S catalog only shows the rotary Neptune (4098), so it looks like the piston version (5098) might have been discontinued.

Regarding slurring. Having played piston tubas, before changing over to rotors, I would agree that slurring is more difficult with rotary valves. Piston valves seem to aid you in the slur, while a rotary valve does not give that natural assistance. Still quite possible to slur smoothly with rotary valves, but requires greater control by the player.

[jeopardymaster]

A difference in ease of slurring between rotors and pistons? I confess I never thought about it.

I can say I tried a Neptune piston horn at WWBW around 10 years ago and was very much disappointed in it. At the time I was aspiring to a MW 2165 but hadn't liked any of them either, at least not enough to buy one.

One further testimony to my Neptune and slurs. You guys all know the a-to-b trill in the Prelude to Meistersinger. On some horns I find it more of a chore to get the lip trill the way it wants to be. Well, I just performed "PMS" on the Neptune this past weekend. It feels like - like - coming home after a too-long trip. Unbelievable.

[Wyvern]

One thing that has not been mentioned in this thread is how the CC Neptune is unusually made to also play as a BBb. The connection to the 5th rotor is via a thumb screw which can be easily moved to the other side as shown in the pictures below. This causes the air to go through the 5th valve loop by default and with some adjustment to the slides quickly turns the Neptune into a BBb with one tone ascending 5th valve.

You would expect it to play as stuffy as hell and have bad intonation as a BBb, but my experience is that it plays just fine like that, maintaining its full tone and having quite manageable intonation.

A very useful facility to play the BBb Bass part in brass bands as I did a number of times before I owned a 'real' BBb in the form of my Cerveny.

[jimgray]

some folks mentioned concerns about slurring on rotary valve tubas-

It is worth mentioning that the Neptune design includes a good feature that helps in this regard: rotors that all spin in such a direction as to cut INTO the air stream rather than against it. This is a somewhat common modification to older rotary horns and I have seen it on many modern rotary horns.

Makes a big difference, IMO.

[oedipoes]

Neptune,

Since you're playing your cerveny 701 in brass band, how does that sound together with the (very british indeed) besson, LMI, York, ... most of your collegues probably play?
Are there many intonation issues (pedal notes in the lower BBb-tuba part) compared to the mostly compensating EEb and BBb collegues, or is it manageable with some slide-pulling? (it has only 4 valves?)

Would the neptune CC sound blend together if you would play it in brassband or wind band, or does that specific sound only work in symphonic music?

Sorry for interviewing you like that...

Thx

[Wyvern]

Since you're playing your cerveny 701 in brass band, how does that sound together with the (very british indeed) besson, LMI, York, ... most of your collegues probably play?
Are there many intonation issues (pedal notes in the lower BBb-tuba part) compared to the mostly compensating EEb and BBb collegues, or is it manageable with some slide-pulling? (it has only 4 valves?)

Would the neptune CC sound blend together if you would play it in brassband or wind band, or does that specific sound only work in symphonic music?

The comment from the conductor when I first took along the Cerveny was "that really sounds like a BBb bass"! Considering how different the 701 is from a typical 3+1 BBb it is amazing how well its tone colour fits into the brass band, although it is without doubt a more powerful tuba than a British BBb. But that is good in my case as I am the only BBb with three players on EEb (none of which are prepared to play the band's unused Besson BBb's ).

For intonation, I have few issues - just making the occasional 4th valve slide pull in the low register.

The sound the Cerveny puts under the band is really great! One of the euphonium players is often a few minutes late for rehearsal and he say that from outside the band hall he can tell if I am present from the low vibrations

The Neptune has a much more focused and colourful tone, so does not blend so well with the saxhorns of a British brass band. Its full tone, I think, works much better within an orchestra, or symphonic wind band where varied tone colours are welcome.

No problem asking my view - that is what this forum is for!

[jeopardymaster]

Per Bloke: "Why do slurs, in general, seem "easy" on my not-technologically-up-to-date rotary tuba?"

Luke: I don't believe it!
Yoda: That is why you fail.

[Ed Jones]

To answer at least some of Neptune’s original questions, the VMI 4098, Mel Culbertson, Neptune (AKA the tuba with many names) was first introduced in mid to late 1994. One of the first sold in the US was to the late Tommy Johnson who is said to have described it as “a 188 on steroids”. I can’t say what the sound concept behind the horn was since I have never spoken to Mel Culbertson, but the body seems to be inspired by, if not directly copied from, the Cerveny ACB 601. The valve section is the stock, B&S/VMI rotary valve block with graduated bore. The chief difference is that the leadpipe enters at the top of the fifth valve rather than the side as in the B&S tubas, effectively lengthening the leadpipe. The B&S PT7P was introduced about two years after the Neptune and the 5098 piston Neptune sometime after that.

Orpheus Music in San Antonio, TX, which at that time also had exclusive rights to Meinl-Weston products, was originally the sole dealer for the Neptune and other VMI instruments. The early Neptunes had darker lacquer and a laurel leaf engraving on the bell as opposed to the fat faced guy blowing his brains out that is engraved on the newer horns. Also, the older horns seem to be a bit lighter in weight and sound than the newer versions.

I sat next to Alex C in the Dallas Wind Symphony for nearly ten years while he played his excellent Holton CC (original, not cut). Six of those years I used an older rotary Neptune so I had many opportunities to compare both horns. I also had a couple of opportunities to compare my Neptune with another excellent original Holton CC and I find the statement that the Neptune was designed to sound like a Holton a little puzzling. The design concepts are completely different and the resulting sounds, while both big, are quite different.

I should also add than Alex is the Dallas County Intonation Inspector and in all the years that I sat next to him, he never issued me a citation so I guess my pitch was OK.

[kmshimfe]

Neptune,

I bought a piston Neptune back in May and I have to say that I absolutely love it! I have never played on a rotary Neptune, but the way you describe that yours plays sounds a lot like the way mine plays. There may be some differences in both styles of Neptune, but I think that they both are centered around the fact that the Neptune is a large 6/4 CC that sounds like a 6/4, but plays and handles like a 4/4.

I am interested in what kind of mouthpiece you use with your Neptune. I am still experimenting with my Neptune and I keep hitting closer to home...but I am not quite there yet. What do you find works best for you?

Thanks,
Kerry

[jimgray]

great post, Ed!
Thanks for all the details...

regarding mouthpiece choices - highly subject to personal taste, of course.

I am a Scott Laskey junkie, and therefore vacillate between the 30H and 30G (with a little 30F thrown in for good measure). These are all reasonable choices on the Neptune (for me) with the 30H being "middle of the road", the 30G having a distinctly broader (and more "complex/colorful" in a good way) sound (I use this in a large wind ensemble) and the 30F being a specialty mouthpiece, usable for high excerpts/solos or anytime you need some extra "punch".

Same rim on all of them (and also the same as on the Schilke Helleberg II, which I spent all of my formative years on, thanks to Sam Pilafian). I still have that beloved SH II, but (much as I try) I can't make it sound as "clear" as my 30H. So, its starting to turn colors from dis-use, unf.

Options are good - I find the Neptune responds well to each of them, just in different ways.

what do others use?

Jim

[Allen]

All of this talk about Wonderful Neptunes is making me drool. Where in the USA does one go to have a toot on one (and perhaps buy one)?

Allen

[Wyvern]

the late Tommy Johnson who is said to have described it as “a 188 on steroids”. I can’t say what the sound concept behind the horn was since I have never spoken to Mel Culbertson, but the body seems to be inspired by, if not directly copied from, the Cerveny ACB 601.

Thanks Ed for the additional information Very interesting! When I recently heard Andy Cresci of the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra playing his Neptune - He (using 24AW mouthpiece?) made it sound to my ears rather like a Besson Sovereign 981 on steroids. It appears to be a very adaptable tuba tonally, which through mouthpiece choice can be well molded to ones own personal sound concept.

The layout of piping on the Neptune is very similar to the Cerveny, but all the same comparing against my red brass 701 they still play so very different. Must be the internal bore profile?

I am interested in what kind of mouthpiece you use with your Neptune. I am still experimenting with my Neptune and I keep hitting closer to home...but I am not quite there yet. What do you find works best for you?

When playing my Neptune with the "M" bore leadpipe which is 95% of the time, I use a Perantucci PT-90 - a relatively small mouthpiece at 31mm diameter, but with deep cup. I find that gives me a clear tone, with rich harmonics.

Then on the occasions I play with "L" leadpipe I match with a larger PT-48 (like I use on my Cerveny 701) to provide a broader "Fafner" tone.

Of course your own mouthpiece choice will depend on your individual playing characteristics and sound concept.