Euph AND Tuba players

[Peach]

A few guys have proven very successful at playing both Euphonium and Tuba at the highest level.

As I see it, Euph players nearly all play 3+1 comp instruments but if they start playing tuba they nearly all play non-comp instruments.
It would seem logical (to me at least) for guys used to their 3+1 Euphs to try 3+1 tubas if they were looking. If they did, they seem to have rejected them.

I wonder if anybody with first hand experience with this would share their experience in finding a tuba when already a top-level euph player?

Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying everyone should play 3+1 comp tubas - far from it...

Thanks for any responses.
MP

[Teubonium]

While I love my 3+1 comp euph, I did not like the 3+1 comp tubas. They were stuffy and the ergonomics didn't agree with me.

For me, the intonation problems in the low range which the comp system addresses is solved on my Eb with a fifth valve, and on me BBb with alternate fingerings.
I don't find it neccesary to pull slides.

[bububassboner]

A few guys have proven very successful at playing both Euphonium and Tuba at the highest level.

As I see it, Euph players nearly all play 3+1 comp instruments but if they start playing tuba they nearly all play non-comp instruments.
It would seem logical (to me at least) for guys used to their 3+1 Euphs to try 3+1 tubas if they were looking. If they did, they seem to have rejected them.

I wonder if anybody with first hand experience with this would share their experience in finding a tuba when already a top-level euph player?

Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying everyone should play 3+1 comp tubas - far from it...

Thanks for any responses.
MP

Hmm... I think it is due to the fact that almost all pro level euphoniums are 3+1 horns. It's not easy or cheap to get a 4+1 horn or a 4 front action comp horn. While for tubas it is really easy to find 4+1 horns in any key. I seems like the horn choice of 3+1 euph and non-comp tuba is one due to choices available.

Bububassboner (who's favorite euph is the Willson front action comp but I cant convince the owner to sell it)

[Roger Fjeldet]

Among a lot of other instruments I play a Yamaha prestige 3 + 1 compensated Euphonium and a Conn double bell 4 valve (+1) euphonium, a Compensated Besson 3 + 1 Eb tuba and a 5 valve Eb Norwegian star light Miraphone tuba. Different sounds - different use
Every instrument have it`s benefit - the fingerings is just a matter of taking time to learn.

Roger

[pgym]

Among a lot of other instruments I play a Yamaha prestige 3 + 1 compensated Euphonium

Shouldn't that be Yamaha CUSTOM (842) rather than Prestige (which is a trademark of Besson)?

[Peach]

Hmm... I think it is due to the fact that almost all pro level euphoniums are 3+1 horns. It's not easy or cheap to get a 4+1 horn or a 4 front action comp horn. While for tubas it is really easy to find 4+1 horns in any key. I seems like the horn choice of 3+1 euph and non-comp tuba is one due to choices available.

Bububassboner (who's favorite euph is the Willson front action comp but I cant convince the owner to sell it)

I'm going to respectfully disagree; here's why...

Sure, almost all pro-level euphs are 3+1 comps but that's because the market demands that, not because they happen to exist therefore everyone plays one?
Since other instrument setups are available for euphs, if they were 'better' catagorically, a large share of the market would use them surely?


______________________
I'll provokingly speculate some more:

Is it possible that most 3+1 comp Euphs 'work' just a bit better than most 3+1 comp tubas?

Cheers,
MP

[sloan]

Perhaps it's just that it's easier to reach around a euphonium than a tuba?

I think it's all about the ergonomics.

When I started playing my EEb 3+1 tuba, there was a definite adjustment period
figuring out the right playing position.

Just think about what it would be like if I were to convert my Conn 36J to 3+1 (without
even considering what the compensation would do...) [HMMMM...Hey Joe - as long as it's
in pieces on your shop floor, how about moving that 4th valve, increase the bore on the
4th valve loop, and...while you are at it, could you add a few miles of compensating loops? I'll want that in satin silver, by Tuesday]

[oedipoes]

A few guys have proven very successful at playing both Euphonium and Tuba at the highest level.

As I see it, Euph players nearly all play 3+1 comp instruments but if they start playing tuba they nearly all play non-comp instruments.
It would seem logical (to me at least) for guys used to their 3+1 Euphs to try 3+1 tubas if they were looking. If they did, they seem to have rejected them.

I wonder if anybody with first hand experience with this would share their experience in finding a tuba when already a top-level euph player?

Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying everyone should play 3+1 comp tubas - far from it...

Thanks for any responses.
MP

I play a besson prestige 3+1 comp with great pleasure.
For me, that is the ultimate euphonium sound. Everything I wanted to do on euphonium works on the prestige!

On tuba, well, I do not like the 3+1's very much, they don't seem to work that good for me. Compensating BBb's are not what I expected them to be.
Don't know why.

Wim

[bububassboner]

Hmm... I think it is due to the fact that almost all pro level euphoniums are 3+1 horns. It's not easy or cheap to get a 4+1 horn or a 4 front action comp horn. While for tubas it is really easy to find 4+1 horns in any key. I seems like the horn choice of 3+1 euph and non-comp tuba is one due to choices available.

Bububassboner (who's favorite euph is the Willson front action comp but I cant convince the owner to sell it)

I'm going to respectfully disagree; here's why...

Sure, almost all pro-level euphs are 3+1 comps but that's because the market demands that, not because they happen to exist therefore everyone plays one?
Since other instrument setups are available for euphs, if they were 'better' catagorically, a large share of the market would use them surely?

Funny story,
So a euphonium major here was trying said front action comp euph. I asked him how he liked the valve set up and he said "it's way better than the 3+1". So I asked him if he would ever buy a horn with that set up and he said no. When I asked why he said "everyone uses the 3+1, no one would take me seriously".

Here is another take to the original question. Of the people that play "top level" euphonium and tuba, everyone that I can think of plays F and CC tuba. Where can one get a 3+1 CC tuba new?

[MaryAnn]

When I was playing the Eb tuba part in the brass band (I am now playing euph) I tried a Besson 3+1. I literally could not reach it...and was afraid I'd drop it trying. However, a few years previous to that I played a Willson 3+1 BBb, and found it very playable.

I think that whoever said he wouldn't be taken seriously if he didn't use a 3+1 euph is on to something....I see that kind of thing a lot. Like, if you don't play a Loree oboe you might not be taken seriously, no matter how you happen to sound. There are some things that are just "the way it's done" and if you want to be accepted, you have to do it that way or be excluded.

MA

[pgym]

Sure, almost all pro-level euphs are 3+1 comps but that's because the market demands that, not because they happen to exist therefore everyone plays one?
Since other instrument setups are available for euphs, if they were 'better' catagorically, a large share of the market would use them surely?

Or, really?

You mean like Betamax, which was technically and videographically superior to VHS, dominated the VCR market?

Oh ... wait ... it didn't: VHS, which was cheaper and based on an open standard, beat the pants off Betamax.

B&H/Besson marketed a 3-valve enharmonic compensating euph alongside the 3+1 until the early '80s.

The 3-valve comps was cheaper to manufacture, lighter in weight, less stuffy in the compensating register, and offered superior intonation to the 3+1 system, but the 3+1 squeezed it out.

Why? Probably because the 3+1 patent expired in 1974, while the enharmonic patent continued in force until 1981, by which time most other mfgs had jumped into the market with a 3+1, which, combined with the comparatively small niche that was (and is) the compensating euph market and the economics of setting up and maintaining a production line for 3-valve enharmonics, effectively foreclosed the possibility of its widespread adoption, despite its superiority on many, if not most, important levels.

So, no, a better setup does NOT necessarily equate to market share.

[Weaponofchoice]

When making the transition from Euphonium to tuba everything is going to be new and different. Trying to relate things back to euphonium may only confuse the process. Pick up the tuba to learn the tuba and approach it the way a beginner or say college freshman would. The question of hand position (3+1 vs. 4 vs. 5) is almost irrelevant, like I said everything is going to be new and the valves are no exception. Learn to speak all three valve languages, it will only make you more versatile.

[MikeMilnarik]

You have to play the instrument that you feel most comfortable on and what you feel demonstrates "your" sound. You need to independently find the euphonium that works for you and the tuba that works for you. Then practice.

Mike Milnarik

[b.williams]

My euphonium story: In 1975, I switched from a Yamaha to a Besson because the fingerings in the low register were much easier on the Besson than the Yamaha. The 4th valve on the Besson was a magic octave key. At the time I didn't want to play a horn that couldn't play a low B natural. So the Yamaha had to go! Besides, I loved ripping low register chromatic scales on the Besson. in 1981, I switched to a Boosey and Hawkes because of the purdy 12 inch bell. After all, I had to have the biggest bell around.

In hindsight, I sould have kept the Yamaha and practiced 5 hours a day with it. After all, Rich Matteson did okay with one.

So, get a hold of a quality horn, learn its personality, and make it sound the way you want it to.

[Peach]

I think a couple of folks may have misinterpreted my post, which is fine, however this post isn't me wanting advice on what to play.
Was wondering why existing euph players seem to dismiss the compensating bass tubas in 3+1 when they're so used to that setup.

As folks have responded, it seems for a lot of highly skilled euph players used to 3+1, switching to 4+1 isn't a big deal.
Here in England (in my experience) most tuba players who try 4+1 tubas find it tricky getting the little finger working well. I know some US players like the sound of Besson 3+1 comps but can't get used to the LH 4th.

[b.williams]

I am sorry. I for one didn't answer your question. I will try again.

I started out as a euphonium player. My first exposure to tuba was in 1983 while I was with Navy Band San Diego. I was told to get a sousaphone and get on the bus. You are now a tuba player.(The other two players had been kicked out for drug use violations )
So I played what they had. Many of our tuba brothers play what the school/band/church has.

I played a 3+1 comp euphonium because I lived near a premier service band and heard a 3+1 comp euphonium played by a master. So, it made sense for me to obtain one. Recently, I had the desire to try a 3+1 comp tuba. Having access to them via the internet allowed me to buy one. Having a lot of free time allowed me to try it out for an extended period of time.

I love the way my B&H Imperial, 3+1 Comp, 19" bell, silver tuba sounds. Like any horn It has some issues that I must overcome. (Together my tuba and my B&H Sovereign, 12" bell, silver euphonium look like Me and Mini-me.)

Bottom Line: Most of the time in this country access determines what type of tuba is used.

[Bob Kolada]

I love the way my B&H Imperial, 3+1 Comp, 19" bell, silver tuba sounds. Like any horn It has some issues that I must overcome. (Together my tuba and my B&H Sovereign, 12" bell, silver euphonium look like Me and Mini-me.)

I'm afraid we're going to need a picture of that!