Different perspective on the 1 horn model

[MartyNeilan]

I am thinking about going the one horn route again. My previous attempts were using horns on the large 3/4 to small 4/4 side. I was always left wanting. Now, back in the day when I had my massive 190, I used it for almost everything except quintet and the Vaughan Williams. Played Marcello sonatas and Mozart horn concerti on it. Even played Hungarian March on it per Don Harry. A few years ago I played a Marcello sonata and a concert band trumpet "showpiece" on a 6/4 vintage Martin. A little over a year ago, I played the Brahms German Requiem on my nearly 6/4 Kalison, and, except for having to concentrate on the high notes, didn't really have any problem (and didn't get the hand - horns were way louder than I was.)

My point being, unless one is going to travel the world as a tuba soloist it seems to me that a bigger horn that is still agile (not all big horns suck the air out of you) may be a better choice than a smaller horn that just doesn't have the "depth". Now, admittedly, something almost as big as Jake's horn doesn't work as an only horn unless you ARE Jake. However, something in the large 4/4 - small 5/4 size like a 1291, MW 2000, B&M/Nirschl, that can lay down a bottom but still be brightened up by a C4 seems to be able to handle most "real world" tuba demands.

Think about it - Nobody wants a puny tuba sound, maybe just a softer "big" sound.

[iiipopes]

I use the "two mouthpieces" approach on my 186: the Curry for larger ensemble pieces, and, ironically, quintet, for a broader, darker tone, and the PT34 for more "up front" playing, higher range, smaller ensemble, etc. with its more "ah" than "oh" tone.

Oh, yeah -- add the Kelly 18 if I have to play outdoors in temperature extremes. So, "2 1/2" mouthpiece approach.

A King 1241 with a deep funnel for concert and a bowl for dixieland and other stuff would work with this approach, as it is also nimble.

Sam Gnagny's horns, which many are based on the 1241 platform, seem like good candidates for the "one horn -- two mouthpiece" approach.

[Tuba Guy]

On my CB50 (not a big horn by anyone's measure), I used a Curry for when I had to sound really big, and a Helleberg for quintet or jazz band (4th bone substitute).
My bigger horns, I just use one piece, but I think they only get used in big groups.

[The Jackson]

When I was looking at the Yamaha YCB-621 for my personal horn, my biggest fear was that it would not be big enough in the orchestra or bands that I was playing in and those that I would be playing in come college. If I got it, it would be mine for a while and I'd be S.O.L. if it didn't work out. BBC has an awesome trial policy, though, and I had the good fortune be able to take the horn to rehearsals for both the band and orchestra. At the orchestral rehearsal, I told no-one that I had a new tuba until the rehearsal was over (the horn I had before was a 4/4 YCB-661). No-one told me anything, not even the brass coach, who is a professional bass trombonist and very excellent musician. I was convinced that the horn would work and, with all factors considered, would be the horn for me. That was nine months ago, and I haven't looked back.

My previous attempts were using horns on the large 3/4 to small 4/4 side. I was always left wanting.

That is, certainly, a completely reasonable reservation. This is a personal preference thing with no wrong answer.


I toyed around with the multiple mouthpieces idea for a while (I even made a thread about it), but I just haven't ever thought that I needed to use another mouthpiece on my tuba. A few months ago, though, I would just arbitrarily grab one of the two pieces (Dillon G3B and Kellyberg) in my tuba case, as they were both fine with me and no-one in any group many any comments.

[windshieldbug]

I certainly agree with the 5/4 approach.

Using the right horn and mouthpieces, one can certainly perform MOST of the literature excellently, just not in an "original ensemble" sense.

When I needed a bass tuba for note accuracy, I would most often use a 6/4 F.

In my experience, VERY FEW conductors are savvy enough to know the difference in sound of a small bass tuba, and most modern trumpeters/trombonists can't be bothered to use historically accurate horns/bores to match. Nor do any modern orchestral string players play with short fingerboards and gut strings... (when I performed Berlioz on ophicleide at the conductor's request, nobody else was required to make a single change)

[Todd S. Malicoate]

In my experience, VERY FEW conductors are savvy enough to know the difference in sound of a small bass tuba, and most modern trumpeters/trombonists can't be bothered to use historically accurate horns/bores to match. Nor do any modern orchestral string players play with short fingerboards and gut strings... (when I performed Berlioz on ophicleide at the conductor's request, nobody else was required to make a single change)

+1. In MY experience, this extremely important point is almost always "overlooked"...ESPECIALLY among tuba players.

Irony is using an ophicleide for Symphonie Fantastique while the guy on your right plows away on a Bach 50B3.

[pwhitaker]

I'm sort of in the one horn, multi mpc camp. I have an older 5/4 BBb Rudy and a Conn 20J with a recording bell. Both of them have a large robust sound, but are very flexible and responsive. I use 2 different style mpc's: wide (36 mm) ultra deep (2"+) bowls for indoors and trio work, and wide shallower bowls for parades, street gigs and "high" solos indoors. I generally use the Conn now because of the recording bell and it's cases are safer for transporting than is the Rudy's gig bag. Although I don't play quintets any more I wouldn't hesitate to use either of these horns in that setting with the deeper bowls.

I used a Besson Eb and a Yamaha Eb exclusively throughout the 80's and 90's as my one horn and had no problems holding down the bottom in the large bands I played with at that time. I like to use the lower range more now and find that the contra fingerings are less cumbersome down there and easier on my arthritic hands.

I now play only Trad Jazz and some swing tune stuff so I don't need the above the staff virtuosity required for symphonic or advanced quintet work, thus my contras are more than adequate.

[MartyNeilan]

I guess the original point of this thread was the concept of approaching the one-horn model from the "biggest possible" perspective instead of the "smallest possible" perspective as I had previously done.

Interesting to see all the multiple mouthpiece posts on the one horn thread. I really don't think you can pull the one horn thing off, in a wide variety of ensembles and styles, without at least two mouthpieces. For me, it was deep V paired with shallow C or small V. I am currently doing the two mouthpiece thing on my Bloke'd bass trombone. I have a Ferguson V (1 1/2 G ish) for parts in the middle to upper range and Ferguson Jeff Reynolds L (between 59-60, but more commercial sounding) for the true bass trombone parts that spend a lot of time below the staff. Eithe piece can still play in the top or bottom range, but the V is more compact up top and the L bigger on the bottom.

[tubatom91]

Miraphone 188:
-obviously I'm biased so it's hard to judge unless you try one out.
-there's a couple for sale out there, looks like some nice ones to
MW Thor:
-I've heard good things about these but their singular timbre reputation puts me off

Those seem to be a couple popular choices lately but there are some others that are tossed around to. My 188 isn't all that mouthpiece sensitive but I can make it sound large and small, which I like. I haven't found the sound at all displeasing either "large" or "small."
although I'd like to have a horn for each situation, I can't afford it and don't need it. My 188 tends to hold it's own.
If this helps, good. If not, well...ignore

[MartyNeilan]

MW Thor:
-I've heard good things about these but their singular timbre reputation puts me off

Having owned the predecessor, MW2155R, even if the Thor has been "tamed" I would still definitely not consider it a do-everything horn. Although it could play the notes, I am sure the horn would be far too dominant to be tasteful in many situations. I actually find my current K2001 far more adaptable than the pre-Thor howitzer I once owned (but, what a howitzer it was!) Even with an F tuba, I still felt like a needed a small CC or something similar to fill in more gaps. The next owner after me sold it for the same reason - not versatile enough for an only horn.

[rocksanddirt]

as a complete amature duffer....I'm on the one horn plan (a BBb 186, durrrr) and use two mouthpieces a Bach 24 nice round deep soup bowl and a blokepiece I.

[SplatterTone]

In my case one horn, one mouthpiece.
Playing varies between
1. Small ensemble (3 woodwinds, 4 brass)
2. Approx. 60 rank Aeolian Skinner, miked choir, 600 voice audience, plus whatever band people show up.
The main difference for me is if I can play two measures in one breath or two beats. However, it would be nice to have a horn that would do more of the work for me when raw power is called for.

Not being among the ranks of those who get paid, It doesn't cost me anything to hold the opinion that if they want a tuba, they're going to get a tuba -- a big B-flat tuba. I can play as softly as they want, and pretty full when needed. If they want a bass trombone sound, they can go hire one. Personally, I like small brass ensembles that use a big tuba. But then, I'm probably prejudiced.

A 3/4 is nice to have for when you don't want to drag the big one around.

[peter birch]

There is one thing that has not been mentioned, and it may be that it is just taken for granted - rather than different instruments or mouthpieces what is needed is a different approach or different technique for different ensembles and different music. the music can change within a few bars in a piece, from verse to verse if accompanying singing, and we change dynamic, attack and style to accomodate these changes without switching any equipment.
If you can't change anything else, you can always change yourself

[MartyNeilan]

There is one thing that has not been mentioned, and it may be that it is just taken for granted - rather than different instruments or mouthpieces what is needed is a different approach or different technique for different ensembles and different music. the music can change within a few bars in a piece, from verse to verse if accompanying singing, and we change dynamic, attack and style to accomodate these changes without switching any equipment.
If you can't change anything else, you can always change yourself

That's why pops concerts are so much fun!

( Seriously, I may be one of the few people out there who actually enjoys playing pops concerts.)

[MartyNeilan]

my quintet instrument - in particular - needs to be able to offer gymnastics-with-delicacy. I haven't quite found that in any sort of "all applications" type of tuba.

So, since tubas with factory nicknames are all the rage now, what would your ideal quintet horn be called? The Peggy Flemming? The Paul Hamm??

Marty "owns a Tonya Harding mouthpiece"
(realizing that any all purpose horn is going to have to be a compromise somewhere)

[Alex C]

An easy case for the Miraphone 186, 188 or 1291/2 as a "1 horn model" could easily be made. Harvey Phillips had a ground breaking career with a small Conn, it might still be possible.

However, I would put in a vote for the YFB 822 and similar horns like the Miraphone Petruschka and the Gronitz 125. These easily work as a small CC substitute and still have flexibility to burn. I heard a performance by Ed Jones in the FW Symphony playing the 822 (new piece, forget the name) and the low register playing was stunning.